The Heart Of Budge And Revprodeji

[N/A Gone]

C'ma....we cool with this as you suggested?

Here is the link to the original parts.

[url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=65407"]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=65407[/url]

Let me post the parts of importance for understanding


Revprodeji wrote

[quote]Budge let me ask you something..

1.) What exactly is my faith lacking for you. (dont use sargon, just tell me in simple real terms)

2.) What would I gain from leaving the catholic church and following your epistemology

I am seriously wondering. Please dont cut-paste. I want to know your words[/quote]

[N/A Gone]

The rest of her parts you can read in the link....here is my response to the last part from here

(mod;s, if you wanna combine the budge/revprodeji parts I would appreciate it

Thank you for your patience budge

Budge

Multiple Quotes on multiple pages is just going to be a mess for me. I will attempt to respond in letter form as our fathers did so very long ago.
In regards to Augustine, not to seem cocky, (ironic since we are speaking of Augustine) I have not heard that quote before. I own all of Augustine's writings on the Psalm, but there was none on Psalm LXXXIX. Could you please check that quote again so I could do some research on it? I checked my files twice and could not find that psalm. I know you do not respect Church history, but I would be interested in researching that Quote.
I understand that ministry is a tough field, for anyone regardless of confessional community. With your people targeting catholics is common than for almost any other protestant denomination. I respect anyone who is willing to go to the front line and fight, I just feel that your understanding of the target is wrong.
Your experience of the Eucharist shows a lack of understanding, as well as your general age at the time. Stepping away from advanced and speculative theology, you need faith for the Eucharist to have its full effect. It is the amino acids that your body needs to eat food. If you were to eat a pizza, but had no tummy digestive fluids then your body would not get the benefit from the pizza. Same thing for the Eucharist. If the Eucharist was an inanimate object, then your concern about Idolatry would be more than justified and I'm sure any and all catholics would agree with you, but the fact of the matter is before the reformation the universal church had always taught that it was more. There is no Grey area, the fathers clearly taught it, Thomas clearly taught it. The idea itself that the Eucharist is just bread did not occur until after the rebellion has begun. I know you do not respect tradition, or history, but on pure academic standards this utterly destroys the claim of the Eucharist just being bread. Even Luther was unwilling to say it was just a simple and broke ties with Calvin over the words “This is my body” to the point where they “no longer considered each other brothers.” That is huge.
Children often do not have a reverent devotion to the Eucharist, often teens do not even attempt to understand their theology. (St. Thomas More is amazing considering this) The majority of active theological leaders had a time when they stepped away from the faith at a young age. I did this myself in junior high and did not come back to Christianity until late in high school. What you describe as your feelings at the young age are more than common. The Eucharist is the center of catholic worship. In my understanding, but that should be no surprise. It is Christ in his BBSD. It is grace, it is unity, it is the primary method of sanctification. You must acknowledge, Ma'am, that if it IS Christ then its proper place of course is the center. What else is more important?
Kant is something we can discuss if you want. Many of the tenants of your world view have been effected by Kant. Kant (in a nutshell,) said there was a wall between the physical world and the supernatural world. And because we can only know and experience from our 5 senses then that is all we can truly know and experience. Thus creating a dynamic where we can not experience the divine. Well, the Eucharist and other sacramental theology (which, mind you existed far before kant) is the divine using the physical world to implore grace to us. It is the divine constantly breaking through the wall and using the physical to relate to us.
My evangelical background was mostly in the Baptist General Conference. They have a free-Church feel, but are the standard evangelical situation that we see in numerous churches regardless of the affiliation. I had great fellowship, I led worship teams (I have a decent voice, and my mom was a musician when she was younger) I was active in youth ministries and even co-led three mission trips. I have no issue with my evangelical background. I received amazing mentorship from Dr. Greg Boyd (regardless of your theological view, the man is a great theologian and a great pastor) I am attending an academic bible college now with a Double major in Pastoral leadership(called general ministry since my conversion) and Biblical theological studies. I have a 3 year teachers assistance spot with our theology director, I am in good standing and even received evangelical masters programs offerings as well as churches looking for an associate pastor. My catholic faith is less of a conversion and more of a reconciliation. My faith grew into catholicism. It was put in the fire and the bad was melted away and the good became strong. I have a strong biblical doctrine upbringing. I cant stand Rick Warren or the hippy warm-fuzzy no substance talk (we agree here) In my understanding I was not missing anything as an evangelical. The problem is, I didn't know what I was missing. As cliché as it sounds, to acknowledge history is to deny protestantism. I was studying inter-denominational ecumenism and the issue of division and “why” they were divided led me down a path to which I learned things about catholicism I never knew. I cleaned away the polemic hateful rhetoric and actually did an in depth study with six other evangelicals on the theological merit of the catechism. Which led me to fully confess that catholicism is the only form of Christianity with a complete systematic theology. I have this in writing from before I converted. The issue of authority bothered me as well. I was not willing to stake my salvation on my ability to interpret something that numerous people disagreed on. I also did not want to miss out on all the blessings that my own interpretation could not work on. I didn't want to re-invent the wheel. I also saw, in answer to this, that 90% plus of theology programs in the protestant world teach their students to find an author/professor/theologian and just follow them. Develop your theology in regard to them. The “Sola” seem like a foreign concept to anyone who passed freshman theology. If I was going to follow someone's view of scripture, and even more the entire Christian metaphysic then I needed to test the credibility of their claim to authority. Catholicism checked out. So please, understand that I loved my evangelical faith and I grew and I was entirely devoted to being a pastor to the flock of believers. I had a great evangelical life. But we were meant for so much more. That is why I will honestly claim that there is nothing that the evangelical community has that the catholic church is lacking. Individual churches might be different, but in eccesiological wholes there is nothing that evangelicalism has that is good, that we did not give to them. Trace your roots.
I was not sucked into vain philosophies. I was also not ignorant. I was a catholic basher, I did it out of contempt and naive misunderstandings. You can not disregard theologians because they are willing to intellectually engage our faith. Some are called to do that. I would consider it a spiritual gift, a needed part of the body. I have not studied myself out of belief. I have studied to understand and experience a fullness to my belief. I still read numerous protestant theologians (I'm big on Volf lately, exclusion and embrace is a great book) and I do understand your concerns with some theologians, but you are shooting your own people in the foot if you consider theology to not be Christian. Your own statement of “knowing Christ from the bible” makes yourself a theologian.
We address Peter Kreeft in the other thread, we can just continue that there. I do want to speculate on what you said about leading individuals to Christ. I fully agree with this here. The method of ecumenism in the realm of catholic-protestant relations is not trying to force faith on anyone. It is to develop unified relations in order to promote our Christian unity in changing the world. Also, out of these dialogues we can deal on a corporate level with the things that have kept us apart for so many years. But catholicism fully speaks against proselytism of any kind. You have cited in the past that you did not know a clear understanding of catholic ecumenism. I recommend reading parts of this thread. I also recommend a book on there that would help understand the process

