Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
KiwiChristian

The error of the catholic "priest".

Recommended Posts

A study of the New Testament reveals that ALL Christians are priests. Peter said,"Be you yourselves as living stones, built thereon into a spiritual house,a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ." (1 Pet. 2:5).Thus,all Christians are of that holy priesthood and can offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.There is not a man or group of men on earth who can offer unto God spiritual sacrifices for others.
 
ALL Christians have the right to go to God through Jesus Christ, our High priest (Heb. 4:14-16). There is no priesthood on earth that has the right to forbid each Christian to go directly to God through Christ, or to assume the authority to administer graces and obtain mercy for others.
 
A Roman Catholic priest is one who acts in the place of Christ, supposedly making unbelievers into Christians by "baptising" them. He converts the bread into Christ's flesh in the mass, and he forgives sins in the confessional.
 
In the Bible, all ministers are called elders, bishops or pastors, all referring to the one office, but there is no office of "priest". Christ is our Great High Priest, the only mediator between God and man (1 Timothy 2:5), so there is no need for other priests to mediate for us. Peter never called himself a priest, but did call himself a "fellow elder". 1 Peter 5:1.
 
In Acts, there is no reference anywhere to a sacrificing priesthood. In Revelation 1:6 ("hath made us kings and priests unto God"), and in 1 Peter 2:5,9 ("ye are a holy priesthood", "ye are a royal priesthood"), all believers are priests and have direct access to God through
Christ. We don't offer an atoning sacrifice because only Christ did this on the cross. The only sacrifices we offer to God are prayers (Ephesians 6:18), praise and money (Hebrews 13:15,16), and ourselves in service to God (Romans 12:1). This Biblical truth of the
priesthood of all believers was rediscovered in the Protestant Reformation of the 1500's.
 
A pastor's real job is to preach the gospel, teach the Word of God and pray, not to hear confession, or change bread to flesh etc. Peter in 1 Peter 5 when he instructed fellow preachers, made no mention of any Roman Catholic priest’s practices of today.
  • Thumbs Up 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone else concluded that the reason there are so many pedophile Catholic Priest's, is because they are not allowed to have a normal sex life, (which the NT says is a doctrine of devils)....Yeah, it really teaches this Truth....> 1st Timothy 4:1-4.

So, is it any wonder that if this demonic Catholic theology is forced like a straitjacket on normal males, then many many many of them are going to find it impossible, at some point,  not to find some type of outlet for their normal God given, "replenish the species" sex drive that is strangled and unnaturally suppressed?

There IS a reason that the NT told us that it is,  "better to MARRY then to BURN".

So do you See what "BURNING" DOES< when it is inflicted on men by a false religious theocracy?

And its because of  this "burning", if not dealt with by sex, through marriage, or by man <> woman.......If this drive is subverted and harmed for the sake of Religious lies, then the outcome is that the males are going to reach out for the nearest RELIEF.

= Pedophilia.

Imagine a religious cult whose theological Doctrine actually causes perverted sexual practice, within their LEADERSHIP.

Well, the bad new is, you don't have to imagine it, as its a REALITY.

This is truly the insane asylum being run by the inmates.

Edited by Behold
  • This is Worthy 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/21/2018 at 6:01 PM, KiwiChristian said:
A study of the New Testament reveals that ALL Christians are priests. Peter said,"Be you yourselves as living stones, built thereon into a spiritual house,a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ." (1 Pet. 2:5).Thus,all Christians are of that holy priesthood and can offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.There is not a man or group of men on earth who can offer unto God spiritual sacrifices for others.
 
ALL Christians have the right to go to God through Jesus Christ, our High priest (Heb. 4:14-16). There is no priesthood on earth that has the right to forbid each Christian to go directly to God through Christ, or to assume the authority to administer graces and obtain mercy for others.
 
A Roman Catholic priest is one who acts in the place of Christ, supposedly making unbelievers into Christians by "baptising" them. He converts the bread into Christ's flesh in the mass, and he forgives sins in the confessional.
 
In the Bible, all ministers are called elders, bishops or pastors, all referring to the one office, but there is no office of "priest". Christ is our Great High Priest, the only mediator between God and man (1 Timothy 2:5), so there is no need for other priests to mediate for us. Peter never called himself a priest, but did call himself a "fellow elder". 1 Peter 5:1.
 
In Acts, there is no reference anywhere to a sacrificing priesthood. In Revelation 1:6 ("hath made us kings and priests unto God"), and in 1 Peter 2:5,9 ("ye are a holy priesthood", "ye are a royal priesthood"), all believers are priests and have direct access to God through
Christ. We don't offer an atoning sacrifice because only Christ did this on the cross. The only sacrifices we offer to God are prayers (Ephesians 6:18), praise and money (Hebrews 13:15,16), and ourselves in service to God (Romans 12:1). This Biblical truth of the
priesthood of all believers was rediscovered in the Protestant Reformation of the 1500's.
 
A pastor's real job is to preach the gospel, teach the Word of God and pray, not to hear confession, or change bread to flesh etc. Peter in 1 Peter 5 when he instructed fellow preachers, made no mention of any Roman Catholic priest’s practices of today.

 

 

A study of the New Testament reveals that ALL Christians are priests. Peter said, "Be you yourselves as living stones, built thereon into a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ."

 

Permit me to respond to the points you have made, which I have numbered.

 

I’ll begin by sharing an INFALLIBLE RULE FOR RIGHT UNDERSTANDING OF THE BIBLE:

 

Never EVER, Can, May, or Does one single verse; passage or teaching invalidate, override, or make VOID; another verse, passage or teaching: were this even the slightest possibility {ITS NOT!}; it would render the entire bible as being worthless to discover GOD’S TRUTHS.

 

2 Tim. 3: 16-17 “[16] All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice, [17] That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.”

Douay Bible Explanation:” [16] "All scripture,": Every part of divine scripture is certainly profitable for all these ends. But, if we would have the whole rule of Christian faith and practice, we must not be content with those Scriptures, which Timothy knew from his infancy, that is, with the Old Testament alone: nor yet with the New Testament, without taking along with it the traditions of the apostles, and the interpretation of the church, to which the apostles delivered both the book, and the true meaning of it.” End Quotes

 

No my friend; you’re not understanding this fully.

 

Haydock Bible commentary:

Verse 5 
“You also....a holy (2) priesthood; and, as he saith again, (ver. 9.) a royal priesthood. 1. Because they had ministers of God, who were truly and properly priests, of whom Christ is the chief. 2. Every good Christian in a less proper sense may be called a priest, inasmuch as he offers to God what in a less proper and metaphorical sense may be called sacrifices and oblations; that is, the sacrifice of an humble and contrite heart, (Psalm l.) the sacrifice of self-denials and mortifications, or prayer, almsdeeds, &c. And it is called a royal priesthood, as Christians may be called metaphorically kings, by governing their passions, or because they are invited to reign with Christ in his kingdom, to sit on his throne, &c. See Apocalypse iii. 21. &c. (Witham)”

 

2 Peter 1: 18-21

[18] And this voice we heard brought from heaven, when we were with him in the holy mount. [19] And we have the more firm prophetical word: whereunto you do well to attend, as to a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts[20] Understanding this first, that no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation. [21] For prophecy came not by the will of man at any time: but the holy men of God spoke, inspired by the Holy Ghost.

