Evangelicals, can you answer these questions?

[Cranmer2010]

The fact that something is “spiritual” does not mean it isn’t “real” (only symbolic)

What did Jesus mean when he said “the flesh is of no avail”?

Wow Guano, I believe that this is the first time you made a response that I agree with for the most part!

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Enjoy it while you can. I have yet for it to happen

Wow Guano, I believe that this is the first time you made a response that I agree with for the most part!

 

[Third_Day]

=Auburn88;7028266]No, I was in the right verse. I just looked it up again.

Verse 16 the Greek is poimaine G4165

Other pastors laid hands on me. We don’t have bishops as Catholics understand them

.
And who laid hand on the pastors? As a Protestant it is impossible for you to trace the laying on of hands back to the apostles since you do not have apostolic Bishops.

And you are welcome to your opinion, but my Bible says differently.

Show me in scripture where Jesus established denominations

Yeah, some guy named Jesus something or other.

Give the name of your denomination and I will prove it was started by a man or a woman.

Because it matches the interpretation of the church and of the historic creeds, confessions, and catechisms of the church.

If you believe in faith alone, bible alone, once saved always saved, Eucharist is symbolic, baptism is only an outward sign, the rapture of all believers before the tribulation,etc. etc. it doesn’t match any historic creed or biblical or Church teachings

By the authority given to all believers by the Word of God.

Show me in scripture where all "believers’ are guided by the Holy Spirit into an infallible interpretation

Because I have not taught falsely.

If you preach all that I listed above, you are a false teacher

What does one have to do with the other?

The literal interpretation of scripture is always taken first.

He is giving the church, which Auburn88 is a part of, the keys and the authority.

Where in scripture does Jesus give every individual the keys and authority? Do you have the authority to bind in heaven?

Only that I posted the whole chapter and it wasn’t there.

Who proclaimed the dogma that gentiles could be saved. Peter or James?

 

[Auburn88]

Third Day:

And who laid hand on the pastors? As a Protestant it is impossible for you to trace the laying on of hands back to the apostles since you do not have apostolic Bishops.

That’s true. However, you have to remember that our doctrine is based on scripture, which doesn’t measure authority the same way you do.

Show me in scripture where Jesus established denominations

Show me where He established the designated hitter.

If you believe in faith alone, bible alone, once saved always saved, Eucharist is symbolic, baptism is only an outward sign, the rapture of all believers before the tribulation,etc. etc. it doesn’t match any historic creed or biblical or Church teachings

It doesn’t match Catholic teachings. It matches many of the creeds and each of these things is found in scripture.

Show me in scripture where all "believers’ are guided by the Holy Spirit into an infallible interpretation

Show me in scripture where all believers must drive big block Chevys.

If you preach all that I listed above, you are a false teacher

And your religious leaders have made their opinions abundantly clear. However, we don’t define what is a false teacher based on their opinions, but based on whether or not the teachings line up with scripture.

The literal interpretation of scripture is always taken first.

\

Obviously. But please answwer the question: What does one have to do with the other?

Where in scripture does Jesus give every individual the keys and authority?

Where in scripture does Jesus say that you’ve got to use a Carolina rig and not a Missouri rig?

Do you have the authority to bind in heaven?

The church has the authority to bind in Heaven.

 

[Third_Day]

=Auburn88;7036971]That’s true. However, you have to remember that our doctrine is based on scripture, which doesn’t measure authority the same way you do

I would disagree that your doctrine is based on scripture. According to scripture the apostles held the office of bishop. They laid hands on others making them bishops. Your denomination has never had Bishops thus you have no scriptural authority to preach.

Show me where He established the designated hitter

.Matt. 16:18

It doesn’t match Catholic teachings. It matches many of the creeds and each of these things is found in scripture

. No apostolic creed mentions once saved always saved, bible alone, rapture etc. The bible doesn’t mention them either.

And your religious leaders have made their opinions abundantly clear. However, we don’t define what is a false teacher based on their opinions, but based on whether or not the teachings line up with scripture.

Tha’t the problem. Protestant teaching don’t line up with scripture. Show me where the exact words" we are saved by faith alone" are found.

Obviously. But please answwer the question: What does one have to do with the other?

The literal and the spiritual interpretation complement each other.

Where in scripture does Jesus say that you’ve got to use a Carolina rig and not a Missouri rig?

In other words you have no answer.

The church has the authority to bind in Heaven.

Thank you. You gotten one right. Christ established only one Church to bind in heaven. Under your premise, thousands of denominations could all bind the same thing with different meanings.One binds that baptism is necessary another binds that it is not. It’s a shame you can’t see how un-biblical your premise is.

 

[Auburn88]

Third Day;:

I would disagree that your doctrine is based on scripture.

Just as I don’t believe that your doctrines are based on scripture. You are welcome to your opinion.

According to scripture the apostles held the office of bishop. They laid hands on others making them bishops. Your denomination has never had Bishops thus you have no scriptural authority to preach.

Except that that isn’t where the authority to preach comes from.

No apostolic creed mentions once saved always saved

But the Bible does teach eternal security.

bible alone

Straw man.

Tha’t the problem. Protestant teaching don’t line up with scripture. Show me where the exact words" we are saved by faith alone" are found.

You’re cherry picking. By your own logic, Catholcism must be false because the “exact words” “sinners must go to Purgatory to atone for their sins” isn’t found anywhere in scripture.

How about addressing the doctrine and not playing such silly games?

The literal and the spiritual interpretation complement each other.

Again, what are you talking about? What does any of this have to do with the analogy of scripture?

In other words you have no answer.

No, in other words, your question was non-sensical and so I answered with a non-sensical answer.

Your problem is that your whole argument is based on straw men and demanding that I defend things that I’ve never said or even suggested.

Christ established only one Church to bind in heaven. Under your premise, thousands of denominations could all bind the same thing with different meanings.One binds that baptism is necessary another binds that it is not. It’s a shame you can’t see how un-biblical your premise is.

Actually, it isn’t Unbiblical. You even quoted the passage of scripture it comes from.

 

[Brandon72]

guanophore;The fact that something is “spiritual” does not mean it isn’t “real” (only symbolic)

What did Jesus mean when he said “the flesh is of no avail”?

If He was not referring to His literal Body and Blood, why were the Jews scandalized?

Why did the Apostles take it literally?

How to you explain the writings of the disciples of the Aposltes, who believed in this literally?

How can you "profane’ that which is not really present?

Jesus is the “bread of life” in the sense that he nourishes people spiritually and satisfies the deep spiritual longings of their souls. In that sense, those who trust in him shall not hunger; that is, their spiritual longing to know God will be satisfied. The Apostles didn’t take it literally, the Jews who grumbled about him couldn’t understand this saying because they took it literally

[35] Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst. [36] But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe. [37] All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. [38] For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. [39] And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. [40] For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”
(John 6:35-40 ESV)

**Two things. One, He is pleased to be present with us, and waits only to be invited. He said “whereever two or more of you are gathered, there I am in your midst”. What would make you think He does not wish to be called?

Second, He was clear that it is His will that we do this “DO THIS” in memory of me. And, if you notice, He set His memorial meal in the context of the Passover, where a “real” lamb was slain and eaten.**

Of course He is pleased to be present with us!!! If you are regenerated and born again, you to will have Him IN YOU, ALWAYS THERE!!!

Romans 8:9
You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit (uh oh, there’s the spirit thing again!!), if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him.But if Christ is in you, although the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

And this is our understanding of the celebration of the Eucharist. We participate in His once for all sacrifice.

Great!

If they are alive and well, then why do you think they can’t support us in joining them?

That is what the Holy Spirit and Jesus Christ are for.

You are lacking some basic information about the history of your faith, Brandon. Constantine did not make Chrisianity the official religion of the Empire. In the Edict of Milan, he decrimminalized it, so that it was no longer punishable by death. At that point, the Church was able to burst out upon secular society in a way it could not before, since it was underground. Pagan temples were converted into churches, since those who used to worship in them did not use them any more.

