T
tgGodsway
Guest
Sorry I do not believe in the concept of a sacament.
This brings to mind a very poignant legal case.Was wondering about the best possible response for this question: if someone were to lose their memory and die soon after, would they be held accountable for the sins they committed in the past? As they’re unable to repent (because they weren’t aware of their sins),of course.
“Vernon Madison murdered an Alabama police officer in 1985…After a series of strokes, he is now unable to walk, and is also incontinent, legally blind, and so demented that he cannot recite the alphabet or rephrase a simple sentence. Perhaps most important legally, he can no longer remember the crime he committed, though he does understand that the state plans to execute him for murder.”
If a person has a brain injury and cannot remember all of the sins he has, he can still make a valid confession. There would be an excuse from material integrity. He can tell the Priest he is very sick and he cannot remember his specific sins because of his accident, but he is afraid for his soul and he knows he is Catholic (lets say his family visited him in the hospital and requested a Priest)…and the Priest can absolve him validly, provided penitent has even an imperfect contrition for any sins he may have committed.There seems to be no opportunity for him to repent if he can’t remember anything before his death. So i guess that leads to whether he is given an opportunity to repent after his death, but I’m not sure how legitimate this teaching is.
That’s the technical meaning. True.Ordinance- rule, law, decree. We recognize the command to baptize. But the word sacrament from the Latin according to the Catholic dictionary says they are vehicles of Grace.
On the contrary, we receive grace based upon God’s promises.Na… The concept itself (setting aside the practices) are forein to the Apostolic founder’s understanding of how we receive grace.
How did you connect the dots between the Hebrews 8 passage and the idea that the better promises were 7 sacraments? Curious.Hebrews 8:6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.
These better promises are the seven Sacraments.
I asked myself, “what is the difference between the Old and New Testaments?” The answer, “the better promises, the Sacraments.”De_Maria:![]()
How did you connect the dots between the Hebrews 8 passage and the idea that the better promises were 7 sacraments? Curious.Hebrews 8:6 But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.
These better promises are the seven Sacraments.
That’s because you’ve abandoned the Traditions which are the bedrock of the New Testament.My apology De_Maria, I didn’t read on. My bad.
But I am still interested in why you call these things sacraments. I believe in all you listed from the Hebrew passage but have never thought of them as sacraments.
The powers that come forth from the Body of Christ. Mark 5:25-34I accept the ordinance of Baptism and communion, but the concept of Sacrament itself I cannot find rooted in scripture. However, I would love to hear your view on it.
“For this reason a man shall leave [his] father and [his] mother
and be joined to his wife,
and the two shall become one flesh.”
32 This is a great mystery, but I speak in reference to Christ and the church.
If I’ve abandoned the traditions which are the bedrock of the New Testament, you would think that you could produce at least one New Testament writer or Apostle who directly teach, not just the concept of the Sacraments, but actually calling them sacraments. How about indirectly teach it?.. Surely somewhere in the Apostle Paul’s letters is a section on Sacraments. … Surely this specific word is stated somewhere by Peter in his letters… If the traditions reflect the reality of the 1st. Century Church, it should be a carbon copy of the intent found in their letters. Wouldn’t you think?That’s because you’ve abandoned the Traditions which are the bedrock of the New Testament.
Because you read Scripture anachronistically, you make unrealistic demands of Scripture. Asking for things which are not yet developed. The Church wrote the New Testament at a time when the Doctrines of Jesus Christ were recently born and not yet fully understood. Therefore, you will not find in Scripture words like “sacraments”, “trinity”, “transubstantiation”, or “hypostatic union.” You will only find these in later centuries as the Church developed language which better explained the mysteries which Jesus Christ revealed. This is to fulfill what Jesus Christ had prophecied:De_Maria:![]()
If I’ve abandoned the traditions which are the bedrock of the New Testament, you would think that you could produce at least one New Testament writer or Apostle who directly teach, not just the concept of the Sacraments, but actually calling them sacraments.That’s because you’ve abandoned the Traditions which are the bedrock of the New Testament.
Aspects of the Sacrament of Baptism are clearly explained by various authors in Scripture. For example:How about indirectly teach it?..