Pay to Pray eRosary from the Vatican

[reformed1689]

You are one perverted person...this ends this conversation.

How in the world do you get off on calling me perverted? Again, you dodge the questions to your theology because it is bogus.

 

[reformed1689]

1 Peter 4:8 And above all things have fervent charity among yourselves: for charity shall cover the multitude of sins.

What does this have to do with my post or this thread?

 

[Jane_Doe22]

Again, you make us out to be canibals with your theology and misinterpretation. The bread/wine does not change to the literal flesh and blood of Christ. By the way, if it did, which it does not, what happens after we ingest it? Do you then expel Christ through your feces?

Dude: are you TRYING to be the biggest most offensive jerk possible?

How it that remotely edifying or Christ-like?
Do you feel it glorifies God to mock other people?

 

[Prayer Warrior]

How in the world do you get off on calling me perverted? Again, you dodge the questions to your theology because it is bogus.

FYI, one thing you need to know about forums is that not all is as it seems. Some people have more than one username, so you never know to whom you're talking. And some of these "people" like to gang up on unsuspecting newbies. I've been bullied by a person on here when I wouldn't answer a question. Just so you know what you're up against.

 

[reformed1689]

FYI, one thing you need to know about forums is that not all is as it seems. Some people have more than one username, so you never know to whom you're talking. And some of these "people" like to gang up on unsuspecting newbies. I've been bullied by a person on here when I wouldn't answer a question. Just so you know what you're up against.

Here's an example of what I'm talking about with the bullying:

Oh they do not intimidate me. I'm a bull in a china shop. I fight for truth and I will not be discouraged.

 

[reformed1689]

Dude: are you TRYING to be the biggest most offensive jerk possible?

Offensive jerk? Why the name calling?

My question was genuine and honest. The fact that he couldn't answer is because the notion of it being the actual blood and flesh of Christ is absurd. Ideas have consequences. We need to think through our theology. There is nothing in Scripture that states it is the literal flesh and blood. It is symbolic, pure and simple. There is no way with the context, and common sense, that it is meant to be literal.

How it that remotely edifying or Christ-like?
Do you feel it glorifies God to mock other people?

Asking tough questions is not mocking. It is fighting for the truth.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

Offensive jerk? Why the name calling?

My question was genuine and honest. The fact that he couldn't answer is because the notion of it being the actual blood and flesh of Christ is absurd. Ideas have consequences. We need to think through our theology. There is nothing in Scripture that states it is the literal flesh and blood. It is symbolic, pure and simple. There is no way with the context, and common sense, that it is meant to be literal.

Your question was deliberately offensive and mocking. That's just being a clanging cymbal, not fighting for Truth or Christ.

 

[Prayer Warrior]

Offensive jerk? Why the name calling?

My question was genuine and honest. The fact that he couldn't answer is because the notion of it being the actual blood and flesh of Christ is absurd. Ideas have consequences. We need to think through our theology. There is nothing in Scripture that states it is the literal flesh and blood. It is symbolic, pure and simple. There is no way with the context, and common sense, that it is meant to be literal.



Asking tough questions is not mocking. It is fighting for the truth.

That's another thing--the name calling. Only some people on here can get away with it. Double standards.

 

[marks]

Two points here:
-- To my understanding, Catholic Christians do not believe that just the act of consuming the Eucharist saves a person at all. In fact, they are quite strict how the only people who should be partaking in Communion are person whom have already come to Christ, have a broken/repentant heart, and striving to follow His ways empowered by Him. It is an act of renewal, not initial salvation.
Disclaimer: I'm not Catholic, if I'm misunderstanding any of this, I welcome any knowledgeable Catholic to help me out here.

--- Using Sola Scriptura, the interpretation that the prayer during the Lord's Supper being literal has the same exact foundation as the interpretation that it is symbolic.

I'm likewise working from the position of "outside", so I rely on what I'm told. I suspect that some of what I'm told is purposely obfuscated, so I don't have all that much confidence.

My understanding is that the Catholics believe that while there is more required to be and remain saved, without this sacrament all is lost.

I'm not sure which prayer you are referring to here, though.

Much love!

 

[VictoryinJesus]

My question was genuine and honest. The fact that he couldn't answer is because the notion of it being the actual blood and flesh of Christ is absurd. Ideas have consequences. We need to think through our theology. There is nothing in Scripture that states it is the literal flesh and blood. It is symbolic, pure and simple. There is no way with the context, and common sense, that it is meant to be literal.

Been considering “metaphorical” and “literal”. Figuratively means metaphorically, and literally describes something that actually happened. Literally...means something that actually happens...
John 6:51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

John 6:53-56Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. [54] Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. [55] For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. [56] He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.

When saying “metaphorically” Or “symbolism” ... “He that eats my flesh, and drinks my blood, dwells in me, and I in him.” Does not literally happen? God (Christ)does not dwell in those that eat His flesh and drink His blood ...but only metaphorically dwells within them? What “metaphorically” enters in and becomes alive(literally)?

...the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. ...metaphorically or “something that actually happened?”

 

[Prayer Warrior]

I'm likewise working from the position of "outside", so I rely on what I'm told. I suspect that some of what I'm told is purposely obfuscated, so I don't have all that much confidence.

