What if the Protestant reformation never happened?

[Root of Jesse]

Some good points. The use of the spoon for the laity is to lessen the chance of spilling the host to the ground. The clergy receive from the chalice. Prior to the spoon tongs were used. It began around the 9th century.

I believe it also reduces the chance of desecration, too.

I think it's amazing how people want to divide us more than we are divided. And I know that's the devil's work.

 

[bbbbbbb]

The documentation of the Church's involvement with the Third Reich before the evil reared it's ugly head is one thing. There were periods in the Third Reich. Just like today, do you think that Hitler could have gone in and installed his political agenda if he had told everyone what he was up to? Same can be said about the current POTUS. If he had said exactly what he planned to do, he wouldn't have been elected.

When the Third Reich became totalitarian, the Church protected the Church's interests, and no more. So "In bed with the Nazis" is a blatant falsehood. And classified as fiction.

Actually Hitler did tell everyone what his agenda was when he published Mein Kampf. The problem was that Mein Kampf was so outrageous that nobody actually took it, or him, seriously.

Mein Kampf - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Albion]

Some good points. The use of the spoon for the laity is to lessen the chance of spilling the host to the ground. The clergy receive from the chalice. Prior to the spoon tongs were used. It began around the 9th century.

This would parallel the practice in the Western church of the altar boy holding a device under the chin of the communicant that looked somewhat like a hand mirror turned glass-side down.

 

[Willie T]

One thing that would be different is that there would be no doctrine of a rapture. That was invented by a Jesuit priest, Francisco Ribera about 1587, in response to Luther's actions.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Actually Hitler did tell everyone what his agenda was when he published Mein Kampf. The problem was that Mein Kampf was so outrageous that nobody actually took it, or him, seriously.

Mein Kampf - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Right. Nobody took him seriously. So the Church was expected to go against that?

 

[Root of Jesse]

This would parallel the practice in the Western church of the altar boy holding a device under the chin of the communicant that looked somewhat like a hand mirror turned glass-side down.

IT's called a paten, and it ensures that the holy Eucharist doesn't fall on the floor. As it is, not enough reverence is shown. If a host falls on the floor, most don't know what's to be done with it, or to the spot where it's fallen. The paten alleviates this problem, in that nothing would fall on the floor.

 

[Root of Jesse]

One thing that would be different is that there would be no doctrine of a rapture. That was invented by a Jesuit priest, Francisco Ribera about 1587, in response to Luther's actions.

It's not a doctrine. We don't have a doctrine on a rapture.

 

[Mama Kidogo]

It's not a doctrine. We don't have a doctrine on a rapture.

Willie did say the fellow invented it. Can't say I've ever heard that theory laid on a Catholic before
from what i've read it wasn't rapture he proposed but futurism.

 

[Rhamiel]

Willie did say the fellow invented it. Can't say I've ever heard that theory laid on a Catholic before
from what i've read it wasn't rapture he proposed but futurism.

I have heard that the idea of the Rapture was a theological musing from a Catholic priest.
but the idea was never adopted as a doctrine of the Church and quickly was found to be incompatible with Scripture

it was seen as more of a theory, never really a movement in the Church

 

[Mama Kidogo]

I have heard that the idea of the Rapture was a theological musing from a Catholic priest.
but the idea was never adopted as a doctrine of the Church and quickly was found to be incompatible with Scripture

it was seen as more of a theory, never really a movement in the Church

OK. So I'll blame it on the Catholics from now on.Ya'll told a joke and some Protestant took it serious. Those sneaky Jesuits.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Deacon Gerry's Blog.: A Jesuit invented the Rapture theory

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by Willie T

One thing that would be different is that there would be no doctrine of a rapture. That was invented by a Jesuit priest, Francisco Ribera about 1587, in response to Luther's actions.
​

So it was invented by a RC Priest? Interesting.

It's not a doctrine. We don't have a doctrine on a rapture.

What is your Denomination's eschatological view on Revelation? Aren't y'all Amillennialists?



.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Right. Nobody took him seriously. So the Church was expected to go against that?

Well, if you mean the Catholic Church, then the answer would be yes.

 

[BobRyan]

Deacon Gerry's Blog.: A Jesuit invented the Rapture theory

That is pretty interesting.

It was a way to oppose the Protestant Historicist view of Revelation.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Rhamiel]

That is pretty interesting.

It was a way to oppose the Protestant Historicist view of Revelation.

in Christ,

Bob

yeah, I never really knew that before

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

MOD HAT...

This thread has undergone a cleanup. If you post has gone missing it is because it was either off topic to this thread or it replied to a post that was off topic.

Something for everyone to keep in mind. If someone reports a post as off topic, then it would make sense that that person should neither reply to such a post, nor discuss this off topic topic.

This is the topic; let's stay on it.

Thanks.

Mark
Area Supervisor

 

[Targaryen]

OK. So I'll blame it on the Catholics from now on.Ya'll told a joke and some Protestant took it serious. Those sneaky Jesuits.

Indeed

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

That is pretty interesting.

It was a way to oppose the Protestant Historicist view of Revelation.

in Christ,

Bob

And also the Preterist and Amill views

Aren't the unorthodox Christadelphians Historicists?



.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

And also the Preterist and Amill views

Aren't he unorthodox Christadelphians Historicists?



.

Not sure about that, but they do teach soul sleep.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Not sure about that, but they do teach soul sleep.

I found this on a google search "christadelphians historicist"....

In Defence Of Historicism - Historicist Exposition - Bible Discussion Forum
In Defence Of Historicism


In the following review, prominent Futurist Thomas Ice attempts to repudiate the Historicist position by means of a number of logical fallacies, and by picking at a poorly written Historicist apologetic by one 'Steve Wohlberg'.

We shall see if Ice's criticism of Wohlberg gives him sufficient grounds on which to invalidate Historcism.

Ice opens with a tidy piece of well-poisoning:

There is no doubt that Historicism is far from the majority eschatological methodology today, but it is far more widely accepted than Ice would be aware, and its voice is far from faint.

http://www.gordonwatts.com/theology/SoulSleep.html

Soul Sleep: Good scriptural arguments both for and against! (I'm really confused LOL)

​

In “soul sleep” (a doctrine believed by the Jehovah’s Witnesses, Seventh Day Adventists, and Christadelphianism), the person is “asleep” and not conscious after he or she dies and awaits the resurrection.
Proponents of this doctrine cite such Old Testament passages as are shown on page 169 of the JW literature, Reasoning from the Scriptures:

Since you will find that this Theological Position Paper here makes a compelling case for BOTH 'Soul Sleep' AND the lack of it (e.g., being consciously aware & AWAKE after death), I would ask that you re-read my entire paper, and pay especially close attention to those verses that DISAGREE with your view. -- By that, I mean, if you believe in Soul Sleep, look at the verses that suggest the dead ARE aware, and if you one of those who believe 'Soul Sleep' is "bad theology," then please look VERY CLOSELY at the verses herein that suggest that there really *is* 'Soul Sleep.'



.