Do Catholics believe John 6:53?

[mikeledes]

While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word… Then Peter answered, “Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?" [Acts 10…]

And this was an extraordinary event that visibly proved God’s desire to extend the message of the Gospel to the Gentiles. The Catholic Church teaches that God is not bound to exclusively work through the Sacrament of Baptism. Remember, Jews had a difficult time accepting Gentiles joining the Christian community and this event served to prove to the Jews that the gospel of salvation was for the Gentiles as well.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[fbl9]

So then you are saying that the guidance of the Holy Spirit is more important then the guidance of the leaders of the Jews? If you were a Jew at the time of Paul, would you follow the guidance of the Holy Spirit and leave the religion that God established and follow Paul’s teachings instead?

Are you saying that the leading of the Holy Spirit in an INDIVIDUAL’S life is more important than following the leaders in the religion that God had established?

Not sure what line you are trying to lead up to but it isn’t going to play out that way.
The religion St.paul was teaching is the promise of the religion reveled to the Jews.Why do you think three thousand Jews converted in one day.Have you forgotten that the NT is the fulfilment of the OT?
Never said anything about importance only you did.

 

[guanophore]

We do see communion celebrated in the NT but what we do not see is mediator or preist between God and man except Jesus. There is no earthly priesthood in the Bible.

You are right, the priest or mediator is not “between” as an obstacle as you seem to represent. A mediator facilitates and enables contact, not stand it the way.

I also agree that the priesthood of the NT is not “earthly”. It is spiritual. It emanates from the priesthood of Christ, which is spiritual. I am not sure what “earthly” means the way you use it, but clearly communion is a spiritual event. The only parts that come from the "earth’ are the fruit of the vine, and the wheat for the bread.

Communion is not medicine.

It is for those who embrace the Real Presence. Sin is an ailment, and grace is the cure. Jesus, whom we receive in communion, is the great physician, who is the ultimate medicine. He gives us His flesh for the life of the world. The perfect and most complete medicine for the sickness of sin.

Nothing you eat can defile you and nothing you eat can make you holy - for everything you eat passes out the other end.  It nourishes the body but it cannot nourish the soul.  Man shall not live by bread alone but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.

This is true about earthly food, for sure. however, the bread and the wine become the Body and Blood of our Lord, and because they are then heavenly food, they are able to impart life and defilement in a way that earthly food cannot.

1 Cor 10:16-17
16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? 17 Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread…
27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself. 30 That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died. 1 Cor 11:27-31

Scripture is clear that we can defile ourselves when we take the body and blood in an unworthly manner. This condition, though spiritual, does have physical consequences. How can you profane something that is not present?

It is what comes out of the mouth that defiles you and it is what comes out of the mouth that saves you. If you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus you will be saved.

so what do YOU think He meant when He said “unless you eat…you will not have life”?

 

[guanophore]

To say that baptism in water is equivalent to baptism of fire is to make God subservient to you. T

I suppose this would be true, if baptism were of human origin, but it is not. It is the means by which Jesus has commanded that we be born again of the spirit. Since He is the baptizer, we are subservient to Him in baptism. We enter the water “calling upon His name”.

Acts 22:15-16
16 And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name.’

Do we imagine that we “wash away sins” ourselves? Surely not. As we have agreed, only the blood of Jesus can cleanse us from sins. By taking ourselves into the baptismal waters, calling upon His name, we join with Him in His death. God’s Spirit was joined to the waters of baptism when He entered them. Since that time, no separation between baptismal waters and the impartation of the Spirit has been practiced until men departed from the Apostolic Teaching.

Baptism is one of the ways that we “boldly approach the throne of grace”.

to say that every person who is baptized in water is also baptized with the Holy Spirit is to play the role of God.

And yet, you believe that any Christian can play this role, when the gospel is preached. You have testified that, if one accepts the Gospel, any Christian can declare that persons “sins are forgiven”, yet if they do not accept the gospel, Christians are authorized to declare “your sins are retained”. How is that any less 'playing God"?

No ritual – no formula can move the hand of God in obedience to your will.

