I like that you said your theology. Cause that's what it is. It's not traditional Christian understanding and you know it too. Ignatius was a desciple of the apostle John. And he affirmed real presence. Luther and Calvin both basilly did too. Then why pray the Lords pray and receive more forgiveness? Also please explain Paul's Baptism cause it seemed to forgive sins? Baptism is God's work, he forgives sins and so is the eucharist. God's work.
@@YNRChoppa_08 Hello, my I suspect Lutheran contributor. Thank you for watching and for your reply. God bless you. Scripture, Scripture, Scripture for me. No man has a scintilla more authority than we do post the apostles in interpreting that Scripture. And everyone, just as you did, will claim what is or isn’t “traditional”. I do not condemn on this. Luther was wrong on baptism. Many were. But to Scripture- from it first my theology on the ordinances is found soundly. It is mine, but of course not just mine. Many share my beliefs and always have as they are the correct interpretation of the data. Baptism is a work. Period. Paul’s baptism didn’t forgive sins. His Savior alone did/does. The Cross is not our baptisms. No works save (as in regenerate)…even when we mislabel our good works “God’s works” which no apostle ever did. They sanctify, but they do not regenerate or justify. Baptism is made analogous to salvation because it is, but Christ did *not rise so that our good works would become our saviors, sir.
@@Biblecia name me 1 passage where is says baptism is to show everyone you are a Christian? Name me 1 early church father that did not agree with baptismal regeneration. You can't, and if you say you view is just clear in scripture. What about the Mormons, JW and the other 40 000 denominations. Where did the Apostles explain in detail what scripture meant? So the earliest and closest people to the Apostles are the ones who tell us what they meant. Off course they not fallable. But brother their was no canon till what year? I must say off course I respect you and your view as a brother in Christ and as a Pastor. So nothing like that here I just thought I'd share the unanimous position of the church for 1500 years. Also Luthor was right about the cannon but not baptismal regeneration? Why trust him at all?
I felt hurt by that. Christians for 1500 years believed the eucharist was truly the flesh and body of Lord. Now you call them apostacy when baptist only came in the 16th century. At least can we have respect for each other. Also creation fell because of a fruit. God gave the tree of life after already breathing life into adam and eve. The rock in the wilderness was Christ as Paul said. God appeared as a burning bush. So why is it so hard to see that God loves blessing his people and we in the new covenant are so blessed to receive the eucharist and holy baptism. I was raised baptise and for the past 2 months I've been studying other traditions. May the lord lead me where I may receive the the blessed eucharist. I seek that. May the lord bless you and keep you pastor. ❤
Sorry. "Christians" did NOT believe that the eucharist was truly the flesh and body of the Lord for 1500 years. No. It was not really even debated all that much until the end of the 9th century. And well into the 12th century, future popes like Hildebrand were publicly arguing on behalf of other church members that the church should officially tolerate both the memorial view and the literal transubstance view because there was no dogmatic definition at all yet. So, you can "feel hurt" by my view, sir, but I'm "condemned to hell" by the 13th century (and mostly beyond) developments of un-biblical dogma on the nature of the elements. So, it's not my side that made this a divisive issue, it's the other side(s). I must simply answer the men who've made it such. Anyone who adds to the word of God like that is guilty of great sin and they'll answer to God for it. My whole argument is to support the "blessings" of the ordinances of the Christian Faith. He does love his people, and they are gifts of his love. What Rome has done, along with the EOC, in its sacrifices in "eucharist" are completely false and destructive of the Gospel.
@Biblecia off course u do not agree with the Pope and his Dogmas and Rome did mess up with their resacrificing the middle ages. But the view of real presence has always been there. Ignatius of Antioch, desciple of John. Quote 107 AD:"They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins and which the Father in His goodness, raised up again". Also the corinthians were sick and died from participating and remembering the symbol. Also we sin against the symbol of his body. Jesus(The one who said let their be light) said this symbolises my body? Can you please find me a early church father that had your view? Unless the church somehow fell away right when the Apostles died. Again I do respect and love you as a brother in Christ. I just disagree on those points.
Thank you
Good morning glory to God
@@siphomlangeni1978 Good evening to you. Hello! And may it be!
