To Budge

[Justified Saint]

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1061648' date='Sep 12 2006, 04:14 PM']
Doesn't that totally debunk the entire theological argument that Christ is present as an unbloody sacrifice? Doesn't that go completely against Jesus saying his flesh is bread, he is present as bread? If anything, it refutes what the Host is supposed to be and raises the idea that a charlatan is at work.
[/quote]

No, it doesn't. These phenomenas refer to Eucharistic miracles, not the sacrifice as such. The whole point of a miracle is that it deviates from the norm, and in this case is a particularly special grace and revelation.

Also, according to Eucharistic theology, the consecrated appearances both signfy and contain the reality they represent. What do they signfy? The body and blood of Christ of course. Thus it is no stretch of the imagination that the consecrated elements through a miracle could actually take on the physical appearances (i.e. blood) of which it signifies.

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='Budge' post='1061435' date='Sep 12 2006, 05:11 PM']
Mainline Prot churches are infested with tons of Catholicism with the first thing being sacramentalism. Ie the Reformers were able to unshackle some of the chains but didnt finish the job.

There are three types of churches--yes I knwo Im simplifying this, Liturgical--Sacramental daughters of Rome and Catholic chruch with its rites, other churches infested with liberalism--that overlaps into the liturgical churches and Bible believing churches. [/quote]

But there are also conservative and liturgical branches, like the Missouri Synod of the Lutheran church. Regardless, they also claim to stick to Sola Scriptura. In all honesty, why shouldn't I believe them?

[quote name='Budge' post='1061435' date='Sep 12 2006, 05:11 PM']I consider Lutheranism just acouple steps outside the Catholic door. I am close to someone who grew up Lutheran, and they told me straight to my face, that the Mass with the exception of longer sermons matched almost exactly to their Lutheran services.[/quote]

Well, I say the Lutheran church is about 95 steps from the Catholic Church I'd say the Lutheran liturgy is structured similarly to the Catholic Latin Rite, but there are a lot of differences when you get into the wording and practices.

[quote name='Budge' post='1061435' date='Sep 12 2006, 05:11 PM']Study the BIBLE, then youll realize how much in churches is the tradition of men and nowhere near anything that Jesus taught!
[/quote]

Where does the Bible get into details about church gatherings and liturgies? What about all the teachings of the Church Fathers instructing the early Christians to obey their bishops, that the Eucharist is truly the body of Christ, that sins are forgiven through Baptism, etc.?

[Budge]

I consider the early church fathers of Catholicism to be early deceivers.

They were already dealing with deceivers by the book of Acts.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

Hey Budge, maybe I missed it, but I didn't see a reply to my earlier post. Did you pick some topics you wanted to make the subject of our debate?

[Budge]

[quote]I challenge you to a debate on the Catholic faith using only the Catechism and the Bible as sources.
[/quote]

Now remember I will use Cathechism only to describe what you believe, but not as an authority of course.

I dont know what subjects, you can pick and start a thread..

I think Eucharist has been already talked about enough.

Do Purgatory, Immaculate Conception, Papal Infalliblity....

[aalpha1989]

[quote name='Budge' post='1062290' date='Sep 13 2006, 11:05 PM']

I think Eucharist has been already talked about enough.


[/quote]


not that I am going to be involved in the debate....but can we really ever talk about the Eucharist enough? Ummm no...considering it is the source center and summit of our faith...Also considering every time you talk about Jesus you ARE talking about the Eucharist, whether you know it or not...

[Budge]

[quote].considering it is the source center and summit of our faith...Also considering every time you talk about Jesus you ARE talking about the Eucharist, whether you know it or not...[/quote]

I am not talking about a round wafer of bread, I am talking about the One True God, who made the universe...

I believe the Eucharist is another Christ and not the Jesus Christ I worship.

You do know your leadership loves the Eucharist because it gives them all the power. They are the middleman between you and God, the only ones who can 'confect' the Valid god-wafer. Think about this, it was to claim power over others, it is NOT Biblical.

Edited September 14, 2006 by Budge

[kamiller42]

[quote name='Budge' post='1062332' date='Sep 13 2006, 11:31 PM']
I am not talking about a round wafer of bread, I am talking about the One True God, who made the universe...

I believe the Eucharist is another Christ and not the Jesus Christ I worship.[/quote]
It is not a second Christ. It is Jesus himself.

[quote]47 Amen, amen, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life.
48 [b]I am the bread of life[/b].
49 Your ancestors ate the manna in the desert, but they died;
50 this is the bread that comes down from heaven so that [b]one may [u]eat it[/u] and not die[/b].
51 [b]I am the living bread[/b] that came down from heaven; [b]whoever [u]eats[/u] this bread[/b] will live forever; and [b]the bread that I will give [u]is my flesh[/u][/b] for the life of the world."
52 The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, "How can this man give us (his) flesh to eat?"
53 Jesus said to them, "Amen, amen, I say to you, [b]unless you [u]eat the flesh of the Son of Man[/u] and [u]drink his blood[/u], you do not have life within you[/b].
54 Whoever [b][u]eats[/u] my flesh and [u]drinks [/u]my blood[/b] has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day.
55 For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink.
56 Whoever [b]eats my flesh[/b] and [b]drinks my blood[/b] remains in me and I in him.
57 Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me.
58 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your ancestors who ate and still died, whoever eats this bread will live forever."
59 These things he said while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum.
60 Then many of his disciples who were listening said, "[b]This saying is hard[/b]; who can accept it?"
61 Since Jesus knew that his disciples were murmuring about this, he said to them, "[b]Does this shock you?[/b]
62 What if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before?
63 It is the spirit that gives life, while the flesh is of no avail. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life.
64 But [b]there are some of you who do not believe[/b]." Jesus knew from the beginning the ones who would not believe and the one who would betray him.
65 And he said, "For this reason I have told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by my Father."
66 As a result of this, many (of) his disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him.
67 Jesus then said to the Twelve, "Do you also want to leave?"
68 Simon Peter answered him, "Master, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life.
John 6:47-68 (NAB)[/quote]
The questions here are: Will you be like the Jews and not understand eating His flesh? Will you be like the disciples who did not understand and walk away? As Jesus said, this is hard to accept. But for one who takes the Bible so literally, your answer to both questions has to be "no".