Certainly not. However, when we do that which He has commanded of us, he is faithful and just, and keeps His word to us.

Remember the man upon whose eyes Jesus rubbed the mud? Jesus commanded the man to go wash in a certain pool. He was obedient, and was healed. Was this the man keeping a “ritual” or “formula”? He was obedient and did what Christ directed. Did his actions “move the hand of God to obey his will”? Certainly the man desired to see, or he would not have cooperated with the directions. It was his will to be healed of blindness. Healing did not come from himself, though, but from the grace of God. If the man had disobeyed, not washed in the pool, would he have received his sight?

 

[fbl9]

Not sure what line you are trying to lead up to but it isn’t going to play out that way.
The religion St.paul was teaching is the promise of the religion reveled to the Jews.Why do you think three thousand Jews converted in one day.Have you forgotten that the NT is the fulfilment of the OT?
Never said anything about importance only you did.

What about the other six items from your post,that i responded to…
I know what you were trying to lead up to BreanRuss,in this line of questioning, and like i said it isn’t going to play out in your favor.

 

[joe370]

BereanRuss Hey Joe, now that I think about it, do you ever answer my questions? Which is greater, the baptims of water or the Baptism of fire? If a person is baptized in water but not in file will not his baptism become un-baptism?

I always answer your questions…Baptism by water leads to baptism by fire!!! If a person is baptized by water in this life, he will be baptized by fire in the next life!!!

Therefore, if an uncircumcised man keeps the righteous requirements of the law, will not his uncircumcision be counted as circumcision? And will not the physically uncircumcised, if he fulfills the law, judge you who, even with your written code and circumcision, are a transgressor of the law? For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh; but [he is] a Jew who [is one] inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not from men but from God. [Rom 2:26…]

Agreed…

I asked you a very simple question and you did not answer it; you said:

I think about 99% of protestants believe these truths.

Again, salvation is not dependant upon understanding perfectly every scripture. Salvation comes by believing the Gospel.

Only after a person has received the Gospel can they begin to understand the truth in the Bible. God teaches each believer as HE see fit - for the word of God is living and powerful.

Which Lutheran church regarding John 6, is now understanding the truth? Does God teach contradictory truths, or just one truth regarding John 6?

The church is not the “Pillar and Foundation of truth” because she has a correct and perfect catechism.

A catechism is nothing more than a book giving a brief summary of the basic principles of Christianity, as per the C.C., in question-and-answer form; if the C.C.'s catechism is wrong then she is not the pillar and foundation of truth, as per the Spirit of truth, the Holy Spirit, and I should leave this church immediately!

The church is the Pillar and Foundation of truth because she is steward of the perfect word of God and is empowered by the Spirit of God to proclaim this truth to the world.

How can all of the P.C.'s in the world today, be the pillar and foundation of truth if these stewards of the one perfect word of God, empowered by the Spirit of God to proclaim this truth to the world, is utterly divided and fractured when it comes to said truth? I gave you a straight forward answer; will you give me a straight forward answer???

I think about 99% of protestants believe these truths.

99% of protestantism is utterly divided when it comes to the definition of truth vis-a-vis any one doctrine; if protestantism was not divided when it comes to truth, why the need for so many isolated churches?

Again, salvation is not dependant upon understanding perfectly every scripture. Salvation comes by believing the Gospel. Only after a person has received the Gospel can they begin to understand the truth in the Bible. God teaches each believer as HE see fit - for the word of God is living and powerful.

The church is not the “Pillar and Foundation of truth” because she has a correct and perfect catechism. The church is the Pillar and Foundation of truth because she is steward of the perfect word of God and is empowered by the Spirit of God to proclaim this truth to the world.

So, believe the Gospel, even though I don’t understand everything? OK…Does God teach the literal interpretation of John 6 to one Lutheran church and the symbolical interpretation to another Lutheran church; is this what you mean when you say: God teaches each believer as HE see fit? Satan is the author of confusion, as per the one Bible; he wants to divide Jesus’ established church; wouldn’t you agree??? Christ is all about unity and oneness; he wants all of His divided churches to be one and united; wouldn’t you agree?

