Is Scripture MISSING Dogmas? (2)

[topcare]

I apologize if this offends Brother and I know that I can be the worst when it comes to trying to present scriptural truth in love, although please try to understand what it means to those who think of how insulting this is to the LORD.

One if His creatures (a man) is asking God to turn a piece of bread into Himself so that an assembly can consume it, pass it through their digestive tract, and then out their bowel, while being led to believe that it's God.

The bread is actually the body of Christ, the church of God and it is supposed to be leavened bread for that reason. We are that one bread and it's fellowship in remembering the LORD in His death til He comes. It's all about the BODY of Christ coming together to REMEMBER Him, not EAT Him.

This is going to be offensive because of its nature and that's understandable.. just try to be as understanding of a believer like myself who considers it an insult for ANY man to think that He is eating the LORD.. we certainly are FEASTING on His WORD because He is the WORD made flesh and the scriptures are God's testimony concerning His only begotten Son.. our Lord Jesus Christ.

The Word of God is of no offense to me. You came in here like a bull in a china shop and making fun of the Holy Eucharist from the very beginning, instead of try to understand the doctrine that came from Christ Himself. There were people with your ideas in the NT and because they could not fathom the idea that Christ was truly present they walked away. Now those same type of people try to get people to follow "it's only a symbol" idea which is just another version of not being able to believe what Christ said and walking away.

There was a time when no one who followed Christ would have the gull to question Christ and what he said. For almost 1500 hundred years from the very beginning the Apostles knew what Christ meant but in the 1500's a man changed everything, not God but a man thought what he thought right was the way to go and him and many that follow profane the Body and Blood of Christ daily.

If you really want to know and not just give lip service to it than look the doctrine up that Christ Himself gave to Christians. Of course

Yes I am mad, mad and very hurt that people always seem to get away with insulting the Blood and Body of Christ and those of us who believe He was speaking literally in those verses and the whole of the Body of Christ believed Him until the 1500's and when we defend we always get in trouble. I am sure you may be like most and continue to hate us and profane the Blood and Body of Christ, it would be nice if one looked but we are to be hated.

 

[ThatTrueLight]

The Word of God is of no offense to me. You came in here like a bull in a china shop and making fun of the Holy Eucharist from the very beginning, instead of try to understand the doctrine that came from Christ Himself. There were people with your ideas in the NT and because they could not fathom the idea that Christ was truly present they walked away. Now those same type of people try to get people to follow "it's only a symbol" idea which is just another version of not being able to believe what Christ said and walking away.

There was a time when no one who followed Christ would have the gull to question Christ and what he said. For almost 1500 hundred years from the very beginning the Apostles knew what Christ meant but in the 1500's a man changed everything, not God but a man thought what he thought right was the way to go and him and many that follow profane the Body and Blood of Christ daily.

If you really want to know and not just give lip service to it than look the doctrine up that Christ Himself gave to Christians. Of course

Yes I am mad, mad and very hurt that people always seem to get away with insulting the Blood and Body of Christ and those of us who believe He was speaking literally in those verses and the whole of the Body of Christ believed Him until the 1500's and when we defend we always get in trouble. I am sure you may be like most and continue to hate us and profane the Blood and Body of Christ, it would be nice if one looked but we are to be hated.

And yet you can't even begin to fathom that it's you who profane His body when you all pretend to turn bread into the Almighty and then pass him through your digestive system.

 

[Souldier]

That's great. That sums up the social doctrine of the Church. But my question to you was what dogmas are in the bible? Please be specific.

His sheep know His voice and they follow it.

 

[Albion]

Who said He didn't get it right?

Every member of any church that says the Bible is not complete or adequate such that they have to follow "Tradition" instead. There would be no reason to do so otherwise.

 

[Rick Otto]

The Word of God is of no offense to me. You came in here like a bull in a china shop and making fun of the Holy Eucharist from the very beginning, instead of try to understand the doctrine that came from Christ Himself. There were people with your ideas in the NT and because they could not fathom the idea that Christ was truly present they walked away. Now those same type of people try to get people to follow "it's only a symbol" idea which is just another version of not being able to believe what Christ said and walking away.

There was a time when no one who followed Christ would have the gull to question Christ and what he said. For almost 1500 hundred years from the very beginning the Apostles knew what Christ meant but in the 1500's a man changed everything, not God but a man thought what he thought right was the way to go and him and many that follow profane the Body and Blood of Christ daily.

