-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Yet evidently you do not believe/discern that Christ is truly present in the Eucharist. That is sacrilege.
"For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves."
It should be noted however that the bread and grape-juice served up by protestant congregations is not the Eucharist, not the body and blood of our Lord (Pastor Bob at the local community church has no more authority than you or I to consecrate bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. Only the Apostles and their designated successors have this authority, authority given only to them by our Lord). So if you are taking communion in such a congregation then it is indeed only symbolic, which is a heresy unto itself.
"For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves."
It should be noted however that the bread and grape-juice served up by protestant congregations is not the Eucharist, not the body and blood of our Lord (Pastor Bob at the local community church has no more authority than you or I to consecrate bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. Only the Apostles and their designated successors have this authority, authority given only to them by our Lord). So if you are taking communion in such a congregation then it is indeed only symbolic, which is a heresy unto itself.
Do you know what, until I came onto these websites, I don't think I had ever heard the word heresy
Apparently you are a heretic if you have get it wrong about fillique, you are a heretic if you get it wrong about the pre trib raptiure, you are a heretic if you don't accept extra biblical demands for salvation etc,. etc, etc
As for the true church, sorry to disappoint you but it is not according to denomination but the Holy Spirit. Some seem to think if they go to church once a week and partake of certain rites, rituals and ceremonies they are fine. I wonder if for some that is a conveniant excuse never to give from the heart what God requires.
Now I don't put myself out to attack your denomination, I've lived among Catholics, nice people, they didn't tend to call people heretics, or say you had to belong to their denomination. There's true Christians in all denominations, and also people in all denominations who seem unable to grasp what is most important in the faith
Apparently you are a heretic if you have get it wrong about fillique, you are a heretic if you get it wrong about the pre trib raptiure, you are a heretic if you don't accept extra biblical demands for salvation etc,. etc, etc
As for the true church, sorry to disappoint you but it is not according to denomination but the Holy Spirit. Some seem to think if they go to church once a week and partake of certain rites, rituals and ceremonies they are fine. I wonder if for some that is a conveniant excuse never to give from the heart what God requires.
Now I don't put myself out to attack your denomination, I've lived among Catholics, nice people, they didn't tend to call people heretics, or say you had to belong to their denomination. There's true Christians in all denominations, and also people in all denominations who seem unable to grasp what is most important in the faith
Last edited:
I am not calling you a heretic, mark. Those who promote false teaching are heretics. You are not teaching false doctrines, but rather simply lack understanding, and- like so many today- are abiding by them.
Your post does illustrate well though the dangers that exist today as thousands of different individual protestant congregations each teach their own version of the teachings of Jesus Christ. Some truth is really no Truth at all (see Joel Osteen, for example).
Unity in the body of Christ existed for the first 1500 years of Christianity. It's only been since the protestant reformation of the 1500's that we find this terrible fragmentation among the body of believers, and extraordinary rise of false teachings which exist today. People who start their own churches have no authority whatsoever to interpret and teach the Gospel of Christ.
It is no wonder then that there are so many unbelievers today who think that Christianity is a joke.
Christ prayed to the Father that this splintering which has occurred over the past 500 years would not happen;
"I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me."
Lord, have mercy.
So your church preaches the truth?
Your priests stand up in the pulpit and tell their congregations they are not under law but under grace, and that includes the Ten Commandments unto righteousness before God. They also tell people the power of sin is the law, and the sinfiul passions in us are aroused by the law. Ands also that when Paul strove to obey the Ten Commandments sin used the commandment to wrought all manner of concupiscence in Paul, and he felt condemned.
And they also tell them the law is now written on their hearts and minds, it is internal to the Christian not external
I am impressed. Can you give me a link to a Catholic talk/sermon where the above is preached
Thanks
Your priests stand up in the pulpit and tell their congregations they are not under law but under grace, and that includes the Ten Commandments unto righteousness before God. They also tell people the power of sin is the law, and the sinfiul passions in us are aroused by the law. Ands also that when Paul strove to obey the Ten Commandments sin used the commandment to wrought all manner of concupiscence in Paul, and he felt condemned.
And they also tell them the law is now written on their hearts and minds, it is internal to the Christian not external
I am impressed. Can you give me a link to a Catholic talk/sermon where the above is preached
Thanks
Last edited:
Jesus said to them, “I tell you the truth, 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. [SUP]33 [/SUP]For the bread of God is he who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world(eternal life).”
