[arcura]

paraclete,
I think he will since you asked so nicely.
Fred

[JoeT777]

Joe your argument fails on the Testimony of Christ himself. Why did Jesus need to undergo baptism to fulfill all righteousness? The reason is that he was in fact born into the same situation we're born into and that makes him true man. So how about stop copying the pat answers and start to understand what Scripture is actually saying

You might recall, I can think outside the book. I'm not chained to a book alone.


The reason for Christ's baptism was to fulfill the Old Testament law and prophesy; as He said, “I have come not to destroy, but to fulfill the law". Paraphrasing St. Chrysostom, it's here we see the reasons for John's indulgence. It's here and during Christ's passion do we see the doors to the Church open, the veil rent, and the Holy of Holies exposed to man. Offering Himself as the manna of life, Christ eclipsed the renewal baptism that merely renovated Jew's soul, transforming Baptism to the rebirth of a new spirit of Christian soul. “Not until then, assuredly, were either the heavens opened, nor did the Spirit make His approach. Because henceforth He leads us away from the old to the new polity, both opening to us the gates on high, and sending down His Spirit from thence to call us to our country there; and not merely to call us, but also with the greatest mark of dignity. For He has not made us angels and archangels, but He has caused us to become sons of God, and beloved, and so He draws us on towards that portion of ours.” (St. Chrysostom, Homilies on Matthew, Homily 12) It's in this verse of Matthew that we are “born again”. Unless a man Baptism, “he has not salvation … For when the Saviour, in redeeming the world by His Cross, was pierced in the side, He shed forth blood and water; that men, living in times of peace, might be baptized in water, and, in times of persecution, in their own blood. (Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, 3:10). Christ instituted Baptism so that we will become the adopted sons of God in a personal call to a real salvation in an eternal life.

JoeT

[JoeT777]

more copies Joe would you provide us with your source

HERE! HERE!

I hope you enjoyed it.

[JoeT777]

more copies Joe would you provide us with your source

I am the source. Do I need to cite myself too? (JoeT777, p.9, AMHD, Today, 09:03 PM)

[450donn]

I am the source. Do I need to cite myself too? (JoeT777, p.9, AMHD, Today, 09:03 PM)

AHHHH You have finally made it clear to all.
You believe that YOU are the source, IE God!
Thanks for finally revealing your true source and spirit!

[paraclete]

You might recall, I can think outside the book. I'm not chained to a book alone.


The reason for Christ's baptism was to fulfill the Old Testament law and prophesy; as He said, “I have come not to destroy, but to fulfill the law". Paraphrasing St. Chrysostom, it's here we see the reasons for John's indulgence. It's here and during Christ's passion do we see the doors to the Church open, the veil rent, and the Holy of Holies exposed to man. Offering Himself as the manna of life, Christ eclipsed the renewal baptism that merely renovated Jew's soul, transforming Baptism to the rebirth of a new spirit of Christian soul. “Not until then, assuredly, were either the heavens opened, nor did the Spirit make His approach. Because henceforth He leads us away from the old to the new polity, both opening to us the gates on high, and sending down His Spirit from thence to call us to our country there; and not merely to call us, but also with the greatest mark of dignity. For He has not made us angels and archangels, but He has caused us to become sons of God, and beloved, and so He draws us on towards that portion of ours.” (St. Chrysostom, Homilies on Matthew, Homily 12) It's in this verse of Matthew that we are “born again”. Unless a man Baptism, “he has not salvation … For when the Saviour, in redeeming the world by His Cross, was pierced in the side, He shed forth blood and water; that men, living in times of peace, might be baptized in water, and, in times of persecution, in their own blood. (Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, 3:10). Christ instituted Baptism so that we will become the adopted sons of God in a personal call to a real salvation in an eternal life.

JoeT

Where in the Law did it require him to be baptised? So he did not fulfill the Law by being Baptised. Christ instituted two "new" sacraments, Baptism and Communion. These things are outside the Law. They are part of the new covenant. Every time you get near RCC teaching you find it all twisted up, why is that? Traditions of man, I guess

[JoeT777]

Where in the Law did it require him to be baptized? So he did not fulfill the Law by being baptized. Christ instituted two "new" sacraments, Baptism and Communion. These things are outside the Law. They are part of the new covenant. Every time you get near RCC teaching you find it all twisted up, why is that? Traditions of man, I guess

Good question, very good question, GREAT question, and I've got an answer; surprise!

