|
Post by HomeAtLast on Mar 14, 2004 16:40:26 GMT -5
Are we to believe that Jesus was advocating consumption of Human flesh and blood, CONTRARY to the law which says "do not eat blood" (Lev17:12)? If there is true flesh and blood in communion, then the LAW is violated (Jesus "did not come to DESTROY the law but to FULFILL it" (Matt5:17), and Jesus is promiting CANNIBALISM.Jesus, in fulfilling the Law, DOES NOT VIOLATE IT. This is a fact --- no eating blood.It is clear that the idea behind communion is addressing the ESSENCE of salvation, which is "death of the old sin nature and birth of the new". Paul says (Rm6) that we are "BURIED-IMMERSED-CRUCIFED-DEAD- UNITED in Jesus' death, AND His resurrection". The "eating of His flesh" is exactly the same idea as "uniting with Him" --- it is a spiritual union, Jesus INDWELLS us. "Abide in Me, and I in you." Jn15:4 No cannibalism, no "eating blood", but spiritual communion. Nothing less, nothing more...Ben, Not at all. You need to look at Jesus words and not assume. He said "This is MY body" while holding up bread, not a finger. Paul says we are to imitate him as he imitates Jesus. You are assuming that he meant to eat actual human flesh. and yet still, no one will address my question that I have asked so many times....if Jesus was talking just spiritually or in a parable, why did he not call back his followers that were leaving when he told them that they must eat his body for eternal life? This question has been ignored every time that I have asked it. Blessings, Ann
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Mar 15, 2004 5:39:06 GMT -5
Mel Gibson is technically a sedavacanist. They are technically Roman Catholics who do not recognize Vatican Council II as a legal council, and as a result consider the Chair of St Peter vacant and any pope (including the present one) as illegitimate. Really? If what you state is true, then I've learned something here. Why doesn't he accept Vat2 as legal? Personally, I don't believe either of them is legal, by scriptural standards. [/color]
|
|
|
Post by RealistState on Mar 15, 2004 5:49:01 GMT -5
Mel Gibson is technically a sedavacanist. They are technically Roman Catholics who do not recognize Vatican Council II as a legal council, and as a result consider the Chair of St Peter vacant and any pope (including the present one) as illegitimate. Really? If what you state is true, then I've learned something here. Why doesn't he accept Vat2 as legal? Personally, I don't believe either of them is legal, by scriptural standards. [/color][/quote] Do a Google search on the word sedavacantist on the internet. You'll probably get lot's of hits on "ultra-conservative" and Pope Pius X. Some of their ideas make the most anti-Catholic groups seem tame by comparison. The irony is that he went to the Pope with his movie to get some legitmacy. Kind of two-faced if you ask me.
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Mar 15, 2004 5:53:58 GMT -5
gene, Since you are speaking of Paul and his teachings being compared to Jesus words check out 1 Corinthians 11. Yes, rather than taking one verse, the whole chapter speaks volumes with Paul using Jesus own words. If the body and blood of Jesus are not present in the Eucharist why must we discern our state before we take communion? Because, while being symbolic, it is serious and a casual approach to communion is a mockery of Jesus death and resurrection. Jesus said "DO THIS IN REMEMBERANCE OF ME". Communion is a REMINDER of what Jesus did for us. [/color] Why must we be sure to be clean before communion if it is only a symbol? He begins by saying "Imitate me, as I imitate Christ". Why would he say that unless he was doing this in remembrance of Christ? My answer above should have been here instead. [/color] If Jesus, when he said "You must eat my body and drink my blood" was just speaking in parables This wasn't a parable, but symboilc of His body and blood. Symbolism doesn't have to be a parable. and followers of his left at the teaching of this, why did he not say, hey guys, that was just a parable, I did not really mean it literally? Again, it wasn't a parable. Maybe Jesus could see where their hearst were and let them go. Maybe they were looking for an excuse to deny Him. Who knows for sure. Just because the Rcc gave a meaning to these people leaving doesn't mean that is the correct reason. [/color] This is what scriptures say, not just the RCC. This comes from true study of the Scriptures, not"indoctrination. No, it's what the Rcc says the scriptures means. [/color] I have just finished "The Case For Christ" by Lee Strobel. Have you read it. I highly recommend it for Christians as well as non-Christians. It was very informative, especially chapter 14. Blessings, Ann Have you read "The Desire of Ages" or "Steps To Christ" by Ellen White? "Steps to Christ" has been translated into over 100 languages and I highly recomend these two books to any Christian who wants to see what a heart belief is about. I only recomend this to Christians because non-Christians generally, would have no interest in reading about Jesus. I assure you that Steps to Christ is probably one of the best books about Jesus and His word that you will ever read, if you ever do so. [/color]
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Mar 15, 2004 6:00:00 GMT -5
Ben, Not at all. You need to look at Jesus words and not assume. He said "This is MY body" while holding up bread, not a finger. EXACTLY!! The bread is symbolic of His Flesh. [/color] Paul says we are to imitate him as he imitates Jesus. You are assuming that he meant to eat actual human flesh. and yet still, no one will address my question that I have asked so many times....if Jesus was talking just spiritually or in a parable, why did he not call back his followers that were leaving when he told them that they must eat his body for eternal life? This question has been ignored every time that I have asked it. Blessings, Ann This is the second time I'm answering it. Those left Jesus just as others did. There were various reasons for people turning from Jesus. Maybe those were looking for a reason to reject Him. They obviously had no spiritual insight or were not being directed by the holy spirit. Why didn't all of them leave Jesus? Why didn't they ask Jesus to explain what He was talking about? Their hearts weren't following Jesus. Maybe tghey liked the miracles and were looking for a way to have that power themselves. There could have been a thousand reasons why they chose to leave Him. The main reason is that they had no understanding of Jesus words. [/color]
|
|
|
Post by marysia on Mar 15, 2004 9:09:55 GMT -5
The irony is that he went to the Pope with his movie to get some legitmacy. Kind of two-faced if you ask me. actually he took it to just about every denomination and non denomination in existance. although he does not recognize JP2 as the pope, he does know him as a priest.
