I think "ye must be born again" is pretty clear language.
Again, jumping around and avoiding answering a simple question.
***
“Paul commands them in 1 Cor. 5:11 "..not to keep company, if any man that is CALLED A BROTHER be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolator, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat." Yet the faithful (the body of Christ) were eating the Lord's supper in a haphazard way, in the presence of openly sinful brethern.”
Again, you have to jump back 5 chapters, cut and paste to come with up with your interpretation. You ignore the literal. Somehow you equate “not discerning the Lord’s body” which is mentioned just two verses this one, with fornicators. The Lord’s supper is not mentioned in 1 Cor. 5. How do you connect these? Jumping around, cutting and pasting.
Try reading the actual scripture.
“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: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come. Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. 1 Corinthians 11:23-30
There is nothing here that relates to the verse you cited.
***
“Thou that judgest art guilty of the same??? :)”
Huh? I read three verses together, but you consider this jumping around and cutting and pasting? That makes a lot of sense.
***
“No, they understood his words”
* I am the vine. Symbolic language. No one questioned. No one left.
* I am the door. Symbolic language. No one questioned. No one left.
* I am the light. Symbolic language. No one questioned. No one left.
* I am the Bread of life. Lots of questions. In John 6:60 : "Many of his disciples, when they heard it, said, ‘This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?’" These were His disciples. No clarifications, corrections or retractions. Desertion by followers. Those who left understood Jesus told them to eat the literal flesh of the Lord. This they could not accept. This is when Judas turned, not being able to accept the literal truth.
***
“I think Peter's commands in Acts 2:38 are pretty clear as well, yet the RCC does not follow those orders.”
Jumping around again, avoiding a simple question.
“Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.”
Are you saying that the Catholic Church does not believe in Baptism? Wrong again.
I said: I think "ye must be born again" is pretty clear language.
You said: **Again, jumping around and avoiding answering a simple question.**
The question IS about being 'born again', because remmission of sins is a major step to being 'born again'.
Interesting..,I get accused of not answering a question.
I said more than once (IN CONTEXT with the passage in John 6) 'it is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing'. It's obvious that the disciples that stayed understood what is said in that verse, and that you don't even like to admit it is there. Jesus was trying to make it clear that he was to be spiritually consumed by believers, BY BEING FILLED WITH THE HOLY GHOST, "At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me and I in you." John 14:20. That verse is IN CONTEXT with verses 16-26, explaining the coming of the 'Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost'.
Pertaining to 1 Cor. 11:23-30:
**Again, you have to jump back 5 chapters, cut and paste to come with up with your interpretation.**
Spin. I told you that the previous 10 chapters pertain to the church body allowing corruption, and chapter 11 shows the corruption was even in the partaking of Lord's supper, which was done 'in remembrance of him'. I show you a verse in chapter 5 that is an excellent example of the bad behavior present in 'the body', and you dismiss it.
I stand corrected, you don't cut and paste, you just cut. You/your church fathers pull eight verses (1 Cor. 11:23-30) out of the epistle, and say the rest of it is not related to this issue.
**Are you saying that the Catholic Church does not believe in Baptism? Wrong again.**
You've probably heard comments like: 'If your not going to do it right, then you might as well not do it at all.'
If you and your church believed that baptism (by immersion, and only performed on people old enough to know what they are doing)in the NAME of JESUS CHRIST was (and still is) for the REMISSION of SINS, you would obey it, and therefore would not be looking for some other means for remission of sins, such as the 'mass' ritual.
Forgive me if I come across as somewhat blunt, I'm just being straight forward and trying not to be longwinded (I can't be since I'm a very slow typist).