Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

From Rome to Christ
Banner of Truth Trust ^ | Gearoid Marley

Posted on 01/03/2012 3:30:48 PM PST by Gamecock

Not many people get the opportunity to attend seminary. In an amazing way I have attended two. The first was training for the Roman Catholic priest­hood in Ireland and the second at a conservative Evangelical seminary in England.

Raised a Catholic . . . but not knowing God Like most boys in the Republic of Ireland in the 1980s, I was brought up a Roman Catholic. My parents taught me to live a good life, say my prayers, and attend mass every Sunday. I believed there was a God, but I didn't know him personally. I prayed as my mother taught me, but I never knew whether or not God was really listening. I attended confession monthly and did many penances. Conscious of my sinfulness, I hoped that God would accept me into heaven if I did enough good works. I tried to live the best life I could. It was like balancing the accounts, hoping that my credits (good works) would cancel my debits (sins). Zealous to please God, I was just eleven years old when I decided to become a Roman Catholic priest. I told the local priest, but he said I would have to wait until I was eighteen before I could enter the seminary.

During my teenage years I got involved in much sinful behaviour. I rebelled against God and disobeyed his commandments. I loved my sin, but I hated that miserable life and started to cry out to God. I realise now that God was working in my heart. He showed me I was a sinner. I longed to be right with him. This became the focus of my life. I knew that I needed to be saved from my sins. I went on a pilgrimage to a famous Roman Catholic shrine. I ate oatcakes, drank black tea, and crawled on my knees around the Stations of the Cross over three days to do penance for my sins. I fasted and meditated but never knew pardon for sin. I wanted to know forgiveness, but how?

Training for the priesthood

At the age of nineteen, and after checking different possible organisations, I finally decided to join the Society of Missions to Africa (SMA). They are a society of priests who live together in small communities in different parts of the world, seeking to convert pagans to the Roman religion. I entered the Roman Catholic Seminary located in Maynooth, County Kildare, Ireland. During my two years at seminary, I learned about religion and philosophy but there were no biblical studies. I attended daily mass and monthly confession but, alas, there was no teaching on forgiveness for sin. We had set times of prayer as a community - morning, evening, and night. I heard many talks that were focused on pleasing God by doing charitable works and buying favour with God through the church. I also heard a lot about how to use psychology to counsel people spiritually. Not once did I hear how to be reconciled to God through Christ who alone could forgive my sins.

I began to read the Bible (a Protestant translation my parents had given to me). As I read it, I asked the priests serious questions about the religious rituals in the Roman Catholic faith, but they couldn't show me any scriptural basis whatsoever for so much of their superstition and their many traditions. I discovered that the Bible does not promote the veneration of Mary as practiced in the Roman Catholic Church. The official teaching of the Roman Church is that Mary does not necessarily answer prayers but rather intercedes on the Catholic's behalf and prays for them. However, the Bible teaches that she is a sinner: in the famous 'Magnificat' she is found praying to God her Saviour. Mary knew she had sinned and we find her rejoicing in God her Saviour, the one conceived in her womb by the Holy Spirit - Jesus Christ her Lord.

I realised that rosaries and prayers to the saints have no scriptural basis. Mary is addressed in Roman Catholic prayers (eg 'O Mary, conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee'), but the Saviour teaches us to pray to the Father directly. Indeed, the Bible warns us against ritualistic prayer. This described me exactly: outwardly very holy and pious, but inwardly my heart was sinful and corrupt. Also, the Roman Church teaches its followers to pray to the saints. There is a saint for almost every circumstance, such as St Christopher for travel, St Anthony for lost property, St Martin de Porres for healing, St Joseph for the dying, St Vincent de Paul for the poor, and St Jude for lost causes. Unable to find anything in Scripture to support these things, I asked the priests many questions, and I was told that these Church traditions could not be questioned.