John6:32&33
Then Jesus declared, “I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty.[SUP]36 [/SUP]But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe.
35&36
I am the bread of life. [SUP]49 [/SUP]Your forefathers ate the manna in the desert, yet they died. [SUP]50 [/SUP]But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which a man may eat and not die. [SUP]51 [/SUP]I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever.(have eternal life)
48-52
I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life
John5:23
I tell you the truth if anyone keeps my word, he shall never see death(have eternal life)
John8:51
So Jesus said, “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am the one I claim to be and that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me.
John 828
“My teaching is not my own. It comes from him who sent me. [SUP]17 [/SUP]If anyone chooses to do God’s will, he will find out whether my teaching comes from God or whether I speak on my own
John7:16&17
For the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God[SUP][k][/SUP] gives the Spirit without limit.
John3:34
When they went across the lake, the disciples forgot to take bread. [SUP]6 [/SUP]“Be careful,” Jesus said to them. “Be on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” [SUP]7 [/SUP]They discussed this among themselves and said, “It is because we didn’t bring any bread.”
[SUP]8 [/SUP]Aware of their discussion, Jesus asked, “You of little faith, why are you talking among yourselves about having no bread?[SUP]9 [/SUP]Do you still not understand? Don’t you remember the five loaves for the five thousand, and how many basketfuls you gathered? [SUP]10 [/SUP]Or the seven loaves for the four thousand, and how many basketfuls you gathered? [SUP]11[/SUP]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.” [SUP]12 [/SUP]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
Above is what gives eterrnal life, below is what is done in remberance of what Christ did for us on the cross, two different things
When the hour came, Jesus and his apostles reclined at the table. [SUP]15 [/SUP]Andhe said to them, “I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before Isuffer. [SUP]16 [/SUP]For I tell you, I will not eat it again until it finds fulfillment in the kingdom of God.”
[SUP]17 [/SUP]After taking the cup, he gave thanks and said, “Take this and divide it among you. [SUP]18 [/SUP]For I tell you I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.”
[SUP]19 [/SUP]And he took bread, gave thanks and brokeit, and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body given for you; do this inremembrance of me.”
[SUP]20 [/SUP]In the same way, after the supper he tookthe cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.
Luke22:19&20
Jesus did not say that to take communion (the bread and wine as symbols of his blood and body) would bring eternal life, but that the disciples should do this, in rembrance of him.
Paul confirms this:
For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus,on the night he was betrayed, took bread, [SUP]24 [/SUP]and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” [SUP]25 [/SUP]In the same way, after supper he took thecup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me
1Cor11:23-25
John6:32&33
Then Jesus declared, “I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty.[SUP]36 [/SUP]But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe.
35&36
I am the bread of life. [SUP]49 [/SUP]Your forefathers ate the manna in the desert, yet they died. [SUP]50 [/SUP]But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which a man may eat and not die. [SUP]51 [/SUP]I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever.(have eternal life)
48-52
I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life
John5:23
I tell you the truth if anyone keeps my word, he shall never see death(have eternal life)
John8:51
So Jesus said, “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am the one I claim to be and that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me.
John 828
“My teaching is not my own. It comes from him who sent me. [SUP]17 [/SUP]If anyone chooses to do God’s will, he will find out whether my teaching comes from God or whether I speak on my own
John7:16&17
For the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God[SUP][k][/SUP] gives the Spirit without limit.
John3:34
When they went across the lake, the disciples forgot to take bread. [SUP]6 [/SUP]“Be careful,” Jesus said to them. “Be on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” [SUP]7 [/SUP]They discussed this among themselves and said, “It is because we didn’t bring any bread.”
[SUP]8 [/SUP]Aware of their discussion, Jesus asked, “You of little faith, why are you talking among yourselves about having no bread?[SUP]9 [/SUP]Do you still not understand? Don’t you remember the five loaves for the five thousand, and how many basketfuls you gathered? [SUP]10 [/SUP]Or the seven loaves for the four thousand, and how many basketfuls you gathered? [SUP]11[/SUP]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.” [SUP]12 [/SUP]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
Above is what gives eterrnal life, below is what is done in remberance of what Christ did for us on the cross, two different things
When the hour came, Jesus and his apostles reclined at the table. [SUP]15 [/SUP]Andhe said to them, “I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before Isuffer. [SUP]16 [/SUP]For I tell you, I will not eat it again until it finds fulfillment in the kingdom of God.”
