Dan, to say that if that one verse tarreyl pointed out wasn't in the Bible the RCC would add these other mysterious "oral traditions" that supposedly were directed by the apostles after John wrote Revelation, just doesn't seem right. They added apocryphal books to the Old Testament, and, according to you, ideally would like to add to the New Testament as well. I would like to see whatever proof you have that the apostles really did teach such traditions as are seen in the RCC today. Please provide this, or I will disgard your comment on it. As for transubstansiation, I believe it is a false assumption that ignores the nature of Christ's presenting the, yes, biblical ritual. I had hoped that it would have been understood by my previous post that such things as baptisms, wedding ceremonies and also Communion were not what I was talking about. These things, done in a biblical way, are not the rituals I meant. I should have called them man-made rituals from the beginning. But back to transubstansiation- Jesus meant the bread and wine to be a symbolic way to remember His sacrifice and our own union with that sacrifice, having accepted it and Christ now living within as a result. Same goes for "the Lord's Prayer". It was a general guide for prayer, and by no means was meant to be repeated word for word. God is not legalistic, and He does not give us words to repeat that we would need to try to fit into our particualr situations. I cringe inside whenever I hear a group of people "pray" it together, (and why in such a drone-like, lifeless way anyway?) or when I hear people "pray" the same words together. Prayer is supposed to be a unique expression of your heart to God's. The true nature of it is lost in such things. Also, you really believe that you only receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit when you particiapate in the outward act of water baptism? This is entirely unscriptual! The baptism of the Holy Spirit was given to many people in the New Testament before they were water baptized. In fact, Peter recognized that Gentiles were given this by God, and so declared that if God would give Gentiles the baptism of the Holy Spirit, there is no reason that they should not be allowed the physical representation of it. Spirit and fire first, water second. That's the biblical doctrine on it.
Dan wrote:Simply because you do not acknowledge the purpose of the rituals does not make them unhealthy to a Christian. You simply do not understand what is at work behind the scenes when these things are being done, the Holy Ghost is there and the works serve to glorify Christ as faith is in the background, there to cement the link between worldly Christian and spiritual and Holy Christ.
I fully acknowledge the take you have on all this. I recognize your view on it. I have heard you completely and understood what your saying. What I say is, though, that your take does not line up with God's Word. Your very own Bible, sitting on your shelf or headboard or whereever, contradicts your stance on this. It has been consitant throughout the Bible that the spiritual is what is to come first, then the external expression of it if there is to be one at all. They are not connected. They do not depend on one another. Faith=instanst justification, which =works, one of which is baptism, though baptism is not necessary.
Dan wrote:the works serve to glorify Christ as faith is in the background, there to cement the link between worldly Christian and spiritual and Holy Christ.
Here did you mean that faith is what does the "cementing", or the works plus the faith? Faith is indeed the biblical, God-chosen method, but does not require works to be there along side.