game Reform Club

[Fidei Defensor]

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. 

Edited July 29, 2020 by Fidei Defensor

[Justin Adams]

1 hour ago, Fidei Defensor said:

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

I just do not bother. Mostly they are quite in error in many areas. Just like the 'church fathers'.

If someone is slightly tainted by anti semitism, I will ignore them. The ROOT speaks of the FRUIT...

[David1701]

2 hours ago, 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. 

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. 

I doubt if many posters know enough to defend more than one (if that) of these views.  A couple of them are utterly indefensible anyway (Romanism and Anglicanism).

[Fidei Defensor]

@Justin Adams Well, if you don’t want to play, that’s your choice.  

Edited July 26, 2020 by Fidei Defensor

[Fidei Defensor]

Alright, the topic that is chosen is: 

The Eucharist/ Lord’s Supper/ Communion

 

[Fidei Defensor]

I will start and offer the Romanite view. 

Roman Catholic Argument: 

The Eucharist is the literal body and blood of Jesus, “Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh )of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.(55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them.” (John 6:53-56) 

When the Priest offers the Bread and Wine on the altar, it changes into His body and blood, Transubstantiates into the real Christ to be “real food and real drink.” For the Lord says we must eat His body and drink his blood to abide in Him. 

The approach of Zwingli and Brucer with their symbolist simplicity is error, for they ignores the Lord’s words “my flesh is real food and my blood real drink.” 

GM Verdict: 2pts for Scriptural support for Transubstantiation.  

Can anyone offer a rebuttal? Argue that Rome is wrong on this interpretation? 

Edited July 29, 2020 by Fidei Defensor

[David1701]

3 hours ago, Fidei Defensor said:

I will start and offer the Romanite view. 

Roman Catholic Argument: 

The Eucharist is the literal body and blood of Jesus, “Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh )of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.(55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them.” (John 6:53-56) 

When the Priest offers the Bread and Wine on the altar, it changes into His body and blood, Transubstantiates into the real Christ to be “real food and real drink.” For the Lord says we must eat His body and drink his blood to abide in Him. 

The approach of Zwingli and Brucer with their symbolist simplicity is error, for they ignores the Lord’s words “my flesh is real food and my blood real drink.” 

GM Verdict: 2pts for Scriptural support for Transubstantiation.  

Can anyone offer a rebuttal? Argue that Rome is wrong on this interpretation? 

They claim that an RC priest has the power to conjure the Lord from heaven and turn him into a wafer-god (they don't word it like this, of course).  There is zero biblical evidence for this blasphemy.

They claim that the wafer-god is to be worshipped.  This is idolatrous blasphemy.

They claim that the Mass is the re-enactment of the cross, in a bloodless sacrifice, repeated over and over and over again.  This is blasphemous and contradicts the once-for-all efficacy of the cross.

Phrases like, "This is my body..." are metaphors.  An architect shows someone a scale model of his proposed building and says, "This is my building.".  No-one in his right mind would think that he meant it literally.

[Fidei Defensor]

1 minute ago, David1701 said:

They claim that an RC priest has the power to conjure the Lord from heaven and turn him into a wafer-god (they don't word it like this, of course).  There is zero biblical evidence for this blasphemy.

They claim that the wafer-god is to be worshipped.  This is idolatrous blasphemy.

They claim that the Mass is the re-enactment of the cross, in a bloodless sacrifice, repeated over and over and over again.  This is blasphemous and contradicts the once-for-all efficacy of the cross.

Phrases like, "This is my body..." are metaphors.  An architect shows someone a scale model of his proposed building and says, "This is my building.".  No-one in his right mind would think that he meant it literally.

Well said David. 

GM awards 2 points to David. 

You can earn two more points if you can find the Scripture to support “the-once-for-all-effiacy of the cross.” 

Romanite Rebuttal: 

Christ lives outside time (2 Peter 3:8). He is able to be crucified perpetually on the cross, rule from the throne at the Father’s right hand and return all at the same time for Him, but different periods historically for us. We can thus through The Sacrament transport Jesus’ suffering to present day and partake of its grace when we eat His body and drink His blood.   

