The Eucharist (as practiced by the Roman Church)

Regardless doctor to HOW you apply your own system of study to the Bible and regardless if you never heard of any Baptist confessions growing up (and neither did I as I was raised and saved a Baptist as a youth)...this still doesn't change the fact that you were raised a Baptist...hence your quote:
I come from a line of "Baptists"

Which tells me that you were exposed to Baptist distinctives...as you attended Sunday service, maybe even Wednesday evening services, maybe you never missed a Sunday School and probably even attended your fair share of Revivals.

So, and I'm just guessing here...but when you finally decided to pick up the Bible and read it, you were already indoctrinated in what the Baptist Church (or your particular brand, as like you said...there's many!) believes, so you gravitated towards a Baptistic understanding. It wasn't your own doctor.

In XC
-

 

No, but it is supernatural. How can I explain it to you if you have not experienced it. It is the same experience that Paul speaks of when understanding is given to the Scriptures:

1 Corinthians 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
--An unsaved man has a hard time understanding the basic truths of the Bible, even if he is well read. He may be a scholar. But he doesn't have a grasp on the basic truths of Scripture for a good reason.

1 Corinthians 2:11-13 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.
--The Spirit of God is given to every believer. Every believer is able to understand spiritual things (like the Bible), because he has the Spirit of God.

12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
--The unsaved man has the spirit of the world; the believer has the Spirit which is of God. Therefore he is able to know the things that are freely given to us of God. One of those things is eternal life--a free gift of God.

13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
--Paul didn't speak with man's wisdom though he was very educated. He spoke as the Holy Spirit taught him, and led him. He compared spiritual things with spiritual things which is the same as comparing Scripture with Scripture. Note the many that would rather compare ECF and history to what they consider truth. This is not what Paul did. He relied on the Spirit of truth, and the Scripture.

I only quoted one verse (John 10:27) for brevity's sake. I could quote dozens of others if you would like. If you want more say so, and I will give you others such as John 5:24; 1John 5:11-13 as well.
The guarantee comes from believing on Christ and his sacrificial work.
"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be save."

Acts 10:43 To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.

John 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

He does. It is clearly presented in verses 1-4, one of the clearest presentations of the gospel in the Bible.

I didn't see Queen Victoria, Hitler, or even Nero. But I know they existed. I know they existed because of faith. Faith relies on the witness of others. The witness of history tells me they existed though I never saw them. The resurrection is one of the most verifiable facts of history. It is verified by more than 500 witnesses. Can I go back in history and call more than 500 witnesses all liars? I don't think so.

1 Corinthians 15:6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.

I don't believe in mediums either. I believe in prayer.
John 16:24 Hitherto have ye asked nothing in my name: ask, and ye shall receive, that your joy may be full.
--That is what Jesus said to his disciples, and the promise is applicable to us today. Jesus is not a medium. He is risen from the dead and alive today. You can check his grave. He is not there. Christ is the object of my faith, the object of my prayers. He is risen from the dead. He is not a medium. He is God Almighty, the Creator of the universe.

Read Hebrews 1:1,2

Hebrews 1:1-2 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
--In the OT God spoke to His prophets through an audible voice, through visions, through theophanies, etc. But he doesn't speak that way in this time. In this age he speaks through His Son. His Son is revealed to us through His Word. That is where we will find the Lord. He is revealed to us through His Spirit in the Word of God.

Read 2Pet.1:16 to the end of the chapter. In verses 16 to 18 Peter describes the most incredible experience that any man alive could ever have. He experienced the transfiguration of Christ. He saw Christ in all his glory and Elijah and Moses standing with him. Who wouldn't want to see and experience such a sight as this:

2 Peter 1:16-18 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.

Then what does he say:
2 Peter 1:19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:
--We have a more sure word of prophecy.
Better than experience, better than the greatest experiences you may ever have is the sure word of God, the Bible that you hold in your hand is certain, sure. You can rest your faith on that, far more than you can rest your faith on experience.
All other books, such as the Book of Mormon, have contradictions. The Bible has no contradiction that doesn't have an answer for it. In other words there are "seemingly" contradictions to some. But they aren't. There is an answer. There are no contradictions in the Bible. I rest my case on the Word of God.