If you really want to know and not just give lip service to it than look the doctrine up that Christ Himself gave to Christians. Of course

Yes I am mad, mad and very hurt that people always seem to get away with insulting the Blood and Body of Christ and those of us who believe He was speaking literally in those verses and the whole of the Body of Christ believed Him until the 1500's and when we defend we always get in trouble. I am sure you may be like most and continue to hate us and profane the Blood and Body of Christ, it would be nice if one looked but we are to be hated.

Oversimplification is such fun.
Cartoonish, but fun!
Everything was perfect before "you guys" showed up.
You're demons and we are angels.
I get it.
Fun.

 

[fhansen]

Every member of any church that says the Bible is not complete or adequate such that they have to follow "Tradition" instead. There would be no reason to do so otherwise.

The problem isn't the bible; the bible has it right. The problem is when its readers don't have it right. Tradition doesn't add anything so much as it helps us to 'get it right'. On this very thread, those going by the bible alone disagree vehemently on the real presence, both certain they have it right. So Catholics raise their hands and say, "um, well, this is how we've always done it, and the eastern churches have always done it essentially the same way, and this agrees with scripture as well", and then this "tradition" is summarily dismissed as irrelevant compared to someone picking up the bible 1500 or so years down the road and claiming to have it right upon reading it themselves.

People are attracted to the bible because they hear and recognize the voice of God in it. And this is as it should be. In the New Testament, especially, we learn of His abiding and incomparable goodness, trustworthiness, kindness, gentleness, mercy, and love-at least we should. But, going by the disagreements over its meaning, there are still many important differences regarding His nature and will.

 

[Souldier]

The problem isn't the bible; the bible has it right. The problem is when its readers don't have it right. Tradition doesn't add anything so much as it helps us to 'get it right'. On this very thread, those going by the bible alone disagree vehemently on the real presence, both certain they have it right. So Catholics raise their hands and say, "um, well, this is how we've always done it, and the eastern churches have always done it essentially the same way, and this agrees with scripture as well", and then this "tradition" is summarily dismissed as irrelevant compared to someone picking up the bible 1500 or so years down the road and claiming to have it right upon reading it themselves.

How do we know the traditions of any Church are correct though? Do you agree with all SDA tradition? No, so you are not following tradition are you?All we can really do is follow the scriptures. When paul talks about tradition hes talking about His traditions. Hes not referring to traditions that a Church may have picked up later on. So tradition is not to be followed in that way. The words of the scripture are to be followed. The problem however is that you might believe that RC is the first Church and that its traditions are the same as Paul gave the Church. They are not the first Church and all their traditions are not the same as Pauls traditions however. Its just a fact.

 

[Albion]

The problem isn't the bible; the bible has it right. The problem is when its readers don't have it right. Tradition doesn't add anything so much as it helps us to 'get it right'.

Well, that's so wrong that all I can surmise is that you don't understand what "Tradition" is supposed to be or mean.

But as we've noted before, even if what you say here were true, "Tradition" doesn't do a thing to correct the problem that you describe. I've pointed this out many times and no Catholic ever answers it, since to do so would be to admit to the phoniness of that argument about "readers don't have it right."

 

[fhansen]

Why so they can tell me the same nonsense I hear right here.. how that some guy in your assembly says some prayer which turns a little piece of bread into God so that you can consume him and pass him through your digestive system and then out your bowel?

That's probably the most insulting thing I've ever heard concerning the Lord Jesus Christ.

Jesus was quite earthy. God created our bodies: He's not squeamish or prudish about them the way man can be. Shame came in with the Fall, after all. Either way, we're to partake of Him; and He must remain in us.

 

[Souldier]

Jesus was quite earthy. God created our bodies: He's not squeamish or prudish about them the way man can be. Shame came in with the Fall, after all.

Jesus was quite spiritual and he spoke in spiritual ways. He fulfilled the prophecy which foretold that God would speak to people in parables, and that by hearing they would not understand, and by seeing they would not see.

Jesus suffered at the cross and died to the world. Likewise he teaches us to follow Him and to bear our own cross.,

 

[fhansen]

Jesus was quite spiritual and he spoke in spiritual ways. He fulfilled the prophecy which foretold that God would speak to people in parables, and that by hearing they would not understand, and by seeing they would not see.

yes-He was earthy and spiritual and spoke in parables. and so??

