Last edited on Tue May 27th, 2008 08:22 pm by EMarshallBuckles

Luke 24:35 (RSV) Then they told what had happened on the road, and how he was known to them in the breaking of the bread.

Acts 2:42,46 And they devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers. . . . And day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts,

Acts 20:7 On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread,

1 Corinthians 10:16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?

1 Corinthians 10:17-21 Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread. Consider the people of Israel; are not those who eat the sacrifices partners in the altar? What do I imply then? That food offered to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? No, I imply that what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be partners with demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons.

Acts 15:29-30: "For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled and from unchastity."

Even if we had no other passage than this we could sufficiently strengthen all consciences and sufficiently overcome all adversaries . . . He could not have spoken more clearly and strongly . . . The bread which is broken or distributed piece by piece is the participation in the body of Christ. It is, it is, it is, he says, the participation in the body of Christ. Wherein does the participation in the body of Christ consist? It cannot be anything else than that as each takes a part of the broken bread he takes therewith the body of Christ . . .

(Against the Heavenly Prophets in the Matter of Images and Sacraments, 1525; LW, 40, 177, 181, 178)

It is not sound reasoning arbitrarily to associate the sin which St. Paul attributes to eating with remembrance of Christ, of which Paul does not speak. For he does not say, “Who unworthily holds the Lord in remembrance,” but “Who unworthily eats and drinks.”

(Ibid., 183-184)

John 6:52-66: The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?" So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me. This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live for ever." This he said in the synagogue, as he taught at Caper'na-um. Many of his disciples, when they heard it, said, "This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?" But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples murmured at it, said to them, "Do you take offense at this? Then what if you were to see the Son of man ascending where he was before? It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. But there are some of you that do not believe." For Jesus knew from the first who those were that did not believe, and who it was that would betray him. And he said, "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father." After this many of his disciples drew back and no longer went about with him.

1 John 5:16-17 If any one sees his brother committing what is not a mortal sin, he will ask, and God will give him life for those whose sin is not mortal. There is sin which is mortal; I do not say that one is to pray for that. All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin which is not mortal.

Matthew 10:40 He who receives you receives me, and he who receives me receives him who sent me.

Luke 10:16 "He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me."

John 13:20 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who receives any one whom I send receives me; and he who receives me receives him who sent me."

2 Corinthians 5:20 So we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We beseech you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.

Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself. That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died. But if we judged ourselves truly, we should not be judged. But when we are judged by the Lord, we are chastened so that we may not be condemned along with the world.

Matthew 16:19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Matthew 18:18 Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

John 20:21-23 Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.” And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained."

Matthew 23:1-3 Then said Jesus to the crowds and to his disciples, "The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat; so practice and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do; for they preach, but do not practice.

Acts 23:1-5 And Paul, looking intently at the council, said, "Brethren, I have lived before God in all good conscience up to this day." And the high priest Anani'as commanded those who stood by him to strike him on the mouth.  Then Paul said to him, "God shall strike you, you whitewashed wall! Are you sitting to judge me according to the law, and yet contrary to the law you order me to be struck?" Those who stood by said, "Would you revile God's high priest?" And Paul said, "I did not know, brethren, that he was the high priest; for it is written, `You shall not speak evil of a ruler of your people.'"

1 Corinthians 15:29 Otherwise, what do people mean by being baptized on behalf of the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized on their behalf?

2 Kings 13:20-21 So Eli'sha died, and they buried him. Now bands of Moabites used to invade the land in the spring of the year. And as a man was being buried, lo, a marauding band was seen and the man was cast into the grave of Eli'sha; and as soon as the man touched the bones of Eli'sha, he revived, and stood on his feet. (the Bible also teaches about Elijah's mantle being a relic: 2 Kings 2:11-14; as well as Paul's handkerchief: Acts 19:11-12)

And a great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars;  she was with child and she cried out in her pangs of birth, in anguish for delivery. And another portent appeared in heaven; behold, a great red dragon, with seven heads and ten horns, and seven diadems upon his heads. His tail swept down a third of the stars of heaven, and cast them to the earth. And the dragon stood before the woman who was about to bear a child, that he might devour her child when she brought it forth; she brought forth a male child, one who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron, but her child was caught up to God and to his throne, and the woman fled into the wilderness, where she has a place prepared by God, in which to be nourished for one thousand two hundred and sixty days.

