Is the Bible Inerrant?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Randy_Carson
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Church_Militant said:
I don’t think so. Since our Eucharistic beliefs are identical to those both of the New Testament and to the ECF (See Ignatius letter to Smyrna Chapters 7 & 8). I’d say that those churches who do not hold those beliefs would be the ones to have departed from the faith of the apostles and the real early church.
Click to expand...
Identical!!!
You replaced the meal practiced by the Apostles with a liturgical service!
In the following directives I have no praise for you, for your meetings do more harm than good.
Click to expand...
  1. In the first place, I hear that when you come together as a church, there are divisions among you, and to some extent I believe it. 19. No doubt there have to be differences among you to show which of you have God’s approval. 20. When you come together, it is not the Lord’s Supper you eat, 21. for as you eat, each of you goes ahead without waiting for anybody else. One remains hungry, another gets drunk. 22. Don’t you have homes to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and humiliate those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you for this? Certainly not!
Click to expand...
*23. For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you:
The Lord Jesus, on the night He was betrayed, took bread,
24. and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said,
“This is My body, which is for you;
do this in remembrance of Me.”
25. In the same way, after supper He took the cup, saying,
“This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this,
whenever you drink it, in remembrance of Me.”
26. For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes. 27. Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28. A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup. 29. For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself. 30. That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep (died). 31. But if we judged ourselves, we would not come under judgment. 32. When we are judged by the Lord, we are being disciplined so that we will not be condemned with the world. 33. So then, my brothers, when you come together to eat, wait for each other. 34. If anyone is hungry, he should eat at home, so that when you meet together it may not result in judgment. *
 
Fredricks said:
Im rather busy. You are a good summarizer CM. What are your thoughts?
Click to expand...
Sorry, can’t help ya with that. If you’re too busy to follow up a lead for yourself, you’re too busy to enter a debate on the the issue. It’s simple…download the MP3 and then burn it to a CD and then listen to it as you drive to and from work or whenever you have the time.

If truth is important to you…you’ll go for it.
 
Church_Militant said:
Sorry, can’t help ya with that. If you’re too busy to follow up a lead for yourself, you’re too busy to enter a debate on the the issue. It’s simple…download the MP3 and then burn it to a CD and then listen to it as you drive to and from work or whenever you have the time.

If truth is important to you…you’ll go for it.
Click to expand...
Burn a CD? I would get thrown out for sure! We are not allowed to have matches!
 
Fredricks said:
Identical!!!
You replaced the meal practiced by the Apostles with a liturgical service!
Click to expand...
and …
  1. Where is that proscribed by scripture?
  2. How did the belief differ?
You cannot provide a viable case for either one.
Fredricks said:
Burn a CD? I would get thrown out for sure! We are not allowed to have matches!
Click to expand...
So…either you are computer illiterate or trying to be cute.

Do your own homework.
 
So…either you are computer illiterate or trying to be cute.
Click to expand...
Do your own homework.
Click to expand...
The first. Bet I know more than your Grandfater or Father does, do not know how old you are.
Militancy is the opposite of hospitality I suppose.
 
The “passover” meal was liturgical and that was what they were celebrating at the “last supper” How could the meal celebrated by the early christians be other than liturgical supper?

How could an ordinary supper eaten “un-worthily” bring “death” upon the partaker?

No. Scripture gives witness to the eucharistic meal celebrated liturgically and history amd the constant tradition of the Church say “amen”
 
YADA said:
The “passover” meal was liturgical and that was what they were celebrating at the “last supper” How could the meal celebrated by the early christians be other than liturgical supper?
How could an ordinary supper eaten “un-worthily” bring “death” upon the partaker?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Fredricks said:
Identical!!!
You replaced the meal practiced by the Apostles with a liturgical service!
Click to expand...
Exactly when did we replace the meal practiced by the Apostles with a liturgical service.

Was it before 155 AD when St. Justin Martyr wrote his First Apology (see chapters 66 and 67)?

Or was it before 120 AD when St. Ignatius died after writing his Epistle to the Smyrnaeans ? (see chapter 6)?

Or was it before 70 AD when the Didache was written? (see chapter 9)?

Or was it on the road to Emmaus in 33 AD, where the two disciples told what things were done in the way: and how they knew him in the breaking of bread?

But back to the topic of this thread, I have to say that the Bible is inerrant, and the Catholic Church is the infallible interpreter of this inerrant book. What good would an inerrant book be without some one to explain it to us?

Acts 8: 27 - 31
And he rose and went. And behold, an Ethiopian, a eunuch, a minister of the Can’dace, queen of the Ethiopians, in charge of all her treasure, had come to Jerusalem to worship and was returning; seated in his chariot, he was reading the prophet Isaiah. And the Spirit said to Philip, “Go up and join this chariot.” So Philip ran to him, and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet, and asked, “Do you understand what you are reading?” And he said, “How can I, unless some one guides me?” And he invited Philip to come up and sit with him.
 
We eat the mana from heaven, the bread that nourishes the soul. You do not think that one bite of the Body and Blood of Jesus is a full meal?

God’s ways are not ours and how the Eucharist nourishes is a mystery. But Jesus told us we must “eat and drink” to have life in us. Tead John Chapter 6. He [Jesus] instituted the Eucharist at the Last Supper and told us to do this…

This Eucharistic meal was first in addition to a common meal, but St. Paul tol the followers to eat first and then come to the Eucharist. And that is a practice we still follow.

Sometimes our seperated brethren beleive in a God that is too small and too insignificant. That “Jesus” cannot speak what he means, leaves a church without leadership, cannot make himself present in the Eucharist. In fact when his followers left him for teaching cannibalism in oposition to Jewish Law, Jesus the Eucharist is only symbolic let them leve rather than explain his metaphore and/or symbology. In fact, he never explained the symbology to the apostles so they could later set the record straight. That Jesus could not be a savior to his earthly mother at the moment of her conception nor assist her in remaining free of personal sin. In fact, that Jesus our seperated brethren hold seems a distant God and far different than the Jesus of scripture.

That Jesus lets a church gro to strength and influance, determine the “Bible” and in apostasy at the same time…Amazing…

Scripture teaches the validity of the Eucharist as in it is the real body and blood which we are called to eat and drink, worthily, less we eat and drink to our death. To say “communion” is symbolic is not found anywhere in scripture…
 
Fredricks said:
The first. Bet I know more than your Grandfather or Father does, do not know how old you are.
Militancy is the opposite of hospitality I suppose.
Click to expand...
As usual a misunderstanding of my username…

I’m 54 an both are dead…both were Catholics.

No…I just figure that if it’s important enough for you to debate then it’s important enough for you to make the effort for yourself. I’ve already heard it…

It’s not like it’s difficult…you can even just listen to it on that comp you are using.

Hospitality is one thing…debate is another. You studied all the stuff about the Catholic Church that you currently believe…it behooves an honest person to study when refutation is provided concerning something that you currently hold as true.

If you have the courage of your convictions that is…
 
Church_Militant said:
As usual a misunderstanding of my username…

I’m 54 an both are dead…both were Catholics.

No…I just figure that if it’s important enough for you to debate then it’s important enough for you to make the effort for yourself. I’ve already heard it…

It’s not like it’s difficult…you can even just listen to it on that comp you are using.

Hospitality is one thing…debate is another. You studied all the stuff about the Catholic Church that you currently believe…it behooves an honest person to study when refutation is provided concerning something that you currently hold as true.

If you have the courage of your convictions that is…
Click to expand...
Not old enough to be your grandfather…
might be younger than your parents would be.
God bless.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top