Catholic Church The First (Jesus Christ, Earth, Messiah, Kingdom, tradition)

[Scuba Pete]

Originally Posted by TruthInCatholocism

O_O Transubstansiation as in a term For what it is ... The True Presence....

Neither concept is in the scriptures. Why should I ascribe to them?

Originally Posted by TruthInCatholocism

So... Jesus said "This is My Body" "This is my Blood" But.. He was just Joking...

Herein lies your basic fallacy: that somehow the spiritual is less than the physical to the point that you call it "joking". Why do you hate the spiritual?

I Corinthians 15:42 So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; 43 it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; 44 it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.
If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. 45 So it is written: "The first man Adam became a living being"; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit. 46 The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual. 47 The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven. 48 As was the earthly man, so are those who are of the earth; and as is the man from heaven, so also are those who are of heaven. 49 And just as we have borne the likeness of the earthly man, so shall we bear the likeness of the man from heaven.NIV

Do you believe that your natural body will be raised, or your spiritual one? The former is perishable, while the latter is imperishable. Do you believe the Blood of Christ to be perishable or imperishable? If the former, then you do our Lord a disservice. If the latter, then it must be spiritual indeed.

But still, WHERE IN THE NT DOES THIS MARK THE ONE TRUE CHURCH? WHERE??? There are some marks, but this isn't one of them.

[Scuba Pete]

Originally Posted by TruthInCatholocism

I would liek to know how im complicating scripture.

By adding terms/concepts that are not in scripture. You contend that this HAS to be physical when the scriptures say no such thing. That's called ADDING to the scriptures. Why do it?

[TruthInCatholocism]

Originally Posted by TruthInCatholocism

I would liek to know how im complicating scripture... When in fact i am pointing out a clear message .. written as is... Wouldnt your interpratation of what Jesus meant.. Be Complicating Scripture? seeing as it is clear in the first place?

Fundementalists...Born again.. Most non Catholic Christians Say.. The Bible is Literal....Every thing but...well what Calvin and King James and other reformers decide......

"I am the way, and the truth, and the life."
John 14:6
Whatever Jesus Christ said is true, because He said it.

Lets look at the old testiment.... ( a early Prophecy)

Can it be agreed

In order to avoid the slaying of their firstborn by the Angel of Death the isrealites had to take aunblemished male lamb and slaughter it?

Read Exodus 12:8 we see that in order for the first born to be save they must also have eaten the lamb... si that agreeable?

Actually "Consuming" The slain Lamb is typical Thru out the whole Bible....

Can that be agreed?

Jesus is Represented as The Lamb Of god thruout the Whole Bible....

"Behold, the Lamb of GOD, who takes away the sin of the world." Spoken By John The Baptist......

Read Malachi Prophecy I belive its 1:11

The Catholic Church Fufills this Prohpecy with The holy Eucharist....

Infact Where in all Of Mathew is Jesus Body and Blood Used in Symbolism?

In Matthew 26:26, He said, "Take and eat; THIS IS MY BODY."

In Matthew 26:27-28 He said, "All of you drink of this; FOR THIS IS MY BLOOD OF THE NEW COVENANT, WHICH IS BEING SHED FOR MANY UNTO THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS."

Gospels of Mathew, Mark , Luke, John.. Though Writing For Different Audiences... They all Different Writers in genral... and Write on different Parts of Jesus Life... Still Hold This one thing In common and Very true.... This is My Body... This is my Blood ... Showing No symbolism ....

i wonder why? dont you?

John is actualy Really Amzing in this regard....

We start off with Loaves and fish (feeding of the body)
Verse 22 thru the end we learn that we need spiritual nourishment for our souls as well.

He said, "...you seek Me, not because you have seen signs, but because you have eaten of the loaves and have been filled. Do not labor for the food that perishes, but for that which endures unto life everlasting, which the Son

When you who celebrate in Remembrance with Oyser Crackers and Juice... How does that fufill you spirutally? The Eucharist does ....

Count the number of times Jesus said, He is the bread, the living bread, that it is His flesh and it is His blood, and that we must eat of His flesh and drink His blood?

Think about it really

sorry posted to late.. see the spirutal is just as important.

I type slow sometimes

[Victor]

The fact this is even a question just baffles me. Any honest venture into history shows just who was the first Church. Just comes to show you just what interpretational chaos can do.

[UnityNow101]

Not really interpretational chaos, but search for the truth. For a very long time, the Catholic Church leaders were the only ones able to interpret the Scriptures or even had a copy of them. So it was what they said or nothing at all. Most of the population was illiterate. But now, we have the KJV Scripture in our hands and see no mention of the Catholic Church. Sorry for our inability to see what is not there. What are we supposed to do?

[TruthInCatholocism]

Thats Just it though....

Sola Scriptura... Is self Reputing.. The first church to have Scripture tells us one thing... They were the first...

Second The early Church Compiled the original Bible... What need for Change considering the Bible itself doesnt say what Books should be in the Bible... Hence why Sola Scriptura is self reputing.. and further more The King James Version Negates The Apychropha Why... By whos call...? King James... Calving.....? Who are they.. What authority do they hold? non they Reformed a church..... They didnt like things so they Removed it... THey removed Centuries of tradition.....

Explain

[TruthInCatholocism]

Again sorry.. Is it the forum or what? Sorry to go off topic... But its taking forever to post so i repost by going back and foward ... O_O sorry...

[Scuba Pete]

Originally Posted by Victor

Just comes to show you just what interpretational chaos can do.

Interpretational CHAOS wasn't the first church either, but I bet Max Smart could help you with them.

Really, why the fixation on twisting history and the scriptures to name the Catholic Church as the premiere church, when it clearly WASN'T. Why did it adopt this name? Because it was different than the other churches of Christ of the time. No, the catholic church bears nothing in common with the first century church, with it's structure of priests and man made laws. Saying it was is a clear attempt to rewrite history out of some desire to claim some spiritual authority over Christendom. If nothing else, the bloody history of the Catholic Church tells me it was never the true church.

The ecclesia of Christ is a SPIRITUAL body. It does not conform to man made mantras or laws. If you are stuck on the PHYSICAL (as many of you seem to be) then there is no way for you to understand this.

[UnityNow101]

I would honestly like to know where the Catholic Church is mentioned in the Bible. If it is there, then I would agree that it is the only true Church. Otherwise, we are just arguing over something that cannot be proven or disproven. It goes back to faith. If you believe that the Catholic Church is the true church, then God bless you and follow your heart's desire. But to say that someone is wrong in saying that they are not the true Church when they are not found in the Bible is wrong. It is like the Trinity. Although it is not found in the Bible, millions adhere to it. Just believe what you feel to be right. That is all one can do.