Constantine built a church in honor of His mother, but it was the first building that was used that had not been used for another purpose previously.

Well he sure helped didn’t he. He also helped fuse Christianity into the pagan beliefs going on at that time in the Roman Empire. In fact, if you haven’t yet, you might want to look into pagan practices of that time. The similarity between the Cult of Isis, Mithraism, the henotheists pagan practice, are strikingly similar to Mary’s adoration, the eucharist or mass, and the RC saints.

After Jesus teaching on holiness, we consider the building consecrated because it contains the Altar that makes the gift Holy.

Yes, of course! But you notice that Jesus and the Apostles still went to the Temple and the synagogue.

He told her salvation is of the Jews, the ones who built that fancy temple.

Did you read the passage? He told her a time was coming (after his death), where He would be worshiped in the Spirit, not in a temple or in a mountain.

Worship in Spirit and Truth is the celebration of His Body and Blood. We do this on consecrated ground, to commemorate the solemnity of His sacrifice,a nd our reverence for Him. The vessels set aside for it are also not use for any other purpose.

Whatever, I’m not going to keep arguing this point. If you thing your church is the only place to worship, you are missing out!

 

[bluelake]

There are a few things that I have some issues with when I speak to some Evangelicals regarding their beliefs and what Scriptures says. If you noticed, I am not Roman Catholic, I am Anglican. Here are a few of those issues and please do respond to them.

1. Scripture clearly talks about the Body and Blood of Christ and how Christ professed the bread and wine at the last supper to be his Body and Blood. How do you explain it down to symbolism when Scripture is clear on several accounts that it is much more than that?
2. How can you not believe in the saints being alive and well in Heaven when the Transfiguration proved that Moses and Elijah were absolutely alive and well years and years after they physically died?
3. Why do you not worship in the ways that Early Christians worshipped? Why are altars, vestments, incense and the Eucharist all absent from your worship? I don’t understand how it can be beneficial to strip away all of the Early Church tradition from worship.

I appreciate any and all dialogue. Thanks./QUOTE

I get the impression that you view Evangelicals as believing the same doctrine.
Are you asking about all non-Catholics in general?
Baptist, Methodists, Pentecostals all have a different docrines from LCMS. and the C.C.
ELCA, the most liberal Lutheran Church, invites practicing homosexuals to receive Holy Communion.
They also ordain women .
The Lutheran Church , Missouri Synod, celebrates the Eurcharist and believes in the ‘Real Presense’ both the body and the blood.’ See 1Cor.11:23-29, Jn.6:53-59

God bless,
bluelake

 

[daniel82]

There are a few things that I have some issues with when I speak to some Evangelicals regarding their beliefs and what Scriptures says. If you noticed, I am not Roman Catholic, I am Anglican. Here are a few of those issues and please do respond to them.

1. Scripture clearly talks about the Body and Blood of Christ and how Christ professed the bread and wine at the last supper to be his Body and Blood. How do you explain it down to symbolism when Scripture is clear on several accounts that it is much more than that?
2. How can you not believe in the saints being alive and well in Heaven when the Transfiguration proved that Moses and Elijah were absolutely alive and well years and years after they physically died?
3. Why do you not worship in the ways that Early Christians worshipped? Why are altars, vestments, incense and the Eucharist all absent from your worship? I don’t understand how it can be beneficial to strip away all of the Early Church tradition from worship.

I appreciate any and all dialogue. Thanks.

as far as taking communion i or anything to do with being a christian would be found in the bible as far as i know i havent read anything about the items mentioned in #3 alters and incense were in the old testament not apart of Jesus’s church Jesus says in Matt 16:18 and i say unto thee.That thou art peter and upon this rock i will build my church and the gates of hell shall not prevail againts it so to me right there something new started the new covenant that Jesus was bringing to revelation

 

[PbloPicasso]

You have to remember that we don’t base our worship on what other people do or did, but on how the Bible tells us to worship.