[url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=65160"]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=65160[/url]

In regards to Islam, remember that they trace themselves back from Abraham, so in essence you could say that their God is our God, they just do bad theology. Kind of like Calvin. But I don't believe in watering down the faith in anyway.
You have some interesting points about interpretation. I understand that you have a vision of sola scripture. Something that was taught at my Mother's church as well as in my college situation. The problem is I would argue that sola scripture does not exist. Even the people who claim to read the bible alone will follow the heremeutical patterns of their related denomination or spiritual leader. (who in turn follows his denomination or spiritual leader) You cite that roman interpretive practices are based on defense. I would argue this is in regards to the place you are at. Even evangelical apologetics can have a defensive taste if they are in a situation of being attacked. You understand catholicism as someone attacking it. Thus what you see is the defensive talents. I would argue, as I have in the past that catholicism is the only systematic theology. Something that the protestant world can not approach. I find it offensive, and rather unproductive to assume from you that Catholics can not fully love scripture. We had scripture and loved scripture for hundreds of years before your epistemology existed. I do not feel your experience of catholicism was genuine, you are angst against the Church and very bitter. If I saw the church as you did I am sure numerous amounts of us would be against her too; but your understanding is not genuine.
Stone campbellism was not my evangelical background. I cited that above, but wanted to site it again. My Bible college started as a stone-campbell school, but is just non-denominational now. I am not stone campbell, but I find it interesting that you feel your best route is to attack my former experience without giving any reason for it. I am starting to understand that my evangelical experience was very similar to yours. Like I said before, you sound like my mother a lot of times and she is in that same arena. The curious thing is if you feel that people can just pick up scripture and read it, then why do you feel compelled to put yourself as the authoritative person above their interpretation? The essence of the stone-Campbell movement is that you personally interpret. Silent were scripture does not speak, no creeds etc, seems like the fulfillment of your epistemology. Yet you consider yourself authoritative to challenge and condemn them.(btw, they don't teach they are the one true church- they are evangelical and I would be interested in how you consider them a cult) It is interesting that even among your protestant brothers you still consider them heretical if they do not believe in the same form of baptism as you. No offense ma'am, you are not that special. You do not have authority over everyone else you meet. The ECF's are not ignorant cavemen that you need to protect the world against. Baptism is needed for salvation, your friend was right. Yet you also feel that you have the authority to question and ridicule your friend's perspective. Your situation truly saddens me in this regard.
You claim that scripture is more authoritative in the protestant community. You cite this based on the catholic understanding of a tri-fold system of leadership. (The same system that the jewish people had, and as it grew into catholicism) I do not feel that sola scripture exists. You have the same trifold system of governing budge. You have your traditions that you apply before and during your scripture reading. (prejudices would be a big part of this) you also have the authority of either yourself or church leaders. You have the same system we do, just do not have a proper authority or a proper tradition. But please, don't be fooled that you actually have scripture alone.
I would be interested in where you say that scripture has been edited during the mass. I have never heard of this before. If you could cite I would appreciate it. I still read the bible just as much as I did as a protestant, I have various translations and multiple people to discuss the heremenutical principles of my reading.
Jesus warned against false traditions, not against traditions themselves. I would challenge that you participate in a false tradition and should heed the warning of our Lord. The tradition of the catholic church is that of Christ's church, they made the bible and set the foundation from which your people broke off of and started their own traditions. The false tradition.
Sometimes I wonder if your distaste for the catholic church blinds you against some of the comments you make. Assuming that the only “good” priests are the ones that get in trouble, and the rest are all concerned about money is such a horrible statement. You do understand that a catholic priest makes the salary he makes regardless of the size of his church. Typically around 24,000 a year. Where as a protestant pastor makes his money based on how many sheep he can re-pen from the other local churches. In my pastoral class they told us that running a church is similar to running a major business. Almost being a CEO. It is this commercial mentality that promotes simple warm and fuzzy sermons and pastors who make six figure statements. There are good pastors and there are bad pastors, there are good priests and there are bad priests. This is a human condition regardless of the Church. The problem with discussing this point with you is that you pretty much do not like anybody. You are quick to insult bishops, but I have read numerous writings from bishops, as well as have a decent relationship with one. We are taught to keep one eye on our bishop and one on the Pope. If they differ from each other than put both on the Pope. But I strongly disagree if you think they are bad preachers.
You did not understanding my statement about protestant eccesiology. The protestant church is centered on the preacher. Regardless if you have a council of elders, the service itself is centered on the pastor, on his sermon on what point of view he wants to teach. What issue he wants to lecture, what theology he wants to promote. In a catholic mass the focus is on the liturgy, something you would not pretend to properly understand (as you have wrote it off for boring numerous times) but we get from the fathers of our faith. We have the celebration of the word, in which we actually read from the scriptures. Not just a sprinkling that fits a sermon, but the actual scriptures and then the priest will speak and shed some light and understanding on the message. Then we have the Eucharist.
Now, you ask where in the bible does it say that we need the mass and they Eucharist. I will ask, where does the bible say we need the bible? The mass was celebrated long before the canon was put together. The Eucharist was celebrated long before the canon was created. At least a thousand years before the first reformer thought otherwise.
Your understanding of metaphysics and how the sacrifice of Christ and the mass is something I am sure we can go at arms length with. What we should do is make a list of the various topics and go through them one at a time in order to avoid the confusion a 12 pages reply makes. I am willing to dialogue with you on this Ma'am. What you wrote shows a lack of understanding and I would enjoy a conversation on it.
I appreciate your experience of Christian fellowship, I felt that in my mothers church, the church of my youth, as well as currently in the catholic church. This again, is a thing based on people. Not the church denomination. Some churches are great at small groups, and promoting charities, others are not. You see this regardless of the confessional community. This is not a protestant-catholic issue. The shaking hands in mass has nothing to do with community, it has to do with the fact that the catholic community exists in every facet of our life, mass is a time of devotion and veneration. A solemn respect for what is happening. Some think that shaking hands has a negative effect on this situation. But that is not a negative to community.
Christ preached against Vain repetition, against meaningless ritual. Not against ritual itself. As a good jew Christ participated in a religion that had a legit religious ritual system in its theology. That same religion in which my Church grew from. Assuming a catholic priest needs less biblical or theological knowledge is just ignorant. The majority of pastors do not create their own ideas, rather they just babble about something they heard somewhere else. A sermon has an agenda, something not of the biblical narrative itself, but that uses the biblical narrative to lend itself credibility. Do not misunderstand me, I have no issue with sermons. My issue is that Church is not the situation for a speaking about life. I think the perfect Church would have Mass, and also small groups, and study classes and teachings and morals and community built in. Your sermons you desire are more than seen in the church, just not in mass. The point of mass is to not push the agenda of the pastor. But to feed the Church in the message of the scriptures and the Logos in the Eucharist. This is the mass of our fathers.
I think we will need to talk about sanctification and soteriology later in another thread. I think we see eye to eye on justification but not on sanctification. Your problems with purgatory appear to be based on this misunderstanding. In Augustine's model of salvation a big portion is that we do not properly love. In doing works we learn how to properly love, we develop a focus on the community, rather than on the self. This is a part of salvation, we are already justified, but we are working out our salvation as St. Paul teaches. In purgatory we finish off this process that already started here on earth. We are no more separated from God than here on earth. I do not desire to dive into speculative theology, but purgatory is to finish of the sanctification in order to exist with the divine. CS Lewis writes about the grass being too real and us cutting our feet. The un-pure can not exist in the divine. If we are not sanctified we burn up. I don't see the literal fire part of purgatory, that is speculative to my understanding. Often Judgment and fire are symbols of each other. The suffering is important, but anytime we grow, anytime we have a self-realization of our failings there is pain. When we hurt someone we feel pain. Pain is a part of growth Ma'am, and I fully expect and embrace that. Christ's blood opens the gates, it pays the price. It is complete in that, but we need to walk through that gate, we need to be pure. We need to be fully human. I disagree with your Hebrews exegesis, and I think we can talk about this again in a full thread if you desire. Your model of salvation is stripped down, it is simpler to understand, but that does not make it correct. Rather I argue it is sorely lacking. Salvation is a process that starts, continues and it finished only when we are with the divine. You have a system where it is a one time experience, hence why you can say works comes out of that. But I would agree. Works come out of that, as well as promote and further that process of sanctification. The difference he is what salvation is.
This goes into the Pauline argument we were having on adoption. Please, make note ma'am, that we should discuss this topic in proper commitment. I would challenge that catholicism has the complete understanding of adoptionism that protestant theology attempts to have with a cheap grace model.
You spent considerable time on sacramentalism and rituals. I feel that you are right in that they alone do not save. That they can be something that people walk in motions on. But if someone has genuine faith and combines that faith with the sacraments, and with the practices of the church they find such a depth to their faith that words can not describe, only experience. This is something that still brings me near tears when thinking of what I was lacking in my evangelical faith, and the desire to share this fullness is overwhelming. But the root is still faith. We agree there ma'am. Ritual is nothing without faith. But what could your faith be if you worshiped with your whole body in the way our fathers worshiped? My faith is not based on my own efforts, it is based on response to the divine. Your faith is based on response to the divine. We respond in different ways, but we are both “doing” something. Do you understand ma'am?
In your critique of the eucharist you cite that that christians receive Christ by faith, they receive they holy spirit. That they do not need fill-ups. I agree and disagree, for catholics we must have faith. That is the starting point. We receive the holy spirit, but the fill-ups that you see is the difference in our models of sanctification. We know that we are continuing to work out our salvation(phil) and the eucharist is continuing to assist us in that process. In your system it is a one time thing. Boom, saved. So the idea of a continuing help makes no sense in your system. I acknowledge that. Rites are part of love, even marriage has its rites and parts. I know my wife likes her back scratched, I was taught at a young age to express to her how beautiful I truly feel she is. We learn from each other how to love each other. How is that any different for the bride of christ? What ritual stands in the way? Does kneeling stop you from praying? Could you be specific budge because these things have strongly helped me.
We acknowledge that loving is consuming the eucharist, not from our own understanding but from Christ's directives. In John when Christ speaks of the body and blood he finishes by explaining to think with the spirit not the flesh. Because a worldy understanding of his message caused many people to leave, but in understanding the divine. The spiritual understanding of things that our minds can not understand, we are exercising our love in obedience to the blessed sacrament. Your exegesis is that Christ's message of consuming is a metaphor for acceptance. I disagree with you with 2 concepts. 1.) That is not how anyone at that time took it, they would not have left. There was a mass exodus of his followers that left because of that passage. 2.) nobody in the christian tradition considered it that way until the time of the reformation. I know you do not respect the ECF's, but when the evidence for understanding is so obvious it must make you logically wonder the roots of your positon in being anything more than a justification of a bad theology.
You cite that the holy spirit assists you in understanding scripture. I see the value in this, I truly do. But I see a problem when there are at least 8,000 protestant schools of though. Either the spirit has schizophrenia or there is more than just the spirit in the exegesis. Protestant theologies change usually in a 20 year period. The catholic church is 2000 years old. Just look at the numbers ma'am.
I really dont know what to say about your comments on demonics. The idea that demons can use sacraments and marian devotions as an entrance point is just a polemic comment with no grounds in anything but your own angle. We can talk about this more, but the point will not be found. Perhaps demons know what to consider a threat and what to not consider a threat? Having experience in ritual and occultic studies I am willing to discuss your understanding of parapsychology in the context of litugical communities.
I will always seek after God, I believe the fundamental option of the christian relationship is seeking God. But I feel that he left the church in order for his people to find him. A visible universal church with direct connections to the original teachers themselves. That is just something that you could never offer me ma'am.

