ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Why Easter And Christmas

Why do churches have Easter and Christmas. Are these invented by the pope?

Join Our Christian Singles and Take The Easter Story Quiz
 ---Dementio on 4/16/17
     Helpful Blog Vote (2)

Post a New Blog



Hello readers,

As you can see, Reuben continues to run to the Greek to try to say Jn 6:35-70 is literal, but anyone who studies Biblical Languages responsibly knows you only use the languages when the text of Scripture may not be completely understood by the reader and you utilize the languages with the absolute view of the context in mind of which Mr. Reuben completely ignored...

Words without or taken out of context means absolutely nothing...
---john9346 on 5/16/17


reuben states, "4. If Jesus were demanding us to eat His flesh in a symbolic sense, He would be saying "He who reviles or assaults me has eternal life."

Sir, did the disciple see this as literal?

Let see, vs 68-69, "If one pay close attention Peter understood exactly what the Lord Jesus Christ was saying from vs 35-63, "68 Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life." 69 "And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God."

If literal, Peter would have bitten the Lord Jesus and the Lord would have permitted it... It would have been an "Act of Worship."
---john9346 on 5/16/17


john9346* Now if you disagree that it is not all a "Metaphor." vs 35-63 then show us all wheredid it change fromvs 35-63??

1. Words change from 'hungry-thirst to eat, flesh, drink and blood.

2. No one grumble about hungry-thirst, but when he change the words to eat, flesh, drink and blood.

3. The greek verb use trogo is chew, gnat and munch.

4. If Jesus were demanding us to eat His flesh in a symbolic sense, He would be saying "He who reviles or assaults me has eternal life."

john9346* And again "words without context mean absolutely nothing."

Practice what you preach!
---Ruben on 5/15/17


Reuben states, "John Jesus DOES NOT even come close to repeat himself."

Sir, Please Listen to him,"35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger, and he that believeth on me shall never thirst."

50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.

51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

50-51 is a repeat of vs 35 and more of a clarification.

Note, vs 35 starts the context.

---john9346 on 5/15/17


reuben states, "Besides when Jesus talks about the spirit gives life and the flesh is being of no avail,He is talking about the need to have supernatural faith to understand his words."

Exactly sir, this is his point starting in vs 35 this isn't to be taken in a Physical sense.

"35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger, and he that believeth on me shall never thirst."

You have all ready admitted this is all a metaphor.

Now if you disagree that it is not all a "Metaphor." vs 35-63 then show us all wheredid it change fromvs 35-63??

And again "words without context mean absolutely nothing."
---john9346 on 5/15/17




If one pay close attention Peter understood exactly what the Lord Jesus Christ was saying from vs 35-63, "68 Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life." 69 "And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God."

Note, Peter's, Words, "Words of Eternal Life." and "And we believe."

If literal, Peter would have bitten the Lord Jesus and the Lord would have permitted it... It would have been an "Act of Worship."


---john9346 on 5/15/17


John vs 35 when he first starts this conversation vs 50-51 the Lord Jesus says again what he all ready said in vs 35.
---john9346 on 5/13/17

John,

v 35 " I am the bread of life He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty."

John Jesus DOES NOT even come close to repeat himself. Notice uses the words 'Eat', Flesh, Drink, and blood! In fact When Jesus said ' he who believes in me will never go thirsty', this metaphor tells us to think of drinking water not BLOOD. Notice the Jews were not grumbling about the metaphors 'Hungry' and 'thirsty'. As already mention, he responded by using an even more literal verb (Greek, trogo) which means to "gnaw, chew,"
---Ruben on 5/15/17


john9346* to which he wasn't because he used vs 63 very clearly to define his meaning...

"It is the spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life." vs 63

John are you saying when Jesus said " This bread is my flesh which I will give to the world.")the flesh profiteth nothing)-really

Besides when Jesus talks about the spirit gives life and the flesh is being of no avail,He is talking about the need to have supernatural faith to understand his words.