It's going to take some time to pull it all together, but baptism isn't a New Testament sacrament (I'm assuming you're equating Old Testament ecclesiastical ritual with New Testament sacraments – while we can say this in a general sense, not every ritual in Judaism has Divine roots but, we can say that all sacraments are Divinely ordained.) There are 'washing' rituals that would make baptism recognizable to the Jew. Notice that Nicodemus didn't ask what the water was for. “I say to you, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost.” Why didn't Nicodemus say “what's the water for? I've got flesh; I've got spirit, why do I need water?” I believe there's a reason for this.

The sacrament of Holy Communion has to do with the Pascal Lamb and 12 loaves/knowledge, the Twelve, Moses, and manna from heaven. But, like I said this may take a few hours.

You're right, when you make your own traditions outside the Magisterium, especially concerning the Eucharist, things do tend to get mixed up.

JoeT

[paraclete]

Good question, very good question, GREAT question, and I’ve got an answer; surprise!

It’s going to take some time to pull it all together, but baptism isn’t a New Testament sacrament (I’m assuming you’re equating Old Testament ecclesiastical ritual with New Testament sacraments – while we can say this in a general sense, not every ritual in Judaism has Divine roots but, we can say that all sacraments are Divinely ordained.) There are ‘washing’ rituals that would make baptism recognizable to the Jew. Notice that Nicodemus didn’t ask what the water was for. “I say to you, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost.” Why didn’t Nicodemus say “what’s the water for? I’ve got flesh; I’ve got spirit, why do I need water?” I believe there’s a reason for this.

The sacrament of Holy Communion has to do with the Pascal Lamb and 12 loaves/knowledge, the Twelve, Moses, and manna from heaven. But, like I said this may take a few hours.

Your right, when you make your own traditions outside the Magisterium, especially concerning the Eucharist, things do tend to get mixed up.

JoeT

Joe you have to understand baptism was Jewish ritual symbolising change, but it was used for all sorts of purposes, In the New Covenant Jesus connected it with spiritual new birth "born again" something the Law could never do for you. Similarly, Communion whilst having rootes in the Passover and the pascal Lamb is something entirely new and an anathema to the Jew since we are eating Jesus flesh and drinking his blood. The Jew could eat of a lamb but not human flesh. The Old Testament is a shadow of the New. We can see direct parralels and the old prophesies what is to come

[arcura]

JoeT,
Excellent.
I'm surprised though I should not be that someone would calim you are trying to be God.
That's and LOL if there ever was one.
Pax Christi,
Fred

[450donn]

Laugh all you want Fred, this is EXACTLY what Joet said;

"You might recall, I can think outside the book. I'm not chained to a book alone. "

Is that not what he is saying that by thinking outside the book (bible) he is placing himself above all others? At least in relation to this discussion. If Joe was indeed a Christian, then he is bound by the bible in all aspects of his life. Not some book written by man telling him what the bible ought to say instead of what it actually says.

[JoeT777]

The reason why Christ was baptized by John was to institute baptism as an entry to the Kingdom of God. The reason for The Twelve not to be baptized by Christ, but by John, was because they had already received a certain grace different from us. Being in the presence of Christ, you might say they were the Shewbread that feed His lambs. Ever wonder why Christ said this to Peter? It's my opinion that Peter and the others were to feed them knowledge of a hope. We need to be shown the need for hope and understand the promise of hope before we can have hope. [Cf. "bread of the presence (of Yahweh)" (Exodus 35:13; 39:35, etc.) "holy bread" (1 Samuel 21:6), "bread of piles" (1 Chronicles 9:32; 23:29), "continual bread" (Numbers 4:7), or simply "bread" (Hebrew Version, Exodus 11:23)] Not as the manna from heaven, but a different type of food, you might say our first grace, knowledge of Christ.

The reason for Christ’s baptism was to fulfill the Old Testament law and prophesy; as He said, “I have come not to destroy, but to fulfill the law". Paraphrasing St. Chrysostom, it’s here we see the reasons for John’s indulgence. It’s here and during Christ’s passion where we see the doors to the Church open, the veil rent, and the Holy of Holies exposed to man. It’s here that The Twelve ‘loaves of proposition” are exposed to the Holy of Hollies.

