[geocentrism] Re: The Literal Word
- From: "Philip" <joyphil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 19:13:07 +1000
Thats a god response, Neville, and I watch with interest.. However, ypir
position does depend a lot upon how you interpret scripture, and as you have
stated previously, you do not accept the KJV as the inerrant word of God, then
which ?
There is nothing within your quotes that appear to me to give any person the
power to bring down the conversion of bread into His flesh, yet every thing in
scripture points to His giving such to his chosen apostles, even Judas, which
might , if you think about it, explain the bad priests throughout history.
Judas was chosen.
Philip
----- Original Message -----
From: Dr. Neville Jones
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2005 8:33 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: The Literal Word
Nick,
Since you have answered that the priest's spiritual health is irrelevant,
then surely the flesh and blood has come direct from Christ and, if it has come
directly from Christ, why can I not take it directly from him, since he is my
head?
I picked this particular sin, or combination of sins, not for dramatic
effect, but because of how widespread it appears to be in your church, and
because I do not for one minute think that Christ would tolerate such a
situation in his church (recall how annoyed he got with the merchants in the
temple).
In answer to your question, Nick, I do not have any "minister" or "pastor."
I, as a man, am directly in subjection to Christ. There is absolutely no one,
no church and no organization, between myself and my good shepherd. He provides
me with reconciliation back to God, which Adam had taken away. I have therefore
only to examine my own conscience when I proclaim Christ's death by taking his
flesh and blood - I do not need to concern myself with someone else's
conscience or spirit. Isn't this what the Scriptures say?
(1 Cor 11:28 KJV) But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that
bread, and drink of that cup.
(1 Cor 11:29 KJV) For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and
drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
Respectfully,
Neville.
"Niemann, Nicholas K." <NNiemann@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Neville,
Thank you for the follow up. The answer to your question is yes. The validity
of the consecration at Mass is not dependent on the priest being a non-sinner.
This is thankfully the case, since we are all sinners (including Catholic
priests, who I think the devil is spending extra resources attacking, so let's
pray for them). You've picked out one of the more hideous sins, perhaps for
dramatic effect, I assume, since that seems to be the one that is launched at
Catholics these days.
But let me ask you Neville. If the priest otherwise has the Christ-given
power to change the substance of bread and wine into the body, blood, soul and
divinity of Jesus Christ (which I presume you believe your minister or pastor
can do), do you think the presence of sins on that man's soul removes that
power (from the priest or your minister), and if so, on what Biblical or
logical basis do you reach that conclusion.
Thanks for the courteous discussion.
Regards,
Nick.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
Other related posts:
