23 Feb 17
Originally posted by sonshipDo all of Jesus's followers partake?
I have been to hundreds of table meetings. The physical body of one of the praying serving ones probably obscured for a moment the visibility of the cup.
What is done is that the cup and the plate of bread are passed around. Unless there was a break in the film, one of those men took the cup to pass it around. You just could not see it for a moment when he picked it up.
23 Feb 17
Originally posted by sonshipIf all are to partake, shouldn't he have it arranged for all his followers to be there that night to partake? Maybe out on a hillside like he did once before? It would appear all the thousands of his other followers missed out. Your thoughts?
In the local churches all believers in Christ are invited to partake of the symbols - the bread and the cup.
It is [b]"the Lord's Table".[/b]
23 Feb 17
Originally posted by divegeesterEven the JWs can put two and two together to get four.
And all the times Jehovah said that HE is the only saviour and that he will not give his glory to another...
But they won't because they are so stuck in their dogma.
Jesus is the savior of man, post-Jesus and "Jehovah" is the savior of man, pre-Jesus (according to them).
Put this together with "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God",
There is no "pre-Jesus", so what does one suppose this means?
A thinking person might think they're talking about the same thing. ONE savior, not two.
23 Feb 17
Originally posted by SuzianneYour still not paying attention.....
Even the JWs can put two and two together to get four.
But they won't because they are so stuck in their dogma.
Jesus is the savior of man, post-Jesus and "Jehovah" is the savior of man, pre-Jesus (according to them).
Put this together with "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God",
There is no "pre-Jesus", ...[text shortened]... ns?
A thinking person might think they're talking about the same thing. ONE savior, not two.
23 Feb 17
Originally posted by galveston75There is a bit of a difference between "followers" and "apostles".
If all are to partake, shouldn't he have it arranged for all his followers to be there that night to partake? Maybe out on a hillside like he did once before? It would appear all the thousands of his other followers missed out. Your thoughts?
Having thousands of followers at the Last Supper would dilute the message. The same message his apostles would take into the world. That was their job. That we partake now is a testament to their work.
In any large organization (with a cast of thousands?), one does not disseminate policy from the bottom up. It's all top down, for a reason.
23 Feb 17
Originally posted by galveston75You got all the parts, you're just not making the final connection.
Oh my....still so hard to grasp I see.
Do you disagree that before Jesus came to earth and presented himself to be offered up his life which is what was needed to be our savior, that his father, not Jesus was the only savior mankind had up to the point of Jesus arriving on earth?
Jehovah, not Jesus, had not only been the savior of his people many ...[text shortened]... e explains.
But his son could become flesh to help us, so he did.
Anything? Any help at all?
Originally posted by SuzianneCould you show me by scripture those ideas you have?
There is a bit of a difference between "followers" and "apostles".
Having thousands of followers at the Last Supper would dilute the message. The same message his apostles would take into the world. That was their job. That we partake now is a testament to their work.
In any large organization (with a cast of thousands?), one does not disseminate policy from the bottom up. It's all top down, for a reason.
And no your not paying attention. You think you know why we believe as we do and your still wrong. Every time you explain something about our beliefs your still wrong.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
24 Feb 17
4 edits
Originally posted by galveston75At that first Lord's Table / Lord's Supper were the twelve.
After the church began from Pentecost they met from house to house and broke bread (Acts 2:46).
"And day by day, continuing steadfastly with one accord in the temple and breaking bread from house to house, they part of their food with exultation and simplicity of heart..."
I think they showed their enthusiasm by having many bread breaking and cup sharings from house to house in "the church in Jerusalem".
The principle the local church should practice is that all believers are invited in principle to the Lord's Table. All Christians are welcomed to the Lord's Table. A Christian should examine himself to see if his conscience is clear that he should partake of it in peace.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeThink of a creatures living on a two dimensional plane being communicated with by a person in a three dimensional reality.
Why does this divine revelation need to be so mysterious and ambiguous?
There is bound to be something rather mysterious about the latter to the former.
Contacting God - there is bound to be something rather incomprehensible about Him to us. But we still may have fellowship together.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 29783
02 Mar 17
Originally posted by sonshipIf God turns out to be one, rather than 3, do you think He will be forgiving towards Trinitarians, bearing in mind his first commandment was 'You shall have no other Gods but me,'
Think of a creatures living on a two dimensional plane being communicated with by a person in a three dimensional reality.
There is bound to be something rather mysterious about the latter to the former.
Contacting God - there is bound to be something rather incomprehensible about Him to us. But we still may have fellowship together.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
02 Mar 17
5 edits
Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
If God turns out to be one, rather than 3, do you think He will be forgiving towards Trinitarians, bearing in mind his first commandment was 'You shall have no other Gods but me,'
If God turns out to be one,
I believe that He has revealed Himself as one.
That part is already settled.
Three-one is a great mystery.
I cannot fully explain three-one. And I don't think anyone else has been fully able to in church history.
But we can enjoy the Triune God.
rather than 3, do you think He will be forgiving towards Trinitarians, bearing in mind his first commandment was 'You shall have no other Gods but me,'
You seem to be speaking about Tritheism - a belief in three gods.
Modalism, Tritheism or the Pure Revelation of the Triune God by Ron Kangus
http://www.contendingforthefaith.org/responses/booklets/modalism.html