I am a Protestant who wants an honest answer

[churchlady7]

Dear sister in Christ,

I am a “cradle Catholic” who has been taught all her Catholic life that we can never judge a persons soul. Only God can do that for only God knows a persons heart. That is why it struck me as rather offensive to hear Protestant sisters say that they, “Were standing at the bus stop with some of the unsaved.” Can you please help me understand how one knows someone is unsaved? Are they marked in some way on their forheads? Which leads me to your question of , If we can’t know is is not saved then we also cannot know who IS saved. Once again only God knows such mysteries. I would NEVER EVER presume to know who is saved and who is not saved, but I am taught as a faithful Catholic to pray for the salvation of ALL, if it is God’s will. We do believe that the Saints recognized by the Church are in heaven based on their lives of heroic virtue and miracles attributed to them. And we only declare their Sainthood. The church does not make Saints, only God makes Saints. The church merely proclaims what God has already done.
Chruchlady7

 

[Cubby]

Evidently Ozzie misunderstood my earlier post.

He stated “The salvation you describe in your post is a “works” salvation and circumvents the cross.”

• The salvation that I believe in is simple - faith with works, for faith without works is dead!

Simply put, Judas had faith, he had works, and he made a sinful choice to throw it all away. The wages of sin is death.

May the peace of Christ be with this discussion thread!

Cubby.

 

[Pax]

Ozzie,

Please note what is burned up. It is not the gold, silver, or precious stones. What is burned up is the wood, hay, and straw. This is clearly purification. There is nothing in Protestant theology that explains these verses more clearly than Catholic teaching, especially in light of all of the other verses of scripture that were provided to you. None of these verses mean much of anything to you, but it is crystal clear that Paul is talking about purification.

This is made even more clear because he relates it to his other statement that the man will still be saved, but only as through fire. Purification has frequently been associated with fire in scripture. An excellent example of this is found in Malachi 3:2-3 that says, "But who can endure the day of his coming, and who can stand when he appears? “For he is like a refiner’s fire and like fullers’ soap; he will sit as a refiner and purifier of silver, and he will purify the sons of Levi and refine them like gold and silver, till they present right offerings to the Lord.”

Ozzie, these verse do speak of what the Catholic Church teaches. Obviously, by your tradition and standards you are free to interpret them differently, but based on your tradition and standards alone, our view is just as valid as yours. Based on exegesis we feel our teaching has a clear advantage. Based on the historical teachings of Christianity we also find our position to be solidly supported.

 

[Ozzie]

JesusFreak16:

Now, it annoys me when people say how many ways that there are to God, through other religions. “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life,” Jesus said, and I believe Him. However, couldn’t it be true that there can be more than one way to Jesus? I may be in favor of a “personal relationship” with Him through prayer and reading the Bible. You may prefer to know Him through the sacrements, Catholic doctrine, or other ways I am not aware of. Do you recognize both ways, or just your own?

Hi Lisa, you started this thread asking if you as a Protestant are considered saved by RCs. You wanted an honest answer, and by reading ALL the post it looks like you never got one. Reason being is those who still don’t know if they themselves are saved, have eternal life, can not answer a question pertaining to the eternal condition of others. It’s like asking a tax question to someone who’s still trying to figure out the tax laws.

God’s Word presents only one way TO Jesus Christ and that is by personal faith. Because as you well point, when asked by Thomas how to know the way where Jesus was going (ascending back to Heaven) Jesus responded, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me” (Jn. 14:6). Pax points out that the first believers adopted this term “the Way,” but it was in reference to Jesus Christ Himself, not sacraments. The “Way” to God was faith in Jesus Christ alone. They preached Christ (read the Book of Acts).

Now it’s very interesting how Pax, in his post to you, calmly takes “the Way” away from Jesus, and personal faith in Him, and cunningly slips in sacramentalism.

but it is fair to say that within “the way” there are many elements, spiritual tools, and spiritual aids. Reading scripture, contemplative prayer, group prayer, singing hymns, loving God, trusting God, giving thanks, asking for forgiveness, giving praise and adoration to God, having faith in God, meditating on Christ’s passion, attending Mass, receiving the sacraments, and many other things are all part of “the way.”

