game Reform Club

[David1701]

12 hours ago, Fidei Defensor said:

Well met. 

You get 2 points for proving effiacy. 

Another 2 points for your argument for metaphor. Zwingli could be of some help here.  

Romanite Rebuttal: 

We live out the sacrifice of Christ, “I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.” (Galatians 2:20), if this is so then it stands to reason that Christ’s sacrifice can be presenf in the Sacrament and distribute gratia.  

This is not living out the sacrifice of Christ.  It is living out the life of the risen Christ, having been crucified with him and risen with him.

The stuff about Christ's sacrifice being present in the "sacrament" and distributed is a non-sequitur.

Quote

We are expected to work out our salvation and be perfect, “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect,” (Matthew  5:48) and “Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed--not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence--continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling.” (Philippians 2:12). Christ did pay for all sin, but expects us to live perfectly and become holy like the Saints.

We are indeed to cultivate our salvation, with godly fear and trembling, because it is God who works in us the willingness and doing of his good pleasure.

Our perfection is only in Christ.  In us (that is, in our flesh) dwells no good thing.  It is Christ who is our sanctification and, without him, we can do nothing.

Quote

The Cross is holy, it is venerated on Good Friday service. Constantine’s mother, St. Helena, found three crosses and the one that healed people was declared The True Cross. To Mother Church’s great sorrow, the True Cross was lost on July 4th, at the Battle of Hattin to the infidel Saladin. But through the Eucharist and a Crucifix, we bring the cross and Christ into the church.  

Oh, good, grief! 

The Bible says NOTHING about venerating a piece of wood!  Christ is in the assembly by the Holy Spirit, who lives in his people.

Quote

Its says the Galatians saw Christ Crucified, this is evidence of a Stigmata experiance like St. Francis of Assisi, where Christ appears and a worthy person recieved His wounds on their body. St. Paul experianced the Stigmata “From now on let no one cause me trouble, for I bear on my body the marks (scars) of Jesus” (Galatians 6:17). 

This would be funny, if it were not serious!

The Bible does not say what Paul's marks were; but it's likely that they were scars from being stoned or shipwrecked (i.e. scars gained in service for the Lord).

Quote

Wafer-god is not what Mother Church preaches. In the Wafer is substance, and it transmutes into His body of Christ when the priest declares during Elevation of the Host: “Per ipsum et cum ipso et in ipso est tibi Deo Patri omnipotenti in unitate Spiritus Sancti omnis honor et gloria per omnia saecula saeculorum (Through him, and with him, and in him, O God, almighty Father, in the unity of the Holy Spirit, all glory and honour is yours, for ever and ever).”

The wording is different but the meaning is the same: wafer-god.

There are two spiritual "mothers" in Scriptures: the New Jerusalem and the Mother of Harlots and Abominations of the Earth.  I know which "mother" Romanism is.

Quote

 

The Eucharist transports Christ’s sacrifice ro our time: 

“In the Eucharist the same sacrifice that Jesus made only once on the cross is made present at every Mass. According to Compendium of the Catechism of the Catholic Church"The Eucharist is the very sacrifice of the Body and Blood of the Lord Jesus which he instituted to perpetuate the sacrifice of the cross throughout the ages until his return in glory. Thus he entrusted to his Church this memorial of his death and Resurrection. It is a sign of unity, a bond of charity, a paschal banquet, in which Christ is consumed, the mind is filled with grace, and a pledge of future glory is given to us." (https://www.vatican.va/archive/compendium_ccc/documents/archive_2005_compendium-ccc_en.html#The sacraments of Christian initiation) 

GM awards 2 pts to TREAM Rome. 

 

The effects of the cross are perpetual, so they don't need to be transported anywhere or any time.  The event of the cross was once only and to claim that it needs to be re-enacted is to deny its perpetual efficacy.

[Fidei Defensor]

@David1701 you are awarded 3pts for your argument.  

Roman Rebuttal coming soon.. Check back at this post when I edit it. 

[David1701]

On 7/31/2020 at 12:17 AM, Fidei Defensor said:

@David1701 you are awarded 3pts for your argument.  

Roman Rebuttal coming soon.. Check back at this post when I edit it. 

How soon is "soon"?

