• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

What the RCC endorses

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
Catholic League is OK with ‘Black Jesus’ character who smokes, drinks

The Catholic League said the “Black Jesus” character on the Adult Swim network may drink, smoke and try to pick up women — but that he has some redeeming qualities, nonetheless, and the show could actually draw viewers to the spiritual light.
 

RLBosley

Active Member
Well that's appalling.

But what can you expect from an apostate church that believes Christ is re-sacrificed week after week...
 

Walter

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Well that's appalling.

But what can you expect from an apostate church that believes Christ is re-sacrificed week after week...

It is not a re-crucifixion of Christ or 're-sacrifice, it is a representation of the one sacrifice 2,000 years ago. The Early Church Fathers spoke of it frequently. If you really want to learn what it is: http://www.catholic.com/video/do-catholics-re-sacrifice-christ


As to what Donhue said of Black Jesus, he didn't exactly condone it, did he? He said it had SOME redeeming qualifies. “If the goal is to lure young people to take a closer look at Jesus, the Son of God, that is noble,” he said, Newsmax reported. “But if so, it is not a good sociological sign: Must we debase Jesus to make him real?
Not exactly an endorsement. And the Catholic Church has said nothing about it. No statement at all. DHK's assertion that the RCC endorses this is a not at all accurate. The Catholic League is NOT the Catholic Church. It is an organization made up of Catholics. And, again the Catholic League is not actually endorsing it.
 

RLBosley

Active Member
It is not a re-crucifixion of Christ or 're-sacrifice, it is a representation of the one sacrifice 2,000 years ago. The Early Church Fathers spoke of it frequently. If you really want to learn what it is: http://www.catholic.com/video/do-catholics-re-sacrifice-christ


As to what Donhue said of Black Jesus, he didn't exactly condone it, did he? He said it had SOME redeeming qualifies. “If the goal is to lure young people to take a closer look at Jesus, the Son of God, that is noble,” he said, Newsmax reported. “But if so, it is not a good sociological sign: Must we debase Jesus to make him real?
Not exactly an endorsement. And the Catholic Church has said nothing about it. No statement at all. DHK's assertion that the RCC endorses this is a not at all accurate. The Catholic League is NOT the Catholic Church. It is an organization made up of Catholics. And, again the Catholic League is not actually endorsing it.

I will not debate the Catholic Eucharist. I have learned enough of it and my opinion of it's utterly blasphemous quality will not be changed.

On the topic of the OP: No he did not explicitly endorse it, yet he said there could be something good, "some redeeming qualities", coming from such blasphemy. To "lure young people" to look at Christ in such a vile way is not at all something to praise. And yes the CL is not an official part of the RCC, in that way the OP was wrong, however the CL has close ties to the RCC.
 

Walter

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I will not debate the Catholic Eucharist. I have learned enough of it and my opinion of it's utterly blasphemous quality will not be changed.

On the topic of the OP: No he did not explicitly endorse it, yet he said there could be something good, "some redeeming qualities", coming from such blasphemy. To "lure young people" to look at Christ in such a vile way is not at all something to praise. And yes the CL is not an official part of the RCC, in that way the OP was wrong, however the CL has close ties to the RCC.

Well, if you really learned 'enough about it' you would not have made the false statement about 're-sacrificing Christ each week'. You know what you WANT to believe about it and will keep that view regardless of the facts. Perfect!
 

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
It is not a re-crucifixion of Christ or 're-sacrifice, it is a representation of the one sacrifice 2,000 years ago. The Early Church Fathers spoke of it frequently. If you really want to learn what it is: http://www.catholic.com/video/do-catholics-re-sacrifice-christ


As to what Donhue said of Black Jesus, he didn't exactly condone it, did he? He said it had SOME redeeming qualifies. “If the goal is to lure young people to take a closer look at Jesus, the Son of God, that is noble,” he said, Newsmax reported. “But if so, it is not a good sociological sign: Must we debase Jesus to make him real?
Not exactly an endorsement. And the Catholic Church has said nothing about it. No statement at all. DHK's assertion that the RCC endorses this is a not at all accurate. The Catholic League is NOT the Catholic Church. It is an organization made up of Catholics. And, again the Catholic League is not actually endorsing it.

Actually, the Mass IS Jesus being recrucified each time during the sacrament, as that is said to be his literal body and blood. correct?
 