I was conscious of my sin and longed to have assurance of salvation. I asked the priests but I was told that we could never be sure of salvation until we died. I was instructed to attend the priest for confession, but I did not find that in Scripture either. The Bible instructs us to confess our sins to God, not to human priests. I also realised that as a priest I would have to hear people's confessions and absolve them. I was confused. How could I forgive other people's sins, when I did not even know forgiveness myself? I now realise that the Lord was lifting the veil from my eyes to show me that true faith and forgiveness for sin is to be found in Christ alone.

Eventually, I left the Roman seminary in 1995. The Society had decided that I was not suitable, but the Lord, through his Word, had shown me the errors of Rome and that I shouldn't continue training for the priesthood. I had entered the seminary thinking that I would find God's answer to my sins. When I left, I thought that I had finished with God - but he hadn't finished with me! Over the next two years I lived in Dublin and continued my search for God. I went to various Protestant churches and also met people from different cults. One cult told me that if I was to be baptized again, then I would be born again. This sounded too much like the Roman Church and its teaching of justification by works, so I had nothing more to do with them.

Going to England

I went to London in preparation for nursing studies. On the first night I met a man who told me how I could know forgiveness for sin. He gave me a leaflet that emphasized the need to trust in Jesus Christ alone. I read this leaflet many times, but still had no peace with God. Although well physically, I became very depressed spiritually.

I knew that I was condemned if I was not converted. The Bible told me that if I did not believe then the wrath of God abode upon me. Then I read 'There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit' (Rom. 8:1). This was a constant challenge to me. I was alone in a huge city with no one to turn to for spiritual help. How my heart yearned to be right with God.

While pursuing my nursing studies, I met some students who seemed to know God. I attended their church where the Bible was central to the whole service. The sermon was preached from the Bible - that was something completely new to me. Deep down I knew these people were genuine Christians. I asked many questions and started to attend the church regularly. About this time, a small Christian group was meeting in my halls of residence. I went along aiming to disrupt the meetings, but slowly began to be drawn to Christ. I saw that they had something that I didn't have - peace with God and a real love for Christ. They knew the reality of 'Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ' (Rom. 5:1). One of them gave me J. I. Packer's book, Knowing God. I read the book and saw that I too could know God in a personal way.

My conversion

One Sunday morning, 8th February 1998, I was listening to a sermon from Luke 10:30-37 about the Good Samaritan. The preacher spoke of Jesus Christ being like the Good Samaritan - coming to help us in our wretched sinful state - while revealing that the Holy Spirit gives new life to lost sinners. He also urged the listeners to repent of sin and trust in Jesus Christ alone for forgiveness. I called upon Jesus Christ to save me, 'For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved' (Rom. 10:13). There and then, I knelt down in my room and prayed, 'O God, I know that you have sent your Son Jesus Christ into the world to save sinners. Will you save me? I trust in Christ alone and ask that you would come into my life by the power of your Holy Spirit and make me new.' I felt a huge weight of guilt and sin taken from my heart. As soon as I opened my eyes a deep sense of peace came over me. At that moment I knew that I was a Christian and truly forgiven of all my sins. The Bible became the living Word of God and he was speaking to me as I read. I realised that we are not saved by works but by grace, 'For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast' (Eph. 2:8,9). I was baptised in London as a believer in September 1998. After my baptism I struggled with temptations and trials, but the Lord was my constant refuge: 'God is our refuge and strength, a very present help in trouble'(Psa. 46:1).

My life as a Christian

On my first visit back to Ireland, I did not know of a Christian church, so I went to mass with my parents. I realised the priest was re-enacting a sacrifice that was accomplished once and for all on the cross of Calvary (Heb. 9:26; 1 Pet. 3:18). For this reason, I couldn't attend the Roman Catholic mass any longer. As a young Irish man, swearing was second nature to me. Very soon after my conversion this dried up. Worldly pursuits like drinking in pubs and going to nightclubs ceased. Prayer and communion with God became a whole new area of experience. I had learned formal rote prayer as a young boy, but now I began truly to pray from my heart. This is still an amazing experience to me: to be able to lift my heart to God as my Father and know that he is listening and will answer my prayers according to his will.

