Can you be forgiven for "eating to your harm"?

[Ron Gurley]

And the "Rocky" passage: Simone Peter's spiritual revelation was the "rock".

Matthew 16 (NASB)
13 Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi,
He was asking His disciples (saved followers),
“Who do people say that the "Son of Man" is?”
14 And they said,
“Some say John the Baptist; and others, Elijah; but still others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets.”
15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”
(the question for ALL today!)
16 Simon Peter answered,
“You are the Christ, (Divine Messiah) the Son of the living God.”
17 And Jesus said to him,
“Blessed are you, Simon Barjona,
because flesh and blood did not reveal this (spiritual truth) to you,
but My Father who is in heaven.
18 I also say to you that you are Peter (petros=Rocky),
and upon this rock (petra=revelation) I will build My "church" (body of believers);
and the gates of Hades will not overpower it.
19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven (FORE-KNOWLEDGE), and whatever you loose on earth shall have been
loosed in heaven.”
20 Then He warned the disciples that they should tell no one that He was THE Christ.

Jesus has the "keys'!

Revelation 1:18
and the living One; and I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore,
and I have the keys of death and of Hades.
(and Paradise, the good side of Abraham's Bosom)

Luke 23:43
And He (Jesus on Cross) said to him,
“Truly I say to you, (repentant thief)
today you shall be with Me in Paradise.”

 

[bbbbbbb]

So does the Catholic Church. That's not the point. The point is, what does the Body of Christ refer to IN THIS PASSAGE. The subject of the passage is NOT THE CHURCH. It's communion.

Thank you for understanding my point.

So, where does the Bible crisply tell us that the bread really and truly becomes the physical body of Jesus Christ and the wine really and truly becomes the physical blood of Jesus Christ if, and when, an ordained Catholic priest says the prescribed words?

Secondly, why is it that the bread and the wine really and truly do not become physical flesh and blood after the ordained Catholic priest says the prescribed words?

 

[Meowzltov]

I believe in the doctrine of: "Scriptura Suprema"...if any doctrine/dogma of any denomination is in direct conflict with the God-breathed Scripture, the spiritual "litmus test", then the Bible WINS...it is supreme and over-rules ALL.

Let's start with the RCC requirement of "confession" to a RCC "father" as a pre-requisite to receiving "communion". 5 of the 7 "graces" granted by the RCC deal with the issue of SIN...the barrier between God and Man.

The problem is you condemn us for doctrines that are NOT in conflict with scripture. You condemn us for disclinplines that are in addition to scripture.

For example, scripture is QUITE CLEAR that we are to confess our sins aloud to another, and not just to God. It's because God knows there is something especially healing about stating our grave sins aloud to another human being, something releasing.

In the early Church this meant confessing before the entire congregation and penance was given right there and then. This was only done for serious sins such as murder and adultery, which Christians were thoroughly expected to refrain from.

The problem is, this style of confession led to terrible gossip and lives were ruined. Eventually, to solve this problem, the Church moved to private confession with the presbyter. Doesn't that MAKE SENSE to you? PART OF CONFESSION IS FOR THE PENITENT TO PRAY DIRECTLY TO GOD (the Act of Contrition). The tradition that only serious sins are required to be confessed still holds. If you embezzle $100K, you go to the priest for help in confessing and advice in turning your life back around. If you swipe a pen from the office, you return it and confess directly to God.

It is Christians who refuse to confess one to another who have a practice contrary to Scripture. Why aren't you picking on them???

 

[Meowzltov]

Thank you for understanding my point.

So, where does the Bible crisply tell us that the bread really and truly becomes the physical body of Jesus Christ and the wine really and truly becomes the physical blood of Jesus Christ if, and when, an ordained Catholic priest says the prescribed words?

Secondly, why is it that the bread and the wine really and truly do not become physical flesh and blood after the ordained Catholic priest says the prescribed words?