Walter

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Actually, the Mass IS Jesus being recrucified each time during the sacrament, as that is said to be his literal body and blood. correct?

Did you check out the link I provided? It is explained well. No, Jesus is not re-crucified each time during the mass. Re-presentation is not re-sacrifice or re-crucified.
 

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
Did you check out the link I provided? It is explained well. No, Jesus is not re-crucified each time during the mass. Re-presentation is not re-sacrifice or re-crucified.
No matter which way it is rationalized the very doctrine of transubstantiation is one of the most hellish and blasphemous doctrines to be taught in the history of Christianity. It is wrong. You can call it "re-presentation" and dress it up with words that are more palatable to the common person. But that doesn't change the doctrine or the essence of its blasphemous nature. It is still heresy.

It is that heresy that Christians throughout centuries have fought against.
1. During every period of the "Dark Ages" there were in existence many Christians and many separate and independent Churches, some of them dating back to the times of the Apostles, which were never in any way connected with the Catholic Church. They always wholly rejected and repudiated the Catholics and their doctrines. This is a fact clearly demonstrated by credible history.



2. These Christians were the perpetual objects of bitter and relentless persecution. History shows that during the period of the "Dark Ages," about twelve centuries, beginning with A.D. 426, there were about fifty millions of these Christians who died martyr deaths. Very many thousands of others, both preceding and succeeding the "Dark Ages," died under the same hard hand of persecution.

http://jesus-is-savior.com/Books,%20Tracts%20&%20Preaching/Printed%20Books/trail_of_blood_jm_carroll.htm
 

Earth Wind and Fire

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I think it is wrong and shows that people have no respect for Jesus. What will help people is contained in the bible.

What will help people is the gift of the HS. That must come prior to preaching, prior to reading scripture....the indwelling the indwelling.

See the devil knows the Bible .... athiests even read it. Its inert matter without the Spirit and his guidence.....then it comes alive. Isn't that fascinating!
 

Thinkingstuff

Active Member
Catholic League is OK with ‘Black Jesus’ character who smokes, drinks


Interesting. Unfortunately you are not telling the whole story which makes your comment misleading lets look at the actual comment.
We have long taken the position that portraying Jesus as black is fine with the Catholic League, and indeed we find it silly that anyone would object. The Jesus character in this show is a mixed bag: He is irreverent, and can be downright crude, but he also has many redeeming qualities... it is not a good sociological sign: Must we debase Jesus to make him real? It will be interesting to see how the show develops, and how the audience reacts to the Jesus message, however twisted his delivery.
So it is clear that this group does not have an issue portraying Jesus as a black man (because Jesus is for everyone though in actuality he was a Judean probably similar to Arab looking peoples of today. I think the only people who might have a problem with that is the Anglo-Israelism type people) But they certainly have an issue with the mix bag of debasing his character to make him interesting to people. Also in my opinion I believe that this television program not only is sacrilegious but racist by insinuating that black people can only relate to a Jesus that reflects the broken down dregs of inner city black communities. Not only does it demean Jesus but black people as well.
 

Salty

20,000 Posts Club
Administrator
Why would you ask such a question as that to a Catholic?

Because Walter said in Post # 4 "It is not ...'re-sacrifice, it is a representation of the one sacrifice"

The RCC doctrine transubstantiation does not line up with what Walter said.
 

Zenas

Active Member
Because Walter said in Post # 4 "It is not ...'re-sacrifice, it is a representation of the one sacrifice"

The RCC doctrine transubstantiation does not line up with what Walter said.
I think you are trying to combine two separate and distinct events. Transubstantiation occurs when the bread and wine are turned into the body and blood of Christ. The sacrifice of the mass occurs afterward, when these elements are received and consumed by the faithful. In some cases it's hours or days later.

Where Walter said, "It is a representation of the one sacrifice," it may be a little confusing due to "representation" being a homograph. He is not talking about representation, which is the noun counterpart of the verb "represent." Rather he is talking about representation as being a presentation of the same event over and over. It helps if you write is as "re-presentation."
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
I think you are trying to combine two separate and distinct events. Transubstantiation occurs when the bread and wine are turned into the body and blood of Christ. The sacrifice of the mass occurs afterward, when these elements are received and consumed by the faithful. In a few cases it's hours or days later.
But we know that doesn't happen. It is just a superstition.
 
Top