A Protestant attending a Catholic service.

[bigsierra]

On that count, I agree with you. Christians have been far too willing to impose their will on other Christians and non-Christians and in the end it only reduces our credibility.

God has an amazing amount of mercy on us considering all of our schisms, heresies and hatreds of each other.

ken

Amen

 

[Knight]

Ok, prove or proof probably wasn't the word to pick. Pointing to any blood, but that of Christ, isn't applicable.

I do not disagree with you in the context of trying to prove a point. Or in the context of vengence over such a death.

Are you suggesting it is improper to honor those who have died, justly, for the faith. What about Stephen? Or James, Peter, Paul, or any of the apostles?

 

[bigsierra]

I do not disagree with you in the context of trying to prove a point. Or in the context of vengence over such a death.

Are you suggesting it is improper to honor those who have died, justly, for the faith. What about Stephen? Or James, Peter, Paul, or any of the apostles?

No, that's not what I was saying. That's an interesting thought though. I guess each different group would have their own martyrs, outside those mentioned in the Bible.

So, if he was originally "only" honoring those that had fallen, then that's fine and good, but it didn't seem like that was the case. Honoring Saints of the past is an important part of Christianity.
We can learn a lot from history. Hopefully, to not make the mistakes of the past.

 

[Knight]

No, that's not what I was saying. That's an interesting thought though. I guess each different group would have their own martyrs, outside those mentioned in the Bible.

Good. We can be friends now...

So, if he was originally "only" honoring those that had fallen, then that's fine and good, but it didn't seem like that was the case.

I'll let Cal speak for himself in this case....
(Frankley, I'm surprised he's been quiet this long...)

Cal???

Honoring Saints of the past is an important part of Christianity.
We can learn a lot from history. Hopefully, to not make the mistakes of the past.

Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it. (who said that?)

 

[LynneClomina]

No, it isn't all right because: "There be only two sacraments ordained by Christ our Lord in the Gospel; that is to say, Baptism and the Supper of the Lord: neither of which may be dispensed by any but by a minister of the Word lawfully ordained." (Westminster Confession XXVII:IV). Roman priests are ordained according to the laws of Rome and as such are not qualified to administer any sacrament whatever to a Protestant, nor should they be willing to do so.

where in the BIBLE does it say only an ordained minister can dispense the communion?

(seriously curious!)

 

[LynneClomina]

Personal opinion here:
I don't think I could take communion in a Roman Catholic service because of what is being said about the elements. (ie: transubstantiation)

personally, i agree; but i could eat a cracker at home in remembrance of Christ; so, let them speak of transubstantian as much as they may, it's not true, it's a peice of bread, and to me no different than eating a peice off a loaf at my church when it comes to breaking the bread between my teeth and thinking on Him.... (should He request me to do so at a Catholic church, and while i certainly hope not, i examine myself - would i be willing to obey God rather than men in this instance?)

i believe wholeheartedly that transubstantiation is not biblical, but whatever others say about a wafer don't make it true - and if it's not true, i dont have to think about the wafer as transubstatiated bread and thus reject communing with my Lord over it, SHOULD He so call me to do so.

 

[Dark_Lite]

How dare you,it is against cannon law if you receive communion that is not even funny why would you put a smiley icon not even to kid.

Funnily enough, I respect other people's beliefs, regardless of how much of a double standard it might be.

I'm assuming this post gives me the permission to jump to conclusions and assume you worship Mary!

Oh... wait.... no it doesn't.

 

[Cal]

Don't you think loss of life is stupid, either direction? Both sides of the issue has blood on there hands. It is a reprehensible blemish on the name of Christ, no matter what.

No I don't think it is stupid, I think it is a great blessing to suffer for Christ and for righteousness sake.

MAT 5:10 Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

MAT 5:11 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.

MAT 5:12 Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.


What I think is bemish on Christ's name is those who will not die for Him or for righteousness sake, but instead will save their name, reputation and skin for compromise, so called "peace" and for unrighteousness sake.

 

[Cal]

Well proving truth by how many has fallen is support of it wouldn't be accurate or we would have the Salem Witches saying they died for their faith. I'm sure they do somewhere.

God call's those who have fallen for Him heroes and their martyrdom as a token of their Christianity.

2TH 1:4 So that we ourselves glory in you in the churches of God for your patience and faith in all your persecutions and tribulations that ye endure:

2TH 1:5 Which is a manifest token of the righteous judgment of God, that ye may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which ye also suffer:


Those whom have died for Christ and His righteosness are considered hero's!

Hero's of Faith Chapter

HEB 11:25 choosing rather to endure ill-treatment with the people of God than to enjoy the passing pleasures of sin,

HEB 11:26 considering the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt; for he was looking to the reward.

HEB 11:35 Women received back their dead by resurrection; and others were tortured, not accepting their release, so that they might obtain a better resurrection;

HEB 11:36 and others experienced mockings and scourgings, yes, also chains and imprisonment.

