Looking For A True Church To Call Home

6/21/11 | Me

[NoGrayZone]

Okay, here's the deal in a long story short. I was raised Lutheran, moved out to Long Island and continued to be raised in St. Paul's Lutheran Church.

Aunt Jeannie (my name sake) has been a member since. I decided years ago I wanted back, so I went.

I did not feel Him there, thought it was me. I kept looking around the congregation, thinking it was me. After a while, I realized it wasn't (a couple of things happened after that confirmed it wasn't me).

Anywho, the icing on the cake was my Aunt Jeannie stopped going as well. After almost 30 years she felt the change as well. I looked up our church and saw they were apart of the "accept homosexuals as Pastors" crowd. That was 1 of the things that confirmed it was not me.

But my Aunt Jeannie leaving was the icing on the cake.

Here's our delima. Both of us are July babies. She is the 2nd, I am the 18th. We decided on 7/17 we would find a church to attend (we both want one to belong to and believe in), then go have brunch to discuss.

She is much more open minded than I am, but I promised her I would be open minded, if just for an hour, on that day.

I said to her, during our conversation "how do we know if the "Pastor" is a homo or not. She believes He is with us no matter where we are. I agree....to a point. I don't believe a homosexual can be one of His Shepard's leading His herd if that is so.

There have been so many "demoninations" coming out for homosexual "Shepard's" I have NO idea where to begin.

I have called a few churches and left messages for the Pastor to call back so I can interview Him (no lady Pastors for me).

Any advise to where we can look? Anyone know anything about Presbyterians?

[NoGrayZone]

But I am not good enough, yet, to be able to do that. I carry all my sins upon my back, as punishment.

The burden has become to much to bear any longer; hence my thread.

I just spoke with a Pastor who’s church looked good on paper. My interview with him went well. He stated they are strictly Biblical. I asked about allowing the homosexuals as “pastors”. He then asked me “what does the Bible say about homosexuality”? I answered “He stated it is detestable to Him”.

The Pastor then went into scripture regarding that subject and they DO NOT allow it, as the Bible states.

I am going to their service on Sunday, he told me to come earlier and go to the hospitality suite for visitors. He told me to seek him out. I told him about my Bible studies w/ the JW’s and that is still the Bible I use. He told me to stay away from them because they are a cult and to throw out my Bible.

I said I couldn’t throw away my Bible, but could he do it for me. He told me to bring it with me and he would look it over. If it needs to be thrown out, he would do it for me and give me one of theirs. I believe they use the King James Version, but I could be wrong. There was so much info being passed back and forth my head was spinning!

He also stated that they do not believe the body and blood of Christ (they call it the last supper)is literal and told me to read the 1st Corinthians which explains it.

I read it and am very confused and have NO idea what I read (I will certainly tell him that part). He also stated if I believe the body and blood is literal I should seek the Catholic Church. I told him the problems I had with it (praying to Mary, Saints and statues).

I have a feeling I will be staying after the service for a true one on one. As I have stated before, a lot of what I believe can be wrong.....which I have a feeling a lot will be.

I just need to find that crooked, unlit path that is almost impossible to stay upon.

[Elsie]

I understood this from baptists — if I am wrong, please do tell me.

I really have no idea.

(I was hoping you'd tell ME! ;^)

[Elsie]

We have different understandings of what it means to be "catholic and apostolic".

And what ARE they?

[Elsie]

Elsie -- this is a thread for NoGreyZone's question. you want to hijack it into a discussion that has been had many times?

If I have too!

I will NOT let ANYONE get away with only allowing what THEY want to say be unquestioned.

[Elsie]

Elsie -- this is a thread for NoGreyZone's question.

And I have said a LOT of things that address that 'question'; have I not?

[Elsie]

NoGreyZone evidently believes in the Real Presence in the Eucharist. You don't. As she believes in this, she should, in my humble opinion search for a church that believes the same as she would not be happy in a place that did not.

It is SO hard to define WHERE a 'belief' originates.

Shouldn't our 'beliefs' be formed from SCRIPTURE and NOT from the SPINNING of it?

[Elsie]

When we dig deeply into His word...

Watch out!

You'll get chastized for this!

