Do Catholics believe John 6:53?

[NotWorthy]

You don’t mind if I ask you a question, do you? If you were alive at the time of Christ and you heard Him say, “…repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand”, would you believe Him and repent or would you ignore Him?

By who’s authority would you believe Him?

That’s pretty simple. I’d follow Him and only Him.

And, when He says that He must leave, and that He is leaving us a Church, I’d follow that Church just as faithfully. By following the Church that He built, that would last to the end of the age, I am following Christ!

 

[PRmerger]

What you do not understand is that my salvation and Ralph’s salvation is NOT dependant upon our correct understanding of every scripture.

So, Russ, what do you think about a Jehovah’s Witness that allows his child to die (by refusing a blood transfusion) because of his interpretation of the Bible? Is his interpretation correct?

Do you not think understanding Scripture correctly matters?

God will correct my understanding of His word as HE sees fit and in HIS timing.

Do you have a Scripture verse for this?

 

[PRmerger]

BereanRuss:

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

This is the truth that saves a man. Any truth beyond this cannot save anyone.

What is the point, then, of the entirety of Scripture?

Catholics believe and affirm John 3:16, so we are saved according to your beliefs.

Why are you here on these forums, Russ, if not to argue all the points of Scripture with us? (And, lest you misunderstand, I welcome you and rejoice that you are here–more power to you for dialoguing and being open to what Catholics and others have to say!)

However, it really sounds as if you’re saying that Scripture really doesn’t matter–just the essential truth of John 3:16.

 

[NotWorthy]

What is the point, then, of the entirety of Scripture?

Catholics believe and affirm John 3:16, so we are saved according to your beliefs.

Why are you here on these forums, Russ, if not to argue all the points of Scripture with us? (And, lest you misunderstand, I welcome you and rejoice that you are here–more power to you for dialoguing and being open to what Catholics and others have to say!)

However, it really sounds as if you’re saying that Scripture really doesn’t matter–just the essential truth of John 3:16.

So “all Scripture is inspired by God and is profitable…” doesn’t really mean “All Scripture”?

 

[PRmerger]

So “all Scripture is inspired by God and is profitable…” doesn’t really mean “All Scripture”?

I have to agree with you, NotWorthy. It does indeed sound as if Russ is picking and choosing what Scripture is essential.

 

[jmcrae]

Does the believer have direct access to the throne of grace for the forgiveness of sin?

Yes, we most certainly do! And where do we find this throne of grace, in order to go to it? We find it in the Confessional!

Personally, I find it odd that someone would consider themselves to be “going to” anywhere except sleep, while remaining in their room, and not moving at all.

For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin. Let us therefore come boldly to the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need. [Heb 4:15, 16]

Jesus is in the Confessional, waiting patiently for us to come to Him. The priest is a kind of “window” that allows us to hear Christ speaking to us with our natural ears.

If the believer now has access to God’s throne of grace and is commanded to come boldly, why not take God at His word?

We do. We go boldly to Confession to confess our sins at the Throne of Grace.

Why go through an earthly priest when you have authority to boldly go to Jesus Himself?

Because the priest has the ability to make Christ present to us in a way that we can hear and see and understand.

 

[BereanRuss]

You are creating a false dichotomy. The priest acts in the Person of Christ. He is just an avenue through which we approach the throne of Grace with boldness.

When Jesus died on the cross, the robe in the temple was ripped from top to bottom. This robe was the separation in the Temple between the “holy place” and the “holy of holies” – the very room in the temple where God dwelt.

There is no longer separation between God and man. God has made a way through Jesus Christ for any and all “who will call on His name” to freely enter His presence “behind the veil”

This hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and steadfast, and which enters the Presence behind the veil, where the forerunner has entered for us, even Jesus, having become High Priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek. [Heb 6:19, 20]

Jesus is the only priest in the NT and all believers are to come to God only through Him…

For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus

Most of the book of Acts is about the initial preaching of the gospel. Confession is for post baptismal sins. The best example of retention of sin is Ananias and Sapphira. They were baptized members of the community who sinned against the HS and the Church.

I also thought of this passage when considering this subject and I agree that this is about post-baptismal sin however, this passage has nothing to do with confession of sin to a priest at all. It has to do with non-confession of sin. I agree however that the Bible does give authority to the leaders of the church to “deliver such a one to satan…”

Well, we have public examples. We don’t know how many may have confessed their sins privately to the Apostles and those He appointed. However, the history of the early church demonstrates that you are correct. Confession was public. It was not until the Church realized that public confession could cause more harm than good that private confessions were implemented.

Wow, so John the Baptist was wrong after all. That is heavy.

John was from the priestly line. In fact, His father was acting as High priest the year he was conceived. His birth was announced to his father inside the Holy of Holies, remember? In any case, God ordained him to that ministry, so even if he had not been of a priestly line, he was authorized by God.

