What Church Is Most Biblical?

  • Thread starter Thread starter GerardPaul
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Does the Bible, or any of the ECF’s, support your view?
St. Justin’s description of the Mass does not include any praying or speaking in tongues, which indicates that if it was happening (as St. Paul’s writings seem to show that it was), then it was happening outside of Mass.
 
No. It is saying IF there is not an interpreter, let him remain silent. If there is an interpreter, and it is done in an orderly manner, there is not a problem. As 14:39 indicates.
Next time you go to church bring a muslem so he can interpret - babbling “googgooogaaagaa” dosent count as tongues
 
St. Justin’s description of the Mass does not include any praying or speaking in tongues, which indicates that if it was happening (as St. Paul’s writings seem to show that it was), then it was happening outside of Mass.
I assume you are referring to Martyr’s description because of my reference to the ECF. Martyr does not describe what was occuring 100 years earlier. The debate is whether or not the BIBLE talks about speaking in tongues as part of worship, which it does. No ECF refutes that or says that speaking in tongues occured outside of the worship at the time of Paul’s writing. That is why I referenced the ECF. There seems to be a few people arguing a rather odd point that the 14th chapter of Corinthians refers to events outside of Christian worship. It is the first time I have ever read anyone contend this. It will no doubt come as a surprise to those who have diligently studied this chapter as it refers to both tongues AND the famous “women keep silent in the church” remarks.
I have never once contended that speaking in tongues was part of Christian worship 100 years later.
Please show me where Paul’s writings seem to show that tongues occured outside of worship.
 
Next time you go to church bring a muslem so he can interpret - babbling “googgooogaaagaa” dosent count as tongues
I do not speak in tongues and am not around people who do. I will try to take you up on the bringing a Muslim to church though praise God 🙂
 
I do not speak in tongues and am not around people who do. I will try to take you up on the bringing a Muslim to church though praise God 🙂
Acts 10:44 While Peter was yet speaking these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them that heard the word. 45 And the faithful of the circumcision, who came with Peter, were astonished, for that the grace of the Holy Ghost was poured out upon the Gentiles also.46 For they heard them speaking with tongues, and magnifying God. 47 Then Peter answered: Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, who have received the Holy Ghost, as well as we? 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Then they desired him to tarry with them some days.
 
I have never once contended that speaking in tongues was part of Christian worship 100 years later.
If not, then it was never part of Christian worship, to begin with, since the essentials of the Mass have never changed. The order sometimes shifts around a bit, or some things get shortened, or lengthened, but nothing ever gets dropped completely.
Please show me where Paul’s writings seem to show that tongues occured outside of worship.
Well, he never actually says that they occur during worship - he’s not specific either way.
 
If not, then it was never part of Christian worship, to begin with, since the essentials of the Mass have never changed.

The order sometimes shifts around a bit, or some things get shortened, or lengthened, but nothing ever gets dropped completely.
Please prove the statement I have put in bold.
Is this also official Catholic doctrine or your opinion? If it is official, I need to know this.
 
Please prove the statement I have put in bold.
Is this also official Catholic doctrine or your opinion? If it is official, I need to know this.
It is the official teaching of the Church that the Mass is the Mass, and that it was established by Jesus Christ at the Last Supper with all of its elements. As I mentioned before, some of the elements have shifted around (we take up the collection at a different point in the Mass today than was done at some other periods of history, and the passing of the peace jumps around all over the place from era to era) but no element has ever actually gone missing from the original.
 
It is the official teaching of the Church that the Mass is the Mass, and that it was established by Jesus Christ at the Last Supper with all of its elements. As I mentioned before, some of the elements have shifted around (we take up the collection at a different point in the Mass today than was done at some other periods of history, and the passing of the peace jumps around all over the place from era to era) but no element has ever actually gone missing from the original.
“The liturgy of the Eucharist unfolds according to a fundamental structure which has been preserved throughout the centuries down to our own day”* Catechism*

“All of its elements” and fundamental structure to me differ. The Catechism does not have an official statement on whether tongues were part of the early worship, although the Catechism certainly treats tongues better than some of her Catholic posters on this thread. Interesting, I can understand why Catholics would think Paul’s description of early Christian worship is not part of the worship service…for obvious reasons.
 
“The liturgy of the Eucharist unfolds according to a fundamental structure which has been preserved throughout the centuries down to our own day”* Catechism*

“All of its elements” and fundamental structure to me differ. The Catechism does not have an official statement on whether tongues were part of the early worship, although the Catechism certainly treats tongues better than some of her Catholic posters on this thread. Interesting, I can understand why Catholics would think Paul’s description of early Christian worship is not part of the worship service…for obvious reasons.
That passage wasn’t about worship. Tongues were said in the Church because the Church people with diverse groups of people who speak a different languages.

