All ya need is love... All ya need is love.

I'll prove the invisible church exists, when you prove the Holy Spirit exists!

 

Singer, the Catholic does not believe in Sola Scriptura.

How well I know, Pacman. It's something you should confess to the Lord about.
If the bible doesn't say Peter is a Saint; then he ain't a saint.

I sure would like to see some evidence of this "invisible" or "remnant" church that seems
to exist out of Protestant/Fundamentalist/Evangelical imaginations, yet can provide no
proof of such a "super-silent church."

Right there in front of your face, Pacman. "Whosoever believes in me and lives shall never die"
and "Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved" Rom 10:13

Now imagine 10,000 people who fall into that catagory, (Pre Catholicism) (which is
the time that Jesus was saving people for starters) and you have a church that qualifies
as the invisible church. It didn't include Catholics of course because the name was
still not created by Ignatius at that time.

Where was this "super-church" from between Pentecost until, shall we say, the so called
Protestant Reformation?

Okay....where was YOUR super-church between the beginning of Christ's
teaching on earth and Matt 16:18..?

Prove they exist or have ever existed! That is all I am asking! search all of church history
for a single sign of them, please!

Hey History Nut......where was your Catholic Church between Christ's birth and Pentecost..?
(At which time thousands were saved by hearing the gospel)

You cannot find a scrap of this so called "invisible" church except in your own imagination!

That just might be your shortcoming Pacman. You're looking for a visible kindgom, a
visible church and a visible leadership. Search your heart for truths that can only be
revealed in your heart.

 

You do what you have to do, but if there were indeed, an "invidible church," there would be a tangible record of it, right?

If you believe in the "Tooth Fairy," I just might ask for some tangible proof, right?

But if all you can do is reply with a retort that cannot possible be done, other then to testify in pure faith that the Holy Spirit exists, which is an intangable mixed-up up with a tangible possibility (proof that the "invisibal church" existed/exists) then we will not have much of a conversation, will we?

God bless,

PAX

Bill+†+


Pillar and Foundation of Truth, the Church. (1 Tim 3:15)

 

Singer replied, where I said:

Singer, the Catholic does not believe in Sola Scriptura.[/b]

How well I know, Pacman. It's something you should confess to the Lord about.
If the bible doesn't say Peter is a Saint; then he ain't a saint.

Even while there was a period of time when the New Testament did not exist? Where, as a very early Christian, do I turn to for authority if faith, doctrine and morals under those circumstances?

And as I say this, I wonder if you could give me your definition of Sola Scriptura. Can you do that, Singer?

I sure would like to see some evidence of this "invisible" or "remnant" church that seems
to exist out of Protestant/Fundamentalist/Evangelical imaginations, yet can provide no
proof of such a "super-silent church."

Right there in front of your face, Pacman. "Whosoever believes in me and lives shall never die"
and "Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved" Rom 10:13

Who were those who believed, Singer? Would you believe they became members of the only church around in those early days?

Now imagine 10,000 people who fall into that catagory, (Pre Catholicism) (which is
the time that Jesus was saving people for starters) and you have a church that qualifies
as the invisible church. It didn't include Catholics of course because the name was
still not created by Ignatius at that time.

Those 10,000 people became members of the (gasp!) CHURCH! Guess whis one, Singer? There was only one around then, you know...

Where was this "super-church" from between Pentecost until, shall we say, the so called
Protestant Reformation?

Okay....where was YOUR super-church between the beginning of Christ's
teaching on earth and Matt 16:18..?

Actually, it was not quite in operation yet, as most believe that the church "activated" at Pentecost. And guess what, your salvation during that time was not yet secured...until His death on the cross either! Jesus, during that time, spoke of His church in future tense. ("...Upon this rock I will build my church..." therefore, you are in the setting-up period of the church.

Prove they exist or have ever existed! That is all I am asking! search all of church history
for a single sign of them, please!

Hey History Nut......where was your Catholic Church between Christ's birth and Pentecost..?
(At which time thousands were saved by hearing the gospel)

Non sequitur, Singer. We are speaking of the spread of the church and all of Christianity from Pentecost onward, remember?