Also notice Jesus doesn't say my flesh is spirit, but that my words are spirit. What words are they ? Eat my flesh and drink my blood or we have no life in us!
---Ruben on 5/14/17


Reuben states, "Yes John, the bread is spiritual nourishment but why?"Sir,

Sir, the answer from the Lord Jesus to your question is vs 35 when he first starts this conversation vs 50-51 the Lord Jesus says again what he all ready said in vs 35.
---john9346 on 5/13/17


Reuben states, "Yes but not all-From v51-58 the Greek verb (trogo) which means to chew, gnat, or much is used."

Sir, words without context mean absolutely nothing if the Lord Jesus Christ through the Holy Spirit had not stated vs 63 then he would have indeed been teaching "Cannibalism." to which he wasn't because he used vs 63 very clearly to define his meaning...

"It is the spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life." vs 63
---john9346 on 5/13/17




john9346-Reuben, 61 again.

John, " What if you see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before?" BTW the disciples did see him ascending ( Acts 1:9-11)

john9346* In this context vs 50-66 it is used spiritual.

Yes John, the bread is spiritual nourishment but why? Jesus tell us , " "the bread that I give is my flesh for the life of the world."

John you must like them , deal with his plain meaning of his words!

John 9346- But there are Spiritual Symbolism through out "Scritpure."...

Yes but not all-From v51-58 the Greek verb (trogo) which means to chew, gnat, or much is used. And as mention to you before it was use twice (Mt 24:38, Jn 13:18) but never symbolic.
---Ruben on 5/13/17


Reuben:

"John, it makes no sense for Jesus to keep saying about his flesh,"

Sir, you obviously didn't read jn 6:61??

Reuben, yes, they all understood it to be physical see, vs 61 again.

"BTW- The word SPIRIT is never use symbolically in scripture,"

In this context vs 50-66 it is used spiritual.

But there are Spiritual Symbolism through out "Scritpure."...

Not symbolic
---john9346 on 5/11/17


john9346* So how can his flesh profiteth nothing?"

Reuben, you have to continue reading what the Holy Spirit had John to write it answers your question, "the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life."

John, it makes no sense for Jesus to keep saying about his flesh,

v52-55!

The Jews and his Disciples understood him literally, because he responded by using an even more literal verb (Greek, trogo) which means to "gnaw, chew, trogo is use twice more in scripture (Mt 24:38, Jn 13:18) both times it means to chew.

BTW- The word SPIRIT is never use symbolically in scripture, Which words give spirit and life, those I just wrote v51-55!
---Ruben on 5/11/17


Reuben:

"' This flesh I gave to the world and he will also raise up on the last day . So how can his flesh profiteth nothing?"

Reuben, you have to continue reading what the Holy Spirit had John to write it answers your question, "the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life."

"But if they left because they misunderstood him, why would he allow you to go to hell,

Sir, the Lord Jesus just told you vs 64-65 in fact he states repeatedly 37, 44-45, 64-65...
---john9346 on 5/8/17


john9346* jesus tells you vs 56, "56 He that eateth my flesh, , dwelleth in me, "

John is saying "the flesh profiteth nothing" is Jesus own flesh. But on the verse you gave, tells us he that eat my flesh dwells in me and I in him, also ' This flesh I gave to the world and he will also raise up on the last day . So how can his flesh profiteth nothing?


John-Reuben ask, Why did Jesus not call them back?"

The Lord Jesus answers your question in vs 64-65...

Of course he knows, after all he is God. But if they left because they misunderstood him, why would he allow you to go to hell, the answer is because you do not believe what he says, he allows you to go. John-Do you also want to leave?
---Ruben on 5/7/17


cluny states, "
"Transubstantiation" is the MEANS that Roman Catholics have determined this happens. Orthodoxy has never committed herself to defining just how the change takes place, we just confess that it does."

Exactly as stated,therefore, you are suppose to maintain "Neutrality." of which you are not doing so.

In other words, you don't 100% agree with "Transubstantiation." and you don't 100%disagree disagree with "Transubstantiation."
---john9346 on 5/6/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Lead Generation


reuben ask, "Whose flesh is Jesus referring to?"

the Lord jesus tells you vs 56, "56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him."