My family were upset that I had left the Roman Catholic faith. At first they thought it was another religious phase I was going through, but they soon realised that this was different. However, the Lord gave me opportunities to share the true gospel with them. About a year later my youngest brother was converted. What joy filled my heart!

Since my conversion, the Lord has taught me so much from his Word. I am especially thankful to one man from the church in London who helped me to study the Bible. We did a complete overview of the Scriptures together, as well as an in-depth study of the doctrines of grace (Calvinism). The glorious truth that God is sovereign in salvation and reaches out in mercy to sinners is truly humbling and amazing. That God, the Creator and Sustainer of the world, should call wretched sinners to himself illustrates his grace. What a joyful day it will be when all his people are united with him in heaven.

Christian service and ministry

About a year after my conversion I was seeking the Lord about serving him. One Lord's Day evening after the service I was praying to the Lord asking him where he wanted me to serve. I read 2 Timothy 3:16-4:5 and was profoundly challenged. I had never studied this portion of God's Word before. It was impressed on me that this was how the Lord wanted me to serve him - to preach the Word. I graduated and worked for a year in the National Treatment Centre for Alcohol and Drugs. Some of the patients were hardened criminals; others were involved in sordid areas of society due to their addictions. I realised the psychological treatment was not dealing with their real problem: their unpardoned sin. I couldn't witness openly to the patients but some enquired what kept me through the difficult times in my life. I told them that it was my faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, and they were amazed. Both my house­mate and a Roman Catholic friend were converted and baptised during this time. It was a great privilege to see the Lord use even me to win sinners to Christ. I conducted a Bible Study in Colossians with some Jehovah's Witnesses. They began to seek Christ but their leaders visited and put an end to it. I pray for these people, that the Lord would open their eyes to his truth. As I taught young boys in a Crusaders Class I soon realized that children can be taught the deep truths of Scripture in a simple, understandable way.

The Lord opened up the way for me to study at London Theological Seminary. The lasting memories of my time there are of the nightly prayer meetings with fellow students and the godly men who taught us theology and prepared us for the ministry.


TOPICS: General Discusssion
KEYWORDS: calvinismisdead; slander; truth; truthforthedeceived
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 401-417 next last
To: Religion Moderator

That is a word for word translation, but in my opinion does not quiet express the fallacy that gives title to the expression.

From the site “Logical Fallacy.”

“Tu Quoque is a very common fallacy in which one attempts to defend oneself or another from criticism by turning the critique back against the accuser. This is a classic Red Herring since whether the accuser is guilty of the same, or a similar, wrong is irrelevant to the truth of the original charge. However, as a diversionary tactic, Tu Quoque can be very effective, since the accuser is put on the defensive, and frequently feels compelled to defend against the accusation.”

It would be hard to grasp that all from the literal translation, so if one does not know it looking it up is the best response. I had to look it up, since it has been many years since I had any logic classes.


181 posted on 01/04/2012 12:10:51 PM PST by lastchance ("Nisi credideritis, non intelligetis" St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: lastchance

You wrote, “But instead he repeats the tired old Protestant claims that Catholics don’t personally know Christ.”

Where did the author of this piece say that?

Maybe you are the one telling “whoppers to try to increase your bona fides.”


182 posted on 01/04/2012 12:11:35 PM PST by Theo (May Rome decrease and Christ increase.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: Theo

I stand corrected it was more of an inference I made based on the implication of this statement

“Raised a Catholic . . . but not knowing God”

But you are correct he never outright wrote that and please accept my apologies for a hasty assumption.


183 posted on 01/04/2012 12:22:43 PM PST by lastchance ("Nisi credideritis, non intelligetis" St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: Theo; Al Hitan; don-o
your interpretation isn't cute, Theo --> your post wrongly accused Al hitan of saying that you were not a follower of Christ because you were not Roman Catholic.

