So are you saying the early church had it wrong? If so when did they finally get it right? When you came along or earlier, if earlier give a time.
You come here calling us idolaters, refuse to answer any of the many questions asked of you in this thread or the other on John 6 and then suggest we need to relax? I don’t get what your goal is here.
I was offended at first, then I realized it was a response from someone that couldn’t offer a real answer.
That would work except for context. Your reply, as a “joke”, does not fit the context of the thread nor the reply to YOUR question.See, I knew Catholics had no sense of humor!
Have you heard the one about the Priest and a late night game of bingo?
Before this time the Church did not have to declare it because all knew that the Church Compiled the Bible through the guidance of the Holy Spirit. If you think the bible is infallible then the Authoritative Church that declared it inspired must also be. The Bible support Catholic Traditions because the Church used Catholic Tradition to help with the compiling of the bible so they must and do support each other.
He’s not going to pray to St. Francis about this because he’s asking you the question, which you’ve seemed to miss . . . or maybe you haven’t and are just dodging the question . . .Why don’t you pray to him and wear his medal and put a candle in front of his haloed icon and maybe you’ll experience a Marian apparition! Oh wait, he’s the pet saint, right?
C’mon! That’s funny!
and then I decide to do bad things to that symbol symbol…like say this: http://pages.prodigy.net/rogerlori1/emoticons/blowup1.gif I may indeed be guilty of abusing that symbol of the good man Karl Keating, but am I guilty of his body and blood? Silly question…of course not! Why? BECAUSE KARL KEATING IS NOT REALLY PRESENT IN THAT SYMBOL is he?As a young catholic at first I was offended and enranged by this comment. Now I’m just sad , deeply sad. Sad that a Pastor can be this callous and misguided. Like others have said, even if you don’t agree with or understand our devotion to the saints , why would you mock it? Some part of you wanted to offend just because or maybe because you had no other answer for all the challenges that have been presented to you.Why don’t you pray to him and wear his medal and put a candle in front of his haloed icon and maybe you’ll experience a Marian apparition! Oh wait, he’s the pet saint, right?
C’mon! That’s funny!
If these things were invented by Catholics 500 years after the Great Schism, as you claim, then why do the Orthodox believe in Sacred Tradition and venerate Mary. How do Protestants even explain the existence of the Orthodox Churches? If they’re not proof that the early Church wasn’t Protestant I don’t know what is.
That reminds me of Second Thessalonians where Paul gave some very instructive teaching about following the traditions (both oral and written) passed down by the apostles: “Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours” (2:15).
The Bible can’t stand on it’s own. The Bible can’t even define which books make up the Bible. Take a step back, Sacred Tradition gave us Sacred Scripture. The gospel was declared orally decades before it was written down, centuries before the Canon was set, and well over a millennium before most Christians were literate. There’s no need to pit Tradition and Scripture against each other, they both convey the same deposit of faith that was given to the Apostles - they compliment and complete each other. If you don’t believe me, just ask the Orthodox.
See, I knew Catholics had no sense of humor!
Have you heard the one about the Priest and a late night game of bingo?
:clapping:I used to be a Southern Baptist, and almost went into their ministry, but God had other ideas. (My Testimony)
You try to yank John 6 out of the context of the rest of the New Testament on the doctrine of the Eucharist, but it’s a waste of time. Those committed to absolute truth look at all the relevant passages as well as the authentic and verifiable writings of the earliest church fathers who received their teaching from the apostles themselves.
1500 years later, men produced errant doctrines that agree with neither the New Testament nor those same Church fathers.
This is shown in the following article from my own Catholic blog.
The Eucharist IS Scriptural
If there is no real presence in the Eucharist, then how can St.Paul warn us not to take it unworthily lest we become guilty of the body and blood of the Lord? That “spiritualization” makes complete nonsense not only of the 6th chapter of John, but of 1st Corinthians 10:16-17 “16 The chalice of benediction, which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? And the bread, which we break, is it not the partaking of the body of the Lord? 17 For we, being many, are one bread, one body, all that partake of one bread.”
and 11: 23-30
23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread. 24 And giving thanks, broke, and said: Take ye, and eat: this is my body, which shall be delivered for you: this do for the commemoration of me. 25 In like manner also the chalice, after he had supped, saying: This chalice is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as often as you shall drink, for the commemoration of me.
26 For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until he come. 27 Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. 28 But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. 29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. 30 Therefore are there many inform and weak among you, and many sleep.
Now, how can one become guilty of the body and blood of the Lord IF THAT BODY AND BLOOD OF THE LORD IS NOT REALLY THERE? Now if I make a symbol of Karl Keating like this symbol here:
There is the the whole case for why the Eucharist really is the presence of Our Lord Jesus Christ…body and blood, soul and divinity.
Grace be with youLet me comfort you by telling you what a priest told me when I informed him that I had been a Baptist before my conversion. He said that a large percentage of Catholic converts come from the baptist denomination…very large
I though this was an “Ask the Baptist Pastor” thread… I guess we are supposed to ask easy questions, instead of hard hitting ones. After reading some of the other posts it is starting to become clear to me that we are dealing with a troll. Not the first time, and it will not be the last
It is inconsistent. If it was good enough for 1500ish years there was no need to codify it at that point because everybody already knew about it. Or there is the alternative, which I believe is more likely.
You can be broken and sinful AND infallible. Infallible and incorruptible are two different things.
Can you point me to the Apostles, those who gave those oral statements and letters, where they venerated Mary for instance. No? I didn’t think so. We can keep going down this trial, but I don’t think you’ll find the support you would purport for your argument here.