My understanding is that the Catholics believe that while there is more required to be and remain saved, without this sacrament all is lost.

I'm not sure which prayer you are referring to here, though.

Much love!

Why not ask BoL? He's a walking encyclopedia of Catholic doctrine.

My understanding is that someone must be in good standing with the Catholic Church in order to receive the sacraments. And these sacraments are required for salvation. But I'm open to correction on this.
.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

My understanding is that the Catholics believe that while there is more required to be and remain saved, without this sacrament all is lost.

That's about remaining with Christ, which all Christians do believe. Yes, there's different outward gestures, but the inward purpose is the same.

 

[reformed1689]

Been considering “metaphorical” and “literal”. Figuratively means metaphorically, and literally describes something that actually happened. Literally...means something that actually happens...
John 6:51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

John 6:53-56Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. [54] Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. [55] For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. [56] He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.

When saying “metaphorically” Or “symbolism” ... “He that eats my flesh, and drinks my blood, dwells in me, and I in him.” Does not literally happen? God (Christ)does not dwell in those that eat His flesh and drink His blood ...but only metaphorically dwells within them? What “metaphorically” enters in and becomes alive(literally)?

...the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. ...metaphorically or “something that actually happened?”

Do you know what the Catholic church teaches about the Eucharist?

 

[Prayer Warrior]

Been considering “metaphorical” and “literal”. Figuratively means metaphorically, and literally describes something that actually happened. Literally...means something that actually happens...
John 6:51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

John 6:53-56Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. [54] Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. [55] For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. [56] He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.

When saying “metaphorically” Or “symbolism” ... “He that eats my flesh, and drinks my blood, dwells in me, and I in him.” Does not literally happen? God does not dwell in those that eat his flesh and drink His blood ...but only metaphorically dwells within them? What “metaphorically” enters in and becomes alive(literally)?

...the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. ...metaphorically or “something that actually happened?”

This is making my brain hurt. I don't think it's really that complicated. Jesus used metaphors at times. He called Himself a gate. He was not made of wood and used to secure an opening in a fence. He said that He is the Good Shepherd. I haven't read anything in the Bible saying that He watched over the animals we call sheep.

Here's my question about Transubstantiation (the wafer and wine literally becoming the flesh and blood of Jesus). If this were true, then the wafer and wine would taste like human flesh and blood, but I've never heard reports of this being the case.
.

 

[reformed1689]

Your question was deliberately offensive and mocking. That's just being a clanging cymbal, not fighting for Truth or Christ.

So now you get to assign intent? No. The question still stands. It was genuine. I was not mocking, I really want to know the answer. You do not get to read my mind and assign intent. If it is offensive, someone should be asking why? Is it because it is truly offensive, or is it because it rebukes the false teaching and they do not have a response? My argument is it is the second option. The question was not offensive and it definitely was not perverted as was accused.

 

[marks]

That's about remaining with Christ, which all Christians do believe. Yes, there's different outward gestures, but the inward purpose is the same.

I believe that any work or gesture or anything that is more than faith in the finished work of Jesus that is intended to "keep us saved" is work of the flesh, and meaningless to God. If it's to celebrate our salvation, to remember the sacrifice of Jesus on our behalf, wonderful. But nothing we do can add anything to what He did. As I see it.

Much love!

 

[reformed1689]

This is making my brain hurt. I don't think it's really that complicated. Jesus used metaphors at times. He called Himself a gate. He was not made of wood and used to secure an opening in a fence. He said that He is the Good Shepherd. I haven't read anything in the Bible saying that He watched over the animals we call sheep.

Here's my question about Transubstantiation (the wafer and wine literally becoming the flesh and blood of Jesus). It this were true, then the wafer and wine would taste like human flesh and blood, but I've never heard reports of this being the case.

Be careful, your question is "perverted" and "mocking".....

 

[Jane_Doe22]

I believe that any work or gesture or anything that is more than faith in the finished work of Jesus that is intended to "keep us saved" is work of the flesh, and meaningless to God. If it's to celebrate our salvation, to remember the sacrifice of Jesus on our behalf, wonderful. But nothing we do can add anything to what He did. As I see it.

Much love!

And that is a fairly reasoned belief.

But Catholics don't see that outward celebration as "adding" to Christ's work.

(Again, I'm not Catholic and totally welcome a knowledgable Catholic to help out here).

 

[Jane_Doe22]

So now you get to assign intent? No. The question still stands. It was genuine. I was not mocking, I really want to know the answer. You do not get to read my mind and assign intent. If it is offensive, someone should be asking why? Is it because it is truly offensive, or is it because it rebukes the false teaching and they do not have a response? My argument is it is the second option. The question was not offensive and it definitely was not perverted as was accused.

Frankly: I don't believe your claim that you were not deliberately trying to be offensive.

 

[Prayer Warrior]

Frankly: I don't believe your claim that you were not deliberately trying to be offensive.

Mmm hmm, and so it goes..........

 

[reformed1689]

Frankly: I don't believe your claim that you were not deliberately trying to be offensive.

Doesn't really matter what you believe. I told you my intent. I still have the same intent. It is a genuine question that deserves to be answered. The idea of transubstantiation is...

1. Not found in Scripture.
2. The whole idea us utterly absurd.
3. Quite honestly, it is offensive to think that we are canibals.