Non sola scriptura beliefs origins, like flat Earth...?

[Davy]

"You are what you eat." ~Anonymous

That was a doctrine of the Hari Krishnas too.

 

[Davy]

He was born in 1564 and died in 1642. His Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems was written in 1632. Not THAT early in the Protestant rebellion.

Still pretty close; Martin Luther's 95 thesis was around 1517, which is one of the main things that started the Protestant rebellion. So that still put Galileo pretty close to that same era.

 

[HTacianas]

Traditions of men is actually what you are referencing as being more important than God's Holy Writ. And that just is not so. God's Holy Writ is the Measure of all things.

I have already pointed out to you "God's Holy Writ". And it agrees with the longstanding teachings of Christianity.

Now, since it does, and you are telling me something different, how do I distinguish between your traditions and God's Holy Writ?

 

[d taylor]

-​

Look at the lies, science has cause many christians to place their faith into.

 

[Petros2015]

 

[ViaCrucis]

Of course that is the Catholic Church understanding, but it is not the Protestant Church understanding. The bread and wine are SYMBOLIC REPRESENTATIONS for Christ's body and blood.

Woah there pardner. Firstly, there is no such thing as "the Protestant Church", and there is no such thing as a "Protestant understanding" of Communion.

Lutherans, just like our Roman Catholic and Orthodox brethren, explicitly confess the real and literal bodily presence of Jesus Christ "in, with, and under" the bread and wine. That means when we receive the bread and the wine, we are not receiving "symbolic representations", we are receiving what Jesus Christ, God Himself, said. He didn't say "This represents My body", He said, "This IS My body".

At the meeting between Luther and Zwingli at Marburg, Luther scratched the Latin words "hoc est" onto the table. Hoc est is Latin for "This is". This was the hard line that Luther would not compromise on. Jesus said "This is", and that is what the Church has always believed, it's what the Apostles believed, it's what the ancient fathers believed, it's what Christians, both East and West and everywhere in the world believed, and it's what Lutherans continued--and continue--to believe.

Your "Protestant understanding" is not. It's merely Zwinglianism. Which is just one of several different views among Protestants.

Just because Zwingli decided to reject 1500 years of unanimous Biblical, Christian teaching on the Eucharist doesn't mean that he gets to speak on behalf of all Protestants, let alone all Christians.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Davy]

Woah there pardner. Firstly, there is no such thing as "the Protestant Church"
....

Brethren, ViaCrucis is obviously someone living backwards in time.

The PROTESTANT Church DOES exist, and it is NOT allied with the Catholic church 'system'.

Just how the Catholic system still wars... against the Protestant Church today can be seen in the scholarly documentary called Bridge to Babylon (on YouTube). Catholic political system supporters lie often, and have no problem telling lies.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Brethren, ViaCrucis is obviously someone living backwards in time.

Nope, just explicitly and emphatically Lutheran. Verbum Domini Manet in Aeternum.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

Actually, the politics of man's catholic system has no problem telling lies, like I said before, and their acts are in reality more closely aligned to Communist strategy against the Protestant Faith, because Communists believe that 'the end justifies the means'. In case you don't know what that means, it means that ANY act that helps reach their goal is justified. That kind of mentality is 'evil', and is not from God.

Sounds like a Jack Chick tract. If I wanted to read nonsense I'd go pick up some Texe Marrs books.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

"Of the Supper of the Lord they teach that the Body and Blood of Christ are truly present, and are distributed to those who eat the Supper of the Lord; and they reject those that teach otherwise." - The Augsburg Confession, Article X

