Search results

Pope Francis is not particularly skilled in nuance, true. Even though he basically changed nothing, he did in effect, exercise his Ex Cathedra power here, something that also the Pope in the 11th century exercised when he doubled down on the Filioque clause being added or accreted to the Creed...

Beautiful. ἀνθρώποις πάντας πανταχοῦ "Men (or people) All Everywhere."

Paul preached the Gospel of Isaiah 53's Suffering Servant. Christ identified Himself with Isaiah's Suffering Servant after He as lector in the synagogue, read the day's reading in Nazareth that day, which happened to be, from Isaiah: The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed...

So there are different Gospels AND different Laws then.

Meaning you have to believe in the blood. And for that matter, the flesh, or body of the victim, for the sacrifice, to be effective. For you. The sacrifice is effective in whatever way it otherwise works, but it is effective for and to you, when you believe in the blood and body of the...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrew_Catholics These guys are the Remnant. Just 500 of them, but such a curious tiny little community. They aren't Judaizers, they don't sin according to Galatians, they might do devotions that echo the Torah and Torah observance, but they are just devotions...

There is no six point Calvinist, just as there is no six star general—even if it did exist it would only be a figurehead position since it overlaps with the roles and responsibilities and duties of other offices. This is why there's no six star general, it's not that there's no six star general...

I don't think so. All the links are working.

OK, well I was just guessing—why don't you just come out and say what you're thinking—your post was mysterious so I hung a breaking ball there to see if you'd swing at it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_opere_operato It isn't like this is the first time in 2000 odd years the Church had...

There is no distinction in Roman Catholicism simpliciter (nor in Eastern Orthodoxy, the other ancient Eastern Church branches—and not even in many of the oldest Protestant branches, such as Lutheranism and Anglicanism (Methodists descend from Anglicans). If His blood is really present, then so...

The Church. We call it Apostolic, oral, Sacred Tradition. Tradition isn't a charged word here, it just means, we inherited it, we received it, meaning, we didn't develop it ourselves, it was given to us, or handed to us, handed on, transmitted. We were born and it already was there. That's...

What do you mean "still"? This is just begging the question. Straw man. It HASN'T always. Begging the question! No—in YOUR Bible's, which is LUTHER's Bible, which he changed. According to LUTHER. And you're having LUTHER decide for you—fine—justify it. Why LUTHER? why him? why not...

Right, and who's the "our" there? Who is that? "Our" is a first person plural. It's goes with "we" and "us", we and us are our. So, "He was wounded for OUR transgressions"—Paul says, "Christ died for OUR sins"—Isaiah 53 also says, "Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to...

Combining your prior two posts together, we need to replace what sounded good, with what worked again. Thing is, can we remember? There's such a thing as a lost art. We might need a Renaissance to recapture how to live together freely.

1st Corinthians 15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; "the Scripture" Isaiah 53. There's even the repeating 5 3. 15:3 and 53. Isaiah 53 is clearly about Christ dying for our sins, 1st Corinthians...

Sounds like the Good News of the crucifixion. That's Paul's Gospel, no?

But you have in Hebrews explicitly to not forsake gathering together, you have Our Lord saying wherever two or more are gathered together, and you have Acts and Paul saying Sundays. It's like the rainbow of colors coming out from a prism with white light shining into it. The white shining...

I'm going to take another bite of the apple ... again. Isn't it interesting that in baptism, the water symbolizes or represents or means or signifies Christ's blood, but if Roman Catholic theology of the Eucharist is correct, then the chalice actually IS His actual blood? The water of baptism...

And thank the Lord for it. What's funny is that in reality, for this analogy to be right, there are a million (OK not a million, but a lot more than just one) stacks all labeled "Biblical Christianity", and if you added all those stacks together, it would make a far taller stack than Roman...

So do you not like the Sunday obligation?