When people put their own individual interpretations, it leads to such errors

That is the root of your errors in individual interpretations of scripture as well.

184 posted on 01/04/2012 12:33:53 PM PST by Cronos (Party like it's 12 20, 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: Iscool
Why haven't you been???

You are making assumptions again. You need to stop doing tha you are making yourself look bad.

185 posted on 01/04/2012 12:34:11 PM PST by verga (We get what we tolerate and increase that which we reward)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: Iscool
Ignorant??? You don't have the original Greek...You've never seen the original Greek...And you don't know anyone who has ever seen the original Greek...

So what does that make you??? Seriously, you need to document this assertion, you don't clue one.

186 posted on 01/04/2012 12:36:26 PM PST by verga (We get what we tolerate and increase that which we reward)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

I’m glad you’re NOT using that term because I agree it’s too broad. Anyone advocating “whole sale sinning” or “gay theology” as mentioned elsewhere on this thread (whatever THAT is!) is ignoring Scriptural warnings that grace is NOT a license to sin (subject dealt with by Paul in the NT)— and I don’t know of any mainstream Protestant churches who would preach this. One would have to cut out large sections of Scripture to justify such — and if one is saved, one is a “new creature” and the Holy Spirit will convict any and all He indwells of sinful desires. Put more simply, it isn’t that born-again believers don’t sin or can’t sin, it’s that their desires have been changed. They no longer find unbounded joy in living outside of God’s will. It’s an experience common to those who have been born -again and unlikely to ever make sense to those who have not experienced such. Thus the advocacy of any “whole sale sinning” by those who do not know Him and have not been saved. They are playing “church” and engaging in religious ritual. Nothing more. Sad.


187 posted on 01/04/2012 12:39:30 PM PST by JLLH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

Christ is the Word made Flesh. Correct. I never said differently, but adding to the written word by adding to the Gospel as presented in Scripture has been anathematized in the NT. It was to this that I was referring.


188 posted on 01/04/2012 12:47:51 PM PST by JLLH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Cronos

At my Church we DO have the Lord’s Supper — but it is symbolic (as laid out in Scripture), not literal and furthermore has not salvific properties. I have read my Bible and continue to do so — and there is no such tie between the symbolic acts of water Baptism and salvation or the Lord’s Supper and salvation - as some Catholics would claim.


189 posted on 01/04/2012 12:51:18 PM PST by JLLH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: fishtank

Well said in post #98. I always marvel at the historical revisionism that takes place on these threads. Unbelievable (not to mention completely inaccurate, lol!)


190 posted on 01/04/2012 12:52:54 PM PST by JLLH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: JLLH
I don't know about the 'whole sale sinning' and I view 'gay theology' as a common affliction to all Christianity -- we ALL need to learn from the falling away of the ECUSA, ELCA, PCUSA, etc. -- pointing fingers without noticing the failings among us is foolish

"grace is NOT a license to sin" -- do note that there have been some who have taught to the contrary

I don’t know of any mainstream -- now that is the error - the ECUSA right now DOES teach gay theology, but i wouldn't use that to smear the Traditional Anglicans, for example

Those who are born-again in Christ have already been saved by Him, are being saved by Him and will be saved by Him. As Christ said (Matt 23:13But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.)

191 posted on 01/04/2012 1:00:35 PM PST by Cronos (Party like it's 12 20, 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: JLLH
but adding to the written word by adding to the Gospel as presented in Scripture has been anathematized in the NT

That is where you are doubly wrong: firstly, the words in Apocalypse 18-19 say:If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book
19And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

so "curses on both those add and take away from the book"

Secondly, read verse 18 carefully "the plagues that are written in this book" -- that tells you that the verses mean if you take away or add to the book of Revelation -- the Bible is a collection of books and John of Patmos refers solely to his book -- Apocalypse.