[Anomaly]

[quote name='Budge' post='1062332' date='Sep 13 2006, 10:31 PM']
I am not talking about a round wafer of bread, I am talking about the One True God, who made the universe...

I believe the Eucharist is another Christ and not the Jesus Christ I worship.

You do know your leadership loves the Eucharist because it gives them all the power. They are the middleman between you and God, the only ones who can 'confect' the Valid god-wafer. Think about this, it was to claim power over others, it is NOT Biblical.
[/quote]Leadership and Sacraments.
As if any denomination does not have people in a leadership or power position? To have no leadership, is non-biblical. In practice, all denominations have persons in power who will discourage or kick out people who make trouble.
Eucharist teachings has it's theological problems, but you toss out all 'sacramental' theology. No sacraments is particularly non-biblical, wouldn't you agree?

[Budge]

Anomaly, what church are you in?

Just curious, seems youre not Catholic but defend aspects of Catholic teachings...

Lutheran?

[quote]eadership and Sacraments.
As if any denomination does not have people in a leadership or power position? To have no leadership, is non-biblical. In practice, all denominations have persons in power who will discourage or kick out people who make trouble.[/quote]

One apostle preached "FOLLOW ME as I FOLLOW CHRIST."

I do consider my pastor as having authority over me, as long as he sticks with Gods Word, and fulfills the tenets of Timothy 1.

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='Budge' post='1062332' date='Sep 14 2006, 12:31 AM']
You do know your leadership loves the Eucharist because it gives them all the power. They are the middleman between you and God, the only ones who can 'confect' the Valid god-wafer. Think about this, it was to claim power over others, it is NOT Biblical.
[/quote]

Yet through the Eucharist we are able to physically touch and commune with Christ. You can't get much closer to God than that in this world

As far as having any kind of power, the way I see it Catholic priests and bishops really have less power to do things their own way than the pastors and leaders of any other denomination. Even those who are disobedient know they can only go so far if they wish to avoid excommunication. Besides, the sacraments are God's work... priests are merely God's instruments.

Now, I have heard this theory that the true Christian faith went underground shortly after Christ ascended from a couple of Baptist seminary students here in Louisville, but where is the evidence for this? To me, it sounds like a crafty way of explaining away all the evidence in early Christian writings that favors Catholicism. For 1,500 years of Church history, is there anything more than the sporadic priest or monk who strayed from Catholic teaching?

[Budge]

I trust in Gods word.

Since your church "wore out the saints" for centuries...

its the 'winners' of human wars and conflicts that write the history...

I dont expect Catholic history to be unbiased.

Most true Christians were not like catholic saints, celebs of their time, but died hated, and mostly unknown by the world.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Budge' post='1062290' date='Sep 14 2006, 12:05 AM']
Now remember I will use Cathechism only to describe what you believe, but not as an authority of course.

I dont know what subjects, you can pick and start a thread..

I think Eucharist has been already talked about enough.

Do Purgatory, Immaculate Conception, Papal Infalliblity....


[/quote]

Oh, of course I wouldn't expect you to accept the Catechism as an authority. I just find it unfair when people try to quote things that aren't Church teaching and then refute them. The Catechism is a clear, concise document for what the Church teaches. It should be considered the norm for the Catholic faith in any debate.

[Budge]

I quote the Catechism all the time, go look at my threads.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Budge' post='1063373' date='Sep 15 2006, 11:04 AM']
I quote the Catechism all the time, go look at my threads.
[/quote]
I believe you also often misunderstand what it's saying. My hope is to clarify for you what it says, while at the same time you can clarify for me exactly what your objections are.

Besides, you also quote from anti-Catholic articles.

Our topic should either be the Magisterium (which includes the pope), the pope (in particular), or Divine Revelation, since these things are at the core of the disagreements you bring up (even moreso than Mary or the Eucharist).

[Budge]

[quote]
I believe you also often misunderstand what it's saying. My hope is to clarify for you what it says, while at the same time you can clarify for me exactly what your objections are.[/quote]

This is a misnomer, you would tell me I misunderstand until I AGREE with it.

I know what it says. I dont need a guided tour of the mystical magical Catholic world of semantics.
[quote]
Besides, you also quote from anti-Catholic articles.
[/quote]

why wouldnt I? I dont agree with Catholicism.

[quote]
Our topic should either be the Magisterium (which includes the pope), the pope (in particular), or Divine Revelation, since these things are at the core of the disagreements you bring up (even moreso than Mary or the Eucharist).[/quote]

I just started a thread on the Magisterium yesterday.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Budge' post='1063382' date='Sep 15 2006, 11:14 AM']
This is a misnomer, you would tell me I misunderstand until I AGREE with it.

I know what it says. I dont need a guided tour of the mystical magical Catholic world of semantics.
[/quote]

No, you're free to disagree. However, just like Jack Chick misunderstands the Catechism when it says, "God became man so that man might become God," so you misunderstand some of the points in the Catechism. Just as one would correctly demonstrate that the above quote isn't saying that man becomes God, but rather that God shared in human nature so that we might share in divine nature, so I wish to clarify exactly what the Catechism says.

You accuse the Church of being subtle, but say that you don't need a guided tour. Well, if you don't know the language, you need a translator.