HEB 11:37 They were stoned, they were sawn in two, they were tempted, they were put to death with the sword; they went about in sheepskins, in goatskins, being destitute, afflicted, ill-treated

Those whom have died for Christ are considered blessed and to have been given a great reward:


PHI 1:29 For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake;

1PE 4:16 Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf.

1PE 4:19 Wherefore let them that suffer according to the will of God commit the keeping of their souls to him in well doing, as unto a faithful Creator.

ACT 5:41 And they departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for his name.


Those who suffered and died for Christ and His righteousness were considered to be like Christ and predestined to do so:


JOH 15:20 Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also.

JOH 15:21 But all these things will they do unto you for my name's sake, because they know not him that sent me.


MAT 10:19 But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak.

MAT 10:20 For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.

MAT 10:21 And the brother shall deliver up the brother to death, and the father the child: and the children shall rise up against their parents, and cause them to be put to death.

MAT 10:22 And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved.

MAT 10:24 The disciple is not above his master, nor the servant above his lord.


2TI 3:12 Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.

ACT 9:16 For I will show him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake.


And we should suffer in their suffering and not be ashamed of them:


1CO 12:26 And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it.



Yes, pointing to these martyr's for the obvious token of God's pleasure with them, to their obvious predestined honor and great reward, to their predestined act to be "Christ-like," to their faith, and to their inclusion into the Hall of Hero's is a thing we should point to, and do so quite regularly.


Just because frauds have died for their beliefs, this is no reason not to honor the true martyr's sent by God to be a witness to us all. There is an absolute truth, there are absolutely true martyr's, and these are those we should absolutely point to for example and for truth.


If you haven't read Fox's Book of Martyrs I think you would be extremely blessed and edified to do so.


There are thousands recorded who were tortured, lost homes and family and who died rather than participate in transubstantiation. The Bible and faith versus works meant this much to them. They have a lot to teach us "courageous" American's today, I think!

 

[bigsierra]

Ok, so we have two Christians killing each other over a doctrine, and you say that glorifies God. I don't think I wan't to perpetuate this discussion.

 

[Bob Moore]

Thousands of Christians spilled their blood and gave up their lives on exactly this point....

Don't you think loss of life is stupid, either direction? Both sides of the issue has blood on there hands. It is a reprehensible blemish on the name of Christ, no matter what.

Not necessairily. If what is being died for is the integrity of the Word of God (as in the cases Cal cites), then it is indeed a noble sacrifice.

 

[Bob Moore]

where in the BIBLE does it say only an ordained minister can dispense the communion?

(seriously curious!)

References for Ch XXVII:IV

Matthew 28:19; 1 Cor. 11: 20, 23; 1 Cor. 4. l; Heb. 5:4

 

[Cal]

Ok, so we have two Christians killing each other over a doctrine, and you say that glorifies God. I don't think I wan't to perpetuate this discussion.

No, we have PEOPLE who hate God, His Son and His righteousness killing God's children. You can't avoid this. God told Adam it would last for the entire history of the Earth.

GEN 3:15 And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel."

God is saying that Satan and his seed would always be at war with Christ and his seed (us)!

 

[LynneClomina]

References for Ch XXVII:IV

Matthew 28:19; 1 Cor. 11: 20, 23; 1 Cor. 4. l; Heb. 5:4

what is Ch XXVII:IV???

i see no references in there about only those who ordained giving the Lord's supper.

could you be specific, and why it is?

 

[bigsierra]

.

 

[tigersnare]

Please stop breaking the rules.

Do you still hold to reformed theology? I thought you were just steps away from being catholic, if that is the case, there are rules for you as well.

If I'm mistaken, so be it.

 

[rnmomof7]

The rules as posted are that debate here may only be between Reform believers.

2) Reformed/Calvinist, as well as all members of the Congregational Forums can post fellowship threads here. Only Reformed/Calvinist members are allowed to debate threads to discuss various doctrines to do with their own denomination and other denominations as long as they are within our rules.

It is my expectation that this rule will be observed. If a non reform believer wishes to debate an issue like doctrinal differences I would suggest starting a thread on the General Theology forum

 

[rnmomof7]

error

 

[bigsierra]

Do you still hold to reformed theology? I thought you were just steps away from being catholic, if that is the case, there are rules for you as well.

If I'm mistaken, so be it.

Being a step away and being are two major different things. As far as that goes, I'm may steps away. It would be Easter of next year, and I could be denied, if it was considered that I am still Protestant in my beliefs.

I was discussing basic human decency and was holding that there were wrongs done on both sides, during the Reformation/Counterreformation era. I never called anyone a child of satan or a hater of God.

I hope I didn't offend anyone here.

 

[Gabriel]

I hope I didn't offend anyone here.

You have. You put Cals' posts together to make something of them that they were not.

You are breaking the rules in this forum as you are not of Reformed doctrine. Cease and desist immediately or you will be warned.