Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Episcopalians refuse affirmation of Christ
Virtue Online ^ | June 20, 2006 | Hans Zeiger

Posted on 06/21/2006 5:15:34 AM PDT by MountainMenace

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260261-280281-300 ... 361-368 next last
To: Nihil Obstat

Isn't it fascinating that people who are all for literal interpretations of Scripture have a hard time taking these parts literally?


261 posted on 06/21/2006 12:40:54 PM PDT by Romish_Papist (St. Jude, pray for my lost cause. St. Rita, pray for my impossible situation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave

You assume that He could not have been linking the two?

YES!

The words "This is my body" mean something different than "This symbolicly represents my body."

Again, symbolism, Jesus didn't become a gate either. Scripture helps us interpret scripture, we see the context of words and symbols that are used and they are consistent.

Since Jesus is the Bread of Life, I assume you know it to be a reference about salvation and not a meal.

In your interpretation, we stretch the meaning and recieve Jesus through a peice of bread that we have to depend on a priest to convert for us, instead of believing in our minds, where the "believing" part is performed as opposed to our stomachs.

Similar to the forgiveness for sins through a priest, both being dependent on the church instead of going directly to God.


None of this is even hinted at in scripture. It's a house of cards. Why wouldn't we receive Jesus through believing in our hearts and minds, instead of being dependant on some ceremony that is not clearly defined in the Bible ? Don't you think Jesus would have spelled this out ?

For God so Loved the world, that he gave his only begotten son, that whoever believes in him, shall not perish, but have eternal life.

There are a million references to faith and believing and none about gaining salvation through a peice of bread.

I'll pray for you ! Please attend a Bible study



262 posted on 06/21/2006 12:52:38 PM PDT by Veeram (why the does the left HATE America ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 243 | View Replies]

To: Veeram

*Chuckle* The Catholic Church is a 2,000 year old Bible study. You might want to check out some of it's "notes" in the Catechism.


263 posted on 06/21/2006 12:56:03 PM PDT by Romish_Papist (St. Jude, pray for my lost cause. St. Rita, pray for my impossible situation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies]

To: Veeram
You assume that He could not have been linking the two?

YES!

So there's no link between the bread and wine taken at the Last Supper and the Crucifixion? That's an interesting claim.

Again, symbolism, Jesus didn't become a gate either. Scripture helps us interpret scripture, we see the context of words and symbols that are used and they are consistent.

Who told you this and what assurances do you have that they are telling you the right interpretation?

In your interpretation, we stretch the meaning and recieve Jesus through a peice of bread that we have to depend on a priest to convert for us, instead of believing in our minds, where the "believing" part is performed as opposed to our stomachs.

LOL. It isn't our stomachs that do the job for us. It takes a tremendous amount of faith to partake in the Eucharist and St. Paul warns people who do not have faith, who can not "discern the Body and Blood" to not drink a curse upon themselves.

You're quite ill-informed if you think we think it's a magic food that only the stomach interacts with.

SD

264 posted on 06/21/2006 12:59:12 PM PDT by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies]

To: MountainMenace

So do they still consider themselves a Christian denomination? If Scripture is a lie, including the words attributed to Christ himself, what is their faith, and what do they base it on?


265 posted on 06/21/2006 12:59:25 PM PDT by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MountainMenace; sionnsar

BUMPping


266 posted on 06/21/2006 1:00:02 PM PDT by Brian Allen (All that is required to ensure the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

Or a social club.


267 posted on 06/21/2006 1:00:33 PM PDT by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Veeram
None of this is even hinted at in scripture. It's a house of cards. Why wouldn't we receive Jesus through believing in our hearts and minds, instead of being dependant on some ceremony that is not clearly defined in the Bible ? Don't you think Jesus would have spelled this out ?

How can you be so blind that you will not see that it is spelled out word for word in the Gospel according to John? You deny the plain meaning of the words, and then complain that it doesn't spell it out for you. It's as if you don't like what it says so you want it to be said some other way, but there is only one way. You must EAT HIS FLESH and DRINK HIS BLOOD or you have no part in him.

268 posted on 06/21/2006 1:02:37 PM PDT by ichabod1 (Let us not flinch from identifying liberalism as the opposition party to God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies]

To: piperpilot
Instead, I am reading the Bible on my own and feel much closer to Christianity than I ever did growing up and going to church every week.

Good for you. Sometimes that is the best way to re-discover true Christianity. Too many churches these days are focused more on material things (i.e. money, what type of car you drive, clothes you wear, etc.) than on the spiritual aspects of their fellow man.

I myself became so disgusted with church that I quit completely for about 12 years until the spirit of God moved me to search for another. I was fortunate enough to find a good church with a decent congregation and a Pastor who preaches the gospel of Christ, not the gospel of man.
269 posted on 06/21/2006 1:15:39 PM PDT by reagan_fanatic (Man was made in the image of God, not pond scum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 246 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg; xzins

What is fascinating is the spiritual slippage of the ECUSA, PCUSA and the SBC with its election of a "moderate" President and their movement towards each other without the uniting work of the Holy Spirit. Each has aposticized, some deeper than the other but all are on the slippery slope to irrelevance. One of the coups of the Anti-christ is his allowing the church to become universal and inclusive in its doctrine, making it easy for him to subsume it into his one world government. We will wait and see what the United Methodists and the American Baptists do, but I fear, the pressure will be too great for them to compromise.