Reuben ask, "And if his DISCIPLES were correct to walk away (because a Jewish Rabbi teaching cannibalism ) Why did Jesus not call them back?"

The Lord Jesus answers your question in vs 64-65...
---john9346 on 5/6/17


\\As an Eastern Orthodox you don't even believe, "Transubstantiation." so how seemly you are attempting to argue for something that you reject??
---john9346 on 5/6/17\\

john, Orthodox believe that by the power and descent of the Holy Spirit on the bread and wine in the Anaphora, they become the true and objective Body and Blood of Christ.

"Transubstantiation" is the MEANS that Roman Catholics have determined this happens. Orthodoxy has never committed herself to defining just how the change takes place, we just confess that it does.

NOW do you understand?

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 5/6/17


Absolutely and that is why the Lord Jesus stated, "63 It is the spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life." Jn 6:63

Referencing eating his flesh and drinking his blood...
---john9346 on 5/5/17

Jesus himself said "Whoever eats this bread will live forever, This bread is my Flesh which I will give to the world"v 51 then many times after being ask " How can this man give us his flesh to eat?" v52

Whose flesh is Jesus referring to?v63

And if his DISCIPLES were correct to walk away (because a Jewish Rabbi teaching cannibalism ) Why did Jesus not call them back?

You walk away from Jesus no have no life!
---Ruben on 5/6/17


cluny states, "This verse you quoted has NOTHING to do with Christ's Body and Blood in the Eucharist."

Exactly, Jn 6:35-70 is not addressingthe "Christ's Body and Blood in the Eucharist."

Have you told this to Nicole and other followers of the RCC??

They love to run to Jn6:35-70 to try to invent this "False Teaching."...
---john9346 on 5/6/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Mortgages


cluny states, "Cannibalism is one of the charges Roman pagans levelled against Christians. Seems you think like they did."

Again, Sir, I was explaining what the Holy Spirit had John to record for us of why some of the individuals walked away.

This is why The Lord Jesus cleared up for the other disciples what he meant in vs 63.

That he wasn't telling them to eat his flesh and drink his blood, but it was a Spiritual Meaning and concept...
---john9346 on 5/6/17


Cluny,

As an Eastern Orthodox you don't even believe, "Transubstantiation." so how seemly you are attempting to argue for something that you reject??
---john9346 on 5/6/17


\\But those in John 6 were correct to walk away because a Jewish Rabbi teaching cannibalism was an abomination and a "Divine Curse." That is why the Lord jesus clarified in Jn 6:63...
---john9346 on 5/2/17\\

This verse you quoted has NOTHING to do with Christ's Body and Blood in the Eucharist.

Cannibalism is one of the charges Roman pagans levelled against Christians. Seems you think like they did.

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 5/5/17


cluny states, "Nice to know you think like they do."

Sir, I was explaing what the Holy Spirit had John to record for us of why some of the individuals walked away.

Cluny states, "Of course, spiritual things are spiritually discerned."

Absolutely and that is why the Lord Jesus stated, "63 It is the spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life." Jn 6:63

Referencing eating his flesh and drinking his blood...
---john9346 on 5/5/17


Locate Christian Home Based Business Opportunities


cluny states, "One of the things that the pagan Romans accused the Christians of was cannibalism."

And Justin Martyr defended against this notion you do know this right??
---john9346 on 5/5/17


\\But those in John 6 were correct to walk away because a Jewish Rabbi teaching cannibalism was an abomination and a "Divine Curse." That is why the Lord jesus clarified in Jn 6:63..\\

One of the things that the pagan Romans accused the Christians of was cannibalism.

Nice to know you think like they do.

Of course, spiritual things are spiritually discerned.

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 5/5/17


Most people on these blogs "walk with Jesus no more" precisely because of the issue upon which Jesus was teaching, namely the Eucharist.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 11/11/14

But those in John 6 were correct to walk away because a Jewish Rabbi teaching cannibalism was an abomination and a "Divine Curse." That is why the Lord jesus clarified in Jn 6:63...
---john9346 on 5/2/17


cluny states, "The pre-Reformation name for the second order of m inistry, ccommonly called PRIEST in English is really a contraction of the Greek word for Elder.

