Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If only life were so neat and trim as Miss Kate would like it to be. John Calvin (father of Reformed/Presby/Congregational theological everything) referred to the visible and invisible church. A way of saying that ultimately, only God knows who is "saved." Although I like that term less and less as days go by.
Here within time and space, people are both the solution and the problem. Call it "Original Sin." We can't get out of our own way. We try to do good, but it's always mitigated or temporary. Along the way, we ****-up, too. People get unhappy and LEAVE existing churches to found their own. It's a disease, a scourge. And it makes it very, very difficult to definitively make a list of real, genuine churches, and those led by clowns, whose members are being hoodwinked.
No, there were no denominations in the NT. It was completed by the end of the 1st century or into the 2nd. Too early for denominations as we know them. There had not been TIME EMOUGH for foolish, idiot humans to muck things up as much as they have done by now, denomination-wise. Anglican bishop N.T. Wright had this to say, on a visit to the USA, when asked for a chief impression he might take away with him, regarding the church(es) in this country: "You American Christians are not united, and you don't even CARE that you're not united."
Ya. There is the visible and the invisible church, across denominational lines; but I'd like to think that there are churches who "get it" and communicate and live the gospel, more deeply, genuinely, than some others. You can't tell me it just doesn't matter; otherwise, there'd be no reason to seek the truth.
Frankly, as a "nonreligion-ist" believer because of my encounter in deep meditation, it is clear to me that Christ embodied the very Holy Spirit of God. I see all the division, discord, and dysfunction in Christianity as the result of its misguided focus on "religious beliefs and ritual" and not the God Jesus unambiguously demonstrated. We have nothing to prove to God about what we "believe" (we don't actually control that anyway). We have everything to prove about what we are BECOMING using Jesus as our ideal standard of measure and His instructions to love God and each other every day and repent when we fail.
It means that some hold to the teaching that has always been held, while some hold to novelties.
Even leaving aside the clear and consistent testimony of the Church Fathers regarding the Eucharist, we have more than enough reason to take Jesus' words literally just within the text itself.
"My way or the highway." That's what started the Reformation. But we are in sacramental theology here, not discussing the corrupt practice of indulgences that were begun, back then.
Sounds like you want to attribute to Jesus some theological stuff from centuries later. Was Jesus deliberately instituting a sacrament as we know it? Of course not.
As far as I'm concerned, after all Jesus had been through and endured already, he had every right to be disgusted. His words at the Last Supper might just as well have been intended to say: "(For all you care,) this bread could be my body. And for all you care, this wine could be my blood."
Then we made a sacrament out of it. By now, it has evolved into a habitual ritual, or should I say it has DEVOLVED into a ritual. Quoting a priest I knew: "The worst thing that ever happened to the Eucharist was when it was changed from a meal, to a snack."
It is certainly more than a re-enactment of a fond episode from that Last Supper. But transsubstantiation is simply goofy. It hinges upon Thomas Aquinas' philosophical and theological categories, which even back then, made no sense. It's like sacraments are sacraments by magic. Bushwah.
When I look up at the night sky, I CHOOSE to believe I'm viewing things that are over 13 billion light years away.
Some say that the math is correct, others not.
What I believe I'm looking at is my choice. I really don't KNOW for certain what the heck I'm looking at.
When it comes to The Lord's Supper, I choose to believe the bread and wine are not similar to His flesh. It does not represent His flesh. It is no in memory of His flesh.
It is His flesh.
It makes the the experience more meaningful and fulfilling for me.
When I look up at the night sky, I CHOOSE to believe I'm viewing things that are over 13 billion light years away.
Some say that the math is correct, others not.
What I believe I'm looking at is my choice. I really don't KNOW for certain what the heck I'm looking at.
When it comes to The Lord's Supper, I choose to believe the bread and wine are not similar to His flesh. It does not represent His flesh. It is no in memory of His flesh.
It is His flesh.
It makes the the experience more meaningful and fulfilling for me.
It's really just that simple for me.
There is the subjective element, which you have described; but there is also the objective element. The objective element matters.
When I look up at the night sky, I CHOOSE to believe I'm viewing things that are over 13 billion light years away.
Some say that the math is correct, others not.
What I believe I'm looking at is my choice. I really don't KNOW for certain what the heck I'm looking at.