DOUAY BIBLE INTERPERATION [20] "No prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation": This shews plainly that the scriptures are not to be expounded by any one's private judgment or private spirit, because every part of the holy scriptures were written by men inspired by the Holy Ghost, and declared as such by the Church; therefore they are not to be interpreted but by the Spirit of God, which he hath left, and promised to remain with his Church to guide her in all truth to the end: END QUOTES

 

Permit be to guide you to correct and a fuller understanding of this statement.

 

When taking upon oneself the weighty “authority” to self-interpret the bible one {very often given the huge number of Protestant churches; EACH identified by its OWN chosen understanding of Sacred Scripture} often is led to either an incorrect, or an incomplete understanding, which is precisely why Jesus; as did Yahweh, choose just “ONE.”

 

One True God

One True Faith

One Chosen People Exo. 6:7; which Jesus perfected with “MY CHURCH” Mt 16:18 {notably singular.}

 

Giving humanity the added advantage on being able to GRASP His Truths; tied to the number “One.” … BY having just One TRUE-Truth, the odds {not the facts} are better that it will be missed.

 

Hence Jesus freely choose to form One True Church that would be the harbinger of HIS Good News. That Church, historically and Biblically is today’s RCC. Even then the Holy Spirit protects His Church from error; {Jn.17:17-20}even by us Catholics; by insisting that HIS Truths MUST {absolutely} align with the Catholic Ordinary Magisterium, to be assured that it IS God’s Truth.

 

Eph. 20:19-22 [19] Now therefore you are no more strangers and foreigners; but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and the domestics of God, [20] Built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone: [21] In whom all the building, being framed together, groweth up into an holy temple in the Lord. [22] In whom you also are built together into an habitation of God in the Spirit.

Even this requires further explanation:

 

My friend the Bible is a Catholic BIRTHED book:

 

It was the early Fathers who amidst much debate and HS guidance; who selected the 46 OT books to be included. And it was men known today to be Catholics {6 of them Apostles} who AUTHORED the entire New Testament.

 

This is both historically and Biblically provable. Thus anytime one reads the term “church” or “churches”; it is a direct and exclusive reference to today’s RCC. The Bible was fully authored around the END of the 1st Century. The Reformation being still some 1,400 years distant.

 

To claim that “WE ARE A PREISTLY PEOPLE” is to imply that Catholic laity are to emulate our Priest in their holiness. {YES I am aware that this grave obligation is at times abused.} Further it also means that like our Priest WE are to offer OUR sacrifices with AND through them. {“With” at the Consecration of the Most Holy Eucharist; NOT that we add anything beyond our personal intentions}; through them is a similar act as the OT Priest offered up Sacrifices to God on their behalf.

 

 

(1 Pet. 2:5).Thus, all Christians are of that holy priesthood and can offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. There is not a man or group of men on earth who can offer unto God spiritual sacrifices for others.**[/quote]

 

REPLACE” of THAT holy priesthood” with the explanation with what I have shared above and you’d be far more correct.

 

** REALLY?

Mt. 10: 1-5[1] And having called his twelve disciples together, he gave THEM {SOME OFHIS} power over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of diseases, and all manner of infirmities[2] And the names of the twelve apostles are these: The first, Simon who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother, [3] James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, Philip and Bartholomew, Thomas and Matthew the publican, and James the son of Alpheus, and Thaddeus, [4] Simon the Cananean, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him. [5] These twelve Jesus sent: commanding THEM saying: Go ye not into the way of the Gentiles, and into the city of the Samaritans enter ye not.”

 

Mt. 16: 15-19[15] Jesus saith to them: But whom do YOU SAY that I am?

[16] Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God. [17]And Jesus answering, said TO HIM Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. [18]And I say TO YOU That thou art Peter; and upon {YOU} this rock I will build MY CHURCH {SINGULAR} , and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. [19] And I will GIVE TO YOU ALL OF}the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever YOU shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever YOU shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven. 

FYI; These 2 terms “to bind” & “to Loose” had 2 meanings:

In That time and place of the walled in city of Jerusalem it was the NORM {when NOT under Roman Rule} that each such city would have a King; this king would as the NORM, appoint a Prime Minister to handle ALL of the cities day-to-day affairs ANSWERABLE only to the KING. …This is the precise model Christ had in mind in appointing Peter to be Christ THE KINGS Prime-minster. Jesus appointed Peter to be HIS Prime-minster; to handle ALL day-today decisions; and to do WHATEVER he deemed best for the Salvation of Souls; answerable ONLY to the KING Jesus.

DOUAY EXPLANTION [18] "Thou art Peter": As St. Peter, by divine revelation, here made a solemn profession of his faith of the divinity of Christ; so in recompense of this faith and profession, our Lord here declares to him the dignity to which he is pleased to raise him: viz., that he to whom he had already given the name of Peter, signifying a rock, St. John 1. 42, should be a rock indeed, of invincible strength, for the support of the building of the church; in which building he should be, next to Christ himself, the chief foundation stone, in quality of chief pastor, ruler, and governor; and should have accordingly all fulness of ecclesiastical power, signified by the keys of the kingdom of heaven.

[18] "Upon this rock": The words of Christ to Peter, spoken in the vulgar language of the Jews which our Lord made use of, were the same as if he had said in English, Thou art a Rock, and upon this rock I will build my church. So that, by the plain course of the words, Peter is here declared to be the rock, upon which the church was to be built: Christ himself being both the principal foundation and founder of the same. Where also note, that Christ, by building his house, that is, his church, upon a rock, has thereby secured it against all storms and floods, like the wise builder, St. Matt. 7. 24, 25.

[18] "The gates of hell": That is, the powers of darkness, and whatever Satan can do, either by himself, or his agents. For as the church is here likened to a house, or fortress, built on a rock; so the adverse powers are likened to a contrary house or fortress, the gates of which, that is, the whole strength, and all the efforts it can make, will never be able to prevail over the city or church of Christ. By this promise we are fully assured, that neither idolatry, heresy, nor any pernicious error whatsoever shall at any time prevail over the church of Christ.”

 

John 17: 17-20 [17] Sanctify THEM in truth. Thy word is truth. [18] As thou hast sent me into the world, I HAVE ALSO SENT THEM into the world. [19] And NOT for THEM only do I pray, but for them also who through their word shall believe in me;

 

Here Jesus again transfers some of His POWER and ALL of HIS Authority to Peter and the Apostles. Further Christ here is giving HIMSELF as the Personal WARRANTY of His One TRUE CHURCH and His Apostles and their Successors to teach ONLY His Trues without even the possibility of error on ALL matters of Faith and Morals.