[N/A Gone]

I understand I will get views here, thank you for respecting this thread for the use of Budge and I. However. If someone reads my post and has a question, or comment I would fully appreciate pm's on any subject. Otherwise, I wait in joyful anticipation for Ms. Budge.

[Budge]

[i]
In regards to Augustine, not to seem cocky, (ironic since we are speaking of Augustine) I have not heard that quote before. I own all of Augustine's writings on the Psalm, but there was none on Psalm LXXXIX. Could you please check that quote again so I could do some research on it? I checked my files twice and could not find that psalm. I know you do not respect Church history, but I would be interested in researching that[/i]

[url="http://mb-soft.com/believe/txuf/august92.htm#39"]HERE YOU GO SCROLL DOWN...[/url]

course with those ECFs, there are so many deletions, subtractions and additions, between even church denominations that present them, you can get yourself in a fix.



[i]
I understand that ministry is a tough field, for anyone regardless of confessional community. With your people targeting catholics is common than for almost any other protestant denomination. I respect anyone who is willing to go to the front line and fight, I just feel that your understanding of the target is wrong.[/i]

Actually it is UNCOMMON. Most Prot, evangelical and Christian churches have joined with Rome. In fact except in fundamentalism, most chuches do not even warn of the false teachings of Roman Catholicism anymore. There are very few ministries to Catholics online, I can count off maybe 20 and many have died out. This is not an easy thing to go into. Most ex-Catholic Christians RUN and never look back at those left behind.

[i]
Your experience of the Eucharist shows a lack of understanding, as well as your general age at the time. Stepping away from advanced and speculative theology, you need faith for the Eucharist to have its full effect.[/i]

I had those same thoughts as an adult, in fact when I was back in the Catholic Church< I stopped taking communion a year before I left, because I no longer believed in it due to my readings in the Bible.

I believe the Eucharist detracts from faith.