And by the way, a very famous convert to Catholicism, Cardinal John Henry Neumann, once said:

"To be deep into history is to cease to be Protestant."

You remind of my Protestant Fundamentalist minister who once told me that "classical music was the music of the devil" (or similar words.)

Is history the "work of Satan" in your mind, Singer?

You cannot find a scrap of this so called "invisible" church except in your own imagination!

That just might be your shortcoming Pacman. You're looking for a visible kindgom, a
visible church and a visible leadership. Search your heart for truths that can only be
revealed in your heart.

And that is precisely what Christ set-up! Don't you get it yet? Christ was a visible man, and so was His church. For the church to be viable here on earth, it had to be visible to be effective. And visible it was, from the martyrdom of Christians in the Roman arenas, their blood being the paint that adorned their frescoes and their epataphs that asked for prayers for their dead (Gulp! purgarory!) and in veneration of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the first ICON of Mary!

YOu have a lot to learn, Singer...

God bless,

PAX

Bill+†+

My soul proclaims the greatness of the Lord; my spirit rejoices in God my savior.
For he has looked upon his handmaid's lowliness; behold, from now on will all ages
call me blessed. (Luke 1:46-48)

 

Love will not be a "consideration"; love will be the ruling and victorious force in that day. As the first letter of John aptly states, "God is love." As Paul wrote the Corinthians, love is what is there at the end, having endured all things, and is greater than faith or hope. God saves us because God is love, and while your love or mine is "a work of the spirit", God's love is much more, indeed is the essential nature of the Spirit.

There, I've been as self-assured and dogmatic as you!

Haruo
still a bit of a universalist

 

Harau,
It seems to me you are relying on God's love to the extent of neglecting his Justice!

I could have said that because God loves those who love Him and thereby have faith in him, are saved from the lake of fire, but all others who do not love God and who do not have faith in God are cast into the lake of fire. Would that make you feel better. The truth is, the faith condition of the spirit determines eternal destination and not the love condition.

 

You do what you have to do, but if there were indeed, an "invidible church," there would
be a tangible record of it, right?

Pacman.........IF there was a 'visible church', wouldn't there be evidence of it between
Christ's birth and Pentecost ? Or...if creation's purpose was to expose the Catholic Church
like Carson claims, (so people could be saved), why did Christ not make that a little more
evident than just a passing mention in Matt 16:18 about Peter being Peter and a comment
about "upon this rock" which has been easily misinterpreted to mean Peter.

Catholicism has made the simple gospel into a guessing game with an unreliable outcome;
keeping its members in fear of excommunication all the while giving reverence to an old
man in the Vatican, Mary and Peter ( who is considered a saint), counting beads, imagining
Purgatory, making communion, confessing to a mere man and looking to baptism to save .

Less emphasis is given to God's Grace, the Bible, Jesus' solution on the cross,
claiming salvation, and spreading the Good and Simple News of the Gospel.

"Come unto me, Ye who labor and are heavy laden and I will give you Rest" (Jesus)

I don't think He requires us to be wearing a "I AM A CATHOLIC" button for entry.

 

Singer replied, where I last said:

You do what you have to do, but if there were indeed, an "invisible church," there would
be a tangible record of it, right?

Pacman.........IF there was a 'visible church', wouldn't there be evidence of it between
Christ's birth and Pentecost ?

Why am I not concerned as to the "visibility" of Christ's Church? Because I think it is a visible as can be? What would it take for you to see it, Singer, then to open your eyes and your mind?

Or...if creation's purpose was to expose the Catholic Church like Carson claims, (so people could be saved), why did Christ not make that a little more evident than just a passing mention in Matt 16:18 about Peter being Peter and a comment about "upon this rock" which has been easily misinterpreted to mean Peter.

How much "more evident" must it be to satisfy you, Singer? And you call Matthew 16:18 simply a "passing mention"? Are you serious? And when you take it along with verse 19, does it not come out to you like a lion about what Christ is doing, declaring the creation of His church with the awesome authority of the "Keys of the kingdom" through Peter (sorry, had to mention his name!) let alone the follow-up of the power to "bind and loose"?