192 posted on 01/04/2012 1:03:34 PM PST by Cronos (Party like it's 12 20, 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: JLLH
Note the above: adding/removing is only with reference to the book of Revelation.

The canon i.e. the Bible is a collection of books.

Did you know that for most of the Early Christians until the canon was closed in the third century, for most of these, the book of Revelation in fact was NOT in the Bible?

For example the Jewish canon itself was not closed until the 2nd century AD? Unless one takes into account 1 Maccabeus 3 which shows how this was closed in the time of the Maccabees and included Esther, Maccabees etc.

Christian canons start from Marcion's in the first century which tossed out the entire OT and kept only the Pauline Epistles and the Gospel of Luke.

Origen's in the 2nd century was closer -- it include all of the books in the current Catholic canon except for four books: James, 2nd Peter, and 2nd and 3rd epistles of John.

Athanasius' canon in 367 included the Book of Baruch and the Letter of Jeremiah in the canon but omitted the book of Esther from the canon.

Anyway, the upshot is that canon was collected over centuries and closed under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit by the community of Christ, i.e. the Church, in councils.

193 posted on 01/04/2012 1:20:02 PM PST by Cronos (Party like it's 12 20, 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: fishtank; conservativguy99; JLLH
fish: The validity of the NT is grounded in apostolic authorship

err... the Gospel of Luke was not written by an Apostle, neither was the Gospel of Mark (though arguably Mark was writing down what Peter taught -- as Irenaeus said)

Also, arguably, John of Patmos, the author of Apocalypse may not have been the Apostle John.

Finally, Jude is not known if it was written by the Apostle Jude or the brother of James the Just or if the two were the same.

194 posted on 01/04/2012 1:31:01 PM PST by Cronos (Party like it's 12 20, 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: JLLH

Well, your interpretation is that it is symbolic, but if you wish us to respect your interpretation, then respect ours. We’ve had this for quite a long time and many of us. So, you can go ahead and believe what you interpret if you wish, but give us the same respect for our interpretation.


195 posted on 01/04/2012 1:33:14 PM PST by Cronos (Party like it's 12 20, 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: JLLH
Also, as laid out in Scriptures, the Eucharist is much more than symbolic, if you read in the Bible, starting from John 6:30, we read
30 So they asked him, “What sign then will you give that we may see it and believe you? What will you do?
31 Our ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written: ‘He gave them bread from heaven to eat.’
32 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread from heaven, but it is my Father who gives you the true bread from heaven.
33 For the bread of God is the bread that comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.”
34 “Sir,” they said, “always give us this bread.”
35 Then Jesus declared, “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never go hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty.
36 But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe.
They asked Him for a sign, saying that Moses gave them manna in the desert. If Jesus (according to them) was aspiring to the level of Moses, He should do something as big as that.

and Jesus says something strange to them -- He says Moses didn't give you bread, My father did, and bread that comes down from heaven. Then He says that HE is the bread of life, HE is the manna -- and manna was to be eaten.

The people around Him made the same mistake you did, which is to think he was speaking as a metaphor.

Yet Jesus REPEATED the same thing, saying
48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness, yet they died.
50 But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which anyone may eat and not die.
51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”
And now the crowd is openly rebellious saying “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”
And
53 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.
54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.
55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink.
56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them.
57 Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me.
58 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your ancestors ate manna and died, but whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.
Note -- Jesus doesn't clear up the Metaphor, like he did in Matt. 16:5–12
5 When they went across the lake, the disciples forgot to take bread.
6 “Be careful,” Jesus said to them. “Be on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees.”
7 They discussed this among themselves and said, “It is because we didn’t bring any bread.”
8 Aware of their discussion, Jesus asked, “You of little faith, why are you talking among yourselves about having no bread?
9 Do you still not understand? Don’t you remember the five loaves for the five thousand, and how many basketfuls you gathered?
10 Or the seven loaves for the four thousand, and how many basketfuls you gathered?
11 How is it you don’t understand that I was not talking to you about bread? But be on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees.”
12 Then they understood that he was not telling them to guard against the yeast used in bread, but against the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees.
So, Jesus DOES indicate when it is a metaphor and when it isn't.
In this case, look at the reaction of his DISCIPLES, people who had heard his teachings for so long and followed him
60 On hearing it, many of his disciples said, “This is a hard teaching. Who can accept it?”...