 

THIS TEACHING AFFIRMS THE RCC AS THE ONLY CHURCH & FAITH THAT CAN EVIDENCE THE STATEMENT THAT CHRIST HIMSELF IS OUR PERSONAL WARRANTY OF TEACHING THE FULLNESS OF HIS TRUTHS ACCURATELY

Luke.10:16 "He who hears YOU hears ME, and he who rejects YOU REJECTS ME, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me."

Mt. 28: 18-20[18] And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. [19] Going therefore, teach YOU all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. [20] Teaching them to observe ALL THINGS whatsoever I have commanded YOU: and behold I am with YOU all days, even to the consummation of the world.”

Douay Bible Explanation [18] "All power": See here the warrant and commission of the apostles and their successors, the bishops and pastors of Christ's church. He received from his Father all power in heaven and in earth: and in virtue of this power, he sends them (even as his Father sent him, St. John 20. 21) to teach and disciple, not one, but all nations; and instruct them in all truths: and that he may assist them effectually in the execution of this commission, he promises to be with them, not for three or four hundred years only, but all days, even to the consummation of the world. How then could the Catholic Church ever go astray; having always with her pastors, as is here promised, Christ himself, who is the way, the truth, and the life. St. John 14”.

My friend the SUMMARY of the above is that your stated position is at best presumptuous; and not Biblically provable.

 

 

ALL Christians have the right to go to God through Jesus Christ, our High priest (Heb. 4:14-16). There is no priesthood on earth that has the right to forbid each Christian to go directly to God through Christ, or to assume the authority to administer graces and obtain mercy for others.

 

THE RCC COULD NOT AGREE WITH YOU MORE ON THIS RIGHT.

 

Friend it MIGHT not be the most effective way; and CERTAINLY is not the ONLY way.

 

 

A Roman Catholic priest is one who acts in the place of Christ, supposedly making unbelievers into Christians by "baptizing" them. He converts the bread into Christ's flesh in the mass, and he forgives sins in the confessional.

 

WOW, with this right understanding you ought to be a CATHOLIC!

 

Catholic Priest are to be Role Models of Jesus Himself for us {From MY Lips to GOD’S ears}.

 

Actually trying with God’s help and grace to make all humanity into Catholics. Christian Baptism {not only Catholic Baptism} done with water and in the Name of the Blessed Trinity makes the Baptized a child of Christ; and highly conditionally; able to enter into heaven.

 

And YES, Catholic Priest are able to convert ordinary bread and wine into the VERY Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ THAT VERY SAME JESUS WHO DIED FOR US ON THE CROSS. IT IS THAT IDENTICAL {ORIGINAL} DIVINE SACRIFICE {MIRACLE & MYSTERY} THAT IS “RE-PRESENTED” TIME AND TIME AGAIN. NOT REPRESENTED; NO; “RE-PRESENTED.” Mt 26: 26-28; Mk. 14: 22-14; Lk. 22: 17-20 : Paul 1st. Cor. 11:23-30 & John 6: {all of it} here are verses 56-57[56] For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed. [57] He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in him.”

 

Verse 57 precisely describes what DOES take place in Catholic Holy Communion.

 

As for sin forgiveness: Yes, again Catholic Priest; acting on behalf of Jesus Christ:

John 20:19-23 “ [19] Now when it was late that same day, the first of the week, and the doors were shut, where the disciples were gathered together, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in the midst, and said to them: Peace be to you. [20] And when he had said this, he shewed them his hands and his side. The disciples therefore were glad, when they saw the Lord.

[21] He said therefore to them again: Peace be to you. As the Father hath sent me, I also send you. [22] When he had said this, he breathed on THEM; and he said to THEM Receive YOU the Holy Ghost. [23] Whose sins YOU shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins YOU shall retain, they are retained.”

And I thank you for pointing this out for US.

 

 

In the Bible, all ministers are called elders, bishops or pastors, all referring to the one office, but there is no office of "priest". Christ is our Great High Priest, the only mediator between God and man (1 Timothy 2:5), so there is no need for other priests to mediate for us. Peter never called himself a priest, but did call himself a "fellow elder". 1 Peter 5:1.

 

Thanks again for pointing this out. Indeed Peter did not call himself a “priest” {he was a {Bishop}, but did not even call himself by THAT title: THEY were called the “Apostles.”

 

The RCC is both pragmatic and organic. By “organic” I means She {“Mother Church”} can and does grow. Keep in mind at that time and place the NEW FAITH; New RELIGION was in competition even when Jesus was STILL on earth; with the OT Jewish Religion; {WHICH HAD PRIEST} and was the One God & One Faith proving grounds which Jesus was NOW PERFECTING & organically growing with the SAME One God ONLY-One True Faith; only NOW it was the SAME God; BUT an Entirely New One True Faith that did NOT void the OT teachings; rather it perfected and overrode them. … Rom. 6: 14-15  [14] For sin shall not have dominion over you; for you are not under the law, but under grace. [15] What then? Shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.” …

 

As the New “THE WAY” church grew in membership; the Holy Spirit also enabled it to grow in Wisdom and Understanding. To AID this understanding “The WAY” {the original  name for todays’ RCC} began to develop its OWN Organic-growth-terminology; which too, being Organic changed & grew with the Church-growth.

 

“Priest” from the Catholic Encyclopedia:

Priest This word (etymologically "elder", from presbyterospresbyter) has taken the meaning of "sacerdos", from which no substantive has been formed in various modern languages (English, French, German). The priest is the minister of Divine worship, and especially of the highest act of worship, sacrifice. In this sense, every religion has its priests, exercising more or less exalted sacerdotal functions as intermediaries between man and the Divinity (cf. Hebrews 5:1: "for every high priest taken from among men, is ordained for men in the things that appertain to God, that he may offer up gifts and sacrifices for sins"). In various ages and countries we find numerous and important differences: the priest properly so called may be assisted by inferior ministers of many kinds; he may belong to a special class or caste, to a clergy, or else may be like other citizens except in what concerns his sacerdotal functions; he may be a member of a hierarchy, or, on the contrary, may exercise an independent priesthood (e.g. MelchisedechHebrews 7:1-33)”

That the Apostles appointed Bishops is clear:

"Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood."
[Acts Of Apostles 20:28]

"Paul and Timothy, the servants of Jesus Christ; to all the saints in Christ Jesus, who are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons."
[Philippians 1:1]

That the {unnamed} position of Priest as we know them today; were ALSO appointed is also evident in the Bible.

 

Lk. 10: 1-5[1] And after these things the Lord appointed also other seventy-two: and he sent them two and two before his face into every city and place whither he himself was to come. [2] And he said to them: The harvest indeed is great, but the labourers are few. Pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he send labourers into his harvest. [3] Go: Behold I send you as lambs among wolves. [4] Carry neither purse, nor scrip, nor shoes; and salute no man by the way. [5] Into whatsoever house you enter, first say: Peace be to this house.”