How big of a hammer do I need to get your attention, Singer?

Catholicism has made the simple gospel into a guessing game with an unreliable outcome;
keeping its members in fear of excommunication all the while giving reverence to an old
man in the Vatican, Mary and Peter ( who is considered a saint), counting beads, imagining
Purgatory, making communion, confessing to a mere man and looking to baptism to save .

Singer, I know of no good practicing Catholic that "fears excommunication" at all! If fact, that is seldom done these days, save for the most obstinate and obvious public sinner who is a public figure in fame's limelight.

The rest of your litany is too much to expand upon here, but just for kicks, explain John 20:22-23 for me sometime in regards to the power of priests to forgive sins.

Less emphasis is given to God's Grace, the Bible, Jesus' solution on the cross,
claiming salvation, and spreading the Good and Simple News of the Gospel.

And all this time, I thought this was well promulgated during the past Lentin season!

"Come unto me, Ye who labor and are heavy laden and I will give you Rest" (Jesus)

We read this comment made by Jesus all of time, Singer... Are you preaching to me now?

I don't think He requires us to be wearing a "I AM A CATHOLIC" button for entry.

I will have to take a trip to the nearest Catholic book store and see if I can find one of those badges!

Singer, I have come to the conclusion you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about....

Sorry.....but God loves you anyway.

God bless,

PAX

Bill+†+

Not riches, but God.
Not honors, but God.
Not distinction, but God.
Not dignities, but God.
Not advancement, but God.
God always and in everything.

- St. Vincent Pallotti -

 

This shows how little you know. The Catholic Church says that though the orthodox are in schism, they do have legitimate apostolic succession and there Eucharist is also the body and blood of Christ. If a Catholic cannot get to a Catholic mass due to availability he can go to an Orthodox Mass. So your example is not a good one.

Blessings </font>[/QUOTE]You introduced a whole new element into the discussion that was not previously part of the discussion and then you say that my example is not a good one?

You see, I believe that the Eucharist (communion elements) are the Body and Blood of Christ, but that does not make me either Catholic or Orthodox. I am free to partake of the Eucharist no matter what body of believers I am worshipping with.

I have been baptised by emmersion, in the Baptist tradition, by emmersion in the Bretheren tradition, and by sprinkling in the methodist tradition. I have not been baptised in the Catholic church nor in the Orthodox Church, however if baptism by those traditions is by emmersion or sprinkling, I am covered. Of course in a legalistic organization that may not be sufficient, because my baptism was not done by one of their Priests! I wonder what Jesus would have to say about that!

I confess Jesus to be the son of God, the Messiah...My Savior!

I do not pray to the departed Saints, because scriptures do not so instruct prayer to them.

I do not memorize the rosary nor carry beads to remind me to pray. Jesus warned against vain repitition in prayer and any other vanity in prayer. I pray whenever and wherever the Holy Spirit moves me to pray, and for whom ever the Spirit inspires me to pray for. When I cannot find the word, the Holy Spirit prays to the Father in my behalf.

I do not genuflex, again no scriptural support!

I do not light candles or burn insense, though it is conceivable that some scripture may support it.

I do not hold one man or a collection of men to be intercessor(s) between God and me, save for the Lord Jesus Christ. Currently, I am indebted to none either, save for Jesus Christ.

 

Pacman.........IF there was a 'visible church', wouldn't there be evidence of it between
Christ's birth and Pentecost ?

Why am I not concerned as to the "visibility" of Christ's Church?
Because I think it is a visible as can be? What would it take for you to see
it, Singer, then to open your eyes and your mind?

You're sure sidestepping THAT question aren't you.!!
For such an important issue...it sure seems to evade discovery.
Would God intentionally hide something as important as the "one true church"
and make us guess for 2000 years just what He's up to ?

Maybe it's not an important issue though...maybe it's just another fallacy of
the Catholic Church.

