D
ding
Guest
Why do you believe that it is more reliable?I listen to no man but I used his sites, it is more reliable than the catechism.
Why do you believe that it is more reliable?I listen to no man but I used his sites, it is more reliable than the catechism.
Because it does not come from a lying institution for a start. I looked up the quotes to check them out and find them factual. I don't blindly follow an institution or a man.Why do you believe that it is more reliable?
So the quote is not the problem. Great. But what about Matt's interpretation? How do you know Matt's interpretation is not a problem?Because it does not come from a lying institution for a start. I looked up the quotes to check them out and find them factual. I don't blindly follow an institution or a man.
As I said I use my brain, and I find your institution tells one lie after another and this has been its practice for years and years, decades and decades, centuries and centuries etc. If I disagree with his interpretation I would have pointed it out. I am capable of thinking. But it is symbolic and strike three you are out and I hit the ball out of the park.So the quote is not the problem. Great. But what about Matt's interpretation? How do you know Matt's interpretation is not a problem?
It is symbolic???? But then you claim that scripture alone is your final authority. If scripture alone is your final authority then you don't have the authority to settle the issue. You are still striking out.As I said I use my brain, and I find your institution tells one lie after another and this has been its practice for years and years, decades and decades, centuries and centuries etc. If I disagree with his interpretation I would have pointed it out. I am capable of thinking. But it is symbolic and strike three you are out and I hit the ball out of the park.
No it is you that says what is my final authority but I am not an idiot and now the difference between symbolic and literal. I am also not blindly following a lying institution. You are still striking out and that will never change.It is symbolic???? But then you claim that scripture alone is your final authority. If scripture alone is your final authority then you don't have the authority to settle the issue. You are still striking out.
Who or what is your final authority?No it is you that says what is my final authority but I am not an idiot and now the difference between symbolic and literal. I am also not blindly following a lying institution. You are still striking out and that will never change.
My posts are clear, try you may find the truth.Who or what is your final authority?
If you leave it up to me, I gather from your posts that you are your final authority.My posts are clear, try you may find the truth.
Which clearly shows your comprehension problem. Keep trying. I have clearly stated my beliefs over and over again.If you leave it up to me, I gather from your posts that you are your final authority.
I don't see any reason to keep trying, it is obvious that you are your own final authority. It is not scripture and it is not the Holy Spirit.Which clearly shows your comprehension problem. Keep trying. I have clearly stated my beliefs over and over again.
I don't find a need to repeat myself when I have clearly stated who is and you haven't understood it in the past. It would be like throwing pearls before...you have once again posted lies about me. But no surprise as your institution lies and is founded by the father of lies.I don't see any reason to keep trying, it is obvious that you are your own final authority. It is not scripture and it is not the Holy Spirit.
The bread and wine are the body and blood of Christ. But certain Christians tell us that it is not. Why should we believe these other Christians? Here are the strikes against these Christians who tell us that the bread and wine are not the body and blood of Christ:
strike one: the actual words of scripture say that it is the body and blood of Christ
strike two: a vast number of Christians believe that it is the body and blood of Christ. (There are no Christians who believe that Jesus was a literal door or a lamb...)
strike three: it was taught and believed by the very early church. Christians who knew the apostles, who were disciples of the apostles and whose first language was Greek.
So I say that 3 strikes and your out, right?
Scripture strikes out according to your knowledge, since you decide what is and is not literal.To my knowledge that has not been even one Christian who believed that Jesus was speaking literally in any of these passages is stark contrast to the bread and wine being the body and blood of Christ. So there isn't even a debate over the passages you listed. Sorry but you are still striking out here.
strike one: the actual words of scripture say that it is the body and blood of Christ
strike two: a vast number of Christians believe that it is the body and blood of Christ.
strike three: it was taught and believed by the very early church.
which isn't different than you 'gathering' your own truth from the RCC - your final authority.If you leave it up to me, I gather from your posts that you are your final authority.
according to your posts here you don't understand scripture or how the Holy Spirit works.I don't see any reason to keep trying, it is obvious that you are your own final authority. It is not scripture and it is not the Holy Spirit.
the wide road is a crowed road!Actually, the Holy Spirit says repeatedly that the consecrated Eucharist is bread.
Yet Catholics refuse to believe Him and charge Him as a liar.
It is a good thing sound doctrine is not determined by popular vote!
Why you thought popularity is a litmus for truth reveals great naivete. What I find very interesting about your claim is the reality that most Catholics themselves do not even believe it!
catholics don't connect the 2. the RCC doesn't connect the 2 so it can't teach it. catholics only know what the RCC teaches them.The early church believed many things about the Eucharist....some of which are rejected by the RCC.
Looks like Catholics strike out on that alone.
Secondly, what matters to a Christ follower is what the Word of God says, not what some fallible people said centuries after Christ.
The words that Jesus used in the upper room where not words that would be used if he was speaking figuratively.Scripture strikes out according to your knowledge, since you decide what is and is not literal.
and as Monty Python would say... 'run away, run away' ... did disciples leave Christ in droves over these 'hard sayings'?Here are more actual words:
John 9:5 As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.
John 10:7 Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep.
John 15:1 I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.