Even the EARLIEST Christian document concerning Liturgical worship makes no mention of speaking in tongues. The earlies document is from St. Justin Martyr in 150… From his discription the Christian worship gather on the first day of the week, share memoirs of the Apostles, Bread the Break, provide offers, and kiss exchanges between brothers…
 
In his First Apology, a letter of defense written to Roman emperor, Antonius Pius, 161-180, Justin described simple Christian worship services and practices, explaining:

…after we have thus washed him who has been convinced (converted to Christianity) and has assented to our teaching, we bring him to the place where those who are called brethren are assembled, in order that we may offer hearty prayers in common for ourselves and for the baptized person, …so that we may be saved with an everlasting salvation. Having ended the prayers, we salute one another with a kiss. There is then brought to the president of the brethren bread and a cup of wine mixed with water; and he taking them, gives praise and glory to the Father of the universe, through the name of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, and offers thanks at considerable length for our being counted worthy to receive these things at His hands. And when he has concluded the prayers and thanksgivings, all the people present express their assent by saying Amen. … And when the president has given thanks, and all the people have expressed their assent, those who are called by us deacons give to each of those present to partake of the bread and wine mixed with water over which the thanksgiving was pronounced, and to those who are absent they carry away a portion…And this food is called among us Eucharistia or [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. … we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh. For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, “This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body;” and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, “This is My blood;” and gave it to them alone.[46]
Despite Ignatius’ rejection of Judaizing, see above, Christianity continued many of the patterns of Judaism, adapting to Christian use synagogue liturgical worship, prayer, use of Sacred Scripture, a priesthood, a religious calendar commemorating on certain days each year certain events and/or beliefs, use of music in worship, giving material support to the religious leadership, and practices such as fasting and almsgiving and baptism.

Christians adopted as their Bible the Greek translation of the Jewish Scriptures known as the Septuagint and later also canonized the books of the New Testament. There are however many phrases which appear to be quotations and other statements of fact, in the early church fathers, which cannot be found in the Bible as we know it. For example in Clement’s First Letter he states that Paul “reached the limits of the West”, and also appears to quote a variant form of Ezek 33.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Christianity
 
St. Justin’s description of the Mass does not include any praying or speaking in tongues, which indicates that if it was happening (as St. Paul’s writings seem to show that it was), then it was happening outside of Mass.
St. Paul didn’t preach about anything that resembles the Catholic mass.
 
I certainly would not say the Catholic church even though I have been Catholic most all of my life.
I’ve been Catholic for 32 yrs. I believe it to be so. Just because you were a former Catholic, I find nothing you can say will convince otherwise that the CC isn’t. It is my friend. That is the view of the majority of the Catholics in this forum, as well as those who practiced their faith.
 
St. Paul didn’t preach about anything that resembles the Catholic mass.
He did. Read 1 Cor 11 verse 21-26.

21 For every one taketh before his own supper to eat. And one indeed is hungry and another is drunk. 22 What, have you not houses to eat and to drink in? Or despise ye the church of God; and put them to shame that have not? What shall I say to you? Do I praise you? In this I praise you not. 23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread. 24 And giving thanks, broke, and said: Take ye, and eat: this is my body, which shall be delivered for you: this do for the commemoration of me. 25 In like manner also the chalice, after he had supped, saying: This chalice is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as often as you shall drink, for the commemoration of me.

26 For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until he come. 27 Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. 28 But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. 29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. 30 Therefore are there many infirm and weak among you, and many sleep.

Commentary: Paul said that some in the Church have been receiving the Body and Blood of the Lord unworthily. He tells the congregation that they should examine themselves before consuming the Body and Blood of the Lord. He wrote this because the Christians in Corinthians have gone to Church because they were hungry. So Paul says, If any man be hungry, let him eat at home; that you come not together unto judgment. And the rest I will set in order, when I come

Also every Sunday, the first day of the week the Apostles gather together and also break bread. In the Mass we do break bread on Sundays.
 
That passage wasn’t about worship. Tongues were said in the Church because the Church people with diverse groups of people who speak a different languages. …
It was not about worship…really? What other parts in 1st Corinthians 14 ARE NOT about worship and how do you know? Nothing in the Catechism says that is the case, is this your personal interpretation?
 
It was not about worship…really? What other parts in 1st Corinthians 14 ARE NOT about worship and how do you know? Nothing in the Catechism says that is the case, is this your personal interpretation?
And your claim that is speaking of tongues is worship is your private interpretation…

and where does it say it is a form of worship? 1st Corinthians 14 says nothing of such. It speaks about Paul speaking about tongues and if people were to speak of tongues, an interpretator is needed. The passage itself makes no mention of it as form of worship. The Letter does said in the that let know one prevent one from speaking in tongues. The entire passage makes no mention of it as a type of worship…
 
You do agree it is “in the church” and that Christians are gathered?
It is done in the Church I’m just claiming that it isn’t a type of Worship. I read the entire passage. Paul spoke about the importance of speaking in tongue. That it is a gift from God, and that one should not be prevented to speak it. There is** no mention that speaking of tongue as a type of worship**. 1 Corinthians 14 doesn’t say worship at all. It’s just believers speaking in tongues in the Church.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top