We have no altar because altars are for sacrifices and Christ has already been sacrificed on our behalf. We have no vestments or inscence because the Bible doesn’t instruct us to do those things.

In the Bible, the focus of the church is always on the preaching and proclamation of the Word of God so that’s why we spend most of our time focusing on that.

this is where I was at many years ago trying to figure out several things that resulted in digging deeper in history. The first thing that is denied by most non-liturgical worshipers is the fact that the bread and wine become the body and blood of Christ. Ignatius of Antioch, Clement of Rome to name the earliest of which I am more familiar and Justin Martyr, Policarp and many other later on. There is not one doubt by reading Ignatius that the bishop is one and in charge and that the body and blood of Christ is required belief without being considered a heretic. And sine the bible clearly explains it at the body and blood of Christ everything else in my believe began to come into question compared to what the bible said.

Then I realized that the bible never says it’s not final word. But it does clearly say to follow the teachings and traditions 2 Thes. 2:16. I’m avoiding flooding this thread with scripture because few actuall seem to care after it’s mentioned. Then, the canon of scripture after discovering all of the other writings out there. Paul wasn’t with the original 12, so why should be be given a slot. Revelation is just crazy. Mark and Luke also weren’t part of the original 12 and that excluses Acts then. Etc. Etc. The point is I started digging deep for answers and ultimately after everything seeming to point to Catholicism there was no way angels and saints would or could hear our prayers… but wait…what about the cloud of witnesses? That added the questions. Then guardian angels popped out of New Testament. My goodness, it was a flood and in spite of all my prejudisms towards Catholicism i also found out the lung of the East also had similar teachings and practices. Celibacy, and the one main thing that blew me away was the fact that even scripture clearly defines God as transcending time and space. Sounded like a lesson on physics. in light of this concept the eternal sacrifice of the lamb, Jesus the Christ, made more sense than ever before. It’s not a new sacrifice but a re-enactment (that by God’s grace through the priest, another topic, becomes the present), similar to the passover meal that foreshadowed the new, mass/divine liturgy. I’d have to tear all of this apart bit by bit on an endless thread to get across what I learned. It’s the only thing that ever made real since and corroborated what the New Testament teaches without making excuses and dismissing it with “necessary inference” and terms that really convoluted the actual word of God written in scripture.

I’'m not sure how much I can post before it won’t take so I cut it down. Sorry if its not clear enough. But I can pull up a desk slap my bible on it and start explaining the entire thing too. But outside of Catholic teaching it really just falls short of the Glory of God because each man that interprets it becomes an isolated fool acting like a pope. No offense intended. I was solo scripture for 45 years of my life and from a very large protestant family.

 

[Izdaari]

1. Scripture clearly talks about the Body and Blood of Christ and how Christ professed the bread and wine at the last supper to be his Body and Blood. How do you explain it down to symbolism when Scripture is clear on several accounts that it is much more than that?
2. How can you not believe in the saints being alive and well in Heaven when the Transfiguration proved that Moses and Elijah were absolutely alive and well years and years after they physically died?
3. Why do you not worship in the ways that Early Christians worshipped? Why are altars, vestments, incense and the Eucharist all absent from your worship? I don’t understand how it can be beneficial to strip away all of the Early Church tradition from worship.

1. I do believe in the Real Presence, though not quite in the same way that Catholics do. I’m closer to Lutheran on that.
2. I don’t have a problem with that. But I don’t recall where in the Bible we’re told to pray to saints in Heaven.
3. Simply that it isn’t the tradition of my denomination. But I do go to liturgical services sometimes, usually either Lutheran or Anglican, and I enjoy them.

That said, I’m probably not your target audience: technically, I’m evangelical, being a member of an Assemblies of God church, but my faith has been much influenced by such great Anglicans as C.S. Lewis and N.T. Wright, and by reading Luther and Calvin directly rather than learning about them from their followers. (My impression is that what both great Reformers meant is quite a bit different from what their followers have developed.)