[Fidei Defensor]

On 8/2/2020 at 6:58 AM, David1701 said:

How soon is "soon"?

I have decided to give you the win. 

Powerful passages against The Mass Sacrifice is: 

“24 For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf.
25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own,
26 for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.
27 And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment,
28 so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him..” (Hebrews 9:24-28)

next topic....

Church Militant: Crusaders, Puritans, and Soldiers of Christ O My! 

Is it alright to fight in the name of Christ? Are we allowed to be warriors of Christ? Does Jesus support Milites Christus? 

[David1701]

4 hours ago, Fidei Defensor said:

I have decided to give you the win. 

Powerful passages against The Mass Sacrifice is: 

“24 For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf.
25 Nor was it to offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters the holy places every year with blood not his own,
26 for then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.
27 And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment,
28 so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him..” (Hebrews 9:24-28)

next topic....

Church Militant: Crusaders, Puritans, and Soldiers of Christ O My! 

Is it alright to fight in the name of Christ? Are we allowed to be warriors of Christ? Does Jesus support Milites Christus? 

We are an army; so, yes, we are to fight in the name of Christ; but our weapons are not carnal, they are mighty through God, to pull down strongholds of the mind.  We are to fight in prayer, in witnessing, in love, in truth, in righteousness, joy and peace in the Holy Spirit.

John 18:36 (KJV) Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

2 Cor. 10:3-5 (KJV)

3 For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh:
4 (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;)
5 Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;

[Fidei Defensor]

Good you have chosen the “not carnal warefare” side. I shall argue for the Romanites and Puritans. 

Christ said to wield a sword, “He said to them, "But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.”  (Luke 22:36). He armed his disciples, “And they said, "Look, Lord, here are two swords." And he said to them, "It is enough." ( Luke 22:38). 

The times were going yo be perilous for followers of Christ. So he told his disciples to become milites, to arm themselves for self defense. 

The rebuke of Peter cutting off Malchus’ ear was that Peter was resisting Christ’s plan to die for our sins, “10 Then Simon Peter, having a sword, drew it and struck the high priest's servant and cut off his right ear. (The servant's name was Malchus.)
11 So Jesus said to Peter, "Put your sword into its sheath; shall I not drink the cup that the Father has given me?"  (John 18:10-11), just as he had done before, “21 From that time Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised.
22 And Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him, saying, "Far be it from you, Lord! This shall never happen to you."
23 But he turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are a hindrance to me. For you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of man."( Matthew 16:21-23). 

Thus we see Christ is in favor of arming ourselves to fight for the defense of our brethern in Christ or ourselves. 

Edited August 6, 2020 by Fidei Defensor

[David1701]

40 minutes ago, Fidei Defensor said:

Good you have chosen the “not carnal warefare” side. I shall argue for the Romanites and Puritans. 

Christ said to wield a sword, “He said to them, "But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.”  (Luke 22:36). He armed his disciples, “And they said, "Look, Lord, here are two swords." And he said to them, "It is enough." ( Luke 22:38). 

The times were going yo be perilous for followers of Christ. So he told his disciples to become milites, to arm themselves for self defense. 

The swords could be as protection against wild beasts (e.g. there were lions in that part of the world, at that time) and as a deterrent (just as nuclear weapons are intended to prevent the wars that could precipitate their use).

Quote

The rebuke of Peter cutting off Malchus’ ear was that Peter was resisting Christ’s plan to die for our sins,

True; but we have been warned that those who live by the sword will die by the sword, that our enemies are not people but the powers of darkness, that our weapons are not carnal and to turn the other cheek, if attacked.

[BeauJangles]

On 7/26/2020 at 2:12 AM, Fidei Defensor said:

First Rule of Reform Club.. you don’t talk about.. Transubstantiation (The Bread and Wine in Communion). Just ask Luther and Zwingli..  

Here is a place to discuss and debate Reformed Theology in a game of sorts.  

Pick a Team:

TEAM Luther -Lutheranism 

TEAM Calvin -Presbyterianism 

TEAM Tudor -Anglicanism 

TEAM Zwingli -Reformed

TEAM  Chelčický-Anabaptist 

TEAM Zinzendorf -Moravian

TEAM Rome -Catholicism

The aim is to pick a team and make a case with the particular theology and doctrine of the Reformed Person and or Institution. Its not meant to be a heated debate, but to assume a side and theraby learn via posing a question like Predestination, Eucharist (Communion), Sola Scriptura, and etc and answering as one of the Teams; then from there answer one another. 