What is interesting too is most Catholics [not on phatmass] dont even know what the Catholic Church teaches about Transubstantiation. As I was leaving the Catholic Church, reading scripture and studying Roman Catholicism, I brought up the issue with three Catholics pals after mass, all of them were shocked and had no idea! Two told me, "no way, Im not believing that". There are a lot of proto-Protestants in Catholic churches, at least with them I suppose there is less sin.


[i]
It is the amino acids that your body needs to eat food. If you were to eat a pizza, but had no tummy digestive fluids then your body would not get the benefit from the pizza. Same thing for the Eucharist.[/i]

I believe Jesus when He said this which clarifying to me the eating was spiritual and not carnal. Also there is that sticky issue of Jews not being allowed to drink blood.

Mat 15:17 Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught?

IVe asked Catholics ten times what this means to THEM, and they simply do not have an answer.

[i]
If the Eucharist was an inanimate object, then your concern about Idolatry would be more than justified [/i]

It is an inanimate object, it just sits there, and as a child, I know I thought if that is "God, I want nothing to do with this religion. I believe that the Eucharist is one way Satan has dishonored God,with many people falling for the lie. What better way could Satan attempt to keep Jesus Christ on the cross forever in the minds of the deceived, having people trust in rituals and rites more then what He did on the cross for them. One unanswered question I have asked of Catholics is, WHERE DOES IT SAY IN THE BIBLE YOU NEED TO PARTAKE OF THE EUCHARIST to APPLY what JESUS CHRIST DID FOR YOU? The Bible teaches salvation via Faith in Christ, not imbiding of a piece of bread. The Lord's Supper has been twisted via Rome, it was to be done in rememberance with the church body--[the body of Christ] coming together.

Jack Chick who everyone hates here was on to something when he did that on notorious tract I cant link to here basically saying the Eucharist was invented to cement clercial and priestly power of the Catholic Church.

Also if the Eucharist wafer had any inherent powers....[considering I ate dozens of them as a child and teen] wouldnt I still be Catholic?

The thing is, it doesnt have those powers, it is just a piece of bread.
[i]
There is no Grey area, the fathers clearly taught it, Thomas clearly taught it. The idea itself that the Eucharist is just bread did not occur until after the rebellion has begun. I know you do not respect tradition, or history, but on pure academic standards this utterly destroys the claim of the Eucharist just being bread. [/i]

No it does not.

Because "winners" write the history...Think of today where our mostly liberal colleges have their own special brand of history they write. The apostles warned of EARLY DECEIVERS, and even DECEIVERS from the very beginning....I believe all the fathers connected to Constantine, and Eusebius, and the Alexandrian school were part of this deception. On my board over the years, though we have not posted on this as recently, we even discovered the many forgeries Rome is known for. So much of the history is spurious at most. THere was one guy one a Christian board who was posting this writing by a church father supposely to the Virgin Mary, I had to tell him even the Catholics admit that is a fraud.
[i]

Even Luther was unwilling to say it was just a simple and broke ties with Calvin over the words “This is my body” to the point where they “no longer considered each other brothers.” That is huge.[/i]

Lutheranism is basically Catholic LITE. How do I know? I have someone very close to me who grew up in the Missouri Synod. They told me themselves the Mass matched their services almost exactly with the exception more emphasis was put on the sermon. Luther discovered some Biblical truths but the fact he was a priest did not change and he kept much of the core basics of Catholicism. Calvin made the mistake of going by his own wisdom inventing a new theology as it were that has many errors. I dont want to get into Calvinism here, that would take a whole other thread.

Most Prot churches to be frank with you are daughters of Rome.
[i]

Children often do not have a reverent devotion to the Eucharist, often teens do not even attempt to understand their theology.[/i]

Because children are not capable of doing intellectual gymnastics to convince themselves of something that is simply NOT TRUE.

Why else does it take the grown-ups, 20 paragraphs to convince themselves a piece of bread is Jesus Christ, and thats not even getting into the outdated Aristolean "science" about "accidents and substance".

That is one reason I left to be UU at the age of 17-18, I saw too many logical fallacies in what I beleived to be Christianity to be true.
[i]The majority of active theological leaders had a time when they stepped away from the faith at a young age. I did this myself in junior high and did not come back to Christianity until late in high school. What you describe as your feelings at the young age are more than common. [/i]
Sure, young people question. If I had a child, I would want them to be able to question and discover things. I would try and give them a good Biblical foundation and tell them what I had learned and where I had been, but I would want them to truly be born again, not just be "Christian" because mother was.

[i]
The Eucharist is the center of catholic worship. In my understanding, but that should be no surprise. It is Christ in his BBSD. It is grace, it is unity, it is the primary method of sanctification. You must acknowledge, Ma'am, that if it IS Christ then its proper place of course is the center. What else is more important?[/i]

Christ should be the center of one's life. Not a piece of bread. The Bible TWICE states that God cannot be contained in something made by human hands. Im going with what the Bible says.

[i]
Kant is something we can discuss if you want. Many of the tenants of your world view have been effected by Kant. Kant (in a nutshell,) said there was a wall between the physical world and the supernatural world. And because we can only know and experience from our 5 senses then that is all we can truly know and experience. Thus creating a dynamic where we can not experience the divine.[/i]

What about Jesus Christ's teachings regarding the SPIRIT and the FLESH.

What does this verse mean to you?

Jhn 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, [they] are spirit, and [they] are life.

The problem with Catholicism is it elevates THIS WORLD, and the FLESH. Even the idea that God can be contained in a piece of bread that will ROT and DECAY goes against everything regarding the very nature of God.

I found this idea inherent even with the UU paganism, where nature, trees and more were to be held at a very high point.



[i]Well, the Eucharist and other sacramental theology (which, mind you existed far before kant) is the divine using the physical world to implore grace to us. It is the divine constantly breaking through the wall and using the physical to relate to us.[/i]

Wheres does the incarnation fit into all that?

God came to earth as man, it made your church's sacraments and rituals and rites UNNECESSARY.
[i]

My evangelical background was mostly in the Baptist General Conference. They have a free-Church feel, but are the standard evangelical situation that we see in numerous churches regardless of the affiliation. [/i]

Ok thanks for telling me you had some time outside of Campbells...
Actually ive visted some of those churches, I consider them along the lines of mainline Baptists though they probably could be considered 'evangelical'. Baptist is a pretty wide ranging word. Remember it incorporates not only fundamentalists but those like Rick Warren who decry fundamentalism.
[i]
I am attending an academic bible college now with a Double major in Pastoral leadership(called general ministry since my conversion) and Biblical theological studies[/i]

It is a shame they have not taught you the truth about the false teachings of Catholicism. I am curious if a Mormon or Jehovah Witness was in there would there error be dealt with? It is the sad state of our seminaries today that long held Biblical truths are being denied.
[i]
I have a 3 year teachers assistance spot with our theology director, I am in good standing and even received evangelical masters programs offerings as well as churches looking for an associate pastor. My catholic faith is less of a conversion and more of a reconciliation. My faith grew into catholicism.[/i]

As Ive stated most of the Prot and evangelical churches are joining with Roman Catholicism. It is Revelation 17 in action. Sad that even long held views by prots are denied like Sola Fide. The Reformers who taught that the Pope was the antichrist {I wondering if they made sure to edit that out of your textbooks} have to be spinning in their graves.