It stops short of saying physical, but it definitely teaches Real Presence, not symbol only.

 

[Phil 1:21]

The problem is you condemn us for doctrines that are NOT in conflict with scripture. You condemn us for disclinplines that are in addition to scripture.

For example, scripture is QUITE CLEAR that we are to confess our sins aloud to another, and not just to God. It's because God knows there is something especially healing about stating our grave sins aloud to another human being, something releasing.

In the early Church this meant confessing before the entire congregation and penance was given right there and then. This was only done for serious sins such as murder and adultery, which Christians were thoroughly expected to refrain from.

The problem is, this style of confession led to terrible gossip and lives were ruined. Eventually, to solve this problem, the Church moved to private confession with the presbyter. Doesn't that MAKE SENSE to you? PART OF CONFESSION IS FOR THE PENITENT TO PRAY DIRECTLY TO GOD (the Act of Contrition). The tradition that only serious sins are required to be confessed still holds. If you embezzle $100K, you go to the priest for help in confessing and advice in turning your life back around. If you swipe a pen from the office, you return it and confess directly to God.

It is Christians who refuse to confess one to another who have a practice contrary to Scripture. Why aren't you picking on them???

I think you are confusing what was allowed with what is required. Yes, there is scripture to support the act of confessing sins to a third party (although nothing to support the notion that this only applies to a certain severity of offense). But nowhere does the Word of God state that we must confess our sins to our fellow man in order to receive forgiveness from The Lord. Actually, Jesus tells us the exact opposite in Luke 18:9-14 when he states that the tax collector went home justified before God after he "... beat his breast and said, ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner.’"

 

[Meowzltov]

But nowhere does the Word of God state that we must confess our sins to our fellow man in order to receive forgiveness from The Lord.

If it is commanded to confess out sins to a third party, and we are not doing it, then that sin alone is not forgiven.

 

[Phil 1:21]

If it is commanded to confess out sins to a third party, and we are not doing it, then that sin alone is not forgiven.

But nowhere does God command us to confess to a third party. As a matter of fact, Jesus is pretty clear about asking for forgiveness directly to the Father.

Our Father, who art in heaven
Hallowed be thy name
Thy kingdom come
Thy will be done
On earth as it is in heaven
Give us this day our daily bread
AND FORGIVE US OUR TRESPASSES
As we forgive those who trespass against us.
Lead us not into temptation
But deliver us from evil
Amen

 

[zippy2006]

But nowhere does God command us to confess to a third party.

"Therefore confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effects" (James 5:16).

As a matter of fact, Jesus is pretty clear about asking for forgiveness directly to the Father.

Apparently they aren't mutually exclusive.

 

[bbbbbbb]

"Therefore confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effects" (James 5:16).

Apparently they aren't mutually exclusive.

The problem, of course, comes when people decide to make one or the other the only acceptable form of confession. In the case of the Catholic Church confession cannot normally be made just to any Christian, but must be made to a Catholic priest who then determines the appropriate penance (punishment) for the sins.

 

[zippy2006]

The problem, of course, comes when people decide to make one or the other the only acceptable form of confession. In the case of the Catholic Church confession cannot normally be made just to any Christian, but must be made to a Catholic priest who then determines the appropriate penance (punishment) for the sins.

The Church does not limit who you may confess your sins to, it simply acknowledges that Jesus did not give everyone the power to bind and loose. It is the bishop--and by extension, the priest--who has this power.

 

[bbbbbbb]

The Church does not limit who you may confess your sins to, it simply acknowledges that Jesus did not give everyone the power to bind and loose. It is the bishop--and by extension, the priest--who has this power.

Yeah, I could confess my sins to my pet goldfish, but that would have no more success than confessing them to my High Priest directly (who is none of other than Jesus Christ) because the Catholic Church insists that only their priests can forgive sins (assuming that the sinner undergoes the aforementioned penance (punishment) meted out by the Catholic priest).