Initial Conversion

[Livin_the_MASS]

[quote]St. Matthew 26:26-28; St. Mark 14:22-24; St. Luke 22:19-20; St. John 6; St. Paul> 1 Corinthians 11:24-26

hehehehe.... i assume you already know those though [/quote]

You bet ya! Jesus is Truth and He gave us His Flesh to eat and Blood to drink with His own Hands. You can have no closer of a relationship with God than Holy Communion when God comes into man and abides with him! [b]HE IS TRULY PRESENT BODY, BLOOD, SOUL, AND DIVINITY[/b], under a veil of a sacrament. Thank You Jesus for such a great gift the gift of Your very Self!

[ironmonk]

"Covenant theology" - another doctrine of man? where did it come from, who was the first to preach it?

Now, correct me if I'm wrong...

[color=red][Edited by dUSt: Uncharitable Comment][/color]

Well... to a be a bible Christian, wouldn't one have to believe as the Christians at the time of and before the bible?

I understand that some may mean only using the bible, but the fact is, the first Christians should know what the bible really meant and we know that they will never be overcome... so, who are the disciples of the disciples from 33 AD?

We see that the first Christians at the time of the Bible and before the bible believed in the Real Presence.... therefore those who do not believe in the Real Presense are not bible Christians.

Here is what the First Christians wrote, no one contested the Real Presense.

Ignatius of Antioch

"I have no taste for corruptible food nor for the pleasures of this life. I desire the bread of God, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, who was of the seed of David; and for drink I desire his blood, which is love incorruptible" (Letter to the Romans 7:3 [A.D. 110]).

"Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God. . . . They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes" (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6:2–7:1 [A.D. 110]).


Justin Martyr

"We call this food Eucharist, and no one else is permitted to partake of it, except one who believes our teaching to be true and who has been washed in the washing which is for the remission of sins and for regeneration [i.e., has received baptism] and is thereby living as Christ enjoined. For not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nurtured, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus" (First Apology 66 [A.D. 151]).


Irenaeus

"If the Lord were from other than the Father, how could he rightly take bread, which is of the same creation as our own, and confess it to be his body and affirm that the mixture in the cup is his blood?" (Against Heresies 4:33–32 [A.D. 189]).

"He has declared the cup, a part of creation, to be his own blood, from which he causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of creation, he has established as his own body, from which he gives increase unto our bodies. When, therefore, the mixed cup [wine and water] and the baked bread receives the Word of God and becomes the Eucharist, the body of Christ, and from these the substance of our flesh is increased and supported, how can they say that the flesh is not capable of receiving the gift of God, which is eternal life—flesh which is nourished by the body and blood of the Lord, and is in fact a member of him?" (ibid., 5:2).


Clement of Alexandria

"’Eat my flesh,’ [Jesus] says, ‘and drink my blood.’ The Lord supplies us with these intimate nutrients, he delivers over his flesh and pours out his blood, and nothing is lacking for the growth of his children" (The Instructor of Children 1:6:43:3 [A.D. 191]).


Tertullian

"[T]here is not a soul that can at all procure salvation, except it believe whilst it is in the flesh, so true is it that the flesh is the very condition on which salvation hinges. And since the soul is, in consequence of its salvation, chosen to the service of God, it is the flesh which actually renders it capable of such service. The flesh, indeed, is washed [in baptism], in order that the soul may be cleansed . . . the flesh is shadowed with the imposition of hands [in confirmation], that the soul also may be illuminated by the Spirit; the flesh feeds [in the Eucharist] on the body and blood of Christ, that the soul likewise may be filled with God" (The Resurrection of the Dead 8 [A.D. 210]).


Hippolytus

"‘And she [Wisdom] has furnished her table’ [Prov. 9:2] . . . refers to his [Christ’s] honored and undefiled body and blood, which day by day are administered and offered sacrificially at the spiritual divine table, as a memorial of that first and ever-memorable table of the spiritual divine supper [i.e.,
the Last Supper]" (Fragment from Commentary on Proverbs [A.D. 217]).


Origen

"Formerly there was baptism in an obscure way . . . now, however, in full view, there is regeneration in water and in the Holy Spirit. Formerly, in an obscure way, there was manna for food; now, however, in full view, there is the true food, the flesh of the Word of God, as he himself says: ‘My flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink’ [John 6:56]" (Homilies on Numbers 7:2 [A.D. 248]).


