O
Ozzie
Guest
Oh, so now you’re speaking for all mankind? I think you have a fantasy about being Pope. Am I right? You want to be Pope, don’t you?
- Status
X
xrc
Guest
Actually since the Scriptures do not support any of these contentions, it is not up to me to disprove them, it’s up to you to prove them!!! The burden of proof is yours my friend!
In Christ Alone,
Mike
O
Ozzie
Guest
And if He’s standing there in His body, that should give you your first clue that He is speaking figuratively. He didn’t say this door will become Me, just as He didn’t say, “This bread will become Me,” or “this wine will become My blood.” Think about it.
E
embertx
Guest
With all due respect, are you ashamed of your faith? You seem so unwilling to share it. Don’t you know you’re suppose to be light in a world filled with darkness? 1 Peter 3:15 states…'always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have." You claim to be a follower of Christ so what are you afraid of?
Your question was “if you were to die and were standing before God and he asked you, “why should I let you in my heaven” what would you say?” 1 Peter 3:15 has nothing to do with your question although I was thinking that you would come up with this quote. It seems to me the verse was twisted to fit your question and out of context. The answer to your question is for God to know and is an option if one wants to share with the world. As to “don’t you know you’re supposed to be a light in a world filled with darkness?” I didn’t realize that I was responding to a question from a person that was filled with darkness. Please don’t assume that a person is “ashamed of your faith” just because you don’t get the response according to your liking. As to “you claim to be a follower of Christ so what are you afraid of?” What makes you think I am “afraid.” Do you know my heart? Just because a person can quote the bible/scriptures inside and out does not mean they are a follower of Christ. Satan quoted the word to Christ in the desert. God bless
Your question was “if you were to die and were standing before God and he asked you, “why should I let you in my heaven” what would you say?” 1 Peter 3:15 has nothing to do with your question although I was thinking that you would come up with this quote. It seems to me the verse was twisted to fit your question and out of context. The answer to your question is for God to know and is an option if one wants to share with the world. As to “don’t you know you’re supposed to be a light in a world filled with darkness?” I didn’t realize that I was responding to a question from a person that was filled with darkness. Please don’t assume that a person is “ashamed of your faith” just because you don’t get the response according to your liking. As to “you claim to be a follower of Christ so what are you afraid of?” What makes you think I am “afraid.” Do you know my heart? Just because a person can quote the bible/scriptures inside and out does not mean they are a follower of Christ. Satan quoted the word to Christ in the desert. God bless
D
dennisknapp
Guest
xrc said:
I am asking you to provide evidence that what you believe is not an innovation of the 16th century. Therefore, the burden of proof is yours.
Where is the historical evidence that what you believe is not an INNOVATION?
Show us that what you believe (that does not agree with the historical Church) existed prior to the 16th century.
I know you are probably going to cop out and say,“what I believe is in Scripture, therefore I need no evidence.”
But if what you believe is so "biblically"clear and understandable then there should be someone who agrees with you somewhere prior to the 16th century, shouldn’t there?
To quote a popular movie line, “Show me the money!”
N
ncgolf
Guest
Actually I do believe He is the literal light of the world. I find no need to separate spirtual light from physical light. They both can co-exist easily in this world. I am both physical (body) and spiritual (soul). Without Him I am and would be in darkness. Cant you feel and see it everyday. Both of us are blessed because we can live in the lght. I know people … as am sure you do that have no faith in Jesus … they do walk in darkness.
He also says eat my flesh and drink my blood 3 times. A symbolic gesture would not require this repetition. They didn’t know it at the time … there is no way they could have but Jesus was pre-figuring the Eucharist. The apostles stayed with Jesus even though they could not understand what He was saying.
V
Vincent
Guest
That presupposes that it’s impossible for God to do a miracle like that.
Even if He used the word “become” you’d still be tempted to reduce his words to mere symbolism, so that argument is a red herring.
1 Corinthians 11:24 is even more unambiguous. Literally rendered, it’s “This of me is the body.”
O
Ozzie
Guest
But “nc,” please be rational. He Himself is not literally and physically lighting the world. To believe that would go against Scripture since on the first day of creation God created physical light (Hebrew “or”), i.e., the entire electromagnetic spectrum, the shortwave and longwave phenomena. And on the fourth day He created light-giving lanterns (Hebrew “ma-or”) i.e., the sun, moon and stars. Since creation it is these that physically light our world. Jesus is not claiming to be any of these.