How much "more evident" must it be to satisfy you, Singer? And you call
Matthew 16:18 simply a "passing mention"? Are you serious? And when
you take it along with verse 19, does it not come out to you like a lion
about what Christ is doing, declaring the creation of His church with the
awesome authority of the "Keys of the kingdom" through Peter (sorry,
had to mention his name!) let alone the follow-up of the power to "bind and loose"?

While we're doing scripture, lets go back to verse 17 and see just what they
were talking about. In vs 15 Jesus asked "Whom say ye that I am"?
Peter answered "The Son of the livingGod". Jesus then said in vs 17 "Blessed art
thou, for my Father which is in heaven revealed IT unto you. (Paraphrased).

What was the "IT" they were talking about?
"IT" was Peter's answer that Jesus is the Son of the living God.
In vs 18 Jesus said "And upon this rock............"
Still the subject is "Who Am I" and the answer "Son of God"
The subject is "IT" (Son of the living God).
That's the IT that Jesus was making of utmost importance.
That is the foundation of our faith.
Not some visible church.
Good Grief.

(Boy you ain't gonna like that answer)

Singer, I have come to the conclusion you have absolutely no idea
what you are talking about...

Me and ten million other Christians who don't agree with Catholicism you mean ?

I THOUGHT I was getting to ya, Strongman. What's the matter...too many questions
that you can't find book answers to?

1. Where was YOUR pet church between Christ's birth and Pentecost.?
2. What in the heck is Supernatural Actual Body and Blood?
3. Why didn't the apostles eat Jesus when they had the chance.?

This would be a good time to insult my intelligence now and make an exit.
(That must be part of your training in the "How to Handle Protestants When They
Ask Questions You Can't Answer) section.

 

Christ was present before Petnecost. Afterwards, He was not present. In His absense, He established the Church, in order to bring people to Christ, which will last until His triumphant return.

By the way. You sidestep countless questions, and then you harass someone because they didn't answer one. Proud of yourself?

God bless,

Grant

 

Answered.

I've never heard of that word usage before. However, God is supernatural. God presents Himself in the Eucharist. He is actually there, although supernaturally (beyond our weak human understanding). How's that? Somehow, I feel you will not be (ever) satisfied, which means you have no desire to hear an answer, but only to continue tossing questions.

Because the apostles didn't understand Him either. However, they chose to remain with Him regardless. Then, they DID partake of His body and blood when He instituted the Eucharist at the Last Supper.

You insulted him just now. Practice what you preach.

God bless,

Grant

 

Give me a break, please. You make up a convoluted question which is hard to answer because of your wording, and then you call YOUR OWN QUESTION a fallacy of the Catholic Church? HUH? If you spent more time staying on track and listening to our answers to your questions, you wouldn't have to make up so much stuff. Why don't you pull out another obscure Luther reference for us. Can't ever get enough of those!!!

God bless,

Grant

 

Question:
1. Where was your pet church between Christ's birth and Pentecost:

Answer:
Christ was present before Petnecost. Afterwards, He was not present. In
His absense, He established the Church, in order to bring people to Christ,
which will last until His triumphant return.

Response from Singer:
Oh now wasn't that sneaky of Him to intentionally hide such an important
feature and then let mankind guess for evermore what He really intended.

Question:
2. What in the heck is Supernatural Actual Body and Blood?

Answer:
I've never heard of that word usage before. However, God is supernatural.
God presents Himself in the Eucharist. He is actually there, although supernaturally
(beyond our weak human understanding). How's that? Somehow, I feel you will
not be (ever) satisfied, which means you have no desire to hear an answer, but
only to continue tossing questions.

Response by Singer:
I never heard of the term either but yet even here you say Christ presents
His body supernaturally. Yet you claim you're eating the actual (ACUTAL)
body and blood of Jesus. How is even a half intelligent humanbeing supposed
to understand that. That isn't one of the great mysteries of God, that is a
Catholic Concoction; and that answer by Pacman clouds the issues even more.
Christ is actually here in our hearts too. Christ is within us. The kingdom of God
is within us. Catholics don't have the franchise on Jesus.

