Shocking things everyone should know about Luther

  • Thread starter Thread starter FindingTruth
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
bobregan said:
That is part of the Mystery…Christ, heaven, God do not participate in the human, mortal, earthly definition of “time and space” as we do. The Eucharist is a “piece of Heaven” that we will never fully understand till we get to Heaven because we are finite mortals.

I know this is a little confusing, but gotta run here, in a bit of a rush…i’ll try and explain a little clearer when I get a chance.
Click to expand...
It is a mystery and if you had left it at that we could agree. But then there is transubstantiation which is nothing sort of hokus-pokus.
 
Hisalone said:
It is a mystery and if you had left it at that we could agree. But then there is transubstantiation which is nothing sort of hokus-pokus.
Click to expand...
The term “hokus-pokus” certainly originated from a garbled version of the Words of Institution (Hoc est Corpus Meum). But you don’t define what you mean by “hokus-pokus,” so it’s hard to evaluate or respond to your statement.

Perhaps you should define transubstantiation before making fun of it, so that we know we are all talking about the same thing.

Edwin
 
bobregan said:
For Fundamentalist writers
Click to expand...
But orangeman has just assured you that he does believe in the Real Presence (in some form). Perhaps you might inquire as to what he actually believes about the Eucharist before applying to him the standard Catholic apologetic against fundamentalists.

Edwin
 
Contarini said:
But orangeman has just assured you that he does believe in the Real Presence (in some form). Perhaps you might inquire as to what he actually believes about the Eucharist before applying to him the standard Catholic apologetic against fundamentalists.

Edwin
Click to expand...
He had earlier had said ut was “symbolic”…
 
Hisalone said:
It is a mystery and if you had left it at that we could agree. But then there is transubstantiation which is nothing sort of hokus-pokus.
Click to expand...
Where do you get your authority to say that you are right and the Catholic Church is wrong on transubstantiation?
 
Questions to Protestants on this thread. I had asked this before:

There are many attacks on Catholic teaching and doctrine such as the Catholic teaching on the Eucharist, on this thread. The Protestant Reformation did not happen till the 1500’s. If major Catholic teaching is wrong, do you believe then that for the almost 1500 years before the Reformation, Christ had abandoned His Church, did not provide the Catholic Church with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, causing the Church for 1500 years to teach in such incredible error?

And what makes you right?
 
Contarini said:
But orangeman has just assured you that he does believe in the Real Presence (in some form). Perhaps you might inquire as to what he actually believes about the Eucharist before applying to him the standard Catholic apologetic against fundamentalists.

Edwin
Click to expand...
“Real Presence (in some form)” opens it up to being defined in 30,000 different ways.
 
Hisalone said:
It is a mystery and if you had left it at that we could agree. But then there is transubstantiation which is nothing sort of hokus-pokus.
Click to expand...
You have faith to truly believe Christ walked on water? Correct?

You have faith to truly believe that Christ healed the sick? Fed thousands with a couple of loaves of bread and fish? Correct?

You have faith to truly believe Christ Rose from the dead? Correct?

You (possibly, I don’t know) have faith to believe in the Trinity? Correct?

You have faith to believe that there are angels, Heaven, Hell? Correct?

Why do you decide to come up short in having faith to truly believe that the Eucharist is Christ’s true Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity?
 
orange_man said:
there’s a difference between symbolic representation and real presence (in a spiritual sense). This represents some of the differences between Zwingli and Calvin.
Click to expand...
Zwingli, Calvin, Luther, all teaching different things about the Eucharist. Is it acceptable to have three different definitions or beliefs in the Eucharist? Choice is good, just pick one that fits your own, personal beliefs and lifestyle? The Holy Spirit is OK with three different teachings on such an important teaching? sounds very confusing.
 
bobregan said:
Zwingli, Calvin, Luther, all teaching different things about the Eucharist. Is it acceptable to have three different definitions or beliefs in the Eucharist? Choice is good, just pick one that fits your own, personal beliefs and lifestyle? The Holy Spirit is OK with three different teachings on such an important teaching? sounds very confusing.
Click to expand...
From a Lutheran perspective, we are Lutherans because we are not Calvinists or Zwinglians. We believe that the body and blood of Christ are truly and substantially present in the Eucharist. I doubt that the Holy Spirit is OK with any teaching that denies the Real Presence.
 
gcnuss said:
From a Lutheran perspective, we are Lutherans because we are not Calvinists or Zwinglians. We believe that the body and blood of Christ are truly and substantially present in the Eucharist. I doubt that the Holy Spirit is OK with any teaching that denies the Real Presence.
Click to expand...
Good point.