It has NOTHING to do with the Jewish Kohenim."

Sir, Heb 7 of which we are discussing is addressing the Biblical Priesthood

We are discussing "Scripture." and not Epics of Time such as the prereformation Era.

The Holy Spirit instructed Paul in Heb 7:11-28 to write that our only priest to look to is the Lord Jesus Christ Alone...
---john9346 on 5/1/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Personal Loans


1. In the NT the Office of a priest is not found.

2. In the NT all Christians are priests see Rev 1:5-6, 5:9-10, and 1 Pet 2:4-10.

3. The Pastoral Epistles mention nothing of a Priestly Office, the Greek Words, presybuteros and episcopos do not mean priest in the NT.
---john9346 on 5/1/17


\\
cluny ask, "Did you know that the English word "priest" is a contraction of the Greek word PRESYBTEROS through a middle form PRESTER?"

Your point sir?
---john9346 on 5/1/17\\

You mean you didn't get it?

The pre-Reformation name for the second order of m inistry, ccommonly called PRIEST in English is really a contraction of the Greek word for Elder.

It has NOTHING to do with the Jewish Kohenim.

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 5/1/17


Nicole:

The Holy Spirit instructed Paul to write less there would be any doubt to write these words:

11 If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?

12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

Nicole, Note, vs 12, "For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law."

The priesthood is changed because we are no longer under the law of Moses, but now under the law of Christ...
---john9346 on 5/1/17


cluny ask, "Did you know that the English word "priest" is a contraction of the Greek word PRESYBTEROS through a middle form PRESTER?"

Your point sir?
---john9346 on 5/1/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Auto Insurance


]]Next, vs 11-28 the Holy Spirit instructed Paul to show the difference between the Levitical Priesthood and the New Priesthood represented founded in the Lord Jesus Christ Alone...]]

Did you know that the English word "priest" is a contraction of the Greek word PRESYBTEROS through a middle form PRESTER?

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 5/1/17


Nicole states, "That is why I said I don't think you understand Hebrew 7."

Ma'am, if you please take time to read vs 1-10, the Holy Spirit instructed Paul to make a comparison between the Lord jesus and Melchizedek.

Next, vs 11-28 the Holy Spirit instructed Paul to show the difference between the Levitical Priesthood and the New Priesthood represented founded in the Lord Jesus Christ Alone...

Nicole, The OT Priesthood was fulfilled in the Lord Jesus Christ we're now under "Grace." Not "The Law."

John 6:35-70 has nothing to do with Heb 7 totally different topics...
---john9346 on 4/30/17


Nicole:

"The Primacy of Peter has nothing to do with Apostolic Church."

Ma'am, respectfully, you are wrong...

"The Orthodox and CC acknowledge each other as an Apostolic Church because we BOTH have VALID Priesthood."

error...

"Our main dispute is about PETER."

Ma'am, you are patently Wrong... again...

"As to the Bible you error in that as well."

Take that up with the authorities/sources of the EOC and RCC as I have cited.

I'll like to see you tell Mr Timothy Ware an EOC Authority that he is wrong :-)
---john9346 on 4/30/17


strongaxe had it right when he said the following:

Monk_Brendan wrote: The Catholic, Orthodox and other pre-Reformation Churches began at this time, and continue to this day.

Jerry6593 wrote: The Seventh-day Adventist Church began at Creation, suffered persecution by the RCC for 1260 years and continues to this day.

Mohammed also claimed that Islam started at creation, and that all the leaders of the Bible (Adam, Noah, Abraham, Joseph, Moses, Jesus, etc.) were Muslims.

Given any particular religious frame of reference, it's easy to claim that this perspective began very long ago, and that all others are merely deviations from it.
---StrongAxe on 6/23/16
---john9346 on 4/30/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Holidays


Not accurate, Nicole.

The chapter divisions were made by the Roman Catholic Church.

The verse divisions were made by the Protestant scholar Stephanus

They are of mere human contrivance for convenience, and cannot claim divine inspiration.

