re: Vivek: Jesus is A son of god but not THE son of god. A way to heaven but not THE way

Are you arguing that a treaty supplants other supporting documents that support Christian foundation?

If he is not a Christian, and looks like he's not, you guys want him to LIE how he really feels? That makes no sense, most Indians are Buddhists right? If he lied and said I think Jesus is the son of God, he would just be pandering for votes, and lying. I prefer a truth teller.

Of course he doesn't understand the REAL TRUTH, but he is being truthful about his belief. Those kind do not worry me, its the MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY types that scare me its ok to be a Muslim or Buddhist, as long as you do not try to impose that on us

Is he not Hindu? Did we expect him to say something different?

quote:

---

most Indians are Buddhists right?

---

Good lord.

quote:

---

Vivek is a fake Christian

---

He has never claimed to be Christian. He's Hindu.

quote:

---

Who are you people?

---

I'll take "People who are ignoramuses" for $1000, Alex.

quote:

---

Deported to where?

---

where do you think

quote:

---

He was born in Cincinnati.

---

hopefully birthright citizenship is on its way out

quote:

---

Of course they can because yours is pretend. That’s like saying anyone can take tea with the queen when your 3 year old is pretending to be queen. Meaningless.

---

Ours is most certainly not pretend. We have bread and wine. We have the elements accompanied by the preaching of the word. We have the warning and blessing. We have the infusion of grace towards sanctification. We even have the real presence (Christ is very much spiritually present to the faith of the one receiving it).

What we lack is the cannibalism of Rome that stems from a misinterpretation of Jesus’ words in John 6, which was spoken in the context of the feeding of the 5,000, with the manna from Moses being referenced.

Jesus didn’t mean He was literally a vine or a door or a shepherd, or that He gave people literal water or literal light in those other ‘I am’ statements in John, but this one time, He really meant that He was literally bread, and that we had to literally eat Him with our mouths, in reference to the Eucharist, which He didn’t yet institute and He didn’t explain except to the 12 disciples later on (allegedly)?

quote:

---

The fact that no other churches have the real presence through transubstantiation is why I’m Catholic.

---

It is sad that you hang your hat on a false teaching that you require of everyone else, but that no one else actually believes, not even the EOC, at least exactly the same way (the EOC doesn’t use transubstantiation language, but epiclesis language, regarding the Spirit’s mysterious work).

Instead of seeing that other Christians do feed on Christ spiritually by their faith as a help to them and as true communion with Christ as our head through faith, you see the Church as the necessary differentiator in whether or not it is legit, through the sacramental system developed over 2,000 years.

quote:

---

I’ve prayed on the idea of changing to Orthodox and haven’t ruled it out, but there’s no way I’m going anywhere that doesn’t have a legitimate line of succession to the apostles

---

This thinking fascinates me. Catholics will on the one hand look to the Pope as a legitimate link in the unbroken chain from the apostles as a justification for RCC being the only true Church while absolutely trashing the particular Pope in question, calling him illegitimate or at least a “bad” Pope. The RCC even went as far as to condemn and anathematize Honorius. So it doesn’t matter what the Pope believes or what he does, so long as he sat in the chair.

Then you have issues like the three Popes in the 1400s, and the Church having to decide which one was the real one after a generation of Christians had already submitted to one or another.

While the Church structure is important, you make the mistake of the Jews, who focused on the priestly sacrificial system instead of on Christ, Himself, as the sacrifices pointed to. God rejected the hypocritical sacrifices of the Jews and even refused to listen their prayers due to their wickedness and unbelief, yet Rome puts everything on the priestly sacrifice of the Mass and the literal succession of Popes, as the Jews looked to their literal succession from Abraham. Paul condemned that outright, as those who are true Jews are such faith, not by blood, but Rome holds on to the sign more than the thing signified.

quote:

---

Of course they can because yours is pretend.

---