There is a hint in the word ‘fire’ in psalms 29, Isaiah 42:1-4, 6-7 or was it Isaiah 40:1-5, 9-11 relating to New Covenant baptism in relationship to Luke 3:16-17 and Matt 3:11, “I indeed baptize you in water unto penance, but he that shall come after me, is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you in the Holy Ghost and fire “. All of which leads us to the understanding that this was a pivotal point in Christ’s ministry where we see the- beginning-of- the-end of the Old Covenant and the beginning (or formation) of the New Covenant.

In Exodus 40 we see the tabernacle (the residence of God) being described. A veil or curtain separates the ark from the priests. Loaves of bread were stacked in front of the curtain in two stacks of 6 (12 loaves) in the presence of God. “And Moses did all that the Lord had commanded …And he set the table in the tabernacle of the testimony, at the north side, without the veil, Setting there in order the loaves of proposition, as the Lord had commanded Moses” The bread was exposed to God, remaining there for about a week. Then in at the appropriate time, it was removed and used by the priests for substance.

Offering His self as the manna of life, Christ eclipsed the renewed baptism from merely renovating the Jew’s soul, transforming it to a Baptism of a rebirth in a new spirit as adopted sons of God. “Not until then, assuredly, ‘were either the heavens opened, nor did the Spirit make His approach’. Because henceforth He leads us away from the old to the new polity, both opening to us the gates on high, and sending down His Spirit from thence to call us to our country there; and not merely to call us, but also with the greatest mark of dignity. For He has not made us angels and archangels, but He has caused us to become sons of God, and beloved, and so He draws us on towards that portion of ours.” (St. Chrysostom, Homilies on Matthew, Homily 12) It’s in this verse of Matthew that we are “born again”. Unless a man is Baptized, “he has not salvation … For when the Savior, in redeeming the world by His Cross, was pierced in the side, He shed forth blood and water; that men, living in times of peace, might be baptized in water, and, in times of persecution, in their own blood." (Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, 3:10). Christ instituted Baptism so that we will become the adopted sons of God in a personal call to a real salvation in an eternal life. St. Thomas says that the “role of The Apostle says (Romans 8:24): ‘What a man seeth, why doth he hope for?’ Now the blessed enjoy the sight of God. Therefore hope has no place in them.” In other words if we already have a vision of Christ, we have no need of hope, i.e. "hope has no place in them." Conversely, given knowledge Christ gives us hope for a future vision of Christ.

I’m sure you’re aware, baptism wasn’t new, the Jews of Christ’s day would have immediately connected the waters of baptism to “Mikvah” (MIK-vuh) the Jewish cleansing ritual “ A Liturgical gathering at a ritual bath used for spiritual purification. It is used primarily in conversion rituals and after the sexual separation during a woman's menstrual cycles, but many Chasidim, a branch of Orthodox Judaism, immerse themselves in the mikvah regularly for general spiritual purification. See Mikvahand Mikveh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There is one other Jewish ritual that has both spiritual and hygienic purposes not to mention a unique marking of the male body. To the Jew in Abraham’s time, Moses’ time and the Jew in Christ’s time it’s a physical mark of a spiritual connection with God. Brit milah was an obligation both for the father and for the child. Not only was the child to be circumcised on the eighth day of the child's life, but failing to properly execute the ritual the father and child suffered a spiritual separation. The child would continue to suffer spiritual excision. It left both father and child (unable to enter the Kingdom of God to COME – one of the most server punishments in the Jewish culture, at least until as an adult the child could be circumcised. I’m told the ritual that accompanies the brit milah is a solemn occasion with prayers and blessings recited with the child receiving his Hebrew name. The Jew did not take circumcision lightly; it marked them spiritually and physically as a member of the Jewish community and a future member of the Kingdom of God. It joined their manhood to God. (Cf. If there is interest Judaism Judaism 101: Birth and the First Month of Life) Consequently, we can view baptism as another form of circumcision, a spiritual connection with Abraham, the Father of the Jews, with Moses, with David, with Christ, thereby becoming eligible to receive the Divinely promised salvation. The result isn’t a NEW religion, but rather an entrance, a door with a universall doormat, open to all, to the promised Kingdom of God to be presented by Christ to God.