Jesus suffered at the cross and died to the world. Likewise he teaches us to follow Him and to bear our own cross.,

yes

 

[Souldier]

That is what paul means when he teaches us to walk by faith not sight, and to look at that which is unseen rather than the earthly things we see.

 

[Souldier]

yes-He was earthy and spiritual and spoke in parables. and so??

That is what paul means when he teaches us to walk by faith not sight, and to look at that which is unseen rather than the earthly things we see.

 

[fhansen]

Well, that's so wrong that all I can surmise is that you don't understand what "Tradition" is supposed to be or mean.

But as we've noted before, even if what you say here were true, "Tradition" doesn't do a thing to correct the problem that you describe. I've pointed this out many times and no Catholic ever answers it, since to do so would be to admit to the phoniness of that argument about "readers don't have it right."

Maybe you could address the rest of my post-in order to come to an understanding about how readers do supposedly have it right. It does little good to simply continue to weakly dismiss the logical argument for the need for Tradition, which has been answered over and over ad nauseam. You end up in the rather absurd position of agreeing with others on the validity of the doctrine of sola scripura while disagreeing with them on Scripture's very meaning! As if its OK to compromise our beliefs as long as we agree that Scripture serves to "norm" our beliefs.

 

[Souldier]

Doesnt it just get you excited? It does me. Its a wonderful mystery. It doesnt make sense to the natural man, yet we walk by faith not sight and God gives us sight. From glory to glory.

 

[Albion]

Maybe you could address the rest of my post-in order to come to an understanding about how readers do supposedly have it right.

"How readers have it right" is not the issue. It's "What is the authority?"

It does little good to simply continue to weakly dismiss the logical argument for the need for Tradition, which has been answered over and over ad nauseam.

I'd like you, for once, to actually address the point I made.

HOW DOES TRADITION SOLVE THE PROBLEM YOU POINTED TO (i.e. DIFFERENT INTERPETATIONS)?

 

[fhansen]

"How readers have it right" is not the issue. It's "What is the authority?"

What good is an authority if it can't consistently instruct?

I'd like you, for once, to actually address the point I made.

HOW DOES TRADITION SOLVE THE PROBLEM YOU POINTED TO (i.e. DIFFERENT INTERPETATIONS)?

l already have. The CC doesn't have different interpretations

 

[tadoflamb]

His sheep know His voice and they follow it.

Thanks again. My faith group was discussing that verse last Tuesday night.

But my question to you is, what dogmas are in the bible?

 

[fhansen]

People are attracted to the bible because they hear and recognize the voice of God in it. And this is as it should be. In the New Testament, especially, we learn of His abiding and incomparable goodness, trustworthiness, kindness, gentleness, mercy, and love-at least we should. But, going by the disagreements over its meaning, there are still many important differences regarding His nature and will.

I’ll give an example of how these different theological nuances affect our understanding-and maybe why theology in general is important. The doctrines of some denominations emphasize God as more of a stern father and task master, with man as essentially worthless and bad, deserving of hell, and with God actually predestining some to hell. God’s own glory-whatever that’s understood to mean- is the only objective.

Other theologies understand man to be fallen, corrupted, wounded, but still possessing an inherent dignity, nobility, beauty, and freedom, a being God loves fiercely, with a desire that none should perish. Man’s eternal, boundless, joy and happiness has always been God's chief concern with man. These kind of differences reveal major differences in our concepts of God’s nature and will, and affect how we live our faith and how we treat each other.

The bible can be-and is-used to support both positions.

 

[Albion]

What good is an authority if it can't consistently instruct?

What a strange question. Without an authority, we have no bearings...but more than that, almost every last Christian denomination, out of thousands of them, does accept this one as God's own word!

That's not really up for grabs. YOUR point, however, is that we should still look elsewhere, and I wonder what conceivable argument you could have for suggesting that. What you've said is that not every one of us agrees on the meaning of every last part of Scripture (although we do agree on almost all that could be considered essential to our faith). But what is better?

l already have. The CC doesn't have different interpretations

Very well. Then your argument is purely sectarian. It is not an argument on behalf of Tradition, even though you put it that way every time Scripture is criticized.

And that argument of yours is essentially the same one as advanced by the Mormons, the Jehovah's Witnesses, the Armstrongites, etc. etc. The upshot is that the Scriptures aren't lacking anything, but everyone should just follow whatever your own denomination says to believe, and for no reason other than that it says so.

At least, we can stop talking past each other now.