It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Fitzpatrick
I think heavan and hell are found within onlesself and not simply something you go to after you die.
Originally posted by FlyersFan
Those are very clear instructions. VERY clear. You have to eat
the flesh and drink the blood of Christ to have eternal life. At
this point only the Catholics, Orthodox, and some Episcopalians
have transubstantiation in their worship services.
Originally posted by FlyersFan
Mostly John. Here is what I have about Christ being present
in the Holy Communion. (get your bible out)
Christ actually present in -
Matthew 26:26, Mark 14:22, Luke 22:19,
John 35, 41, 51-58
1 Cor 11:27-29
Source of divine life -
John 6:27, 33, 50, 51, 58
1 Cor 11:30
Originally posted by DrHoracid
Well you are close, hell doesn't exist. It a creation from "Dante". hell is nowhere in the bible.
Originally posted by DrHoracid
Hell implies that those there would get imortality, actually unrepentant's die a "second" death in the lake of fire.
Originally posted by FlyersFan
Originally posted by dancer
is it Really a requirement that one be "Saved" before
one can enter Heaven?
Here's an 'eternal life' requirement for ya' -
John 6 51 - Jesus said 'I am the living bread which
comes down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will
live forever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the
world is my flesh.'
then Jesus backs this up with John 6 53-56 -
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 o on 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.
Those are very clear instructions. VERY clear. You have to eat
the flesh and drink the blood of Christ to have eternal life. At
this point only the Catholics, Orthodox, and some Episcopalians
have transubstantiation in their worship services. Guess that
means ya'll have to become Catholic, Orthodox or perhaps
Episcopalian to get to heaven.
Oh ... but make sure you go to confession before going to
Holy Communion to receive Christ. Because if you go to the Lord's
Table without first confessing your sins, then you bring abomination
upon your soul and you are back to not getting into heaven.
Not sure of the bible quote on that one ... It's there ...
I'll look it up and get back to you with it.
How's THAT for a requirement? There are bunches.... just gotta'
read the scriptures.
Originally posted by dancer
Since I didn't see/notice this topic, and it seemed to be a fruitful discussion I will ask:
The born Again Christians are big on saving souls, and it is a very nobel undertaking, but is it Really a requirement that one be "Saved" before one can enter Heaven?
Originally posted by saint4God
Originally posted by FlyersFan
Those are very clear instructions. VERY clear. You have to eat
the flesh and drink the blood of Christ to have eternal life. At
this point only the Catholics, Orthodox, and some Episcopalians
have transubstantiation in their worship services.
So ah, all the guests of these churches are going to Heaven too? Quite a door-prize I'd say if that's the case. Don't need to believe in God or Jesus Christ, just participate in our ritual and you're in! No need to repent of sin or follow Christ's teachings...is that how it goes?
[edit on 10-3-2005 by saint4God]
Originally posted by Mahree
Here is the part you missed.
"Oh ... but make sure you go to confession before going to
Holy Communion to receive Christ. Because if you go to the Lord's
Table without first confessing your sins, then you bring abomination
upon your soul and you are back to not getting into heaven. "
You must take instruction in the Catholic Church before you can take part in the Sacraments. Catholic Christians do believe in God the Father, Jesus our Savior and the Holy Spirit.
It takes a long time to be ready to receive the Sacraments. Here we learn the importance of a good confession and then the forgiveness of God. Then we can partake of the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ. (The Eucharist)
Originally posted by jake1997
As for John 6:51
Jesus is the Word. Read it, BELIEVE IT , and act on it,
and live forever. plain and simple.
The rest of the stuff was littered with catholicisms.
The pope is a false teacher, ...him and his organization
are not to be confused with Christs church.
Originally posted by dancer
If the Bible (Old Testiment) is the inspired word of God, and Christs teachings are based on the Old testiment, What makes His word better than the Old Testiment? (We can essentially prove that the Old testiment was the signature of God with the Bible Code, yet we can't do like wise with the New testiment. However, on the same token it can be proven that any of the Gospels was made last - Due to the fact that "some" of the specific words used are not found in any of the other gospels. (I belive the reference on that was Dr. Gene Scott, although it is possible that it was Chuck Missler).
Is it not feasable, that when Christ said I am the light that he was refering to his teachings, and his life being primary examples of enlightenment?