I like that you said your theology. Cause that's what it is. It's not traditional Christian understanding and you know it too. Ignatius was a desciple of the apostle John. And he affirmed real presence. Luther and Calvin both basilly did too. Then why pray the Lords pray and receive more forgiveness? Also please explain Paul's Baptism cause it seemed to forgive sins? Baptism is God's work, he forgives sins and so is the eucharist. God's work.
@@YNRChoppa_08 Hello, my I suspect Lutheran contributor. Thank you for watching and for your reply. God bless you. Scripture, Scripture, Scripture for me. No man has a scintilla more authority than we do post the apostles in interpreting that Scripture. And everyone, just as you did, will claim what is or isn’t “traditional”. I do not condemn on this. Luther was wrong on baptism. Many were. But to Scripture- from it first my theology on the ordinances is found soundly. It is mine, but of course not just mine. Many share my beliefs and always have as they are the correct interpretation of the data.
Baptism is a work. Period.
Paul’s baptism didn’t forgive sins. His Savior alone did/does. The Cross is not our baptisms. No works save (as in regenerate)…even when we mislabel our good works “God’s works” which no apostle ever did. They sanctify, but they do not regenerate or justify. Baptism is made analogous to salvation because it is, but Christ did *not rise so that our good works would become our saviors, sir.
@@Biblecia name me 1 passage where is says baptism is to show everyone you are a Christian? Name me 1 early church father that did not agree with baptismal regeneration. You can't, and if you say you view is just clear in scripture. What about the Mormons, JW and the other 40 000 denominations. Where did the Apostles explain in detail what scripture meant? So the earliest and closest people to the Apostles are the ones who tell us what they meant. Off course they not fallable. But brother their was no canon till what year? I must say off course I respect you and your view as a brother in Christ and as a Pastor. So nothing like that here I just thought I'd share the unanimous position of the church for 1500 years. Also Luthor was right about the cannon but not baptismal regeneration? Why trust him at all?
I felt hurt by that. Christians for 1500 years believed the eucharist was truly the flesh and body of Lord. Now you call them apostacy when baptist only came in the 16th century. At least can we have respect for each other. Also creation fell because of a fruit. God gave the tree of life after already breathing life into adam and eve. The rock in the wilderness was Christ as Paul said. God appeared as a burning bush. So why is it so hard to see that God loves blessing his people and we in the new covenant are so blessed to receive the eucharist and holy baptism. I was raised baptise and for the past 2 months I've been studying other traditions. May the lord lead me where I may receive the the blessed eucharist. I seek that. May the lord bless you and keep you pastor. ❤
Sorry. "Christians" did NOT believe that the eucharist was truly the flesh and body of the Lord for 1500 years. No. It was not really even debated all that much until the end of the 9th century. And well into the 12th century, future popes like Hildebrand were publicly arguing on behalf of other church members that the church should officially tolerate both the memorial view and the literal transubstance view because there was no dogmatic definition at all yet. So, you can "feel hurt" by my view, sir, but I'm "condemned to hell" by the 13th century (and mostly beyond) developments of un-biblical dogma on the nature of the elements. So, it's not my side that made this a divisive issue, it's the other side(s). I must simply answer the men who've made it such. Anyone who adds to the word of God like that is guilty of great sin and they'll answer to God for it. My whole argument is to support the "blessings" of the ordinances of the Christian Faith. He does love his people, and they are gifts of his love. What Rome has done, along with the EOC, in its sacrifices in "eucharist" are completely false and destructive of the Gospel.
@Biblecia off course u do not agree with the Pope and his Dogmas and Rome did mess up with their resacrificing the middle ages. But the view of real presence has always been there. Ignatius of Antioch, desciple of John. Quote 107 AD:"They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins and which the Father in His goodness, raised up again". Also the corinthians were sick and died from participating and remembering the symbol. Also we sin against the symbol of his body. Jesus(The one who said let their be light) said this symbolises my body? Can you please find me a early church father that had your view? Unless the church somehow fell away right when the Apostles died. Again I do respect and love you as a brother in Christ. I just disagree on those points.