66 From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him.
You cannot say that this was just bread and wine of that this is a metphor for coming and having faith in the Lord or some kind of metphor for believing in Christ because of the reaction of the Jews and the very language -- to eat one's flesh and drink the blood means to do violence on some one. You see it even in Hindi where a threat is "Mein tera Khoon pie jaongaa" or "I will drink your blood" -- and this is among vegetarians! To drink a persons blood means a serious threat of injury.So, if you believe that this was just a metphor, you mean to say that Christ is rewarding people for crucifying Him?!! That's nonsensical, sorry.

You cannot even say it was a metaphor by incorreclty comparing it to John 10:9 (I am the gate/doorway) or John 15:1 (I am the true vine) is because this is not referenced in the entire verse in the same way as John 6 which shows the entire incident from start to finish of Jesus saying His body is to be eaten, repeating it and seeing his disciples go and not correcting them (as he did in Matthew 16).

Even in the literal sense -- Christ says he is the gateway to heaven and the vine such that we get nourishment with him as the connecting path. But John 6 is much much more than mere symbolism as He categorically states that "For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed" (John 6:55).

Even at the end of John 6, Jesus rebukes those who think of what He has said as a metaphor by emphasising that

61 Aware that his disciples were grumbling about this, Jesus said to them, “Does this offend you?
62 Then what if you see the Son of Man ascend to where he was before!
63 The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you—they are full of the Spirit[e] and life.
64 Yet there are some of you who do not believe.”
Jesus repeats the rebuke against just thinking in terms of human logic (Calvin's main problem) by saying
John 8:15 You judge by human standards; I pass judgment on no one.
16 But if I do judge, my decisions are true, because I am not alone. I stand with the Father, who sent me.
Just using human logic as Calvinist thought does, without God's blessings behind it fails in grace.John 6:63 does not refer to Jesus's statement of his own flesh, if you read in context but refers to using human logic instead of dwelling on God's words.

And, all of this is confirmed in Paul's writings to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 10:16)
6 Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ?
and also 1 Cor 11:27-29
27 So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord.
28 Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup.
29 For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves.
How clear can Paul get? "The bread IS a participation in the body of Christ" and "who eats the bread... will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord" This is not just mere bread and wine anymore. This is the body and blood of Christ.

Finally, the Earliest Christians also said any consideration of this as just a metaphor was false -- Ignature of Antioch (disciple of Apotle John) wrote in AD 110 wrote about heretics who abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in his goodness, raised up again" (Letter to the SMyrnaens). The earliest Christians beleived this to be the ACTUAL body of Christ. Why, they were also accused by pagans of being cannibals and Justin MArtyr had to write a defence to the Emperor saying "Not as common bread or common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nourished, . . . is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus"

in view of this overwhelming evidence from scripture and supplemented by the practise and belief of the earliest Christians, we can only say that there IS a real presence in the Eucharist. Martin Luther too believed it -- he said that Who, but the devil, has granted such license of wresting the words of the holy Scripture? Who ever read in the Scriptures, that my body is the same as the sign of my body? or, that is is the same as it signifies? What language in the world ever spoke so? It is only then the devil, that imposes upon us by these fanatical men. --> only Calvin/Zwingli turned around what Christ had said
196 posted on 01/04/2012 1:36:28 PM PST by Cronos (Party like it's 12 20, 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: JLLH
Also, as laid out in Scriptures, Baptism is more than symbolic Our Lord tied the forgiveness of sins to faith and Baptism: "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to the whole creation. He who believes and is baptized will be saved."
Mk 16:15-16
15And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

16He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Baptism is the first and chief sacrament of forgiveness of sins because it unites us with Christ, who died for our sins and rose for our justification, so that "we too might walk in newness of life."
Rom 6:4
4Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
; Rom 4:25
25Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.

