Featured per Hebrews/Jesus Died ONCE AND FOR ALL/Why does RCC resacrifice him each Mass?

Nice words but where's the beef? If you want to deal with the whole context in an exgetical fashion I am game!

 

anyone includes people of nationalities does it not. It still doesn't follow that if you haven't seen something it isn't true.

Have you not read in scripture that circumcision which is a foreshadowing of the NT is a process by which one enters into a covenant relationship with God? It is clear that is true in the OT. Now look a what Paul says in Col.

Paul equates the covenant circumcision of admission into the Jewish nation with Baptism or the covenant admission into the Kingdom of God. It is clear by this verse. A baptism btw as Peter says.

Note that Peter also said

And Peter practiced what he preached

Which includes children.

As you can see its based on scripture.

So?

This is where you go astray. You believe that you are God and everything depends on what you believe. When in reality you ignore the scriptures when the OT and the NT shows that we aren't just individuals we are made up of a community. And the community has faith and the responsibility to bring in its young (jewish children were circumzised at 8 days) so that they can raise the youth in the faith. As we can see from the foreshadowing in the OT

and how Jesus responds in the NT

Note little children believing in Jesus How? because the community passed on their faith from the childs infancy. Most Baptist churches don't baptist 3-6 year old children. But its clear Jesus expects the community to pass on their faith. And so the infant is incapable of doing anything on its own the community must care for it, feed it, give it drink, clothe it, and pass on its faith.

Therefore you are wrong.

Let me be specific. Willful with serious matter is not semantics. Some sin are negligent. Not all sin is purposeful willful with serious matter rebellion against God! Ie Adultry and Fornication, Homosexuality etc....

Yes and we choose to repent. Did you repent or do you still live in sin?

Wrong! By the people of this board you guys believe God created sin so he can glorify himself (which makes God evil) According to people on this board you believe its impossible to sin as a believer. By people on this board Jesus doesn't even have Jewish blood!!!! I'm wondering why anyone on this board still believes in the Trinity which was defined and Catagorized as orthodox by the Catholic Church.

By my own words I have shown scriptural support for Catholic soteriology.
I am not ashamed of my words lets look at them again

.

Ah it seems once again you ignore what James says

It is clear this apostle thought you needed the community of believers to confess to not just God. And note there is healing with this type of confession so agains scriptures shows you to be wrong.

2

again you ignore James. I bet you wish you could take that book out of the NT!!!! But what does he say?

What are the Presbyters (priest) doing? Acting in the Name of the Lord on behalf of the body of believers. You also ignore Jesus' own words to his Apostles

thats the problem with smorgishboard christianity you take things out of context. Yes there is one mediator. But we also mediate for each other by praying for each other and forgiving each other. You don't stop those practices do you? We are inheritors of the Kingdom and are required to act as such.

[

So you ignore how Jesus taught us to pray

Do you expect we are not to forgive because the is one highpriest? Are we not a nation of Priest? How can we forgive sins? Because Jesus told us to.


[

No where in that verse does it say only Jesus will forgive your sins. It says Jesus will help us in our time of need. You inproperly eisegesis that passage.

Then we are in agreement there.

Again you are wrong

I can prove all 7 but you just want one?

and again

Jesus is very clear.

 

Let me get this straight. You can barely put a rational sentence together, but you want me to take your opinion of patristic sources?

 

No joke. This guy thinks he's the ultimate authority on the Catholic Church, yet nobody even takes him seriously. It's hilarious.

 

For instance you always quote romans to support your belief that all you need is some nebulous belief in Jesus without action. but you forget Paul already laid the ground rules for christians in Chapter 2 requiring we act. Therefore you've taken Paul out of context.

and again

Note the word righteous in this passage is dikaioō which word we use for Justified. Paul first establishes this goes on to say that the Levitical law is not required for salvation such as circumcision. But that doesn't do away with God's moral law or the decalogue.

 

I'm not the ultimate authority on the Catholic Church but compared to you I am.

 

I take him seriously and he certainly know more about Catholicism than you do!

 

Whoooa! I thought you were talking about the overall context of John 6? So you want to rule out John 6 and Romans 4?????

Romans 2 has absolutely no contextual application to Christians at all. The subjects preceding and following are self-righteous hypocrits who believe they will be justified UNDER THE LAW by their OWN works. You talk about jerking verses out of context - you take the cake here! No flesh will be justified under the law (Rom. 3:19-20).

 

The ceremonial levitical law that is which was the problem of the Judiazers. Know the audience. Paul doesn't contradict himself but in your view he would have to.

John 6 is clear. But I used Romans because Romans is your staple. John 6 is about the Eucharist. It starts out as a discussion about eating, then faith, ending with the eucharist. Which requires both faith and eating.

