How many deny Jesus Christ in the Eucharist?

[benedictus2]

Shawn, still waiting for your response to this!

When 2 Christians “apply the test of Scripture just as the Bereans did” and come to 2 completely different understandings of Scripture, what’s the solution in your systemology?

There is no answer that will support his position and he knows it, that is why he is remaining silent.

 

[benedictus2]

Oh, dear Larkin, we are perfectly capable to talk about *both *things–you and this topic!

I’d have to disagree with you here PR, fence sitters are not very interesting individuals.

 

[benedictus2]

Well, you must be going out dancing tonight, cuz this is quite a dance in this post. My hat is off to your ability to avoid the subject of Jesus’ rebellion and execution and the reason(s) that the Romans put him to death.

Interesting coming from someone who has done nothing but dance around the real issue.

Make up your mind as to which camp you want to argue from. The divided heart is visible. The schism inside is boiling over to your posts.

 

[Esdra]

How would anyone know? That answer is only a matter of faith. They are all pretty good. I don’t see how one can go too wrong, really. It’s all about working hard, being humble, being kind, being just. The rest is little details….

You got it, larkin! +++++++++++++++

That’s exactely what I have been saying the last 500 posts in this thread or so!!

Hey guys, I have a nice quote for you.

We were talking about unity - about ONE body whose head is Christ himself.
This is what I found on: Weg der Versöhnung/Runder Tisch (=Way of reconciliation/Round Table):

Einheit in Christus bedeutet für uns nicht Vereinheitlichung, sondern die Anerkennung der Vielfalt des Leibes (Einheit in der Vielfalt).

in English: Unity in Christ doesn’t mean for us standardization, but recognition of the diversity of the body of Christ (Unity in diversity). [cf. “E pluribus unum”]

If anyone here knows German, I invite him to have a look at this Website! It’s great!
All denominations in Austria (the Baptists, the Pentecostals, the Catholic Church and the Lutheran Evangelical Church and some more) are sitting together on a round table, not for discussing but for learning from each other…

Esdra

 

[larkin31]

Interesting coming from someone who has done nothing but dance around the real issue.

Make up your mind as to which camp you want to argue from. The divided heart is visible. The schism inside is boiling over to your posts.

How is my heart divided, pray tell?

 

[larkin31]

Actually, this is the most reasonable conclusion if you believe that the Bible is inspired. I have shown with a clear logic why this is so…No, you have not. I keep replying that “inspired” and “inerrant” are not synonyms and that “inspired” does not logically lead to “inerrancy” either. You have offered no definitions to suggest that they are synonymous nor any logcial reasoning to demonstrate that inerrancy must by necessity follow from “inspiration.” I also keep repeating that the Bible is full of holy persons (I have listed them) who even while working with God’s inspiration (serving his will on earth) commit errors. I have even responded to the “all truth” line about the Church with a paragraph of rebuttal directly on the topic. That is no dance.

So, until you actually produce here some deductive or inductive reasoning of your own, then you should not make the claim that you have shown “with a clear logic” anything at all.

 

[rinnie]

Well, you must be going out dancing tonight, cuz this is quite a dance in this post. My hat is off to your ability to avoid the subject of Jesus’ rebellion and execution and the reason(s) that the Romans put him to death.

Larkin where did Jesus fight against anyone. Do you really think that the Romans put Jesus to death. Sorry my friend. The Romans had no power over Jesus. Did you not hear what Jesus said when he knew he was to be put to death. Jesus stood right in front of the crown and all and said you have no power over me, only what my Father has given you.

Jesus never came into this world as a Rebel. By Rebel I mean a fighter. That is why the Jews did not recognize him. They were looking for a strong King like David.

Jesus came in this world as gentle as a Lamb. The Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. And Jesus left this world as the Lamb led to slaughter for OUR sins.

The reason the Romans put Jesus to death is because they were afraid of him for goodness sakes. He was not putting up with their sinfull ways. They were afraid of losing control and power over people.