|
|
|
Post by HomeAtLast on Mar 15, 2004 10:45:56 GMT -5
gene, Since you are speaking of Paul and his teachings being compared to Jesus words check out 1 Corinthians 11. Yes, rather than taking one verse, the whole chapter speaks volumes with Paul using Jesus own words. If the body and blood of Jesus are not present in the Eucharist why must we discern our state before we take communion? Because, while being symbolic, it is serious and a casual approach to communion is a mockery of Jesus death and resurrection. Jesus said "DO THIS IN REMEMBERANCE OF ME". Communion is a REMINDER of what Jesus did for us. [/color] Why must we be sure to be clean before communion if it is only a symbol? He begins by saying "Imitate me, as I imitate Christ". Why would he say that unless he was doing this in remembrance of Christ? My answer above should have been here instead. [/color] If Jesus, when he said "You must eat my body and drink my blood" was just speaking in parables This wasn't a parable, but symboilc of His body and blood. Symbolism doesn't have to be a parable. and followers of his left at the teaching of this, why did he not say, hey guys, that was just a parable, I did not really mean it literally? Again, it wasn't a parable. Maybe Jesus could see where their hearst were and let them go. Maybe they were looking for an excuse to deny Him. Who knows for sure. Just because the Rcc gave a meaning to these people leaving doesn't mean that is the correct reason. [/color] This is what scriptures say, not just the RCC. This comes from true study of the Scriptures, not"indoctrination. No, it's what the Rcc says the scriptures means. [/color] I have just finished "The Case For Christ" by Lee Strobel. Have you read it. I highly recommend it for Christians as well as non-Christians. It was very informative, especially chapter 14. Blessings, Ann Have you read "The Desire of Ages" or "Steps To Christ" by Ellen White? "Steps to Christ" has been translated into over 100 languages and I highly recomend these two books to any Christian who wants to see what a heart belief is about. I only recomend this to Christians because non-Christians generally, would have no interest in reading about Jesus. I assure you that Steps to Christ is probably one of the best books about Jesus and His word that you will ever read, if you ever do so. [/color][/quote] gene, Obviously, I do not agree. To me the fact that they left when he said they must eat his body, is obvious that they had limitations in what they would do for the Messiah. The reason I asked if you had read "The Case For Christ" is because the author started this journalistic investigation as an atheist and completed it knowing that Jesus was the Son of God and becoming a Christian. (Don't worry gene, he is not catholic). He interviewed over a dozen experts on bible, psychology and archeology study. Blessings, Ann
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Mar 18, 2004 6:44:27 GMT -5
gene, Obviously, I do not agree. To me the fact that they left when he said they must eat his body, is obvious that they had limitations in what they would do for the Messiah. The reason I asked if you had read "The Case For Christ" is because the author started this journalistic investigation as an atheist and completed it knowing that Jesus was the Son of God and becoming a Christian. (Don't worry gene, he is not catholic). He interviewed over a dozen experts on bible, psychology and archeology study. Blessings, Ann Then why didn't he become a Rc if the bible is as clear as you claim? [/color]
|
|
|
Post by HomeAtLast on Mar 18, 2004 10:00:48 GMT -5
gene, Obviously, I do not agree. To me the fact that they left when he said they must eat his body, is obvious that they had limitations in what they would do for the Messiah. The reason I asked if you had read "The Case For Christ" is because the author started this journalistic investigation as an atheist and completed it knowing that Jesus was the Son of God and becoming a Christian. (Don't worry gene, he is not catholic). He interviewed over a dozen experts on bible, psychology and archeology study. Blessings, Ann Then why didn't he become a Rc if the bible is as clear as you claim? [/color][/quote] Hmmm....guess you would have to ask him that yourself. How would I even begin to know that? You see I am just happy that he has gone from atheism to knowing Jesus, so he is in the catholic (universal) church. Blessings, Ann
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Mar 18, 2004 10:37:26 GMT -5
Hmmm....guess you would have to ask him that yourself. How would I even begin to know that? You see I am just happy that he has gone from atheism to knowing Jesus, so he is in the catholic (universal) church. Blessings, Ann I could be wrong, but the Catholic church has biblical qualifications. Any church can't be the Catholic church if it teaches doctrines opposed to God's word. I guess this is the root of all arguments. What are God's requirements?
