Who hath woe? who hath sorrow? who hath contentions? who hath babbling? who hath wounds without cause...

"Apostolics" absolutely BTFO! Jesus used grape juice.

Attached: Lords-Supper-Communion.jpg (714x500, 294.61K)

Other urls found in this thread:

fundamentallyreformed.com/2008/08/10/proverbs-23-and-a-universal-prohibition-of-alcohol/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Wine in the OT = fermented grape juice which makes one drunk, i.e. what we typically associate with wine today.

By NT times the meaning was modified to mean either regular grape juice or the fermented kind, as the Greek word oinos itself demonstrates. Since the Bible clearly warns against wine as sinful, and we know Jesus was sinless, we can deduce that he used grape juice not wine.

"Apostolics" BTFO!

Are you finally insane?

Attached: Fr_Gregory_Hesse.webm (640x360, 7.78M)

SHUT UP PROTESTANT
Please go get a proper Bible and stop talking nonsense. Peace be with you.

Attached: tumblr_olp9m1smRw1r4yioeo4_1280.jpg (800x450, 122.54K)

fundamentallyreformed.com/2008/08/10/proverbs-23-and-a-universal-prohibition-of-alcohol/

Attached: c10cd350bca3656cd8c1ba8808d7086f54ba755e7ade80b7268716bf39d52279.jpg (206x244, 5.86K)

Hesse is a meme

Attacking people for drinking. Where have I heard that before?

But at least we all remember the wedding at Cana:

Attached: 1531643001074.jpg (271x186, 7.77K)

Yeah, no. Good thing that Christ did use whole of Bible: Wine taken with sobriety is equal life to men: if thou drink it moderately, thou shalt be sober.

"It remains for the new preachers to point out those falsehoods of which they accuse these books; which they will in truth never do. But I see them coming, bringing forward the intercession of Saints, prayer for the dead, free-will, the honouring of relics, and similar points, which are expressly confirmed in the Books of Machabees, in Ecclesiasticus, and in other books which they pretend to be apocryphal. For God’s sake take care that your judgment does not deceive you. Why, I pray you, do you call false, things which the whole of antiquity has held as articles of faith? Why do you not rather censure your fancies which will not embrace the doctrine of these books, than censure these books which have been received for so long a time because they do not jump with your humour? Because you will not believe what the books teach, you condemn it; why do you not rather condemn your presumption which is incredulous to their teaching?"

- St. Francis De Sales

If you reject the "apocrypha" why accept the rest of Sacred Scripture? The Church affirmed it for you.

Or, do you take it that the Jews have authority over the Christian canon?

"As to your saying that these books which you call apocryphal are not received by the Jews, you say nothing new or important. S. Augustine loudly exclaims: “It is the Catholic Church which holds the Books of Machabees as canonical, not the Jews.” (De. Civ. Dei. Xviii. 36.) Show me from Scripture that the Christian Church has not as much power to give authority to the sacred books as the Mosaic may have had. There is not in this either Scripture or reason to show for it."

If you believe in Transubstantiation why does it matter whether the grape juice is alcoholic or not, seeing as it will ultimately become Jesus' blood?

If you're doing it in memory of Him it helps to remember it right.

It's still the Fruit of the Vine

Are you aware that Luther cut up the Bible literally because the kikes told him to?
Great job parroting the lies of the synagogue of Satan without even knowing. Top protestantism.

the church whose priests and prophets follow after the ways of baalim even to this day, user. if christian church history has led to where it is today, then therebye do we know its fruits.

It's not wine if it's not alcoholic.
It's not bread if it's not leavened.

...

Attached: 1ggf44458167.png (550x404, 110.16K)

Luther hated jews silly. He cut out the Catholic Bible because Masoretic text is much earlier then Septuagint which didn't have thosr catholic books

If Transubstantiation is the true doctrine then it doesn't matter what the original items used were because they are annihilated when they become the Body and Blood. I'm sure the wine used in Communion isn't the same as that Jesus used in Palestine 2000 years ago. Insisting on it being X and Y just smacks of Memorialism.

The Septuagint was the Christian Old Testament for centuries, the Masoretic text was used by Jews to discount Christianity. Protestant Bibles are literally based on Jewish texts. Not surprised though considering that so many of your are "Christian" Zionists.

Wrong, they still have the outer appearance of bread and wine.

Christ used wine when he said "This is my blood", so we also use wine.
'The exact same' isn't an argument, we use the same kind of liquid, namely wine which is different from fruit juice.

Also as what you said here
This is like saying why does the bible or going to church on sunday matter if the only thing you need for your salvation is faith.

He didn't hate Jews early on, it was only after he got burned by the Jews and the damage was already done.

From the essay "That Jesus Christ Was Born a Jew" 1523 Martin Luther


They have dealt with the Jews as if they were dogs rather than human beings; they have done little else than deride them and seize their property


1546 Martin Luther writes "On the Jews and Their Lies"

is that a small cup of maple syrup with a teaspoon of butter?

Is this a joke?

Baptists and nondenoms aren't protestant. Protestants broke from the Church of Rome.

Baptists are protestant, your entire tradition is sprung from puritans

If all you have are lies to back up your presumption, it is surely grievously sinful, user.


The biggest Christian and longest running Church of all-time? There's a reason why the Catholic Church traces itself back to Christ, your man-made church cannot say the same.

...

Get behind me, Satan.

that's my line.

Satan cannot be divided against himself, so I doubt that.