They could not control Jesus. Jesus made all men equal. But Jesus did not make a out and out war as a rebel would do. Jesus took it upon himself to take all the pain and abuse.

A Rebel is one who resists authority. Jesus was the complete example of obeying. He never resisted authority. He was completely loyal to his Father. That is what the Catholic CHurch teaches to be obey the leaders the Church has set out for you. We are also not Rebels we obey the teachings of Christ.

Jesus came to this world for one thing. To do his Fathers work!! To obey and be completely loyal to God is not a Rebel. I am sorry I disagree.

 

[PRmerger]

I’d have to disagree with you here PR, fence sitters are not very interesting individuals.

That’s interesting that you say that…'cause in a different thread another poster was confused about whether larkin was saying he was an atheist or an agnostic.

It seems that larkin, whom I am quite fond of despite his adamantine refusal to acknowledge his inconsistencies, is suffering from theological schizophrenia. :sad_yes:

 

[PRmerger]

Originally Posted by larkin31

                 [forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif](http://forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=6688164#post6688164) **The rest is little details...**.*

You got it, larkin! +++++++++++++++

That’s exactely what I have been saying the last 500 posts in this thread or so!!

Esdra, do you have Scripture verses which tell us which are the important things to believe in and which are the “little details”?

(I am not asking for your* interpretation* of what’s an important thing and what’s a “little detail”. I am looking for verses that you’ve found that tell us “this is an essential belief for Christians” and “this is a little detail”.)

As for me, to support what we’re doing here in discussing the “little details”, I will provide you with this one: “'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your MIND” (Luke 10:27)

Thus when we are discussing all of what you call “little details” we are trying to “love God with our MIND”. We are doing what has been commanded of us.

 

[rinnie]

No, you have not. I keep replying that “inspired” and “inerrant” are not synonyms and that “inspired” does not logically lead to “inerrancy” either. You have offered no definitions to suggest that they are synonymous nor any logcial reasoning to demonstrate that inerrancy must by necessity follow from “inspiration.” I also keep repeating that the Bible is full of holy persons (I have listed them) who even while working with God’s inspiration (serving his will on earth) commit errors. I have even responded to the “all truth” line about the Church with a paragraph of rebuttal directly on the topic. That is no dance.

So, until you actually produce here some deductive or inductive reasoning of your own, then you should not make the claim that you have shown “with a clear logic” anything at all.

Larkin what are you talking about? How can you say that inspired and inerrant are not used as synonyms. Please let me break it down for you.

Inspired = Divine means from GOD. inerrancy means containing no errors.

So when we say that the Church cannot err in its teaching we mean it.

The RCC is the Living CHrist. It is God leading the Church through the power of the Holy SPirit into all truth.

So what that means in simple English is this. God is speaking to the Church directly and God is perfect in his teaching and cannot err.

So to say that the RCC can err in its teaching is calling Jesus a Liar. Jesus said to the Apostles I will be sending you the Advocate the Holy Spirit who will give you the words.

Please do not take my words for it. Read it for yourself

John :25 I have said these things to you while I am still with you but the Paraclete the Holy Sprit whom the Father will send in my name will TEACH YOU EVERYTHING and remind you of all I have said to you.

The Teaching in this world is the Catholic Church which is left here. IT is the Living CHrist being led by the Holy Spirit to lead the Pope and the Bishops, Priests into all truth.

John 18 I shall not leave you orphans.

Now put that together and what do you get. Every teaching of the CC is inspired (the DIVINE TEACHING) of God and is Innerant (cannot err). Because the Holy Spirit cannot be wrong.

 

[rinnie]

That’s interesting that you say that…'cause in a different thread another poster was confused about whether larkin was saying he was an atheist or an agnostic.

It seems that larkin, whom I am quite fond of despite his adamantine refusal to acknowledge his inconsistencies, is suffering from theological schizophrenia. :sad_yes:

Much be too much of that dancing at night!:

 

[larkin31]

Larkin what are you talking about? How can you say that inspired and inerrant are not used as synonyms.