Team Rome is  the standard challenger. You may argue the Romanite view on a topic like Transubstantiation even if you are not RCC. 

The Goal is to learn more about The Reformation, and the different branches. 

Rules

You may switch teams after each round. 

A round consists of a topic, examples: 

“Sola Scriptura” “Eucharist/Communion” “Justification”   “Predestination vs Arminianism.”                  “Images, Idolatry or Spiritual Aids”                                      “Church Militant, Crusaders and Puritans” 

Points are earned by forming an argument that is most accurate to the TEAM you represent, an example:

2+ Pts for stating Luther was in favor of Consubstantiation. 

1pt if you argue Luther was in favor of Transubstantiation, which is true in several  interpretations and periods of His life. But not the most accurate. 

5-10 pts if your case is stronger and beats the other team in the criteria of Scriptural Soundness (supported by Scripture), Logic, Accuracy to your Team’s views,  and is Well Reasoned argument. 

Minus pts are for getting something totally wrong about about your Team’s point of view. 

You may take your time to form your argument, look up sources online and prepare a rebuttle. 

There is no time limit. 

GM/ Game Master: The Person in charge of judging and distruputing points. For now I, @Fidei Defensor will be GM until another is appointed. 

The goal of this game is not to cause offense, people on these forums hold these particular beliefs.  So no baiting, flaming, and insulting another’s point of view. Be respectful, you’re aim is to argue the point of view of the reformed person and denomination, not to create a personal apologeia and treatsie in defense of your own Lutheranism, Calvinism, Zwinglism, Moravianism, and Romanism. 

The ultimate goal is to learn more about these persons, beliefs, and churches. 

Oh my goodness! Nooo! This is way over my head, bro! 

Walking slowly and precisely... 

Now run away! 

[Fidei Defensor]

On 8/6/2020 at 2:09 PM, David1701 said:

The swords could be as protection against wild beasts (e.g. there were lions in that part of the world, at that time) and as a deterrent (just as nuclear weapons are intended to prevent the wars that could precipitate their use).

True; but we have been warned that those who live by the sword will die by the sword, that our enemies are not people but the powers of darkness, that our weapons are not carnal and to turn the other cheek, if attacked.

But if it wasn’t for the sword, we, the church, would cease to exist. When the Ottoman Turks wages their holy war to conquer the West, Byzantium, Constantinople fell. The Turks tried to take the rest of Christendom, but were met by Catholic and Protestant forces at Vienna, Malta, Rhodes, and Lepanto. These battles with the aid of Christ’s  intervention, ensured we are still here and not part of the Ummah or Dar al-Islam. Instead by the grace of God and the devotion of warriors, we remain Dar al Hareb, and continue to preach the Gospel. It was at gun point and swoed point the Lord preserved Christendom. 

[David1701]

19 minutes ago, Fidei Defensor said:

But if it wasn’t for the sword, we, the church, would cease to exist. When the Ottoman Turks wages their holy war to conquer the West, Byzantium, Constantinople fell. The Turks tried to take the rest of Christendom, but were met by Catholic and Protestant forces at Vienna, Malta, Rhodes, and Lepanto. These battles with the aid of Christ’s  intervention, ensured we are still here and not part of the Ummah or Dar al-Islam. Instead by the grace of God and the devotion of warriors, we remain Dar al Hareb, and continue to preach the Gospel. It was at gun point and swoed point the Lord preserved Christendom. 

This bucket holds no water. 

God's kingdom is not about who controls this or that country; in fact, Christianity often flourishes the most under persecution.  In Communist China, where there have been varying levels of persecution for many decades, there are more Christians than members of the Communist Party!  In Muslim Iran, there is a revival of Christianity happening.

Where did the Church start?  Under Roman occupation of Israel.  The Church continued to flourish, during various Roman persecutions, then began to stagnate and apostatise, under Emperor Constantine, when he made "Christianity" the official religion of the Roman Empire.