All Catholics are heavily betrayed with the Eucharist. The Pope lies to the whole world. A Catholic representative of the Eucharist was determined to prove that the Catholic Eucharist is biblical. His own argumentation broke not only his neck, but also the neck of the Catholic Church.
Hello Klaus, it's amazing. Your letters have 100% the same form as Peter's letters. There are some characteristics that perfectly prove that you are Peter. That you have to hide behind several identities is very sad. The fact that you also equip this game of hide-and-seek with real-looking or even specially created e-mail addresses throws even sharper light on your tactical approach. I mention this so that the readers will notice that you as a Catholic blatantly use lies.
You have so far lost every argument against the Bible, for Catholicism. What keeps your defiance and your painstakingly held back anger alive? [RH]
I am quoting your words here: "He called the bread his flesh and the wine his blood." With this definition you are basically expressing the same thing that the Jehovah's Witnesses Bible expresses in the relevant passages: Take, eat! This means my body, this means my blood (e.g. Mt 26:26,28). So, in spite of clear mistranslation, it has become correct. That is something that first needs to be done! On the other hand, in every other proper Bible you read that "is" my body, which "is" my blood. And between "means" and "is" there is a serious difference. Nobody can live from something that only means something, one can only live from the substance as such.
Then why did the disciples take the bread, eat it and taste bread? Why then did the disciples take the wine, drink it and taste wine? Do you really think that they ate human flesh and drank human blood at the Lord's Supper? – When Jesus turned water into wine, did people drink the wine and taste water? No. Jesus, when he did a miracle, never did a miracle that did not exist, that did not show itself to people. Jesus did real deeds in all his deeds and never claimed anything that was not verifiable. – But the Catholic Church claims that Jesus did a miracle at the Lord's Supper that nobody noticed and felt and perceived. The Catholic Church manages to fill the comparison that Jesus makes with magic that can be repeated only by the hand of the priests wearing the fish-head hats. The Catholic Church thus transforms the Lord's Supper, with its unique symbolism that is inimitable worldwide, into an act of imposition. Jesus is said to have given bread and wine to his disciples, who were indeed his flesh and blood. No disciple came forward and asked: "Why does the meat still taste of bread? No disciple complained because the wine tasted like warm blood. Klaus-Peter! You are so dirty with your extra-imposed invisible miracle that your goddess Mary, if she existed, would blush with shame. [RH]
Why do you reduce God's love, greatness and omnipotence to zero? Those who love your salvation should always say: Great is the Lord God (Ps 40:17). Does He, the Truthful One, need to pretend to mankind, His children, something that in reality is not true?
Yes! That's what I just asked you! Why would Jesus play that kind of game with his disciples?! He never pushed anybody over the edge. By transforming the bread into his flesh and the wine into his blood, he would not only have created a fact that the disciples could not even realize, but he would also have anticipated the sacrifice and only repeated it on the cross! In this way he would have created a situation that would have watered down his sacrifice on the cross, for the one who offers his flesh for the Lord's Supper and distributes his blood for drinking really seems to have a little too much of it left. Then the sacrifice on the cross would not have been necessary at all. For why should people see him being executed, when they should believe in transubstantiation, like the disciples of your teaching? They could not have believed in Jesus' sacrifice without seeing the death on the cross before their eyes.
Whoever teaches the anticipation of sacrifice in the Lord's Supper hollows out Jesus' deed on the cross. Anyone who sees Jesus' reference to the parallel between bread and wine and his flesh and blood as a quasi pre-sacrifice shows that he is very willing to add a few fairy tales and anecdotes to Jesus and the Bible, back and front, to strengthen his own power. Whoever attributes this transformation of bread and wine to Jesus only wants to be able to repeat his sacrifice constantly in order to bind people to himself. Such people have only one thing in mind: the appropriation of the power of God. They don't care that they thereby destroy the actual sacrifice to which Jesus referred. The main thing is that the Pope has the power between heaven and earth. [RH]
Can he not really give his flesh to those whom he loved to perfection in the form of bread? Can he really not? Yes, he can, and he still does so today.
Yes, if your teaching is correct, he is still being sacrificed daily on the bloodstained altars of the Catholic Church. Sacrificed because his blood was shed once. If it had to be shed daily even today, you would be sloppy blood banks and meat wholesalers. [RH]
Rüdiger, your answers to the topic "Lord's Supper" prove that you have not understood the origin and meaning of the Last Supper at all. Haven't you noticed that what we call today "Last Supper" coincided with the celebration of the Passover meal? The main course of this meal was a lamb. On the eve of his crucifixion or slaughter, Jesus holds this ritual meal with the 12 apostles.