[/color]
|
|
|
Post by Pietro on Mar 26, 2004 20:03:19 GMT -5
[Through the Eucharist] Christ develops your life into Himself like a photograph. Then a continual pkmtyolm, a deep and urgent sense of identification with an act of incomprehensible scope and magnitude that somehow has its focus in the center of your own soul, pursues you wherever you go; and in all situations of your daily life, it makes upon you secret and insistent demands for agreement and consent. This truth is so tremendous that it cannot be expressed. It is entirely personal. And you have no special desire to tell anybody about it. It is nobody else’s business. Not even distracting duties and work will be able to interfere with it altogether. You keep finding this anonymous Accomplice burning within you like a deep and peaceful fire. Perhaps you will not be able completely to identify this presence and this continuous action going on within you unless it happens to be taking place formally on the alter before you: but at least then, obscurely, you will recognize in the breaking of the bread the Stranger Who was your companion yesterday and the day before. And like the disciples of Emmaus you will realize how fitting it was that your heart should burn within you when the incidents of your day’s work spoke to you of the Christ Who lived and worked and offered His pkmtyolm within you all the time. --Thomas Merton
|
|
|
Post by genesda on Mar 29, 2004 6:48:48 GMT -5
[Through the Eucharist] Christ develops your life into Himself like a photograph. Then a continual pkmtyolm, a deep and urgent sense of identification with an act of incomprehensible scope and magnitude that somehow has its focus in the center of your own soul, pursues you wherever you go; and in all situations of your daily life, it makes upon you secret and insistent demands for agreement and consent. This truth is so tremendous that it cannot be expressed. It is entirely personal. And you have no special desire to tell anybody about it. It is nobody else’s business. Not even distracting duties and work will be able to interfere with it altogether. You keep finding this anonymous Accomplice burning within you like a deep and peaceful fire. Perhaps you will not be able completely to identify this presence and this continuous action going on within you unless it happens to be taking place formally on the alter before you: but at least then, obscurely, you will recognize in the breaking of the bread the Stranger Who was your companion yesterday and the day before. And like the disciples of Emmaus you will realize how fitting it was that your heart should burn within you when the incidents of your day’s work spoke to you of the Christ Who lived and worked and offered His pkmtyolm within you all the time. --Thomas Merton Nice speech, but unbiblical. [/color]
|
|
|
Post by Pietro on Apr 9, 2004 13:18:00 GMT -5
Pange Língua (English)
Hail our Savior's glorious Body, Which his Virgin Mother bore; Hail the Blood which, shed for sinners, Did a broken world restore; Hail the sacrament most holy, Flesh and Blood of Christ adore!
To the Virgin, for our healing, His own Son the Father sends; From the Father's love proceeding Sower, seed, and word descends; Wondrous life of Word incarnate With his greatest wonder ends.
On that paschal evening see him With the chosen twelve recline, To the old law still obedient In its feast of love divine; Love divine, the new law giving, Gives himself as Bread and Wine.
By his word the Word almighty Makes of bread his flesh indeed; Wine becomes his very life-blood; Faith God's living Word must heed! Faith alone may safely guide us Where the senses cannot lead!
Come, adore this wondresence; Bow to Christ, the source of grace! Here is kept the ancient promise Of God's earthly dwelling place! Sight is blind before God's glory, Faith alone may see his face!
Glory be to God the Father, Praise to his coequal Son, Adoration to the Spirit, Bond of love, in Godhead one! Blest be God by all creation Joyously while ages run! Amen.
|
|
|
Post by HomeAtLast on Apr 9, 2004 13:55:36 GMT -5
Pange Língua (English) Hail our Savior's glorious Body, Which his Virgin Mother bore; Hail the Blood which, shed for sinners, Did a broken world restore; Hail the sacrament most holy, Flesh and Blood of Christ adore! To the Virgin, for our healing, His own Son the Father sends; From the Father's love proceeding Sower, seed, and word descends; Wondrous life of Word incarnate With his greatest wonder ends. On that paschal evening see him With the chosen twelve recline, To the old law still obedient In its feast of love divine; Love divine, the new law giving, Gives himself as Bread and Wine. By his word the Word almighty Makes of bread his flesh indeed; Wine becomes his very life-blood; Faith God's living Word must heed! Faith alone may safely guide us Where the senses cannot lead! Come, adore this wondresence; Bow to Christ, the source of grace! Here is kept the ancient promise Of God's earthly dwelling place! Sight is blind before God's glory, Faith alone may see his face! Glory be to God the Father, Praise to his coequal Son, Adoration to the Spirit, Bond of love, in Godhead one! Blest be God by all creation Joyously while ages run! Amen. AMEN AMEN AMEN God Bless you and yours with his glorious resurrection! Ann
|
|
|
Post by Pietro on Aug 30, 2004 11:37:58 GMT -5
Remember this thread?
|
|