[Cronos]

My apologies NGZ

Elsie -- From the Lutheran LCMS.org website

All three accounts of the institution of the Lord's Supper in the Gospels (Matthew 26:26-29; Mark 14:22-25; Luke 22:14-23) explicitly state that Jesus took BREAD, blessed it, broke it, and gave it to his disciples saying, "Take, eat; this [i.e., this BREAD, which I have just blessed and broken and am now giving to you] is my body." Jesus uses similar language in referring to "the cup" (of wine) as "his blood."...

Perhaps the most explicit expression of this truth, however, is found in 1 Cor. 10:16-17, where Paul writes: "The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread."

Paul clearly says here that we all "partake" of "BREAD" when we receive the Lord's Supper--even as we also partake of and "participate in" the true body of Christ. And he says that we all "partake" of the wine (the cup), even as we also partake of the true blood of Christ.

Similarly, in 1 Cor. 11:26, Paul says: "For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes." Paul expressly states here ........................that those who eat this bread and drink this cup are also partaking of the true body and blood of Christ.

So "real" is this participation in Christ's body and blood, in fact, that (according to Paul) those who partake of the bread and wine "in an unworthy manner" are actually guilty of "profaning the body and blood of the Lord" (1 Cor. 11:27). (Partaking of the Lord's Supper "in a worthy manner," of course, is not something that we "do" or "accomplish" on the basis of our "personal holiness" or "good works." It means receiving God's free and gracious gifts of life and forgiveness offered in the Lord's Supper in true repentance produced by the work of the Spirit through God's Law and in true faith in Christ and his promises produced by God's Spirit through the Gospel).

Even Martin luther weighed in in favor of the True Presence in the Eucharist when he said:

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.

[Elsie]

Whenever the pastor would say "take and eat, this is my body, given to you, do this in remembrance of me"

But you have to remember that it was in the context of a Passover Meal - a YEARLY event that brought to rememberence the Salvation of the Lord out of Egypt.

Christ IS our PASSOVER LAMB; as John said, "Behold, the Lamb of God, that takes away..."

[HereInTheHeartland]

A good church will have only Scripture as it's foundation. They will also not be afraid if you challenge anything preached with a scriptural question.
Their sermons will also be based on scripture and should be teaching chunks of that.

Nothing wrong with using other things to help teach the message as long the scripture is central to the message.

Having said that, there are a lot of writers that are helpful in unpacking Scripture for us mortals.
C.S. Lewis is timeless. Lee Stroebel also does a good job with A Case For Christ.

There are many others of course.

Everyone has a bias on translations also.

[Elsie]

But here I was sitting each week for Mass in Polish...

So; there was speaking in tongues; did anyone interpret?

[Elsie]

I make some mistakes over and over, I must be getting on His nerves!

Are you up to 490 yet?

[Lakeshark]

If you believe the Lutheran doctrine about communion, and you have said that is important to you, you would likely do well in a Missouri Synod Lutheran church as suggested.

Best of luck to you.

[Elsie]

I didn't erase my slate -- He did.

AMEN!!

I, too, have had an image that I could NOT get rid of.

But God did it for me!

[Elsie]

Try the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

Sounds like my homepage.

[Elsie]

The burden has become to much to bear any longer; hence my thread.

We get this.

So what are you hoping this NEW church will tell you to aleviate your burden?

[Elsie]

Similarly, in 1 Cor. 11:26, Paul says: "For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes."

Paul expressly states here ........................that those who eat this bread and drink this cup are also partaking of the true body and blood of Christ.

He DOES??

I guess I'll have to believe you instead of my lying eyes.

[Cronos]

Cronos: but you do not have the erase your slate. indeed, you or I am not able to do this. I had a problem that was nagging me since Christmas -- a family bicker that festered. I couldn't get it off my shoulders. After I solemnly confessed, the relief was enormous. I didn't erase my slate -- He did.

NGZ: But I am not good enough, yet, to be able to do that. I carry all my sins upon my back, as punishment.

But you do not have to do so. Seriously -- do you think I'm any better than you? Hardly. We're all sinners here, you and me and all.

He also stated if I believe the body and blood is literal I should seek the Catholic Church -- perhaps you should come and see for yourself? Salvation or Highlyopinated can direct you to a good place near you? I'm aware this is like selling "my brand", but why don't you discover for yourself?

Bluntly we don't pray to any of those and I can describe that to you on freepmail otherwise this thread will descend into the standard FR RF mud-slinging.

[Cronos]

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

[Cronos]

HITH is correct — CS Lewis or GK Chesterton (Orthodoxy in particular) are priceless. you can read them online