frazzydee

whats going on here??? i just heard that christian ppl believe that at one point in time, "wine turned into blood" and the "bread turned into flesh." They use this as proof that there is god!!! If u ask me this is crazy!!! I mean, humans are so dumb! Please post any other silly beliefs that theists have here!

Someone7

Well, some believe in always using proper punctuation and capitalization.

Those crazy Christians!

Pensee

I think that's mainly the Catholic church. It's called transubstantiation (sp?). I think they still believe it.

I was raised in a Christian home, Christian private schools, attending church 3x a week or more. I still consider myself a Christian. My family, churches, and I have never believed anything like that. In fact, the first time I heard of it, I was amazed that anybody could believe that. It sounded pretty sick to me...

Metacrock

I don't think anyone uses that as an argument for God's existence. It has to do with Thomistic concepts of essence. They don't think that bread and wine become actual flesh and blood, but that they become in essence.It's a theological thing.

The Guy

At least where I live (east Tennessee) snake handlers probably outnumber Catholics in most small towns.

They (obviously) handle snakes and drink strychnine (Mark 16:18), but the most bizarre thing that they do is handle fire... I have tried for years to figure out why, and even one of their preachers I know is unable to tell me (he assures me the reason is biblical, but he doesn't know what it is). Anyway, they put a wick in a bottle full of a flammable liquid, light it, and hold the burning flame under their hand or chin.

Pensee

I've taken communion all my life. We believe the bread to be symbolic of Jesus' body and the wine (grape juice in the churches I've attended) to be symbolic of Jesus' blood. However, I think the Catholic church does believe that the bread literally turns into Jesus' body and that the wine literally turns into Jesus' blood.

I must say that the handling fires, snakes, etc. is out there. I don't think most Christians believe in that.

copernicus

Frazzydee, Christians have long been criticized for maintaining a ritual that almost certainly grew out of the religious practice of cannibalism. The practice of eating parts of dead heros or "god-flesh" is an ancient ritual that may also have been part of the practice of human sacrifice, another religion-inspired practice that became taboo as civilization matured. (Thank God for Abraham's second thoughts, eh? ) The Christians only borrowed a very familiar and popular ritual practice. This ritualized cannibalism is disgusting when you consider its origins, and most Christians probably don't realize its historical significance. Nancy Sherer speculates on this web page that it is no accident that Easter Communion and the Jewish Passover occur at the same time of the year as the Dionysian Mystery rites. The idea of a dying and rising god was a common metaphor in many ancient Middle Eastern cults for winter and summer. (The death of a god caused winter, and his/her rebirth caused summer.) Purification and renewal ceremonies require sacrifice, and that probably meant human victims in many cultures. Think about this the next time you contemplate what Jesus did during the Last Supper. Why would the participants want to eat his flesh and drink his blood, symbolically or in reality? We should look back on the substitution of animals for humans and bread/wine for flesh/blood as important steps in the progress of human culture. So, although communion may be a disgusting practice because of its historical origin, it is a righteous practice because of what it did for the advancement of civilization.

[ November 10, 2001: Message edited by: copernicus ]

daemon

While you're correct on the first point, Meta, a proper Catholic would likely disagree with your claim that they do not become actual flash and blood; according to transubstantiation, they do, because that is their substance. I personally think it's an insane doctrine... I used to get into arguments with my mother about it years before I went agnostic.

copernicus

Daemon, I don't despise the doctrine of transubstantiation. I think of it as a device used by evolving civilization to end the dangerous practice of cannibalism. Lots of religious rituals are designed to protect public health--e.g. bans on incest--and transubstantition did some good in helping to move primitive people away from the practice. The rationale for cannibalism was that it allowed one to assimilate the strength or intelligence of enemies, heros, ancestors, deities, etc. It has been a very widespread and common practice in human history. The Christian ritual deserves some respect for the good that it once did.

[ November 10, 2001: Message edited by: copernicus ]

daemon

I'm not saying it's evil, I'm saying it's insane, bizarre... it asserts that the bread and wine literally change into something completely different without any percievable effect whatsoever. I'd say there's no change in the physical world, but transubstantiation states that it is a physical change. It's the perfect example of irrational faith--you can't prove it, you can't explain it, it just is because the Church says so.