 

Acts 12: 28 [28] And God indeed hath set some in the church; first apostles, secondly prophets, thirdly doctors; after that miracles; then the graces of healing, helps, governments, kinds of tongues, interpretations of speeches.”

 

1 Titus 1: 5 [5] For this cause I left thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and shouldest ordain priests in every city, as I also appointed thee”

 

And NO; all the tiles DID NOT refer to “one office”; ONE MISSION, yes; but with different ranks of authority; is a loose way, following OT Priestly responsibilities which had carried over to the THEN present Jewish Religious hierarchy.

 

 

In Acts, there is no reference anywhere to a sacrificing priesthood. In Revelation 1:6 ("hath made us kings and priests unto God"), and in 1 Peter 2:5,9 ("ye are a holy priesthood", "ye are a royal priesthood"), all believers are priests and have direct access to God through

Christ. We don't offer an atoning sacrifice because only Christ did this on the cross. The only sacrifices we offer to God are prayers (Ephesians 6:18), praise and money (Hebrews 13:15,16), and ourselves in service to God (Romans 12:1). This Biblical truth of the

priesthood of all believers was rediscovered in the Protestant Reformation of the 1500's.

 

I think this has already been addressed by me

 

 

A pastor's real job is to preach the gospel, teach the Word of God and pray, not to hear confession, or change bread to flesh etc. Peter in 1 Peter 5 when he instructed fellow preachers, made no mention of any Roman Catholic priest’s practices of today. END QUOTES

 

My Dear friend in Christ,

 

Thank you for your POST.

  

REALLY {HUGE smile here}

 

Mt. 26: [26] And whilst they were at supper, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke: and gave to his disciples, and said: Take ye, and eat. This is my body. [27] And taking the chalice, he gave thanks, and gave to them, sayingDrink ye all of this[28] For this is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many unto remission of sins.”

 

Mk. 14:”[22] And whilst they were eating, Jesus took bread; and blessing, broke, and gave to them, and said: Take ye. This is my body. [23] And having taken the chalice, giving thanks, he gave it to them. And they all drank of it. [24] And he said to them: This is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many.” 

Lk. 22 [17] And having taken the chalice, he gave thanks, and said: Take, and divide it among you: [18] For I say to you, that I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, till the kingdom of God come. [19] And taking bread, he gave thanks, and brake; and gave to them, saying: This is my body, which is given for you. Do this for a commemoration of me. [20] In like manner the chalice also, after he had supped, saying: This is the chalice, the new testament in my blood, which shall be shed for you.”

Douay Bible Explanation: [19] "Do this for a commemoration of me": This sacrifice and sacrament is to be continued in the church, to the end of the world, to shew forth the death of Christ, until he cometh. But this commemoration, or remembrance, is by no means inconsistent with the real presence of his body and blood, under these sacramental veils, which represent his death; on the contrary, it is the manner that he himself hath commanded, of commemorating and celebrating his death, by offering in sacrifice, and receiving in the sacrament, that body and blood by which we were redeemed. End QUOTES

Paul: 1st Cor. 11:23-30 [23] For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread. [24] And giving thanks, broke, and said: Take ye, and eat: this is my body, which shall be delivered for you: this do for the commemoration of me. [25] In like manner also the chalice, after he had supped, saying: This chalice is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as often as you shall drink, for the commemoration of me. [26] For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until he come. [27] Therefore whosoever shall eat this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord. [28] But let a man prove himself: and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice[29] For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. [30] Therefore are there many infirm and weak among you, and many sleep.” {“sleep” here means self imposed eternal damnation: HELL!}

 

Douay Explanation [27] "Or drink": Here erroneous translators corrupted the text, by putting and drink (contrary to the original) instead of or drink.

[27] "Guilty of the body": not discerning the body. This demonstrates the real presence of the body and blood of Christ, even to the unworthy communicant; who otherwise could not be guilty of the body and blood of Christ, or justly condemned for not discerning the Lord's body.

[28] "Drink of the chalice": This is not said by way of command, but by way of allowance, viz., where and when it is agreeable to the practice and discipline of the church. END QUOTES

John 6: 47-56[47] Amen, amen I say unto you: He that believeth in me, hath everlasting life. [48] I am the bread of life. [49] Your fathers did eat manna in the desert, and are dead. [50] This is the bread which cometh down from heaven; that if any man eat of it, he may not die.

[51] I am the living bread which came down from heaven[52] If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world. [53] The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat? [54] Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you[55] He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day.

Douay Bile Explanation: [54] "Eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood": To receive the body and blood of Christ, is a divine precept, insinuated in this text; which the faithful fulfil, though they receive but in one kind; because in one kind they receive both body and blood, which cannot be separated from each other. Hence, life eternal is here promised to the worthy receiving, though but in one kind. Ver. 52. If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh for the life of the world. Ver. 58. He that eateth me, the same also shall live by me. Ver. 59. He that eateth this bread, shall live for ever.”

[56] For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed. [57] He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in him.”

 

As for Christ Priest and the forgiveness of sins GOD’S WAY: Why my new friend do YOU suppose this is in the Bible IF God did not intend it to be so?

John 20:19-23 [19] Now when it was late that same day, the first of the week, and the doors were shut, where the disciples were gathered together, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in the midst, and said to them: Peace be to you. [20] And when he had said this, he shewed them his hands and his side. The disciples therefore were glad, when they saw the Lord. [21] He said therefore to them again: Peace be to you. As the Father hath sent me, I also send YOU. [22] When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: Receive YOU the Holy Ghost. [23] Whose sins YOU shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins YOU shall retain, they are retained. “

So my friend: a rhetorical question: was Jesus inventing the “wheel” here or only perfecting it?

 

Exodus 28: 1[1] Take unto thee also Aaron thy brother with his sons, from among the children of Israel, that they may minister to me in the priest's office: Aaron, Nadab, and Abiu, Eleazar, and Ithamar.”

 

Lev. 5: 16-18 “[16] And he shall make good the damage itself which he hath done, and shall add the fifth part besides, delivering it to the priest, who shall pray for him, offering the ram, and it shall be forgiven him. [17] If any one sin through ignorance, and do one of those things which by the law of the Lord are forbidden, and being guilty of sin, understand his iniquity, [18] He shall offer of the flocks a ram without blemish to the priest, according to the measure and estimation of the sin: and the priest shall pray for him, because he did it ignorantly: and it shall be forgiven him”

 

Easter Blessings and THANKS for the opportunity to share the REST OF THE STORY.

Patrick

PS: GOD never intended that EVERYTHING be in His Bible, which is historically, logically and even Biblically provable.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Yowm said:

I'll just take the first...

We have the traditions of the Apostles and their interpretation contained in the NT. Even if all we had was the OT, that would be sufficient according to 2 Tim 3:16-17 cited above.

No my friend; that is an untenable position. HERE"S WHY

The Birth of the GOD-man was a world changing event.

