Which Church is THE Church?

[Alithis]

Not true. Jesus started a single Church, led by the apostles. The apostles, appointed by Jesus, chose successors.

Here's one of them writing in 107 AD. Ignatius was a follower of John:

“You must all follow the bishop as Jesus Christ follows the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles. Reverence the deacons as you would the command of God. Let no one do anything of concern to the Church without the bishop. Let that be considered a valid Eucharist which is celebrated by the bishop, or by one whom he appoints. Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. Nor is it permitted without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate the agape; but whatever he approve, this too is pleasing to God, so that whatever is done will be secure and valid.” (St. Ignatius of Antioch, Bishop and Martyr; Letter to the Smyrneans § 8)

Wot a koad of fluff.dont quote random non scriptural fluf at me as if it has authority.thats like saying bob from bobtown said blah blah and that nullifies scripture.
fluff and rubbish.
dont message me again
.

 

[W2L]

Fullness, right here> Isaiah 55:12

Praise Lord my soul, I love Jesus!

 

[rturner76]

The Church decided the canon of the New Testament at the councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397,

 

[W2L]

I didn't say they wrote it I said they approved the Cannon

Yes, and that's flaw in RC assertions that they are the first Church. What's funny is you claim your church approved it, yet why would they need to if they wrote it? That actually proves they didn't write it and wasn't the first Church established by the apostles. They didn't add Revelation until 200 years after it was written, proving again they were not the Church the apostles founded. Keep boasting about it, you actually boast that your Church wasn't the church that the apostles established.

 

[rturner76]

Yes, and that's flaw in RC assertions that they are the first Church. What's funny is you claim your church approved it, yet why would they need to if they wrote it? That actually proves they didn't write it and wasn't the first Church established by the apostles. They didn't add Revelation until 200 years after it was written, proving again they were not the Church the apostles founded. Keep boasting about it, you actually boast that your Church wasn't the church that the apostles established.

They didn't write it I never said they did. There were many churches in the beginning including Corinth, Antioch, Jerusalem, Greece, etc. It's just that Rome was at the center of what was going on.

 

[rturner76]

Oh, and I'm sur it wasn't all the Apostles that established the church in Rome, it was Peter and his followers, though I'm sure others came through so I hope I didn't give that impression and I'm not boasting. I'm just telling the history of the Church

 

[amadeois]

This thread is going nowhere with so many hard headed catholics.

Peace with you.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Oooooookay! This is really weird, having a Lutheran defending us. But thanks for the props.

This is also our theology.

 

[Strong in Him]

I think we are having a misunderstanding. I'm referring to the Real Presence as in the physical presence of Christ as the bread and wine are turned into flesh and blood. Only Catholics, Orthodox, and Episcopalians have this Sacrament. Lutherans have a version of it. I believe you are referring to a spiritual presence which I believe is valid.

I wasn't going to post again in this thread because it's become too heated. But this answer intrigues me.

So "real presence" means that the bread and wine become literal, physical flesh and blood so that Jesus is physically present ? I hadn't understood that before.
Serious question, and with respect; why is that necessary/important? Before his death and resurrection, Jesus told his disciples that it was better for them if he went away because then he would send the Holy Spirit who would live IN them, John 16:7. The Holy Spirit was poured out at Pentecost and can live in us now. The Spirit is God; the 3rd person of the trinity, sent by Jesus, to live in us and point us to him.
So as we can have GOD himself living in us, assuring us of our salvation and that we are God's children, why is it necessary to believe that Jesus is physically present with us as well as we share communion?

Jesus stayed for 40 days after the resurrection teaching his disciples, Acts 1:3, but then ascended to heaven. He has promised to be with us always, but nowhere has he said that this presence would be physical. Neither did he say that if anyone believed in a physical presence that meant they would have more of him than those who believed he was present by his Spirit.
So why the teaching on the "real presence"?

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

I wasn't going to post again in this thread because it's become too heated. But this answer intrigues me.

So "real presence" means that the bread and wine become literal, physical flesh and blood so that Jesus is physically present ? I hadn't understood that before.
Serious question, and with respect; why is that necessary/important? Before his death and resurrection, Jesus told his disciples that it was better for them if he went away because then he would send the Holy Spirit who would live IN them, John 16:7. The Holy Spirit was poured out at Pentecost and can live in us now. The Spirit is God; the 3rd person of the trinity, sent by Jesus, to live in us and point us to him.
So as we can have GOD himself living in us, assuring us of our salvation and that we are God's children, why is it necessary to believe that Jesus is physically present with us as well as we share communion?

Jesus stayed for 40 days after the resurrection teaching his disciples, Acts 1:3, but then ascended to heaven. He has promised to be with us always, but nowhere has he said that this presence would be physical. Neither did he say that if anyone believed in a physical presence that meant they would have more of him than those who believed he was present by his Spirit.
So why the teaching on the "real presence"?

The Reformed will argue this, but at the literal reading of the accounts of the last supper, Christ does say "is" in regard to His very body and blood. He also tells us to do it often and that in doing so, sins will be forgiven.

While the sacraments are "necessary" for salvation, they are not completely necessary. We can not put limits on God's grace. Because grace was conferred on the faithful through His death and resurrection, does not mean that we can not be given grace through baptism and the Eucharist; likewise, we are given grace through God's holy word (another gift given by the Holy Spirit).

In Churches that hold this traditional teaching, we believe that at the Eucharistic Liturgy both space and time are transcended, and the whole Church comes together in one place in what we confess as the Communion of the Saints. While I can not speak for the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox, in Western Eucharistic Liturgies there is a part called the "Preface", generally there is one which is common for general usage, but there are what we call "Proper" Prefaces that are specific to days and seasons. (there are other parts; the "ordinaries" that do not change, and the "propers" which change with the Church year. Below is an example of the "Proper Preface" used during Advent (the four weeks before Christmas):

It is truly good, right and salutary that we should at all times and in all places give thanks to You, Holy Lord, Almighty Father, Everlasting God, through Jesus Christ our Lord, who's way John the Baptist prepared, proclaiming Him the promised Messiah, the very Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the word, calling sinners to repentance that they might escape from the wrath to be revealed when He comes again in Glory. Therefore, with angels and archangels and all the company of heaven we laud and magnify Your glorious Name, ever more praising You and saying (Lutheran Service Book, page 184):

Holy, holy, holy, Lord God of Sabaoth;
heaven and earth are full of thy glory.
Hosanna in the highest.
Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord
Hosanna in the highest. (Lutheran Service Book, Divine Service III).
​

This is one very real communion of the saints (the whole Chruch, those living here in this world, and those who have gone before us, who are with Christ in heaven.

 

[civilwarbuff]

The Catholic Church is the original church that approved the Biblical Cannon so you can thank the Roman Catholic Church for your Bible

That sounds suspiciously like pride......

 

[rturner76]

I wasn't going to post again in this thread because it's become too heated. But this answer intrigues me.

So "real presence" means that the bread and wine become literal, physical flesh and blood so that Jesus is physically present ? I hadn't understood that before.
Serious question, and with respect; why is that necessary/important? Before his death and resurrection, Jesus told his disciples that it was better for them if he went away because then he would send the Holy Spirit who would live IN them, John 16:7. The Holy Spirit was poured out at Pentecost and can live in us now. The Spirit is God; the 3rd person of the trinity, sent by Jesus, to live in us and point us to him.
So as we can have GOD himself living in us, assuring us of our salvation and that we are God's children, why is it necessary to believe that Jesus is physically present with us as well as we share communion?

Jesus stayed for 40 days after the resurrection teaching his disciples, Acts 1:3, but then ascended to heaven. He has promised to be with us always, but nowhere has he said that this presence would be physical. Neither did he say that if anyone believed in a physical presence that meant they would have more of him than those who believed he was present by his Spirit.
So why the teaching on the "real presence"?

Good question. I wouldn't be qualified to answer. You would need to talk to a Catholic apoligist or scholar.It does make me want to study more. Mt personal answer not representing the churchis thsat it is a comfort to me and Jesus said the bread and wine is his flesh and blood.

 

[rturner76]

That sounds suspiciously like pride......

It could be. I got offenced by the way this person disregarded the Catholic Church like they had no part in the history of the church and were just rubbish. I let my emotions get the better of me.

 

[Albion]

This "undenominational" church in Rome I believe is what we now know as the Roman Catholic Church.

Of course you do. And Mormons insist that it's theirs. Jehovah's Witnesses insist that it's theirs. Baptists insist that it's theirs. And the Eastern Orthodox have, by any measurement, a much stronger claim on being the original church than the Roman Catholic Church, which didn't even know what a Pope was all about until several hundred years after Christ.

