Why is there not a single Protestant Understanding of the Bible?

  • Thread starter Thread starter couponfit
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Luvtosew said:
and also can you explain the sacrifice of the Mass to me. thank you.
Click to expand...
Will do, Luv.

But first, could you address my earlier question? You stated that you don’t believe the Church is infallible.

So, if you could, please, tell us where you believe the Church erred in discerning and affirming the canon of Scripture? So do you think the Church got it wrong somewhere and that one of the books of the Bible isn’t supposed to be in there? Or do you believe that one of these other early Christian texts (the Didache, the letter of Clement, the Protoevangelium of James perhaps) ought to be in the Bible?
 
Luvtosew said:
Yes I know when Aristotle lived, but that is where the word transubstantiation comes from.
Click to expand...
I don’t know about that. Source, please.

Now the philosophical concepts and truths that Aristotle proferred were the foundation for Transubstantiation, but I don’t see how that refutes the possibility that Transubstantiation is true.

Democracy is said to have had its formal origins in pagan Greece. Yet Catholic social teaching is founded upon the principles espoused by the Greeks. We don’t discount Catholic teaching here just because pagans first thought of it, right? 🙂
 
PRmerger said:
I don’t know about that. Source, please.

Now the philosophical concepts and truths that Aristotle proferred were the foundation for Transubstantiation, but I don’t see how that refutes the possibility that Transubstantiation is true.

Democracy is said to have had its formal origins in pagan Greece. Yet Catholic social teaching is founded upon the principles espoused by the Greeks. We don’t discount Catholic teaching here just because pagans first thought of it, right? 🙂
Click to expand...
Why don’t you just answer my questions please.
 
Luvtosew said:
Why don’t you just answer my questions please.
Click to expand...
And, could you first please provide the source that says that Aristotle came up with the term “transubstantiation”? Primary source would be preferable–not another source saying, “Aristotle came up with the term transubstantiation.”

I’d like to read Aristotle saying it, please.
 
Newsy said:
You seem to have missed many questions asked of you. Could you please address my last 3 posts, as they contained questions.
Click to expand...
Luv is offline right now.

I think she’s catching up on her Aristotle readings. 😃
 
PRmerger said:
And, could you first please provide the source that says that Aristotle came up with the term “transubstantiation”? Primary source would be preferable–not another source saying, “Aristotle came up with the term transubstantiation.”

I’d like to read Aristotle saying it, please.
Click to expand...
Cant find it sorry.
 
Newsy said:
You seem to have missed many questions asked of you. Could you please address my last 3 posts, as they contained questions.
Click to expand...
Newsy if you don’t mind I’m talking with PR and you keep budding in and using degrading

symbols such as:banghead: Like I’m some sort of ingorant person , so please don’t let me make you bang your head anymore.
 
Luvtosew said:
Newsy if you don’t mind I’m talking with PR and you keep budding in
Click to expand...
Well, as far as this objection, Luv, the nature of a forum is that all members are invited to join in the conversation.

It’s never only between 2 posters. Even if 2 are in dialogue there’s always lurkers who are part of the discussion as well.
 
Luvtosew said:
Cant find it sorry.
Click to expand...
Well, I appreciate your honesty. 👍

So this is a false foundation that you’ve attempted to establish.

Again, even if the philosophical principles of transubstantiation are borne in Aristotle’s theories, so what?
 
PRmerger said:
Luv is offline right now.

I think she’s catching up on her Aristotle readings. 😃
Click to expand...
You know if this is your way of having fun you guys, I don’t want to be the object of your enjoyment. I’m sure some luckers will find this interesting PR, maybe not in the way you would want tho. I ask questions and you never answer except to ask me a question , so its become a worthless conservation. If your not going to answer my questions fine.
 
JonNC said:
Certainly, ours is a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving. As for adoration outside the sacramental act, I’m personally not opposed to it.

I am diligently working within my parish to see to it that we offer it weekly, as I believe that it is the responsibility of the Church to do so. Currently, it is every 1st, 3rd and 5th Sundays, and other important holidays.
Not sure what you mean by “host”, but yes, we use unleavened bread (a wafer) and wine, as Christ used. However, I wouldn’t say we “take” wine. We* receive* the true body and blood of Christ.

