Ex-Protestants

[TwinMommy]

Basically that most things in the Catholic church are from the devil. That Catholics are idolaters. That traditions of the Catholic church are all unbiblical. Catholics worship Mary…always the main one.

I am being told this even more now that I am converting. Funny how the more this stuff is thrown at me, the more I go to the Lord, the more I pray my Rosary and the closer I am coming to Jesus. It is increases my faith.

 

[Bonnie]

It usually doesn’t come from the pulpit–at least not overtly. I’ve heard veiled side-swipes from the pulpit, but not direct attacks. (

I never heard anti-Catholic stuff from anybody, neither from the pulpit nor the pews. Of course, this was well over 40 years ago - before the Internet & when people were still civil.

 

[inChristAlone33]

In regards to apparitions of Mary, I would suggest praying to God for spiritual discernment and wisdom. Human beings are easily deceived and I would not believe everything your read or hear. If you are not sure, go to God and ask of Him to give you understanding.

 

[Della]

In regards to apparitions of Mary, I would suggest praying to God for spiritual discernment and wisdom. Human beings are easily deceived and I would not believe everything your read or hear. If you are not sure, go to God and ask of Him to give you understanding.

This is why Jesus founded his Church, so we could know what is of him and what isn’t. All reported apparitions are investigated by the local bishop who determines if they are “not spiritual”, merely a human endeavor, or “worthy of belief”. The well known apparitions, such as Lourdes and Fatima have been investigated and been determined “wothy of belief”. This does not mean, though that anyone, Catholics or otherwise, must believe in any messages or make any apparition a part of their devotional life. What Catholics must believe is that the Church has the authority from God to make such determinations.

 

[inChristAlone33]

This is why Jesus founded his Church, so we could know what is of him and what isn’t. All reported apparitions are investigated by the local bishop who determines if they are “not spiritual”, merely a human endeavor, or “worthy of belief”. The well known apparitions, such as Lourdes and Fatima have been investigated and been determined “wothy of belief”. This does not mean, though that anyone, Catholics or otherwise, must believe in any messages or make any apparition a part of their devotional life. What Catholics must believe is that the Church has the authority from God to make such determinations.

To me, this undermines the personal relationship I have with Jesus Christ. I pray, earnestly, to Him when in need. God, Himself, must teach us good judgment, wisdom and discernment and we need to go to Him and seek what is lacking within us.

 

[pablope]

To me, this undermines the personal

relationship I have with Jesus Christ.

How? Can you give a concrete example?

I pray, earnestly, to Him when in need. God, Himself, must teach us good judgment, wisdom and discernment and we need to go to Him and seek what is lacking within us.

 

[inChristAlone33]

How? Can you give a concrete example?

During His earthly ministry, Jesus referred to Himself in many different ways, including “bread” (John 6:35), “light” (John 8:12), “door” (John 10:7) and “vine” (John 15:5), not because he was a plant or made of flour but to teach the people of the antiquity with references to which they could relate. If Jesus really wanted the crowd to eat his flesh as you state, He would have begun to slice off his flesh, or at least ordered the disciples to recover and eat his dead flesh after his crucifixion. Instead, Jesus rose from the dead and ascended into heaven in his uneaten body. The “flesh” Jesus is referring to is His sacrifice for our sins on the cross that we must partake to be saved. Why did Jesus speak so forcefully in the passage you referred and why didn’t He chase after the departing “disciples”? The immediately preceding passage (John 6:1-47) states that after witnessing Jesus feed 5000, the crowd had followed Him to “take Him by force and make Him king” (they wanted Him to lead a rebellion against the Romans). Jesus wanted none of it and wanted them to disperse, hence the forceful words.

Jesus’ declaration on the cross, “It is finished!” (John 19:30) precludes “continuous representation” of the Catholic Eucharist, which is a fallacy used to enforce Vatican’s claimed monopoly on access to Christ and salvation.godvoter.org/jesus-flesh.html

 

[thenobes]

**Well, I don’t believe the pope or bishop is infallible, so i go straight to the Father in Heaven and I trust His Spirit will lead me into truth and mercifully give me spiritual discernment.
**

During His earthly ministry, Jesus referred to Himself in many different ways, including “bread” (John 6:35), “light” (John 8:12), “door” (John 10:7) and “vine” (John 15:5), not because he was a plant or made of flour but to teach the people of the antiquity with references to which they could relate. If Jesus really wanted the crowd to eat his flesh as you state, He would have begun to slice off his flesh, or at least ordered the disciples to recover and eat his dead flesh after his crucifixion. Instead, Jesus rose from the dead and ascended into heaven in his uneaten body. The “flesh” Jesus is referring to is His sacrifice for our sins on the cross that we must partake to be saved. Why did Jesus speak so forcefully in the passage you referred and why didn’t He chase after the departing “disciples”? The immediately preceding passage (John 6:1-47) states that after witnessing Jesus feed 5000, the crowd had followed Him to “take Him by force and make Him king” (they wanted Him to lead a rebellion against the Romans). Jesus wanted none of it and wanted them to disperse, hence the forceful words.