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 4/30/17


John, please ignore verses. Remember verses were only used to help Monks copy the Bible.

Read all Genesis 14, Psalms 110, Hebrew 7 and the Gospel of John 6.

The Primacy of Peter has nothing to do with Apostolic Church.

The Orthodox and CC acknowledge each other as an Apostolic Church because we BOTH have VALID Priesthood.

Our main dispute is about PETER.

As to the Bible you error in that as well.

Remember all the Apostles came from the East. They were all JEWS. Our split occurred in 1051. The Bible was compiled in the 5th century by Pope Damasus.

John Chrysostom is an Early Church Father of both Churches because there was only ONE CHURCH when he was alive.
---Nicole_Lacey on 4/30/17


Nicole:

"It's about Melchizedek who was a King and High Priest at the same time."

Ma'am,did youread vs 25-28??

"What did he offered in honor of Abraham's victory?"

Ma'am, did you read the chapter??

Ma'am, did you read the entire conversation of the Lord Jesus in Jn 6:35-70????

He explained himself very clearly invs 63 did you read??
---john9346 on 4/29/17


The EOC and the RCC contradict eahch other on who gave the world the bible.

see below:


"It is from the Church that the Bible ultimately derives its authority, for it was the Church which originally decided which books form a part of Holy Scripture,"

Ware, Timothy

The Orthodox Church p. 199)


"It was the Catholic Church and no other which selected and listed the inspired books of both the Old Testament and the New Testament...If you can accept the Bible or any part of it as inspired Word of God, you can do so only because the Catholic Church says it is." (The Bible is a Catholic Book, p. 4).
---john9346 on 4/29/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Health Insurance


The EOC and the RCC

Also, disagree over the Filioque Controversy and Papal Primacy.

Nicole, as a Roman Catholic, you believe in "Papal Primacy." and Cluny a Eastern Orthodox "Rejects." "Papal Primacy."

These are "Paramount Disagreements/controversies...
---john9346 on 4/29/17


John, you are speaking about the whole chapter of 7 in Hebrew.

Do you understand why Paul (no one really knows who wrote the letter to the Hebrews) used Name Melchizedek?

Do you know who he is?

Do you know the connection between Melchizedek, Abraham with Jesus as the Climax and Summit in John 6?

That is why I said I don't think you understand Hebrew 7.

You can't deny John 6 and understand Hebrew 7 at the SAME time.
---Nicole_Lacey on 4/30/17


\\No, he didn't say that. He said, "Do this in memory of me". He did not say what "this" is - you are just inferring it.\\

And what do you think Jesus had just gotten through doing when He said these words?

BTW, the Greek word ANAMNESIS (translated by the colorless word "remembrance" in most English Bibles) does not mean a mere mental reminder, but an actual making present of the event being commemorated.

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 4/29/17


//You wrote: Jesus TOLD the Disciples to offer up His Body and Blood ALWAYS until He returns.

No, he didn't say that. He said, "Do this in memory of me". He did not say what "this" is - you are just inferring it.--StrongAxe on 4/29/17

No, you are just want to make excuses.

If I am digging a hole and HAND you the shovel telling you to do this in memory of me.

What do you think I want you to do?

DIG HOLES.

Tell us, what do you think Jesus is speaking about when he is passing around bread and wine to His Disciples?
---Nicole_Lacey on 4/29/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Dating


Nicole states, "I believe you do not understand Hebrew 7 yourself."

Well, Lets all read to see


25 Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.

26 For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens,

27 Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.

28 For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity, but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated for evermore.
---john9346 on 4/29/17


//Nicole said, "No Samuel is saying as if one is an Apostolic Church and the other isn't.***

But each does think the other is wrong I believe that is his point if not that is in fact the Historical Contention---john9346 on 4/25/17

Correct!

Cluny and I are trying to tell you and Samuel that the CC and the Orthodox believes each other Church is an Apostolic Church.

We believe we are the ONLY Churches that are Apostolic Churches.

NO OTHER CHURCHES.

Do you understand?

Only Protestants think that is our disputes with each other.