It’s similar to the Galatians who listened to those who also said, yes, you must believe in Jesus, but then added, you must also get circumcised and follow the Law. But in truth, you “trust God,” “give praise and adoration to God,” express your love to God with thanksgivings, study His Word, etc., BECAUSE He HAS forgiven ALL your sins through Christ Jesus, and you belong to Him, bought with the blood of Christ (i.e., been redeemed). And in Communion we remember not simply “Christ’s passion” but His finished work on the cross for our complete reconciliation to God and redemption through His blood. In Communion we don’t sacrifice Him all over again (i.e., "re-present), we proclaim His historic death until He comes. We rejoice in the Biblical truth that HE, Jesus, IS THE WAY. And God’s Word presents only one way to Christ, and that’s BY FAITH alone. Pax writes:

As Catholics we believe that Jesus laid out the way, and that He wants us to follow it according to His plan.

In John 6:14 Jesus didn’t say He “laid out the way,” He said "I am the way." He pointed to nothing else and no one else but Himself. This is the whole foundation of “The Way” and true, historic, Christian faith.

 

[Pax]

Ozzie:

First of all *“once saved always saved” *is not a "Calvinistic “approach” to anything. It’s a Biblical revelation. Though the Bible doesn’t use that particular phrase, the concept is based on what God “gifts” the one who puts his/her faith in the Person and work of Jesus Christ. ]/QUOTE]

Ozzie,

OSAS is not a biblical revelation. This is a doctrine made up from whole cloth by “men.”

This doctrine flies in the face of the following verses:

James 5: 19-20
My brethren, if any one among you wanders from the truth and some one brings him back, let him know that whoever brings back a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins.

2 Peter 2: 20-22
For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overpowered, the last state has become worse for them than the first. For it would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandment delivered to them. It has happened to them according to the true proverb, The dog turns back to his own vomit, and the sow is washed only to wallow in the mire.

Romans 11: 20-21
That is true. They were broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand fast only through faith. So do not become proud, but stand in awe. For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you. Note then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God’s kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness; otherwise you too will be cut off.

Hebrews 2: 1-3
Therefore we must pay the closer attention to what we have heard, lest we drift away from it. For if the message declared by angels was valid and every transgression or disobedience received a just retribution, how shall we escape if we neglect such a great salvation?

Hebrews 4: 9-11
So then, there remains a sabbath rest for the people of God; for whoever enters God’s rest also ceases from his labors as God did from his. Let us therefore strive to enter that rest, that no one fall by the same sort of disobedience.

Hebrews 6: 4-8
For it is impossible to restore again to repentance those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, if they then commit apostasy, since they crucify the Son of God on their own account and hold him up to contempt. For land which has drunk the rain that often falls upon it, and brings forth vegetation useful to those for whose sake it is cultivated, receives a blessing from God. But if it bears thorns and thistles, it is worthless and near to being cursed; its end is to be burned.

Hebrews 10: 26-31
For if we sin deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful prospect of judgment, and a fury of fire which will consume the adversaries. A man who has violated the law of Moses dies without mercy at the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much worse punishment do you think will be deserved by the man who has spurned the Son of God, and profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and outraged the Spirit of grace? For we know him who said, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay.” And again, “The Lord will judge his people.” It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

Now Ozzie, I have just provided you with 7 of my 65 verses that refute “once saved always saved.” Do you still need the other 58?

 

[Pax]

Ozzie,

Once again I’ll give you a little more to think about concerning the literal words of the Lord concerning the Eucharist.

The New Testament accounts describe the Holy Eucharist as Jesus gave it to us. The term “bread from heaven” becomes fully clear only when we reach the Revelation to John. In the Gospels Christ said at Capernaum. Jn 6:51 “I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is My Flesh.”

Jewish life is rich in symbolism. The Seder table is filled with symbolic foods. Jesus said, Mt 26:23 “He who has dipped his hand in the dish with Me, will betray Me.” He referred to the urhatz, the first washing; slaves eat quickly without stopping to wash their hands, but now Jews wash their hands in a bowl of warm water as a symbol of their freedom. The moror, bitter herbs which remind Jews that the Egyptians made their ancestors’ lives bitter with hard labor, are dipped in charoset, a sweet mixture of chopped apples, nuts, and wine, to recall that even hard lives have their sweet moments. The matzo is the bread of haste that the Hebrews ate as they fled from Egypt. The karpas, green vegetables, represent the coming of Spring with its renewal of life, symbolizing the journey from slavery to the promised land; Jews dip them in salt water before eating to recall the tears shed along the way.

