- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 9/16/24 at 2:45 pm to AllbyMyRelf
Also, transubstantiation was not official Catholic dogma until LanFranc pushed for it to become so in the 11th century.
The earliest church fathers (those who were at the last supper) believed in the real presence. When it become dogmatic is of secondary import.
The earliest church fathers (those who were at the last supper) believed in the real presence. When it become dogmatic is of secondary import.
Posted on 9/16/24 at 2:50 pm to AllbyMyRelf
quote:
then to restrict who was allowed to interpret/ explain the canon (probably bad).
This is not how it really works. The Dogma's give you a fence, interpret as you will until you go up against a Dogma, then concede to the Dogma.
Posted on 9/16/24 at 3:20 pm to Stinger_1066
quote:Luckily, Christians agree on the most important parts.
That sounds really unnecessarily complicated.
God exists and he created us, in part, to have a relationship with Him.
Men are sinners and need grace in order to be in community with God.
God sent his son, Jesus, who is fully God and became fully man, to die as the sacrificial lamb for our sins so that we could have community with God.
Jesus rose from the dead.
Faith in God, which includes accepting Jesus as the Christ and as God, is a necessary condition for receiving grace and forgiveness for our sins.
Our lives are changed by his grace and we are no longer slaves to sin. God gives us the Holy Spirit, who is also fully God, to live within us.
We will “bear fruit” in our lives as Christians, which is evidenced by our works.
God also wants to have a relationship with you.
Posted on 9/16/24 at 3:29 pm to Mid Iowa Tiger
quote:
So does that mean Protestants would return to the original belief in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist?
Does it bother anyone here that the early Christians, who had direct connections to the disciples, believed this?
Posted on 9/16/24 at 3:32 pm to RiverCityTider
quote:I'm personally not concerned by this because the Scriptures do not teach this.
Does it bother anyone here that the early Christians, who had direct connections to the disciples, believed this?
The church of Corinth had a direct connection with Paul and he had to write to them multiple times correcting them for sin and error.
This is why Protestants (at least historically) have held to sola scriptura for our ultimate authority. People are sinners and fallible but God is perfect and cannot err.
Posted on 9/16/24 at 3:34 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
Rome teaches a false gospel that doesn't save. That makes them non-Christians in the strictest sense.
This is why there are a thousand protestant offshoots. You can't even agree on who should head up the committee on committees, much less what is or is not a false gospel.
Posted on 9/16/24 at 3:34 pm to Zach
quote:
I'm not interested in anything out of Rome until there is an official Papal denunciation of Communism.
Sounds like someone's religion is Capitalism.
Posted on 9/16/24 at 3:35 pm to bayoubengals88
Especially with Pope Francis(and Ratzinger and JP2 too), they are looking for common ground. I understand that’s what they want to do, but I think even they understand that the differences are too great. Also, I think that most of the protestant churches have drifted so far left that they’re completely off the charts. The Catholic Church has drifted to the left as well, but it’s nothing like what’s happened to the protestant churches. Some of the gaps are caverns now. The Catholic Church isn’t rolling out lesbians married priests in any version of the future.
Posted on 9/16/24 at 3:36 pm to RiverCityTider
quote:The belief in the real presence doesn’t really bother me.
Does it bother anyone here that the early Christians, who had direct connections to the disciples, believed this?
I’m not going to attempt to explain Catholic beliefs on this as if I’m an expert because I’m not, but my understanding is that the disagreement lies with the idea of the meal being a sacrifice instead of being in remembrance of the sacrifice.
I’m sure there’s nuance I’m missing—but I think that’s where most of the disagreement is.
Posted on 9/16/24 at 3:38 pm to AllbyMyRelf
quote:
Luckily, Christians agree on the most important parts.
The replies immediately following this say otherwise
Posted on 9/16/24 at 3:38 pm to AllbyMyRelf
It is truly a difficult teaching.
Posted on 9/16/24 at 3:39 pm to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:The Scriptures are clear on what the gospel is and that's not really in dispute in most Protestant churches, regardless of other differences that may exist.
This is why there are a thousand protestant offshoots. You can't even agree on who should head up the committee on committees, much less what is or is not a false gospel.
The gospel is the difference between a true branch of the one Church of Jesus Christ and a branch that will be cut off and thrown into the fire.
Posted on 9/16/24 at 3:40 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
quote:
Does it bother anyone here that the early Christians, who had direct connections to the disciples, believed this?
I'm personally not concerned by this because the Scriptures do not teach this.
I'm not so sure about that
Posted on 9/16/24 at 3:46 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
This is why Protestants (at least historically) have held to sola scriptura for our ultimate authority. People are sinners and fallible but God is perfect and cannot err.
So the Bible is a fallible collection of infallible books?
Posted on 9/16/24 at 3:50 pm to RiverCityTider
quote:I am sure. We use the same language that Jesus used when He instituted the Lord's Supper when we participate in it. We have no problem calling the bread His "body" or the wine His "blood" even though we do not teach or believe that they are transformed into His literal, physical body and literal, physical blood.quote:I'm not so sure about that
I'm personally not concerned by this because the Scriptures do not teach this.
Jesus in His human body referred to Himself as a gate/door, a shepherd, water, bread/mana, light, and a vine. Obviously He is not literally those things in His humanity, but we know that based on the context.
However when it comes to John 6, Catholics believe He was being literal when He addressed the people whom He just fed with miraculous bread right beforehand. The context shows that they were merely looking for more food and Jesus told them to feed on Him instead, just like He told the Samaritan woman at the well that she should drink from the water that He provides. He was talking about salvation that He gives, and Catholics turned that into cannibalism.
I could go on about how John 6 isn't teaching the real presence, but that's somewhat pointless right now. Point being, the Scriptures don't teach what Catholics claim is taught.
This post was edited on 9/16/24 at 3:51 pm
Posted on 9/16/24 at 3:52 pm to Knartfocker
quote:The Bible was written and preserved by God using human means. The content of Scripture is infallible because it is God-breathed.
So the Bible is a fallible collection of infallible books?
Posted on 9/16/24 at 3:53 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
Most Protestant sects do indeed consider Roman Catholics to be NON-Christians and OUTSIDE of the Body of Christ's Church. That's why we have so much hate for Catholics around here.
Laughed
Catholics been witch hunt for nearly 2000 years.
This isnt our first or last rodeo
Lets get down.
Posted on 9/16/24 at 3:56 pm to AllbyMyRelf
quote:
Luckily, Christians agree on the most important parts.
The biggest bullshite I've ever heard/read/seen is the Baptist we are all saved crap. Its such a load of shite I cannot believe people actually believe it.
Posted on 9/16/24 at 3:56 pm to AllbyMyRelf
quote:
Yes, it was widely believed and accepted, but the belief was not universal, and there were notable detractors from this belief. The disagreement existed peacefully within the Church until the time of Lanfranc.
False. The denial of the Real Presence was always considered to be heresy from the Church.
Page 4 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News