 

Come on! You demanded exegetical examination so lets do it with John 6!

 

I was talking about DHK.

I'm not claiming to be an expert, either.

 

How do you know Mr. Smarty Pants.

 

Sorry I misunderstood. You quoted me I thought you were directing your comments to me. Please forgive my jumping to conclusions.

 

Romans 3:19-20 is not talking about the "ceremonial levitical law" but the law violated by both Jews and Gentiles - Rom. 3:9 - the law that condemns and characterizes the fallen nature - Rom. 3:10-18- the law that "all the world" has violated and that "no flesh" will be justified by but that shuts "every mouth" both Gentile and Jews.

 

We're cool.

 

lets do it. John 6

Note what I said about the outline its starts with food then faith then Eucharist which incorporates both.

John 6:1

This is the starting point for John 6. A crowd gathers around to hear Jesus teach. However, food becomes a question. Previous to this chapter in John Chapter 2 that Jesus turned water into wine showing that he can and does turn one thing into another

in John Chapter 6's begining we see that Jesus can also multiply things

Now having seen this People wanted to Track Jesus down because he fed them and they thought wow an easy way to get food!

However, Jesus wanted them to see which things really matters.

The people were looking for material food which nurish us in this world rather than seen a need for for their spiritual nurishment which last forever in the kingdom. See John 4:1-26. Note only the son of Man can give them this spiritual food. Note He is drawing on Daniel's prophesy and the imagry for the new Kingdom rather than the old Jewish kingdom.

also note the latter part of that verse

which is firm eternal authority. Note when a seal is impressed in wax the wax recieves the complete form of the seal therefore Jesus recieves the entire form of the father. Now either missing the point or trying to be clever they reply to him (still wanting easy food) remember the context is the discussion of food. They consider Jesus to be a Holy Man and thus God gives him the ability to multiply food. So they say, not changing the subject

refering back to what Jesus just previously said

Jesus responds that their task is to believe in Jesus (which means doing what he says)

Now being really clever they want to know why they should trust Jesus because under Moses they recieved real food

Jesus makes it clear Moses didn't give them this food but God did

Jesus then goes on to explain in the present tense what this heavenly bread is

Still looking for easy food they say

Not understanding that the bread as explianed by Jesus is himself which is our spiritual food. As he explained

They want a lifetime supply of material food. Jesus then identifies himself with the bread he is speaking about. Which gives eternal life. And the only way to approach him is by faith

Seeing clearly that Jesus Identifies himself with manna and being from God they complain

Jesus re-affirms his identification with manna and that he is even greater than that

further Jesus Identifies himself with the bread that comes down from heaven and explains even further

indicating that it is his flesh also reference back to vs. 27. The Jews were offended because that meant

Does Jesus tell them they are wrong?

Note in vs 54 Jesus says more than eat but says Trogo or gnaw, chew his flesh. Note

Therefore his many disciples then said

Jesus doesn't say they are mistaken but says

He insist on his position in the Trinity and notes that people wanted just the physical food for their bodies but that accounts for nothing they need the spiritual food of his body that he provides because it is the spiritual side that provides for eternal life. Note it was at this point Judas stopped believing.

and thus

and his 12 consider leaving too

But they had faith in him to continue. Note jesus didn't say all these people misunderstood me.

 

Then you will have to argue away Romans Chapter 2.

 

I do know it is true because it doesn't happen. Infants are not born with a mind that is capable of understanding the gospel. That is a biological fact. That I know to be true without seeing. You also know it to be true.

Nothing like taking Scripture out of context to try and prove a point. The verse doesn't teach baptism saves. Look at in context. The water destroyed. It destroyed all but Noah and his family that were in the flood. Those that were baptized in the flood were destroyed. You have the wrong interpretation. Furthermore, baptism is not a picture of circumcision and never was. All of those shadows were just that--shadows. We have the real thing--Christ, and don't need the shadows. If you want shadows become a Jew and keep the Jewish laws and worship at the Temple (which is no longer).

You are deluded. Peter had three children: Peter Jr, Paul and Mary. They sang pop songs and became well known. How do I know this? The same way you know that they had infants. You read into the Scripture things that are not there. You argue from silence. There is not a single instance in the Bible of an infant being baptized.

You haven't demonstrated that.

So, since infants cannot believe the gospel, and infants enter the RCC through infant baptism the RCC is full of unsaved wretches. As John Newton put it: "that saved a 'wretch' like me." But it was Christ that saved him, not baptism.