Now, if Jesus had said the Holy Eucharist was a symbol the Jews at Capernaum would instantly have accepted it.
The Jews knew that He was speaking literally. Jn 6:52 “How can this man give us his Flesh to eat?” On other occasions when our Lord spoke of Himself as a “door”[Jn 10:9] or a “vine”[Jn 15:1], nobody said, “How can this man be made of wood?” or “How can this man be a plant?” They recognized these as metaphors. But when Jesus insisted in Jn 6:53, “Unless you eat the Flesh of the Son of man and drink His Blood, you have no life in you; he who eats My Flesh and drinks My Blood has eternal life”, the Jews took exception to Him. The Jews who heard this said,“This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?”[Jn 6:60]. They remembered God’s command to Noah and all mankind, Gn 9:4 “Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood.” God spoke more forcefully to His chosen people in Lv 17:10 saying, “I will set my face against that person who eats blood, and will cut him off from among his people.” It was only after Christ’s redemptive sacrifice and the Holy Spirit’s enlightenment that the Apostles saw the full meaning of our Father’s next words. Lv 17:11 “For the life of the flesh is in the blood; and I have given it for you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement, by reason of the life.” In the Old Covenant our Father in heaven had commanded His children not to eat the blood of animals because we are not to participate in the life of animals. Animals, having no immortal souls, and are lower than man in the order of created nature. However, in the New and Everlasting Covenant we consume the Blood of Christ to participate in Christ’s eternal life.

cont. on next post

 

[Pax]

cont. from prior post

Jesus knew we would need a lot of help to become accustomed to the Holy Eucharist. He was in a deserted area when a huge crowd of five thousand men gathered to hear Him teach. Mk 6:34 The Apostles had all of five loaves and two fish. Jesus performed the four great Eucharistic actions: He took the bread, blessed it, broke it, and gave it to His apostles to feed the people. He also divided the two fish among them. As the apostles distributed the bread and fish from their wicker baskets, the amount did not diminish, and all five thousand ate until they were satisfied. Later, Mt 15:36 He did the same for a crowd of four thousand.

After having shown miracles that demonstrated what He could do with food, Jesus then walks on water and demonstrates what He can do with His body. He then makes the discourse on the bread of life in John 6 and promises that His body and blood are true food and true drink. Jesus removes all doubt that he is speaking figuratively when He first uses the generic term for eating (phago in Greek) and then repeats Himself but uses the graphic term “to gnaw or chew” (trogo in Greek). The Jewish disciples knew He was speaking literally, and the terminology in the original Greek text makes it clear to us as well.

The three Gospel narratives of the Last Supper are absolutely consistent. Matthew: 26:26 “This is My Body.” 26:27 “This is My Blood…” Mark: 14:22 “This is My Body.” 14:24 “This is My Blood…” Luke: 22:19 “This is My Body.” 22:20 “This … is the New Covenant in My Blood.” Jesus’ next words instituted the Catholic priesthood: Lk 22:19 “Do this in remembrance of Me.”
Jesus assured the Apostles that the Holy Eucharist is a reflection of the heavenly banquet. Mt 26:29 “I tell you I shall not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.”

After His resurrection, Jesus walked with two disciples to Emmaus. When they arrived, He celebrated the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass for them; Lk 24:30 “While He was at table with them, He took the bread and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to them.” It was in the breaking of the bread that the disciples recognized Jesus.

Ozzie, I’ve thrown a lot out here for you to ponder, but there is actually much more. This is why I suggested that you get some good Catholic materials on this all important topic. They will go into all of this and more in great detail.

 

[Cubby]

Ozzie:

Ozzie wrote “Hi Lisa, you started this thread asking if you as a Protestant are considered saved by RCs. You wanted an honest answer, and by reading ALL the post it looks like you never got one.”

First, I thought I gave Lisa an honest answer, but evidently you missed it Ozzie (maybe I wasn’t clear enough).