To walk through the door of the Kingdom of God we are required to be baptized, there are no exceptions indicated in the verse – there is no “less and except” so to speak; there is no “figuratively” spoken clauses. “Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. (John 3:5) This isn’t the door to the building down the street where they took the corpus off the cross; this is the door to the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, the Kingdom of God. Acts chapter 2, verse 38 speaks clearly of the remission of sins; in Acts 22:16 Be baptized, and wash away thy sins: in Acts 5:25 sqq. Because "Christ loved the Church, and delivered Himself up for it: that he might sanctify it, cleansing it by the washing of water in the word of life: that he might present it to Himself a glorious Church, not having spot or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.“ Not a spot or wrinkle, not actual sin or original sin. In baptism all sin is washed away to be made holy: an infusion of supernatural graces that renders the recipient an adopted son of God. This doesn't require a bifurcation of man, body and soul may be divided for some short time, but will be eventually united in the Kingdom of Heaven.

Look into the very last chapter of Matthew. What's said there? This Chapter tells us of Christ’s last words before ascending to His Kingdom in Heaven. Christ warrants and commissions the Apostles with powers vested only in Him, “teach ye all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.”

Focus the entire story of Christ on the moment of His baptism, the spirit descends, the heavens open…; you know it as well as I do. This singular point in time is where we see the focal point of the beatitudes, communion, confession, His sermon on the mount, His healing miracles, and His very last words to the Twelve Princes of His Kingdom on Earth. What does he say – “Ok I’m finished, have a nice day? It’s not really necessary but I want you to traipse around the county dunking people? “ HEAVEANS! NO! He said, “baptize them in the NAME of the “Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.” Wouldn’t you think baptism is a little more than a ‘good thing’ given what he told Nicodemus (Cf. John 3:3)?

I think there is HOPE in those words, more than self sacrifice. I'm not taking away anything from Christ's sacrifice when I say that I’ve seen Marines sacrifice themselves in that similar uncommon valor as hanging of a sinless man on a tree. I’ve heard tell of men who gave their lives for their family. While uncommon in the history, it is not all together unheard of. So why did He expose His Glory to these Twelve? Could it be for sacrificial bread of hope? But which loaf?

Exodus is 16:12 "I have heard the murmurings of the people of Israel; say to them, `At twilight you shall eat flesh, and in the morning you shall be filled with bread; then you shall know that I am the LORD your God.'"

Examining Exodus 40 we see the Tabernacle (the residence of God on earth) was established for the first time. A veil or curtain separates the ark from the priests. Loaves of bread were stacked on a table in front of the curtain in two stacks of 6 for a total of 12 loaves in the presence of God (Cf. Lev. 24:8). Each loaf “shall take also fine flour …two tenths [of an ephah] shall be in every loaf.” (Lev 24:5-6). An ‘ephah’ is approximately equal to a 10-gallon dry measure bushel. Each loaf was made with 2-gallons of sifted flour which of course excluded all the tars – the purest of breads. The bread was unleavened and oven backed; it’s my understanding that the baking occurred in special ovens. Then each loaf was sprinkled with pure frankincense. The loaves were placed on a “table in the tabernacle of the testimony, at the north side, without the veil, Setting there in order the loaves of proposition, as the Lord had commanded Moses” (Cf. Ex. 40:20,21). The 2 rows of bread were a “memorial of the oblation of the Lord.” (Cf. Lev 24:7). Each Sabbath the bread was removed and replenished with twelve new loaves. Aaron and his priests (only those spiritually clean – presumably through the spiritual purification Mikvah) eat the loaves which made them spiritually pure to teach the God’s Law, God’s Word. Likewise, the twelve Apostles were the loaves “in the presence of God,” exposed to the Logos. These men became the holiest of sacrifices in New Covenant; bread made of sieved wheat with the absence of tars, pure and spiritually purified as a teaching memorial of Christ’s perfect sacrifice.

If we hold that Christ was the fulfillment of the Old Testament then each and everything he did should be related to the temple. So, we see the 12 Apostles “in the presence of God;” the holiest of sacrifices in the temple; bread made of wheat sieved multiple times, i.e. separation of wheat and tars, priests on the order of Aaron. Holding the bread Christ said “this is my body,” the twelve holy loves were present – facing God, “face bread.” In Matthew is the appearance of the loaves first time (the Apostles) in the presence of God who unveils Himself; “who do you say that I am.” These loaves were to be consumed by the people every time they preached; they nourish the faithful with the knowledge of the real flesh and blood of Christ. At the end of their time on earth new freshly baked loaves replace them, the succession of their office

At or near the point in time where the New Covenant and the Old Convent join, is when we recognize for the first time the juncture of the Apostles/Loaves. I think most theologians would agree that that point where Heaven consummates Christ’s ministry occurs at John’s Baptism. Notice that I’m not saying that Christ is MADE divine, He’s already divine, but rather this is where, like David who consummates the new Temple, Christ initiates his Kingdom. In short this is the consummation of the Kingdom of God, the NEW TEMPLE in the New Covenant, i.e. the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.