Jesus’ declaration on the cross, “It is finished!” (John 19:30) precludes “continuous representation” of the Catholic Eucharist, which is a fallacy used to enforce Vatican’s claimed monopoly on access to Christ and salvation.godvoter.org/jesus-flesh.html

If you only go to the Father, why are you bothering with the website you just quoted from?

Just because that fellow points out the verse where Jesus said “it is finished!” doesn’t mean that our sharing in the commemoration of His Sacrifice is finished, nor that that same sacrifice can’t be re- presented to us right now.

Paul himself says that he “fills up in his own flesh what is lacking in the sufferings of Christ for His Body the Church.” If Paul says something may be lacking, why do you agree with someone who says the opposite? That doesn’t sound like spiritual discernment to me.

peace
steve

 

[Miriam1947]

pablope;10522595:

Well, I don’t believe the pope or bishop is infallible, so i go straight to the Father in Heaven and I trust His Spirit will lead me into truth and mercifully give me spiritual discernment.
pablope;10522595:

During His earthly ministry, Jesus referred to Himself in many different ways, including “bread” (John 6:35), “light” (John 8:12), “door” (John 10:7) and “vine” (John 15:5), not because he was a plant or made of flour but to teach the people of the antiquity with references to which they could relate. If Jesus really wanted the crowd to eat his flesh as you state, He would have begun to slice off his flesh, or at least ordered the disciples to recover and eat his dead flesh after his crucifixion. Instead, Jesus rose from the dead and ascended into heaven in his uneaten body. The “flesh” Jesus is referring to is His sacrifice for our sins on the cross that we must partake to be saved. Why did Jesus speak so forcefully in the passage you referred and why didn’t He chase after the departing “disciples”? The immediately preceding passage (John 6:1-47) states that after witnessing Jesus feed 5000, the crowd had followed Him to “take Him by force and make Him king” (they wanted Him to lead a rebellion against the Romans). Jesus wanted none of it and wanted them to disperse, hence the forceful words.

Jesus’ declaration on the cross, “It is finished!” (John 19:30) precludes “continuous representation” of the Catholic Eucharist, which is a fallacy used to enforce Vatican’s claimed monopoly on access to Christ and salvation.

godvoter.org/jesus-flesh.html

Jesus used a lot of material objects to describe Himself–He said, “I am the Light.” “I am the Door.” “I am the Shepherd.”

But He never said, “That light is Me.” “That door is Me.” “That shepherd is Me.”

However, He did say, “That Bread is Me. That Wine is Me.”

You either believe Christ or you think he is a liar.

Your choice.

And yes those are your choices.

gnpcb.org/esv/search/?q=John+6

35Jesus 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.”

41 So the Jews grumbled about him, because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” 42 They said, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?” 43 Jesus answered them, “Do not grumble among yourselves. 44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. 45 It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me— 46 not that anyone has seen the Father except he who is from God; he has seen the Father. 47 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life. 48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. 50 This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.”

52 The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” 53 So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 55 For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. 56 Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. 57 As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever feeds on me, he also will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like the bread [3] the fathers ate and died. Whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.” 59 Jesus [4] said these things in the synagogue, as he taught at Capernaum.

The Words of Eternal Life
60 When many of his disciples heard it, they said, “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?” 61 But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples were grumbling about this, said to them, “Do you take offense at this? 62 Then what if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before? 63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. 64 But there are some of you who do not believe.” (For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.) 65 And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.”

contd

 

[Miriam1947]

contd

66 After this many of his disciples turned back and no longer walked with him. 67 So Jesus said to the Twelve, “Do you want to go away as well?” 68 Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life, 69 and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God.” 70 Jesus answered them, “Did I not choose you, the Twelve? And yet one of you is a devil.” 71 He spoke of Judas the son of Simon Iscariot, for he, one of the Twelve, was going to betray him.

So, how much do you believe of what Jesus said? 36 verses just here to tell you to eat His flesh and drink His blood or you have no life in you.

Tell me, is he nuts, is he a liar? Or is He God?, and He is telling you the Truth.