1. I believe I have God's Scriptures, and everything I believe is based on those Scriptures. I am not therefore God, but the messenger of God and His revelation which He has given me.
2. I am not the one ignoring the Scriptures.
3. We are not Jews. If what you say is true, what tribe do you belong to?
4. Do you circumcise your children on the 8th day?
5. The verse says that they were taught in their youth not in their infancy, thus your argument is defeated.

The "little children" were not infants. They could run and come on their own. It doesn't say the community passed on their faith. You are reading that into the Scripture, but it is not there. Most churches; not all, perhaps not even most.
Who said Jesus expects the community to pass on their faith?
The community's faith nowadays is humanism and secularism. You want that passed on??

I am not wrong. Infants do not have the capacity to be saved.
Infants are not saved according to your philosophy. Your philosophy does not save. Jesus does.

Yes, the RCC teaches anti-Biblical doctrine of venial and mortal sins.
But all sin is willful sin. Sin is a transgression of God's law:

1 John 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

One sin is as bad as another:
James 2:10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.
James 2:11 For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law.

If you tell a little white lie you are just as guilty as that one who murders and commits adultery. You have broken God's law. Sin is a transgression of God's law. It doesn't matter in God's sight. Sin is sin. And all sin is willful sin. You do it because you want to do it. It is purposeful.

Have you repented of lying and now you have never told a lie in your life again?

One cannot believe in the doctrine of the Catholic Church and believe in the gospel of the Bible at the same time. They do not mesh. They are at antipodes, directly contrary to one another. One is a message of works. The other the gospel of salvation by grace through faith. That is a message that the Catholics deny: justification by faith alone. If you don't believe that you cannot be saved.
I don't speak for people on this board who hold to unorthodox doctrine. I don't speak for other people's salvation. I uphold the truths of the Bible, and tell you what is true.

 

No, your words condemn you. You believe in a works-salvation which cannot save.
1. The priest cannot act on behalf of any church. Only Christ can forgive sins. Christ is our only Mediator.
2. What confusion you have. We can pray FOR each other; never TO each other. That is idolatry. That is what makes your church pagan.

No, as I have just explained, it doesn't.

First, it specifically says they are pastors.
Secondly, it says they are praying FOR the sick.
Third, there is no guarantee that the sick would be healed. It was according to the will of God.

Fourth, as already explained, the words in John 20:21 were in the context of church discipline and nothing more. Look at my previous post.

Who has taken Scripture out of context? An objective look at the Scripture you have referred to will tell the truth about that. The verse that you are referring to above is this one:

1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
--There is only one mediator, and it is not a priest. The verse is not taken out of its context. You can study the context for yourself if you wish. You can pray for another, but you cannot mediate for that person. You cannot take that person's sins and forgive them on God's behalf. You are not the mediator that comes between God and that person, like the priest pretends to be when he pretends that he can forgive his sins. Only God can forgive sins.

No, but the Lord's Prayer is not the only Scripture in the Bible. Hebrews 4:14ff tells us that we, as believers and priests before God can come straight before the throne of God and present out petitions before our Great High Priest. We have no need of an earthly priest. We can go straight to Christ himself. This aspect the Catholics do not understand.

1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

1 John 2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:

1 John 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

Mark 2:7 Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only?

We can forgive one another of the wrongs they do against us.
We cannot forgive them for the wrongs they do against God.
The RCC claims that they can. They are wrong.

Sacraments are not found in the Bible. Notice I said "sacraments." There are two ordinances. The other commands are not sacraments. Marriage, for example is not a sacrament. Define sacrament. There is no such thing as a sacrament, according to the Bible.

 

Most of your post is a non sequitur. I've explained the scriptures are clear the verses I used are clear James and Hebrews disagree with your attempt to wipe away those verses such as your attempt to say it only means pastor the word is presbetyr in Greek where we get our term for preist in english as in there are 3 types of elders in NT writings Episcopos (bishop) Presbyter (priest) and deacon (deacon). The term in James is Presbyters and its clear they are accepting confessions of those who want to be healed. You still haven't explained away Jesus saying "those sins you forgive are forgiven" he doesn't make a caveat saying only against you. BTW your quote of John doesn't say only jesus forgives sins. Jesus told his disciples they can forgive sins or retain them. You still need to explain that. James still says to confess your sins.

The part of your post I quoted I found I should respond to because you think you have a point. Jesus instituted the sacraments he doesn't call them sacraments but he commanded that we do them such as baptize etc... He doesn't call them ordenences either. To say there is no such thing as a sacrament is to say there is no such thing as an ordenance. or to say there is no such thing as the Trinity. You've deluded yourself in thinking Jesus doesn't want us to meet him in those things he commanded us to do such as baptism, communion, marriage, repentance, etc...