Here are a few reasons GOD choose to become a mortal man like US; in every way BUT sin.

Yahweh {God} in the Old Testament times was a complete Mystery; He  was a voice from Heaven; in a burning bush; in a cloud; but never really "face to face". John 4:23-24 tells us clearly: "GOD IS A SPIRIT."

Religious Jews at the time, and even at present will not actually say G__D's name; in awe and Wonder of the Almighty.

Jesus changed that. Imagine coming actually face to face with GOD!  the Creator of the Universe; the giver and sustainer of ALL life forms. The unlimited and Perfect Good; the giver of all good things.

[1]Jesus came as Redeemer which He accomplished for every human Soul ever to exist, and even those who will exist in the future.

[2] One of the God imposed penalties of the Original Sin of Adam through Eve {for  whom Adam was responsible} was the reopening of Heaven's Gate which had been closed even before it was used. ... Genesis 3:  [24] "And he cast out Adam; and placed before the paradise of pleasure Cherubims, and a flaming sword, turning every way, to keep the way of the tree of life."

[3] Equally important is that Jesus also came to {highly conditional} to be humanities Savior. This was by His intent to be made a possibility by establishing "MY Church" {singular, Mt 16:18]. And as every church is identified by its chosen set of Faith-Beliefs; we CAN know that Jesus intended this One True Church to be the harbinger of His One True set of Faith beliefs.

[4]  What Jesus did was radically NEW.  We could NOW  place a face on our God who actually modeled for US by His Life's example; the true PATH to our Salvation. His Faith was to BE OUR Faith. We could NOW with humility and a willingness to listen to His Church; LEARN all that He expects from His Humanity. ... Luke.10 16 "He who hears YOU {singular} hears me, and he who rejects YOU rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me."

[5] No my friend; the Old Testament was a precursor; and introduction; a setting of the NEW Stage of Life; a Life that was Perfected by Jesus' Coming.  ... Acts.1323 "Of this man's posterity God has brought to Israel a Savior, Jesus, as he promised." But the Old Testament is not to be ignored; among many other Lessons' it teaches humanity exactly WHY we exist: Isaiah 43: 7 & 21 ". [7] And every one that calleth upon my name, I have created him for my glory, I have formed him, and made him. & [21] This people have I formed for myself, they shall shew forth my praise." .... So we are to marry the OT with the NT to gain a full understanding of God's explanations for us..... Mt 16:24 {ONLY a few verses after He had appointed Peter to Lead His New One God; One Faith & through One Church: ...  [24]Then Jesus said to his disciples: If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. [25] For he that will save his life, shall lose it: and he that shall lose his life for my sake, shall find it.

[6]So o the rewards are greater; God's expectations are greater; and NOW under grace {Rom. 6:14-15} all possibilities are GREATER.  The Old Testament introduces the NT, which fulfills it and Perfects it. Through Christ Church & and the Sacraments HE Instituted; life's difficulties CAN be met and overcome. Amen.

Easter Blessings,

Patrick

 

 

 

 

 

tree of life.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Yowm said:

All that for?

Apparently you disagree with Paul (2Tim 3:16-17) and Jesus...

And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.
(Luk 24:27)
 

 

 

On your first part: No, it is you my friend who is not grasping the entire truth: One True God, FAITH & Church {Read John 17:17-20 paying particular attention to the singular tese words}

As to your second point: Christ is no longer here to interpret; SO He established His RCC to do it on His behalf. Mt. 10: 1-8 ;Mt. 16:15-19; Mt 28:18-20

 

Thank YOU for sharing your thoughts,

Easter Blessings,

Patrick

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Didache was written during the time that the Gospels were recorded.  Why is it that the Catholic churches are so unlike the churches described in the Didache?  This book was an appendix to the early scrolls collected as the New Testament, and for around 400 years was used to teach new converts about the Sacraments, and about morals being also taught in the Scriptures.  

The Douay commentary is not God's word.  It is man's thoughts.  The Holy Spirit was given to all born again believers and is not limited to the Catholic church.  

It is so sad that the Catholic church as strayed so far from the truth of Scriptures that is plainly understood by the majority of true Christians.  There would never have been a reformation were this not true.  It is especially sad when the Scriptures are deliberately twisted to give the institution more power and riches.  It is deliberate deception.  Satan is the deceiver of the brethren and is at work in all churches that deliberately practice deception.  The true head of the Church is Christ.  We are to obey Him, not a mortal or an institution.  

2Pe 3:15 ESV And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him,  2Pe 3:16  as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Davida said:

[1]Gee Patrick, LOL! it is like you are trying to smother anyone who disagrees with the  RCC Doctrine by huge roving posts in gigantic fonts.  But , :PNever fear,even still  I did not loose complete consciousness! :) 

[2]The LORD God is sovereign and so it is the LORD God -who over saw the Bible & it was the reading & study of  word of GOD that triggered the Reformation through Luther.  Sorry to tell you, opposed to what you & all the RC's are taught & what the RCC even brags about , the Bible is not catholic birthed. 

[3]Roman Catholicism Misinterprets the Bible to Prop up their phony man-made apostate traditions to have a higher authority then the Bible scripture. 

[4]Nowhere does the Bible preach for celibate priests to officiate over the assembly of Believers & act in the place of God to forgive sins, not to mention preaching doctrines separate from the Bible. The RC priests are not the royal priesthood. The born again believers are the royal priesthood and we are also called saints. The Bible gives us examples of Pastors - of overseers , shepherds not ornate  Priests quite dressed up in fancy garb like the Jewish religious priests with self-made  high traditions & office that went after the Lord Jesus. 

[5] 2Peter 1:18 was talking about prophesying - he was not referring to individuals reading scripture. The Lord Jesus gave us the example of  reading scripture in the synagogues and also the proper applying & using scripture for instruction. 

THANKS for reading my POST.

[1] Please know that I AM NOT in the "conversion" business; THAT is God's exclusive domain. I'm just a conduit of His Truths. I over explain & over provide evidence of sated positions in the prayerful hope that one MIGHT recolonize these obvious facts.

[2] Please do help me out here. WHERE EXACTLY in the bible are the teachings that somehow encouraged the Protestant revolution?

And IF the bible is NOT "Catholic Birthed"; EXACTLY HOW did it come into existence & based on what evidence?

[3] As the Bible historically {GOOGLE the history of the bible} and discover for yourself that it is a Catholic book; and actually the RCC does have in a theological sense a position at least Equal to the Bible as the seat of Christ Seven Sacraments {one of which is JESUS Himself}; & God's WAY for sin forgiveness {John 20:19-23}

[4] your comments indicate your lack of right understanding of the bible. PLEASE then explain to me what you perceive as being the correct interpretation of Mt 10:1-8; Mt 16:15-19 ; John 17: 17-20; Eph 2: 19-22; Eph. 4: 1-6; & Mt 28:18-20. If I'm WRONG PROVE IT.

[5] REALLY: Prove it.