270 posted on 06/21/2006 1:22:55 PM PDT by blue-duncan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: GrandEagle

Finally! A Christian Church that does not follow Christ! Just what the world needs...


271 posted on 06/21/2006 1:26:49 PM PDT by winner3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: blue-duncan; Dr. Eckleburg

Has the SBC done something wrong?

The ECUSA & the PCUSA are clearly on the wrong track. The Methodists are barely keeping their heads above water. They are far worse off than the SBC, imho.

BTW, aren't you SBC?


272 posted on 06/21/2006 1:29:15 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It. Supporting our Troops Means Praying for them to Win!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 270 | View Replies]

To: MountainMenace

The PepsiColaians are at it again!


273 posted on 06/21/2006 1:30:04 PM PDT by Ignatz (quoting Freeper cyborg: "The lay teachers could not make hands of some girls.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
I think that differences in our positions are really rather insignificant simply put I believe that God would remove the ignorance from the Aborigine by what ever means He wished and bring him to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. And you don't believe that He would remove or would need to remove the ignorance in order to save the Aborigine.
Doesn't matter really that's up to God and He does as he wills
however I think you know what I think he would actually do in this situation.
274 posted on 06/21/2006 1:30:52 PM PDT by Texas Patriot (Remember.... The Alamo, never forget HOORAHH!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 258 | View Replies]

To: Texas Patriot
Good enough for me. Nice having a talk with ya.

SD

275 posted on 06/21/2006 1:36:28 PM PDT by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 274 | View Replies]

To: xzins; Dr. Eckleburg

"Has the SBC done something wrong?"

They elected a young Pastor as President from the "moderate" wing. He has made some statements that lead one to believe he will try to roll back some of the reforms that Patterson and Rogers have maintained such as inerrancy of scripture.

I am a Conservative Baptist, but graduated from an SBC college and law school and Conservative Baptist Seminary.


276 posted on 06/21/2006 1:44:54 PM PDT by blue-duncan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 272 | View Replies]

To: nanetteclaret
>When St. Paul wrote those words, the New Testament was not in existence.<


Yes but God was. Paul was writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.That is just a ludicrous argument for a Christian to make.The New Testament is as much scripture as the old testament.

To make that argument is to deny God all his attributes and make him subject to the literary rules of man.
277 posted on 06/21/2006 1:46:29 PM PDT by Blessed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: Blessed
Yes but God was. Paul was writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.That is just a ludicrous argument for a Christian to make.The New Testament is as much scripture as the old testament. To make that argument is to deny God all his attributes and make him subject to the literary rules of man.

No one is denying that the New Testament is Scripture.

What you are suggesting is that when Paul wrote a letter to a particular audience, that what both Paul and the audience meant by the word "Scripture" was not what the Holy Spirit really meant. That only years later would we come to know what was really meant, and that both the sender and receiver of the letter were out of the loop.

SD

278 posted on 06/21/2006 1:54:35 PM PDT by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 277 | View Replies]

To: Veeram
Since Jesus is the Bread of Life, I assume you know it to be a reference about salvation and not a meal.

Of course. That's why he used an extremely graphic Greek verb for "eat" (trogo, literally "munch", "gnaw") in John 6. He wanted us to know that he was not really talking about eating.

And that's why he said "my flesh is true food and my blood is true drink" ... so we wouldn't take him too seriously.

And that's why, after a number of his followers left him, he said in John 6:73, "Hey, guys, it's just a metaphor, I'm talking symbolically here, don't you get it?"

(That's what John 6:73 says in my Bible; I don't know about yours.)

And that's why Paul in 1 Cor 11 says that if you receive the Eucharist unworthily, you're guilty of the Body and Blood of the Lord, because it's not really the Body and Blood of the Lord.

And that's why Ignatius of Antioch, who knew the Apostles personally and ended up as lion food in AD 110 for refusing to denounce Christ, writes to the Christians of Smyrna that it's better not to even speak of those men who deny that the Eucharist is truly the flesh and blood of Jesus Christ, "flesh which was crucified for our salvation" ... because he didn't really believe it ...

Now you can either believe all this ridiculous stuff, or you can just believe Jesus meant what he said. Which is it?

279 posted on 06/21/2006 2:12:12 PM PDT by Campion ("I am so tired of you, liberal church in America" -- Mother Angelica, 1993)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies]

To: Palladin

What? These 'piscoplians have gone barmy.

Ain't that the truth? We've had almost as bad a week as the looney libs!

Guess I shouldn't joke about this since I just saw a news report that the Diocese of Ft. Worth (Texas) has just made a formal request to be separated from the ECUSA.

So it begins.



280 posted on 06/21/2006 2:48:54 PM PDT by wayoverthehill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 260 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260261-280281-300 ... 361-368 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson