What is it we do in remembrance? this IS my body. We take and eat His body and drink His blood, given and shed, for the forgiveness of sins
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
D
drblank1
Guest
Scriptural gymnastics.
And after Jesus supposedly “turned” the wine into His blood, He said, “For I tell you I will not drink again from the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.” Luke 22:18
Strange how He still called it wine and not His blood. Even more strange is how in ALL the miracles in the Bible, the one most crucial to the Roman Catholic Mass has ZERO commentary in the Scriptures that calls it out as a miracle. The one and only.
Scriptural gymnastics.
And after Jesus supposedly “turned” the wine into His blood, He said, “For I tell you I will not drink again from the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.” Luke 22:18
Strange how He still called it wine and not His blood. Even more strange is how in ALL the miracles in the Bible, the one most crucial to the Roman Catholic Mass has ZERO commentary in the Scriptures that calls it out as a miracle. The one and only.
Scriptural gymnastics.
Last edited:
L
Luke-Suncook
Guest
arg wrth wrtj wruyety wrt
Last edited:
S
Shannon9791
Guest
First things first, I’m a guy.
Now that that’s out of the way, you brought up the “essentials” and I want to know what the protocol is for when you and another Christian (non-Catholic) church disagree on that. Especially if you’re using the same “66 agreed upon books” of the Bible. If there are 2 opposite positions, you both can’t be right.
The Catholic Church does allow us to interpret Scripture. We just can’t do it outside of what the Church teaches. And why would we? If I believe that the Catholic Church is the Church that Jesus founded on the Rock that is Peter 2000 years ago, why would I want to go off on my own to do my own thing?
Your last bit about me critiquing your writing is hilarious, and the hoops you jump through to draw your conclusion are all over the place. You have set the Bible up as your only true authority, but the Catholic Church does not. I don’t have to “conclude from Scripture” that the Catholic Church is the one true Church. The Catholic Church is the Church that codified Scripture from our Sacred Tradition!
Finally, I don’t need Scripture to judge whether or not the Protestant position is wrong. I can judge the Protestant position is wrong by simply asking Protestants, like yourself, a simple question. What is the list of essentials and non-essentials, and to whom do you go when there is a disagreement on those things?
Now that that’s out of the way, you brought up the “essentials” and I want to know what the protocol is for when you and another Christian (non-Catholic) church disagree on that. Especially if you’re using the same “66 agreed upon books” of the Bible. If there are 2 opposite positions, you both can’t be right.
The Catholic Church does allow us to interpret Scripture. We just can’t do it outside of what the Church teaches. And why would we? If I believe that the Catholic Church is the Church that Jesus founded on the Rock that is Peter 2000 years ago, why would I want to go off on my own to do my own thing?
Your last bit about me critiquing your writing is hilarious, and the hoops you jump through to draw your conclusion are all over the place. You have set the Bible up as your only true authority, but the Catholic Church does not. I don’t have to “conclude from Scripture” that the Catholic Church is the one true Church. The Catholic Church is the Church that codified Scripture from our Sacred Tradition!
Finally, I don’t need Scripture to judge whether or not the Protestant position is wrong. I can judge the Protestant position is wrong by simply asking Protestants, like yourself, a simple question. What is the list of essentials and non-essentials, and to whom do you go when there is a disagreement on those things?
S
Shannon9791
Guest
Oh yeah, I know that the Eucharist is both in the Bible and essential, just like Baptism and Confession.
S
Shannon9791
Guest
That’s because in Luke 22:18, Jesus was still talking about wine. He didn’t bless the cup until verse 22.
D
drblank1
Guest
Sorry dude!!! LOL
We go to the The Holy Spirit for the list.
Look at it this way: what was the plot of Harry Potter? Did the characters look at the screen and say to the audience at the beginning of the film, “Now the main plot here is for Harry to fulfill the prophecy and kill the evil overlord.” No, but we all know what the overall plot was as the movies progressed. We didn’t need the character to list out all the plot-lines in the movies did we? Same with the reading Scripture and relying on the Holy Spirit to guide us. It comes down to trusting Him. Plain and simple. And that is why all the main protestant denomination ALL agree on the essentials of faith and doctrine. And how we all agree the Catholic Church is not the one true church of Jesus Christ.
There are no hoops to jump through. Let me prove it to you and I challenge you to directly answer my questions. Why do you believe the CC is correct in its doctrine and practices? Is it because you were told by the CC this is what is and you just believed? Or did you read Scripture for yourself and come to the conclusion that the CC is correct?
We go to the The Holy Spirit for the list.
Look at it this way: what was the plot of Harry Potter? Did the characters look at the screen and say to the audience at the beginning of the film, “Now the main plot here is for Harry to fulfill the prophecy and kill the evil overlord.” No, but we all know what the overall plot was as the movies progressed. We didn’t need the character to list out all the plot-lines in the movies did we? Same with the reading Scripture and relying on the Holy Spirit to guide us. It comes down to trusting Him. Plain and simple. And that is why all the main protestant denomination ALL agree on the essentials of faith and doctrine. And how we all agree the Catholic Church is not the one true church of Jesus Christ.
There are no hoops to jump through. Let me prove it to you and I challenge you to directly answer my questions. Why do you believe the CC is correct in its doctrine and practices? Is it because you were told by the CC this is what is and you just believed? Or did you read Scripture for yourself and come to the conclusion that the CC is correct?
D
drblank1
Guest
And its still strange how in ALL the miracles in the Bible, the one most crucial to the Roman Catholic Mass has ZERO commentary in the Scriptures that calls it out as a miracle. The one and only.
And when Paul was instructing the Corinthians, he could have clarified there was a miracle but didn’t. Hmmmm???
And when Paul was instructing the Corinthians, he could have clarified there was a miracle but didn’t. Hmmmm???
Last edited:
L
Luke-Suncook
Guest
gh stjey wrtuik eyi e
Last edited:
Not just the Roman Catholic mass, the mass of virtually all Christianity except for those who Luther referred to as enthusiast. So, if it is scriptural gymnastics, the entirety of the Church until the likes of Karlstadt and Zwingli practiced it.Scriptural gymnastics.
And after Jesus supposedly “turned” the wine into His blood, He said, “For I tell you I will not drink again from the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.” Luke 22:18
Strange how He still called it wine and not His blood. Even more strange is how in ALL the miracles in the Bible, the one most crucial to the Roman Catholic Mass has ZERO commentary in the Scriptures that calls it out as a miracle. The one and only.
Scriptural gymnastics.
As Luther, who many claim/accuse of being the first "Protestant " said about scriptural gymnastics:
Who, but the devil, has granted such license of wresting the words of the holy Scripture? Who ever read in the Scriptures, that my body is the same as the sign of my body? or, that is is the same as it signifies? What language in the world ever spoke so? It is only then the devil, that imposes upon us by these fanatical men. Not one of the Fathers of the Church, though so numerous, ever spoke as the Sacramentarians: not one of them ever said, It is only bread and wine; or, the body and blood of Christ is not there present.
And about those who defend the real presence:
Surely, it is not credible, nor possible, since they often speak, and repeat their sentiments, that they should never (if they thought so) not so much as once, say, or let slip these words: It is bread only; or the body of Christ is not there, especially it being of great importance, that men should not be deceived. Certainly, in so many Fathers, and in so many writings, the negative might at least be found in one of them, had they thought the body and blood of Christ were not really present: but they are all of them unanimous.
And lest we move in the direction of parsing real presence and Transubstaniation, That was my point, that while those of us who are nonCatholic may not like the metaphysical overtones, the real presence it is intended to defend is scriptural
S
Shannon9791
Guest
I believe the Catholic Church is correct because I’ve read and studied history. What were people doing before the Bible was put together? Do you know why the books of the Bible became the books of the Bible? It’s because they didn’t contradict the things people already believed.
You’ve yet to even answer my question, or attempt to answer it. If you and one of your non-Catholic brethren disagree on what is essential or non-essential, who determines which position is right?
You’ve yet to even answer my question, or attempt to answer it. If you and one of your non-Catholic brethren disagree on what is essential or non-essential, who determines which position is right?