Baptism is the basis of the whole Christian life, the gateway to life in the Spirit.

John 3:5

5Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

The Spirit who had hovered over the waters of the first creation descended then on the Christ as a prelude of the new creation, and the Father revealed Jesus as his "beloved Son."
Mt 3:16-17

16And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:

17And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

In his Passover Christ opened to all men the fountain of Baptism. He had already spoken of his Passion, which he was about to suffer in Jerusalem, as a "Baptism" with which he had to be baptized
Mk 10:38

38But Jesus said unto them, Ye know not what ye ask: can ye drink of the cup that I drink of? and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?

Lk 12:50

50But I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how am I straitened till it be accomplished!

The blood and water that flowed from the pierced side of the crucified Jesus are types of Baptism and the Eucharist, the sacraments of new life.
Jn 19:34

34But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water.

1 Jn 5:6-8

6This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.

7For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

8And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.

From then on, it is possible "to be born of water and the Spirit"

197 posted on 01/04/2012 1:41:08 PM PST by Cronos (Party like it's 12 20, 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: JLLH
also note that Paul did preach that baptism is for remission of sins, and here is what Paul said Acts 2:38,
38 Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Acts 22:16;
16 And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name.
Rom. 6:1–4;
1 What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2 By no means! We are those who have died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? 3 Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.
1 Cor 6:11,
11 And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God
1 Cor 12:13;
13 For we were all baptized by[a] one Spirit so as to form one body—whether Jews or Gentiles, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink.
Gal. 3:26–27;
26 So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, 27 for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ
Eph. 5:26;
to make her holy, cleansing[a] her by the washing with water through the word,
Col. 2:11–12;
11 In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not performed by human hands. Your whole self ruled by the flesh[a] was put off when you were circumcised by[b] Christ,
12 having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead.
Titus 3:5;
5 he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit,

One cannot even say this was a symbol -- look at all of the examples above, look at the language, consistently same the same in each, that in baptism we are saved and buried with Christ, washed of our sins by this and born again

Remember, the words of Jesus Christ Himself in Matthew 28:19

19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

198 posted on 01/04/2012 1:42:36 PM PST by Cronos (Party like it's 12 20, 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: Religion Moderator; rzman21

I’m going to have to pick a fight with you, RM.

“Tu” can be translated as “you,” in general, and “quoque” can be translated as “also.” But the phrase “tu quoque” is a term, which, when translated as such, loses its meaning.

“Hypocrisy” is not a logical fallacy; it’s a commission. Tu quoque is the name of the logical fallacy which is an appeal to hypocrisy. To accuse, “to quoque” is not accuse someone of hypocrisy; it is to accuse someone of using the charge of hypocrisy as an ad hominem attack.

(For those who hate the use of Latin terms for logic, “ad hominem” is a term for an illogical argument which falsely supposes that since a person may be flawed, his argument must be.)


199 posted on 01/04/2012 1:54:52 PM PST by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: conservativguy99
The fact of the matter is some people are too stupid to be Catholic. Catholic theology is far beyond their 80 IQs.

Thank you for the admission!

While you're at it, isn't there something else you'd like to say? You know, something about Bobby Bill and Cleetus hunting squirrels in the outhouse or something?

A little more honesty like yours might get more "rednecks" out of that religion.

200 posted on 01/04/2012 2:05:10 PM PST by Zionist Conspirator (Ki-hagoy vehamamlakhah 'asher lo'-ya`avdukh yove'du; vehagoyim charov yecheravu.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 401-417 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
Religion
Topics · Post Article

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