Posted on 10/19/2011 7:55:51 PM PDT by Brian Kopp DPM
Lutherans and Catholics/Orthodox are divided on the nature of that presence. Consubstantiation vs. transubstantiation.
They are followers of Calvin, not followers of Christ. Just as they would use excerpts from Paul's letters to somehow indicate their belief that Paul superseded Jesus, they use it to indicate their belief that Augustine superseded Paul and so on until it comes to their own personal interpretation -- we see this now in the latest interpretation "gay marriage and abortion are good" as pronounced by this group
Interesting -- it's the same logic used by Mormons for their "Great Apostasy" philosophy.
I’m through with your insults. Your acidic tongue brings shame to Christ. Where is the fruit of the Spirit in your life?
Why can't your group read the Bible instead of relying on excerpts all the time?
As I said, all your group does is use excerpts from Paul's letters to somehow indicate it's belief that Paul superseded Jesus, that Augustine superseded Paul and so on until it comes to their own personal interpretation -- we see this now in the latest interpretation "gay marriage and abortion are good" as pronounced by this group
And yet you ignore my civil questions, why?
Furthermore the fruit of the Spirit is so obviously absent in your group which denies Christ’s very own words. It’s sad. To your group I say, don’t go away mad — just go away.
Where is the fruit of the Spirit in your life?
it’s amazing how so many of the “I hate em caflix” crowd can’t see their own faults. They seem to think they are perfect creatures, but that is an extension of their philosophy that they are a Brahmin, elite, elect caste.
Yep. Many of us feelthy papists (that's a joke, people -- unwad the underthings), myself definitely included, get pretty acerbic. There seems to be at least some of that on the other side. Here is one fault that does not respect denomination.
It is not only my shame, but a kind of general embarrassment that in discussing and examining different opinions about the Lord of Love we forget the Love part, at least I do. We leave the noble "extremism in defense of Liberty is no vice" position and end up somewhere near the self-defeating "We had to destroy the village to save it" territory. Our mutual adversary laughs.
Much as I dislike Cromwell, he did wonderfully suggest to, I believe, Scottish presbyters that they consider that they might be wrong. To strengthen his urging, he appealed to the bowels (that is, to the compassion) of Christ. I think real conversation is impossible without considering at least that reasonable people of good will might think that I am wrong, and that I must try to understand in charity how things look from their point of view.
In both Ephesians and Philippians Paul writes deservedly famous passages about the central mystery of Christ and His reconciling work. He does so in both letters to found his appeals for mutual charity and forbearance not on sentiment but on the one cornerstone.
It may be that in, as we see it, defending Christ, we forget Him and His love. To the extent that I have done so, I ask your forgiveness and prayers and hope that we can contend without bitterness but in expectation that our errors will be conquered by the Truth himself to whose saving care we ought to commend one another.
okay, that's enough grandiloquent and self-satisfied piety for one morning!
You nailed it...If they were indwelt with the Holy Spirit as Christians are, they wouldn't be running around an altar trying to get a bite of the Real Presence of Jesus...
Lovely thoughts Mad Dawg.
And then came reply 112. lol
Almost two hours later. ROTFL
The difference isn’t as great as often claimed (the term “consubstantiation” is often applied to the Lutheran view, but it’s not a term Lutherans use to describe their belief; instead preferring “sacramental union”)
My thoughts exactly.
If one believes the words of Jesus and believes the Eucharist is found in the Church, then why is it difficult to accept the teachings of the Immaculate Conception, Perpetual Virginity and other such doctrines.
Some would say that I am brainwashed or not thinking for myself, but they would be wrong.
My belief in the True Presence comes straight from reading Scripture which then led me to the Church.
Psalm 120:7
You nailed it. ;-D
so you follow the tradition of men from the first 100 to 200 years ad?
those that know history realize it wasn’t so clear, some rejected Hebrews, James, Revelations. some accepted the epistle of clement to the corinthians and other books.
the OT canon was not established in the early first century.
some say they reject the “Apocrypha”, but the books they refer to as the Apocrypha were in the Septuigant used by the Apostles and in every Bible up until the 16th century.
again i ask you, are we left to guess on the canon or is there a way we can know for sure?
we are all “catholic” if we hold the “catholic” faith.
if one rejects Jesus when He said “This is My Body” or believes baptism is not for the forgiveness of sins, they are not “catholic”, but heretical.
i am looking for someone to tell me who held these “non-catholic” beliefs before the 16th century?
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.