Cyprian of Carthage

"He [Paul] threatens, moreover, the stubborn and forward, and denounces them, saying, ‘Whosoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily, is guilty of the body and blood of the Lord’ [1 Cor. 11:27]. All these warnings being scorned and contemned—[lapsed Christians will often take Communion] before their sin is expiated, before confession has been made of their crime, before their conscience has been purged by sacrifice and by the hand of the priest, before the offense of an angry and threatening Lord has been appeased, [and so] violence is done to his body and blood; and they sin now against their Lord more with their hand and mouth than when they denied their Lord" (The Lapsed 15–16 [A.D. 251]).


Council of Nicaea I

"It has come to the knowledge of the holy and great synod that, in some districts and cities, the deacons administer the Eucharist to the presbyters [i.e., priests], whereas neither canon nor custom permits that they who have no right to offer [the Eucharistic sacrifice] should give the Body of Christ to them that do offer [it]" (Canon 18 [A.D. 325]).


Aphraahat the Persian Sage

"After having spoken thus [at the Last Supper], the Lord rose up from the place where he had made the Passover and had given his body as food and his blood as drink, and he went with his disciples to the place where he was to be arrested. But he ate of his own body and drank of his own blood, while he was pondering on the dead. With his own hands the Lord presented his own body to be eaten, and before he was crucified he gave his blood as drink" (Treatises 12:6 [A.D. 340]).


Cyril of Jerusalem

"The bread and the wine of the Eucharist before the holy invocation of the adorable Trinity were simple bread and wine, but the invocation having been made, the bread becomes the body of Christ and the wine the blood of Christ" (Catechetical Lectures 19:7 [A.D. 350]).

"Do not, therefore, regard the bread and wine as simply that; for they are, according to the Master’s declaration, the body and blood of Christ. Even though the senses suggest to you the other, let faith make you firm. Do not judge in this matter by taste, but be fully assured by the faith, not doubting that you have been deemed worthy of the body and blood of Christ. . . . [Since you are] fully convinced that the apparent bread is not bread, even though it is sensible to the taste, but the body of Christ, and that the apparent wine is not wine, even though the taste would have it so, . . . partake of that bread as something spiritual, and put a cheerful face on your soul" (ibid., 22:6, 9).


Ambrose of Milan

"Perhaps you may be saying, ‘I see something else; how can you assure me that I am receiving the body of Christ?’ It but remains for us to prove it. And how many are the examples we might use! . . . Christ is in that sacrament, because it is the body of Christ" (The Mysteries 9:50, 58 [A.D. 390]).


Theodore of Mopsuestia

"When [Christ] gave the bread he did not say, ‘This is the symbol of my body,’ but, ‘This is my body.’ In the same way, when he gave the cup of his blood he did not say, ‘This is the symbol of my blood,’ but, ‘This is my blood’; for he wanted us to look upon the [Eucharistic elements] after their reception of grace and the coming of the Holy Spirit not according to their nature, but receive them as they are, the body and blood of our Lord. We ought . . . not regard [the elements] merely as bread and cup, but as the body and blood of the Lord, into which they were transformed by the descent of the Holy Spirit" (Catechetical Homilies 5:1 [A.D. 405]).


Augustine

"Christ was carried in his own hands when, referring to his own body, he said, ‘This is my body’ [Matt. 26:26]. For he carried that body in his hands" (Explanations of the Psalms 33:1:10 [A.D. 405]).

"I promised you [new Christians], who have now been baptized, a sermon in which I would explain the sacrament of the Lord’s Table. . . . That bread which you see on the altar, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the body of Christ. That chalice, or rather, what is in that chalice, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the blood of Christ" (Sermons 227 [A.D. 411]).

...

"What you see is the bread and the chalice; that is what your own eyes report to you. But what your faith obliges you to accept is that the bread is the body of Christ and the chalice is the blood of Christ. This has been said very briefly, which may perhaps be sufficient for faith; yet faith does not desire instruction" (ibid., 272).


Council of Ephesus

"We will necessarily add this also. Proclaiming the death, according to the flesh, of the only-begotten Son of God, that is Jesus Christ, confessing his resurrection from the dead, and his ascension into heaven, we offer the unbloody sacrifice in the churches, and so go on to the mystical thanksgivings, and are sanctified, having received his holy flesh and the precious blood of Christ the Savior of us all. And not as common flesh do we receive it; God forbid: nor as of a man sanctified and associated with the Word according to the unity of worth, or as having a divine indwelling, but as truly the life-giving and very flesh of the Word himself. For he is the life according to his nature as God, and when he became united to his flesh, he made it also to be life-giving" (Session 1, Letter of Cyril to Nestorius [A.D. 431]).