2 Peter 1: 18-21

[20] Understanding this first, that no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation. [21] For prophecy came not by the will of man at any time: but the holy men of God spoke, inspired by the Holy Ghost.

 

2nd Peter 3: 14-18

“Therefore, beloved, since you wait for these, be zealous to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace. And count the forbearance of our Lord as salvation. So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures. You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, beware lest you be carried away with the error of lawless men and lose your own stability. But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be the glory both now and to the day of eternity. Amen”

Sorry I don't know how to change the front size; I'm not "shouting" ....the main reason that MY POST are lengthy is that I not only makes "charges"; BUT then provide the evidence that supports them. It would add significant weight to your positions, if you did more than disagree; but provide the evidence of your personal opinions. I'm retired so I do have the time to read lengthy POST.

God Bless you and thanks for your POST. Patrick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Yowm said:

True Church? It is all who are born again since Pentecost. Or maybe we should ask the Eastern Orthodox if you are speaking of outward institutions.

Jesus left us the Author of the Holy Scriptures to interpret as well as His Word is self interpreting. But if you are not born again your interpretation most likely will be after the craftiness of men.

 

 

First THANKS for your POST reply.

REALLY: so then please explain why in the Protestant communion their ARE thousands of different churches. WHAT my friend makes them [1] do this [2] different {3] and what and why are they separated {and please don't tell me they are All equal or alike; THAT's a cop-out.}s to your second position: Please prove to me that the Bible is NOT a "Catholic birthed book" as I ascertained. ....  And who; on what evidence, is the "Author" of Holy Scriptura IF it was NOT the Catholic Authors; their Faith and their Church?

HOW my new friend do YOU explain that it was exclusively today's RCC {as thee exclusive Christians for 1,000 years} that interpreted the bible; and NOW no-longer can?  I don't get it?

Easter Blessings,

Patrick

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/3/2018 at 12:18 PM, Patrick Miron said:

 

 

 

 

Permit me to respond to the points you have made, which I have numbered.

 

I’ll begin by sharing an INFALLIBLE RULE FOR RIGHT UNDERSTANDING OF THE BIBLE:

 

Never EVER, Can, May, or Does one single verse; passage or teaching invalidate, override, or make VOID; another verse, passage or teaching: were this even the slightest possibility {ITS NOT!}; it would render the entire bible as being worthless to discover GOD’S TRUTHS.

 

2 Tim. 3: 16-17 “[16] All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice, [17] That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.”

Douay Bible Explanation:” [16] "All scripture,": Every part of divine scripture is certainly profitable for all these ends. But, if we would have the whole rule of Christian faith and practice, we must not be content with those Scriptures, which Timothy knew from his infancy, that is, with the Old Testament alone: nor yet with the New Testament, without taking along with it the traditions of the apostles, and the interpretation of the church, to which the apostles delivered both the book, and the true meaning of it.” End Quotes

 

No my friend; you’re not understanding this fully.

 

Haydock Bible commentary:

Verse 5 
“You also....a holy (2) priesthood; and, as he saith again, (ver. 9.) a royal priesthood. 1. Because they had ministers of God, who were truly and properly priests, of whom Christ is the chief. 2. Every good Christian in a less proper sense may be called a priest, inasmuch as he offers to God what in a less proper and metaphorical sense may be called sacrifices and oblations; that is, the sacrifice of an humble and contrite heart, (Psalm l.) the sacrifice of self-denials and mortifications, or prayer, almsdeeds, &c. And it is called a royal priesthood, as Christians may be called metaphorically kings, by governing their passions, or because they are invited to reign with Christ in his kingdom, to sit on his throne, &c. See Apocalypse iii. 21. &c. (Witham)”

 

2 Peter 1: 18-21

[18] And this voice we heard brought from heaven, when we were with him in the holy mount. [19] And we have the more firm prophetical word: whereunto you do well to attend, as to a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts[20] Understanding this first, that no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation. [21] For prophecy came not by the will of man at any time: but the holy men of God spoke, inspired by the Holy Ghost.

DOUAY BIBLE INTERPERATION [20] "No prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation": This shews plainly that the scriptures are not to be expounded by any one's private judgment or private spirit, because every part of the holy scriptures were written by men inspired by the Holy Ghost, and declared as such by the Church; therefore they are not to be interpreted but by the Spirit of God, which he hath left, and promised to remain with his Church to guide her in all truth to the end: END QUOTES

 

Permit be to guide you to correct and a fuller understanding of this statement.

 

When taking upon oneself the weighty “authority” to self-interpret the bible one {very often given the huge number of Protestant churches; EACH identified by its OWN chosen understanding of Sacred Scripture} often is led to either an incorrect, or an incomplete understanding, which is precisely why Jesus; as did Yahweh, choose just “ONE.”

 

One True God

One True Faith

One Chosen People Exo. 6:7; which Jesus perfected with “MY CHURCH” Mt 16:18 {notably singular.}

 

Giving humanity the added advantage on being able to GRASP His Truths; tied to the number “One.” … BY having just One TRUE-Truth, the odds {not the facts} are better that it will be missed.

 

Hence Jesus freely choose to form One True Church that would be the harbinger of HIS Good News. That Church, historically and Biblically is today’s RCC. Even then the Holy Spirit protects His Church from error; {Jn.17:17-20}even by us Catholics; by insisting that HIS Truths MUST {absolutely} align with the Catholic Ordinary Magisterium, to be assured that it IS God’s Truth.

 

Eph. 20:19-22 [19] Now therefore you are no more strangers and foreigners; but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and the domestics of God, [20] Built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone: [21] In whom all the building, being framed together, groweth up into an holy temple in the Lord. [22] In whom you also are built together into an habitation of God in the Spirit.

Even this requires further explanation:

 

My friend the Bible is a Catholic BIRTHED book:

 

It was the early Fathers who amidst much debate and HS guidance; who selected the 46 OT books to be included. And it was men known today to be Catholics {6 of them Apostles} who AUTHORED the entire New Testament.

 

This is both historically and Biblically provable. Thus anytime one reads the term “church” or “churches”; it is a direct and exclusive reference to today’s RCC. The Bible was fully authored around the END of the 1st Century. The Reformation being still some 1,400 years distant.

 

To claim that “WE ARE A PREISTLY PEOPLE” is to imply that Catholic laity are to emulate our Priest in their holiness. {YES I am aware that this grave obligation is at times abused.} Further it also means that like our Priest WE are to offer OUR sacrifices with AND through them. {“With” at the Consecration of the Most Holy Eucharist; NOT that we add anything beyond our personal intentions}; through them is a similar act as the OT Priest offered up Sacrifices to God on their behalf. 

 

You REALLY expect someone to address all the points you made in this absurdly long post?

 

You are throwing out many points and hoping no-one addresses them.

 

I agree that a doctrine should not be based on one verse. The catholic "church" is guilty of these many times.

 

Lets pick one thing, although most of your points are in fact false or plain lies.