In John chapter one Jesus is the “Word,” the “Logos.” Being God through Him all things came into being, i.e., were created, even the “or” and the “ma-or” - physical light. And though He came into this world yet He Himself is not a created being. In Jn. 1:9 Jesus is called the “true-light” which coming into the world enlightens every man (i.e., those who turn to Him by faith). Since the fall of Adam this world system lives and operates in spiritual darkness, and it is spiritual light that all sons of Adam are in desperate need. Jesus is this LIGHT. And this is what He means when He says in Jn. 8:12 “*I am the light of the world; he who follows Me shall not walk in the darkness, but shall have the light of life.” *Obviously, He is figuratively describing spiritual darkness and spiritual light.
In John 1:4 it is written “In Him was LIFE; and the life was the LIGHT of men.” Christ is both spiritual LIFE and LIGHT. Men born into this world through Adam are both spiritually dead and walk in spiritual darkness. They are in desperate need of both spiritual LIFE and LIGHT, both found in Christ alone. And this life and light are given freely to men when they turn to Him by faith (because of the cross).
O
Ozzie
Guest
Why not? He could say it a thousand times and still, contextually, mean it figuratively. Repetition changes nothing, it does, however, emphasize its urgency, its importance. He actually explains Himself in 6:63.
There are several Biblical reasons why this statement is erroneous. (1) Jesus was speaking to unbelievers in Jn. 6; unbelievers have nothing to do with Communion. (2) John in his Gospel account does not even go on to record the words Jesus spoke in the upper room: “this is My body”…“this is the cup of the New Covenant in my blood.” (3) And those Gospel accounts that do record His words in the upper room, do not record either the event or His words spoken at Capernaum to the unbelieving crowd in Jn. 6. Hence, none of the Gospel accounts actually connect the two events. They are presented as two separate events having two separate meanings/purposes. (4) None of the Gospel writers (not even Jesus Himself) teach that what was said in the upper room fulfilled that which Christ spoke figuratively of Himself at Capernaum. (5) The eating and drinking in Jn. 6 were said in comparison with the manna eaten in the wilderness to sustain life. Hence, John six is about the transference of LIFE through faith Christ (Jn. 6:47) - the LIFE of which all men, born dead in Adam, are in desperate need. However, no transference of life is even mentioned in the words Christ spoke to His Apostles in the upper room. Instead, the eating of the bread and drinking of the cup were to be done in REMEMBRANCE of Him and the PROCLAMATION of His death until He comes - not to transfer life to them (see 1 Cor. 11:26). This transference of His life, He reveals in Jn. 6, is accomplished by believing in Him, not pysically eating Him. (6) Jesus did not say in the upper room that the bread actually becomes His body and the cup actually becomes His blood. He said figuratively, “This is My body which is given for you,” and, “This cup which is poured out for you is the New Covenant in my blood” (Lk. 22). Thereby instituting a sacrament of “remembrance” and proclamation." (7) Nor is it recorded anywhere that He gave His Apostles (or anyone) the power to command or perform such a transformation. This notion has absolutely no Biblical or Apostolic support. Those who partake of it in an unworthy manner are guilty of what it represents (the body and blood of the Lord - His sacrificial death on their behalf), not what it supposedly “becomes.”
Hence, it is made very clear in Scripture that what Jesus said early in His ministry to unbelievers in Capernaum, and what He said at the end of His earthly ministry to His own in Jerusalem, were totally different, unconnected events and served totally different purposes.
O
Ozzie
Guest
Nah…it presupposes nothing of the sort. It simply presents an accurate, exegetical interpretation of the text. Interpreting what is there, instead of what is not there.
Your false accusation toward me is the “red herring.”
Now you’re presenting the “red herring.” Paul makes it very clear in 1 Cor. 11…“do this in remembrance of Me” and "as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes." It is a sacrament of “remembrance” and “proclamation.”
It’s very clear. There’s nothing “mysterious” or supernatural about it. It’s a sacramental expression of our faith until He comes for us.
V
Vincent
Guest
Maybe you can help me out as to how you did your exegesis. You wrote, “And if He’s standing there in His body, that should give you your first clue that He is speaking figuratively.” That suggests that Jesus can’t turn bread into his body because He’s already there in his body.
So if Jesus said, “This bread will become Me,” you’ll take that literally? I hardly think so. You wrote earlier, “If He’s standing there in His body, that should give you your first clue that He is speaking figuratively.” Therefore, “become” wouldn’t change anything in your interpretation, if you wish to be consistent.
As though the Catholic Church opposes you here… It doesn’t. Moreover your explanation doesn’t minimize the effect of placing *mou *after touto: “This of me…”.