I ask again, because you did not answer the question, as I did yours, and, quite frankly:

How can hundreds AND HUNDREDS of churches, (both teacher and pupil of said churches) --isolated from one another, all believing that Scripture via private interpretation is the only infallible rule for deciding issues of faith and practices that involve doctrines, all the while teaching something different when it comes to any one particular doctrine found in the Holy Bible, be the Pillar and Foundation of truth? Can there be more than one truth regarding any one doctrine?

The truth is this. All men are sinners. The wages of sin is death. The gift of God is eternal life. If you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus, you will be saved.

OK…I agree; all men are sinners; the wage of sin is death; the gift of God is eternal life; I confess with my mouth that the Lord Jesus… will you please answer my question…no one else will… If I overlooked one of your questions, please let me know!!!

 

[mbgumby28]

I don’t know how much clearer Jesus can make himself in saying that we need to eat his Body and drink his Blood.kpeople::bible1:

 

[SimonArizona]

My question is, do Catholics truly believe the words of Jesus in John 6:53?

Remember the sacrificial lamb of the old test. must be eaten for forgiveness of sins to apply to you personally.

“Take this, all of you and eat.”
“Unless you eat my body… you have no life in you.”-The Lamb of God

 

[jmcrae]

Are you saying that until you have a perfect understanding of Jesus, you cannot be saved?

Not at all - but there is a strong difference between an infant who does not know, and someone who knows, but rejects what he knows.

An infant does not know his mother, and accidentally does things that she does not like, without realizing that she doesn’t like it.

When he grows up to be a teenager, he knows his mother and what she likes - and if he disobeys her, and does things that she does not like, then he sins against both her and God.

Likewise, a Christian might not have ever heard that Jesus was born without sin from a mother who had no stain of sin - that His body, which is made of her flesh, contains no stain of physical sin. These believe in Jesus without knowing anything, one way or the other about His origin.

But once they have heard of it, if they reject it and say that Jesus came to us in a body made of sinful flesh, they thus deny the doctrine that Jesus is without sin - they now have a Jesus who is nothing like the Jesus of the Christian faith that was handed down by the Apostles.

Inadvertent ignorance doesn’t comment on the subject one way or the other - it is not even aware of the controversy, so is unable to choose the false Jesus at all.

 

[cazayoux]

Again, salvation is not dependant upon understanding perfectly every scripture. Salvation comes by believing the Gospel.

Salvation comes by believing the Gospel.
But it is the GOSPEL itself that either you are Ralphy misunderstands!
If both of you say you accept the Gospel, you are accepting two different Gospels.
One or both of you are accepting a wrong Gospel.
Are you both still saved.

If, by your understanding, John 20:21-23 gives the power to the apostles to declare sins forgiven for a person that accepts the gospel, who between you and Ralphy are forgiven for accepting the right gospel and for which of you is your sin retained because you accepted a wrong gospel?

You cannot hold to YOUR interpretation of John 20:21-23 and at the same time say it is okay if somebody else doesn’t understand that same GOSPEL.

michel

 

[BereanRuss]

1. If water were not required, why would Peter have called for water?

I don’t know any Christian who is against baptism, do you? Peter himself tells us that baptism does not remove sin. Concerning baptism he says …not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God.

So in other words, according to Peter, salvation precedes salvation for the one being baptized no longer has the “filth of the flesh” but has a “good conscience toward God”. But you will disagree because of your tradition. When the scripture and tradition contradict, tradition always has more authority then the words of the Apostles themselves.

1. These were the first Gentiles admitted to the Church. The Holy Spirit fell on them first, in order to show Peter that it is permissible for Gentiles to become members of the Church. This miracle only occurred once, in order that Peter would make a ruling in favour of the Gentiles being allowed to join the Church. (But if the Holy Spirit can do this all by Himself, then why does He need Peter to make a ruling for the Church? )

Peter was already instructed by the Lord Himself that the Gentiles should receive the Gospel and be saved. Jesus said, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature.”

 

[ralphy]

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?

Indeed.

Amen.