I worry that this thread is to try to make Catholism look innocent and superior to everyone else.

Sadly the men running His Church have never been perfect and far from it.
 
bobregan said:
If the word “spirit” in john 6 means “symbolic”, then show me somewhere else in the Bible that the word “spirit” meand “symbolic”. There is no where that it means “symbolic.”
Click to expand...
The distortion I am referring to is that those who left Jesus did so due to the spirtual nature of his message.

They left because they thought he was loopy for saying that we must eat his flesh and drink his blood.
 
gcnuss said:
From a Lutheran perspective, we are Lutherans because we are not Calvinists or Zwinglians. We believe that the body and blood of Christ are truly and substantially present in the Eucharist. I doubt that the Holy Spirit is OK with any teaching that denies the Real Presence.
Click to expand...
I consider certain Lutherans closer to the CC and am always more attentive to them precisely for that reason.

However when we talk of the Real Presence it is only the Real Presence when the bread and wine are consecrated by an ordained Priest - one that is ordained by a Bishop who was ordained in line with Apostopic Succession.

Lutheran priests are not validly ordained. A Lutheran minister told me that the “bread” and “wine” is only the body and blood at the moment it is received by the congregant and what is left over is just bread and wine. That is a strange belief and is far removed from the Real Presence.

Blessings
Cinette
 
Cinette said:
I consider certain Lutherans closer to the CC and am always more attentive to them precisely for that reason.

However when we talk of the Real Presence it is only the Real Presence when the bread and wine are consecrated by an ordained Priest - one that is ordained by a Bishop who was ordained in line with Apostopic Succession.

Lutheran priests are not validly ordained. A Lutheran minister told me that the “bread” and “wine” is only the body and blood at the moment it is received by the congregant and what is left over is just bread and wine. That is a strange belief and is far removed from the Real Presence.

Blessings
Cinette
Click to expand...
Is it such a huge problem that other denoms. have beliefs that differ from yours? There is much that is far removed from Catholicism but yet very Biblical.
 
gcnuss said:
From a Lutheran perspective, we are Lutherans because we are not Calvinists or Zwinglians. We believe that the body and blood of Christ are truly and substantially present in the Eucharist. I doubt that the Holy Spirit is OK with any teaching that denies the Real Presence.
Click to expand...
I would have to say that we would very much agree with that statement.
 
ICA04 said:
Is it such a huge problem that other denoms. have beliefs that differ from yours? There is much that is far removed from Catholicism but yet very Biblical.
Click to expand...
You can interpret the bible to say almost anything. That is not relevant to the truth.

As a convert to Catholicism, I believe that it contains the full revelation of the truth of Jesus.

I want others to have this confidence and fullness of faith.
 
Cinette said:
Lutheran priests are not validly ordained.
Click to expand...
That is the Catholic position on the matter. As a Lutheran I , and virtually all other Lutherans, respectfully disagree. Well, there are some who are probably not so respectful in their disagreement.😦
A Lutheran minister told me that the “bread” and “wine” is only the body and blood at the moment it is received by the congregant and what is left over is just bread and wine. That is a strange belief and is far removed from the Real Presence.
Click to expand...
Regrettably, you can find Lutherans who hold a variety of strange beliefs. Of course, that can be said about almost Christians. A few miles from where I live there is a Catholic church that ascribes to the sedevacantist position. Does that mean that all Catholics are sedevacantist?
 
gcnuss said:
From a Lutheran perspective, we are Lutherans because we are not Calvinists or Zwinglians. We believe that the body and blood of Christ are truly and substantially present in the Eucharist. I doubt that the Holy Spirit is OK with any teaching that denies the Real Presence.
Click to expand...
Agreed, Pastor. But it seems by some posts “Real Prescence” could mean however one defines it or whatever one wants it to be.

It’s like Baptism. Lutherans (like Catholics) believe it is regenerative. Some Baptists believe it is not regenerative, it is only symbolic. Well, these are two opposite beliefs. This leads to much confusion, and further division Where does this confusion and division end?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top