Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: jo kus
Really? Hmmm. So if I was to show you that the early Christians thought that the Eucharist was Christ Himself, whom they worshiped, you'd become a Catholic?

All I said was that I didn't know of any SCRIPTURE supporting Paul partaking. I have no doubt that you can show me Tradition that it was later practiced by some/many Christians.

Christ offers His life to us sacramentally in the Eucharist. You can't get much more intimate than that. Is there a better way that Christ can abide within us than the sacramental presence of Christ in the Eucharist?

Why would Christ want to keep offering His life over and over? Wasn't once enough? To me it just diminishes the accomplishment. BTW, is this the thought behind the crucifix, vs. the empty cross that we use?

I wouldn't place all my bets on a contorted understanding of Paul alone, knowing that this can lead to destruction - according to the Word of God.

I agree, and we don't. In addition, we view all scripture as equally inspired and true.

How would making God visible diminish intimacy? Are you closer to your wife when you are thinking about her, or when you are in her visible presence???

It is diminished because one must go THROUGH a man. The idea is that God cannot be made visible (true or not) UNLESS one submits himself to another man. If I had to go through another man to get to my wife, believe me, there would be no intimacy there. :) In my personal relationship with my wife I can go to her anytime I want, 24/7. THAT is the kind of personal relationship we teach that we are to have with God. No middlemen.

14,955 posted on 05/22/2007 8:21:44 AM PDT by Forest Keeper (It is a joy to me to know that God had my number, before He created numbers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14738 | View Replies ]


To: Forest Keeper
All I said was that I didn't know of any SCRIPTURE supporting Paul partaking. I have no doubt that you can show me Tradition that it was later practiced by some/many Christians.

Doesn't it make sense that the Christians of the 100 AD time frame were merely following what they had been taught by Paul and the rest of the Apostles? Where is the outcry from all of those "real" Christians who said "hey, those Catholics got it all wrong" Where are the "reformed" Christians???

Why would Christ want to keep offering His life over and over? Wasn't once enough? To me it just diminishes the accomplishment. BTW, is this the thought behind the crucifix, vs. the empty cross that we use?

First of all, Jesus is in eternity, the eternal NOW. Thus, His human act is united with His divine self and brought into the eternal NOW. Thus, we of the 21st century can have access to this one-time sacrifice, offering ourselves united with Christ to the Father. Christ continues to intercede for us, says the Scriptures. As to the corpus, Western Tradition sees the death of Christ as the ultimate act of love for mankind.

I agree, and we don't. In addition, we view all scripture as equally inspired and true.

Most of your Scripture quotes come from Paul. I see you don't have much to say about James or John or Peter or the Gospels. Why is that?

It is diminished because one must go THROUGH a man.

I always thought that that was PRECISELY HOW GOD REVEALED HIMSELF! Through the Word made flesh. God took on flesh, thus uniting Himself TO man...

Regards

15,001 posted on 05/22/2007 8:30:43 PM PDT by jo kus (Humility is present when one debases oneself without being obliged to do so- St.Chrysostom; Phil 2:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14955 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


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