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

I don’t recall where Russ and I disagreed, perhaps you can remind me please. Ralph

 

[BereanRuss]

The problem is that Protestants disagree on the nature and role of baptism. Lutherans, following Martin Luther, uphold the historic understanding of baptism (baptismal regneration - which was unanimously taught by the Early Church Fathers, from Ireneaus to Augustine…

Mute point. Those who hold the traditional teaching are baptized and those who do not hold it are also baptized. If some were being baptized and some were not, you might have a point but all are baptized so – mute point.

And the fundamental differences between Arminians amnd Calvinists remain.

There is no difference between Calvinists and Armenians concerning salvation. Both teach that salvation is by grace apart from works – through faith.

After salvation what does it matter if we disagree on certain points if all remain children of God? In any healthy household there are differences among the children but all remain children. God will discipline His children as He see fit.

 

[joe370]

Hey Ralph…

How can hundreds AND HUNDREDS of churches, (both teacher and pupil of said churches) --isolated from one another, all believing that Scripture via private interpretation is the only infallible rule for deciding issues of faith and practices that involve doctrines, all the while teaching something different when it comes to any one particular doctrine found in the Holy Bible, be the Pillar and Foundation of truth? Can there be more than one truth regarding any one doctrine?

 

[NotWorthy]

Peter was already instructed by the Lord Himself that the Gentiles should receive the Gospel and be saved. Jesus said, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature.”

But the preceding of the Holy Spirit helped Peter know that these Gentiles didn’t have to become good Jews (i.e. circumcision) prior to become good Catholics.

Notice that elsewhere in Acts, when the Apostles discover that a group of Christians had only been baptized by John and didn’t know Who the Holy Spirit was, what was the first thing they did? They went down and baptized them in Christ. And then they received the Holy Spirit.

The scene with Cornelius was a unique scene. This second scene follows the normative means of Baptism. Repent, Be baptized for the forgiveness of sins, receive the Holy Spirit.

 

[BereanRuss]

Not sure what line you are trying to lead up to but it isn’t going to play out that way. The religion St.paul was teaching is the promise of the religion reveled to the Jews. Why do you think three thousand Jews converted in one day. Have you forgotten that the NT is the fulfillment of the OT?

The Jewish leaders of the synagogue taught that Jesus was not the fulfillment of the OT. If you were a Jew at the time of Christ, you would have to know the OT for yourself (personal interpretation of the scriptures) and believe that your interpretation was correct and that the priests and scribes interpretation was wrong. You would then have to act on your personal understanding of the Bible and step out in faith against the popular teaching and subject yourself to persecution in order to obey the Gospel.

How did John the Baptist know that he was being led of God when He was not approved by the Jewish leaders?

All believers must be led of the word of God and the Holy Spirit first and foremost over the teaching of any man.

For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. [Rom 8:14]

 

[SimonArizona]

You are demonstrating the inefficiency of Scripture alone by your arguing personal opinions about scripture. Jesus left us with an authoritive interpreter. Jesus said to his disciples “I give you authority.” Your confusion illustrates your need for the Rock.

 

[ralphy]

Hey Ralph…

How can hundreds AND HUNDREDS of churches, (both teacher and pupil of said churches) --isolated from one another, all believing that Scripture via private interpretation is the only infallible rule for deciding issues of faith and practices that involve doctrines, all the while teaching something different when it comes to any one particular doctrine found in the Holy Bible, be the Pillar and Foundation of truth? Can there be more than one truth regarding any one doctrine?

I cannot account for all these churches. I do know however, that it is only the word of God that is infallible, and salvation by the Word of God is the only way to be saved, and not by any other method or teaching of any church regardless of it’s origin or denomination. Ralph

 

[cazayoux]

I cannot account for all these churches. I do know however, that it is only the word of God that is infallible,

Is your INTERPRETATION of the Word of God infallible?

michel

 

[NotWorthy]

I cannot account for all these churches. I do know however, that it is only the word of God that is infallible, and salvation by the Word of God is the only way to be saved, and not by any other method or teaching of any church regardless of it’s origin or denomination. Ralph

Except maybe when God promises to guide that Church into all Truth, perhaps?