There are lots of people who have studied history and have come to a different conclusion.=“Shannon9791, post:92, topic:444554, full:true”]
I believe the Catholic Church is correct because I’ve read and studied history. What were people doing before the Bible was put together? Do you know why the books of the Bible became the books of the Bible? It’s because they didn’t contradict the things people already believed.
People were reading and hearing the apostles. People were listening to the truly ecumenical councils of the early Church. People were listening to the Church Fathers. And people were reading the scriptures - “It is written…”
Scripture, the councils, the ECF’s are a very good start.You’ve yet to even answer my question, or attempt to answer it. If you and one of your non-Catholic brethren disagree on what is essential or non-essential, who determines which position is right?
D
drblank1
Guest
Shannon,
So you read and interpreted for yourself the RCC is correct. And the only way to do so is to judge/interpret Scripture and come to the conclusion that the RCC was correct. You applied your private interpretation against the RCC’s interpretation to come to your conclusion.
I have given you your answer previously. The Holy Spirit guides us on what is essential. I get it why it so hard for a RC to trust in Him, but as you can see, proof is in the pudding. All the mainline Protestant denominations agree on what is essential doctrine. All else, God gives us religious freedom to be guided by the Holy Spirit.
Now that I’ve answered your question, answer mine. Who is correct in their practices and doctrines? The RCC, Reformed Catholic Church, Orthodox Church, or the Anglican Church? And who decides the others are wrong?
So you read and interpreted for yourself the RCC is correct. And the only way to do so is to judge/interpret Scripture and come to the conclusion that the RCC was correct. You applied your private interpretation against the RCC’s interpretation to come to your conclusion.
I have given you your answer previously. The Holy Spirit guides us on what is essential. I get it why it so hard for a RC to trust in Him, but as you can see, proof is in the pudding. All the mainline Protestant denominations agree on what is essential doctrine. All else, God gives us religious freedom to be guided by the Holy Spirit.
Now that I’ve answered your question, answer mine. Who is correct in their practices and doctrines? The RCC, Reformed Catholic Church, Orthodox Church, or the Anglican Church? And who decides the others are wrong?
S
Shannon9791
Guest
Yes, I read things made a judgement call on what was right. Was Scripture one of those things I read, sure, but it wasn’t the only thing. I studied things outside of the Catholic faith and the only conclusion I could muster was that the one true Church is the Catholic Church. Are we not to use our brains to determine our faith? I don’t understand what you’re trying to say here.
You have not answered me on the non-essentials. I disagree with you when you say the mainline protestant denominations agree. My friend who is Lutheran is all in for baptizing infants, but other friends who are Baptist are staunchly against this practice. I’ve even been told by a Baptist that baptism is unnecessary. All three use the bible to back their reasoning, and 2 of the three agree that baptism is needed (aka “essential”). If you believe something is essential and someone else deems it non-essential, who is right? And how do you figure out who is right?
The Catholic Church is the one true Church, founded by Jesus on the Rock that is Peter. All those who fall under her umbrella share in the fullness of truth.
You have not answered me on the non-essentials. I disagree with you when you say the mainline protestant denominations agree. My friend who is Lutheran is all in for baptizing infants, but other friends who are Baptist are staunchly against this practice. I’ve even been told by a Baptist that baptism is unnecessary. All three use the bible to back their reasoning, and 2 of the three agree that baptism is needed (aka “essential”). If you believe something is essential and someone else deems it non-essential, who is right? And how do you figure out who is right?
The Catholic Church is the one true Church, founded by Jesus on the Rock that is Peter. All those who fall under her umbrella share in the fullness of truth.
=“Shannon9791, post:95, topic:444554, full:true”]
Yes, I read things made a judgement call on what was right. Was Scripture one of those things I read, sure, but it wasn’t the only thing. I studied things outside of the Catholic faith and the only conclusion I could muster was that the one true Church is the Catholic Church. Are we not to use our brains to determine our faith? I don’t understand what you’re trying to say here.