That ISN'T wasn't our dispute that caused our split.
---Nicole_Lacey on 4/29/17


Nicole_Lacey:

You wrote: Jesus TOLD the Disciples to offer up His Body and Blood ALWAYS until He returns.

No, he didn't say that. He said, "Do this in memory of me". He did not say what "this" is - you are just inferring it.
---StrongAxe on 4/29/17


The Biblical Priesthood was fulfilled in the Lord Jesus Christ have you ever read Heb 7????--john9346

Sorry for my late response.

I believe you do not understand Hebrew 7 yourself.

It's about Melchizedek who was a King and High Priest at the same time.

What did he offered in honor of Abraham's victory?

Bread and Wine.

Jesus is the TRUE High Priest and King as His told His Disciples in John 6.

You deny Jesus claims of His Body and Blood being REAL AND TRUE for us to eat and drink as His Disciples refused in John 6:66.

Jesus TOLD the Disciples to offer up His Body and Blood ALWAYS until He returns.

Only the Catholic and Orthodox Churches have VALID Priests in following Jesus' Commands.
---Nicole_Lacey on 4/28/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Health Treatments


Nicole said, "No Samuel is saying as if one is an Apostolic Church and the other isn't. That's why he placed the word 'real' in front of Apostolic.,"

But each does think the other is wrong I believe that is his point if not that is in fact the Historical Contention...
Nicole states, "Cluny and I are saying both of us can point our Church Leaders back all the way to all the Apostles."

Every system claims this until "Real-historical Examination."...
---john9346 on 4/25/17


Nicole states, "To have a valid priesthood in your Church you have to be able to connect today's Priests back to one of the 13 Apostles. (Paul and Matthias as part of the 13)."

Nicole, The Biblical Priesthood was fulfilled in the Lord Jesus Christ have you ever read Heb 7????
---john9346 on 4/25/17


Nicole_Lacey:

Religions have been co-opting each other's holidays and places of worship since the dawn of man. It works both ways. The Christian church has been building churches over the ruins of pagan temples and shrines. Islam does the same thing - it turned the Hagia Sofia into a mosque.

Pagans had Samhain. Christians turned it into All Hallow's Eve. Secularists turned it into Halloween.
Pagans had Saturnalia. Christians turned it into Christmas. Secularists turned it into a frenzied spend-fest.
Pagans had spring fertility rites. Christians turned it into Easter. Secularists turned it back into a bunny and egg and chocolate fest.
---StrongAxe on 4/24/17


//Nicole, Samuel is correct when he stated, "Both insist they were the real apostolic church."//

No Samuel is saying as if one is an Apostolic Church and the other isn't. That's why he placed the word 'real' in front of Apostolic.

Cluny and I are saying both of us can point our Church Leaders back all the way to all the Apostles.

//Cluny himself has stated this same belief.--john9346 on 4/22/17

No not as Samuel and you are thinking.

To have a valid priesthood in your Church you have to be able to connect today's Priests back to one of the 13 Apostles. (Paul and Matthias as part of the 13).

Samuel thinks the Orthodox has to accept Pope Francis as their head to a be a 'real' Apostolic Church
---Nicole_Lacey on 4/23/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Affiliate Program


john, this is a 6th century Nestorian theologian I quoted. What he said is basically the Definition of Chalcedon.
---Cluny on 4/22/17

Ok thanks, but I am still cautious of how I use "Heretic." Wording to confirm the truth...


---john9346 on 4/23/17


nicole states, "Cluny, is correct. I believe you are confused in the understanding of Apostolic Church."

Nicole, Samuel is correct when he stated, "Both insist they were the real apostolic church."

Cluny himself has stated this same belief.
---john9346 on 4/22/17


john, this is a 6th century Nestorian theologian I quoted. What he said is basically the Definition of Chalcedon.

It's the same one who compared patriarchs to popes.

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 4/22/17


Bill, Pagans chose our days after Christians being celebrating Christ's Birth and the Resurrection on certain days

Secularists invented a bunny and decided to celebrate that bunny with it's fixings on the same day Christians celebrate the Resurrection.