[SUP]17 [/SUP]After taking the cup, he gave thanks and said, “Take this and divide it among you. [SUP]18 [/SUP]For I tell you I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.”
[SUP]19 [/SUP]And he took bread, gave thanks and brokeit, and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body given for you; do this inremembrance of me.”
[SUP]20 [/SUP]In the same way, after the supper he tookthe cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.
Luke22:19&20
Jesus did not say that to take communion (the bread and wine as symbols of his blood and body) would bring eternal life, but that the disciples should do this, in rembrance of him.
Paul confirms this:
For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus,on the night he was betrayed, took bread, [SUP]24 [/SUP]and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.” [SUP]25 [/SUP]In the same way, after supper he took thecup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me
1Cor11:23-25
A
Just a list of major shisms, heresies which are much more serious are too long to list
This was a response to a statement made that appeared to say the church was fairly stable until the reformation.
- The schism of Marcionism, c.150
- The schism of Gnosticism, which some attribute to Valentinius, c. 150, others much earlier
- The schism of Montanism
- The schism of Monarchianism, c. 200
- The many Antipopes, beginning with Hippolytus (writer) in 217 though Hippolytus later reconciled.
- The Donatist schism, beginning in 311
- The schism with Arianism and Quartodecimanism at the First Council of Nicaea, 325
- The Nestorian Schism, after the First Council of Ephesus in 431, between Western Christianity and Nestorianism
- The Oriental Orthodox schism and rejection of the Council of Chalcedon, c. 451
- The Acacian schism, 484-519
- The schism of the Armenian Orthodox, 491
- Two Fourth Councils of Constantinople, one Catholic (869-870) and one Orthodox (879-880)
- The Cadaver Synod of 897
- The Great Schism of 1054
- Lollardy in the 1350s
- Three Popes at the same time: Roman Pope Gregory XII, Avignon Pope Benedict XIII, Pisan Pope John XXIII, resolved at Council of Constance, see also Western Schism, 1378–1417
This was a response to a statement made that appeared to say the church was fairly stable until the reformation.
Last edited:
Good luck with that, mark. Ripping apart the Word of God to conform it to your own erroneous understanding. Accepting those words of our Lord which conform to your view and discarding those which do not, as evidenced above by your selective pasting of the Bread of Life discourse and Last Supper. Accept it all, or none of it. You are making the mistake of trying to conform Christ to your life, on your own terms, rather than conforming your life to Christ.
You are mistaken, and according to blessed St. Paul are "heaping judgement on yourself" by not discerning the body of Christ in the Eucharist. (Though you're only eating bread and drinking grape juice, so that verse really doesn't apply to you, fortunately. Though you are still in error drinking grape juice (which for you "symbolizes" the blood of Christ) instead and denying the Real Presence in the Eucharist.)
But you choose not to read this vitally important teaching of the apostle Paul since it does not serve you. Carry on then, mark.
You are mistaken, and according to blessed St. Paul are "heaping judgement on yourself" by not discerning the body of Christ in the Eucharist. (Though you're only eating bread and drinking grape juice, so that verse really doesn't apply to you, fortunately. Though you are still in error drinking grape juice (which for you "symbolizes" the blood of Christ) instead and denying the Real Presence in the Eucharist.)
But you choose not to read this vitally important teaching of the apostle Paul since it does not serve you. Carry on then, mark.
Last edited:
This is straining out a gnat to swallow a camel. I wonder how important it is to you for your priests to teach the core of Paul's Gospel of Grace I earlier posted some of, my guess is it isn't important to you at all, but rite, ritual and ceremony are.
As you have freely spoken of what you see as my shortcomings of belief, don't forget, the Pharisees laid the greatest importance on rite ritual and ceremony, but missed out knowing what was most important
The Gospel of grace is what changes lives, and delivers people from being enslaved to sin, but it seems you are more interested in finding fault with those who do not bel,ong to your church and see communion exactly as you do.
Only if the true Gospel is preached and people are set free by it can they partake of communion with the itmost heartfelt gratitude for what has been done for them by the Son of God who loved them and gave himself for them
As you have freely spoken of what you see as my shortcomings of belief, don't forget, the Pharisees laid the greatest importance on rite ritual and ceremony, but missed out knowing what was most important
The Gospel of grace is what changes lives, and delivers people from being enslaved to sin, but it seems you are more interested in finding fault with those who do not bel,ong to your church and see communion exactly as you do.