Shannon, I honor your decision to be Catholic. I believe there the Holy Spirit uses the CC to provide the mean of grace, in word and sacrament.
My point is you are advancing a false narrative here that, somehow, what Lutherans believe is somehow contingent upon, or measured by, what Baptists believe. They are two different traditions, with different roots. And the logical response from either is why does the Catholic Church read the same councils and scripture as the EO, and come up with the idea of Papal supremacy when the EO doesn’t.
Yes, I read things made a judgement call on what was right. Was Scripture one of those things I read, sure, but it wasn’t the only thing. I studied things outside of the Catholic faith and the only conclusion I could muster was that the one true Church is the Catholic Church. Are we not to use our brains to determine our faith? I don’t understand what you’re trying to say here.
Shannon, I honor your decision to be Catholic. I believe there the Holy Spirit uses the CC to provide the mean of grace, in word and sacrament.
I agree with you, too. In the same way, I think it is disingenuous when Catholics use the false narrative that protestants all came from the same group and then splintered, that protestants all have the same “Protestant theology” but disagree.You have not answered me on the non-essentials. I disagree with you when you say the mainline protestant denominations agree.
You make the mistaken assumption that Lutherans only use scripture in the same way that Baptists might. Lutherans use scripture as the final norm, that is true, but consistently look at Tradition and the ECFs to enlighten their understanding of scripture.My friend who is Lutheran is all in for baptizing infants, but other friends who are Baptist are staunchly against this practice. I’ve even been told by a Baptist that baptism is unnecessary. All three use the bible to back their reasoning, and 2 of the three agree that baptism is needed (aka “essential”). If you believe something is essential and someone else deems it non-essential, who is right? And how do you figure out who is right?
My point is you are advancing a false narrative here that, somehow, what Lutherans believe is somehow contingent upon, or measured by, what Baptists believe. They are two different traditions, with different roots. And the logical response from either is why does the Catholic Church read the same councils and scripture as the EO, and come up with the idea of Papal supremacy when the EO doesn’t.
And the EO says the same thing. Just saying so doesn’t make it so.The Catholic Church is the one true Church, founded by Jesus on the Rock that is Peter. All those who fall under her umbrella share in the fullness of truth.
No, they don’t. The statement is just incorrect. there are doctrinal reasons why Baptists and Methodists don’t sign on to the Augsburg Confession, and why continuing Anglicans are not in communion with Calvinists.=“drblank1, post:94, topic:444554, full:true”]
I have given you your answer previously. The Holy Spirit guides us on what is essential. I get it why it so hard for a RC to trust in Him, but as you can see, proof is in the pudding. All the mainline Protestant denominations agree on what is essential doctrine. All else, God gives us religious freedom to be guided by the Holy Spirit.
Lutherans clearly teach Baptismal regeneration, that Baptism is necessary to salvation, and that infant Baptism is critical. It is an essential. Not all mainline protestant traditions teach that.
Anglicans believe that a valid priesthood must be validly ordained within Apostolic succession. This is an essential.
Lutherans and Anglicans clearly believe that the Church is obligated to provide the means of grace, such as confession and absolution, including private confession. This is an essential.
The doctrine of the real presence is essential for Lutherans and (most) Anglicans.
Last edited:
D
drblank1
Guest
Jon, just did a quick check on Lutherans and you are incorrect regarding baptism (at least LCMS). From the LCMS FAQ section on baptism,
“Lutherans believe that the Bible teaches that a person is saved by God’s grace alone through faith in
Jesus Christ alone.” Essential
“The LCMS does not believe that Baptism is ABSOLUTELY necessary for salvation.” EXTREMELY IMPORTANT but not essential.
Also, “As you also no doubt are fully aware, we teach that it is not the lack of Baptism that
necessarily condemns, but it is the despising of this precious gift that endangers faith, for God Himself
has instituted it and attached His promises to it.” Lutherans believe if someone comes to faith by God’s grace alone through faith in Jesus Christ alone, they are saved. And if someone is not baptized (say on his/her way to church to be baptized and are killed in a car accident). EXTREMELY IMPORTANT but not essential for salvation.