Jon
Click to expand...
Jon thank you so much for responding to my questions, Yes I do think they should have communion weekly . Few people take wine in the CC either (at least that I’ve seen). 🙂
 
Luvtosew said:
Newsy if you don’t mind I’m talking with PR and you keep budding in and using degrading

symbols such as:banghead: Like I’m some sort of ingorant person , so please don’t let me make you bang your head anymore.
Click to expand...
I am sorry if I have offended you. You have asked me questions, I have asked you questions. I thought that was the point of our dialog. If my questions have been a problem for you, then I would only ask that you be more prepared to back up your statements. My questions have been meant to make you prove your statements. You must admit, you have made some statements that are hard to accept, I only wanted you to prove your “facts”.

By all means, please continue your dialog with PR. But, you may get more answers if you answer a few of her questions.

I apologize for any offense.😊
 
JonNC said:
Certainly, ours is a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving. As for adoration outside the sacramental act, I’m personally not opposed to it.

I am diligently working within my parish to see to it that we offer it weekly, as I believe that it is the responsibility of the Church to do so. Currently, it is every 1st, 3rd and 5th Sundays, and other important holidays.
Not sure what you mean by “host”, but yes, we use unleavened bread (a wafer) and wine, as Christ used. However, I wouldn’t say we “take” wine. We* receive* the true body and blood of Christ.

Jon
Click to expand...
Hi Jon,
Does the LCMS view communion as the actual Body and Blood of Christ? Could it be said that one is receiving the “Flesh of Our Lord”?
 
Luvtosew said:
You know if this is your way of having fun you guys, I don’t want to be the object of your enjoyment. I’m sure some luckers will find this interesting PR, maybe not in the way you would want tho. I ask questions and you never answer except to ask me a question , so its become a worthless conservation. If your not going to answer my questions fine.
Click to expand...
Look, Luv.

I asked you a question in post #344.

You did not answer it.

You only “changed gears” and asked a question in post #345.

See?

So, numerically, and in the general polite discourse rules of the CAFs, it’s proper for YOU to answer my question in post #344 first.

Because 344 comes before 345. 🙂
 
PRmerger said:
Amen!

And Catholics are free to give a hearty amen to this commentary in the Douay-Rheims bible.

What is there in this commentary that you think refutes the dogma of the Real Presence?

If then you shall see, etc. . .Christ by mentioning his ascension, by this instance of his power and divinity, would confirm the truth of what he had before asserted; and at the same time orrect their gross apprehension of eating his flesh, and drinking his blood, in a vulgar and carnal manner, by letting them know he should take his whole body living with him to heaven; and onsequently not suffer it to be as they supposed, divided, mangled, and consumed upon earth.
6:64 It is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life

'kay.

So do you think the Church got it wrong somewhere and that one of the books of the Bible isn’t supposed to be in there? Or do you believe that one of these other early Christian texts (the Didache, the letter of Clement, the Protoevangelium of James perhaps) ought to be in the Bible?
Click to expand...
I just don’t think that the pope is infallible (same as some other people), as no man is , those letters are online, the bible is the Bible now , no sense adding to it or taking away from it.

Now I believe in the Real Presence, not in the transubstantiation way, I believe it is the faith of the person receiving the Eucharist.
 
Luvtosew said:
I just don’t think that the pope is infallible (same as some other people), as no man is , those letters are online, the bible is the Bible now , no sense adding to it or taking away from it.
Click to expand...
Ok!

So you don’t believe the pope is, but that the CHURCH was, right?

The Church is the one who discerned and affirmed the canon of Scripture for you–you don’t believe that the Church erred in this decision, right, Luv?
 
Luvtosew said:
I just don’t think that the pope is infallible (same as some other people), as no man is
Click to expand...
Ok, so here’s another problem with your paradigm, Luv.

No man is infallible?

Really?

Can you tell me where St. Mark erred in his Gospel?

What about St. Luke? What error did he write in his Gospel?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top