Right. And because it was celebrated before his crucifixion, it can only have been a symbolic reference to his death. The assumption that Jesus had already tasted his sacrificial death in a private round like at a cold buffet is equal to the magic of magicians. With such an action Jesus would have made himself equal to all gentile cult priests and also to the gentile cult priests of modern times. The Catholic cult priests with their magic power lie to Jesus about such an act so that they can continue the lie for themselves. The fact that they have had so much success with people to this day shows the greatness of their sin and the sophistication of their magical theology.
If Jesus had carried out this preliminary tasting of his sacrifice in the way the Catholic fish-god sorcerers claim, he should not have said, do so in memory of me, but he should have said it truthfully: Do this for your anticipated salvation. And he should have given them the instruction to repeat this secondary sacrifice constantly for the redemption of men. But he only said: Do this in memory of me. No pre-redemption, no pre-sacrifice, no magic. For the sacrifice definitely took place later, and the disciples understood the meaning of the Lord's Supper only after his death.
Whoever inflicts a magical flesh-blood transformation on the Lord's Supper has only the following interests: 1) to seize power and 2) to dismember the sacrifice of Jesus and offer it to Satan. [RH]
As soon as Jesus began his public ministry, John immediately referred to him as the Lamb of God. Already Isaiah (53,7) points to this: "Like a lamb that is led to the slaughter..." And Rev 5,12 and 13,8 also speak of the Lamb that is slaughtered. Now I am using the Duden dictionary of meaning: "By slaughter one understands the professional killing and cutting up of an animal in order to obtain meat for human food." So it is to serve as food for us.
He was not the slaughtered Lamb of God, Klaus-Peter, until the cross, but the Lamb of God who was not slaughtered. The slaughter of the Lamb of God only came into being after the Lord's Supper. Before that the Lord's Supper took place as a solemn reminder and as a symbol of the effect of this slaughter. This Eucharist can never be crossed or mixed with the slaughter. If this mixing takes place, it is only in order to mislead people and to be able to assert that outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation and that one has to celebrate the Eucharist again and again in order to obtain forgiveness of sins.
But the truth is that every person who prays to Jesus is saved. And I am glad that you, with your constant steep presentations, create the opportunity to deal with these facts in the Internet in such a determined way that the truth comes out in the end. [RH]
Therefore, at this Passover meal, Jesus gives Himself to His own as the Passover lamb for food. In 1 Corinthians 5:7 Paul actually calls Christ our Paschal Lamb. And from this Passover lamb the apostles ate in the Upper Room. Therefore our Lord could also say there: "This is my flesh, this is my blood". In John 6:55 he had already expressed this unequivocally and clearly before: "For my flesh is indeed food and my blood is indeed drink"
None of this can substantiate the magical transformation thesis of the Catholic priests of sorcery. Everything refers to the cross, nothing to the Lord's Supper. To transform the Lord's Supper into a pre-sacrificial scene is one of Satan's most insolent lies. It represents a typical religiousization of Jesus. It is only about the conversion of Jesus into a rite. The usefulness of Jesus is increased for the Catholic Church in such a way that it can make a constantly repeatable rite out of the one-time sacrifice. This not only makes it possible to earn money, but also to deceive the whole world permanently. And for this deception the Catholic Church has murdered in such a way that the mountains of human flesh are piled up and the lakes of human blood reach the dimensions of seas. [RH]
But there were already people like you at the time of Jesus. They argued and said: "How can he give us his flesh to eat" (John 6:52)? What Jesus answered is written in the following verses. In any case, he did not say: "Excuse me, I didn't mean it like that, I call this bread my flesh, but of course it remains bread"
And again you mix the Lord's Supper with the slaughter of Jesus on the cross. And you're happy to blame me in this way for something that doesn't suit me. I ate Jesus' flesh and drank his blood. This is what everyone does who entrusts himself to Jesus and claims his sacrifice for himself. The celebration of the Lord's Supper is the recurring solemn testimony of this. But the slaughter never took place in the Lord's Supper and can never be repeated. Not even by your master magicians. [RH]
Many of his disciples who listened to him said, "What he says is unbearable. Who can listen to this (John 6:60)? As a result, many disciples withdrew and no longer walked with him (6:66). These were obviously people like you, who also could not or did not want to believe that it is really his flesh that he gives.
And again you mix communion with Jesus' slaughter on the cross. And this only to condemn me, me, who really believes and preaches the absolute incorporation of Jesus. How beautiful it is to mix the facts of God (the Lord's Supper and the crucifixion) with each other in such a way that you can place yourself above others and condemn others. For whoever can make religiously credible that he must rightly condemn others, accumulates religious power. This is the magical office of your priests: they repeat the power of Pharaoh and set themselves up as God. The so-called "Holy Father" proves this once again. Jesus forbids anyone to be called the Good Father, because only the Father in heaven is this good Father. The Pope even lets himself be called Holy Father. Fie! [RH]
In the Upper Room he spoke to them: "I have longed very much to eat this Pasha meal with you before my suffering" (Lk 22,15)!