The two words, in both etymology and in definition, have absolutely nothing to do with each other. THAT is what I am talking about.

Please let me break it down for you.

Inspired = Divine means from GOD. inerrancy means containing no errors.

So when we say that the Church cannot err in its teaching we mean it.

The RCC is the Living CHrist. It is God leading the Church through the power of the Holy SPirit into all truth.

So what that means in simple English is this. God is speaking to the Church directly and God is perfect in his teaching and cannot err.

So to say that the RCC can err in its teaching is calling Jesus a Liar. Jesus said to the Apostles I will be sending you the Advocate the Holy Spirit who will give you the words.

You call this “clear logic”? This is a jumble of non-logic. Is this meant as a syllogism? I can’t even follow the grammar of each sentence. And you have non-sequitors in here in more than one place.

Please do not take my words for it. Read it for yourself

John :25 I have said these things to you while I am still with you but the Paraclete the Holy Sprit whom the Father will send in my name will TEACH YOU EVERYTHING and remind you of all I have said to you.

The Teaching in this world is the Catholic Church which is left here. IT is the Living CHrist being led by the Holy Spirit to lead the Pope and the Bishops, Priests into all truth.

John 18 I shall not leave you orphans.

Now put that together and what do you get. Every teaching of the CC is inspired (the DIVINE TEACHING) of God and is Innerant (cannot err). Because the Holy Spirit cannot be wrong.

I am familiar with the scriptural quotes. I am asking about persuasive argument. I see that you proclaim inerrancy as your faith.

I am even tempted to help you out and write the premises and conclusions for you. But I think that it is important for the self-assured to have to do the work themselves.

 

[larkin31]

Larkin where did Jesus fight against anyone. Do you really think that the Romans put Jesus to death.

wow

I don’t know what to say.

Yeah, I think that the Romans put Jesus on a cross and killed him. Yes, I do.

 

[monina]

The two words, in both etymology and in definition, have absolutely nothing to do with each other. THAT is what I am talking about.

Since no one seems to understand your definition of “inspired”, larkin, why don’t you make it clear to us.

What do you mean by the Bible is “inspired”? Please define “inspired” as it applies to Scripture.

 

[larkin31]

…A Rebel is one who resists authority. Jesus was the complete example of obeying. He never resisted authority. He was completely loyal to his Father. That is what the Catholic CHurch teaches to be obey the leaders the Church has set out for you. We are also not Rebels we obey the teachings of Christ.

Jesus came to this world for one thing. To do his Fathers work!! To obey and be completely loyal to God is not a Rebel. I am sorry I disagree.

I did not claim that he rebeled EVERYWHERE or even that he rebelled against God. It’s ok if you don’t see Jesus in part as being a rebel. But, you must admit at least this: he did not always obey gravity or the laws of physics

rebel!

You are kind of funny about this.

 

[larkin31]

Since no one seems to understand your definition of “inspired”, larkin, why don’t you make it clear to us.

What do you mean by the Bible is “inspired”? Please define “inspired” as it applies to Scripture.

inspire ɪnˈspaɪə]

vb

1. to exert a stimulating or beneficial effect upon (a person); animate or invigorate
2. (tr; foll by with or to; may take an infinitive) to arouse (with a particular emotion or to a particular action); stir
3. (tr) to prompt or instigate; give rise to her beauty inspired his love
4. (Christianity / Ecclesiastical Terms) (tr; often passive) to guide or arouse by divine influence or inspiration
5. (Life Sciences & Allied Applications / Physiology) to take or draw (air, gas, etc.) into the lungs; inhale
6. (tr) Archaic
   a. to breathe into or upon
   b. to breathe life into
   (in the sense: to breathe upon, blow into): from Latin inspīrāre, from spīrāre to breathe]

Here is “inerrant”:

in·er·rant (n-rnt)
adj.