"The Tenth Article has been approved, in which we confess that we believe, that in the Lord’s Supper the body and blood of Christ are truly and substantially present, and are truly tendered, with those things which are seen, bread and wine, to those who receive the Sacrament. This belief we constantly defend, as the subject has been carefully examined and considered. For since Paul says, 1 Cor. 10:16, that the bread is the communion of the Lord’s body, etc., it would follow, if the Lord’s body were not truly present, that the bread is not a communion of the body, but only of the spirit of Christ. And we have ascertained that not only the Roman Church affirms the bodily presence of Christ, but the Greek Church also both now believes, and formerly believed, the same. For the canon of the Mass among them testifies to this, in which the priest clearly prays that the bread may be changed and become the very body of Christ. And Vulgarius, who seems to us to be not a silly writer, says distinctly that bread is not a mere figure, but is truly changed into flesh. And there is a long exposition of Cyril on John 15, in which he teaches that Christ is corporeally offered us in the Supper. For he says thus: Nevertheless, we do not deny that we are joined spiritually to Christ by true faith and sincere love. But that we have no mode of connection with Him, according to the flesh, this indeed we entirely deny. And this, we say, is altogether foreign to the divine Scriptures. For who has doubted that Christ is in this manner a vine, and we the branches, deriving thence life for ourselves? Hear Paul saying 1 Cor. 10:17; Rom. 12:5; Gal. 3:28: We are all one body in Christ; although we are many, we are, nevertheless, one in Him; for we are, all partakers of that one bread. Does he perhaps think that the virtue of the mystical benediction is unknown to us? Since this is in us, does it not also, by the communication of Christ’s flesh, cause Christ to dwell in us bodily? And a little after: Whence we must consider that Christ is in us not only according to the habit, which we call love, but also by natural participation, etc. We have cited these testimonies, not to undertake a discussion here concerning this subject, for His Imperial Majesty does not disapprove of this article, but in order that all who may read them may the more clearly perceive that we defend the doctrine received in the entire Church, that in the Lord’s Supper the body and blood of Christ are truly and substantially present, and are truly tendered with those things which are seen, bread and wine. And we speak of the presence of the living Christ [living body]; for we know that death hath no more dominion over Him, Rom. 6:9." - Defense of the Augsburg Confession, Article X

"What is the Sacrament of the Altar?

–Answer: It is the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, under the bread and wine, for us Christians to eat and to drink, instituted by Christ Himself.

Where is this written?

–Answer: The holy Evangelists, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and St. Paul, write thus:

Our Lord Jesus Christ, the same night in which He was betrayed, took bread: and when He had given thanks, He brake it, and gave it to His disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is My body, which is given for you. This do in remembrance of Me.

After the same manner also He took the cup, when He had supped, gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Take, drink ye all of it. This cup is the new testament in My blood, which is shed for you for the remission of sins. This do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of Me.

What is the benefit of such eating and drinking?

–Answer: That is shown us in these words: Given, and shed for you, for the remission of sins; namely, that in the Sacrament forgiveness of sins, life, and salvation are given us through these words. For where there is forgiveness of sins, there is also life and salvation.

How can bodily eating and drinking do such great things?

–Answer: It is not the eating and drinking, indeed, that does them, but the words which stand here, namely: Given, and shed for you, for the remission of sins. Which words are, beside the bodily eating and drinking, as the chief thing in the Sacrament; and he that believes these words has what they say and express, namely, the forgiveness of sins.

Who, then, receives such Sacrament worthily?

–Answer: Fasting and bodily preparation is, indeed, a fine outward training; but he is truly worthy and well prepared who has faith in these words: Given, and shed for you, for the remission of sins.

But he that does not believe these words, or doubts, is unworthy and unfit; for the words For you require altogether believing hearts." - Small Catechism (intended for children), Part VI on the Sacrament of the Altar

I could continue. But the Lutheran Confessions, which are Norma Normata standard of Lutherans, and has been for nearly five hundred years, couldn't be any clearer on this subject.

So say whatever one may about me, but I'm merely saying what has always been said.

I could be more forceful on this matter, there is no true Church where the Sacrament of the Supper is not observed with full reverence. For the Church is not where Word and Sacrament are not; it is Word and Sacrament that makes the Church the Christian Church.

And a denial of the Real Presence is nothing other than a rejection of biblical, Christian, normative orthodoxy. Though, if I recall correctly one of the posters of this thread has come out and blatantly said they deny even the resurrection of the body. And if one denies the resurrection, which is heresy, it should not also be shocking that they deny this same resurrected and glorious Lord Jesus Christ gives Himself in His Supper. St. Ignatius of Antioch spoke of such heretics just a decade after St. John wrote the Apocalypse.

Though perhaps that is approaching being too harsh. Though it remains indisputably true.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[d taylor]

-​

God's true creation descriptions/accounts are found in The Bible, not in science books.

 

[ViaCrucis]

-​

God's true creation descriptions/accounts are found in The Bible, not in science books.

This earth is a globe. That's just facts. Your opinion about what the Bible says on the subject is irrelevant.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[J_B_]

I could be more forceful on this matter, there is no true Church where the Sacrament of the Supper is not observed with full reverence. For the Church is not where Word and Sacrament are not; it is Word and Sacrament that makes the Church the Christian Church.