"Unless you eat the body and drink the blood you have no life in you"

Very sad that people deny Jesus.





Bro Adam and Lumberjack;
"Convent theology" has already fallen... I'd be interested to see what claims they have to prove otherwise. Their very definition of faith destroy's it.

"faith is all you need" + "Works are part of faith" = Works are important and justify us. The works prove that we are living and accepting the free gift of a life in Christ


Basic logic. Fundie POV's are just illogical and do not add up. They are new. They are doctrines of men. They cannot be traced to Christ.... they are traced to Luther, John Smith, Calvin, Knox, etc...


Back up what you claim or don't make a claim... Ample Scripture has been provided and Christian Historical facts (ECF) that prove the Catholic Church is not wrong.

[color=red][Edited by dUSt: Uncharitable Comment][/color]

If the Catholic Church is wrong, please show me so I can have the truth. If the Catholic Church is right, accept the Truth of Christ.

God Bless,
ironmonk

Edited March 19, 2004 by dUSt

[Livin_the_MASS]

Ironmonk,
You da bomb!!

[PedroX]

Bro Adam,

First, my apologies for some of the bashing you've been taking as you honestly search for the truth.

Covenant Theology has some real strong points. Mainly, that it is a coherent, scripture based all encompassing systematic theology. It looks at scripture as a whole (Old and New Testament), and examines God from this "wholistic" perspective. This is not surprising, since Jean Calvin (the very first Covenant Theologin) was trained in a Catholic Seminary. Pure Covenentual Theology differs little from Catholic Theology, until Calvin inserts Solia Fides.

Well, I better run as I'm sure the flames will be headed my way now. My prayers are with you.

peace...

[Brother Adam]

:angry: On the other hand, Ironmonks posts have me so angry right now, I'm ready to be done with phatmass. :angry:

[Aloysius]

duude ironmonk, you do need to take a deep breath: he's trying to understand for goodness sake and you're arguing with him

you seriously don't seem to be helping... :ph34r:

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Brother Adam' date='Mar 18 2004, 02:10 PM'] :angry: On the other hand, Ironmonks posts have me so angry right now, I'm ready to be done with phatmass. :angry: [/quote]


:crash:

[Aloysius]

For by grace you are saved through faith: and that not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God. Not of works, that no man may glory. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus in good works, which God hath prepared that we should walk in them. [i]Ephesians 2:8-10[/i]

now let's difine these terms biblically, shall we?

[b]grace[/b] we receive it by Christ and it intricately connected to our mission being sent to the whole world, our apostleship [i]Romans 1:5[/i] it is spiritual, an apostle may bring it to you through teaching and it strengthens you [i]Romans 1:11[/i] by it we are freely justified and such grace is available because of the redemption found through Jesus Christ [i]Romans 3:24[/i] we have access to grace through faith [i]Romans 5:2[/i] grace abounds to men by Jesus Christ in order to justify them [i]Romans 5:16[/i] grace reigns by JUSTICE so that life everlasting may be achieved [i]Romans 5:21[/i] i think it's reign being by JUSTICE is very important, it shows that grace given unto us governs us in true justice according to morality, and thus serious sin can cut grace off because grace is just.
[b]saved[/b] in hope we are saved [i]Romans 8:24[/i] he saves us and calls us through grace not of works OUTSIDE grace, only through works in the justice of grace INSIDE grace [i]2 Timothy 1:9; Romans 5:21[/i] we are continually being saved through the cross (suffering) which is the power of God[i]1 Cor 1:18[/i] we work out our salvation in fear and trembling [i]Phil 2:12[/i] we obtain the salvation of our souls as the outcome of our faith [i]1 Peter 1:9[/i] all of this we've been saved and are being saved work towards the final goal, enduring to the end and being eternally saved [i]Matt. 10:22, 24:13; Mark 13:13; Acts 15:11; Rom. 5:9-10[/i] we can be saved in the future by fire [i]1 Cor. 3:15[/i]
[b]faith[/b] a just man must live by faith! therefore, only if one lives their entire life according to true faith are they justified [i]Romans 1:17[/i] we are justified by faith, not by works of the law [i]Romans 3:28[/i] through JUSTICE of faith was abraham justified [i]Romans 4:14[/i] there is a certain justice of faith by which we are called to live and think by [i]Romans 10:6[/i] and the later pasages indicate one's belief, their confession of the Lord, and their lives make up faith and that he who truly believes with true faith won't be confounded [i]Romans 10:7-11[/i] faith stands on the power of God [i]1 Corinthians 2:5[/i] yet faith is useless without charity and love, thus you must live what you believe by faith to have true living faith [i]1 Corinthians 14:2[/i] it is this true living faith that includes charity and love that scripture speaks of in [i]Ephesians 2:8[/i] along with [i]1 Corinthians 14:2[/i] faith must be spoken of in context of [i]James 2:17[/i] and thus this faith that justifies and all the other things you see faith doing throughout the scriptures must consist of belief [i]Romans 10:6-11[/i] love [i]1 Corinthians 14:2[/i] and works [i]James 2:17[/i]. unless it includes all these things, it is not faith.