We address judges as "Your Honor" and are commanded by God to "honor" our mothers and fathers (Ephesians 6:2), widows (1 Timothy 5:3), Christian teachers (1 Timothy 5:17), wives (1 Peter 3:7), fellow Christians (1 Corinthians 12:12-26), and governing authorities (Romans 13:7, 1 Peter 2:17). A spirit of honoring those who are worthy of honor is to typify the Christian (Romans 12:10, 1 Peter 2:17). . . .

A sound biblical basis for the veneration of saints can be found in the Pauline passages where the Apostle exhorts his followers to "imitate" him (1 Corinthians 4:16, Philippians 3:17, 2 Thessalonians 3:7-9) as he, in turn, imitates Christ (1 Corinthians 11:1, 1 Thessalonians 1:6). Also, we are exhorted to honor and imitate the "heroes of the faith" in Hebrews 6:12 and chapter 11, and to take heart in the examples of the prophets and Job, who endured suffering (James 5:10-11).

Last edited on Thu May 29th, 2008 09:21 pm by Dave Armstrong

Hi Andrea,

If you don't mind, I'll give a few of my thoughts on your questions and comments.

I don't think there are too many Catholics who deny, if they are truthful about their apologetics, that there are a lot of problems in the church since her inception and probably always will be (the same can be said for all denominations). 

Of course. People are sinners. We were told to always expect sin in the Church (the wheats and the tares, etc.). We need only look at Paul's writing to the Galatian and Corinthian churches, and the seven churches in the book of Revelation, to see this clearly (or, for that matter, Judas, one of the disciples). We don't believe that affects the truthfulness of teaching, though...

I believe it does affect the "truthfulness of teaching" when the teaching did not originate with Jesus nor any of the apostles.  Much of the "teaching" of the Catholic Church were not uttered by Jesus nor were contained in tradition, Dave.  At least that's what I believe from my research.  If you look at what was believed and done right after Jesus died, arose and ascended into heaven, you will find that there wasn't a Mass within a million miles around.     The transubstantiation wasn't even thought of, let alone claimed, at that time.  And we all know how tradition goes... it's like the game of telephone we used to play as kids, only imagine a game of telephone that has lasted 2,000 years! 

 because we believe that the Holy Spirit has supernaturally protected the Catholic Church in a unique way. It ain't men who do that, but God.

I think that if you believe the Holy Spirit would supernaturally protect a group of people, then you must in turn believe that God would take away that group's free will.  Because humans are going to screw things up sooner or later... and so then you must believe that the Holy Spirit takes away free will when humans are about to make a screw up in the Catholic church.  I just can't buy that, Dave.

Some people like Luther and Simons left the Catholic church over those problems but many didn't.  

It wasn't just what was going on in the Church. Luther decided to depart from received Catholic theological tradition in at least 50 ways that had little to do with sin in the Church or indulgences and all the rest of the standard Protestant mythology concerning why Luther dissented.

By quoting a Catholic website, Dave, you aren't doing anything to prove your point.  I mean (and I'm not being snarky here... it's just a fact), people are bias to what they believe.  If they're Catholic, they're going to talk Catholic-speak and they aren't going to say anything that would incriminate the Catholic church.  It's like the corner grocery store.  They're not going to print flyers that tell people how good the other store down the street is.  They're going to print flyers that tell people how good their own store is.  The same thing with all these quotes from Catholic sources you have given, in this response.   

The question with me is *not* a matter of which denomination is "right"... but pertains more with me deciding, with the help of the Holy Spirit, how much of the Catholic church's teachings are man-made and how much is God-made... thus deciding whether or not the Catholic church contains the Truth that I seek.  I'm not interested in man-made truth but God-made Truth.

I think that is the right question to ask. It was key in my own decision to become a Catholic.