 

 

The standard response from catholics when they get cornered is to flood people with many topics or points ( as you have done ) or start attacking the Bible, either by the "thats your interpretation" game ( even though the catholic "church" has only officially interpreted 0.01% of the Bible! ) or the "if it wasnt for us, you wouldn't have a Bible".

 

So, now the topic changes to the source of the Bible.

 

It cannot be proven that the Catholic Church is solely responsible for the gathering and selection of the New Testament books. In fact, it can be shown that the New Testament books were gathered into one volume and were in circulation long before the Catholic Church claims to have taken its action in 390 at the council of Hippo.

God did not give councils the authority to select His sacred books, nor does He expect men to receive His sacred books only because of councils or on the basis of councils. It takes no vote or sanction of a council to make the books of the Bible authoritative. Men were able to rightly discern which books were inspired before the existence of ecclesiastical councils and men can do so today. A council of men in 390 with no divine authority whatever, supposedly took upon itself the right to state which books were inspired, and Catholics argue, "We can accept the Bible only on the authority of the Catholic Church." Can we follow such reasoning?


Now, if you want to discuss this topic of the Bible, start a new thread.

 

This thread is about the false catholic priesthood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Patrick Miron said:

 

First THANKS for your POST reply.

REALLY: so then please explain why in the Protestant communion their ARE thousands of different churches.


 

Lie. Please list these churches. Bear in mind that the NAME on a building does not indicate or prove a separate denomination.

Also, you use the term "protestant" incorrectly.

 

4 hours ago, Patrick Miron said:

 And who; on what evidence, is the "Author" of Holy Scriptura IF it was NOT the Catholic Authors; their Faith and their Church?

It cannot be proven that the Catholic Church is solely responsible for the gathering and selection of the New Testament books. In fact, it can be shown that the New Testament books were gathered into one volume and were in circulation long before the Catholic Church claims to have taken its action in 390 at the council of Hippo.

Jesus QUOTED the Old Testament!

God did not give councils the authority to select His sacred books, nor does He expect men to receive His sacred books only because of councils or on the basis of councils. It takes no vote or sanction of a council to make the books of the Bible authoritative. Men were able to rightly discern which books were inspired before the existence of ecclesiastical councils and men can do so today. A council of men in 390 with no divine authority whatever, supposedly took upon itself the right to state which books were inspired, and Catholics argue, "We can accept the Bible only on the authority of the Catholic Church." Can we follow such reasoning?


 

4 hours ago, Patrick Miron said:

HOW my new friend do YOU explain that it was exclusively today's RCC {as thee exclusive Christians for 1,000 years} that interpreted the bible; and NOW no-longer can?  I don't get it?

 

 

More lies. 

The Roman Catholic "Church" was not really in effect as an organization in the first couple hundred years of the Christian Church.  The Christian church was under persecution and official church gatherings were risky business in the Roman Empire.  Catholicism as an organization with a central figure located in Rome did not occur for quite some time, in spite of its false claim they can trace the papacy back to Peter.


The early church as described in the NT did the following: shared all things in common, relationships, support missionaries/ministers, teaching & preaching, praying, worshiping, reading of scripture, evangelism, fostering spiritual gifts. No where does the NT dictate fancy buildings, robes, repetitive prayer, a priesthood, Mary worship, sectarianism, or any order of service, etc.. all these are MAN MADE traditions ADDED ON. 

The true church isn't catholic or protestant. It doesn't have a mailing address or a zip code. It is the body of believers in Jesus Christ the world over. Christ has written their names in the book of life. Christ knows who His friends are.
 

You say the catholic "church" interpreted the Bible?

 

LOL. It's only officially interpreted 0.01% of the Bible!

 

I am going to start a new thread for this topic, as this thread is about the false catholic priesthood.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Similar Content

    • By Ryan2203
      Edit:(sorry my question was not clear enough) 
      Should I a Christian attend an Orthodox Church? My roommate is orthodox and I go to church with him almost every Sunday. Should I keep doing this? I don’t really have the ability to go to another church since I don’t have a car and I live in an area with not many Christian churches.
    • By Behold
      Gospel : Paul teaching = "preaching of the Cross". "we preach Christ Crucified"..."Jesus sent me not to baptize but to preach the Gospel".."faith comes by hearing this".....

      So, all that, if believed by an unbeliever resolves an eternal issue......
      What is the issue?
      What is God's purpose for coming to earth to die as Jesus The Christ on a Cross?
      What is He doing?...What is He alone solving, that all our 10 commandment keeping and holy lifestyle can never solve, which is WHY HE had to solve it? ?
      And right here is what is so often misunderstood, or not taught correctly, and this is why so many people who mean well, and love Jesus, or would like to love him, do not understand <>WHAT IS<> the actual reason that God came here to die.

      So what is that reason?
      The reason, is that keeping the law, the 10 commandments, and doing good works, confessing sin, and living as holy as we can, could not make us acceptable to God..
      And here is the "catch 22".... It also can't AFTER you are saved.
      And right here is where "Legalism vs Grace" becomes the touchstone of constant fighting on forums, and everywhere else that it can show up where believers WILL clash.
      (Apparently this clash became such a long standing fight and fury on this forum that members here are barred from posting- fighting about it.)

      It is a fact and statement of the CROSS that the law and the 10 Commandments can't make you righteous, they can only show you that you are unrighteous., as that is the actual purpose of the Law, as well as outlining what God expects regarding our basic moral conduct & behavior, once we are born again.
      So, how can it be that half the body of Christ is trying to keep all this, all these works, and they believe that this is "keeping them saved".
      Whereas the other half of the body of Christ is trusting in Jesus to keep them saved.
      So, do you see the line in the sand?
      Its this " What is keeping you SAVED"....that is the minefield of theological confusion.
      THATS the fight.
      Legalism vs Grace.
      Its happening on every forum like this one, and its the reason for 5000 denominations that don't agree, and 300 bibles that don't agree.
      This issue started with Paul and his preaching of "justification by Faith" >alone, and he wrote the letter to the Galatians that talks about it, and explains it.
      2000 yrs later, this issue of Legalism vs Grace is still a fist fight between "Christians".
      Here on this forum, apparently they outlawed the battle. 

      Isn't it interesting to realize that if the 10 commandments, or lawkeeping, or living holy, could save you or keep you saved, if that were the truth, then Jesus could have stayed in Heaven and saved Himself some PAIN.....
      But ita not the case.
      Now im not certain what you have been taught, but i teach that you "present your body a living sacrifice" and you to "live holy as God is holy", not to save yourself or keep yourself saved, but because this is what you should do, and what God expects, .. because you ARE saved.
      The Legalist would argue that .."no, you do it to stay saved", and if you don't then you're not.
      I wonder, reader, what you believe.
      However, keep it to yourself, as this is between you and God, tho make sure you get it right, as if you get it wrong and you are teaching it, then Galatians 1:8 has become quite a literal issue for you.

