New survey: Only one-third of Catholics believe in Real Presence

[Reformed1689]

Our baptism are not symbolic an fake.

As the Eucharist.

We take what God says as the law. So like if he says eating a particular fruit is forbidden.....you might think that is symbolic and the fruit actually doesn't do anything, We'd say you are wrong Cause GOD CAN DO WHAT HE WANTS , HOW HE WANTS.

You have a lack of respect of God's ORDINARY power. God says the gospel converts people, you say no, that god is required to intervene. Silly view of God's power.

You can set your sprinkler to water a lawn.......but God can't save a person with a gospel.

Strawman/ad hominem/red herring.

 

[MarysSon]

No, actually it wasn't.

Funny how you always respond with quick, hit-and-run posts, but you never stick around to explain your answers.
WHY is that?

 

[Reformed1689]

Funny how you always respond with quick, hit-and-run posts, but you never stick around to explain your answers.
WHY is that?

John 6 is symbolism. Manna saved the Hebrew in the wilderness. So does the flesh of the savior being crucified and raised again save humanity. He is not literally saying "eat my flesh" we are not cannibals.

 

[MarysSon]

No, that is NOT what Christ describes in John 3:5

Is Baptism Part of Salvation?

Ummm, I see that you "responded" to me on a thread that I do not have permission to respond because I am not Baptist: John 3:5 Is Not Requiring Baptism For Salvation

How "brave" of you . . .

 

[Reformed1689]

Ummm, I see that you "responded" to me on a thread that I do not have permission to respond because I am not Baptist: John 3:5 Is Not Requiring Baptism For Salvation

How "brave" of you . . .

First, you should not assign intent. I had no idea you couldn't access that thread. Second, if you read the article you see I already went in depth. If you have further gripes about it, YOU start a new thread somewhere you can see.

 

[MarysSon]

John 6 is symbolism. Manna saved the Hebrew in the wilderness. So does the flesh of the savior being crucified and raised again save humanity. He is not literally saying "eat my flesh" we are not cannibals.

Funny that you should use the word "cannibal" because that is precisely what the Romans accused the Early Church of because of their worship and consumption of the Eucharist.

- Explain to me why Jesus didn't explain the "symbolism" to His Apostles like he always did - instead of simply asking of they ALSO wanted to leave.

- Explain the use of the Greek "Trogon" for the way an animal rips apart his food as opposed to the usual "Phagon", which is the way a human eats.

- Explain why most of His disciples LEFT Him that day and returned to their former way of life if this was all just "symbolism".

 

[MarysSon]

First, you should not assign intent. I had no idea you couldn't access that thread. Second, if you read the article you see I already went in depth. If you have further gripes about it, YOU start a new thread somewhere you can see.

This is a discussion/debate forum. Bring your case to the table.

I do not read article or watch video links.
Make your case here for ALL to read like I have - or why bother posting?

 

[MarysSon]

First, you should not assign intent. I had no idea you couldn't access that thread. Second, if you read the article you see I already went in depth. If you have further gripes about it, YOU start a new thread somewhere you can see.

If you want to continue this discussion on Baptism - move your thread to an open place where I have access - and I will engage you there.

 

[Reformed1689]

Funny that you should use the word "cannibal" because that is precisely what the Romans accused the Early Church of because of their worship and consumption of the Eucharist.

- Explain to me why Jesus didn't explain the "symbolism" to His Apostles like he always did - instead of simply asking of they ALSO wanted to leave.

- Explain the use of the Greek "Trogon" for the way an animal rips apart his food as opposed to the usual "Phagon", which is the way a human eats.

- Explain why most of His disciples LEFT Him that day and returned to their former way of life if this was all just "symbolism".

Because it is SELF-EXPLANATORY. So do you literally eat the flesh and blood of Christ?

 

[Reformed1689]

If you want to continue this discussion on Baptism - move your thread to an open place where I have access - and I will engage you there.

I don't have a way to do that. Clearly you don't want to take initiative to discuss it because you can't.

 

[MarysSon]

Because it is SELF-EXPLANATORY. So do you literally eat the flesh and blood of Christ?

We consume our Lord sacramentally - Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity under the appearance/accidents of bread and wine.
That is what HE prescribed at the Last Supper.

 

[MarysSon]

I don't have a way to do that. Clearly you don't want to take initiative to discuss it because you can't.

Because we have been asked by a Moderator to move the Baptism discussion elsewhere.
YOU shouldn't assign intent . . .

 

[Reformed1689]

We consume our Lord sacramentally - Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity under the appearance/accidents of bread and wine.
That is what HE prescribed at the Last Supper.

Yes or no, do you eat the literal flesh and blood of Christ?

 

[Reformed1689]

Because we have been asked by a Moderator to move the Baptism discussion elsewhere.
YOU shouldn't assign intent . . .

Right, and I did move it elsewhere. You didn't like it but yet you won't start your own thread.

 

[MarysSon]

Right, and I did move it elsewhere. You didn't like it but yet you won't start your own thread.

I can't respond to it because I am not identified as a Baptist here.
I already explained that to you.

Besides, YOU are the one who decided to argue with ME about Baptism - so the onus to start a thread is on YOU.
I couldn't care less . . .

 

[Reformed1689]

I can't respond to it because I am not identified as a Baptist here.
I already explained that to you.

Besides, YOU are the one who decided to argue with ME about Baptism - so the onus to start a thread is on YOU.
I couldn't care less . . .

I did start a thread. Thanks. Sorry if you can't post there, but honestly makes me wonder why you are at a Baptist board to begin with. That being said, feel free to start a thread so I can, again, show you how you are in deep error on the topic of John 3.

 

[MarysSon]

Yes or no, do you eat the literal flesh and blood of Christ?

What's wrong with you??
I just got done explaining this.in post #31.

Go back and R*E*A*D it again.

 

[MarysSon]

I did start a thread. Thanks. Sorry if you can't post there, but honestly makes me wonder why you are at a Baptist board to begin with. That being said, feel free to start a thread so I can, again, show you how you are in deep error on the topic of John 3.

Why??
It was never my intent to argue about Baptism. YOU'RE the one who had a problem with it - not me . . .

 

[Reformed1689]

What's wrong with you??
I just got done explaining this.in post #31.

Go back and R*E*A*D it again.

Yes or no? Do you believe we eat the literal flesh and blood of Christ disguised as bread and wine? Why is this so hard to answer? Simple yes or no.

 

[MarysSon]

. . . honestly makes me wonder why you are at a Baptist board to begin with.

I was invited here.
Hear there were a lot of anti-Catholics who needed to hear the truth.