Overall however how could you depart from Biblical truth, and salvation in Christ, and accept Rome's twisted teachings regarding salvation, where Jesus Christ merely "opens" the door as it were and you have to finish it all for YOURSELF.

This is the true picture of Catholicism instead of the true evangelical faith which teaches HE DID IT FOR YOU, this is works based delusions...

Anyone with any evangelical training and teaching should be able to suss out how VERY WRONG this is!
[quote]
2027 No one can merit the initial grace which is at the origin of conversion. Moved by the Holy Spirit, [b]we can merit for ourselves and for others all the graces needed to attain eternal life, as well as necessary temporal goods[/b].[/quote]

[quote] I have a strong biblical doctrine upbringing.[/quote]If you truly do, how can you even believe that Rome's traditions are on the same level of scripture? And before you say STOP, that is right in the CCC.

I dare say I cannot see why any person with a core biblical foundation would be able to accept the following.

If you truly are a lover of God's Word, the following should make you want to run from the room!

[quote]CCC95 "It is clear therefore that, in the supremely wise arrangement of God, sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and the Magisterium of the Church are so connected and associated that [b]one of them cannot stand without the others[/b]. Working together, each in its own way, under the action of the one Holy Spirit, they all contribute effectively to the salvation of souls."[/quote]

[i]I cant stand Rick Warren or the hippy warm-fuzzy no substance talk (we agree here)[/i]

Glad to hear that.
[i]
In my understanding I was not missing anything as an evangelical. The problem is, I didn't know what I was missing. As cliché as it sounds, to acknowledge history is to deny protestantism.[/i]

Look Rome geniuses many with its *history*.

In fact I think that if someone is somewhat more intellectual and searching, they can be easily led to depart from the core basics of God's Word. It is easy to happen. The UU even appeals mostly to the more intellectual and well-read. When I was UU I was sitting in there with published authors and members of the intelligensia, considering my more ordinary background, I was a rarity within those circles. I see this time and time again, with Roman Catholicism conversions. If marriage doesnt take someone in, its Rome's "HISTORY."

Sadly, core Biblical teachings are departed from. People are trained to listen more to vain philosophies rather then the direct teachings of Gods Word.
[i]
I was studying inter-denominational ecumenism and the issue of division and “why” they were divided led me down a path to which I learned things about catholicism I never knew.
[/i]
You think the ecumenical movement is going to teach you the truth about Catholicism?

As much as they teach against division, even now wanting to unify with false religions, they forget the direct teachings of Jesus Christ and replace them with a lie.

They teach agianst division. Jesus said You will be divided.

Which one are you going to pick?
[b]
Luk 12:51 Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:[/b]


[i]I cleaned away the polemic hateful rhetoric and actually did an in depth study with six other evangelicals on the theological merit of the catechism. Which led me to fully confess that catholicism is the only form of Christianity with a complete systematic theology. [/i]

So you studying the Catechism of the Catholic Church to prove it true? It seems they worked hard in that apostate seminary to turn you Catholic. Ive extensively read the Catechism comparing it to the Bible, probably far more then most people. Even the parts of the Catechism Ive quoted here, I had the numbers memorized from before.

[i]
I have this in writing from before I converted. The issue of authority bothered me as well. I was not willing to stake my salvation on my ability to interpret something that numerous people disagreed on. [/i]

Ever think that was the HOly Spirit warning you?

Remember too many want the easy route of others telling them what is true rather then seeking after the Word and God directly and asking HIM and letting the Holy Spirit do the leading.
[i]

I also did not want to miss out on all the blessings that my own interpretation could not work on. I didn't want to re-invent the wheel. I also saw, in answer to this, that 90% plus of theology programs in the protestant world teach their students to find an author/professor/theologian and just follow them.[/i]

Sure that is wrong. They elevate men above Gods Word. That is the core component of what is wrong with Calvinism in a nutshell. Anyone who quotes some theologians polemics over Gods Word has been misled. I dont think much of theologians, most will turn you into an agnostic pronto. One friend of mine has a preacher who told them that staying a Christian within todays modern seminaries is nearly impossible they fill people's heads with so much lies.

[i]
So please, understand that I loved my evangelical faith and I grew and I was entirely devoted to being a pastor to the flock of believers. I had a great evangelical life. But we were meant for so much more.[/i]

I believe you did love it, but you were just misled. Look, there are many paths that lead to lies. Satan will even use ones intellect to lead them to untruths. All the geniuses and college professors in the UU are on the way to hell. The smarter a person is, the more dangerous this can be. Why depart from the Simplicity that is in Christ? {that is in the Bible} Jesus Christ should be everything to a Christian, there should be no more "searching".

[i]

That is why I will honestly claim that there is nothing that the evangelical community has that the catholic church is lacking. Individual churches might be different, but in eccesiological wholes there is nothing that evangelicalism has that is good, that we did not give to them. Trace your roots.[/i]

I know you keep saying it but I dont see it.

The corruption of Rome is well known.

I know for a fact that even the life I had with my last close Christian church was impossible within a Catholic church. Would the Catholic church send 8 people over to a members house to help them move, because they got sick?

I dont know how you can even compare Catholicism's huge impersonal churches where the members really are not involved in each others lives whatsoever, sure they may have friends, but it is not as a church family, to a a good Biblical church where it is really a community.

[i]
I was not sucked into vain philosophies. I was also not ignorant. I was a catholic basher, I did it out of contempt and naive misunderstandings. You can not disregard theologians because they are willing to intellectually engage our faith.[/i]

I do disregard theologians if they preach against Gods Word. Some seem to be more intent on wanting to disprove the faith rather then strengthening it.
[i]
I do understand your concerns with some theologians, but you are shooting your own people in the foot if you consider theology to not be Christian. Your own statement of “knowing Christ from the bible” makes yourself a theologian.[/i]

What does the BIble say about theologians. I beleive they are TODAYS SCRIBES.
Insert THEOLOGIAN everywhere the BIble says SCRIBE and youll see what I mean.
[b]
1Cr 1:20 Where [is] the wise? where [is] the scribe? where [is] the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?[/b]
[i]
But catholicism fully speaks against proselytism of any kind.[/i]

Thats a problem and thats why during my UU years, Catholics who found out I left to be UU, would pat me on the head and tell me "Thats nice, dear"

It is a totally different worldview that.

Im glad I ran into that streetpreacher who told me the truth.

[i]
In regards to Islam, remember that they trace themselves back from Abraham, so in essence you could say that their God is our God, they just do bad theology. Kind of like Calvin. But I don't believe in watering down the faith in anyway.
[/i]
Have you read the Koran?