Only if the true Gospel is preached and people are set free by it can they partake of communion with the itmost heartfelt gratitude for what has been done for them by the Son of God who loved them and gave himself for them
Last edited:
You want to argue about assurance of salvation now? There's a thread already for that (OSAS) where I posted my thoughts. Do a search and discuss it there.
Believe as you wish, mark, concerning the Real Presence (or lack thereof, according to you). I will believe as Christ and his apostles actually taught us.
btw, your pasting of the schism's and such only reinforces my point about what Christ did not want of us (man's splintering of His Church), as illustrated in his prayer to the Father which I posted before.
Peace be with you, mark.
Believe as you wish, mark, concerning the Real Presence (or lack thereof, according to you). I will believe as Christ and his apostles actually taught us.
btw, your pasting of the schism's and such only reinforces my point about what Christ did not want of us (man's splintering of His Church), as illustrated in his prayer to the Father which I posted before.
Peace be with you, mark.
Sounds very interesting. I'll check it out. The passion of those early believers for the mass is sobering.
Here are some awesome quotes from some early Christians regarding the Eucharist...
Justin Martyr
"We call this food Eucharist, and no one else is permitted to partake of it, except one who believes our teaching to be true and who has been washed in the washing which is for the remission of sins and for regeneration [i.e., has received baptism] and is thereby living as Christ enjoined. For not as common bread nor 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 nurtured, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus" (First Apology 66 [A.D. 151]).
Irenaeus
"If the Lord were from other than the Father, how could he rightly take bread, which is of the same creation as our own, and confess it to be his body and affirm that the mixture in the cup is his blood?" (Against Heresies 4:33–32 [A.D. 189]).
"He has declared the cup, a part of creation, to be his own blood, from which he causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of creation, he has established as his own body, from which he gives increase unto our bodies. When, therefore, the mixed cup [wine and water] and the baked bread receives the Word of God and becomes the Eucharist, the body of Christ, and from these the substance of our flesh is increased and supported, how can they say that the flesh is not capable of receiving the gift of God, which is eternal life—flesh which is nourished by the body and blood of the Lord, and is in fact a member of him?" (ibid., 5:2).
Clement of Alexandria
"’Eat my flesh,’ [Jesus] says, ‘and drink my blood.’ The Lord supplies us with these intimate nutrients, he delivers over his flesh and pours out his blood, and nothing is lacking for the growth of his children" (The Instructor of Children 1:6:43:3 [A.D. 191]).
Tertullian
"There is not a soul that can at all procure salvation, except it believe whilst it is in the flesh, so true is it that the flesh is the very condition on which salvation hinges. And since the soul is, in consequence of its salvation, chosen to the service of God, it is the flesh which actually renders it capable of such service. The flesh, indeed, is washed [in baptism], in order that the soul may be cleansed . . . the flesh is shadowed with the imposition of hands [in confirmation], that the soul also may be illuminated by the Spirit; the flesh feeds [in the Eucharist] on the body and blood of Christ, that the soul likewise may be filled with God" (The Resurrection of the Dead 8 [A.D. 210]).
Hippolytus
"‘And she [Wisdom] has furnished her table’ [Prov. 9:2] . . . refers to his [Christ’s] honored and undefiled body and blood, which day by day are administered and offered sacrificially at the spiritual divine table, as a memorial of that first and ever-memorable table of the spiritual divine supper [i.e., the Last Supper]" (Fragment from Commentary on Proverbs [A.D. 217]).
Cyprian of Carthage
"He [Paul] threatens, moreover, the stubborn and forward, and denounces them, saying, ‘Whosoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily, is guilty of the body and blood of the Lord’ [1 Cor. 11:27]. All these warnings being scorned and contemned—[lapsed Christians will often take Communion] before their sin is expiated, before confession has been made of their crime, before their conscience has been purged by sacrifice and by the hand of the priest, before the offense of an angry and threatening Lord has been appeased, [and so] violence is done to his body and blood; and they sin now against their Lord more with their hand and mouth than when they denied their Lord" (The Lapsed 15–16 [A.D. 251]).
Wow! ^ ^ Hear that. So true.
