Posted on 11/23/2011 11:11:08 AM PST by marshmallow
A notoriously 'gay-friendly' parish in San Francisco has invited an openly homosexual Episcopalian cleric to lead an Advent Vespers service.
Most Holy Redeemer parish asked Bishop Otis Charles, a retired Episcopalian prelate, to lead the November 30 service. After serving as the Bishop of Utah from 1971 to 1993, he publicly announced that he is homosexual. Divorced from the mother of his 5 children, he solemnized a same-sex union in 2004.
did you ever wonder why Jesus didn’t say “this represents my body” rather than “This is My Body”?
i assume there was a word like “represents” in Aramaic.
That is 200 years after the Nt church was founded long enough for the doctrines of men to displace the truth of Christ..
One especially timely in warning the NT church of the pagan heresies to come through Rome
Col 2:18 Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,
So you think those portions of scripture I quoted are “another gospel”? Wow!
No I didn't. I used it as an example. Two very similar teachings, both sola scriptura, that end in one determining the other is from Satan. Based on their sola scriptura interpretation.
This is an example that sola scriptura is ultimately not based on the same authority, else it would not result in this example. I could have used other examples.
it's a subset that doesn't cause issue among Protestants as it relates to salvation
Certainly it does. It says Paul's Gospel is different from Christ's (except that it teaches Christ said follow Paul's). The whole point is that Paul teaches a different soteriology than Christ's Kingdom of God.
And examples are found in other sola scriptura branches, the salvation by election branch vs. the others for example.
No Catholic mass recorded in Matthew.
Catholic Church established 33ad.
Apostle John dies around 95ad.
Justin Martyr writes around 150ad.
a ten year old hearing John preach in 95ad would be 65 years old in 150ad.
a twenty year old hearing John would have been 75.
it must be distressing not seeing anything close to “protestantism” appear on the world scene until the 16th century.
Love that Ockham.
Check your math. And no matter what your result, it is far closer to the time Christ and the Apostles and Acts than 1350+ years later.
The history of the Church is contiguous from Acts onward. Your problem is history itself.
They don’t teach Sola Fide.
I should have added that I used Dispensationalism as my example because I was replying to a Dispensationalist.
D, can you imagine thinking there weren’t any Christians around between John dying and 1517?
Joseph Smith would be proud.....
I don’t believe in the Gospel According to William of Ockham.
Did ya ever wonder why He called himself a door? or a light?? or a vine?? That might have something to do with it..LOL..STUDY TO PROVE YOURSELF APPROVED
The Last Supper was actually the Last "passover " and the 1st Lords Supper.
Gods intervention to end the slavery of His people by the Egyptians held many types that pointed to Christ's death .
We see as a prime example the final plague God brought on the Egyptians. Every 1st born was to die at the hand of Gods avenging angel. God gave specific orders on how the jews were to be protected from that sword of death.
They were to have a perfect Lamb and to slaughter him. They were to spread the blood of that lamb over the drop posts ( in a shape similar to a cross) When the angel saw that blood he would pass over that home and the people inside were preserved from the plague.
God gave specific instructions on how to eat that Lamb, that passover meal was to be a ritual that would be celebrated in remembrance of the grace and salvation of God for His people.
That meal prefigured Christ, on the night Jesus was betrayed they celebrated the meal that prefigured His coming .
Christ OUR PASSOVER LAMB would be slain, and many would be saved that were under His blood. There is a blessing, "In memory of the Passover sacrifice, eaten after one is sated."
It was at THIS point during the Last Supper Jesus broke the bread and passed bits to His disciples; however, Jesus added the significant words given in Luke 22:19),
Luk 22:19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake [it], and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.
This is the exact spot where Jesus proclaimed "This is my body which is given for you." as he held that broken Matzo
The next step of the ritual meal is drinking from the wine-goblet called the "Cup of Redemption." That's when Jesus said, "This cup is the New Testament (Covenant ) in my blood, which is shed for you." The Passover meal was a REMEMBRANCE of the deliverance of the Jews. Just as the passover was a type of Christ so is the Passover meal.
Jesus was telling them this, and He was telling them NOW instead of the remembrance of the passover, their eyes were opened and the meaning revealed NOW they were to do the mean in remembrance of HIM, of His blood, the blood of the Lamb of God.
As He held that bread He was revealing the mystery that the symbolism held.
Think of the words the apostles used
1Cr 11:24 And when he had given thanks, he brake [it], and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
The broken matzo was a type of Christ, who's body would be broken for them.
Then in the passover tradition
The host of the meal now takes the third cup of wine, "the cup of redemption," or "the cup of blessing," and offers the main table grace blessing. (In Jewish tradition, the main blessing comes after the meal.) Then they all drink from the third cup.
Luke 22:20, "Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, 'This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you'."
Here is what the apostles and disciples said at the Lords table 1Cr 10:16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?
The were recalling "remembering" the PASSOVER ritual. THEY understood that Jesus was revealing a spiritual truth about the passover being a prophetic meal that prefigured HIM.
The Passover was fulfilled on the day that Christ died, and so from that day forward that meal not longer held a prophetic promise of a future Savior, but it was now a remembrance of the completed work of salvation at the cross.
No I cannot imagine it. But then, I also cannot imagine someone holding a religious faith with so little knowledge of its teaching and history, its creeds for goodness sake!
I can understand when one is young, or if religion is not that important in one’s life at this point… but not for someone who truly values their faith and Church.
There was no agreement on these doctrines..many of the ECF held beliefs closer to the reformers than Rome ...But when people prefer not to think then they will always just want to be told what to believe..if that makes you happy..so be it
Yea, that’s what I thought. The RCC injecting meaning into the verses. 1 Corinthians 18 is not calling the Lords Supper a sacrifice. It’s simply showing the participation we have with the sacrifice of Jesus. We participate in the forgiveness of our sins.
The seder meal was a rabinnical invention that didn’t exist in Jesus’s time.
http://www.bib-arch.org/e-features/jesus-last-supper.asp
NEWS ALERT:
the OT contained “types and shadows” pointing to Jesus Christ and His sacrificial death on the cross.
the NT does away with the types and shadows because Jesus Christ became man, suffered, died and rose again.
NO NEED ANYMORE FOR TYPES AND SHADOWS.
Paul asked a question in 1 Corinthians:
Is not the bread we break a participation in the Body of Christ?
Christians have answered “yes” to this question for 2,000 years.
to non-Christians, this is folly and they answer “no”
whay say you, yes or no?
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.