George1 mumbled, "I never read anything more insane and more cowardly." ... and then as if trying to top it with something REALLY insane ... he posts his blog link. LOL. :^)

Another interesting thing I just wanted to mention is that Jesus said, "For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them." -- Mathew 18:20. And in 1 Cor 11:25 - "After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me." So, if I were strande...more

Another interesting thing I just wanted to mention is that Jesus said, "For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them." -- Mathew 18:20. And in 1 Cor 11:25 - "After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me."

So, if I were stranded on a desert island with another Christian, it seems to me we'd have the makings of a church, in which the Eucharist could be taken at times of our discretion with nothing but coconut milk and fish, and God would be there among us if we were truly gathered in His Name.less

In general BTW ... the historicity of the RCC having been instituted any earlier than the 4th Century is sketchy at best.

IHS stated, "My dad's church was Evangelical-non-denominational with Arminian roots, while my Grandfather's church is evangelical with more Calvinistic roots. A few things caught my eye while I was in seminary studying to be a pastor;" Did you believe in the same tenants of faith you asked me about BEFORE going to seminary. Did the church your father was part of hold to them?

IHS asked, "why do you accept them since it was the authority of the Catholic Church that defined these doctrines as binding on all Christians" ... I accept them because they are scripturally supported facts. Explicit terms don't have to appear for them to be understood as being from the Word of God. Just because the RCC declares a "fact" a "fact" doesn't mean they weren't facts to begin with....more

IHS asked, "why do you accept them since it was the authority of the Catholic Church that defined these doctrines as binding on all Christians" ... I accept them because they are scripturally supported facts. Explicit terms don't have to appear for them to be understood as being from the Word of God. Just because the RCC declares a "fact" a "fact" doesn't mean they weren't facts to begin with. The simpler way of putting this is that ... it's just a coincidence. I hope that the fact that I grew up Catholic doesn't muddy my explanation. If so, we'll have to rely on other Christians here who believe as I do but were never Catholic.less

As for the manna in the desert, there's really not much more beyond what I said yesterday. It seems rather clear that Jesus used this event to explain in metaphor what exactly He was asking those around Him to believe ... the deep meaning of it ... and what they should understand for salvation. Those who walked away did NOT understand and did NOT want to ask. There were many so-called disciples...more

As for the manna in the desert, there's really not much more beyond what I said yesterday. It seems rather clear that Jesus used this event to explain in metaphor what exactly He was asking those around Him to believe ... the deep meaning of it ... and what they should understand for salvation. Those who walked away did NOT understand and did NOT want to ask. There were many so-called disciples were just there to see miracles or waiting for Jesus to start an uprising and overthrow their Roman oppressers. Those who stayed, including the 12 trusted that Jesus's words actually meant something and trusted Jesus, Himself. Perhaps they understood the historical reference right away, perhaps it took them a while. Judas didn't seem to get it even after betrayed the Lord. Otherwise, he would have dropped to his kness before Christ, Himself on the Cross and been forgiven. Those others who left probably went back to their former way of life, having missed out; hopefully, some of them understood later on. In any case, it's another perfect example of Christ's perfect words and meaning for His plan for us, but still does not support the RCC's notion of transubstantiation.

I believe Christ is present in the hearts of those who are worshipping Him and truly with Him. His physical body is REAL, but HE IS RISIN. He is ALIVE and well at the Right Hand of God The Father in Heaven.less

IHS, Sorry this took a while. You knoe, sometimes it's hard to break away from our non-virtual lives. Let's start with Mt 26:22ff, Mk 14:22ff, Lk 22:17. Simply, I agree. This was the institution of the Eucharist. I don't have a problem using that term, BTW, because it doesn't necessarily have a Catholic connotation, associated with transubstantiation. Communion is fine as well. I thi...more

IHS, Sorry this took a while. You knoe, sometimes it's hard to break away from our non-virtual lives.

Let's start with Mt 26:22ff, Mk 14:22ff, Lk 22:17. Simply, I agree. This was the institution of the Eucharist. I don't have a problem using that term, BTW, because it doesn't necessarily have a Catholic connotation, associated with transubstantiation. Communion is fine as well.

I think where we disagree is on the historicity of the Church and the exclusive authority of the RCC to interpret scripture.

On "Ex 12:8, 46 Paschal Lamb had to be eaten. Jn 1:29 Jesus called the Lamb of God and
1Cor 5:7 Jesus called"Paschal Lamb who has been sacrificed""

I agree that the Passover was a clear metaphor of Jesus; that He was to be the final sacraficial lamb, and that those who partook would be spared death. The apostle Paul clearly understood this as well. It supports the Eucharist, but doesn't necessarily support transubstantiation.

"1 Cor 11:23-29 receiving unworthily= guilt of the body and blood. (There is only guilt if the body and blood are truly Christ and not just a symbol.)"

