L
lanman87
Guest
So once again, what he is saying isn’t really what he is saying.
- Status
S
steve-b
Guest
He’s saying in his writings, (in context), the sacraments are real, NOT just symbols or metaphorssteve-b:
So once again, what he is saying isn’t really what he is saying.
If they were just symbols or metaphors, then taking them in that sense, would be idolatry
Last edited:
L
lanman87
Guest
So he is saying the opposite of what he is saying.
S
steve-b
Guest
Already answered.steve-b:
So he is saying the opposite of what he is saying.
L
lanman87
Guest
I’m just want to be clear that you don’t think he is referring to John 6 as a metaphor, even though that is what he says.
S
steve-b
Guest
What you claim he means, is that Jn 6 is pure metaphor. He doesn’t mean thatsteve-b:
I’m just want to be clear that you don’t think he is referring to John 6 as a metaphor, even though that is what he says.
See HERE
Last edited:
M
mcq72
Guest
Absolutely, that is I have not made Real Presence in the definition of transubstantiation, and communion exclusive to said understanding. So of course then one can compare communion understandings, without invalidating all others.
Still, by your language and post, you can not quantify efficacy of CC sacrament and the non sacramental ( per your definition) one.
Yet they have valid spiritual life in Christ, and by their definion of " eating".
The Baptist, as well as anyone in Christ, is partaker of Clements “amazing mystery”, and is indeed the temple of God, even the Lord’s monstrance. The Baptists take part in the great exchange, our carnal nature for His righteousness , and does not need to literally eat Jesus transubstantiated for such life and growth.
Last edited:
S
steve-b
Guest
Well, I’d just saysteve-b:
Absolutely, that is I have not made Real Presence in the definition of transubstantiation, and communion exclusive to said understanding. So of course then one can compare communion understandings, without invalidating all others.
at best, THAT qualifies as relativism or indifferentism of the sacrament and how the sacrament happens or doesn’t happen.
I respectfully disagree,
It takes valid ordination, in apostolic succession, of an individual, elevating them to the priesthood, to produce a valid consecration of the Blessed sacrament. Protestants no matter the stripe, qualify for that
Yet?
OK, How does one assume one really IS in Christ?. How is that determined?
What If one is in mortal sin, for example, they aren’t in Christ in that condition.
So
how does one know they are really forgiven of mortal sin, without the sacrament of reconciliation, which was instituted by Christ for the specific purpose, so that sins could be forgiven and absolved, absolutely?..
A Protestant minister, no matter the stripe, can forgive and absolve, sins of another, sacramentally.
AND Considering
The Baptist religion was Instituted by John Smyth a Protestant, in the 17th century,
I have to ask
scripturally speaking , what does scripture say (NOT ME) is the consequence for dissent and division from Our Lord’s Church?
M
mcq72
Guest
And what would be the consequence fot taking the symbol of unity in the communion element of bread, one loaf, broken for all, and invalidating any universal understanding of the “doing” and by who., excluding all other brethren ?
J
Justin_Mary
Guest
Not at all. I believe in the metaphorical/figurative language, but I also believe in the real presence. I haven’t read Clement of Alexander, so I don’t know what issue he was addressing there. But I do know those who follow Clement of Alexander from then to now, how they worship & what they believe happens on their altar & what they receive into their body.
Teaching about things of the Spirit does not mean denial of the mystery.
J
Justin_Mary
Guest
Maybe. God is Good, Merciful, & Kind. It is God’s Will that all men be saved, especially the baptized, through which the Holy Spirit has been conferred to them. They are living stones.
& yes, reading the word of God & praying in the spirit they partake of Christ & grow in the spirit.
However, I believe they lack that Life in them that has the power to transform them. . . .
& unlike His disciples, given to Him by the Father, who believed by faith until it was revealed in the breaking of the bread.
It’s like being nourished through a straw vs a funnel. They are receiving His Grace, but they’re missing more than they are receiving.
Last edited:
W
Wannano
Guest
To wake up and read this post makes me cry out to the One you say we do not believe in and ask why, why, why is their so much ignorance among the followers of Christ.
Edit: referring to the post immediately above.
Edit: referring to the post immediately above.
Last edited:
L
lanman87
Guest
LOL! The writer of that page gives the quote that I quoted in my first paragraph that Catholic apologist use. The very next chapter starts out
Hear it also in the following way. The flesh figuratively represents to us the Holy Spirit; for the flesh was created by Him.
When we receive the Holy Spirit we are figuratively receiving His Flesh. When we abide in the Holy Spirit we are figuratively abiding in His Flesh.
Which is why 1 John 4:13 says By this we know that we abide in him and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit.
Last edited:
M
mcq72
Guest
Me too, first post i read today…post started out ok but from their a precipitous fall, to be addressed i hope.
W
Wannano
Guest
One could flag it for being extremely uncharitable but I am feeling that if Catholics really believe that of us, they need help. I am choosing to interpret it as ignorance rather than hate.
M
mcq72
Guest
Where is the evidence that you are fat and fed in the Lord and we are thin and undernourished?
You know this is not CC teaching. The life in Christ in baptism is universal.
Actually literal eaters such as Catholics have more in common with the departers for those that left also saw a literal understanding perhaps. While you may participate and do not leave, your literal understanding is closer to those who left, and did not believe from the beginning. They were carnal.
I appreciate your candor, but candor would lead me to say I think it is carnal to think that by literally eating His flesh brings us His life. Reminds me of pagan mentality, where they would aquiesce the essence of things they ate, including human flesh. For example one could receive a portion of a fallen warriors bravery by eating his heart.
Agree with you that as we study His Word, pray in the spirit, and other personal as well as corporate activities it strenghtens us, makes grow in the Lord. The epistles are filled with such exhortations. The only epistle exhortation of eucharisting is to do it properly.
Last edited:
T
TULIPed
Guest
"Early the following morning, Bonhoeffer was lead to the scaffold. The camp doctor watched: “Through the half-door in one room of the huts I saw Pastor Bonhoeffer, before taking off his prison garb, kneeling on the floor praying fervently to his God. I was most deeply moved by the way this lovable man prayed, so devout and so certain that God heard his prayer. At the place of execution, he again said a short prayer and then climbed the steps of the gallows, brave and composed. His death ensued a few seconds. In the almost fifty years that I worked as a doctor, I have hardly seen a man die so entirely submissive to the will of God.”
April 9, 1945 Buchenwald Prison, Germany
S
steve-b
Guest
To clarify,steve-b:
And what would be the consequence fot taking the symbol of unity in the communion element of bread, one loaf, broken for all, and invalidating any universal understanding of the “doing” and by who., excluding all other brethren ?
Those you speak of,
only have a symbol, and NOT a valid sacrament
AND
THEY chose to exclude themselves by their dissent, and keep that dissent going by their own choices. .
Back to the question
scripturally speaking, what is the consequence for such dissent and division
Last edited:
M
mcq72
Guest
Two days later, April 11, the camp was liberated.
M
mcq72
Guest
Same as for false teaching?
- Status