JoeT

[JoeT777]

“The Lord is in his holy temple, the Lord's throne is in heaven.” But the residence of God on earth is in Moses' Tabernacle. If God is present on earth then he domiciles in his Tabernacle and the contents of that Tabernacle must also be present. God promised Moses a Kingdom till the end of times, there is no scriptural reference to the nullification in so far as I know. Moses is told, “If therefore you will hear my voice, and keep my covenant, you shall be my peculiar possession above all people: for all the earth is mine. And you shall be to me a priestly kingdom, and a holy nation.” (Ex.19: 5, 6), which is the Old Testament equivalent of Matt 16:18. The promise made to Moses is an integral part of the Old Testament. The Jewish Kingdom was both a spiritual and temporal Kingdom with a priestly hierarchy; the Jews were to be governed by their priests. It was these that Christ was addressing when he spoke of the hypocritical Pharisee, not the faithful. It was these that were leading the faithful astray suggesting that they wear their faith in the form of customs and rituals as opposed to internalizing their faith.

Then Jesus comes from Galilee to the Jordan to be baptized by St. John. But John stopped him, saying: I ought to be baptized by you, and you come to me? And Jesus answering, said to him: Allow it now.” For so it becomes us to fulfil all justice. Then he allowed him. And Jesus being baptized, forthwith came out of the water: and lo, the heavens were opened to him: and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove, and coming upon him. And behold a voice from heaven saying: This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” (Matt 3:13-17)

Christ didn't overturn this Kingdom by creating a new one; in fact He couldn't because His ministry was the fulfillment of that very same Old Covenant, indeed what is given is the Messianic Kingdom along with the prophecies for a new King. To overthrow this Kingdom would have been to overthrow Himself, a ludicrous idea – but nonetheless put forward by the Core, Dathan, and Abiron of our present day (a.k.a. Protestant). However what Christ was about to do was to turn over the 'Key' of the Kingdom to a new tenant, today's Catholic Church; the all inclusive (Jew and gentile) Kingdom we call the Roman Catholic Church. Which is the reason that in Matthew's gospel, we hear Christ say, “I say to you [Pharisees] that the kingdom of God shall be taken from you and shall be given to a nation yielding the fruits thereof.” This too was the pronouncement of Mt. Sinai. And too, like that provided for Moses, a special manna is provided. But, a rebirth; not renewed but birthed again – how asks Nicodemus, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born again,” – a stupid question coming from a Jewish intellectual isn't it - certainly not with Moses' manna, if you recall “they ate manna, and are dead.” Christ gave us something much better, not only did he give us meat for the hunger of the soul but he gave us 'bread' to feed our faith, a bread of hope. The Twelve Apostles are those loaves of hope, and continually replenished as time requires; still manna for a vision of God. Does Nicodemus understand how a man can be're-born' now?

The connection of the Twelve Apostles/Loaves to the beginning of the end of the Old Covenant and the beginning of the New Covenant hasn't been shown yet. Simply knowing that Christ is the Kingdom of God and knowing that The Twelve are the 'loaves of proposition' doesn't connect necessarily connect the two to the same point in time. Furthermore, there is still the issue of the baptism of the Twelve; scriptures aren't clear, a bit obscure, you might say foggy.

Bring to the Lord, O you children of God: bring to the Lord the offspring of rams. Bring to the Lord glory and honour: bring to the Lord glory to his name: adore the Lord in his holy court. The voice of the Lord is upon the waters; the God of majesty has thundered, The Lord is upon many waters. The voice of the Lord is in power; the voice of the Lord in magnificence. The voice of the Lord breaks the cedars: yea, the Lord shall break the cedars of Libanus. And shall reduce them to pieces, as a calf of Libanus, and as the beloved son of unicorns. The voice of the Lord divides the flame of fire: The voice of the Lord shakes the desert: and the Lord shall shake the desert of Cades. 9 The voice of the Lord prepares the stags: and he will discover the thick woods: 10 The Lord makes the flood to dwell: and the Lord shall sit king for ever. 11 The Lord will give strength to his people: the Lord will bless his people with peace. (Psalms 29)

St. Augustine on Psalms 29: Sung by David at the completion of the tabernacle, it perfects the temple. The first and second verses tell of the strength of the God's mediator in the war against evil and sing his praises. (We'll just take his word for it - I suppose 'ram' is to give the sense of strength to the 'children of God', i.e. the faithful.) These aren't mere platitudes; remember the auspicious occasion where this is being sung. It could easily be described as a dedication ceremony. For David the dedication of the greatest Temple the Jewish nation had seen – it was completed it in perfection.

