Posted on 06/23/2015 10:06:16 AM PDT by RnMomof7
Perhaps Galatians, the third chapter, beginning at verse 15 and to the end of the chapter will help to clarify the distinction which some think is not a difference. Paul actually addressed that very question!
I am trying to understand your beliefs.
Not to speak for MHG, but here is some information on Bereanesque groups from Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bereans
Historically, the Bereans (also called Beroeans, Barclayans or Barclayites) were a Protestant sect following former Scottish Presbyterian minister John Barclay (1734-1798). Founded in Edinburgh in 1773, the Berean Church followed a modified form of Calvinism. It had congregations in Scotland, London and Bristol, but mainly merged with the Congregationalists after Barclay’s death in 1798.
A new Protestant Christian group began in the 1850s in the United States under the tutelage of Dr. John Thomas. The name “Christadelphian” was chosen as it is believed that those who believe and obey the Commandments of Christ and the Bible as the inspired word of God, are “Brethren in Christ”. The original group split, with one group continuing with the name “The Christadelphians” and the second group adding the word “Berean” to become the “Berean Christadelphians”. The word “Berean” was chosen to reflect the words in Acts 17, “These (Berea) were more noble than those in Thessalonica in that they received the word with all readiness of mind and searched the scriptures daily whether those things were so.” Christadelphians, and Berean Christadelphians believe in the promises given to Abraham, Isaac, and David concerning the Kingdom of God. They deny the Doctrine of the Trinity, a central tenet of orthodox Christianity, and this refusal to recognize the triune nature of God has resulted in a major impasse between the Christadelphians/Berean Christadelphians and the Protestant, Catholic, and Eastern Orthodox Churches.
Some groups among the Bible Student movement also adopted the name, such as the Berean Bible Students and the Berean Bible Institute. Churches and institutions who adopt the Berean name, usually do so in order to express their desire to reflect the attitude of the Bereans in Acts 17, committing themselves to “searching the scriptures daily.”
After forty plus years being raised up in the Way I should go, stumbling and coming home again, stumbling and having His guiding hand slap me where I'll feel it then stand me up again, I am certain that teaching people to drink the literal blood of Jesus at Eucharist is a sacrilege, a sacrilege which denigrates what the Real Blood of Jesus was used to accomplish for you and for me. God wanted us to understand it so much that He gave foreshadowings of Messiah in the Feasts times of Israel. God has used Israel for our chalkboard lessons.
God has also left us clear messages regarding what He plans for this planet and humanity. Groups and folks get empowered by misleading others over what God teaches through His Word. His Spirit inspired the Word, His Spirit empowered the Word made flesh Who dwelt among us, and His spirit brings Born from Above LIFE to the dead human spirit when we faithe (yes, the verb form) in Him. When we believe God's Promises, we walk in faith, as Abraham did and it was counted for him righteousness.
Look around you in America. We are murdering millions of our alive unborn, for utilitarian purposes, allowed because Christians are not literally warring against such demonic things. Our nation deserves what the Amalekites got. But as with Sodom, as with Ninevah, as with Enoch and Noah, as with he Israelites 2000 years ago, God gives call after call but will not always strive with the rebellious.
God is Spirit and we worship Him in spirit and truth. Carnal focus is the antithesis of worshiping in spirit.
The Remembrance of His sacrifice for us is designed to aim the mind (part of the soul) toward the spiritual, much the way the incense altar is placed before the Holy of Holies, to prepare the Way to the Presence of God.
In this Church Age, God is in us by His Holy Spirit earnest of our inheritance, to raise us up in the Way that we should go, so that we can keep the Two Great commandments of Jesus now that the laws of sin and death are covered by His Blood upon the Mercy Seat.
God will not overwhelm our human soul, but He will never give up on the parenting while we are alive. Soon, He is going to snatch us away from the wickedness growing exponentially around us. It taints our places of work, our schools, our ballot boxes, our recreational areas, and our homes. We are literally in a well of evil intentions rushing around the planet as electromagnetic signals.
All around us are electromagnetic waves which carry information. A large amount of lies and filth are carried on those waves. All that is needed is a means to resonate those waves, to overwhelm our minds and emotion with the filth satan wants to mire us in in defiance of God. God told us The Life is in The Blood. Our life is in our blood, and the blood is an excellent means to spread a 'strange life' transmitted via electromagnetic waves to receivers implanted in the living body. The antichrist is planning a way to do just that, and people will accept the 'resonator' because if they don't they will not be able to buy or sell and cannot receive 'public servcies'. Any who accept satan's mark, his resonator, will be damned, for his life will be in their blood.
God is not going to leave His Church in a world like that, a world which He has assured us he intends to pour His wrath upon.
God has placed in each Believer His own resonating earnest of our inheritance, The Holy Spirit presence. When Christ comes in the air for His Bride, the signal God sends through the Angel's command will resonate that presence and transform us in the twinkling of an eye into body and soul and spirit fit for immortal living. You don't get His Life in you by drinking His blood, literally. You are imbued with His Spirit by believing in Whom He has sent for your deliverance.