Go read it and you will understand a different spirit is behind that book and it aint the Holy Spirit!

[i]
Even the people who claim to read the bible alone will follow the heremeutical patterns of their related denomination or spiritual leader.
[/i]
Oh come on, this stuff about interpetation is nonsense. You let scripture explain scripture. Ie the OT points to what is in Revelation. The whole book is tied together.

[i]I find it offensive, and rather unproductive to assume from you that Catholics can not fully love scripture.[/i]

Catholics can "love" scripture but it simply does not have the place of authority it does in the Christian's heart. Go back to the Catechism I quoted, Catholics put their tradition and church leadership {Magisterium} on the same level. That is why Catholicism is so prone to error and extra-biblical teachings like the Immaculate Conception.

[i]I do not feel your experience of catholicism was genuine, you are angst against the Church and very bitter.[/i]

I actually had an idyllic childhood in a Catholic school, I was friends with the nuns and hung out in the convent, lived very close to Catholic church and school as a child. I had friends and was RE teacher in the Catholic Church before I left. No one was mean to me or abused me outside of teaching false theology that led me further away from God.
[i]

If I saw the church as you did I am sure numerous amounts of us would be against her too; but your understanding is not genuine.[/i]

Why isnt it genuine. I was in the Catholic Church for 18 years and then back in a few years as an adult. I had the whole Catholic school experience taught by nuns and priests.
[i]
Like I said before, you sound like my mother a lot of times and she is in that same arena[/i]

Is your mother trying to tell you the truth about the Catholic Church? A mothers prayers can work wonders. That gives me hope:)

[i]
The curious thing is if you feel that people can just pick up scripture and read it, then why do you feel compelled to put yourself as the authoritative person above their interpretation?[/i]

Because on here I will post a scripture and I will have Catholics lining up to tell me why that scripture *really* doesnt mean what it directly says.

[i]It is interesting that even among your protestant brothers you still consider them heretical if they do not believe in the same form of baptism as you. No offense ma'am, you are not that special.[/i]

where did I ever say its only my own denomination going to heaven? There are Christians in other churches. If they are born again in Jesus Christ that is what counts.
Sadly the Roman Catholic church does not teach that a person must be born again, or they lead their people technically to believe they are "born again" at infant baptism, which is such a dangerous theology, leading people to believe they are saved when they are not in a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.
[i]
You do not have authority over everyone else you meet.[/i]

I never claimed any authority. Anyhow my lack of authority doesnt mean Gods Word doesnt have any. It has all authority.

[i]
The ECF's are not ignorant cavemen that you need to protect the world against[/i]

Im sure some of them were smart fellows.

One thing I really think you should examine is how different versions of their words are given out by different churches.
[i]
You have the same system we do, just do not have a proper authority or a proper tradition. But please, don't be fooled that you actually have scripture alone.[/i]

One can read scripture and study it and find out truths for themselves. You forget I wasnt saved while in the Catholic Church, and I came out, reading even a badly translated Catholic Bible that got me asking questions. I did not know ONE born again evangelical Christian in my entire community at that time.

[i]
I would be interested in where you say that scripture has been edited during the mass. I have never heard of this before. If you could cite I would appreciate it.[/i]

Well I cant link them here. Google Budge2 The Catholic Cutting Room and find it second one down, read the threads. They have excised even one line sentences out of the middle of scripture.
[i]
I still read the bible just as much as I did as a protestant, I have various translations and multiple people to discuss the heremenutical principles of my reading.[/i]

You mean people to confuse you.

Why not read scripture understanding it is one integrated book and let scripture teach you the meaning of scripture?
[i]
Sometimes I wonder if your distaste for the catholic church blinds you against some of the comments you make. Assuming that the only “good” priests are the ones that get in trouble, and the rest are all concerned about money is such a horrible statement. [/i]

On my board we ran a series called "Profiles in Priestly Courage" we discovered a dozen cases, where whenever a guy dared to question a bishop he was censored and punished to the extreme, some even being removed from their posts. We saw it so much I believe it is a systematic thing. I even knew a seminarian student who personally told me on a Catholic board, [me and him actually debated a lot as this was time I was leaving] that he was kicked out of the seminary for blowing the whistle on an actively gay roommate bringing boyfriends over for the night. The good guys suffer under what I beleive is a corrupt system. If Catholics cared about the "good guys" theyd be as disgusted as me about the corruption and Lavender Mafia.
[i]
You do understand that a catholic priest makes the salary he makes regardless of the size of his church. Typically around 24,000 a year.[/i]

Most have full powers over the finances of the parish. Sure many are honest, but there are many instances of "creative" accounting. We have posted about a few that have been caught stealing millions from their parishes. The prots who follow the numbers game too, in focusing on how many people they can get in the seats too are wrong. The whole church growth nonsense related to Rick Warren is awful.

[i]There are good pastors and there are bad pastors, there are good priests and there are bad priests. This is a human condition regardless of the Church.[/i]

I never said there werent any good priests.

Most are victims as well as the laity. There is plenty of proof in Rome the dross rises to the top. The best stonewallers and more get promotions that is seen time and time again. I feel sorry for them even for whom they have to answer to. I beleive they are harmed being taught obedience without question. I have personally known nuns and priests, I know what they are taught.
[i]
You are quick to insult bishops, but I have read numerous writings from bishops, as well as have a decent relationship with one.[/i]

To be honest with you. I dont have much respect for Catholic bishops because

a) Not one in America protested the rules regarding the sex scandals. Not one seperated from the herd to protest Vatican policy. {Ratzingers 2001 letter} There were 111 bishops in American involved, that means 2/3rds of all of them, in some moving and hiding of sex abusers.

b) Not one {living} has protested the interfaith movement. [there was one now deceased Trad and sedevancantist but Im talking about regular Novus Ordo bishops]

[i]
We are taught to keep one eye on our bishop and one on the Pope. If they differ from each other than put both on the Pope. But I strongly disagree if you think they are bad preachers.[/i]

Well you know how I feel about the popes.

[/quote].
[i]
You did not understanding my statement about protestant eccesiology. The protestant church is centered on the preacher. Regardless if you have a council of elders, the service itself is centered on the pastor, on his sermon on what point of view he wants to teach. What issue he wants to lecture, what theology he wants to promote[/i]

Sure in some Prot churches but in a decent bible church, a pastor is held accountable, and if he preaches agianst Gods Word he is held to that standard.

My old church had open accounting ledgers and had church members running that as well as ran by business vote. Many churches are run too by elders and deacons. The prot or Christian church can vote out a bad minister or get him removed from the pulpit in most cases, in the Catholic system even if a church has a much loved priest, he can be ripped away in an instance by the bishop, even their very church closed agianst their wishes, they have no rights.

[i]
Now, you ask where in the bible does it say that we need the mass and they Eucharist. I will ask, where does the bible say we need the bible? [/i]

:rollin Oh come on.

