Which Church is THE Church?

[rturner76]

How quaint. He thinks transubstantiation is a synonym for real presence.

http://onlinegracelutheran.org/Lutheran.htm

what's the difference?This could be a teaching moment for you

 

[lesliedellow]

Long after the Aural use of the word

And how would you know that? Don't tell me - the Pope says so.

 

[Thursday]

I believe in the church Jesus is building that tears down the gates of hell, which one is that?

Ephesians 2:22 describes the church Jesus is building

Jesus only built one Church and it is 2000 years old. The Catholic Church has spread his message to every nation on earth. 1.2 billion strong and growing by the 10s of millions each year.

 

[Thursday]

When Scripture uses the word Israel to whom is God referring to? All believers, emphasis on BELIEVERS. His church is made up of all true believers, not souls within a given physical church. So to argue a certain church was originally founded by Christ and thus remains to this day the ONLY true building of believers is missing His point.
See Romans...we as believers are referred to as sons of Abraham, the father of all who believe.

When two believers teach contradictory doctrines, are both being led by the Holy Spirit?

 

[lesliedellow]

what's the difference?

Read it. Lutherans don't believe the elements are transformed into the body and blood of Christ. They believe that the elements are both what they appear to be, and, at the same time, the body and blood of Christ. Just as Jesus managed to be both man and God at the same time.

 

[Thursday]

Read it. Lutherans don't believe the elements are transformed into the body and blood of Christ. They believe that the elements are both what they appear to be, and, at the same time, the body and blood of Christ. Just as Jesus managed to be both man and God at the same time.

The difference is only semantic. Catholics believe that the accidents of bread and wine still exist in the body and blood of Christ.

 

[lesliedellow]

Yes, and it has been that way for 2000 years.

At least you admit it makes stuff up.

 

[rturner76]

And how would you know that? Don't tell me - the Pope says so.

Actually I take that back, I don't know that they had a word for it but I believe they knew the concept from what Jesus spoke of the Holy Spirit and his Father and told them they would know all the things that were to come

 

[lesliedellow]

The difference is only semantic. Catholics believe that the accidents of bread and wine still exist in the body and blood of Christ.

No the difference is not semantic. The Catholic position relies upon a no longer sustainable Aristotlean conception of the nature of matter. Lutherans have never introduced Aristotlean philosophy into their Eucharistic doctrine.

 

[lesliedellow]

Actually I take that back, I don't know that they had a word for it but I believe they knew the concept from what Jesus spoke of the Holy Spirit and his Father and told them they would know all the things that were to come

If Jesus spoke explicitly about the Trinity, how come there is no explicit reference to the Trinity in the New Testament?

 

[throughfiierytrial]

When two believers teach contradictory doctrines, are both being led by the Holy Spirit?

I know where you are going...true believers...true believers...as spelled out for us in the Scriptures. And are we not to believe not only in Jesus but also His testimony to be considered a believer?...Abraham believed God...God's prophecies...and it was credited to him as righteousness. It is possible...to answer your question...for some to be led by the devil and not by the Holy Spirit at all. (See II Timothy 2:26)

 

[Thursday]

At least you admit it makes stuff up.

Lies accomplish nothing. Why bother posting if that's all you've got?

 

[Thursday]

No the difference is not semantic. The Catholic position relies upon a no longer sustainable Aristotlean conception of the nature of matter. Lutherans have never introduced Aristotlean philosophy into their Eucharistic doctrine.

Luther just tweaked the definition so it sounded different. The Catholic Church states that the transformation is a mystery beyond human understanding. Transubstantiation is the best definition we have, but consubstantiation isn't much different.

 

[Thursday]

I know where you are going...true believers...true believers...as spelled out for us in the Scriptures. And are we not to believe not only in Jesus but also His testimony to be considered a believer?...Abraham believed God...God's prophecies...and it was credited to him as righteousness. It is possible...to answer your question...for some to be led by the devil and not by the Holy Spirit at all. (See II Timothy 2:26)

Good point. So when two believers teach contradictory doctrines, one of them is not being led by the Holy Spirit.

Does the Church led by the Holy Spirit teach any false doctrines?

 

[civilwarbuff]

Wait a minnit now, I know what I believe. I believe the Nicene Creed.

As do I.....

I believe in the Real Presence that is transubstantiation at holy communion,

I believe He is there in the spiritual sense, not the physical sense as the physical sense would violate a few things.....

I am baptized.

As am I; not just of water though but of the Holy Spirit....

I don't need to know everything a Priest knows to understand the real presence and the trinity.

All any of us need to know is the path to salvation which runs straight through Messiah....

Also you can get the sacrament of communion up to five times one day if you are so inclined (though they don't recommend it). I love being to be able to get the sacrament everyday if I want it/No Protestant Church does that especially with the real presence

If where you are and what/how you practice draws you closer to Messiah then you are where God wants you....no mysteries there......

 

[lesliedellow]

Lies accomplish nothing. Why bother posting if that's all you've got?

I did no more than quote your very words.

 

[rturner76]

If Jesus spoke explicitly about the Trinity, how come there is no explicit reference to the Trinity in the New Testament?

I don't think it was important for recruiting followers and training them in how to behave. I believe these things were higher philosophy and weren't important for training Christians until the early church fathers got a hold of it and started teaching it. Are you buying any of this?

 

[lesliedellow]

Luther just tweaked the definition so it sounded different. The Catholic Church states that the transformation is a mystery beyond human understanding. Transubstantiation is the best definition we have, but consubstantiation isn't much different.

Lutherans do not believe in Consubstantiation. They believe in Sacramental Union, and they tend to get upset if somebody confuses that with Consubstantiation.

 

[lesliedellow]

I don't think it was important for recruiting followers and training them in how to behave. I believe these things were higher philosophy and weren't important for training Christians until the early church fathers got a hold of it and started teaching it. Are you buying any of this?

What I buy is that the Trinity is a doctrine which gradually emerged, as the first Christians tried to work out the implications of what was contained in the New Testament documents.

 

[Thursday]

Lutherans do not believe in consubstantiation.

Which Lutherans?

From Wiki:

The doctrine of consubstantiation is often held in contrast to the doctrine of transubstantiation. While some Lutherans use the term "consubstantiation" to describe their doctrine, many reject it as not accurately reflecting the eucharistic doctrine of Martin Luther, the sacramental union