 

[adrift]

Well, I don’t believe the pope or bishop is infallible, so i go straight to the Father in Heaven and I trust His Spirit will lead me into truth and mercifully give me spiritual discernment.

During His earthly ministry, Jesus referred to Himself in many different ways, including “bread” (John 6:35), “light” (John 8:12), “door” (John 10:7) and “vine” (John 15:5), not because he was a plant or made of flour but to teach the people of the antiquity with references to which they could relate. If Jesus really wanted the crowd to eat his flesh as you state, He would have begun to slice off his flesh, or at least ordered the disciples to recover and eat his dead flesh after his crucifixion. Instead, Jesus rose from the dead and ascended into heaven in his uneaten body. The “flesh” Jesus is referring to is His sacrifice for our sins on the cross that we must partake to be saved. Why did Jesus speak so forcefully in the passage you referred and why didn’t He chase after the departing “disciples”? The immediately preceding passage (John 6:1-47) states that after witnessing Jesus feed 5000, the crowd had followed Him to “take Him by force and make Him king” (they wanted Him to lead a rebellion against the Romans). Jesus wanted none of it and wanted them to disperse, hence the forceful words.

Jesus’ declaration on the cross, “It is finished!” (John 19:30) precludes “continuous representation” of the Catholic Eucharist, which is a fallacy used to enforce Vatican’s claimed monopoly on access to Christ and salvation.godvoter.org/jesus-flesh.html

You have some misunderstanding about the Eucharist. We do not receive the dead body of Jesus but His living transfigured Body. He did order (give instruction) His Apostles to do this in rememberance of Me. He took the bread and said THIS IS my Body This is My Blood. The crowd was asking how could He give them His Body and Blood. He did not correct their understanding because they understood correctly. He always explained to His Apostles yet there was no correction because they understood it correctly. He couldn’t have meant that He didn’t want Communion to continue since He said do this in memory of me. The fallacy is yours.

 

[inChristAlone33]

You have some misunderstanding about the Eucharist. We do not receive the dead body of Jesus but His living transfigured Body. He did order (give instruction) His Apostles to do this in rememberance of Me. He took the bread and said THIS IS my Body This is My Blood. The crowd was asking how could He give them His Body and Blood. He did not correct their understanding because they understood correctly. He always explained to His Apostles yet there was no correction because they understood it correctly. He couldn’t have meant that He didn’t want Communion to continue since He said do this in memory of me. The fallacy is yours.

The article never stated the Eucharist was about receiving Jesus’ dead body but rather the context around Jesus’ command was not literal.

"Roman Catholicism teaches that liturgy (taken from the Greek for “work”) is the conduit through which God provides blessing and salvation. Essentially, in addition to placing the priest between the congregants and God, they also place the bread and wine between themselves and God. They believe they are blessed because of their obedience in taking communion, and that blessing literally streams from God through the bread and wine and into their souls.

“This is not what Jesus taught. He said, “I am the bread of life” and “It is the Spirit who gives life, the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life” (John 6:48, 63). Jesus is the bread of life, but He is also the Word (John 1:1). The bread that nourishes is the Word of God (Matthew 4:4), not a wafer somehow transformed into the flesh of Jesus. The idea that we have to go through a human ceremony to receive that spiritual nourishment is the type of belief Jesus came to abolish. His death tore the veil in the temple, giving us the ability to have a direct relationship with God (Hebrews 4:16). That veil was not replaced by the act of blessing and eating bread and wine.”

Read more: gotquestions.org/real-presence.html#ixzz2OKOxNAda

 

[october_baby]

The article never stated the Eucharist was about receiving Jesus’ dead body but rather the context around Jesus’ command was not literal.

"Roman Catholicism teaches that liturgy (taken from the Greek for “work”) is the conduit through which God provides blessing and salvation. Essentially, in addition to placing the priest between the congregants and God, they also place the bread and wine between themselves and God. They believe they are blessed because of their obedience in taking communion, and that blessing literally streams from God through the bread and wine and into their souls.

“This is not what Jesus taught. He said, “I am the bread of life” and “It is the Spirit who gives life, the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life” (John 6:48, 63). Jesus is the bread of life, but He is also the Word (John 1:1). The bread that nourishes is the Word of God (Matthew 4:4), not a wafer somehow transformed into the flesh of Jesus. The idea that we have to go through a human ceremony to receive that spiritual nourishment is the type of belief Jesus came to abolish. His death tore the veil in the temple, giving us the ability to have a direct relationship with God (Hebrews 4:16). That veil was not replaced by the act of blessing and eating bread and wine.”

Read more: gotquestions.org/real-presence.html#ixzz2OKOxNAda

One of the reasons I’m no longer protestant is because low church protestants claim
to take the bible literally, but don’t take John 6 literally and high church protestants twist
scriptures to suit their political ends. (gay marriage, homosexual clergy.)

 

[thenobes]

gotquestions.org

I’m sorry, but these people have very little idea of what they are talking about. If you really want to understand the Catholic Faith, read the Catechism of the Catholic Church

scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

"Roman Catholicism teaches that liturgy (taken from the Greek for “work”)

actually “work of the people – laitos ergon”

is the conduit through which God provides blessing and salvation.

actually, the Sacraments, not liturgy, are reliable conduits of God’s saving grace.

Essentially, in addition to placing the priest between the congregants and God, they also place the bread and wine between themselves and God.

No, the bread becomes the substance of Jesus Himself and is no longer bread (or wine) .

They believe they are blessed because of their obedience in taking communion, and that blessing literally streams from God through the bread and wine and into their souls.

That we are blessed in obedience is true, but also because it is the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of God that we are receiving, not ordinary bread.

"This is not what Jesus taught. He said, “I am the bread of life” and “It is the Spirit who gives life, the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life” (John 6:48, 63).

If Jesus’s flesh profits nothing, why did he die on the cross? No, by the flesh profiting nothing is meant instead, that the earthly way of understanding, without the guidance of the Holy Spirit, will lead us into error and spiritual death. But from the beginning, the Church has been taught by the Holy Spirit, that that which was bread and wine, is, after consecration, no longer so, but is now the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of our Lord.

Jesus is the bread of life, but He is also the Word (John 1:1). The bread that nourishes is the Word of God (Matthew 4:4), not a wafer somehow transformed into the flesh of Jesus.

It is both Word and Flesh, plus the memory of His Sacrifice, and the acknowledgment of His existence in His mystical Body, the Church.

The idea that we have to go through a human ceremony to receive that spiritual nourishment is the type of belief Jesus came to abolish.

No, it is a Divine ceremony instituted by Christ Himself.

His death tore the veil in the temple, giving us the ability to have a direct relationship with God (Hebrews 4:16). That veil was not replaced by the act of blessing and eating bread and wine."

That’s true, but it is not what Catholics do, so it doesn’t apply to us. We have direct relationship with Christ through the Holy Spirit, His Church, and His Sacraments.

From the Catechism:

II. THE SACRAMENTS OF THE CHURCH

1117 As she has done for the canon of Sacred Scripture and for the doctrine of the faith, the Church, by the power of the Spirit who guides her “into all truth,” has gradually recognized this treasure received from Christ and, as the faithful steward of God’s mysteries, has determined its "dispensation."34 Thus the Church has discerned over the centuries that among liturgical celebrations there are seven that are, in the strict sense of the term, sacraments instituted by the Lord.

1118 The sacraments are “of the Church” in the double sense that they are “by her” and “for her.” They are “by the Church,” for she is the sacrament of Christ’s action at work in her through the mission of the Holy Spirit. They are “for the Church” in the sense that "the sacraments make the Church,"35 since they manifest and communicate to men, above all in the Eucharist, the mystery of communion with the God who is love, One in three persons.

1119 Forming “as it were, one mystical person” with Christ the head, the Church acts in the sacraments as "an organically structured priestly community."36 Through Baptism and Confirmation the priestly people is enabled to celebrate the liturgy, while those of the faithful "who have received Holy Orders, are appointed to nourish the Church with the word and grace of God in the name of Christ."37

1120 The ordained ministry or ministerial priesthood is at the service of the baptismal priesthood.38 The ordained priesthood guarantees that it really is Christ who acts in the sacraments through the Holy Spirit for the Church. The saving mission entrusted by the Father to his incarnate Son was committed to the apostles and through them to their successors: they receive the Spirit of Jesus to act in his name and in his person.39 The ordained minister is the sacramental bond that ties the liturgical action to what the apostles said and did and, through them, to the words and actions of Christ, the source and foundation of the sacraments.

1121 The three sacraments of Baptism, Confirmation, and Holy Orders confer, in addition to grace, a sacramental character or “seal” by which the Christian shares in Christ’s priesthood and is made a member of the Church according to different states and functions. This configuration to Christ and to the Church, brought about by the Spirit, is indelible,40 it remains for ever in the Christian as a positive disposition for grace, a promise and guarantee of divine protection, and as a vocation to divine worship and to the service of the Church. Therefore these sacraments can never be repeated.

peace
steve

 

[pablope]

[SIGN]

[/SIGN]

So how does the pope being infallible or not infallible undermine a true personal relationship with Christ?