Council of Nicaea I
"It has come to the knowledge of the holy and great synod that, in some districts and cities, the deacons administer the Eucharist to the presbyters [i.e., priests], whereas neither canon nor custom permits that they who have no right to offer [the Eucharistic sacrifice] should give the Body of Christ to them that do offer [it]" (Canon 18 [A.D. 325]).
Cyril of Jerusalem
"The bread and the wine of the Eucharist before the holy invocation of the adorable Trinity were simple bread and wine, but the invocation having been made, the bread becomes the body of Christ and the wine the blood of Christ" (Catechetical Lectures 19:7 [A.D. 350]).
"Do not, therefore, regard the bread and wine as simply that; for they are, according to the Master’s declaration, the body and blood of Christ. Even though the senses suggest to you the other, let faith make you firm. Do not judge in this matter by taste, but be fully assured by the faith, not doubting that you have been deemed worthy of the body and blood of Christ. . . . [Since you are] fully convinced that the apparent bread is not bread, even though it is sensible to the taste, but the body of Christ, and that the apparent wine is not wine, even though the taste would have it so, . . . partake of that bread as something spiritual, and put a cheerful face on your soul" (ibid., 22:6, 9).
Ambrose of Milan
"Perhaps you may be saying, ‘I see something else; how can you assure me that I am receiving the body of Christ?’ It but remains for us to prove it. And how many are the examples we might use! . . . Christ is in that sacrament, because it is the body of Christ" (The Mysteries 9:50, 58 [A.D. 390]).
Theodore of Mopsuestia
"When [Christ] gave the bread he did not say, ‘This is the symbol of my body,’ but, ‘This is my body.’ In the same way, when he gave the cup of his blood he did not say, ‘This is the symbol of my blood,’ but, ‘This is my blood’; for he wanted us to look upon the [Eucharistic elements] after their reception of grace and the coming of the Holy Spirit not according to their nature, but receive them as they are, the body and blood of our Lord. We ought . . . not regard [the elements] merely as bread and cup, but as the body and blood of the Lord, into which they were transformed by the descent of the Holy Spirit" (Catechetical Homilies 5:1 [A.D. 405]).
Augustine
"Christ was carried in his own hands when, referring to his own body, he said, ‘This is my body’ [Matt. 26:26]. For he carried that body in his hands" (Explanations of the Psalms 33:1:10 [A.D. 405]).
"I promised you [new Christians], who have now been baptized, a sermon in which I would explain the sacrament of the Lord’s Table. . . . That bread which you see on the altar, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the body of Christ. That chalice, or rather, what is in that chalice, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the blood of Christ" (Sermons 227 [A.D. 411]).
"What you see is the bread and the chalice; that is what your own eyes report to you. But what your faith obliges you to accept is that the bread is the body of Christ and the chalice is the blood of Christ. This has been said very briefly, which may perhaps be sufficient for faith; yet faith does not desire instruction" (ibid., 272).
Council of Ephesus
"We will necessarily add this also. Proclaiming the death, according to the flesh, of the only-begotten Son of God, that is Jesus Christ, confessing his resurrection from the dead, and his ascension into heaven, we offer the unbloody sacrifice in the churches, and so go on to the mystical thanksgivings, and are sanctified, having received his holy flesh and the precious blood of Christ the Savior of us all. And not as common flesh do we receive it; God forbid: nor as of a man sanctified and associated with the Word according to the unity of worth, or as having a divine indwelling, but as truly the life-giving and very flesh of the Word himself. For he is the life according to his nature as God, and when he became united to his flesh, he made it also to be life-giving" (Session 1, Letter of Cyril to Nestorius [A.D. 431]).
Ignatius of Antioch
"I have no taste for corruptible food nor for the pleasures of this life. I desire the bread of God, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, who was of the seed of David; and for drink I desire his blood, which is love incorruptible" (Letter to the Romans 7:3 [A.D. 110]).
"Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God. . . . They 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 that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes" (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6:2–7:1 [A.D. 110]).
Here are some awesome quotes from some early Christians regarding the Eucharist...
Justin Martyr
"We call this food Eucharist, and no one else is permitted to partake of it, except one who believes our teaching to be true and who has been washed in the washing which is for the remission of sins and for regeneration [i.e., has received baptism] and is thereby living as Christ enjoined. For not as common bread nor 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 nurtured, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus" (First Apology 66 [A.D. 151]).