Lisa:

Lisa - (1) If you have faith in Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior and (2) you’ve had the opportunity to be baptized and you’ve been baptized and (3) you’re walking in the light of Christ and (4) you are bearing good fruit (works!) - then rest assured that we Catholics believe that you are “saved”! When I was welcomed into the Catholic church I was not re-baptized. The Holy Roman Catholic Church acknowledged my protestant baptism - performed in the Holy Trinity - as being sufficient! But there is a lot more to being a Christian. I recommend that you visit your local Holy Roman Catholic Church parish and ask the priest or a staff member about RCIA. In short, RCIA (Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults) is a weekly class for those who wish to know more about the Holy Roman Catholic Church.

Ozzie:
Ozzie wrote:
“Reason being is those who still don’t know if they themselves are saved, have eternal life, can not answer a question pertaining to the eternal condition of others. It’s like asking a tax question to someone who’s still trying to figure out the tax laws.”

Second, Ozzie - I’m 100% sure of my salvation as is evident in my works and my love for the church that Christ established. It’s not helping your cause to insult us.

Everyone:
As a convert, I know how tough it was for me to accept the teachings of the church even though I knew in my deepest place that the church was right. What was most difficult, for me, was to acknowledge that my own parents taught me the wrong doctrine and to admit that I was not really raised in the fullness of the Christian faith.

It is human nature to begin fighting and lashing out at others when we’re backed into a corner. Let’s keep the peace of Christ and the brotherhood of our faith in mind while we post. We should pray for each other. It is peace that passes understanding to worship Christ in the Holy Roman Catholic Church. Hopefully Lisa and Ozzie will join us some day.

Peace.

 

[Greg_McPherran]

Hello Ozzie,

OK, this is the fourth time I have asked this. Any other non-Catholic can answer it also if they would like. After any response I would like to step-by-step analyze further whether your answer makes sense. I am not looking for long dissertations about John 6, I seek an answer to this one question to begin with (see below).

John 6:63 It is the spirit that gives life, while the flesh is of no avail. (some Bibles have “the flesh profits nothing” or similar)

Here’s the Question: When Jesus says “the flesh profits nothing” in John 6:63, what does He mean?

Greg

 

[Katholikos]

Cubby,

I think that what Ozzie meant was that Catholics have no moral certitude or absolute assurance that they are saved. He probably believes that “once saved, always saved.”

As you probably know, having been Protestant, that to an Evangelical or Fundamentalist it makes no difference how one lives their life. All that is necessary is to “accept Jesus Christ as personal Lord and Savior” and – if one was sincere when they did this – they think they have absolute assurance of their salvation that “nothing can separate them from the love of God” – not even sin. This is a belief unheard of before the 16th century that was taught by Martin Luther, John Calvin, and others after them.

But Catholics know that we must persevere in the Faith to the end. And we do not know with absolute certainty whether we will persevere until we die or not. We could have some temptation to sin and fall away from grace at any given moment. and if we die before we repent, we will not be saved. To presume that our salvation is absolutely assured no matter what we do is a sin against the Holy Spirit.

Catholic Answers has a good article at their Library called “Assurance of Salvation” that includes this:

Scripture teaches that one’s final salvation depends on the state of the soul at death. As Jesus himself tells us, “He who endures to the end will be saved” (Matt. 24:13; cf. 25:31–46). One who dies in the state of friendship with God (the state of grace) will go to heaven. The one who dies in a state of enmity and rebellion against God (the state of mortal sin) will go to hell.

JMJ Jay (former Protestant)

 

[Ozzie]

Greg_McPherran:

Hello Ozzie,
John 6:63 It is the spirit that gives life, while the flesh is of no avail. (some Bibles have “the flesh profits nothing” or similar)

Here’s the Question: When Jesus says “the flesh profits nothing” in John 6:63, what does He mean? Greg

I explained this in my previous posts on Jn. 6. Jesus said this in context with all that He said pertaining to eating His flesh and drinking His blood. It is the Spirit that gives life when coming to Christ by faith. All throughout Jn. chapters 5 and 6 Jesus states they must come to Him by faith. He was speaking to unbelievers, not believers.

Physically eating anything can do nothing. What is physically eaten goes into the stomach and is eliminated (Matt. 15:17; Mk. 7:19). Physical food does nothing for the soul. For this reason Jesus said, *“the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life.” * He points out that the flesh profits them nothing, ritual cannibalism would profit them nothing, either. The ancients ate physical “manna” in the wilderness and died in the wilderness. But Jesus is the true “Manna” that comes down from heaven, but it is through faith in Him that gives ETERNAL life. This He states over and over again in Jn. chapters 5 & 6.