1. Incapable of erring; infallible.
2. Containing no errors.

“errant” etymology:

[Middle English erraunt, from Anglo-Norman, partly from Old French errer, to travel about (from Vulgar Latin *iterre, from Latin iter, journey; see ei- in Indo-European roots) and partly from Old French errer, to err; see err.]

 

[Esdra]

**

Esdra, do you have Scripture verses which tell us which are the important things to believe in and which are the “little details”?

(I am not asking for your* interpretation* of what’s an important thing and what’s a “little detail”. I am looking for verses that you’ve found that tell us “this is an essential belief for Christians” and “this is a little detail”.)

As for me, to support what we’re doing here in discussing the “little details”, I will provide you with this one: “'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your MIND” (Luke 10:27)

Thus when we are discussing all of what you call “little details” we are trying to “love God with our MIND”. We are doing what has been commanded of us.

I am not so good in bible verses… But I’ll give it a try:

The important things are “mere Christianity” - Things on which nearly every denomination can agree on, like the Trinity, that Jesus is the Christ that He has saved us from our Souls. That He loves us. That we can faithfully call now God our Father (cf. 6:9-14). - Well this is what I understand under Mere Christianity. (Btw. I got that phrase from a board member here! - From Izdaari or so )
Actually also your verse stated above is also quite god what is important. I’d like to add

Mark 12:29-31
**
29** Jesus answered, "The foremost is, 'HEAR, O ISRAEL! THE LORD OUR GOD IS ONE LORD;
**
30 AND YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND, AND WITH ALL YOUR STRENGTH.’
**
31 “The second is this, ‘YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.”

Esdra

 

[PRmerger]

The important things are “mere Christianity” - Things on which nearly every denomination can agree on, like the Trinity, that Jesus is the Christ that He has saved us from our Souls. That He loves us. That we can faithfully call now God our Father (cf. 6:9-14). - Well this is what I understand under Mere Christianity. (Btw. I got that phrase from a board member here! - From Izdaari or so )

What you have done is given me your interpretation of what’s important. (I had asked you not to do that: (I am not asking for your* interpretation* of what’s an important thing and what’s a “little detail”. I am looking for verses that you’ve found that tell us “this is an essential belief for Christians” and “this is a little detail”.)

Saying that "the important things are ‘mere Christianity’ " is itself a man-made tradition, Esdra, as Scripture does not say that ever.

And, how does one know that Malachi 1:11 is not part of the “mere Christianity” principle?

Or that 1 Peter 2:11 is not part of the “mere Christianity” principle?

 

[monina]

inspire ɪnˈspaɪə]

vb
1.** to exert a stimulating or beneficial effect upon (a person); animate or invigorate**
2. (tr; foll by with or to; may take an infinitive) to arouse (with a particular emotion or to a particular action); stir
3. (tr) to prompt or instigate; give rise to her beauty inspired his love
4. (Christianity / Ecclesiastical Terms) (tr; often passive) to guide or arouse by divine influence or inspiration
5. (Life Sciences & Allied Applications / Physiology) to take or draw (air, gas, etc.) into the lungs; inhale
6. (tr) Archaic
a. to breathe into or upon
b. to breathe life into
(in the sense: to breathe upon, blow into): from Latin inspīrāre, from spīrāre to breathe]:

Thanks for the definition of “inspired.”

So now it would help if you would help us understand who it is you believe is doing the “breathing of life into” the Scripture writers.

Who is doing the “invigorating” or “animating” of the Scripture writers?

 

[larkin31]

Thanks for the definition of “inspired.”

So now it would help if you would help us understand who it is you believe is doing the “breathing of life into” the Scripture writers.

Who is doing the “invigorating” or “animating” of the Scripture writers?

It is a metaphorical word for the process of our finding impetus and purpose in our connections with the world around us and with each other and with our ideas that we project onto our environment and our cosmos.

I do not believe that there is a God or spirit in any supernatural sense. We project that idea out from our minds.