The Catholic Church.

[GodsGrace]

I concur with that. In the Anglican church everything takes a sip out of the same chalice. The point is that the CC priest withholds the cup and drinks it himself. This is the departure from the Gospel record that gives it an authenticity issue.

The priest does not withhold the cup....I believe I've explained this.

The Blood is also condoned in the host....both body and blood are present in Either the host or the wine.

It seems people are not too happy about drinking from the same cup. I think a new method has just not been thought of yet.

Did you know that when the wine is poured into the cup, a small amount of water is added...ot represents the Christian community.

Also, the wine must be pure, with nothing added.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

Jesus is not a man,,,He's God (wondering wrote in post #467)
Jesus was 100% man and 100% God (wondering wrote in #469)

So, wondering, which is it?

He is the God -man.
Sounds like superman, doesn't it?
Well, he was a superman, 'thee" superman.
Beyond superman.
Don't mess with him, just obey him.

 

[jaybo]

The priest does not withhold the cup....I believe I've explained this.

The Blood is also condoned in the host....both body and blood are present in Either the host or the wine.

It seems people are not too happy about drinking from the same cup. I think a new method has just not been thought of yet.

Did you know that when the wine is poured into the cup, a small amount of water is added...ot represents the Christian community.

Also, the wine must be pure, with nothing added.

The wine must be pure with nothing added, yet a small amount of water is added? No lo comprendo.

 

[GodsGrace]

The wine must be pure with nothing added, yet a small amount of water is added? No lo comprendo.

Lo siento.

 

[jaybo]

Lo siento.

De nada.

 

[GodsGrace]

The wine must be pure with nothing added, yet a small amount of water is added? No lo comprendo.

You should stop disliking your brother Christians Jaybo.
It would be nice.

You don't have to understand them to love them....
just do what Jesus said to do:

John 13:35
"By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another."


Now, about the wine....I have some time today:

I already explained why some water is mixed with wine.
Don't you find this to be a beautiful concept?

The wine is PERFECT, unadulterated, nothing added to the grapes.
Some water is ADDED to it....
The wine did not have water added to it BEFORE the time of communion.

It's OK if you don't understand this...I also don't understand much of what Christianity teaches in some denominations.
I just think it's not a good thing to hate them ---

 

[jaybo]

You should stop disliking your brother Christians Jaybo.
It would be nice.

You don't have to understand them to love them....
just do what Jesus said to do:

John 13:35
"By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another."


Now, about the wine....I have some time today:

I already explained why some water is mixed with wine.
Don't you find this to be a beautiful concept?

The wine is PERFECT, unadulterated, nothing added to the grapes.
Some water is ADDED to it....
The wine did not have water added to it BEFORE the time of communion.

It's OK if you don't understand this...I also don't understand much of what Christianity teaches in some denominations.
I just think it's not a good thing to hate them ---

Why do you say that I should stop disliking (hating??) my brother Christians? I consider that to be an unwarranted insult. If I disagree with some people, that doesn't mean I dislike them.

How would you judge Paul's message to the Galatians?

Galatians 1:6-10, "I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are following a different gospel— not that there really is another gospel, but there are some who are disturbing you and wanting to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we (or an angel from heaven) should preach a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be condemned to hell! As we have said before, and now I say again, if any one is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, let him be condemned to hell! Am I now trying to gain the approval of people, or of God? Or am I trying to please people? If I were still trying to please people, I would not be a slave of Christ!

 

[GodsGrace]

Why do you say that I should stop disliking (hating??) my brother Christians? I consider that to be an unwarranted insult. If I disagree with some people, that doesn't mean I dislike them.

How would you judge Paul's message to the Galatians?

Galatians 1:6-10, "I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are following a different gospel— not that there really is another gospel, but there are some who are disturbing you and wanting to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we (or an angel from heaven) should preach a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be condemned to hell! As we have said before, and now I say again, if any one is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, let him be condemned to hell! Am I now trying to gain the approval of people, or of God? Or am I trying to please people? If I were still trying to please people, I would not be a slave of Christ!

