Brother Adam Posted December 9, 2004 Share Posted December 9, 2004 (edited) And who wants to explain basic Judaism and covenental theology to ICTHUS? Edited December 9, 2004 by Brother Adam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Adam Posted December 9, 2004 Share Posted December 9, 2004 (edited) ...double Edited December 9, 2004 by Brother Adam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spathariossa Posted December 9, 2004 Share Posted December 9, 2004 I have to weigh in here. During the reformation, Martin Luther sent correspondances to the Orthodox Church as did several other Protestant denominations. What ensued was the Orthodoxy realizing they had far more in common with the Catholics than the protestants. You would contend that the Protestants are returning to the new testament church but that is nonsensical in every possible way. Not only does the Catholic church believe in the real presence of Christ in communion but so do the Orthodox and Orthodoxy has been around for 2000 years. What Church were the reformers trying to get back to? It certainly wasn't true Christianity. However, most protestants are content to sit back and snipe at the Catholics and the abuses of the Renaissance. They don't mention the Orthodox church because they know our very existence disproves everything they have sought to create. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Adam Posted December 9, 2004 Share Posted December 9, 2004 No, it is because they know almost nothing about the Orthodox Church. And the Orthodox Church split off of the Catholic Church. Not the other way around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spathariossa Posted December 9, 2004 Share Posted December 9, 2004 [quote name='Brother Adam' date='Dec 8 2004, 10:55 PM'] No, it is because they know almost nothing about the Orthodox Church. And the Orthodox Church split off of the Catholic Church. Not the other way around. [/quote] Actually it was you and your heretical filioque as well as the false doctrine of papal supremacy. I've heard of respect for bishops but really... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homeschoolmom Posted December 9, 2004 Share Posted December 9, 2004 [quote name='ICTHUS' date='Dec 8 2004, 07:31 PM'] No, I'm saying that the Anglican communion is part of the catholic church. [/quote] ICTHUS, I ask you in all seriousness and with respect-- who else is part of the catholic church (in your view)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quietfire Posted December 9, 2004 Share Posted December 9, 2004 [quote name='spathariossa' date='Dec 8 2004, 11:00 PM'] Actually it was you and your heretical filioque as well as the false doctrine of papal supremacy. I've heard of respect for bishops but really... [/quote] Is it heretical and false because you said so, Or because that is what you have been taught? Where is your authority to decide that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luthien Posted December 9, 2004 Share Posted December 9, 2004 [quote name='ICTHUS' date='Dec 8 2004, 07:33 PM'] Her idolatrous worship of a wafer of bread? [/quote] Its not a wafer of bread, its the Body of Christ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTHUS Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 [quote name='spathariossa' date='Dec 8 2004, 10:53 PM'] You would contend that the Protestants are returning to the new testament church but that is nonsensical in every possible way. Not only does the Catholic church believe in the real presence of Christ in communion but so do the Orthodox and Orthodoxy has been around for 2000 years. What Church were the reformers trying to get back to? It certainly wasn't true Christianity. [/quote] Are you contending that Protestants don't believe in the real presence? This may be true of Baptists, but the majority of educated, evangelical Protestants believe Christ is present, in some form, in the Eucharist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 [quote name='ICTHUS' date='Dec 8 2004, 09:31 PM'] No, I'm saying that the Anglican communion is part of the catholic church. [/quote] Nope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTHUS Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 [quote name='homeschoolmom' date='Dec 9 2004, 01:15 AM'] ICTHUS, I ask you in all seriousness and with respect-- who else is part of the catholic church (in your view)? [/quote] I will let the Westminster Confession answer this for me. [quote]I[b]. The catholic or universal Church, which is invisible, consists of the whole number of the elect, that have been, are, or shall be gathered into one, under Christ the Head thereof; and is the spouse, the body, the fulness of Him that fills all in all.[1] II. The visible Church, which is also catholic or universal under the Gospel (not confined to one nation, as before under the law), consists of all those throughout the world that profess the true religion;[2] and of their children:[3] and is the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ,[4] the house and family of God,[5] out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation.[6][/b] III. Unto this catholic visible Church Christ has given the ministry, oracles, and ordinances of God, for the gathering and perfecting of the saints, in this life, to the end of the world: and does, by His own presence and Spirit, according to His promise, make them effectual thereunto.[7] IV. This catholic Church has been sometimes more, sometimes less visible.[8] And particular Churches, which are members thereof, are more or less pure, according as the doctrine of the Gospel is taught and embraced, ordinances administered, and public worship performed more or less purely in them.[9] V. The purest Churches under heaven are subject both to mixture and error;[10] and some have so degenerated, as to become no Churches of Christ, but synagogues of Satan.[11] Nevertheless, there shall be always a Church on earth to worship God according to His will.[12] VI. There is no other head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ.[13] Nor can the Pope of Rome, in any sense, be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalts himself, in the Church, against Christ and all that is called God.[14][/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTHUS Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 [quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='Dec 9 2004, 07:50 PM'] Nope. [/quote] Oh? Since when did you become a traddie, Cmom? I thought Protestants were part of the Church, but incompletely, or some other nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTHUS Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 [quote name='Luthien' date='Dec 9 2004, 02:23 PM'] Its not a wafer of bread, its the Body of Christ. [/quote] I understand and agree with that, Laura. However, what I object to is Rome's conception that Christ is [i]substantially[/i] present (hence, tran[b]substantiation[/b]). I tend to agree with the Eastern Orthodox who say (if I understand them correctly) that the mode of Christ's presence in the Eucharist is a holy mystery, and not to be probed into further than to affirm that He is indeed present. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justified Saint Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 Transubstantiation is simply a matter of observation. That the bread and wine still look like bread and wine and still taste like it. The EO would mean the same thing but of course not admit it in words since it seems like some of them like to split hairs when it comes to Catholicism and reunion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTHUS Posted December 11, 2004 Share Posted December 11, 2004 [quote name='Justified Saint' date='Dec 10 2004, 06:39 PM'] Transubstantiation is simply a matter of observation. That the bread and wine still look like bread and wine and still taste like it. The EO would mean the same thing but of course not admit it in words since it seems like some of them like to split hairs when it comes to Catholicism and reunion. [/quote] Well, I heard of a girl who got sick from gluten in communion bread. If no bread remained, no wheat remained in the bread, and therefore no gluten. Since the girl got sick, there was gluten in the communion bread. Therefore, transubstantiation is false, proven wrong by science and plain reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now