Greg, no RC believes he has eternal life in this life. Yet Jesus says “he who eats His flesh and drinks His blood HAS eternal life.” You who interpret Him literally claim to eat Him and drink His blood thousands of times in your life time. How many times must you eat and drink before you have eternal life? What happens to this eternal life after you eat? Is it eliminated from your body and flushed down the toilet with the other physical food? Therefore you must eat and drink again and again and again? How is this life then “*eternal?” *Jesus must have been mistaken.

 

[Greg_McPherran]

Ozzie:

Physically eating anything can do nothing.

OK. Now let’s examine what this answer means:

Look at the context of the Gospel of John.

John 1:14 And the Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us…

John 3:6 “What is born of flesh is flesh and what is born of spirit is spirit.”

It is very clear that John is discussing the fact that God who is spirit became physical flesh. Further, John makes the clear distinction between flesh born of flesh and flesh born of spirit. Jesus’ flesh is not earthly flesh because He is born of spirit.

Look at the clear logic:

John 1:14 …the Word became flesh…
Jesus flesh is born of spirit.

John 3:6 ***what is ***born of spirit is spirit.
Therefore since Jesus flesh is born of spirit, his flesh is spirit. Jesus, althought in the flesh, is a spiritual being. That is why in John 6, Jesus continually emphasized that He is from heaven and not born of this earth. He is emphasizing that His flesh is not flesh born of flesh but that His flesh is flesh born of spirit.

Now, address these four points if you will:

**

Ozzie:

Physically eating anything can do nothing.

**
1. So you agree that the listeners thought he was referring to physically eating his flesh. This weakens your own argument that John 6 is figurative.

2. The listeners thought he was referring to physically eating his flesh. How can you be sure that he was not distinguishing between flesh born of spirit and flesh born of flesh, rather that saying not to eat his flesh. The context of John as I have shown supports this. Jesus does not say ***eating ***flesh profits nothing, He says the flesh profits nothing and the spirit gives life. His flesh is spirit, so the interpretation that He was referring to not eating does not fit the context.

3. If Jesus was referring to believing only and not eating, then why would he contrast belief with ***eating ***manna?

**

Ozzie:

Physically eating anything can do nothing.

4****.** Then you are saying that Protestant communion is worthless.

Greg

 

[Katholikos]

To Ozzie, spokenword, and other non-believers in Christ’s Eucharist:

107 A.D. - On the way to his death by the jaws of a lion in the Coliseum, under Roman guard, Ignatius of Antioch wrote to the Philadelphians: “Take care, then, to partake of one Eucharist, for one is the Flesh of Our Lord Jesus Christ, and one the cup to unite us with His Blood . . .” And he wrote to the Symrnaeans: "From Eucharist and prayer they [the heretics] hold aloof, because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the Flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father in His loving-kindness raised from the dead. And so, those who question the gift of God perish in their contentiousness."

155 A.D. - Justin Martyr wrote an explanation of Christian belief to the Roman Emperor: "And this food is called among us Eucharist, of which no one is allowed to partake except one who believes that the things which we teach are true, and has received the washing that is for the remission of sins and for rebirth, and who so lives as Christ handed down. For we do not receive these things as common bread nor common drink, but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Savior having been incarnate by God’s logos took both flesh and blood for our salvation, so also we have been taught that the food eucharistized through the word of prayer that is from Him, from which our blood and flesh are nourished by transformation, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who became incarnate. For the apostles in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, thus handed down what was commanded them: that Jesus took bread and having given thanks said: ‘Do this for my memorial, this is my body’; and likwise He took the chalice and having given thanks said: ‘This is my blood’; and gave it to them alone."

Justin went on to write a description of the Mass at which the Eucharist was confected and distributed.

Your interpretation of the Scriptures is very different from what the early Christians – taught directly by the Apostles – believed. Ignatius was a student of St. John the Apostle, the author of the Gospel that bears his name, and his letters were written only 10 years or so after St. John’s death. He was ordained by St. Peter and was a friend of St. Paul’s. If he was wrong about the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist, why didn’t the Apostles who were his teachers correct him?

