Posted on 04/16/2014 5:37:55 AM PDT by Salvation
Featured Term (selected at random:
ROSMINIANISM
A system of philosophy formulated by Antonio Rosmini-Serbati (1797-1855), founder of the Institute of Charity. Encouraged by Popes Pius VII, Gregory XVI, and Pius IX, he undertook a renewal of Italian philosophy, ostensibly following St. Thomas Aquinas. But the influence of Descartes, Kant, and Hegel shifted his thinking. He came to hold that the human mind is born with the idea of "being." In time it analyzes this basic idea to discover in it many other ideas, which are identical with those in the mind of God. Rosmini also taught that reason can explain the Trinity and that original sin is only a physical infection of the body. After his death forty of his propositions were condemned by Pope Leo XIII in 1887 and 1888.
All items in this dictionary are from Fr. John Hardon's Modern Catholic Dictionary, © Eternal Life. Used with permission.
That commandment, to believe, is indeed repeated often. So why is it that all of a sudden that incoherent Protestant Jesus decided to augment it by asking to eat some miraculous bread? Observe, John 6:29 comes before "Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day." You cannot make an earlier more general admonition to be the entire sense of what follows, which has these curious specifics.
This eating, however, in the Lord's Supper, is not done for salvation, but specifically for remembrance
Well, one cannot remember without believing, so all these roads lead to salvation. Jesus indeed speaks of remembrance, but He also says says that this bread is "given up for you". That "for you" cannot refer to anything but salvation. And St. Paul writes that the Eucharist can condemn (1 Cor. 11:29-30), so presumably it can save also, and of course Jesus in John 6 is very emphatic that the Eucharist saves.
I've got to take a break from this. I'll check back tomorrow sometime. Thank you all for your company today.
We follow Paul, and Peter, and James, and John, and the entire Catholic Church at all times. We are Catholic.
But Jesus said, ......
Matthew 4:19 And he said to them, “Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men.”
Matthew 16:24-26 Then Jesus told his disciples, “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what shall a man give in return for his soul?
We are not called to follow anyone but Jesus.
If you follow men, you are not Christian.
Christ speaks often in this way, for example, in John 4, speaking literally of water that He would give:
Joh 4:13 Jesus answered and said unto her, Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again: Joh 4:14 But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life. Joh 4:15 The woman saith unto him, Sir, give me this water, that I thirst not, neither come hither to draw.
And the case that Christ here speaks literally is even stronger, since Christ does not correct her when she took Him literally, even though we, who have followed His teachings throughout the Gospel of John, would understand it as faith.
Thus Christ's language in John 6 is not obscure or weird, and its direct message is even clearer, insomuch that He bothered to explain Himself twice. First, in the command to believe in response to the "how" of eating, and, secondly, in the reminder that the flesh profits nothing, and it is the spirit which profits, thus pointing us again to a spiritual understanding of His words and a spiritual eating accomplished through faith, exactly as Augustine understood it.
Well, one cannot remember without believing, so all these roads lead to salvation.
But the object of faith is in Christ alone, not in the Eucharist, as otherwise you transform Christ's message here from a call to remember His sacrifice on the cross, to a call to be saved by partaking in a ritual, as if this was the central focus and goal of His death and resurrection. Thus the Thief on the cross is damned because, unlike the Apostles, He did not know that the Gospel was all about the Eucharist, and not the Eucharist for the Gospel.
And St. Paul writes that the Eucharist can condemn (1 Cor. 11:29-30), so presumably it can save also, and of course Jesus in John 6 is very emphatic that the Eucharist saves.
The Sacraments are for our spiritual edification, and those who receive them unworthily bring spiritual condemnation upon themselves and the wrath of God. But the source of the condemnation is not in the elements themselves, or in the water of baptism, but in the faithlessness and the sin of the individual who is unworthily receiving. Thus, what condemns is their lack of faith, their false confession, and so it follows then, that the faithlessness that condemns them, if turned to faithfulness, gives them eternal life, and then makes them worthy to receive all of God's sacraments, as they belong to a holy and pure church for our edification.
I think it's pretty obvious that you DO give a d-mn, else, why would you continue to drone on and on ignoring every bit of Scripture that disputes your false claims and do it so vehemently? You often resort to cursing, ad hominems, insults, condescension and ridicule. No one who does that on such a regular basis does so because he doesn't care. You're not fooling anyone.