For did not St. Paul say this?, “O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified” (Galatians 3:1). The Galatians did not see Christ crucified at Calvary (John 19) but witnessed Him crucified through the blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist. 

Christ instructed we eat His body and drink His blood, “For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed” (John 6:55). He sustains us through the Sacrament by becoming present with us in everyway: 

“In the most blessed sacrament of the Eucharist "the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ and, therefore, the whole Christ is truly, really, and substantially contained." (Council of Trent (1551): DS 1651) "This presence is called 'real' – by which is not intended to exclude the other types of presence as if they could not be 'real' too, but because it is presence in the fullest sense: that is to say, it is a substantial presence by which Christ, God and man, makes himself wholly and entirely present." (Paul VI, MF 39).

For is He not Immanuel? God with us? (Matthew 1:23). 

GM Awards 2 points to TEAM Rome. 

[David1701]

3 hours ago, Fidei Defensor said:

Well said David. 

GM awards 2 points to David. 

You can earn two more points if you can find the Scripture to support “the-once-for-all-efficacy of the cross.” 

John 19:30 (EMTV) Therefore when Jesus received the sour wine, He said, "It is finished!" And bowing His head, He gave up His spirit. 

Heb. 10:14 (Darby) For by one offering he has perfected in perpetuity the sanctified.

Quote

 

Romanite Rebuttal: 

Christ lives outside time (2 Peter 3:8). He is able to be crucified perpetually on the cross, rule from the throne at the Father’s right hand and return all at the same time for Him, but different periods historically for us. We can thus through The Sacrament transport Jesus’ suffering to present day and partake of its grace when we eat His body and drink His blood.   

 

This is sophistry. The cross was a punctiliar, accomplished event.  The effects are in perpetuity, the event that caused those effects was at one moment in time.  We are given grace, because of the accomplished sacrifice on the cross, through faith.  Re-enacting the cross is to deny the efficacy of it in the first place and is blasphemous in the extreme.

Quote

For did not St. Paul say this?, “O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified” (Galatians 3:1). The Galatians did not see Christ crucified at Calvary (John 19) but witnessed Him crucified through the blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist. 

The public portrayal of the cross was through preaching.

Quote

 

Christ instructed we eat His body and drink His blood, “For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed” (John 6:55). He sustains us through the Sacrament by becoming present with us in everyway: 

“In the most blessed sacrament of the Eucharist "the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ and, therefore, the whole Christ is truly, really, and substantially contained." (Council of Trent (1551): DS 1651) "This presence is called 'real' – by which is not intended to exclude the other types of presence as if they could not be 'real' too, but because it is presence in the fullest sense: that is to say, it is a substantial presence by which Christ, God and man, makes himself wholly and entirely present." (Paul VI, MF 39).

For is He not Immanuel? God with us? (Matthew 1:23). 

 

Apparently, they don't understand what a metaphor is.  The wafer-god teaching of Romanism is ancient, but certainly not Christian; many pagan religions taught that they could eat their god in wafer form.

[Fidei Defensor]

32 minutes ago, David1701 said:

John 19:30 (EMTV) Therefore when Jesus received the sour wine, He said, "It is finished!" And bowing His head, He gave up His spirit. 

Heb. 10:14 (Darby) For by one offering he has perfected in perpetuity the sanctified.

This is sophistry. The cross was a punctiliar, accomplished event.  The effects are in perpetuity, the event that caused those effects was at one moment in time.  We are given grace, because of the accomplished sacrifice on the cross, through faith.  Re-enacting the cross is to deny the efficacy of it in the first place and is blasphemous in the extreme.

The public portrayal of the cross was through preaching.

Apparently, they don't understand what a metaphor is.  The wafer-god teaching of Romanism is ancient, but certainly not Christian; many pagan religions taught that they could eat their god in wafer form.

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.  

We are expected to work oit 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.

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.  

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). 

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 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. 

Edited July 29, 2020 by Fidei Defensor