So John had to believe that God spoke to him personally and directly and not through the God-established religion and he had to “rebel” from the Jewish leaders in order to be obedient to God. Interesting.

Do you think it might be harmful to confess your sins to an elder?

No, of course not. However, I do not believe that I am forgiven because I did. I believe that I am forgiven because of the love of God - that He so loved me that He gave His Son to pay the debt that I could never pay.

I do not understand what you mean by “earthly priesthood”. It seems to me that the function of the presybters is primarily spiritual, not “earthly”. I will not rule out the corporate works of mercy, which are largely “earthly” in the sense that they address temporal physical needs, but the primary duties of the presbyters are all spiritual.

A priest is any person who stands between God and man. In the OT the common people would take their offering to the priest to be offered to God. They were not allowed to offer anything to God on their own.

In the NT, Jesus is our mediator who stands between us and the Father. There is no longer a priest on earth but there is a Priest in heaven. All believers are invited to come boldly to His throne to find mercy and help in our time of need.

Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching; 18 for the scripture says, “You shall not muzzle an ox when it is treading out the grain,” and, “The laborer deserves his wages.”

The Apostles is clear that the primary duty of the presbyter is to teach and preach. ARe these “earthly” duties?

While the presbyter does labor in the word, he does not stand between the believer and God. That is why they were not called priests in the NT. Each believer in the NT is commanded to go boldly to His throne to find forgiveness and mercy.

The breath of Christ, the power of the HS, is what empowers men to forgive sins in His name.

For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus

 

[jmcrae]

BereanRuss:

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

This is the truth that saves a man. Any truth beyond this cannot save anyone.

Then why bother with the rest of the Bible?

Surely, every dot and jot in the Bible is essential to our salvation, or else God would not have provided it to the Church for our use.

 

[jmcrae]

When Jesus died on the cross, the robe in the temple was ripped from top to bottom. This robe was the separation in the Temple between the “holy place” and the “holy of holies” – the very room in the temple where God dwelt.

I always thought that this was in order to signify that there is no more need for animal sacrifices, and that the Old Testament is fulfilled.

There is no longer separation between God and man. God has made a way through Jesus Christ for any and all “who will call on His name” to freely enter His presence “behind the veil”

Where does it say this in the New Testament?

This hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and steadfast, and which enters the Presence behind the veil, where the forerunner has entered for us, even Jesus, having become High Priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek. [Heb 6:19, 20]

Jesus is the only priest in the NT and all believers are to come to God only through Him…

He is the only High Priest, which signifies that there are lower orders of priesthood.

For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus

Right. Bishops, priests and deacons do not, themselves, die for our sins. Rather, they intercede for us in prayer, and make Christ known to us in their persons and in the breaking of the bread.

I also thought of this passage when considering this subject and I agree that this is about post-baptismal sin however, this passage has nothing to do with confession of sin to a priest at all. It has to do with non-confession of sin. I agree however that the Bible does give authority to the leaders of the church to “deliver such a one to satan…”

Right. But not just anybody can do this, as we see in Matthew 6:14-15, in which Jesus warns the crowds that any sins they do not forgive, will result in the Father not forgiving them of any of their sins. So, the leadership of the Church was given a charism that not all people are given.

Wow, so John the Baptist was wrong after all. That is heavy.

No. He was following the custom of the Essenes. When the Church became open to the Gentiles and to city dwellers, it became impractical to do public confessions, because of the risk of gossip.

Such a risk does not exist in an enclosed community of like-minded folk, such as the Essenes - and in the Early Church, those who became Christians became cut off from anyone that they might have otherwise gossiped with.

But when the Church became a public institution open to all, rather than a private community enclosed unto itself, it became impractical to have public confessions.

So John had to believe that God spoke to him personally and directly and not through the God-established religion and he had to “rebel” from the Jewish leaders in order to be obedient to God. Interesting.

How did you get that out of the fact that John was a priest in the lineage of Levi? (ie: He was, himself, a recognized religious authority - he wasn’t just some random guy wandering around in the desert.)

By the way, Jesus, being a Rabbi, and licensed to preach in the Temple and in the Synagogues, was also a recognized religious authority. He wasn’t just some homeless guy wandering in there and taking over the pulpit by surprise - He actually had a schedule of times when He was scheduled to preach.

 

[BereanRuss]

I have to agree with you, NotWorthy. It does indeed sound as if Russ is picking and choosing what Scripture is essential.

The message of the Gospel is not negotiable for in it is the power of salvation.

For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

In addition, prior to being born of the Spirit by the power of the gospel, it is impossible to understand the Bible.