[Sojourner]

Bro. Adam,
Please don't be done with Phatmass yet!!

I for one really appreciate that you're asking these questions. A Protestant friend of mine and I have been talking a lot about justification in the last couple of weeks, so I've really been working through this one myself so that I can better explain things to her, and better understand it myself.

I found a great explanation of justification on Scott Hahn's site; it's a debate exploring both Catholic and Protestant perspectives on this topic.

[url="http://www.mindspring.com/~jdarcy/files/justify.htm"]Justification debate[/url]

I'd love to see this discussion continue, charitably, of course.

[ironmonk]

[quote name='Brother Adam' date='Mar 18 2004, 04:10 PM'] :angry: On the other hand, Ironmonks posts have me so angry right now, I'm ready to be done with phatmass. :angry: [/quote]
[color=red][Edited by dUSt: Uncharitable Comment][/color] Stop taking things as personal attacks when they are not.

All of you need to clear your head and re-read the post. There is nothing angery about them.

Maybe you feel it's angery because there the truth is clear. Please, if I'm wrong about something don't "angery" - instead of show me the error?

These posts are not angery or bashing... If some of you think they are, you are adding tone that is not there.

If I wrote:

I believe 2 + 2 = 4. I do not understand how you see that 2 + 2 = 1.


Is that bashing? No. I think not.

I've simply posted why I don't think covenant theory is correct with scripture and why I believe the Real Presense because that is what the first Christans believed.

Perdox - There has not been any bashing... I can't believe that you would even write such a thing... Give me a break. You saying it was and everyone else saying it was is laughable.

Here is an anology- If I write 2+2=4 and you disagree THAT IS NOT BASHING.

If I ask to understand why you believe something because it doesn't add up - THAT IS NOT BASHING.


EXAMPLES OF BASHING: "only morons belief such nonsense" - "Catholics are not Christian" - "Catholics worship Mary" - "You must be a nimrod not to understand this" - "Are you a mental midget" - "Only inbreeds think that" - "What are you? Two?" - etc....


If my questions appear as bashing, maybe it's time for some people to take a break from the computer and interact with people that they can see, touch, and hear?

When someone is reading something online, the reader tends to put what they expect the tone to be.... if someone expects someone yelling, then that's what they will get out of it.... if someone expects a Mr. Rogers tone, then that's what they'll get out of it.





God Bless,
ironmonk :bunnyears: :clown: :thinking: :thumb: :locosign: :scratch: :abduction: :group:

[ironmonk]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Mar 18 2004, 04:14 PM'] duude ironmonk, you do need to take a deep breath: he's trying to understand for goodness sake and you're arguing with him   

you seriously don't seem to be helping...  :ph34r: [/quote]
Adam,

If you are getting angery ask yourself "Why?".

Is it because I've been mean? No.

Have I directed insults you? No.

What have I done?

I asked questions and posted why I think the Catholic Church is right... nothing more.

If you are getting mad saying that you are considering not posting here because of my posts... is it really my posts or is it because I posted what the Church teaches and why?

If it's my post, please show me where the error lies.

Am I stressing out about how you say that you think the Catholic Church is wrong? no.


Then why are you so mad about what I posted?

Our goal here is truth... if you are right, I want to know so that I can change my view. Show me how 'covenant theory' is correct.

Sometimes people go through a denial stage because the Truth is Catholic... that is where lies the anger.

Aloysis - people must sometimes go through conflict... conflict is a part of relationships... in person, on a board, with ourselves. Conflict helps us grow.

If the Catholic Church is wrong, I want to know so I can change... I ask the questions because I don't understand.

How can I argue when he doesn't answer the questions... so I try to ask and explain in a different way....

DUUUDE... I don't need to take a deep breath because I'm not angery, I'm not mad, nor should my questions make it appear that I am.