We see the completion of Christ's ministry much the same way. The auscultation of some Protestants when they hear Christ's last words 'it is finished,' is to hear the gurgle of 'no more can be done,' the work is done, shut the doors! Go home! You can't add more to perfection! The Kingdom of God ends on the Cross, faith and the Mystical Body of Christ starts and ends on this last breath. The sacrifice is complete, priestly prayers and dedication can roll up on a Cross and go home – cover-it-up, put-it-away, it's- too-hard-to-look-at type of faith.

I DON'T THINK SO!! Every English version of the bible except the Douay-Rheims Bible uses the word “finished” as Christ's last utterance hanging on a tree. Nevertheless yes, the Temple was finished in the sense that all the construction work had come to fruition, everything in its place, shined and spit-polished, ready for…ready for what? To FINISH, as in done or end? That doesn't make much sense does it? That's not a living faith now is it? That's a DEAD faith nailed to a tree some 2,000-years ago. The temple was “consummated,” as in finished to perfection and ready to perform its intended function; a faith consummated (brought to a state of perfection) ready to be LIVED – a rebirth in yet another nuance


JoeT

[Wondergirl]

The auscultation of Protestants when they hear Christ’s last words ‘it is finished,’ is to hear the gurgle of ‘no more can be done,’ the work is done, shut the doors! Go home! You can’t add more to perfection! The Kingdom of God ends on the Cross, faith and the Mystical Body of Christ starts and ends on this last breath. The sacrifice is complete, priestly prayers and dedication can roll up on a Cross and go home – cover-it-up, put-it-away, it’s- too-hard-to-look-at type of faith.

This is NOT Protestant belief!

[JoeT777]

This is NOT Protestant belief!

Ok, let me see if I can fix it.

[arcura]

450donn,
No. I don't think so.
What he is saying that there is more to Christianity than the bible.
Example, the writings of the early Church Fathers are very important fior the were taught by the apostels.
In fact what those fathers have said often gives us a better understanding of what is in the bible.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

[Wondergirl]

the writings of the early Church Fathers are very important fior the were taught by the apostels.

When the early church fathers got around to writing anything, the apostles were long gone.

[450donn]

450donn,
No. I don't think so.
What he is saying that there is more to Christianity than the bible.
Example, the writings of the early Church Fathers are very important fior the were taught by the apostels.
In fact what those fathers have said often gives us a better understanding of what is in the bible.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

So again what you are alluding to is that the Bible is incomplete and you have to rely on the writings of someone that is associated with your religion to find out what to believe? Sure your not a Mormon? Come on Fred, do you believe the bible is the complete word of God or not? Why do you insist that you have to rely on the writings of someone with no credentials, no direct contact with my Lord and God? Heck if that were true I should write a book of Donn and sell it . Maybe I can even start my own religion.

[arcura]

450donn,
Of course the bible is incomplete.
It came to and end didn't it?
Or do you think that God stopped being God and inspiring people almost 2000 years ago?
I think not.
The knowledge passed down from the early apostles IS important. Some of the earliest writer WERE taught by some of Jesus apostles so history AND the writings DO show.
That is another reason why Jesus established His Church.
To preserve, as it has, those ancient writings and to protect the bible.
Peace and kindness,
Fred

[paraclete]

Maybe I can even start my own religion.

Would that make you a donnist or the Don?

[inhisservice]

Arcura

Those passages about Jesus flesh IS food indeed and blood IS drink indeed are to be take literally.
They are the Eucharist and the path to eternal like for as Jesus said about those who partake of it, "I will raise them up on the last day".
It does not mean that others who do not partake can not go to heaven there are other means.

Sorry but Joe is not right just because you say so. By the way Joe says that partaking in the flesh and blood of Jesus Christ is a prerequisite for possessing eternal life. But you say there are other means. You contradict him. Which of you are right?