But their minds were blinded. For until this day the same veil remains unlifted in the reading of the Old Testament, because the veil is taken away in Christ. But even to this day, when Moses is read, a veil lies on their heart. Nevertheless when one turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away.

Therefore the Gospel must come first for it is by the Gospel that a person’s heart is opened to understand the word of God.

 

[jmcrae]

The message of the Gospel is not negotiable for in it is the power of salvation.

The Gospel is also not just one sentence pulled out of context. There are four Books of the Gospel.

For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

Amen! That’s from one of the Epistles of St. Paul.

In addition, prior to being born of the Spirit by the power of the gospel, it is impossible to understand the Bible.

There are many who have the Holy Spirit who, for whatever reason (extreme youth, lack of intelligence, lack of time, etc.), have trouble understanding the Bible, as well. Having the Holy Spirit is also no guarantee that one will understand the whole Bible right away. (But it is true that not having the Holy Spirit is a sure guarantee of not understanding it, for certain.)

But their minds were blinded. For until this day the same veil remains unlifted in the reading of the Old Testament, because the veil is taken away in Christ. But even to this day, when Moses is read, a veil lies on their heart. Nevertheless when one turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away.

This sounds like a quotation from something. Do you mind giving a citation?

Therefore the Gospel must come first for it is by the Gospel that a person’s heart is opened to understand the word of God.

Actually, it’s by the coming of the Holy Spirit that, God willing, the understanding is opened. But usually, not all at once. Usually, it is a process that takes a great deal of time.

 

[NotWorthy]

The message of the Gospel is not negotiable for in it is the power of salvation.

For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

In addition, prior to being born of the Spirit by the power of the gospel, it is impossible to understand the Bible.

But their minds were blinded. For until this day the same veil remains unlifted in the reading of the Old Testament, because the veil is taken away in Christ. But even to this day, when Moses is read, a veil lies on their heart. Nevertheless when one turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away.

Therefore the Gospel must come first for it is by the Gospel that a person’s heart is opened to understand the word of God.

But you see, you’ve talking out of both ends of your mouth. You insist on a certain interpretation of Scripture, then you say, well if we’re in disagreement, it must not be important, then you go back to preaching the Gospel again.

No one is question that power of the Gospel, we’re just questioning where you stand on certain issues.

 

[BereanRuss]

Then why bother with the rest of the Bible?

Surely, every dot and jot in the Bible is essential to our salvation, or else God would not have provided it to the Church for our use.

See post 845.

 

[BereanRuss]

This sounds like a quotation from something. Do you mind giving a citation?

2 Cor 3:14

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Any decent theology must reconcile all that the Bible says on any particular subject. On the subject of salvation the Bible says:

Your theology does not reconcile these verses nor do you even care that it does not.

The entirety of Your word is truth, And every one of Your righteous judgments endures forever.

Russ:

NO Decent theology rips one verse out of context and uses it to beat other believers over the head, and then claims that the other person’s theology “does not reconcile these verses” or “even care that it does not” when that person refuses to arrive at the conclusion you demand or, worse, when that person has the nerve to quote chapters in answer to you.

Could you please answer MY CHAPTERS demonstrating that the Catholic Priesthood is a continuance, not of the Aaronic Priesthood, but of the Priesthood of Christ, which is that of Melchizadek of Salem - That Catholic Priests do not offer NEW Sacrifices, but only offer the one Sacrifice that Christ made on the Cross to God the Father, washing himself and us in the Blood of Jesus, the Crucified Lamb of God, crucified as John says in the Revelation “From the foundation of the world”.

Could you please consider the fact that the EARLY CHURCH reconciled ALL the scriptures you could possibly site, but not in the manner and way you would desire? - That the Early Church (35 AD - 300 AD) prayed the Divine Liturgy on the Lord’s Day led by the Bishop (or the Priest in the Bishop’s absence) who led the Divine Liturgy facing the Altar (facing east - the direction our Lord will come from when he returns in glory) at or near sunrise on the Lord’s Day? - That all of those in the Early Church who had been “Baptized into our Lord’s Death and Resurrection” in “the Washing of Rebirth and Regeneration” (all baptized Catholics) would receive the Lord’s Body and Blood during the Divine Liturgy and that ALL would rather have rather died the most terrible of deaths than to have not received the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ (“The Medicine of Immortality”) or revealed the intimate facts of the Divine Liturgy (“The Holy Mysteries”) to unbelievers.

Russ, All of the above can be documented and demonstrated from the letters and books written by Post-Apostolic Fathers (those Bishops and priests who were discipled as Catholics & ordained as priests & consecrated as bishops by the Apostles themselves), by Early Church Fathers from the next 175 years and from documents provided by Roman Judicial Proceedings. I repeat, ALL of the necessary documents were written BEFORE the time of the Emperor Constantine.