It's not an unwarranted insult if it's true.
Your dislike of the CC is very apparent...even after explaining about the wine and water you still posted in a most sarcastic way.

BTW,,,I forgot to answer you question about the 7 churches in Revelation.
They were the universal churches -- the catholic churches.
It was a church God was speaking to...not a denomination.
There was only ONE denomination...the one the Apostles left, and they were all dead by the time Revelation was written.
The Apostolic age was over and the Early Church had begun and was already spread over the area of Asia Minor and Rome.

Re your above question: Paul was right, of course. He was speaking to Galatians who were being drawn away by some other theories...
Paul himself states there cannot be another gospel...there is only one. Perhaps he meant the gospel of works for salvation. The CC does not teach salvation by works BTW.

 

[jaybo]

It's not an unwarranted insult if it's true.
Your dislike of the CC is very apparent...even after explaining about the wine and water you still posted in a most sarcastic way.

BTW,,,I forgot to answer you question about the 7 churches in Revelation.
They were the universal churches -- the catholic churches.
It was a church God was speaking to...not a denomination.
There was only ONE denomination...the one the Apostles left, and they were all dead by the time Revelation was written.
The Apostolic age was over and the Early Church had begun and was already spread over the area of Asia Minor and Rome.

Re your above question: Paul was right, of course. He was speaking to Galatians who were being drawn away by some other theories...
Paul himself states there cannot be another gospel...there is only one. Perhaps he meant the gospel of works for salvation. The CC does not teach salvation by works BTW.

I am sorry that my tone doesn't please you...

I am a Protestant and, yes, there is much about Catholicism that I don't like. IMHO it resembles the Old Covenant more than the New Covenant: a separate class of priests, ritual upon elaborate ritual, practices such as confessing one's sins to a priest for forgiveness, regarding specific (only) people as "saints" who are intermediaries between people and God, the unscriptural dividing of the Body of Christ into Catholics and all other Christians, etc.

If you don't want my participation in this subforum then just say so outright. I understand this to be a place for open and honest discussion, but if the posts must all agree with Catholic dogma then just say so.

 

[GodsGrace]

I am sorry that my tone doesn't please you...

I am a Protestant and, yes, there is much about Catholicism that I don't like. IMHO it resembles the Old Covenant more than the New Covenant: a separate class of priests, ritual upon elaborate ritual, practices such as confessing one's sins to a priest for forgiveness, regarding specific (only) people as "saints" who are intermediaries between people and God, the unscriptural dividing of the Body of Christ into Catholics and all other Christians, etc.

If you don't want my participation in this subforum then just say so outright. I understand this to be a place for open and honest discussion, but if the posts must all agree with Catholic dogma then just say so.

You're the one that said you had questions.
I'm willing to explain to you. It just seems like a waste of time. The CC made many mistakes.
I dislike what they did but we Protestants weren't very nice either in the beginning.

Let's remember that denominations are made up of men and we need to distinguish between man and the denomination.

 

[jaybo]

It's not an unwarranted insult if it's true.
Your dislike of the CC is very apparent...even after explaining about the wine and water you still posted in a most sarcastic way.

BTW,,,I forgot to answer you question about the 7 churches in Revelation.
They were the universal churches -- the catholic churches.
It was a church God was speaking to...not a denomination.
There was only ONE denomination...the one the Apostles left, and they were all dead by the time Revelation was written.
The Apostolic age was over and the Early Church had begun and was already spread over the area of Asia Minor and Rome.

Re your above question: Paul was right, of course. He was speaking to Galatians who were being drawn away by some other theories...
Paul himself states there cannot be another gospel...there is only one. Perhaps he meant the gospel of works for salvation. The CC does not teach salvation by works BTW.

It's not an unwarranted insult if it's true. That's a big "if". I disagree with much of what the Catholic church teaches and practices, as it is contrary to what the New Covenant is about. I won't go into the many ways that is the case, although I might at another time.