      So, leaving all that now, lets just look at the problem that God had to come here and solve for us, as to look at this, is to understand the reason for Salvation which is to understand Salvation.
      Our problem we had, before we were saved, is only one thing, one issue only. And God Himself had to solve it, because we can't.
      We are born, and we get older, and we don't have any righteousness.
      None.
      And so, God can't accept us, because we are UNRIGHTEOUS. 
      This is "lost", "unsaved"....hellbound = we don't have any RIGHTEOUSNESS< as all of ours, are "filthy rags".
      So, in steps SALVATION... Down from Heaven God as The Christ arrives... The Cross has been raised.... As God bleeding out on the "tree" has come down from Heaven to give us HIS righteousness so that He can accept us, based on THAT.......and for no other reason will He accept you, or me.
      God, literally became a man, and died on a Cross, to GIVE US "the righteousness of Christ". (God's very own righteousness).
      And that is what salvation actually is....Its God coming to earth to give us His righteousness so that HE can accept us, as by giving us His very righteousness, this makes us acceptable to God.
      Welcome to Salvation.
      Salvation is only.... "what makes you acceptable to God"....and that is one thing, its GOD'S Righteousness, becoming ours.
      A born again person, has literally BECOME "the righteousness of Christ", and Christ is GOD.

      To say that God's Grace is amazing, is really the least of what it is...
      How can you describe the wonder of God, dying to give you His righteousness in place of your unrighteousness, as a free Gift?
      Is there a word that can even claim to honor this spiritual transaction enough?
      Just one.
      LOVE.
      Agape` Love.
      God is LOVE.
    • By ForHisGlory37
      Hello Everyone,
      I just wanted some of your opinions and insights in regards to going to worship on Sundays.  I have some friends who refuse to come to church now because they say that the Jesuits and the RCC "made it official that everyone has to worship on SUNdays" and they believe that it was because it is to worship their "Sun god." 
      In my opinion, I just find it very legalistic.  I also believe that I don't think God really cares as long as you reserve and give Him one day out of the week to worship Him and make it your Sabbath.  Also, I believe that the devil is using this as a way to isolate them from fellowship with other believers. 
      What do you all think?  Thanks!
    • By KiwiChristian
      ERROR OF TRANSUBSTANTIATION (1215 AD).   Definition: The whole substance of the bread and wine is converted into the actual and real entire body and blood of Christ.   Answer: Radbertus first invented this doctrine in the 9th century. Catholics support this by a literal view of Matthew 26:26-29. "Take eat; this is my body. For this is my blood of the new testament which is shed for many for the remission of sins."   Consider these reasons why the bread and wine were symbols of Christ’s body and blood, to be partaken in for remembrance purposes only, and that there was no material conversion of the bread to the body, nor of the wine to the blood of Christ.   1. Jesus, after saying "this is my blood" in Matthew 26:28 also said "I will not drink henceforth of this FRUIT OF THIS VINE" in Matthew 26:29, showing that the grapejuice was STILL WINE and had not been changed to blood.   2. Jesus often referred to Himself in symbols. So why see Him as literal in a symbolic context?   John 10:7 "I am the door." Did Jesus mean he was literally wooden? No.   John 14:6 "I am the way." Did Jesus mean he was literally a road? No.   John 15:5 "I am the vine." Did Jesus mean he was literally a tree? No.   John 8:12 "I am the light." Did Jesus mean he was literally a torch or a sun? No.   John 6:48 "I am the bread of life." Did Jesus mean he was literally a loaf of dough? No.   John 6:63 states clearly that Jesus was speaking spiritually, not literally: "The words that I speak unto you, they are spirit and they are life."   Luke 22:19 states clearly that the Lord's supper is for remembrance purposes: "This do in remembrance of me." This is a metaphor, where one thing is said to be another thing because of it’s similarity. A metaphor is a figurative use of terms without indicating their figurative nature, for example, “he shall eat his words”.   3. The bread and wine did not become Christ's body and blood because:   a) Christ was still present with them. Christ would have had 2 bodies, one which died on the cross and one which did not.   b) To drink blood was forbidden in Acts 15:20,29 "We write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from BLOOD."   In Deuteronomy 12:16 "Only ye shall not eat the blood."   4. The tense of the Greek verbs "EAT" in John 6:50,51,52,53,54,56,57,58 is in the AORIST tense showing a ONCE-FOR-ALL, point action, that is NOT CONTINUAL.   The Biblical Lord's supper is to be a repeated event, and therefore has no saving merit. Roman Catholics are commanded to believe in transubstantiation because it was stated at the Council of Trent (11 October 1551) that this doctrine was essential for salvation. They pronounced curses on anyone who would deny it.   Paul the Apostle, in contrast, pronounced a double curse on anyone who preached a gospel different from the all sufficiency of Christ's death, burial and resurrection to save us from our sins. Galatians 1:6-9 puts a double curse on this "other gospel" of transubstantiation for salvation.   5. Before Christ ascended to heaven, He promised to come to us during the Church Age, NOT in the sacrifice of the MASS, but by the Holy Spirit (John 14:16-18 as Comforter): "He shall give you another Comforter ... even the Spirit of truth ... I will not leave you comfortless: I WILL COME TO YOU.” Note: Christ will return to earth a second time visibly in glory. This is what is meant by 1 Corinthians 11:26 "For as oftenas ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death TILL HE COME."   Note: This means that Christ does not come literally and visibly as the wafer in the mass, but to the air as in 1 Thessalonians 4:16,17.   6. At the Council of Constance in 1415 it was agreed to withold the cup from the congregation lest the wine be spilt. However this contradicts 1 Corinthians 11:25-29 where ALL Corinthian believers drank of the wine: "Whosoever shall eat this bread and drink this cup unworthily." v.27. Drinking the cup is mentioned six times in five verses. Transubstantiation is not a mystery, but an absurdity; not a difficulty but a contradiction.   Question: How then do we eat his flesh and drink his blood?   Answer: Through the WORD OF GOD.   John 6:63 "The words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life."   John 1:14 "And the Word was made flesh."   John 5:24 "He that heareth my Word and believeth on him that sent me, has everlasting life."   The scribes who knew Jeremiah 31:31-34, "I will put my law in their inward parts", and Jeremiah 15:16, "Thy words were found and I DID EAT THEM; and thy word was unto me the joy and rejoicing of mine heart", understood the idea of receiving God's Word into one’s inner being.   Peter got the message, while others planned to desert Jesus:   "Thou hast the WORDS of eternal life." John 6:68.   "Being born again ... by the WORD of God." 1 Peter 1:23-25.   Peter knew that Jesus was speaking about the WORD of God, and not about literal flesh and blood.   Question: If this doctrine of transubstantiation only arose in the 9th century, and if it is so necessary to Roman Catholic salvation, what happened to those who lived before the 9th century not believing this doctrine? Did they all go to hell?   Question: What about the thief on the cross who repented and never took the wafer? Did he go to hell?    No! Jesus said he went to paradise.
×
×
  • Create New...