So…you do not believe the pope to be infallible…but do you believe you yourself is infallible?

Quote:
I pray, earnestly, to Him when in need. God, Himself, must teach us good judgment, wisdom and discernment and we need to go to Him and seek what is lacking within us.

How personal do you think it gets when a Catholic (and protestants who believe likewise) receives Him in totality…body, blood, soul and divinity?

Jesus’ declaration on the cross, “It is finished!” (John 19:30) precludes “continuous representation” of the Catholic Eucharist, which is a fallacy used to enforce Vatican’s claimed monopoly on access to Christ and salvation.godvoter.org/jesus-flesh.html

When Christ said it is finished…He meant His work at for us is finished…but not our work…

And here…you said you do not believe in the pope being infallible… but now, with you believing what is said in that link…why do you believe what that link tells you? Is the one who wrote what you read infallible?

Why do you take their authority and interpretation of “It is finished” over that of the CC?

How can you be sure they are not mistaken in their teaching if they are not infallible?

[/QUOTE]

 

[adrift]

The article never stated the Eucharist was about receiving Jesus’ dead body but rather the context around Jesus’ command was not literal.

I didn’t realize that it was quote from that article which is so full of misinformation. The article presented that the Apostles did not eat Jesus dead body which is a misrepresentation of what Jesus taught and requested of His Apostles.

"Roman Catholicism teaches that liturgy (taken from the Greek for “work”) is the conduit through which God provides blessing and salvation. Essentially, in addition to placing the priest between the congregants and God, they also place the bread and wine between themselves and God. They believe they are blessed because of their obedience in taking communion, and that blessing literally streams from God through the bread and wine and into their souls.

This is not what the Catholic Church Teaches.

"This is not what Jesus taught

.
The article builds a strawman and then says Jesus didn’t teach it. The Church doesn’t teach it either.

He said, “I am the bread of life” and “It is the Spirit who gives life, the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life” (John 6:48, 63). Jesus is the bread of life, but He is also the Word (John 1:1). The bread that nourishes is the Word of God (Matthew 4:4), not a wafer somehow transformed into the flesh of Jesus. The idea that we have to go through a human ceremony to receive that spiritual nourishment is the type of belief Jesus came to abolish. His death tore the veil in the temple, giving us the ability to have a direct relationship with God (Hebrews 4:16). That veil was not replaced by the act of blessing and eating bread and wine."

Read more: gotquestions.org/real-presence.html#ixzz2OKOxNAda

It totally ignores Jesus’ command of “Do this in Memory of Me”

 

[JoyfulRC]

thenobles and pablope both have provided very insightful, challenging, and thorough responses. It will be interesting to see how this turns out.

 

[Goya]

In regards to apparitions of Mary,*** I would suggest praying to God for spiritual discernment and wisdom. Human beings are easily deceived and I would not believe everything your read or hear. If you are not sure, go to God and ask of Him to give you understanding***.

“Physician, heal thyself!”

Head your own counsel, sir–since, as a protestant, you’ve subscribed hook line and sinker, to one of the biggeest whoppers in history–sola scriptura–

Itself, a manufactured ‘tradition of men’, with no authority–not even in scripture …

…while you have expressly rejected the Church that Christ himself founded.

 

[Godisgreat23]

Read more: gotquestions.org/real-presence.html#ixzz2OKOxNAda

“Got Questions Ministries seeks to glorify the Lord Jesus Christ by providing biblical, applicable, and timely answers to spiritually related questions through an internet presence.”

GotQuestions.org is a volunteer ministry of dedicated and trained servants who have a desire to assist others in their understanding of God, Scripture, salvation, and other spiritual topics. We are Christian, Protestant, conservative, evangelical, fundamental, and non-denominational. We view ourselves as a para-church ministry, coming alongside the church to help people find answers to their spiritually related questions.

This is the description of the site if your always going to use one sided interpretation of the bible how can you seek truth?

 

[Church_Militant]

“Got Questions Ministries seeks to glorify the Lord Jesus Christ by providing biblical, applicable, and timely answers to spiritually related questions through an internet presence.”

GotQuestions.org is a volunteer ministry of dedicated and trained servants who have a desire to assist others in their understanding of God, Scripture, salvation, and other spiritual topics. We are Christian, Protestant, conservative, evangelical, fundamental, and non-denominational. We view ourselves as a para-church ministry, coming alongside the church to help people find answers to their spiritually related questions.

This is the description of the site if your always going to use one sided interpretation of the bible how can you seek truth?

A good point.