Posted on 03/29/2015 2:11:17 PM PDT by RnMomof7
So because I deny the presence of Christ in Communion I am denying the Trinity and the Holy Spirit?
Well, although throwing out part of the Old Testament is already an absolute blaspheming of the Holy Spirit, if that’s not enough of a denial of the Trinity, denying that Christ is anything other than His human flesh and blood would do the trick.
What part of the OT am I throwing out? Christ as I said is 100% human and 100% God even right now he has a physical body in Heaven. Denying the PHYSICAL presence of Christ in the bread and wine has nothing to do with the denying the Holy Trinity.
Denying the perfection of the Holy Spirit is blaspheming the Holy Spirit pure and simple.
Denying the physical presence of His body and blood in the Eucharist is the same as saying it was impossible Christ to heal the sick by touching them, enter a locked room, or do anything supernatural prior to or after His resurrection. If someone insists that Christ was only human as we are rather than God and human, so be it. They can call that whatever they like but in reality it's denying that Christ is God and human rather than only human with some augmentation.
Yes, He still has the same physical body as the one that walked the earth, was resurrected, and now is where? Can we go there at this moment in our human bodies? No, Christ is man and God, not one or the other which is exactly how His body is present in the Eucharist exactly as He said it is. Denying His presence in the Eucharist is limiting Him to what is physically possible for any other human because that's comfortable for the person doing the denying.
Even Luther refused to contradict the clear statement of Christ Himself and taught that His body and blood are really present in the Eucharist even though he asserted that they were present due to the faith of the individual. Another case of Luther distilling everything down to Self and Self Alone which is what "Scripture Alone" and "Faith Alone" both dissolve into on careful reading of his writings and especially in practice. Scripture as my Self interprets Scripture and Faith in what my Self determines is required of me (now widely taught as being nothing more than saying the magic words when you're a kid and being home free no matter what you do thereafter).
Believe Scripture and Christ Himself or believe what your Self and Self Alone is comfortable with, that's the choice. A large part of taking up your cross and following Christ is accepting His Word rather than your own comfort zone. In fact, shedding the ever insistent Self and believing is the hardest part of taking up your cross and following Him.
Sometimes, they are replaced by new heresies. Those folks then call the other folks "heretics".
Also “believe and repent” as well.
What do you think about those Bibles that do include the 7 OT books, but are put in a separate section, like what is often seen in today’s Bibles for Catholics? Thank-you and God Bless.
Nah...
...the RC's are just the mouthy, boastful ones that want to be the Boss in the religious world.
We Prots LIKE taking on the Giant with our sling and a few stones.
And that's what happened...And those faithful men penned the words that Paul spoke into numerous copies of the scriptures and they were spread out to the world, hundreds of years before your religion was hatched...
3. Peter emphasized that the authority to interpret Scripture does not rest solely with the individual: “no prophecy of scripture is of private interpretation.” (2Peter 1:20)
You ought to learn what the verse means before you quote it as a proof text for your false religion...
Eph 3:4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)
Paul was speaking to private individuals here...Obviously you believe the people who taught you that you aren't even smart enough to understand what Paul says in the verse...
I missed the COMMAND...
I daresay that bread and wine were consumed; not Jesus' flesh and blood.
Golly!
I missed THAT; too!
Can you point out the verse for me?
Really?
I like silly stuff!
Bonaventure: …the gates of heaven will open to all who confide in the protection of Mary. Blessed are they who know thee, O Mother of God, for the knowledge of THEE is the high road to everlasting life, and the publication of thy virtues is the way of ETERNAL SALVATION . Give ear, O ye nations; and all you who desire heaven , serve, honor Mary, and certainly you will find ETERNAL LIFE.
Ephem: …devotion to the divine Mother…is the unlocking of the heavenly Jerusalem.
Blosius: To the, O Lady, are committed the KEYS and the treasures of the kingdom of Heaven.
Ambrose: …constantly pray ‘Open to us, O Mary, the gates of paradise, since thou hast its KEYS.
Fulgetius: …by Mary God descended from Heaven into the world, that by HER man might ascend from earth to Heaven.
Athanasius: …And, thou, O Lady, wast filled with grace, that thou mightiest be the way of our SALVATION and the means of ascent to the heavenly Kingdom.
Richard of Laurence: Mary, in fine, is the mistress of heaven; for there she commands as she wills, and ADMITS whom she wills.
Guerric: …he who serves Mary and for whom she intercedes, is as CERTAIN of heaven as if he were already there…and those who DO NOT serve Mary will NOT BE SAVED.
Anselm: It suffices, O Lady, that thou willest it, and our SALVATION is certain.
Antoninus: …souls protected by Mary, and on which she casts her eyes, are NECESSARILY JUSTIFIED AND SAVED.
David committed adultery.
David was not stoned.
Nah...
Rome has it's LEADERS to keep it on the right course...
'
Pope Stephen VI (896–897), who had his predecessor Pope Formosus exhumed, tried, de-fingered, briefly reburied, and thrown in the Tiber.[1]
Pope John XII (955–964), who gave land to a mistress, murdered several people, and was killed by a man who caught him in bed with his wife.
Pope Benedict IX (1032–1044, 1045, 1047–1048), who "sold" the Papacy
Pope Boniface VIII (1294–1303), who is lampooned in Dante's Divine Comedy
Pope Urban VI (1378–1389), who complained that he did not hear enough screaming when Cardinals who had conspired against him were tortured.[2]
Pope Alexander VI (1492–1503), a Borgia, who was guilty of nepotism and whose unattended corpse swelled until it could barely fit in a coffin.[3]
Pope Leo X (1513–1521), a spendthrift member of the Medici family who once spent 1/7 of his predecessors' reserves on a single ceremony[4]
Pope Clement VII (1523–1534), also a Medici, whose power-politicking with France, Spain, and Germany got Rome sacked.
Anyone who makes claims and then FAILS to produce evidence is dismissed as being lazy or UNABLE to back up what their fingers have typed.
Which do YOU choose to known as?
(CommerceComet) Where exactly is that requirement in the Old Testament that Jesus must assign responsibility for the care of his mother to his siblings and not to someone else?
Jewish custom and tradition held in the same regard as the law, hence Christ rebuking Pharisees for setting aside money for the Temple which obligated the Rabbis to take care of their parents rather than taking care of their own parents.
Honoring your parents, according to Jewish tradition, included caring for them when they were dependent the way they cared for you when you were dependent and not placing responsibility for them on anyone not their child.
That's not even a GOOD dodge...Jesus didn't think much of the traditions of men...And still doesn't...
Mar_7:8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
Col_2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
So I've heard...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.