Orthodox folks just say the bread and wine change when consecrated without further explaining the point. For them, you either accept what Christ Himself said or you have no faith in Christ. For Orthodox folks, someone saying they have faith in Christ while denying what Christ Himself said is foolishness at best and a willful denial that Christ as God at worst.
The Catholic Church elaborated what changes with consecration using the difference between substance and accident, terminology commonly used in philosophy, theology, and science discussions during the Middle Ages and well understood. Basically, it's a way to describe the nature of something independent of the physical properties it has.
The nature of something can change without there being any perceptible change to the physical attributes it has which is exactly what the Catholic Church teaches and always has taught. The Catholic Church has never taught that the accidents of the consecrated bread and wine change, but they have always taught that the substance changes into the body and blood of Christ exactly as Christ Himself said it does.
Neither approach to undersanding what Christ says takes place matters to Protestant folks. That's because in reality as opposed to their espoused doctrine, the overwhelming majority of Protestant folks place their faith in Self first and science when it serves their purposes, not in Jesus Christ.
They pretend to accept that Christ is God incarnate but then refuse to accept what Christ Himself said. They even routinely insist that if Christ meant exactly what He said then science could prove that the bread and wine are changed.
So much for "Faith Alone" as taught by those who so obviously have none.
The argument about the Real Presence is primarily just a way of denying the need for a sacrificial priesthood exactly the same way Korah denied the need for such a priesthood. The Lutheran (as well as a very few other small segments of various groups) approach is to not deny what Christ Himself said, but to claim that it is individual faith that consecrates the bread and wine, not consecreation by the priest in spite of Christ's actions at the Last Supper. That is, they deny what Christ did but not what Christ said.
The majority of Protestantism doesn't stop there, they deny both what Christ said and what Christ did at the Last Supper. They simply ignore the fact that what Jesus Christ, God incarnate, both said and did at the Last Supper were forshadowed in the Old Testament.
The vast majority of Protestant folks ignore it all, in spite of their claim to base what they believe on Scripture Alone they throw out anything in Scripture that complicates their embrace of the heresy of Korah. They ignore the Old Testament being fulfilled and claim the Last Supper is essentially meaningless because Christ and the Apostles were just having a snack. A grape Popsicle and handful of Cheerios for all intents and purposes.
So much for "Scripture Alone" as taught by those who so obviously ignore Scripture.
Instead of deceiving readers why don't catholic blood apologists TRY to show in the Old Testament where drinking the blood of the atonement lamb or the Passover lamb is taught? catholics can't because just the opposite is taught int hese prefigurings, but catholics will continue to float the lies to defend the sacrilege instead of practicing the sacred.
Very good post MHG
If someone believes Jesus Christ is God, the words of Christ Himself are sufficient.
Those who demand that someone "show" them something in addition to the words of Christ Himself must have a problem with the fact that Christ is God.
No need. That Jesus, who is God, said it is good enough.
I guess that would be like Catholics who add LOTS of stuff to the words of Christ. And they label it *sacred tradition*.
Kind of condemning for the Catholic church by your own words.
And PS all those covenant were completed by God in Christ ...
to 230
So sad that Catholics can not understand.. but my friend those were fulfilled by Christ ..
Interesting how you keep giving equivocating answers instead of just saying yes or no.
No the Old covenant was never "set aside" or changed.. The OT was a foreshadow Of Christ.. it was a promise ....
The laws that followed those covenants were such that NO MAN COULD KEEP...
A "covenant" or "agreement" is not synonymous with "law."...Only God Himself could fulfill the laws He gave ..AND HE DID... ALLOWING FOR A NEW COVENANT
Douay-Rheims Bible
Do not think that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets. I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. ..Mat5; 17
I did give you a VERY DIRECT ANSWER ..Jesus fulfilled the Temple sacrifices ..by being the Lamb slain for my sin...
And likewise Circumcision also a type...
Deuteronomy 30:6 The LORD your God will circumcise your hearts and the hearts of your descendants, so that you may love him with all your heart and with all your soul, and live.....
Romans 2:29 No, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a person's praise is not from other people, but from God.
Please study your bible
I am going to take your answer as no, we do not have to keep the law of circumcision, dietary laws and Temple sacrifices. If Jesus can relieve of these laws he can do so also of the prohibition against blood in the reception of the Eucharist.
There are none so blind as those who will not see.
If the Gospels do not agree with the catholic teaching, which do you folloow? Have you read the scene in Luke of the Passover meal before the Crucifixion? If you do not see there is a difference from what catholicism teaches then I leave you to your heresies. But if you do see there is a difference, the use of other scriptures passages is the way to resolve it. Apparenly, catholics do not want to know the sacred just the sacrilege.
Really?
Too WHOM were these LAWS supposed to APPLY to?
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.