Without Gods Word what is there to test things against?

You could be following Shirley McClaine and think she is teaching things of God.

Do you not trust that God preserved His own Word as promised in the Bible?

[i]he mass was celebrated long before the canon was put together. The Eucharist was celebrated long before the canon was created. At least a thousand years before the first reformer thought otherwise.[/i]

Early deceivers. Even Simon Magnus was right there in the book of Acts.

[i]
Your understanding of metaphysics and how the sacrifice of Christ and the mass is something I am sure we can go at arms length with. What we should do is make a list of the various topics and go through them one at a time in order to avoid the confusion a 12 pages reply makes. I am willing to dialogue with you on this Ma'am. What you wrote shows a lack of understanding and I would enjoy a conversation on it.[/i]

Rome's "metaphysics" to explain its false Eucharist teachings are based in vain philosophies, not in anything in scripture.

[i]I appreciate your experience of Christian fellowship, I felt that in my mothers church, the church of my youth, as well as currently in the catholic church. This again, is a thing based on people.[/i]

No I think its not the people's fault that fellowship is so lacking in Catholic churches. They feel it. Even my last Catholic church asked why is there so little involvement with each other? I have had Catholics lament to me, saying they wish they had what other churches had in that regard. I think when there is such an elevated clergy and when so much is centered on rituals and rites, the people themselves become too far back in priority.
[i]
The shaking hands in mass has nothing to do with community, it has to do with the fact that the catholic community exists in every facet of our life, mass is a time of devotion and veneration. A solemn respect for what is happening. Some think that shaking hands has a negative effect on this situation. But that is not a negative to community[/i].

Christians dont have to be "told" to shake hands with each other or even hug each other. That comes natural. This too speaks of the stiffness and imposed oppressive formality of Catholic churches. You must shake hands at this prescribed time.

[i]
Christ preached against Vain repetition, against meaningless ritual. Not against ritual itself. [/i]

Rome has made its rituals first and foremost. How many Catholics even in other countries use church as a sacramental filling station to the point there is no community?
[i]

As a good jew Christ participated in a religion that had a legit religious ritual system in its theology.[/i]

And those sacrifices were done away with because of His sacrifice.

[i]My issue is that Church is not the situation for a speaking about life.[/i]

See thats some of the problem. It makes God unreachable. Catholics especially young people see Gods Word and more as untenable and irrevelant to their OWN lives. There is no changing of ones life or leading to obedience there. Just God in the abstract and DISTANT.

[i]
I think the perfect Church would have Mass, and also small groups, and study classes and teachings and morals and community built in. Your sermons you desire are more than seen in the church, just not in mass. The point of mass is to not push the agenda of the pastor. But to feed the Church in the message of the scriptures and the Logos in the Eucharist. This is the mass of our fathers.[/i]

There is so much focus on the piece of the bread even here, the people come way behind. Do you not realize the true body of Christ here on earth is the church, the people with the Holy Spirit indwelling. This is a fact that Satan wishes to obliterate via the false rituals of Catholicism and focus on the piece of bread.

.[/quote] [i]
I think we will need to talk about sanctification and soteriology later in another thread. I think we see eye to eye on justification but not on sanctification. Your problems with purgatory appear to be based on this misunderstanding[/i]

Yes start another thread on that.

[i]In Augustine's model of salvation a big portion is that we do not properly love. In doing works we learn how to properly love, we develop a focus on the community, rather than on the self[/i]

Works come OUT of faith.

Those who do works thinking it will teach them to love, have things turned around.

The only true works that are not as filthy rags are those done when one is led by God for His Glory.

[i] This is a part of salvation, we are already justified, but we are working out our salvation as St. Paul teaches. In purgatory we finish off this process that already started here on earth. [/i]

As I said above, Catholicism makes Jesus a mere door opener, basically teaching you have to finish the job for yourself.
[i]
Christ's blood opens the gates, it pays the price. It is complete in that, but we need to walk through that gate, we need to be pure. We need to be fully human[/i]

He is pure, we are not.

Can you realize it is all about HIM? Not about you or me.

Ok this is getting long will answer more later....

[N/A Gone]

Ma'am,

Do you want me to wait for the rest of your reply and deal with it in whole? Your choice ma'am.

[Budge]

go ahead with what Ive posted...

[N/A Gone]

I personally would rather wait until you have finished responding in full to my letter. once you have done that please let me know. The last thing I want to happen is to have a point left on the table because we have moved on.

Just let me know when you are finished responding Ma'am.

[N/A Gone]

hehe,

first, you wrote LXXXIX, and the Psalm is actually XXXIX....hehe, the problem with typo's. Ok, I will address that quote in my response when you are finished ma'am

[Budge]

Yeah sorry about that..
[i]
his goes into the Pauline argument we were having on adoption. Please, make note ma'am, that we should discuss this topic in proper commitment. I would challenge that catholicism has the complete understanding of adoptionism that protestant theology attempts to have with a cheap grace model.[/i]

I dont think depending on Jesus Christ for total salvation means it is cheap grace, but it is TOTAL grace!

Remember lets think of the LAW and its demands for UTTER PERFECTION.

Then one is stuck in this mode...

TRY HARD...

FAIL.

Try HARDER.

Fail again...

See where that goes? God promises the born again they will become new creatures in Christ. The Holy Spirit is to work within you.

There are basically two religions in the world...

Those of works, people who belive they can save themselves via their own efforts.

or those who have accepted Jesus Christ's gift of salvation where you LET HIM...instead of trying to make it based on your own EFFORTs.

When I became a Christian, I realized it wasnt about me or my efforts, or my filthy works it was all about Him. When I got saved, I knew I was wicked and didnt have a chance making it on my own efforts or merits. Referring back to that Catholic Church Catechism about merits, I totally disagree with that.

Jesus Christ is not only a mere gate opener or door opener, He does it all.

[i]


You spent considerable time on sacramentalism and rituals. I feel that you are right in that they alone do not save[/i]


Glad to hear that...then why are they needed?

I believe that as a Christian, my fellowship with the body of Christ, and my own prayer life and learning Gods Word edified me more then any of Catholicism rituals and rites which left me cold. I would take a acouple committed Christians dedicated to God, praying over me when sick far more then Rome's scripted words from the priest any time. In fact Ive had Christians pray for me when sick and have been healed and vice versa.

I feel sorry for Catholics , hey I was there, who are missing out on active vibrant faith and involvement with other Christians, I know most Catholics do seek after God, I feel they are so cheated, stuck with those scripts and cold removed distance rituals, I when one reads the book of Acts, you see them breaking bread together as one body...that wasnt the formal get in line, rituals and rites the Catholic Church developed over the centuries.
[i]

That they can be something that people walk in motions on. But if someone has genuine faith and combines that faith with the sacraments, and with the practices of the church they find such a depth to their faith that words can not describe, only experience[/i]

I guess I see that depth missing in Catholicism. I know when I was there, I met many good people, who sought after God, but they were not being given true spiritual food.

