About Mel and Guyna Horne Expertise Anyone can read the Bible but sometimes it helps to have someone assist with the understanding (Acts 8:26-40).
Truth comes from God through his holy spirit of truth (Jn. 16:13, 1Cor. 2:12), which is available to anyone who believes, repents and seeks God fervently and wholeheartedly, with humility, faith and persistence (Mat. 7:7, Deu. 4:29, Isa. 66:2, Jas. 4:1-10, Phil. 2:12).
Truth is not limited to, or by, man’s religious organizations, church traditions, popular beliefs or personal opinions (Jn. 8:32, 14:6).
We will try to help with any question regarding scripture or Christian living.
Experience Over 40 years of personal study of the entire Bible (Deu. 8:3, Mat. 4:4, 2Tim. 3:16, Deu. 4:12, Rev. 22:18).
B.A. in Theology with continuing studies in religious history and education (2Tim 2:15, 1Ths. 5:21).
Years of informal counseling of young adults, teens, and couples based on scripture and on actual life experience in the world outside of classrooms and church buildings and including a long and happy marriage. Non-denominational.
Publications: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/1611/
Bible Studies - Protestant vs. Catholic perspectives
Expert: Mel and Guyna Horne - 8/26/2006
Question How can Protestant churches say they believe the Bible literally most of the time (Jesus walking on water, multiplication of loaves, healing people) and then when Jesus says in no uncertain terms "This is my body" it isn't considered literal any more? The Catholics say it is His Body and they have been saying that
exact same thing for 2,000 years.
Answer Hi Randall,
We are neither Catholic nor Protestant and thus, have no stake in this dispute which apparently has been ongoing since the 4th cent. AD., when Saint Augustine, Bishop of Hippo argued against a literal interpretation. Both Catholics and Protestants pick and choose which scriptures are to be taken literally or only figuratively.
To get a Protestant's answer to your question, we would suggest that you try someone in the "Christianity-Protestantism" section of allexperts.com
Or, to get information faster and a broader view, you could Google "transubstantiation + Baptists" (or any other group).
Wikipedia has a concise discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transubstantiation#Lutheranism which includes Lutheranism, Anglican and "other" beliefs on this subject.
Protestantism has approx. 1 billion followers while the Catholic church claims 1.1 billion followers. Had it not been for certain disputed doctrines, including transubstantiation, which caused the Protestant Movement (of Catholics out of Catholicism), then the Catholic church would probably be twice the size it is now. Some might say that this contradicts a statement such as "The Catholics say it is His Body and they have been saying that exact same thing for 2,000 years."
However, your question piqued our interest enough to do some quick research on the subject. The following is provided for your information, because, if you engage a Protestant in a discussion of this subject, he/she may present the following information, of which you may not be aware.
The following quotes are from http://www.newadvent.org/ , which has been rated second only to the Holy See web site, among all the top Catholic web sites in the world.
". . . according to Augustine's exposition on Ps. 4 [On Ps. 98:9]: "Give a spiritual meaning to what I have said. You are not to eat this body which you see, nor to drink the blood which they who crucify Me are to spill. It is a mystery that I put before you: in its spiritual sense it will quicken you; but the flesh profiteth nothing."
". . . Augustine makes this observation (Tract. xxx in Joan.): "The Lord is on high until the world be ended; nevertheless the truth of the Lord is here with us; for the body, in which He rose again, must be in one place; but His truth is spread abroad everywhere." Therefore, the body of Christ is not in this sacrament in very truth, but only as in a sign."
"Moreover the apostles were prevented from receiving the Holy Ghost because they were attached to His bodily presence, as Augustine says on John 16:7: "Except I go, the Paraclete will not come to you" (Tract. xciv in Joan.). Therefore Christ is not in the sacrament of the altar according to His bodily presence." http://www.newadvent.org/summa/407501.htm
". . . the Fathers and several Ecumenical councils (Ephesus, 431; Nicæa, 787) adopted the literal sense of the words, though it was not dogmatically defined (cf. Council of Trent, Sess. XXI, c. i). If it be true that a few Catholic theologians (as Cajetan, Ruardus Tapper, Johann Hessel, and the elder Jansenius) preferred the figurative interpretation, it was merely for controversial reasons, because in their perplexity they imagined that otherwise the claims of the Hussite and Protestant Utraquists for the partaking of the Chalice by the laity could not be answered by argument from Scripture. (Cf. Patrizi, "De Christo pane vitæ", Rome, 1851; Schmitt, "Die Verheissung der Eucharistie bei den Vütern", 2 vols., Würzburg, 1900-03.)" http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05573a.htm
The Catholic church does not believe in literalism of all scriptures including those mentioning the wine of Passover (Catholic- "Eucharist"):
Regarding the "seven days of creation" in Genesis:
" It was natural that in the early days of the Church, the Fathers, writing with little scientific knowledge, should have had a tendency to explain the days of Genesis, i, as natural days of twenty-four hours. Still, they by no means all did so. Thus the Alexandrian Fathers (St. Clement, Origen, St. Athanasius, and St. Cyril) interpreted the days of Creation ideally, and held that God created all things simultaneously. So did St. Augustine; and St. Thomas Aquinas hesitated between idealism and literalism. The literal interpretation has now been entirely abandoned; and the world is admitted to be of immense antiquity." http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03731a.htm
Regarding the teachings of Christ's parables:
"It abounds in lively speaking figures, and stands midway between the literalism of mere prose and the abstractions of philosophy."
"That the character of Christ's teaching to the multitude was mainly parabolic is clear from Matthew 13:34, and Mark 4:33. Perhaps we should ascribe to the same cause an element of the startling and paradoxical, e.g., in His Sermon on the Mount, which, taken literally, has been misunderstood by simple or again by fanatical minds." http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11460a.htm
Regarding John 6:53, "Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you have no life in you." (KJV):
"(b) There is no Divine precept binding the laity or non-celebrating priests to receive the sacrament under both kinds (Trent, sess. XXI, c. i.)"
"Not only, therefore, is Communion under both kinds not obligatory on the faithful, but the chalice is strictly forbidden by ecclesiastical law to any but the celebrating priest."
"Now the Utraquist interpretation would suppose that in verse 54 [53 KJV]Christ meant to emphasize the distinction between the mode of reception "by eating" and the mode of reception "by drinking", and to include both modes distinctly in the precept He imposes. But such literalism, extravagant in any connection, would result in this case in putting verse 54 [53 KJV] in opposition to 52 and 59 [51, 58, KJV], interpreted in the same rigid way." http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04175a.htm
We hope that this information may be of some help to you.
Sincerely,
Mel and Guyna