Question:
Why didn't the apostles eat Jesus when they had the chance.?

Answer:
Because the apostles didn't understand Him either. However, they chose
to remain with Him regardless. Then, they DID partake of His body and
blood when He instituted the Eucharist at the Last Supper.

Response by Singer:
No, they partook of the symbols of his body and blood which was
bread and wine. They didn't eat his actual body and blood even though
it was available. But nowdays....Catholics claim they are eating His
ACTUAL body and blood. They might have one more chance; when
He returns in the same body he left with. Will they still be willing to eat
His ACTUAL body and blood, or will they cower away and assure
us that they would never do that. (Unlike their claim today) ??

We (believers) will also reign with Him for 1000 years. Are you still going
to support eating his flesh and blood (not bread and wine) at that time?

I'll make that question # 4.

 

WPutnam said

If you were spirit filled you would be able to recognize the members of the Bride of Christ church wherever you meet them. They are among, but distinctly different than the church attender. Most of them are are members in a Body of Christ church, but not all. They are recognizable for what they are by those who are also part of the Bride of Christ Church, that is, Spirit filled persons. One need not be in their home church to be recognized or to recognize others of kindred spirit. They have been among the Body of Christ church from the very first churches to today without any breaks or gaps in time. Among their members are those who have continually tested the Body of Christ to make sure it stays on course. They were present during the split you call the protestant reformation. They have been in virtually every congregation formed from the very first. At any time during the past two thousand years, if the Lord had Returned to "snatch up" his Bride, they would have departed from among the congregations, leaving empty pews where they had been, while most pews would remain occupied by curious attenders who wondered where they went. That is the invisible Bride of Christ Church. You may have heard about it, but since you say you haven't, you can't say that anymore.

 

What are you talking about? How was he sneaky? Who is guessing? You? I'm not. Your question makes no sense; I'm guessing about that! Christ formed His Church, guided by the Holy Spirit (which decended at Pentecost) to lead the people to truth until His return. While Christ was here, there was no need for a Church, which is why He said "I will build my Church," ie, future tense. Any problems with that are self-created by you, not the Catholic Church.

I used the "actual/supernatural" language because that is what your question called for!!!!!! And now you criticize me for it! These questions are so loaded with venom it hurts me. The latter half of your response is nothing worth responding to, as you are spouting off your opinion, and which you certainly will reject anything I say in response to anyway.

So you ask me a question, waiting for the Catholic response, and then tell me I'm wrong. That's another baited question. And you wonder why people ignore your questions? You don't want to listen; you only want to lift yourself above me.

Use your noggin. When He returns, there will not be a need for that, for we will be in the VERY PRESENCE OF GOD IN HEAVEN.

All I have to say is: *sigh*

God bless,

Grant

 

What are you talking about? How was he sneaky? Who is guessing?
You? I'm not. Your question makes no sense; I'm guessing about that!
Christ formed His Church, guided by the Holy Spirit (which decended at
Pentecost) to lead the people to truth until His return. While Christ was here,
there was no need for a Church, which is why He said "I will build
my Church," ie, future tense. Any problems with that are self-created by
you, not the Catholic Church.

How was he sneaky you ask? Well you said "in his absence he established the Church".
Now why would God in the Flesh, who created the world for the purpose of establishing
the Catholic Church, purposely neglect to even mention it or attempt to do even one little thing
to assure its beginning...?

Catholics refer to the Catholic Church as the Bride of Christ, The Body of Christ, the
Kingdom of God, the One True Church and the Reason for Creation. Yet scripture
doesn't line up with those claims and now we hear that He established that church in
his absence.....even when He had full opportunity when He was here ......and leave
mankind to squabble over what the bible means with the result being that thousands
upon thousands will miss out on their eternal reward because they failed to "get it" that
he was secretly referring to the Catholic Church all the time?? Now THAT'S Sneaky !!

On the other hand, He was NOT sneaky and He DID set up his church while He was
here and it is well portrayed in Yelsew's last post. It IS an invisible body of believers
who God has written down the names of in the Big Book of Life. There will be no
name of a church in that book and there will be no complete congregations named
just because they belonged to the Catholic Church.