JMJ Jay

Reference: Ancient Christian Writers, Volumes 1 and 56
underscore added

 

[hlgomez]

**
John 3:6 “What is born of flesh is flesh and what is born of spirit is spirit.”

It is very clear that John is discussing the fact that God who is spirit became physical flesh. Further, John makes the clear distinction between flesh born of flesh and flesh born of spirit. Jesus’ flesh is not earthly flesh because He is born of spirit.

Let’s get to the basic Christian faith. God is Spirit–yes. And John said; " And the Word (God—a Spirit) became flesh (not Spirit) and made his dwelling among us*"(I added some emphasis).* You can’t see a spirit, can you? That’s why the Word of God which wasn’t seen by men’s physical eyes became flesh so we could see Him, touch him, feel him, and most importantly so He could, as a flesh, offer Himself as a sacrifice to the Father on behalf of the fallen human race. Jesus wasn’t “born of Spirit” because He was God. There’s no need for Him to be born “again of water and Spirit”(which Jesus specifically refers to all men) because he doesn’t need salvation–human beings do. Jesus means Saviour. That’s why that referral to be “born of water and spirit” refers to the fallen human race that needs to be saved.

Jesus flesh is truly the flesh of Mary–flesh of a man. Scriptures specifically says that Jesus was all like us; that is, in the flesh, except one thing–to sin. He experience the joy, suferring, getting tired, weep, laugh, sleep, eat, etc. just like human beings does. Typically human, but did not sinned.

Pio**

 

[hlgomez]

**

John 3:6

***what is ***born of spirit is spirit.
Therefore since Jesus flesh is born of spirit, his flesh is spirit. Jesus, althought in the flesh, is a spiritual being. That is why in John 6, Jesus continually emphasized that He is from heaven and not born of this earth.

Jesus wasn’t born of Spirit. He was born of a human being–Mary–in the flesh.

We believe that Jesus Christ is both God–Spirit, and Man–Flesh. Jesus Christ has two natures-- Human and Divine. This is the Catholic Faith right from the very beginning of the Church. The basic Christian faith declares-- that Jesus suffered, died, and was buried. He died in the Flesh, not in His Divinity. That He truly descended into the abode of the dead and resurrected (His Body and Soul reunited) on the third day. And He, Body and Soul, ascended into heaven and sits at the right hand of the Father in glory.

Pio

**

 

[hlgomez]

Physically eating anything can do nothing. What is physically eaten goes into the stomach and is eliminated (Matt. 15:17; Mk. 7:19). Physical food does nothing for the soul. For this reason Jesus said, *“the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life.” *He points out that the flesh profits them nothing, ritual cannibalism would profit them nothing, either.

So you are just virtually saying that Jesus coming in the flesh meant nothing because flesh profits nothing? WHY would Jesus come in the flesh if it will profit nothing? WHY would He offer Himself as a sacrifice to the Father in the flesh if it will profit nothing?

Pio

 

[hlgomez]

ritual cannibalism would profit them nothing, either.

This is precisely the point why the other disciples left Jesus. Why? Because Mosaic law even forbids them to eat blood from animals, much that of a man! And then Jesus turned to the twelve and said; “They didn’t understand what I meant, stop them and let them come back. I just meant eat my words because they are flesh, and spirit, too.” But NO— He further scandalizes it and said to the twelve; “Do you also wish to go?”

Pio

 

[Greg_McPherran]

Hello,

hlgomez:

Jesus wasn’t born of Spirit. He was born of a human being–Mary–in the flesh.

Compare these two:

Conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit.
Born…of the…spirit.

Are the two not saying basically the same thing? Or am I comparing unrelated statements?

Greg

 

[rschermer2]

Greg_McPherran:

Hello,

Compare these two:

Conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit.
Born…of the…spirit.

Are the two not saying basically the same thing? Or am I comparing unrelated statements?

Greg

You are comparing 2 unrelated statements. Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary. He was Conceived by the Holy Spirit.

God Bless,
RS

 

[Greg_McPherran]

You can’t see a spirit, can you?

As a Catholic, you believe that the bread is no longer bread but Jesus. So yes, even though it appears to be bread you are not seeing bread. Is it true that Jesus in Heaven is a union of flesh and spirit? When we see the Eucharist, we are not seeing bread, so how do we explain our sight of the Eucharist?

Greg