fb

Reply To: New Discussion Threat For Theological Debate

Forums Fiction General Writing Discussions New Discussion Threat For Theological Debate Reply To: New Discussion Threat For Theological Debate

#142220
Noah Cochran
@noah-cochran

@rusted-knight

Hey man, glad you dropped in. ๐Ÿ™‚

There isn’t much more for me to say about Transubstantiation, except that the verse talking about the Lord’s Supper are talking about a ordinance/sacrament that the bible command us to do in remembrance of him and what he did for us on the cross. There is no biblical evidence for a literal change to human flesh in a cannibal sense. As for the alleged miracles you mentioned, I mean no offense, but I try to only use the inspired word of God as a basis for my doctrinal beliefs, nothing more, nothing less.

Only ordained priests and bishops can do that.

Absolutely, only ordained bishops/elders and administer the ordiances, if you thought I was saying otherwise, I apologize. I’m not exactly sure what brought that comment up, so if there was some specific reason, enlighten me please.ย  ๐Ÿ™‚

This idea is founded on a single issue that has permeated throughout Christianity. THE GOSPEL CANNOT BE PICKED APART AND SELECTIVELY READ.

I’m confused. ๐Ÿ˜† How was what I said picking it apart? If you mean I was referencing specific verses instead of whole chapters or passages, then you’re welcome to read the whole passage, it will only support the verse. Also, I tried to make a point of listing several sister verses to support each other (hermeneutics, the use of scripture to interpret scripture, the best way by far to study the bible).

Jesus himself said that the path was narrow. He calls all. It is up to us to pick up the cross and stay on the path.

Except it explicitly says that he does not call all. ๐Ÿ˜† The word “elect,” found in numerous places, and it means to “choose out of (please read Eph. 1, 1 Peter 1:2, Col. 3:12, and Romans 9, it will help clear up my view). There are two inherent points in this “choose out of.” First, that God is the one choosing, not us. Second, for someone to choose out of (like in an presidential election for instance), that means some people are notย  being chosen. Thus, not everyone is going to heaven, only the people God elects and saves according to his will and power. Another big point for God not calling all, is found in Romans 9:13, where is clearly says God hated Esau and loved Jacob, and this is right after it mentions the elect in Romans 9:11.

When Jesus talks about the path being narrow (and I think you agree with me on this), he is talking about the people who walk in the straight and narrow in this life, those who serve him. In other words, the people who serve God during their natural lives and enjoy the earthly Kingdom of God are few and far between (which is evident when one studies history and or watches the news). But again, for us to even begin walking that straight and narrow path that few walk, we must be born again first. Thus, walking that straight and narrow does not get us to heaven, it is instead evidence that we are already in heaven. One has to understand the concept of original sin and total depravity for this to make any sense, so even though we disagree, I would greatly encourage you to go read 1 Cor. 2, Eph. 2:1-9, Rom. 3:9-20, and Rom. 8:1-everything. xD.

Catholic ordaining requires the laying on of hands as was dictated in the Gospel. as for the Gospel quote, it comes from Matthew 16: 18 and in its entirety reads โ€œAnd I tell you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church.โ€ The Greek word used for Peter is Petros the masculine form of โ€œRockโ€. Jesus is telling Peter he will be fundamental in the church as he continues in verse 19. โ€œI will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.โ€ Jesus is very specifically giving power to Peter over what He will build.

You still haven’t supplied explicit (and it needs to be explicit) biblical evidence for priests, cardinals, or any of the other hierarchy. As for the Peter verse, we’ll just have to disagree. Throughout the bible Jesus is called the cornerstone of our father, the rock upon which we are built (Acts 4:10-12, Eph. 2:20, 1 Peter 2:6 (is Peter talking about himself there? xD), and more). In the verse I brought up, Jesus is telling Peter (who’s name means Stone, or small rock), that upon this rock (Himself) I will build My church (i.e, Jesus is telling Peter that He (Jesus) is the rock, not Peter, not anyone else, it’s only through Him that the church will stand).

Yes. Mary had no sin.

In Romans 3, Paul quotes from Psalms 14 and 53 which say there are none good, no not one. Including Mary. Mary was a sinner just like the rest of us, and she needed salvation just like the rest of us. God using her as a abode for himself in infant form does not give her status as a perfect human being. As for the Exodus examples, they are kinda a stretch. xD

Loved reading your thoughts man! ๐Ÿ™‚


@irishcelticredflowercrown

Thanks for your thoughts! ๐Ÿ™‚

Again, I really try to only use God inspired and preserved, his word, the good news of his Son, to prove doctrine. Anything else could be mistakes, things of the devil, or an endless number of other things.


@this-is-not-an-alien

Oh, and Cathy, this thread is called theย Threatย ย for Theological Debate. I found that quite amusing.๐Ÿ˜„

Pin It on Pinterest