Just wanted to do a quick check so you know I wasn’t ignoring you. Sorry, I don’t have time to address them all with weekend and family activities on the horizon, but we all agree on the essentials (or at least 98%). I know the least of Anglican faith. Although I know little of their faith, they seem to be more Catholic than Biblical. But I could be wrong.
“Lutherans believe that the Bible teaches that a person is saved by God’s grace alone through faith in
Jesus Christ alone.” Essential
“The LCMS does not believe that Baptism is ABSOLUTELY necessary for salvation.” EXTREMELY IMPORTANT but not essential.
Also, “As you also no doubt are fully aware, we teach that it is not the lack of Baptism that
necessarily condemns, but it is the despising of this precious gift that endangers faith, for God Himself
has instituted it and attached His promises to it.” Lutherans believe if someone comes to faith by God’s grace alone through faith in Jesus Christ alone, they are saved. And if someone is not baptized (say on his/her way to church to be baptized and are killed in a car accident). EXTREMELY IMPORTANT but not essential for salvation.
Just wanted to do a quick check so you know I wasn’t ignoring you. Sorry, I don’t have time to address them all with weekend and family activities on the horizon, but we all agree on the essentials (or at least 98%). I know the least of Anglican faith. Although I know little of their faith, they seem to be more Catholic than Biblical. But I could be wrong.
D
drblank1
Guest
Shannon, Protestants do disagree on infant baptism, but if you will also note, Lutheran clearly state Baptism is not essential for salvation.
ALL Christians agree baptism is an essential step in our faith walk with Jesus. How/when we are baptized is a non-essential issue.
Have a blessed weekend my brother in Christ.
ALL Christians agree baptism is an essential step in our faith walk with Jesus. How/when we are baptized is a non-essential issue.
Have a blessed weekend my brother in Christ.
The early Lutherans considered themselves Evangelical Catholics. Many still do today, though the term isn’t used as much in America. As an Anglican, I now consider myself rather Anglo-Catholic. I do not see the terms “Catholic” and “Biblical” as being opposites somehow. To believe that Catholics do not employ scripture in their Christian faith takes either a lack of knowledge of what they believe, or just imagination.Jon, just did a quick check on Lutherans and you are incorrect regarding baptism (at least LCMS). From the LCMS FAQ section on baptism,
“Lutherans believe that the Bible teaches that a person is saved by God’s grace alone through faith in
Jesus Christ alone.” Essential
“The LCMS does not believe that Baptism is ABSOLUTELY necessary for salvation.” EXTREMELY IMPORTANT but not essential.
Also, “As you also no doubt are fully aware, we teach that it is not the lack of Baptism that
necessarily condemns, but it is the despising of this precious gift that endangers faith, for God Himself
has instituted it and attached His promises to it.” Lutherans believe if someone comes to faith by God’s grace alone through faith in Jesus Christ alone, they are saved. And if someone is not baptized (say on his/her way to church to be baptized and are killed in a car accident). EXTREMELY IMPORTANT but not essential for salvation.
Just wanted to do a quick check so you know I wasn’t ignoring you. Sorry, I don’t have time to address them all with weekend and family activities on the horizon, but we all agree on the essentials (or at least 98%). I know the least of Anglican faith. Although I know little of their faith, they seem to be more Catholic than Biblical. But I could be wrong.
The fact remains, however, that the statement that all mainline Protestant denominations agree on certain essential doctrines is plain false.
For a Lutheran, the essentials of the Christian faith are found in scripture, the three ecumenical creeds, and for the Lutheran tradition within the faith, the primary document is the Augsburg Confession. Here is a link to the Augsburg Confession. For the Lutheran, these are essential doctrines. Not just kind of important. Not just really important. Doctrines, essential doctrines. Let me know if you believe that all mainline Protestant traditions agree with these essential doctrines.
Last edited:
J
JoyToTheWhirled
Guest
I can’t recall exactly who it is, but I’m pretty sure a stripe of Pentecostalism believes that baptism is necessary for salvation. Just as some believe that tongues are a necessary sign of being in filled with the Holy Spirit. Christianity is a complicated old thing.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.