I don't believe it! The Bible disproves our Klaus-Peter in the strongest possible terms and the man uses the Bible passage as an argument for his false doctrine! Unbelievable! First of all it is madness to say that Jesus himself ate of his own flesh and drank of his own blood. Secondly, Jesus here says unequivocally that he celebrates the meal and that he does so before his suffering! What does that tell us?
There was no victim before his suffering. Before his suffering there was no eating of flesh and drinking of blood! Klaus-Peter, stop trying to draw people into your intermingling religion. You will receive your reward. [RH]
This his longing has remained the same until today. Rüdiger, he, your master, thus yearns to eat the Pasha meal with you. He wants to give you his flesh to eat, but you say to him: What you give me you call your flesh, but in reality it is bread.
I do not eat his flesh at communion, but 24 hours a day, claiming his sacrifice for myself. At the Lord's Supper I eat the bread in remembrance of the fact that I was and am allowed to eat his flesh and pass through it to life. To attribute to me the rejection of Jesus from the realistic contemplation of the Lord's Supper is again an act of mixing the Lord's Supper and crucifixion. The Catholic Church lies that the beams bend only to deny salvation to others. Catholics become accomplices by following this baroness of lies. They judge and murder and lead people to ruin. They are happy about anyone who worships Mary. [RH]
On the other hand, how could one sin if one eats and drinks unchecked from something that some call "holy" but in reality is just ordinary bread and wine (1 Cor 11:29)?
The bread and the wine are the memory of what is truly sanctifieing. Jesus Christ. The bread and the wine are and remain symbols in the Lord's Supper. It is only in the act of celebration that holiness emerges, not in the material of the bread and wine. David ate the Shewbread. He is my model and example to make you a universal liar. Stumble and fall over the truth so that you still have a chance. [RH]
Shortly after his birth Jesus becomes a sign. Luk 2,12: And this shall be a sign to you: You will find a child wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger. The child in a manger as a sign can probably have no other meaning than this: I, as a shepherd, give myself to my sheep for food.
Now all you have to do is claim that they baked the child for themselves and presented it to people as the Savior. Then we really arrived in the Catholic Church. Then we will have fully recognized the act of magic and will finally be able to turn away from this all-pervading mother of lies. [RH]
Truly, Ruediger, you are indeed receiving only empty bread in your faith. Catholic and Orthodox Christians, on the other hand, receive the true body of Christ in the form of bread and His blood in the form of wine. In this way, we truly share in his divine life, for whoever eats his flesh and drinks his blood remains in HIM and HE in that (John 6:56). There are several people who lived for years alone on this "transformed" bread. Brother Klaus (Switzerland), for example, lived on this food alone for 20 years. His lack of food is officially confirmed by the state. There are also enough of the host miracles. Perhaps the best known and most important one can be found under "Lanciano".
Do you also have a jar of bloody tears from Maria in the cellar? [RH]
Rüdiger, so you can remain calm with your blessed bread and wine. But there's no life in them.
Oh, yeah! All power to the "Holy Father" whom Jesus has forbidden to be called like that, but fuck it! The pope doesn't have to obey Jesus! [RH]
According to the words of Jesus, there is life from the living bread, which in truth is his flesh or even he himself (John 6:51). Whoever eats this bread will live for eternity (John 6:58).
After the slaughter, Klaus-Peter, not before! Every thing has its time. And the flesh of Jesus became our food at His crucifixion, and His blood became our drink at His crucifixion. And even here it is not a matter of running to the cross and sucking the blood out of the turf, but rather of the spiritual facts. But which you would rather have ritualized so that you can make people dependent on you. [RH]
This view of the Lord's Supper has remained unchanged for the Church of Jesus Christ from the time of the common Supper until today.
Yes, but for the Catholic Magic Church it is a premature and then permanently repeated blood and flesh sacrifice, which it was able to snatch up. A sacrifice that took place before the crucifixion of Jesus and then millions of times afterwards. Klaus-Peter, the devil laughs his head off at the people who fall for Catholicism. Peter says that Jesus was sacrificed once for us. And what do you do? You do it before and after, until the very end. Why? Because you don't want to know what the will of the Father really is. You have your own Holy Father. [RH]
2 Tim 3:14: But you stick to what you have learned and to what you are convinced. Phil 4,9: Whatever you have learned and accepted, heard and seen in me, do it! 1 Tim 3,15: But if I stay longer, you should know how to behave in the house of God, that is, in the church of the living God, which is the pillar and foundation of truth. Which church is meant by this, there are so many? They all teach something different, so in this way there is no foundation of truth!
Hey Klaus-Peter. It can't be the Catholic Church. Maybe you should say a few more rosaries and get down on your knees. I'm sure it's even more effective than the Catholic priests' magic. Have you ever bought the miraculous medal of St. Mary? [RH]
Rüdiger, you can go on scoffing at the Catholic Church, damage – and eternal damage at that – you only do to yourself.
Klaus [November 03, 2010]