[i]This is something that still brings me near tears when thinking of what I was lacking in my evangelical faith, and the desire to share this fullness is overwhelming. But the root is still faith. We agree there ma'am. Ritual is nothing without faith. But what could your faith be if you worshiped with your whole body in the way our fathers worshiped? [/i]

I dont believe the true early Christians worshipped that way. And Prots and Christians are not perfect either. Any mega-church or church that has turned their church into a market or mall has lost the plot too. The Ekkelesia was Christians called out together for prayer, worship and edification, it wasnt rituals and rites for salvation, they knew all salvation was in Jesus Christ.

Can you admit at least, and Ill admit this for many prots and Christians, that the centuries took them further away from how Christianity started, where everything became much more formalized and REMOVED? Jesus warned of this when he spoke of Traditions that superceded the commandments of God. When he spoke of Pharisees that worried more about how the plate appeared on the outside then what was inside.

I know one word used for fundmentalism is primitivism, and that is not a word to be ashamed of, but people who are truly trying to follow the book of Acts.
[i]

My faith is not based on my own efforts, it is based on response to the divine. [/i]

I dont know about your personal faith, but that Catholic catechism about the "merits" seems to say otherwise.
[i]
Your faith is based on response to the divine. We respond in different ways, but we are both “doing” something. Do you understand ma'am?[/i]

Heres the problem, someone can search for God, and have every good intention but be WRONG. When I was UU, I was wrong. I appeared to most to be a nice person, ,--well to most..but I was still wrong.

Saying that I believe God does answer in a positive fashion to those who are truly searching for Him. I read the Bible, to disprove it while UU, see what happened?



[i]
In your critique of the eucharist you cite that that christians receive Christ by faith, they receive they holy spirit. That they do not need fill-ups. I agree and disagree, for catholics we must have faith. That is the starting point. We receive the holy spirit, but the fill-ups that you see is the difference in our models of sanctification. We know that we are continuing to work out our salvation(phil) and the eucharist is continuing to assist us in that process[/i].
[b]
Honestly how does the Eucharist, which I believe is just a piece of bread assist you in that process? Isnt that the job of the Holy Spirit in the Christian's life?

One thing I worry about in Catholic theology there seems to be absolutely no role for the Holy Spirit.

Jhn 14:26 But the Comforter, [which is] the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
[/b]
[i]Rites are part of love, even marriage has its rites and parts. I know my wife likes her back scratched, I was taught at a young age to express to her how beautiful I truly feel she is. We learn from each other how to love each other. How is that any different for the bride of christ? What ritual stands in the way? Does kneeling stop you from praying? Could you be specific budge because these things have strongly helped me.[/i]

Rites are scripted. Lets put in this way...in the Catholic way of marriage using it as analogy, you would be handed a paper with formal words to say to your wife, you would have no real heart to heart conversations. You would have a group of men telling you when and how you could talk to your wife...

Think of how formal the Catholic Church is...to me it is a church, and I suppose this would apply to some other high Prot mainliners, where the rituals have been put over the people. Look how the Catholic Church writes reams and reams of paper to even dictate the right words of the Mass and the rituals. Christian fellowship and one's relationship with God is supposed to be so much more.


[i]
We acknowledge that loving is consuming the eucharist, not from our own understanding but from Christ's directives[/i]


I mean no offense by this, but I wrote it on my board, how can people truly love a piece of a bread, an inanimate object? Honestly that worries me because it leads people to love and adore an object and I believe IT IS IDOLATRY!

And the whole notion of "eating" your beloved one, LITERALLY is so wrong on so many levels, I dont even know where to begin.

You are close to someone by sharing a relationship. Marriage is used in the Bible as an anaology for ones relationship with Christ. You talk to one another, you grow close together. WHere is the role of the Holy Spirit next to the Eucharist?

I dont know if you saw the thread, I should repost it, where I talked about the spiritual meanings of EAT in the Bible, and how Jesus was using this. I asked questions like does this verse mean literally EAT a scroll? That is in there.

[i]
Your exegesis is that Christ's message of consuming is a metaphor for acceptance. I disagree with you with 2 concepts. 1.) That is not how anyone at that time took it, they would not have left. There was a mass exodus of his followers that left because of that passage.[/i]

They left over the spiritual meanings even.

Even the fact Jesus told them he would be going to the cross, they didnt deal well with that either.


[i]You cite that the holy spirit assists you in understanding scripture. I see the value in this, I truly do. But I see a problem when there are at least 8,000 protestant schools of though. Either the spirit has schizophrenia or there is more than just the spirit in the exegesis. Protestant theologies change usually in a 20 year period. The catholic church is 2000 years old. Just look at the numbers ma'am.[/i]

I can get on quite fine with any Bible believing Christians. In fact I have noticed on my board, and we post on prot and Christian issues as well, there is very few disagreements among a vast array of people, as far as I know I was the only indp Bpatist there.

The Prots who have accepted sacramentalism, liberalism and who have departed from the inerrancy of Gods Word, [u]of course [/u]they have differences.




I really dont know what to say about your comments on demonics. The idea that demons can use sacraments and marian devotions as an entrance point is just a polemic comment with no grounds in anything but your own angles

I can prove that marian apparitions using scripture are demonic.

Even there the apparitions have taught things DIRECTLy contrary to Gods word.

I have studied most of them, Ill do a few threads for you.

BTW seriously studying Fatima, was one of those many things that led me out, I realized "mary" was teaching contrary to scripture.

[i]
We can talk about this more, but the point will not be found. Perhaps demons know what to consider a threat and what to not consider a threat? Having experience in ritual and occultic studies I am willing to discuss your understanding of parapsychology in the context of litugical communities.[/i]

I believe that the Mass itself at its core is more craft then biblical. But that would take another thread. Even the fact that if a priest gets ONE WORD wrong in the Mass to supposely change the bread into Jesus, that says it all to me. NOt to offend but it frankly makes it more like a SPELL instead of a prayer. I should do a thread on that as well. Remember one thing about the occult is the seeking of POWER. That is its main motivating factor....Satan's desire was always to have what was Gods. The Mass itself seeks to portend even power over the very precense of God as if man himself would have that power over the precense of God.

I believe you are honestly seeking after God, but have been lead down some false paths.

[N/A Gone]

Ma'am,

I assume you are still writing, so I will leave it until you tell me you have replied in whole.

[Budge]

Ok I answered in whole above:)

[Budge]

Ok I answered in whole above:)

[N/A Gone]

Ma'am,

Your reply is 14 pages after slight editing to cut space down. so give me until wed or so please.

I feel there were still some points in the first letter I wanted you to address, but I do not want to hold back, I will move forward with this. Thank you for the patience.

[N/A Gone]

I have not forgot about this Ma'am, end of the semister and the internship is taking my time. But I will get back to you. Thank you for your patience