Irenaeus
"If the Lord were from other than the Father, how could he rightly take bread, which is of the same creation as our own, and confess it to be his body and affirm that the mixture in the cup is his blood?" (Against Heresies 4:33–32 [A.D. 189]).
"He has declared the cup, a part of creation, to be his own blood, from which he causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of creation, he has established as his own body, from which he gives increase unto our bodies. When, therefore, the mixed cup [wine and water] and the baked bread receives the Word of God and becomes the Eucharist, the body of Christ, and from these the substance of our flesh is increased and supported, how can they say that the flesh is not capable of receiving the gift of God, which is eternal life—flesh which is nourished by the body and blood of the Lord, and is in fact a member of him?" (ibid., 5:2).
Clement of Alexandria
"’Eat my flesh,’ [Jesus] says, ‘and drink my blood.’ The Lord supplies us with these intimate nutrients, he delivers over his flesh and pours out his blood, and nothing is lacking for the growth of his children" (The Instructor of Children 1:6:43:3 [A.D. 191]).
Tertullian
"There is not a soul that can at all procure salvation, except it believe whilst it is in the flesh, so true is it that the flesh is the very condition on which salvation hinges. And since the soul is, in consequence of its salvation, chosen to the service of God, it is the flesh which actually renders it capable of such service. The flesh, indeed, is washed [in baptism], in order that the soul may be cleansed . . . the flesh is shadowed with the imposition of hands [in confirmation], that the soul also may be illuminated by the Spirit; the flesh feeds [in the Eucharist] on the body and blood of Christ, that the soul likewise may be filled with God" (The Resurrection of the Dead 8 [A.D. 210]).
Hippolytus
"‘And she [Wisdom] has furnished her table’ [Prov. 9:2] . . . refers to his [Christ’s] honored and undefiled body and blood, which day by day are administered and offered sacrificially at the spiritual divine table, as a memorial of that first and ever-memorable table of the spiritual divine supper [i.e., the Last Supper]" (Fragment from Commentary on Proverbs [A.D. 217]).
Cyprian of Carthage
"He [Paul] threatens, moreover, the stubborn and forward, and denounces them, saying, ‘Whosoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily, is guilty of the body and blood of the Lord’ [1 Cor. 11:27]. All these warnings being scorned and contemned—[lapsed Christians will often take Communion] before their sin is expiated, before confession has been made of their crime, before their conscience has been purged by sacrifice and by the hand of the priest, before the offense of an angry and threatening Lord has been appeased, [and so] violence is done to his body and blood; and they sin now against their Lord more with their hand and mouth than when they denied their Lord" (The Lapsed 15–16 [A.D. 251]).
Wow! ^ ^ Hear that. So true.
Council of Nicaea I
"It has come to the knowledge of the holy and great synod that, in some districts and cities, the deacons administer the Eucharist to the presbyters [i.e., priests], whereas neither canon nor custom permits that they who have no right to offer [the Eucharistic sacrifice] should give the Body of Christ to them that do offer [it]" (Canon 18 [A.D. 325]).
Cyril of Jerusalem
"The bread and the wine of the Eucharist before the holy invocation of the adorable Trinity were simple bread and wine, but the invocation having been made, the bread becomes the body of Christ and the wine the blood of Christ" (Catechetical Lectures 19:7 [A.D. 350]).
"Do not, therefore, regard the bread and wine as simply that; for they are, according to the Master’s declaration, the body and blood of Christ. Even though the senses suggest to you the other, let faith make you firm. Do not judge in this matter by taste, but be fully assured by the faith, not doubting that you have been deemed worthy of the body and blood of Christ. . . . [Since you are] fully convinced that the apparent bread is not bread, even though it is sensible to the taste, but the body of Christ, and that the apparent wine is not wine, even though the taste would have it so, . . . partake of that bread as something spiritual, and put a cheerful face on your soul" (ibid., 22:6, 9).
Ambrose of Milan
"Perhaps you may be saying, ‘I see something else; how can you assure me that I am receiving the body of Christ?’ It but remains for us to prove it. And how many are the examples we might use! . . . Christ is in that sacrament, because it is the body of Christ" (The Mysteries 9:50, 58 [A.D. 390]).