How do you get your name there, you might ask?
"Believe that HE was/is the Son of the Living God"
(The same answer as in Matt 16:16)
THAT was the issue from the beginning of Creation
THAT adds you to the Body of Christ
THAT is your entry into the Bride of Christ
THAT gives you the Kingdom of God
THAT was the Reason for Creation.

Confess your attempts to please God
God is not impressed with our "filthy rags"
His sacrifice has been offered and it is complete.
We ARE ....Because He Lives !!

Use your noggin. When He returns, there will not be a need for that,
for we will be in the VERY PRESENCE OF GOD IN HEAVEN.

Good Answer, Grant. Now ask yourself if it is not important then...why
is it important now to think that you're eating his body and drinking his
blood. Why not just "do it in remembrance of me " like He said and scrap
the idea that you're eating ACTUAL meat and blood.?

 

This message is for Grant:

Thank you for stepping in and contributing to what has become a most incomprehensible thread. To see this, here is the last thing Singer said:

Good Answer, Grant. Now ask yourself if it is not important then...why
is it important now to think that you're eating his body and drinking his
blood. Why not just "do it in remembrance of me " like He said and scrap
the idea that you're eating ACTUAL meat and blood.?

I now think back to the several attempts I made to indicate that the communicant is not eating "actual" (natural) meat or "actual" (natural) blood, but in fact, His "body" and "blood" in the accidental form of bread and wine, now no longer bread and wine, even while the "accidents" remain.

I guess I am a failure in attempting to explain something that is so wonderful in a "miracle" that we accept in the heart, not from our senses. That we believe Jesus unconditionally that this would happen, as He gave us that gift on the very night before He was betrayed.

So, I hand Singer over to you, Grant. Good luck!

I will take a rest now, especially as I have to do some serious video capture and conversion to DVD+R's today, and that ties-up my computer in a very serious way.

I will pray for Singer and for all of my friends here in this conference......

God bless,

PAX

Bill+†+


"Gloria in excelsis Deo"

(Intoned by the celebrant of the Mass.)

(The choir response.)

Et in terra pax homininus
bone voluntatis
Laudamus te
Benedicimus te
Adoramus te
Glorificamus te,
Gratias agimus tibi propter
magnum gloriam tuum.
Domine Deus, Rex Coelestis,
Deus Pater omnipotens
Domine Fili unigenite
Jesu Christe Domine Deus
Agnus Dei Filius Patris
Qui tollis peccata mundi
miserere nobis.
Qui tollis peccata mundi,
suscipe deprecationem nostram.
Qui sedes ad dexteramPatris,
miserere nobis.
Quoniam tu solus Sanctus,
Tu solus Dominus
Tu solus Altissimus
Jesu Christe.
Cum Sancto Spiritu
in gloria Dei Patris
Amen.

- The Ambrosian Gloria -


http://www.solesmes.com/sons/gloria.ram

(Real monks chanting....)


Gregorian Chant - God's music!

 

These questions are so loaded with venom it hurt me.

Grant, I think what hurts you is that you have been confronted with the
need to use some common sense and not be a puppet of the Pope.

Pacman has attempted to use scripture to prove that scripture is not the
ONLY reliable source of God's wisdom. How ironic. !!

"Rely on History" you might say. Why rely on someone else's imagination
to get you to heaven. Jesus told us how to get to heaven. Martha questioned
just that at Lazarus' grave. His answer was the same as it is today.

I am the Way, the truth and the life".

Salvation is always a one on one confrontation. God doesn't have any
grandchildren who will inherit eternal life from the beliefs of others. Contrary
to RCC teaching, you're not going to heaven just because you belong to what
someone else told you is the "right church", "only church'' or ''first church''.

"The first shall be last" ......remember that scripture?

History may be a point of reference but I wouldn't bank my soul on it.
What's wrong with using common sense..? That would be a good use for that
thing on top of our shoulders. It's not just a hatrack.

Good day boys,
Singer