Think about it, you haven't read about a bunny with Easter from Historians 200 years ago.

//may be we could say he is not inventing, but reinventing??//

YES, by Pagans!

Valentine Day
Real Christian Saint- Centuries ago

Cupid - Pagans

St Patrick's day March 17th.
Real Christian Saint's death. A Bishop of Ireland Centuries ago.

Leprechaun and pot of gold - Pagans.

//Satan does not own any days.---Bill

AMEN!
---Nicole_Lacey on 4/22/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Abortion Facts


One is Christ the Son of God,
Worshiped by all in two natures,
In His Godhead begotten of the Father,
Without beginning before all time,
In His humanity born of Mary,
In the fullness of time, in a body united,
Neither His Godhead is of the nature of the mother,
Nor His humanity of the nature of the Father,
The natures are preserved in their Qnumas*,
In one person of one Sonship.
And as the Godhead is three substances in one nature,
Likewise the Sonship of the Son is in two natures, one person.
So the Holy Church has taught.
---Cluny on 4/22/17


//Both insist they were the real apostolic church.---Samuelbb7 on 4/19/17


Cluny, is correct. I believe you are confused in the understanding of Apostolic Church.

Both are Apostolic Churches capable proving no breaking link of the 'laying of the hands' back to the Apostles.

Meaning both have VALID Priesthood and all VALID SEVEN Sacraments.

The Catholic Church states Pope Francis is the Successor holding the Keys given to Peter by Jesus.

Many Orthodox Churches proudly can direct their Successors (called Patriarchs not Popes) back to Andrew (Peter's brother) and John (The Beloved Disciple), Phillip, James and other Apostles.

The Catholic Church AGREES with these Links of the Orthodox Churches
---Nicole_Lacey on 4/22/17


Cluny,

Well, then he is either a "Nestorian." or not talking about the person you cited from the 6thcentury.

You don't want to risk approving heresy you know??

Remember, the Chalcedonian Creed.
---john9346 on 4/21/17


\\Cluny,

Sir, why would you be quoting "A Nestorian theologian." which is a "Heretic."????\\

You've asked a good question.

The person who wrote this flourished in the 6th century. I could tell you where to find it on line, but I think it's against the ruled.

NOBODY today is a Nestorian as condemned by the Ecumenical Council (except some fringe Protestants). In fact, a few years ago the Nestorian Patriarch Mar Dinkha and Pope John Paul II signed a statement of common Christology, to which the Nestorian Synod agreed.

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 4/21/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Acne Treatment


Well, there are people who claim that December 25 is the birthday of a sun god, and Easter is a day of pagan something.

And ones say that Christians took over those days, in order to use them for celebrating Jesus Christ's birth and His resurrection. They believed it was good to re-invent those days, for God's purpose.

So, in case a pope is using these days, may be we could say he is not inventing, but reinventing??

However, plenty of Jesus Bible believers celebrate Christmas and Easter as holy days, not only for material and social reasons. We can make good use of what is used the wrong way.

Satan does not own any days.

1 Corinthians 3:21-23.
---Bill on 4/21/17


Cluny,

Sir, why would you be quoting "A Nestorian theologian." which is a "Heretic."????
---john9346 on 4/20/17


Not quite, Samuelbb. but close.

Orthodxy has alsways believed that the Pope was the head, but we disagreed with Roman Catholics about what this headship means.

We see it as a primacy of honor, as first among equals. As a Nestorian theologian put it, As the Patriarch is among the bishops, so is the Pope among patriarchs.

Pastor Aeternus, however, defined this headship as a "primacy of ordinary jurisdiction over all the faithful," which we reject.

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 4/20/17


There was one united Church until 1056 AD. Then it split in two. Often referred to as the Great Schism.
---Samuelbb7 on 4/19/17

Samuel, it was 1054 AD not 1056 AD...

Papal Positions developed over time along with the dogmas...