Agreed, and very Lutheran of you to say so. As such, let me ask you a question. For me this only became clear through learning of Walther's struggles and writings. I'm sure one could find the same sentiments echoed in Luther, and maybe even the Church Fathers before him. But is that anachronistic? There are definitely cases of not fully working out a doctrine until the tension of a crisis draws it out.

So, how much do you think the Fathers or the Reformers appreciated this?

 

[Davy]

Sounds like a Jack Chick tract. If I wanted to read nonsense I'd go pick up some Texe Marrs books.

-CryptoLutheran

Just like the "tares" took over the government of Russia in 1917, at some point in the history of the church at Rome, the tares took it over too.

Matt 13:38-39
38 The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;

39 The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.
KJV

 

[The Liturgist]

Those ideas originated in the Catholic Church.

The Roman Catholic Church has never taught a belief in a Flat Earth.

Furthermore, while transubstantiation as defined according to Aristotelian categories is a product of Scholastic Roman Catholic theology, the idea that our Lord Jesus Christ is physically present in the Eucharist and that the bread and wine actually become His Body and Blood dates to the earliest Christians (we know this because of ancient liturgical texts, such as the Didache, the Anaphorae of St. Mark, and of Addai and Mari, the latter two being from the Greek and Coptic Orthodox Churches of Alexandria, and the Assyrian Church of the East, both dated to the second century, and the former being a First Century book of church order which was nearly included in the New Testament canon and was given a deuterocanonical reputation by St. Athanasius). Lutherans and many other Protestants including Anglo Catholics and most other High Church Anglicans believe in the physical presence of Christ in the Eucharist, and Anglicanism and Lutheranism are the 3rd and 4th largest denominations in the world, after the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholics.

In addition, Calvinists believe our Lord is spiritually present in the Eucharist, which is a doctrine very close to the ancient doctrine.

 

[The Liturgist]

Lutherans, just like our Roman Catholic and Orthodox brethren, explicitly confess the real and literal bodily presence of Jesus Christ "in, with, and under" the bread and wine. That means when we receive the bread and the wine, we are not receiving "symbolic representations", we are receiving what Jesus Christ, God Himself, said. He didn't say "This represents My body", He said, "This IS My body".

Indeed.

 

[Eloy Craft]

Traditions of men is actually what you are referencing as being more important than God's Holy Writ.

Traditions of men. Can you identify a man made tradition? Perhaps define and distinguish it from a divine tradition?

 

[The Liturgist]

Traditions of men. Can you identify a man made tradition? Perhaps define and distinguish it from a divine tradition?

I think one classical category of such traditions would be the erroneous belief that many Christians have that see Heaven and Hell as our final spiritual destinations, rather than as the abode of the soul in repose pending the Resurrection, the Day of Judgement and the life of the World to Come, which we confess in the Nicene Creed / CF.com Statement of Faith.

Of course the man-made tradition par excellence is to deny the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, through some form of Unitarianism, Arianism (in which our Lord is regarded as a creature rather than as the Only Begotten Son and Word of God, incarnate), or Pneumatomacchianism (denial of the deity and/or personhood of the Holy Spirit). Also, one occasionally finds other anomalies, such as the Tritheism that took over the Eutychian sect by the 7th century, after which time they became extinct (contrary to popular belief, Eutyches was anathematized by the Oriental Orthodox and it is technically inaccurate to call them Monophysites).

This category of heresy is found in the majority of psuedo-Christian cults today, such as Mormonism, the J/Ws, the Unitarian Universalists, Christian Science, the Doukhobors in Western Canada, and more recent cults like The Weigh Down Workshop / Remnant Fellowship.

 

[Davy]

Agreed, and very Lutheran of you to say so. As such, let me ask you a question. For me this only became clear through learning of Walther's struggles and writings. I'm sure one could find the same sentiments echoed in Luther, and maybe even the Church Fathers before him. But is that anachronistic? There are definitely cases of not fully working out a doctrine until the tension of a crisis draws it out.

So, how much do you think the Fathers or the Reformers appreciated this?

Does that mean 'sola scriptura' then on that "word" part? Strange... since the catholic system DOES NOT BELIEVE IN sola scriptura (Scripture only as the pure Word of God).

 

[St. Helens]

ADMIN HAT ON

ADMIN HAT OFF​