Theodore of Mopsuestia
"When [Christ] gave the bread he did not say, ‘This is the symbol of my body,’ but, ‘This is my body.’ In the same way, when he gave the cup of his blood he did not say, ‘This is the symbol of my blood,’ but, ‘This is my blood’; for he wanted us to look upon the [Eucharistic elements] after their reception of grace and the coming of the Holy Spirit not according to their nature, but receive them as they are, the body and blood of our Lord. We ought . . . not regard [the elements] merely as bread and cup, but as the body and blood of the Lord, into which they were transformed by the descent of the Holy Spirit" (Catechetical Homilies 5:1 [A.D. 405]).
Augustine
"Christ was carried in his own hands when, referring to his own body, he said, ‘This is my body’ [Matt. 26:26]. For he carried that body in his hands" (Explanations of the Psalms 33:1:10 [A.D. 405]).
"I promised you [new Christians], who have now been baptized, a sermon in which I would explain the sacrament of the Lord’s Table. . . . That bread which you see on the altar, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the body of Christ. That chalice, or rather, what is in that chalice, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the blood of Christ" (Sermons 227 [A.D. 411]).
"What you see is the bread and the chalice; that is what your own eyes report to you. But what your faith obliges you to accept is that the bread is the body of Christ and the chalice is the blood of Christ. This has been said very briefly, which may perhaps be sufficient for faith; yet faith does not desire instruction" (ibid., 272).
Council of Ephesus
"We will necessarily add this also. Proclaiming the death, according to the flesh, of the only-begotten Son of God, that is Jesus Christ, confessing his resurrection from the dead, and his ascension into heaven, we offer the unbloody sacrifice in the churches, and so go on to the mystical thanksgivings, and are sanctified, having received his holy flesh and the precious blood of Christ the Savior of us all. And not as common flesh do we receive it; God forbid: nor as of a man sanctified and associated with the Word according to the unity of worth, or as having a divine indwelling, but as truly the life-giving and very flesh of the Word himself. For he is the life according to his nature as God, and when he became united to his flesh, he made it also to be life-giving" (Session 1, Letter of Cyril to Nestorius [A.D. 431]).
Ignatius of Antioch
"I have no taste for corruptible food nor for the pleasures of this life. I desire the bread of God, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, who was of the seed of David; and for drink I desire his blood, which is love incorruptible" (Letter to the Romans 7:3 [A.D. 110]).
"Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God. . . . They 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 that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes" (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6:2–7:1 [A.D. 110]).
7
Father forgive him for he knows not what he says!!! Boy, you're lucky you still have a chance to apoligise to the Lord for calling His Flesh horse flesh. Cz make no mistake my friend, That IS the Flesh of your Saviour and your God that you were talking about. Repent and smarten up champ! Peace
Last edited by a moderator:
7
Are you kidding? Paul's gospels are EXTREMELY important in the catholic church lol. Just shows how little people know about the Catholic Church before they talk rubbish about Her teachings. And by "rite, ritual, and ceremony," if you're talking about the ceremonies we have carried through tradition, then yes, they are EXTREMELY important to us aswell. We can't just go off scripture alone! The Holy Bible wasn't put together for years after Christ.
A christian who believes that the bible is the sole rule of faith (sola scriptura) believes that all questions relating to faith and morals can be answered completely from the written word of God as contained in all the books from Genisis to Revelation. That being the case, there is no need for any other rule to guide the Christian, whether it be tradition, a teaching authority, philosophy, or nature. These inhibit a Christian's path to salvation.
However, a bible-only approach, when applied logically, runs into immediate and numerous problems. For example, can a Bible held in the hand of any Christian answer the following questions: "How do i know that my Bible was correctly translated?" or "does my Bible have the correct number of books in both the old and new testaments?" or "is the interpretation of this verse or that one the correct one?" Ordinary Christians lacking an extensive knowledge of the languages, cultures, and history of the Holy Land and its surroundswould be hard-pressed to answer with certainty any of these questions, with or without a Bible.
Not only is the doctrine of Sola Scriptura not found in the Bible, it is expressly denied by it. The scriptures we have in hand expressly state that they do not contain everything (St. John 20:30; 21:25), or give us an account of all that Christ had said or done (St. John 16:12). In addition, we know that there existed other apostolic writings now lost, such as earlier letters of St. Paul to the Corinthians mentioned in 1 Cor. 5:9: "I wrote to you in my letter...... But now I am writing to you...." Also missing is a Laodicean epistle recommended to the collosians by St. Paul, probably written by himself (Col. 4:16).