There are 242 denominations of Catholics and 781 denominations of Orthodox.
---john9346 on 4/20/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Bad Credit Loans


Cyril of Jerusalem said, "It is called Catholic then because it extends over all the world, from one end of the earth to the other, and because it teaches universally and completely one and all the doctrines which ought to come to men's knowledge, concerning things both visible and invisible, heavenly and earthly , and because it brings into subjection to godliness the whole race of mankind, governors and governed, learned and unlearned, and because it universally treats and heals the whole class of sins, which are committed by soul or body, and possesses in itself every form of virtue which is named, both in deeds and words, and in every kind of spiritual gifts."
---john9346 on 4/20/17


There was one united Church until 1056 AD. Then it split in two. Often referred to as the Great Schism.

After that there existed the Orthodox churches and Roman Catholic church.

Both insist they were the real apostolic church. The RCC states that the Popes were always the head of all the Churches from the first so called pope Peter till now. On the other hand the Orthodox totally dispute the Popes of Rome were the leaders of the whole church ever.
---Samuelbb7 on 4/19/17


pls explain?

Are you referring in the name of Roman??
---Ruben on 4/17/17

Well, remember, the name catholic meant when it was first used meant every singgle believers not referring to a specific institution. Later, believers follow this same line of reasoning and context of their usage as wellas in their many books.
---john9346 on 4/18/17


Reuben ask, "You are kidding right??"

No sir, Absoluteley serious
---john9346 on 4/17/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Bankruptcy


The Roman Catholic Religion that you know today wasn't in existence when Easter and Christmas was established.

Roman Catholicism didn't exist until about the 12th-13thCentury...
---john9346 on 4/17/1

You are kidding right??

pls explain?

Are you referring in the name of Roman??
---Ruben on 4/17/17


Dementio:

The Roman Catholic Religion that you know today wasn't in existence when Easter and Christmas was established.

Roman Catholicism didn't exist until about the 12th-13thCentury...
---john9346 on 4/17/17


Religious holy week ends with the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ, but the ministry of the church begins with the revelation of the gospel of the grace of God not revealed until after that week.

Religions will repeat the events of Jesus earthly ministry and mourn his death as the biggest mistake humanity ever made, in the same ignorance as the disciples as to why he had to suffer and die.
Meanwhile, the stewards of the mysteries of Christ should continue preaching the glory of the cross of Christ as the best news the world has ever received.
---michael_e on 4/17/17


\\I don't know if Easter and Christmas wash invented by the Pope but I now know they are pagan.

Yes, I'm very guilty of celebrating them in the past before I learned the truth.
---Rob on 4/16/17\\

As a matter of fact, Rob, they are not.

The supposed pagan origin of these Christian observances is backwards. It was Emperor Julian the Apostate who paganized these Christian feasts.

I suggest you read THE APOStASY THAT WASN'T.

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 4/17/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Cash Advance


Because Easter vigil is the Holiest Feast of the year and Christmas is the next with it's Midnight Mass.

Jesus rising from the dead should be celebrated.

Next Jesus birth should be celebrated because he is God with us Emmanuel.

These days you should not ignore if you are a Christian.

As directed by God himself the Jews celebrated certain day's yearly as a reminder of it's importance.

If you wish to blame the Catholic Church in keeping these days in circulation in our modern memory we are guilty and not ashamed.

We shall continue until Christ returns. We take Jesus seriously.

Blame God for traditions. He knows how humans are so forgetful.

I loved Holy Week with Easter as its climax.
---Nicole_Lacey on 4/16/17


Dementio ask, "Why do churches have Easter and Christmas."


To remember, celebrate, and above all worship The Resurrected and Incarnated God and Saviour the Lord Jesus Christ who is 100% God and 100% man...

Dementio ask, "Are these invented by the pope?"

No, the Early Christian desired to use Christmas and Easter as days to point pagans to the Real-true Saviour the Lord Jesus Christ.

You see, there were many false gods during this time and what better time to witness to the pagansthe one and only true Living God...
---john9346 on 4/16/17


I don't know if Easter and Christmas wash invented by the Pope but I now know they are pagan.

Yes, I'm very guilty of celebrating them in the past before I learned the truth.
---Rob on 4/16/17


Copyright© 2017 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.