the current church you belong to does not have such?
I noticed both Catholic and Protestant services have such, thus, am curious if your church has such?
The Pope: Man Of God? Or Man Of Perdition?!
- Thread starter Ricko1
- Start date
- Status
the current church you belong to does not have such?
I noticed both Catholic and Protestant services have such, thus, am curious if your church has such?
that is an interesting theory ..
Jesus "borrowed" the idea to eat bread and drink wine in remembrance of Him and our covenant with Him (which it represents) from the Egyptians ???
huh .. who would have known God plagiarized the Egyptians .. lol
BTW: show me the data if you would on the Egyptians please ..
and I mean tangible evidence not some fable out of someones mind ..
Last edited:
the Eucharist ..
Nowhere is the difference between Luther and Zwingli regarding the sacraments clearer than in their views of the Eucharist. While Luther denied transubstantiation, he nevertheless affirmed a form of the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist. Zwingli rejected such a notion. For him, the Eucharist was a mere memorial of Jesus’ death, a ritual sign Jesus left his Church by which to remember his act of self-surrender. The bread and wine of the Eucharist did not change in their being; at best, they changed in their significance because of the context in which they were received.
Luther and Zwingli disagreed vehemently regarding Jesus’ words at the Last Supper. Luther understood “This is my body” to refer to the Real Presence. For Luther, “is” meant “is,” so that when Christ had said “This is my body,” he meant to affirm that something had happened to the Eucharistic elements. Zwingli, on the other hand, understood “This is my body” to mean “This signifies my body.” He didn’t believe anything happened, other than a change of meaning in the minds of the congregants.
The disagreement between Luther and Zwingli represented a first major division among the various wings of the Reformation. Calvin would later disagree with both Luther and Zwingli on the nature of the sacraments, especially the Eucharist.
Calvin, with respect to the Eucharist, he staked out a position between Luther’s belief in the Real Presence on the one hand and Zwingli’s purely symbolic, memorial view on the other. Christ’s Body and Blood were dynamically or virtually “present” in the Eucharist and received through faith. In other words, the grace of Christ was present, but not the substance of his Body and Blood. This view, sometimes called the Dynamic or Virtual Presence, makes it difficult, if not impossible, to distinguish Christ’s presence in the Eucharist from his presence in Baptism or any other occasion of grace. For the “power” of Jesus’ Body and Blood are present in other places as well. What distinguishes the Eucharistic presence of Jesus, then, from his presence in, say, Scripture attended to with faith or a sermon devoutly received?
Nowhere is the difference between Luther and Zwingli regarding the sacraments clearer than in their views of the Eucharist. While Luther denied transubstantiation, he nevertheless affirmed a form of the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist. Zwingli rejected such a notion. For him, the Eucharist was a mere memorial of Jesus’ death, a ritual sign Jesus left his Church by which to remember his act of self-surrender. The bread and wine of the Eucharist did not change in their being; at best, they changed in their significance because of the context in which they were received.
Luther and Zwingli disagreed vehemently regarding Jesus’ words at the Last Supper. Luther understood “This is my body” to refer to the Real Presence. For Luther, “is” meant “is,” so that when Christ had said “This is my body,” he meant to affirm that something had happened to the Eucharistic elements. Zwingli, on the other hand, understood “This is my body” to mean “This signifies my body.” He didn’t believe anything happened, other than a change of meaning in the minds of the congregants.
The disagreement between Luther and Zwingli represented a first major division among the various wings of the Reformation. Calvin would later disagree with both Luther and Zwingli on the nature of the sacraments, especially the Eucharist.
Calvin, with respect to the Eucharist, he staked out a position between Luther’s belief in the Real Presence on the one hand and Zwingli’s purely symbolic, memorial view on the other. Christ’s Body and Blood were dynamically or virtually “present” in the Eucharist and received through faith. In other words, the grace of Christ was present, but not the substance of his Body and Blood. This view, sometimes called the Dynamic or Virtual Presence, makes it difficult, if not impossible, to distinguish Christ’s presence in the Eucharist from his presence in Baptism or any other occasion of grace. For the “power” of Jesus’ Body and Blood are present in other places as well. What distinguishes the Eucharistic presence of Jesus, then, from his presence in, say, Scripture attended to with faith or a sermon devoutly received?
Isn't he speaking about "transub
I believe he was speaking about transubstantiation: not "borrowing" the idea of the Lord's supper.
Why do you keep doing this.....?
Yes there is, I used to attend a Baptist services when I was in another place… there is communion from time to time…..
may I know the name of the church you belong?
I found it interesting then ..... I looked up at your profile and you're an Apostolic Christian?
is it the same as Apostolic Christian Church? i Wikipedia it, they have?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostolic_Christian_Church#Religious_practices
Biblical practices and tradition[edit]
- Communion is served once (to several times) a year at varying times, usually near Easter. Communion services are a closed service, with only members and converts present. Communion is typically preceded by a period, typically around a month, of self-examination and restitution, if needed.
Go on Line and search..
I never stated Jesus " Borrowed" any idea..That is twisting and perverting what I did say...I stated The RCC " borrowed the idea about Transubstanation from The Egyptians who used the Wafer ( same as Eucharist) and told their pagan followers they received their god when they put the wafer on their tongue like the RCC teaches
Google " Transubstanation" Or Isis, Horus, Seb.
You can also discover in two other books where the RCC got confessions to a priest, Nuns, and Clegg not being able to Marry from:
Babylon, Mystery Religion author Ralph Woodrow
The Two Babylons...Alexander Hislop
written in 1856.
it doesn't exist ..
I did .. like I said .. MADE UP IN SOMEONES MIND ..
doesn't it embarrass you to promote falsehoods ???
- Status