Jesus said: "I am the way the truth and the life; no man comes unto the Father but by me.
--Either what he spoke was true and he is the only way to heaven, or he is the biggest liar, fake and deceiver that ever walked the face of the earth. Who is Jesus Christ? That is the question you must answer.

 

Your guessing is wrong and your conclusions are wrong. I think you are speaking of yourself rather than me or others. That is your experience not mine.

I believe I know my own experience better than you do. I know how the Lord taught me and how He did not teach me. I know the difference in struggling with Scripture not understanding it and the enlightement of the Holy Spirit without any struggle understanding it. I know the difference between the internal witness of the Spirit with the Word versus the intellectual grappling with the Word.

Apparently you do not know these things.

 

What I do know about you is this. Your lack of Christian charity and general lack of civility continues in many of your posts and that speaks volumes. Not just with Catholic and Orthodox posters, but with other Baptists. You are not alone, 'Reformed Baptist is even nastier. DHK and others post similarly. What I have long noticed is that the Catholic boards show much more civility and charity. Before you tell me to leave and go there to participate you might think about what non-Christians perceive when (and they do) visit this board. I doubt Jesus is pleased with this kind of behavior.

 

The way a person writes and expresses himself anonymously on the WEB is no indication of how that person may be received in public. Many of us would be surprised at who is behind the keyboard if we met each other face to face.
Some people express themselves in the same way that they would preach.
Some people express themselves in the same way that they would teach in a classroom.
Some people express themselves in the same way that they would converse to their neighbor.
I've seen some people post on this board considering this board as their psychiatrist and reveal far too intimate details of their personal life.
Some people consider the board as their best friend and post likewise.

Keep in mind that there are two kinds of forums--debate and discussion.
If you want just friendly uplifting discussion go down into "All other Discussions," where people talk about the weather, their pets, their favorite food, what they had for breakfast, etc.

But this is a debate forum, and this one in particular people are "contending for the faith." Even Paul and Barnabas disagreed with each other:

Acts 15:39 And the contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder one from the other: and so Barnabas took Mark, and sailed unto Cyprus;
--However they were reconciled at a later date, and their contention was not over doctrine.

Baptists are far more zealous in their faith than Catholics are.

 

You apparently don't read your own posts and read your Catholic friends through rose colored glasses. We have been called liars by your group, talked down to, depicted as ignoramuses of our beliefs. etc., etc.

Thank you anyway but you got a lot work to do about yourself. Dont throw rocks if you live in a glass house.

 

Well, I'd be interested in seeing the posts where I have addressed you in any other way than kind. BTW, there is one other person in my 'group' on this board. I've never read a post of Melanie's that was anything but charitable.

 

'Baptists are far more zealous in their faith than Catholics are.'

There is a difference in being zealous and being nasty. I have several Baptists friends that have checked out some of the 'Catholic' threads here from time to time. Their perception was that there is far too much meaness in the posting. I was asked why I subjected myself to the rancor on this board.

 

You placed yourself in the company of the Catholics on this forum as pitted against myself and others. I did not place you in that category. All I did was respond to the category you placed yourself in. Outside of some saracastic remarks you have made about Baptist history you have basically stuck to issues. However, even you have to admit that your post directed right at me was accusative and personal based upon how you perceived me through black and white letters on a page. However, this is a combat zone and I have never been in combat where someone does not get upset and express themselves with vigor at times. If you read the posts they are full of accusations about misrepresentation, misinterpretation, ignorance of this or that, assumptions, presumptions because that is the nature of strong debate.