 

[Strong in Him]

The Reformed will argue this, but at the literal reading of the accounts of the last supper, Christ does say "is" in regard to His very body and blood. He also tells us to do it often and that in doing so, sins will be forgiven.

While the sacraments are "necessary" for salvation, they are not completely necessary. We can not put limits on God's grace. Because grace was conferred on the faithful through His death and resurrection, does not mean that we can not be given grace through baptism and the Eucharist; likewise, we are given grace through God's holy word (another gift given by the Holy Spirit).

In Churches that hold this traditional teaching, we believe that at the Eucharistic Liturgy both space and time are transcended, and the whole Church comes together in one place in what we confess as the Communion of the Saints. While I can not speak for the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox, in Western Eucharistic Liturgies there is a part called the "Preface", generally there is one which is common for general usage, but there are what we call "Proper" Prefaces that are specific to days and seasons. (there are other parts; the "ordinaries" that do not change, and the "propers" which change with the Church year. Below is an example of the "Proper Preface" used during Advent (the four weeks before Christmas):

It is truly good, right and salutary that we should at all times and in all places give thanks to You, Holy Lord, Almighty Father, Everlasting God, through Jesus Christ our Lord, who's way John the Baptist prepared, proclaiming Him the promised Messiah, the very Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the word, calling sinners to repentance that they might escape from the wrath to be revealed when He comes again in Glory. Therefore, with angels and archangels and all the company of heaven we laud and magnify Your glorious Name, ever more praising You and saying (Lutheran Service Book, page 184):

Holy, holy, holy, Lord God of Sabaoth;
heaven and earth are full of thy glory.
Hosanna in the highest.
Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord
Hosanna in the highest. (Lutheran Service Book, Divine Service III).
​

This is one very real communion of the saints (the whole Chruch, those living here in this world, and those who have gone before us, who are with Christ in heaven.

Thank you for your reply, Mark.
I believe in the communion of saints - it's in the creed, and "therefore with angels and archangels and all the company of heaven ....." was/is part of the Anglican communion liturgy.

But a previous poster said that they have the physical presence of Jesus at communion - when the bread and wine is transformed into his body and blood. I was just wondering why they need to believe that he is physically present. I hadn't heard that before, and it doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Albion]

But a previous poster said that they have the physical presence of Jesus at communion - when the bread and wine is transformed into his body and blood. I was just wondering why they need to believe that he is physically present. I hadn't heard that before, and it doesn't make sense to me.

Yep. The Roman Catholic Church made it a doctrine in the 13th century when magic and alchemy were a big deal. A recent survey of American Catholics showed that most members don't actually believe it, but those who do seem to think that it's especially intimate to believe that what they're ingesting is Christ's body in a very literal sense.

 

[Light of the East]

I see no explicit teaching of this from the Bible. We are baptized from obedience but it has no salvific power.

I would suggest that you read the book THAT YOU MIGHT PROSPER - Dominion by Covenant by the Protestant writer, Ray Sutton. He gives a very nice definition of God's covenant structure and how it works. You can find it online at the I.C.E. freebooks website and you can read it for free.

Whenever there is a covenant being made, there is a ceremony or ritual of covenant making. For instance, in the covenant of marriage, there is the covenant ceremony called "the wedding." In the Old Covenant, the ceremony was circumcision, and it made the one being circumcised a true part of Israel and united that one to God through that covenant community.

In your opinion, where is the covenant ceremony today to enter us into the New Covenant?

 

[Light of the East]

Well if you take the bible literally Jesus is also a vine and we're branches. Also there's worms in hell. And God has feet.

Did you read the article or just blow it off?

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

Bread of the Presence:
Exodus 25:30 (and many other references):
Put the bread of the Presence on this table to be before me at all times.


and, furthermore...
Genesis 14:18-19:
Then Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine. He was priest of God Most High, and he blessed Abram...

I think that recognition of the Presence of the Lord is something that is mostly missing from Protestant teaching and better emphasized in Traditions. And I say mostly missing because of the lack of centrality of this teaching.

With Protestants it's called 'reckoning'. Reckoning ourselves dead yet alive to Christ. But I don't think that even that teaching is expanded on enough to make those taking it in to become aware of the never-failing Presence of the Lord in our every movement in life.

I say the ever Presence because that is the fact. He is not there only when we recognise Him as being there. But it is His being Present that makes christianity Christianity.

 

[Light of the East]

Please see the thread I have started in General Theology -- "Purgatory: A Colossal Fraud".

See you there!