Nevertheless, the fact there are certain Aposotlic writings missing is no fatal consequence to Catholics. This is so because the Catholic Church maintains that devine revelationis fully contained in her Deposit of Faith (body of teaching), comprised of both written Scripture and Tradition. Tradition here is Apostolic Tradition, not merely the tradition of men, and ranks equally with the written Word to complete divine revelation. Tradition supplements the written word of God , it does not contradict it. Furthermore, it assists the church to fully understand and appreciate the whole written word. Tradition ebraces all those truths which have been passed on from age to age either orally, in the writings of the Church Fathers, in the acts of the Martyrs, in early paintings and inscriptions, in the practices and the customs of the Universal Church, and in the definitions of the councils and Popes.
Contrary to Protestant opinion, tradition is actually praised in Scritpure: "So then, bretheren, stand firm and HOLD TO THE TRADITIONS WHICH YOU WERE TAUGHT BY US, EITHER BY WORD OF MOUTH or by letter" (2Thes. 2:15)
God Bless and guide you back home my brother!
A christian who believes that the bible is the sole rule of faith (sola scriptura) believes that all questions relating to faith and morals can be answered completely from the written word of God as contained in all the books from Genisis to Revelation. That being the case, there is no need for any other rule to guide the Christian, whether it be tradition, a teaching authority, philosophy, or nature. These inhibit a Christian's path to salvation.
However, a bible-only approach, when applied logically, runs into immediate and numerous problems. For example, can a Bible held in the hand of any Christian answer the following questions: "How do i know that my Bible was correctly translated?" or "does my Bible have the correct number of books in both the old and new testaments?" or "is the interpretation of this verse or that one the correct one?" Ordinary Christians lacking an extensive knowledge of the languages, cultures, and history of the Holy Land and its surroundswould be hard-pressed to answer with certainty any of these questions, with or without a Bible.
Not only is the doctrine of Sola Scriptura not found in the Bible, it is expressly denied by it. The scriptures we have in hand expressly state that they do not contain everything (St. John 20:30; 21:25), or give us an account of all that Christ had said or done (St. John 16:12). In addition, we know that there existed other apostolic writings now lost, such as earlier letters of St. Paul to the Corinthians mentioned in 1 Cor. 5:9: "I wrote to you in my letter...... But now I am writing to you...." Also missing is a Laodicean epistle recommended to the collosians by St. Paul, probably written by himself (Col. 4:16).
Nevertheless, the fact there are certain Aposotlic writings missing is no fatal consequence to Catholics. This is so because the Catholic Church maintains that devine revelationis fully contained in her Deposit of Faith (body of teaching), comprised of both written Scripture and Tradition. Tradition here is Apostolic Tradition, not merely the tradition of men, and ranks equally with the written Word to complete divine revelation. Tradition supplements the written word of God , it does not contradict it. Furthermore, it assists the church to fully understand and appreciate the whole written word. Tradition ebraces all those truths which have been passed on from age to age either orally, in the writings of the Church Fathers, in the acts of the Martyrs, in early paintings and inscriptions, in the practices and the customs of the Universal Church, and in the definitions of the councils and Popes.
Contrary to Protestant opinion, tradition is actually praised in Scritpure: "So then, bretheren, stand firm and HOLD TO THE TRADITIONS WHICH YOU WERE TAUGHT BY US, EITHER BY WORD OF MOUTH or by letter" (2Thes. 2:15)
God Bless and guide you back home my brother!
7
Brother, go for a browse through these forums and have a look and see who is more interested in finding fault with the other. All you will see in this forum is non-Cathilcs trying to prove the Catholic Church wrong and evil. All we do is defend ourselves. But that's fine by me because the Lord Himself told me i was going to get persecuted in His name. Peace! (hopefully soon)
I can assure you, I am not someone who seeks to go out of my way to find fault with the catholic church, though I grew up in a church where the ministers favourite sermon seemed to be atacking your denomination. I simply ask you to read through my conversation with Maynard, and in honesty, if you can see who first started attacking other denominations and proclaiming their own as correct. I admit to responding to this, and should not have done
If I have offended you I apologise, although from what you have quoted of my words it seems to me I was querying a specific person in that instance, not the denomination
If I have offended you I apologise, although from what you have quoted of my words it seems to me I was querying a specific person in that instance, not the denomination