If the Bible (Old Testiment) is the inspired word of God, and Christs teachings are based on the Old testiment, What makes His word better than the Old Testiment? (We can essentially prove that the Old testiment was the signature of God with the Bible Code, yet we can't do like wise with the New testiment. However, on the same token it can be proven that any of the Gospels was made last - Due to the fact that "some" of the specific words used are not found in any of the other gospels. (I belive the reference on that was Dr. Gene Scott, although it is possible that it was Chuck Missler).
like the serpent enlightening Eve?, or the 'lightbringer' - lucifer, or the solar number - 666. the illuminati seem to be claiming enlightenment by their choice of a name.
Must I be saved? probably.......i seem to always get myself into tight spots that require someone to lend me a hand. But I refuse to buy the whole dying for my sins on the cross theory. I always wondered why people who like Jesus don't become Jews, like him? He wasn't a Christian, I know that.
Originally posted by jake1997
you can look at the history of the RCC and see they
stopped following christ. If not, google it. Its very easy
to find.
Originally posted by dancer
The born Again Christians are big on saving souls, and it is a very nobel undertaking, but is it Really a requirement that one be "Saved" before one can enter Heaven?
Or is being a good and kind person enough?
Originally posted by toolmaker
People in the old testament were taken to heaven, So it cannot be that the only souls saved will be through Jesus.
According to many modern rabbinical scholars the Christian concept of salvation from sin has no equal in Judaism. Judaism does not believe that man, by his nature, is evil or sinful and therefore has no need to be “saved” from an eternal damnation. In fact, most Jews today do not believe in a place of eternal punishment or a literal hell. The Hebrew root word for “sin” is chayt, which literally means to “miss the mark.” It is a term commonly used in archery, of one who “misses the mark” of the bulls eye. When a Jew misses the mark, and occasionally falls into the sin of failing to fulfill the laws of God, the belief is that one can obtain forgiveness through prayer, repentance and doing good deeds.
The Book of Leviticus (17:11), the third Book of the Torah, clearly gives the prescription for forgiveness. “For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul.” The Temple sacrifice was always the centerpiece for Jewish atonement. Once a year, on the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur), the Levitical High Priest would enter the Holy of Holies in the Temple and sprinkle the blood of the sacrifice on the Mercy Seat. Through this yearly act, atonement was made for the sins of all Israel, but the Holy Temple was destroyed in 70 AD, and for almost 2000 years Jews have been without a Temple, a sacrifice, and a means of atonement.
II. PRINCIPAL ADVERSARIES
Theodorus of Mopsuestia opened this controversy by denying that the sin of Adam was the origin of death. (See the "Excerpta Theodori", by Marius Mercator; cf. Smith, "A Dictionary of Christian Biography", IV, 942.) Celestius, a friend of Pelagius, was the first in the West to hold these propositions, borrowed from Theodorus: "Adam was to die in every hypothesis, whether he sinned or did not sin. His sin injured himself only and not the human race" (Mercator, "Liber Subnotationem", preface). This, the first position held by the Pelagians, was also the first point condemned at Carthage (Denzinger, "Enchiridion", no 101-old no. 65). Against this fundamental error Catholics cited especially Rom., v, 12, where Adam is shown as transmitting death with sin. After some time the Pelagians admitted the transmission of death -- this being more easily understood as we see that parents transmit to their children hereditary diseases- but they still violently attacked the transmission of sin (St. Augustine, "Contra duas epist. Pelag.", IV, iv, 6). And when St. Paul speaks of the transmission of sin they understood by this the transmission of death. This was their second position, condemned by the Council of Orange [Denz., n. 175 (145)], and again later on with the first by the Council of Trent [Sess. V, can. ii; Denz., n. 789 (671)]. To take the word sin to mean death was an evident falsification of the text, so the Pelagians soon abandoned the interpretation and admitted that Adam caused sin in us. They did not, however, understand by sin the hereditary stain contracted at our birth, but the sin that adults commit in imitation of Adam. This was their third position, to which is opposed the definition of Trent that sin is transmitted to all by generation (propagatione), not by imitation [Denz., n. 790 (672)]. Moreover, in the following canon are cited the words of the Council of Carthage, in which there is question of a sin contracted by generation and effaced by generation [Denz., n. 102 (66)]. The leaders of the Reformation admitted the dogma of original sin, but at present there are many Protestants imbued with Socinian doctrines whose theory is a revival of Pelagianism.
Originally posted by RANT
Anyone calling themselves "literalists" (as most fundamentalists do),
have a problem. A major problem. How can so many literalists disagree
with each other? Either it's literal and quite clearly so, or it's not.