The Eucharistic bread & wine do not have to be material flesh & blood for one to be guilty of receiving Communion with an unrepentent heart. For one to say they are with Christ and In Christ, when they knowingly live in sin is a terrible sin in itself. Partakers in communion should get right with others and then get right with The Lord. If I have unforgiveness in my heart, and I've just prayed the Lord's Prayer asking Him to forgive my transgressions as I've forgiven others, and then take Communion ... I should expect God to 1) laugh at me at best, 2) judge me at worst ... if I attempt to come to Him falsely. So, in other words ... One can definitely be guilty of falsly partaking in a symbol or rememberance of Christ's sacrafice if they truly know what is is for, but knowingly live in sin.less

IHS, come to think of it ... if you have ANY specific questions about my beliefs, ask away. I'm sure it will help us understand eachother. Keep in mind, I'm a former Catholic from a long line of hard-core Catholics; not as theologically well read as some in my heritage ... but I think I can float ;^)

IHS ... just happened to be making a quick check for responses. You asked if I believe in "Trinity, Incarnation of Christ, two natures of Christ". I can answer that quick. YES, YES and YES; the latter assuming we're on the same page thereabouts referring to God & Man ... and not something weird :^) I guess they are fair questions, since there are many churches out there that deny Our Lord's...more

IHS ... just happened to be making a quick check for responses. You asked if I believe in "Trinity, Incarnation of Christ, two natures of Christ". I can answer that quick. YES, YES and YES; the latter assuming we're on the same page thereabouts referring to God & Man ... and not something weird :^) I guess they are fair questions, since there are many churches out there that deny Our Lord's divinity. It does make me wonder what sort of church you were a pastor of, though. Or was it that you just wanted to make sure that we ARE on the same page?less

IHS, I notice a lot of fellow Catholics have taken in interest in our discussion. I can't post all my responses now, because I'm at work. I'll need to examine some of what you're saying, but I appreciate the detailed response. It'll give me a chance to pray about how to follow up with you on some of the assertions that I've noted. There's some questionable support you reference which I believe...more

IHS, I notice a lot of fellow Catholics have taken in interest in our discussion. I can't post all my responses now, because I'm at work. I'll need to examine some of what you're saying, but I appreciate the detailed response. It'll give me a chance to pray about how to follow up with you on some of the assertions that I've noted. There's some questionable support you reference which I believe does not hold water to transubstantiation, but still supports the symbolic meaning.

Let me at least assure you that I DO have absolute faith in the power of God and in Christ's redeeming sacrafice. I'm a creationist ... and believe God can do anything ... except create a rock that He himself cannot move, that's just silly. I have no doubt that our Lord could manifest Himself in way we could imagine and beyond. I just don't believe this way is in accordance with His Word.

It's not God or His Word I lack faith in, it's the fallability of the RCC who have enacted doctrine which appears to contradict scriptural teaching. So, I have not walked away from Christ like those disciples in John 6. In fact, I don't believe they were true Christians if they rejected Him. Maybe they should have asked for even MORE clarification. The 12 understood the meaning of Jesus words and the emphasis of it based on the historical parallel of the manna in the desert. That manna kept the Hebrews alive and helped them overcome a 40 year wandering in the desert to the promised land. Jesus is the bread that sustains my soul and will sustain me through my wanderings in the world to my final destination in the promised Kingdom.

Talk to you later on, IHS.less

everhopeful ... the reason Curious George1 (aka HumanApe) uses the term Jeebus to blaspheme our Lord and Savior is because he pilfered it from the cartoon character, Homer Simpson ... someone whose portrayed intelligence he's "just" on par with.

HumanApe ... HEY, your back! Look everyone, HumanApe is back!!!! Hurray! Gee, you were gone for a while ... just get out of the ward? Now, everyone ... listen; HumanApe is my GOOD GOOD FRIEND. (He just loves us here). We should welcome him back and let him know that he has our permission to get involved in the discussions. No, no, HumanApe. You don't have to thank us. Our permission is a ...more

HumanApe ... HEY, your back! Look everyone, HumanApe is back!!!! Hurray! Gee, you were gone for a while ... just get out of the ward? Now, everyone ... listen; HumanApe is my GOOD GOOD FRIEND. (He just loves us here). We should welcome him back and let him know that he has our permission to get involved in the discussions. No, no, HumanApe. You don't have to thank us. Our permission is a gift to you. Welcome back, Cornelius.less

MaxVeritas, George1 is formerly known as HumanApe, a.k.a. Major Tosspot. He regularly resurrects his posts with a new moniker and then comes to spew lies, vulgarity and hatred. He's made thinly veiled death threats against Christians in general and even a few specific Christians on this forum (at least expressed a desire to kill them). He's essentially a wimp and a coward who starts his arg...more

MaxVeritas, George1 is formerly known as HumanApe, a.k.a. Major Tosspot. He regularly resurrects his posts with a new moniker and then comes to spew lies, vulgarity and hatred. He's made thinly veiled death threats against Christians in general and even a few specific Christians on this forum (at least expressed a desire to kill them).

He's essentially a wimp and a coward who starts his arguments with character attacks and ad hominem insults. I'd recommend simply ignoring his http://darwinpickedhogsnot.bugsplat.com website.

He has an obsessive hatred against Christians and non-believers who even remotely tolerate or acknowledge our ideals. He's in fact a true terrorist against free speech and our Constitutional rights and his own brand of delusion is impermeable to anything that we could say, here.

Just pray for him that God will soften his heart. Right now, it's just a black lump .less

Unconditional1 says, "Jesus and I, BOTH, will come and rescue you" to Prophet. Unconditional, I hope your not putting yourself on par with our All Mighty Lord & Savior. Are you? Incidentally, Prophet has been saved. The fruit of the Spirit demonstrated by him in the past shows us.

IHS, All set. I posted it at the top of the Confession App thread.

IHS state, "I read the early church fathers and you can see even in the 1st and 2nd century where the consecrated host was adored. Why? Well, if you believe something to be truly Jesus' body and blood, soul and divinity then worshipping it is worshipping Christ." IHS, I appreciate your candor on this topic. I too once believed the same thing and I also appreciate your patient responses to some ...more

IHS state, "I read the early church fathers and you can see even in the 1st and 2nd century where the consecrated host was adored. Why? Well, if you believe something to be truly Jesus' body and blood, soul and divinity then worshipping it is worshipping Christ."

IHS, I appreciate your candor on this topic. I too once believed the same thing and I also appreciate your patient responses to some of my yelling. I'd like to reconsider and maybe rephrase what you said, here. Firstly, be careful about believing in non-canonical writings, even going back to the 1st century. Remember, it didn't take the Gnostics that long to usurp the Word of God and skew it to their agenda. Paul, Peter and the other apostles were doing a good job of spreading the Good News of The Way, and many counterfeits were already trying to hop on board with their own versions.

Also ... consider rephrasing "if you believe something to be truly Jesus' body and blood, soul and divinity then worshipping it is worshipping Christ".

Do you see what you said, there? A paraphrase might go, "If you believe something that's NOT Jesus to BE Jesus ... then it IS Jesus". Based on YOUR OWN personal belief? Or the belief of SOMEONE ELSE who is NOT Jesus? THAT, is a perfect formula in its utter simplicity for idolotry.

Can you (re)explain what you mean ... please? *eyebrows raised, trying to give you every chance*less

Hyperion, yes I did see your last response. Thanks. I'll see if I can set something up ... tomorrow maybe. I may be doing Valentine's Day things with the wife. That shouldn't elicit any smirks from anyone :) I haven't had a chance to look at the clip yet ... I'm at work (gotta draw a line somewhere), but I'll look at it soon. I'd love to talk about some of the allegories I've seen in SB, pa...more

Hyperion, yes I did see your last response. Thanks. I'll see if I can set something up ... tomorrow maybe. I may be doing Valentine's Day things with the wife. That shouldn't elicit any smirks from anyone :) I haven't had a chance to look at the clip yet ... I'm at work (gotta draw a line somewhere), but I'll look at it soon. I'd love to talk about some of the allegories I've seen in SB, particularly the 1st series, and get your feedback on other productions. I'll talk to you later. BTW, did you notice that others are just randomly disagreeing with us? lol.less

IHS, I posted another response for you on the 'Confession App Messes Itself' thread. I was wondering if you could follow up when you get a chance?

BTW, to all my brothers & Sisters in Christ, since we DON'T know the day or hour of His return, we should remind ourselves (jokingly or not) it could very well be May 21 of this year, although it would ultimately have had nothing to do with this absurd prediction. I "predict" that I'm not the only one who's considered this (jokingly ... or not :^)

lofgrenmark115 asserts, "God has mercifully given us many proofs from the Bible (only recently) which teach that without a doubt it WILL BE on May 21 of this year. Not only that, but there are many passages that teach that WE CAN KNOW the day." ... lofgrenmark115, Unbelievable ... you quoted scripture from Matthew 24 all over the thread, but you did not mention the verse immediately following ...more

lofgrenmark115 asserts, "God has mercifully given us many proofs from the Bible (only recently) which teach that without a doubt it WILL BE on May 21 of this year. Not only that, but there are many passages that teach that WE CAN KNOW the day." ...

lofgrenmark115, Unbelievable ... you quoted scripture from Matthew 24 all over the thread, but you did not mention the verse immediately following your evidence ; Matt 24:35-37 - "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be."

I SERIOUSLY doubt that I'm the first to mention this to you. Crispantine already alluded to it. What's your take on it?

With all the careful calculations that you present here, derived from what you claim to be a hidden code for the time and day of Christ's return, don't you think it ODD that Christ, Himself would make a statement such as this. One might claim it was a LIE. And GOD DOES NOT LIE.

I would think an intelligent person such as yourself would have anticipated this rebuttal and preemptively addressed it!

Not that you're worried I suppose ... if you're wrong, and May 21 comes and goes ... or better still, if Christ were to come before then (all the better I say). The only credibility you will tarnish on the forum is the Very Good Name of lofgrenmark115 (probably not the name your mother gave you).

Would you care to address the discrepancy now ... or have you quit posting, altogether? You know that other Christians (and maybe even some non-believers) on this site are going to back me up on this.less