I have no personal dislike for anyone on this forum. I have no personal dislike for you. I hate what you stand for and what you defend. Some one accused me of attacking Thinkingstuff by merely asking what kind of Baptist church he belongs to and what kind of Baptist is he. Both thinkingstuff and myself have strong convictions and we come at each other's position strongly and the thin skinned interpret it is personal attacks. Is it wrong to question another persons salvation based upon the information they give or the position they take on salvation? I think not as they need to be challeged. I don't mind if others question my orthodoxy, my salvation, my interpretations if they can point out in the scriptures something substantial in contrast to what I have stated about myself. I think it is healthy to examine yourself (2 Pet. 1:10).

 

There is no nice way of saying, "The RCC doctrine of the Assumption of Mary is heresy."
I could say: "The Bible terms it as "a damnable heresy," (2Pet.2:1).
I tell the truth. People don't like it. How do you say those things in nice ways? You can't.

 

DHK, we can debate without preaching, especially when the preaching consists of casting aspersions on the other's integrity. Have you ever watched a courtroom argument? The counsellors argue their clients' position forcefully but they rarely attack their opponent. They deal with ideas, not personalities. You and Thinkingstuff have had some of the most vigorous debates of any people on this board and you have usually treated each other with respect. It can be done and it makes for a lot higher level of discussion and debate.

 

The moderating cast aspersion on the doctrine of assumption by saying it was a heresy. He did not attack the person of Lori or you. I haven't seen him attack anyone's person just their position and doctrine. The strong words of attack on the doctrine are keeping with the spirit of the New Testament when dealing with heresies. Sure, that infers the person teaching the heresy is either deceived or a heretic. That is the way the cookie crumbles and the marbles roll by necessary inference and by way of New Testament example.

 

You claim to be a Baptist Zenas. There are those that are Catholics here.
When Catholic doctrine is discussed what would you say concerning a doctrine the Assumption of Mary--that it is all fine and good? Or keep silent and not say anything at all?

There is no kind way of saying "The RCC doctrine of the Assumption of Mary is a heresy."
That is a statement of fact; not preaching, simply stating the truth.
Have you got a better way of telling the truth?

 

Catholics base the Assumption of Mary on Tradition. There is nothing in the bible that specifies what happened to Mary save that Jesus gave John the job of taking care of his mother. We can assume that Mary left Jerusalem with John and lived for a while in Southern Turkey. I think there is a Orthodox Monestary there. We as baptist can only assume that she went the way of all life and died peacefully in Turkey before John got exiled on Patmos. However, since we don't really know what happened and God hasen't seen fit to tell us in scripture all we can do is remain silent. It could be God raised her from the dead. Or not. So to us its all speculation. But we must remain silent on it.

 

So how is your witness any different from a Mormon's burning bussom?

 

I must admit I've been convicted lately about 2 Timothy 2:23 - 24

Unfortunately, I do like arguing. But when its clear its sensless. We should stop.

 

With me it is verifiable; with the Mormon's it isn't.
Any experience I give you can be attested to by millions of other evangelical Christians.
All other empirical evidence concerning the Word of God is just that: empirical--can be demonstrated as true and verifiable.
However the Book of Mormon is full of historical inaccuracies. For example it quotes Jesus as being born in Jerusalem. By that alone we know that it is not the Word of God. It is not true and faithful to simple historical facts, even obvious ones. We all know that Christ was born in Bethlehem, not Jerusalem.

In pages 501-504, Gleason Archer, in his book "A Survey of Old Testament Introduction," lists four pages of historical inaccuracies in the Mormon scriptures.
The Bible has none.

 

One of the moons of Saturn is made of green cheese. That is part of my religion. Since you can't prove me wrong you must accept it as true. This is the argument that you are presenting.

In other words an argument from silence is no argument at all.
The Assumption of Mary is an heretical doctrine.
The evidence:

Hebrews 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
--It was appointed unto Mary to die. No exception was made for her.

 

I'm certain millions of Mormons give attestation to their faith!

There are inaccuracies in the bible as well. But its usually blamed on copiest.

 

Ah! You are entirely wrong. I'm saying that we can't speak on what happen we can assume but we must mention its an assumption. We have no verifiable data. That verse taken literally as you've done makes God into a liar. Because Enoch has not died and neither has Elijah.