Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: daniel1212

I don’t understand why non-Catholics who take the Bible so literally in other senses, do not take the passage about the Last Supper and the Institution literally.

Perhaps you can explan that??

If non-Catholics are sola scriptura believers, then wouldn’t they believe this Scripture?


51 posted on 12/29/2012 10:05:34 PM PST by Salvation (("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies ]


To: Salvation

Unfortunately trying to wrestle the true meaning of the Eucharist from the Sacred Scriptures can be no different for a Catholic than it is for a protestant. Personal interpretation cannot be the starting point, as it is fallible. Through the eyes of Faith the signification and consignification found in the Sacred Scriptures becomes most evident, and the theological works of the Early Church Fathers and Doctors of the Church form an organic whole. I would hope that some might take the time to read the resources you post, but any conversion of heart would have to be a work of Grace, a gift of God. I’m not sure that arguing with a fellow Christian with one scriptural interpretation after another will effect any positive change.

“How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the Gospel of peace.”

In the Byzantine liturgy, the post Communion hymn reminds us that: “We have seen the True Light, we have received the Heavenly Spirit, we have found the True Faith, and we worship the undivided Trinity, for the Trinity hath saved us.”


52 posted on 12/29/2012 11:27:53 PM PST by blackpacific
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]

To: Salvation
I don’t understand why non-Catholics who take the Bible so literally in other senses, do not take the passage about the Last Supper and the Institution literally. Perhaps you can explan that??

Go read my posts in this thread including to you, and my link to more, and interact with that rather than avoiding the answer by parroting a defeated polemic which has been exposed, with your false concept of taking the Bible "so literally."

And that it is Rome that engages in reducing literal events to allegory. But just as Catholics evidence they are unwilling to engage in objectively analysis of Scripture, and only seeks to use it to support traditions of men, you fail to interact with the weight of the evidence against your use of the literal hermeneutic you demand here.

And you also failed to answer my question to you in post #50.

57 posted on 12/30/2012 5:30:51 AM PST by daniel1212 (Come to the Lord Jesus as a contrite damned+destitute sinner, trust Him to save you, then live 4 Him)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]

To: Salvation

“If non-Catholics are sola scriptura believers, then wouldn’t they believe this Scripture?”

Because the Jimmy Swaggart crowd say Catholics are not Christians and had nothing at all to with the early Church, and the church fathers were more protestant than Catholic. They give the Catholic Church credit for nothing. They put Catholics in the same league as Mormans and Johovva Witnesses, all preaching a false doctrine. We are all going to hell except Jimmy Swaggart and his ilk.


59 posted on 12/30/2012 2:31:43 PM PST by NKP_Vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | 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