Posted on 05/26/2008 4:50:16 AM PDT by NYer
I think that Iscool’s post that you refer to was meant to be sarcasm.
No, it was meant to characterize — somewhat bitterly — how Catholics think.
Sarcasm is usually funny. That post was just ugly.
***Yes, ALL people professing Christianity that the Romans dealt with. The Eucharist - and the Roman misunderstanding of It - were accomplished facts in early Christianity.***
Is it possible that the Phibionites of Alexandria, who claimed to be Christian, yet had the most perveted rituals, may have caused the Romans to accuse the true Christians of canabalism?
If I told of their rituals I might be banned from FR.
Actually it says that God appeared to Moses in the midst of the burning bush.
And it is far less of a leap of faith to believe that those things He commanded were written down by the apostles and were not the creation of some Holy Traditions. That statement does not demonstrate your claim of any legitimacy of Catholic traditions.
To carry on with that same thought, Jesus instructs the Apostles to “..Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.”
Note He said “ALL THINGS”
In John’s Gospel he ends by stating: “There are also many other things that Jesus did, but if these were to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written.”
Jesus commanded the Apostles to teach them to observe “ALL THINGS” He has taught. John states that there are many other things about Jesus that he did not write. Since we are commanded to observe “ALL THINGS”, where is one to find what John left out? If you only have sola scriptura (Christianity lite) you can’t because it isn’t written down, it is the teachings of the Church passed on within Sacred Tradition.
Says Catholics...
You said: And it is far less of a leap of faith to believe that those things He commanded were written down by the apostles...
Not according to John. I guess you reject his gospel.
Paul, James, Peter....
bof>No..it was God under the appearance of a burning bush.
Actually it says that God appeared to Moses in the midst of the burning bush.
205 posted on May 26, 2008 10:46:30 AM MDT by Uncle Chip
Wow actually quoting the Holy Word of Elohim when someone quotes the fables of man.
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach Adonai
NAsbU Exodus 3:2 The angel of the LORD appeared to him
in a blazing fire from the midst of a bush; and he looked,
and behold, the bush was burning with fire, yet the bush
was not consumed.
no, but He was the bread of life.
You wrote:
“Is it possible that the Phibionites of Alexandria, who claimed to be Christian, yet had the most perveted rituals, may have caused the Romans to accuse the true Christians of canabalism?”
I doubt it. 1) The Phibionites were Gnostics in the Eastern Levant and probably would not have been confused with Christians even by the Romans. 2) It was Christians who accused the Phibionites of performing the worst of their rituals not the Romans. 3) Catholics everywhere taught that the Eucharist was Christ’s flesh, hence the Romans would have gotten their view of the Eucharist from them and not from a puny sect in the East.
“If I told of their rituals I might be banned from FR.”
Uh, maybe. They did go in for the most bizarre and disgusting of rituals.
You said: Paul, James, Peter
John: “...if these were to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written.”
I never realized that the epistles contained so much additional information that was missing from the Gospels that the whole world was needed to contain them. I mean I have them sitting in the Bible right next to me and it fits right in my hands...
I won’t bother asking you to list everything that is taught by the Apostles that the Gospels are missing. I am sure you could come up with a some things...but certainly not the volume that John speaks of.
It appeared to be a burning bush, but it was not a burning bush.
You mean that it wasn’t what it appeared to be? Is God able to do that? *snicker* That would almost be like the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ appearing to be bread and wine. Again, is God able to do that? But I want to put restrictions on God to fit my anti-Catholic world view!!
“I do too, but I also recognize that Christ shares the office of intercessor with His saints.”
Wha...? Where in the Bible does it say that Christ and someone/others intercede with the Father?
Once again, and I’m quoting scripture — “...no one comes to the Father but by me.”
Seems pretty cut and dried. Christ ONLY.
-Hoss
I never realized that the epistles contained so much additional information that was missing from the Gospels that the whole world was needed to contain them.
nice excerpt, but it is out of context and is not saying what you claim it says. Second off, it was true, then Catholic traditions would be just as inadequate.
There is nothing taught in Catholicism about salvation without Christ.
Read 1 Corinthians. Paul wrote that participaing in the Eucharist was participation in the Body and Blood of Christ.
Also, the Coptic Church, which split from the Great Church over The Council of Chalcedon, believes in the Real Presence.
The Orthodox Church, the Eastern, Greek half of the Great Church which went out of Communion with the Western Half, The Latin Catholic Church in 1054 AD also believes in Real Presence amongst the Eucharist.
The idea that Christ is fully present amongst the Eucharist was fully accepted in the Church long before the word “transubstantiation” was ever used to describe it in Aristotle’s language.
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.