When it comes to The Lord's Supper, I choose to believe the bread and wine are not similar to His flesh. It does not represent His flesh. It is no in memory of His flesh.
It is His flesh.
It makes the experience more meaningful and fulfilling for me.
It's really just that simple for me.
Then the sacrament does what it is supposed to do to your state of mind toward God. Sacraments are supposed to change YOUR state of mind to be compatible with God's agape love. They do not change God's state of mind toward you. His state of mind towards us is always agape love. The sacraments are the physical signs and mnemonic events that are designed to evoke the Holy Spirit of agape love in YOU and put YOU "in Christ" (in the mind of Christ). It is the minds of men long after Jesus's death that have made them supernatural (magical) events.
Like the institutionalized Church, Jesus had no intention of instituting any such nonsense. He is a Jew and He and God are entirely focused on OUR state of mind toward God, NOT vice versa! Jesus and God are not about what "religion" to believe, but what to believe about God, per se, and His relationship to us. Jesus said He is our loving Father (Abba) and that is not remotely what religions in the institutionalized churches have promoted for over two millennia. They have promoted a wrathful and vengeful Godfather who says obey me and love me OR ELSE!
Then the sacrament does what it is supposed to do to your state of mind toward God. Sacraments are supposed to change YOUR state of mind to be compatible with God's agape love. They do not change God's state of mind toward you. His state of mind towards us is always agape love.
This seems to me to be completely in line with the Catholic understanding
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
Jesus and God are not about what "religion" to believe, but what to believe about God, per se, and His relationship to us.
Religion, strictly speaking, is defined as something one *does*, and not necessarily as something one believes; although what one does is generally predicated upon what one believes.
A person *practices* a particular religion depending upon what one believes (or doesn't believe) about God. Because I believe the Catholic Faith, I practice the Catholic religion.
This came from someone online after I made a comment on a video uploaded by a Catholic priest. I'll assume most of the followers on the video are Catholics. I might have made a mistake in posting a comment...should have just clicked on the "don't show me videos like this" feature.
The priest was preaching about how you should only go to the Catholic Church if you want to partake in the Eucharist. Failing to do this means rejecting Jesus. I took offense to this and made a comment saying I do not believe the Eucharist/communion is limited to only Catholics. I believe it is open to anyone who believes, follows, and accepts Jesus as their savior which includes both Catholics and non-Catholics.
Apparently and unsurprisingly, there were people who disagreed with me. Someone replied to me saying by not being Catholic and rejecting the beliefs of the Catholic Church, I am rejecting Jesus, His authority and His church.
All I have to say is this: Even if I agreed with 8 out of 10 of the core beliefs of the Catholic Church, the fact that there are Catholics who have this idea that THEY are the ONLY people who Jesus accepts would convince me NOT to become Catholic. If this is something that Catholic priests preach, I would definitely not feel loved, welcomed, or comfortable being in the Catholic church.
Sorry, that was a little bit of a rant. I having nothing against the Catholic Church and anyone who is Catholic but when you threaten me and say that I am choosing to go against Jesus, I just shake my head and think to myself......if only Jesus would come down from heaven and make things straight with His followers. There wouldn't be such a division between Protestants and Catholics.
I stated it a little differently: if Jesus came down from heaven and made things straight with his followers I would believe in him because there wouldn't be such a division between Protestants and Catholics.
But let's get real. Jesus is never going to come down and make things straight with anything. Because if he was going to do it he would have done it already, don't you think? Why is he sitting and twiddling his thumbs while the world goes to hell in a handbasket? Why do you think Jesus hasn't done anything about all the strife and division between Christians? Because he's lazy or he doesn't care or he doesn't know how to? Gotta be one of the three, don't you think?
I stated it a little differently: if Jesus came down from heaven and made things straight with his followers I would believe in him because there wouldn't be such a division between Protestants and Catholics.
But let's get real. Jesus is never going to come down and make things straight with anything. Because if he was going to do it he would have done it already, don't you think? Why is he sitting and twiddling his thumbs while the world goes to hell in a handbasket? Why do you think Jesus hasn't done anything about all the strife and division between Christians? Because he's lazy or he doesn't care or he doesn't know how to? Gotta be one of the three, don't you think?
I know you're a cynical atheist, Thrillo. I've already accepted that fact about you.
Let me ask you a question that I've asked you before and you never answered it: do you think we live in a utopian world?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