In other words, did God say it is a mortal sin to not attend Mass on Sunday or is that a teaching that humankind thought sounded good and thus initiated. 

This is a straightforward application of the biblical principle of the Sabbath, which was one of the Ten Commandments. If we were toi remember the Sabbath, to keep it holy, how much more ought Christians to observe worship on Sunday. Nothing is more important. Therefore, it is perfectly reasonable (and in line with the Bible) to require Church attendance once a week and to firmly state that it is a sin not to do so, because that wouldn't be "keeping the Sabbath." For more, see my collection of articles: The Sabbath Principle and Christian Sunday Worship / Sunday Obligation to Attend Mass.

The same question can be asked for the whole "mortal sin" and "venial sin" concept in and of itself. 

This is a fairly explicit teaching of Scripture, especially in 1 John. See:

Mortal vs. Venial Sin


Mortal and Venial Sin: The Garden-Variety Objection Answered, + Strong Biblical Support

The same for the holy days "of obligation" and not eating meat on Fridays during Lent and all that jazz.

Holy days of obligation merely extends the Sabbath principle to special occasions, much like the Jewish feasts. Disciplinary rules like no meat on Friday during Lent is an application of the prerogative of preists and the Church to "bind and loose." We see the early Church exercising authority on things like what is proper to eat, in the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15).

  OK, Dave, this is exactly my point.  Whose "extention" of Sabbath principle is it?!  It's not Jesus', that's all I know!!  If Jesus wanted anything "extended"... in other words, if there was more truth to something... He would have stated that while on earth.  That concept is pretty straight forward for me.  Jesus spoke nothing about mortal sins and venial sins and losing heaven by the human action of not attending worship on a certain day.  It seems to me that concerning something with such an everlasting effect, like going to hell, Jesus would have certainly mentioned something about it before He left us.   I mean, that's a pretty important deal, no?

The Mass of today resembles nothing of the early church meetings that took place after Jesus arose and ascended into heaven.  I have a problem with that. 

Most Protestant services bear very little resemblance to early church meetings, either, but ours are closer in key respects.

I agree.  That's why I don't attend any Protestant services.  And that's why I don't attend any Catholic Masses anymore either.  Neither one are even close to the gatherings of Jesus' followers after He ascended.

The gatherings of God's people in the early church were totally different than the gatherings (the Mass) is today.... plus, there was no Eucharist as is known today, back then either. 

The Eucharist was instituted at the Last Supper and became the central focus of early church gatherings:

Nope, sorry, Dave.  That's just not true.  The breaking of bread together certainly was a central focus of the early church gatherings (as the Scripture passages you quoted tell us) because it most mimicked the Passover meal but for folks who believed that Jesus was the Messiah.  But that whole thing about actually changing the bread into Christ's body and the wine into Christ's blood just was not believed or promulgated back in those early years.  In other words, the transubstantiation wasn't even a twinkle in anybody's eye back then.   That whole transubstantiation idea came wayyyy later, my friend.  Truly it did. 

Luke 24:35 (RSV) Then they told what had happened on the road, and how he was known to them in the breaking of the bread.

Acts 2:42,46 And they devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers. . . . And day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts,

Acts 20:7 On the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread,

1 Corinthians 10:16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?

1 Corinthians 10:17-21 Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread. Consider the people of Israel; are not those who eat the sacrifices partners in the altar? What do I imply then? That food offered to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? No, I imply that what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be partners with demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons.

1 Corinthians 10: 17-21 No matter how many of us there are, we all eat from the same loaf (small "l"), showing that we are all parts of the one body of Christ.  And the Jewish people, all who eat the sacrifices, are united by that act.  What am I trying to say?  Am I saying that the idols to whom the heathen bring sacrifices are really alive and are real gods, and that these sacrifices are of some value?  No, not at all.  What I am saying is that those who offer food to these idols are united together in sacrificing to demons, certainly not to God.  And I don't want any of you to be partners with demons when you eat the same food, along with the heathen, that has been offered to these idols."  (The Catholic Living Bible)