I don't understand how "Faith alone" can be said if someone says that "Faith includes works" - then says works are not necessary - to have faith by that definition one must do works - therefore works are necessary.

Please, help me understand this. Show me what I'm missing.

[color=red][Edited by dUSt: Uncharitable Comment][/color]


God Bless,
ironmonk

[PedroX]

[quote]Well, I better run as I'm sure the flames will be headed my way now.[/quote]

peeks head out of shelter, and decides not to come out yet.

peace...

[Livin_the_MASS]

[quote]If you are getting angery ask yourself "Why?".

Is it because I've been mean? No.

Have I directed insults you? No.

What have I done?

I asked questions and posted why I think the Catholic Church is right... nothing more.

If you are getting mad saying that you are considering not posting here because of my posts... is it really my posts or is it because I posted what the Church teaches and why?

If it's my post, please show me where the error lies.

Am I stressing out about how you say that you think the Catholic Church is wrong? no.


Then why are you so mad about what I posted?

Our goal here is truth... if you are right, I want to know so that I can change my view. Show me how 'covenant theory' is correct.

Sometimes people go through a denial stage because the Truth is Catholic... that is where lies the anger.

Aloysis - people must sometimes go through conflict... conflict is a part of relationships... in person, on a board, with ourselves. Conflict helps us grow.

If the Catholic Church is wrong, I want to know so I can change... I ask the questions because I don't understand.

How can I argue when he doesn't answer the questions... so I try to ask and explain in a different way....

DUUUDE... I don't need to take a deep breath because I'm not angery, I'm not mad, nor should my questions make it appear that I am.

I don't understand how "Faith alone" can be said if someone says that "Faith includes works" - then says works are not necessary - to have faith by that definition one must do works - therefore works are necessary.

Please, help me understand this. Show me what I'm missing.

Answer questions posted instead of crying about the questions... we're all adults here right?


God Bless,
ironmonk [/quote]

Your awesome, I'd like to meet You. Could talk for hours! Keep standin for The One Faith man. God's given you a gift. Thats cool man. May He Bless for Standing for His One Catholic Church. I'm here to back you up all the way. All that you did was speak the Truth! When Jesus did that in His day it had the same affect. Some people got mad or upset, but He still said it. We must do the same He is the "WAY". :thumb: Go ironmonk

Edited March 18, 2004 by Jason

[Aloysius]

i just think your posts seemed a lil condescending in tone. i could be wrong, but that seems to be how bro adam interpretted them also, so i'm not the only one.

you're very knowledgeable, very wise, i know that, i've seen that. but i think in this case your style was unneeded.

[ironmonk]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Mar 18 2004, 08:04 PM'] i just think your posts seemed a lil condescending in tone. i could be wrong, but that seems to be how bro adam interpretted them also, so i'm not the only one.

you're very knowledgeable, very wise, i know that, i've seen that. but i think in this case your style was unneeded. [/quote]
guys... thanks, but I'm not wise... I'm a parrot.

Please recall the many times in the past that I have stated that none of my posts are meant to be like that (unless the use of appropriate smilies show it).

I try to be simple and to the point.

I don't intend to offend anyone. I just think we all need to realize that "tone" is sometimes hard to tell.

I did not mean for it to be taken as condescending... My goal in life is to serve Christ... to serve Christ best I must know His truth. If I was a protestant, I would be the same way.


See, I don't want to tell people what to think... I don't want to shove anything down anyone's throat.... So I ask questions and present material the way it looks to me and ask others to correct me if I'm wrong because I love Truth. I think that they should draw the conclusions on their own to what the truth is. I want the answers to the questions myself because if I'm wrong, I want to be corrected. Being corrected is great when I wrong because I remember it that much better and then the next time it comes up, I will be right. I have no issue with being wrong. I just want people to show me when I'm wrong. If someone cannot show me where I am wrong, then what does that mean? - could it be that if I am not wrong, that I could be right? I would think that anyone who loves Christ, will love truth. Sometimes people get upset, but I don't think that they are really upset with me (just a messenger), they are upset with the news.

There are many people who convert to Church and it causes great distress because of their whole families rejecting them. Especially pastors that are converting, they have to learn a new trade or skill because of it. When someone's whole family is anti-Catholic, and they learn of their convertion, it's very difficult for them. But... through conflict we learn and grow. If we went through life without conflict, when we encounter it, we will not know how to react or what to do.


I'm not a writer, I post my thoughts. I ask that you do an experiment... think of Mr. Rogers... now, go back and read the posts with Mr. Rogers tone. That is how they should sound.

God Bless,
ironmonk