I think what really gets y'alls goat is that so many here refuse to back down to your bullying and insistence on having some form of authority by proxy. I imagine it irks people who are so wedded to their "church" as to be unable to bear with any criticism when history quite easily disproves their assertions. Y'all have managed to wedge yourselves quite tightly into that corner because, no matter what hateful verbal missiles you fire at the work of the Reformers, it splashes back on you as if you had spit into the wind.
The "end product" of the Reformation was successful because it exposed the hypocrisy and religious syncretism of the Roman Catholic Church and laid bare the numerous abuses and persecutions of genuine Christians and the lengths the Catholic clergy went to squelch Scriptural knowledge of the believers. Picking up the current Catechism gives ample evidence that cherry-picking of words and phrases to attempt to prove dogmas by Scripture is what Catholicism has ALWAYS done.
I follow the SAME faith as Jesus and His Apostles taught and Catholics CANNOT say the same - if they are being honest. The issues of the Eucharist and the role of works in our salvation has been consistently perverted beginning quite early in the history of the Christian faith by heretics, who at one time were condemned by Catholics, but who latter found support there. Whoever these "Protestants" are that you imply admit to bypassing or ignoring or explaining away the truths of God's word, they either don't exist at all, are sadly misinformed or are being misled into joining the Catholic Church based upon these lies. The movement which can be called "charlatanism" belongs to your guys. The Reformation succeeded because it was right and God was behind it. I am grateful that He cared so much for the truth and for the souls who sincerely and diligently seek it that He used it to triumph over religious leaders who cared more about power and wealth than the righteousness of God's people. My faith is in HIM - not some church that boasts it represents Him.
Sorry; but eating the
is reserved to REMEMBERING the SALVATION from PHYSICAL death in EGYPT. It was eaten; not in a specific place, delievered by a specific person; but in one's own homes.
The Catholic church CHANGED it into a ritual that is performed in a specific place by a specific person with a specific ritual.
Likewise...
I follow Paul, and Peter, and James, and John, and the entire Catholic Church at all times. try to have the MIND of Christ* instead of a specific Religious Organization's set of rules and regulations.
* Philippians 2:5
Didn't we just have a go around with this idea just a couple of weeks ago?
AHHHhhh...
I think I see the problem.
LOL!
They wouldn’t need FReepathons, then, would they?
But Jesus did not come in to the world to condemn it but to save it.
John 3:16-18 “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.
We are not saved until we are condemned. We are condemned until we're saved.
It's not a matter of finding out when we die if we've been good enough, because God's standard is absolute perfection. One sin in the garden broke Adam and Eve's fellowship with God and caused them to be expelled from the garden, to have death, the penalty for sin, to enter the world.
The world stands already condemned by God until it is saved.
Jesus is emphatic that faith saves and the SPIRIT gives life.
John 1:10-13 He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.
John 3:14-18 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life. “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.
John 5:24 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.
John 6:40 For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”
John 11:25-26 Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this?”
John 6:63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.
HE says RIGHT HERE, in the same chapter 6 that Catholics love to quote, that He's speaking in a metaphor.
I beseech you, be ye followers of me, as I also am of Christ. (1 Cor. 4:16)the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. (Acts 20:28)
He is speaking literally in John 4, for Baptism is literally in water. Same as in John 6, where the Eucharist is literally His flesh and blood and the soul.
the object of faith is in Christ alone, not in the Eucharist
Correct, but it seems to me you say "Christ alone" to you means something like "Christ apart from that Catholic stuff He teaches by mistake". "Observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you" (Matthew 28:20) means also to observe this:
Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day. (John 6)
the source of the condemnation is not in the elements themselves, or in the water of baptism, but in the faithlessness and the sin of the individual who is unworthily receiving.
The condemnation results from sin, yes; and it is Jesus Who condemns, yes again. But the sin in focus is believing that Protestant stuff that denies the Eucharist, rather than what Christ says and the Holy Scripture records. Paul specifically explains what the sin is: "not discerning the body of the Lord" (1 Cor. 11:29).
Fine. Follow man and the teachings of man.
It’s your future.
I’ll continue to follow Jesus. I know I can’t go wrong then.
WRONG. Jesus does NOT condemn.
John 3:17
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.