Russ, this would demonstrate not only the clear teaching of the Catholic Church, but also that of the Eastern Orthodox Churches and of the Anglican Communions (all which accept the Teachings of the Fathers and of the first 7 Ecumenical Councils). Almost none of us here know Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic and Syraic with the fluency needed to read the Sacred Scriptures in their original languages, and NO translation of Scripture can possibly capture the nuance of what anyone wrote 2000-3300 years ago (let alone someone from a completely different culture than our own). and We can’t read the minds and intents of those who are speaking to us, let alone those whose words we see only in translation. Because of all of these, Jesus didn’t drop a book down from heaven, he planted a Church and he gave it the authority to teach His Word and to disciple all nations.
I hope to come to you soon, but I am writing these things to you so that, if I delay, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, a pillar and buttress of the truth.
I Timothy 3:14-15 ESV

So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.
2 Thess 2:15
We can continue arguing over this one Scripture which we’ve already beaten to pate, or you can decide if the patience and love shown to you by your fellow posters is a sign that you should consider why those Early Catholics were willing to die horrible deaths rather than to not eat and drink the flesh and blood of the Son of Man.

On another note, I’ve noticed a quickness to throw out the Old Covenant. Did you know that was a Heresy? and, Did you know it has effects even in the Modern Day?

Bridges for Peace - Heresies, Hurts and the Holocaust
bridgesforpeace.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1733

Catholic Encyclopedia - Marcionites
newadvent.org/cathen/09645c.htm

Wikipedia - Marcionism
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcionism

As you can see, Marcionism is a very dangerous heresy, and it’s effects (if the first article is correct) have been horrific.

Your Brother and Servant in Christ, Michael

 

[PRmerger]

The message of the Gospel is not negotiable for in it is the power of salvation.

Yet you and Ralphy disagree. Who is correct? Is one of you saved and one of you damned? Or are you disagreeing only on “nonessential” aspects as you alluded to earlier?

For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

Indeed.

Therefore the Gospel must come first for it is by the Gospel that a person’s heart is opened to understand the word of God.

Amen.

And what happens when 2 Christians disagree on their interpretation of this Gospel? Who is correct?

 

[hawkeye]

You believe that those who do not take communion in the CC do not have life?

Err no, the Catholic Church allows for ignorance, if you know the truth and willing persist in not following it, then you can end up in HELL

 

[guanophore]

My point is that in order for you to have believed Jesus when He came, you would have to make the decision for yourself based upon what you understood the scriptures to say. If you simply listen to the instruction of the religious leaders at the time of Christ, you would have rejected Him just as they did.

God holds us accountable to know and understand His word. We must apply what we understand to be the truth to our lives and continue to grow and trust that God will correct us if we do not understand Him clearly.

Both Protestants and Catholics are studying God’s word for one purpose – to know Him and the truth that sets us free.

You have a good point, and I agree, we are all responsible to study and make decisions based upon what has been revealed to us. I am not sure I agree that people who listened to the leaders of thetime would necessarily have rejected Him. If they were not at least saying the right things, Jesus would never have instructed the people to follow them.

Matt 23:2-3
2 "The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat; 3 so practice and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do; for they preach, but do not practice.

The “Seat of Moses” is part of Sacred Tradition which Jesus affirmed. There is a teaching authority that has been appointed by God, and He expects us to obey them, even if they are personally corrupt. When Jesus rose, He transferred this teaching authority to the Apostles.

We do all study God’s word for one purpose, to know Him, and the truth that sets us free. However, the promise was given to the Church to be led into all truth. we can only participate in that promise to the extent that we are joined to, and in unity with, the Church that Jesus founded. It is incumbent upon us to be subject to the authority He has appointed over us.

Heb 13:17

17 Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account. Let them do this joyfully, and not sadly, for that would be of no advantage to you.

 

[cazayoux]

There is no longer separation between God and man. God has made a way through Jesus Christ for any and all “who will call on His name” to freely enter His presence “behind the veil”

The veil hid the holy of holies, yes, … this is a space, not an item.

so what do we do with the fact that even with the veil torn, you would not be able to see the ‘Word of God’, for it was still inside of the ark.

The ark was the protector of the Word of God (in stone) which is truth.
What is the protector of the Word of God (made flesh) which is truth?

*Scripture *says it is the church.

michel

 

[cazayoux]

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

This is the truth that saves a man. Any truth beyond this cannot save anyone.

You cannot honestly think it is okay to ignore the gospel, can you?
The GOSPEL is what is important … which is why we have four accounts of it.

By your understanding of John 20:21-23 (the GOSPEL), if someone rejects the GOSPEL, their sins are retained … between you and Ralphy, one of you doesn’t understand that same GOSPEL and would not be accepting the correct gospel, and therefore not be declared forgiven.

Which of you is it?

michel