N
ncgolf
Guest
I guess there are many reasons why you may argue The Bread of Life Discourse but they are not Biblical. They are man-made.
Point 1 … Those were the same people who were at the multiplication of the loaves. If they were unbelievers … why John 6:15. They knew Jesus was someone and someone amazing … their bellies with the fishes and loaves miracle. On the contrary they wanted to know more. And they got more than they bargained for. If you are using John 6:36 as your unbeliever quote it is because Christ knew they would be unwilling to believe what He was going to say next. That He was true food and true drink, and that food was to be His flesh and blood.
Point 2. At the end of the gospel of John, he writes “there were many other things that Jesus did , but if those were to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written. John admits he did not write all of what he saw.” Your point 2 is irrelevant.
Point 3. The birth of Christ is recorded differently in Luke and Matthew. So what. The birth did happen … do the two accounts confuse you. They don’t confuse me and I am sure they don’t confuse you. I don’t see the problem you see.
Point 4. He did not have too … the apostles saw the significance after Christ had left. They would not have understood it before anyway. Christ had to die and rise to make His words significant. They had plenty of time to reflect on what they had seen and could put it into perspective after witnessing the resurrection. I am sure they understood much more … Christ left them with the Holy Spirit.
Point 5 and 6. Wow … a lot here. The manna in the desert was just food. Jesus was saying even though the food came from God it could not keep them from dying. Jesus is the food come down from heaven. He says and never wavers, never once … John 6:53 quotes Jesus “Amen, amen I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.” That is hard saying … what idiot can believe that. (That is paraphrase of John 6:60). Christ answers with does this shock you. Of course it would but Christ never recants his position. He knows who would believe this and who would not … not only for that time but for all time. Matthew 26:26 …. Jesus said, “Take and eat, this is my body.” Matthew 26:27 … Jesus said, “Drink from it, all of you for this is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins.” You are changing Christ’s words … I am reading them as He said them …. And I believe them as He said them. Christ straight. His words were spoke forcefully, truthfully and yet many still do not believe. It isn’t due to lack of trying.
Point 7. Christ gave Peter the ability to bind and loose. That is all he needed.
I don’t know what you mean “Those who partake of it in an unworthy manner are guilty of what it represents (the body and blood of the Lord - His sacrificial death on their behalf), not what it supposedly "becomes.”. Sorry.
I think they are connected and I think the connection goes back to the Exodus 12, the ritual of the Passover. The lamb was slaughtered, the blood spread on the door posts and then everyone had to eat the lamb, with unleavened bread and bitter herbs. You could not have escaped the 10th plague without eating the lamb. The lamb had to be without blemish …. No broken bones … ring any bells. The key here is you had to eat the lamb. No symbolic substitutes. Your first born would have paid the price for a symbolic lamb. This is the pre-figurement of the Eucharist. It fits like a glove.
P
Pax
Guest
xrc said:
You should retract this statement immediately and apologize. Unless you are now receiving divine revelation you have absolutely no way of knowing what a person knows or anything about the way they read scripture.
Your manner and methods are annoying not enlightening. You apparently have not read this thread or you would know that you are repeating many things that have already been posed, answered, and refuted. You may think that someone opened your eyes, but the Catholics on this thread readily recognize from your remarks that you do not know Catholic teaching. You need to first know what it is you are disagreeing with. If you believe that Catholics teach works righteousness then you do not know Catholic teaching. Works righteousness was condemned at the Council of Trent and was also condemned earlier when Augustine and others effectively rooted out Pelagianism. This is history and and the facts.
You need to be considerably more circumspect in your criticisms. You must first know what it is you left and not what you “think” it is. If you are simply here to make attacks then you are wasting your time and that of everyone else.
Generally speaking everyone on this thread is interested in the truth. You have not cornered the market on the truth. Truth begins by first understanding and knowing exactly what the Church teaches. You may think you know Catholic teaching, but your posts strongly indicate that this is not the case. If you love the truth then you must pursue it with your whole heart. You can do this by accepting the criticism of your Catholic brothers and sisters who are telling you that your understandings of Catholic teaching are incorrect.
X
xrc
Guest
**As I requested in my last post: Please show me, in the New Testament, where you find baptismal regeneration, seven sacraments, sanctifying grace, transubstantiation, a continuing sacrifice, confession to a priest, temporal punishment, indulgences, purgatory, merited eternal reward, the papacy, Mary’s Immaculate Conception, Assumption into heaven, co-redemptive work, mediation of all grace etc. Just humor me and give me the Book, the chapter and the verse that supports these practices and I’ll concede!
Obviously if none of these are taught in Scripture and in fact contradict it, that is proof that what I believe is not a 16 century invention and is the reason you cannot give a truthful response!**
In Christ Alone,
Mike
X
xrc
Guest
You probably played a lot of Dodge-Ball when you were a kid because you’re really good at dodging my questions!
In Christ Alone,
Mike
X
xrc
Guest
Didn’t Jesus command us to preach the Gospel to every creature? Then why are you so hesitant?
In Christ Alone,
Mike
D
dennisknapp
Guest
xrc said:
What I am asking is for you to show me from HISTORY that what you believe is not an innovation of the 16th century.
To give you Scriptural support for what I believe is useless, for we do not interpret Scripture the same, and as a Catholic, (and one who follows the historical church) Scripure has never in the history of the Church been the only authority. So, by my own criteria and that of history, quoting Scripture alone would be a contradiction, and I don’t deal in contraditions.
But back to my challenge: Historical evidence for the following please,
- Sola fide (that’s faith alone).
- Sola scriptura (scripture alone)
- Baptism is only a symbol and not salvific.
- Eucharist is only a symbol and not salvific.
B
Booklover
Guest
xrc said:
Mike, I’m sick and tired of your ranting! Your posts are enough to gag a maggot and I’m not interested in converting to your brand of Christianity. I believe in the Holy Roman Catholic Church and always will! No matter what you or any other detractors of the Church say, I remain firm in my beliefs because I know they are the truth!
You are just full of hatred of the Church. Your hatred is all consuming. Our Lord was persecuted all his life and it’s not surprising that the only Church he established would be persecuted just as much!
Let me tell you, if I didn’t belong to any denomination, and was looking for a church to join and met anyone like you with all your smug, holier than thou sanctimonious twaddle, I would run the other way! Now I know why it is that some people hate Christians in general! It’s people like you that does it.
I’m not going to try to prove anything you, because I know that anything I say you will take out context.
I ask you again: WHAT MAKES YOU THINK THAT YOU KNOW MORE THAN THE CHURCH THAT’S BEEN AROUND FOR OVER 2000 YEARS?
O
Ozzie
Guest
It doesn’t “suggest” anything of what He “can’t do,” but clearly “demonstrates” what He didn’t mean. He was obviously speaking figuratively. It’s very simple, Vincent. Do you want to argue whether or not Jesus can change a door into His body and blood, too? Or maybe the sun or the moon? Afterall, He did say, “I am the door,” “I am the light.”
O
Ozzie
Guest
That was a carnal act on their behalf, He fed their bellies so they wanted to take Him by force and make Him King. That was no demonstration of faith in Him.
John 6:36 is very explicit, Christ knew their hearts, they did not believe in Him. Yes, He knew exactly what He was doing when He said that “unless they eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood they would have no life in themselves.” He knew their carnal minds could/would only interpret His words literally. And so they did, and so they stumbled, withdrew, and no longer walked with Him. He exposed their carnality and their unbelief. That was His purpose behind His words. They stumbled because they took His words literally.
And to this day all those who still take His words literally continue to stumble, even refusing to believe that through faith in Him, and Him alone, they have eternal life.
Don’t dodge the facts, “nc.” John does not connect the two events, nor do the other Gospel accounts.
No, the Passover prefigured the crucifixion of Christ. “Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (Jn. 1:29). As the angel of death passed over the house on which he saw the blood, even so, this side of the cross, he who turns from unbelief to belief in Christ “does not come into judgment but has passed out of death into life” (Jn. 5:24).
The Jews, to this very day, observe the Passover meal in “remembrance” of that first “Passover” back in Egypt when they were spared death and delivered from the bondage of Egypt through the sacrificial blood of the Passover lamb. Now true believers, this side of the cross, are to partake of bread and wine in “remembrance” of our “Passover Lamb” who delivered us from the bondage of sin and death (1 Cor. 5:7). And when we partake, as Paul said, " we proclaim His death (in our stead) until he comes (1 Cor. 11:24, 26).
Note: The Israelites were required to put the blood on the lintel and door posts only that one time. After that they were required to observe only the meal in remembrance of that historical event when they were delivered by blood. In like manner, our “Passover Lamb” was sacrificed only once (Heb. 9 & 10), and by His shed blood we are delivered from ALL our sins. And now we too are to partake of the “Communion meal” in remembrance of His once-for-all. substitutionary, blood sacrifice on our behalf. As Jesus said: “Do this in remembrance of Me.”
- Status