There were, of course, many churches other than those few mentioned in Revelation. John wrote to the seven churches that were in the province of Asia: Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea. Of course, not mentioned are the churches in Jerusalem, Rome, Galatia, Philippi, Colossae, Thessalonica, and there were probably others. So when you say that they were the universal churches -- the catholic churches -- there is no Biblical basis for saying that. Nor is there any basis for saying that there was only ONE denomination, since Paul wrote over and over about the differences and errors made by the individual churches.

That sums up why I believe what the Bible clearly teaches, not what the Catholic church teaches. There are other reasons -- too many to list now -- but that's it "in a nutshell".

Sola scriptura!

 

[GodsGrace]

It's not an unwarranted insult if it's true. That's a big "if". I disagree with much of what the Catholic church teaches and practices, as it is contrary to what the New Covenant is about. I won't go into the many ways that is the case, although I might at another time.

There were, of course, many churches other than those few mentioned in Revelation. John wrote to the seven churches that were in the province of Asia: Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea. Of course, not mentioned are the churches in Jerusalem, Rome, Galatia, Philippi, Colossae, Thessalonica, and there were probably others. So when you say that they were the universal churches -- the catholic churches -- there is no Biblical basis for saying that. Nor is there any basis for saying that there was only ONE denomination, since Paul wrote over and over about the differences and errors made by the individual churches.

That sums up why I believe what the Bible clearly teaches, not what the Catholic church teaches. There are other reasons -- too many to list now -- but that's it "in a nutshell".

Sola scriptura!

I agree with you about the authority of scripture.

When you say what the CC teaches, do you mean now or 500 years ago?

 

[jaybo]

I agree with you about the authority of scripture.

When you say what the CC teaches, do you mean now or 500 years ago?

I don't know what the CC taught 500 years ago. I had a very close Catholic friend from whom I learned -- in addition to what I observed in person and on TV -- about Catholicism (until he became a big fan of Donald Trump). We discussed the differences in our faith for many hours and I even attended mass with him. The more I learned and saw the more aggrieved I became: upset about the differences between what the CC teaches and practices and what the Bible teaches. The main problem I have is the attitude that if you're not a Catholic you're a member of a false church.

Without going into the many details, I believe that the CC is closer to the OT teachings and practices than it is to the NT teachings and practices. For example, a separate class of priests, confession and absolution of sins by those priests, idolatry (in the form of statues of "saints"), the unScriptural adoration of Mary, the depiction of Jesus still on the cross, the outrageous sins committed by some priests (and the cover-up by the Catholic church), the denial of communion to non-Catholics, the complexity and hierarchy of the clergy, etc.

My personal belief is that the Bible and the personal guidance of the Holy Spirit are the foundation of the Christian life. All the above hinders one having a personal relationship with God through Jesus Christ.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

I'm sure that lots and lots and lots of work a day Catholics are truly saved...

just not -because- of their Catholicism. make sense?

True, there are many Born-Again Catholics
Being born again isn't a "Theological" thing - it's relational - God by His Holy SPirit CONVICTS a person of their SIN, and of Judgement, and the person then (Hopefully) Surrenders to Him, and REpents of their SIN whereupon God Gifts them with saving Faith, and they are Born Again (Eph 2:8,9). Catholicism has nothing to do with any of that, and as a Born Again person takes Jesus' YOKE upon them, and begins to learn of HIM, they'll mature in the FAITH.

 

[Fastfredy0]

The main problem I have is the attitude that if you're not a Catholic you're a member of a false church.

Doesn't bother me much if one sincerely believes I am going to hell. If their doctrine is correct, then they are correct.
Can't blame one for their sincere beliefs unless they are being vindictive/unloving.

 

[jaybo]

I have a number of problems with Catholicism and the Catholic church. I can't discuss them all in one post, so let's discuss them one at a time...

Why does the Catholic church (and crucifixes) depict Jesus as 1) an emaciated European who is still 2) on the cross?

He was a Semite, most probably short in stature with a visage similar to all the other Semitic men of the time.

He is also (obviously) no longer on the cross!! He was removed by Nicodemus and placed in a tomb, from which He was resurrected.

What is the point of showing a suffering European dying a painful death (forever)?