Protestants: Do you believe that Christ is truly present in the communion elements of bread and wine?

[benedictus2]

You say I don’t have the Holy Spirit because I don’t belong to your religious organization…I don’t remember that in the Bible…do you? The next time you judge someone’s soul, which is very implicit in your statement, remember two things: 1) You are not God 2) not very Chrisitan

No. That is not what I said at all. I on my own even though I belong to the Catholc Church cannot claim that my interpretation is correct. Only when it is in conformity with the magisterium of the Church that I can say that my interpretation is correct because that promise of inerrancy was given to the Church not to me as an individual member.

You on the other hand, rely solely on your own understanding which Peter counselled against.

 

[NonCatholic]

Hello "NonCatholic"

Often, as you investigate other religions, you will find that they always have great flowing “testimonies.” How accurate are such "testimonies? What do such “testimonies” really mean? And how would such a “testimony” actually hold up to the test of God’s Word?

Now, I won’t presume to tell you what to think; but I would like to share a bit more of what I think. I remember “testimonies” that I used to give. One day; it ocurred to me that it might be an interesting project to actually take all the components of my own experience, and see what God’s Word actually said about it. I was absolutely shocked to see some of the falsehoods that had been ocurring in my experience.

It is important to note that one of the most glaring things God’s Word pointed out to me was that no matter what doctrine I chose, it was important to experience Jesus, in the personal way depicted in 1 Jo.5:11-12. It has nothing to do with eating bread, drinking wine, making sacrifices, or any other Church sacrament a given Church could drum up.

When I discovered this from a very dear Adventist friend/mentor; I realized that Christ did indeed walk with His people, wherever they would happen to be. As a Seventh-day Adventist, this excited me very much. Why? Because I didn’t have to worry so much about what others believed, I just had to ask myself, "Do they “have” Jesus, as in the context of 1 Jo.11-12? And if so, what can I learn from them, about Him?

I also learned that I did not have to believe every testimony given to me as some sort of “proof” of any particular doctrinal set of beliefs. Testimonies always mean something, but not necessarily pointing out evidence of Bible truths. When a “testimony” gives the inference that all the people in the Church that a given person has left, for eg., are “unregenerated natural persons” this is something that can show a very sad state of affairs. To “have” Jesus, as in 1 Jo.5:11-12, is not very evident in such ramblings, but it does not mean the person is not a Christian. It just means that we need to be careful about believing testimonies as evidence of Bible truth. Too often, testimonies are used to manipulate others into “the real truth.”

The true testimony is the life that one leads and the resulting fruits of righteousness. A persons testimony often tells more about the unregeneration of a person than the regeneration that comes from God.

 

[NonCatholic]

No. That is not what I said at all. I on my own even though I belong to the Catholc Church cannot claim that my interpretation is correct. Only when it is in conformity with the magisterium of the Church that I can say that my interpretation is correct because that promise of inerrancy was given to the Church not to me as an individual member.

You on the other hand, rely solely on your own understanding which Peter counselled against.

Here is what you said: “You however are presuming that you have been given the Holy Spirit. The **only instance **that we can be sure that Holy Spirit is there is in the Church.”

You know I’m not a Catholic; not in the “Church”. How else could that be understood?

 

[Protestant101]

Perhaps he didn’t suffer on the cross as well. That was probably all just symbolic?

Nice little smoke-screen! Guess you keep missing that phrase “IN REMEMBRANCE OF ME?” I think you’re too busy making sport of Protestants. You should try some serious Bible study.

 

[benedictus2]

It is important to note that one of the most glaring things God’s Word pointed out to me was that no matter what doctrine I chose, it was important to experience Jesus, in the personal way depicted in 1 Jo.5:11-12. It has nothing to do with eating bread, drinking wine, making sacrifices, or any other Church sacrament a given Church could drum up.

Can you cite chapter and verse where Jesus says that to be saved, one must have a personal relationship with him?

Me, I can cite chapter and verse where Jesus tells me what I must do to have eternal life.

 

[NonCatholic]

No. That is not what I said at all. I on my own even though I belong to the Catholc Church cannot claim that my interpretation is correct. Only when it is in conformity with the magisterium of the Church that I can say that my interpretation is correct because that promise of inerrancy was given to the Church not to me as an individual member.

You on the other hand, rely solely on your own understanding which Peter counselled against.

“Only when it is in conformity with the magisterium of the Church that I can say that my interpretation is correct because that promise of inerrancy was given to the Church not to me as an individual member.”

You sell yourself short and/or make the Holy Spirit a liar.

 

[benedictus2]

Nice little smoke-screen! Guess you keep missing that phrase “IN REMEMBRANCE OF ME?” I think you’re too busy making sport of Protestants. You should try some serious Bible study.

Guess you keep missing, "eat my flesh’, “drink my blood”. “feed on me”.

And guess what, did Christ say we should study the Bible to be saved?

 

[NonCatholic]

Can you cite chapter and verse where Jesus says that to be saved, one must have a personal relationship with him?

Me, I can cite chapter and verse where Jesus tells me what I must do to have eternal life.

John 17

 

[Protestant101]

Realcatholicgk,

I think we’re almost of the same colour. We posted the same bible verse one time in this thread.
You call their churches “counterfeits”- I once call them on my posts “clones”.

I’m not worried with P101. He didn’t change a bit since my first post in CAF. His belief’s so ‘black’. I’m worried about these “grayish whites” which had become “almost Catholics”.

But you’re here.
God bless.

OOOO…Now I’m shaking in my boots to be sure. This was very touching. Thankyou.

 

[Protestant101]

John 17

Amen!

Joh 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

1Jo 5:11 And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.
1Jo 5:12 He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.

 

[benedictus2]

“Only when it is in conformity with the magisterium of the Church that I can say that my interpretation is correct because that promise of inerrancy was given to the Church not to me as an individual member.”

You sell yourself short and/or make the Holy Spirit a liar.

How so? You are the one making the Holy Spirit a liar. You and the 33,000 or so denominations with different takes on the Bible.

If you are convinced that you are guided by the Holy Spirit and another protestant with a different view to yours is convinced they are guided by the Holy Spirit, which one of you is really guided by the Holy Spirt since you can’t be both correct.

And if you are both guided by the Holy Spirit and yet came up with different interpretations then heavn help us because that means you have one mighty confused spirt.

 

[NonCatholic]

Aaah, the protestants utter lack of understanding of mystery!

A mystery by definition is something not yet revealed…Christ has revealed Himself…keep on being mysterious, which is part of your fascination and it might lead to destruction. I said it might, not it would, but might.

 

[benedictus2]

John 17

Read John 17 again. Nowhere does it say that to be saved one must have a personal relationship with Christ.

 

[NonCatholic]

John 6 does have to do with the message of salvation. How? Because if we eat Christ’s flesh and drink His blood we will have eternal life.

But it is also about the last supper. This discourse was done one year at Passover before the last supper. Take a look at the synoptic accounts of the last supper. There they were having the Passover Meal which by the way has a very precise order to it and all of a sudden Jesus goes, This is my Body, This is my Blood. So totally not part of the order of the Seder Meal But no one of them went " Say what??!!!".
If you look at these gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) there was no building up to this moment at all. His words are are just so totally out of whack with the rest of the narrative.

But not so to the Apostles because they were prepared one year before through this discourse in John 6.

Yes that is true. The flesh and blood are means God used to accomplish the work of salvation. Again, How? According to Christ Himself, when we eat his flesh and drink his Hlood we will have eternal life. To have eternal life is to be saved. So in order to be saved, one must eat His flesh and drink His blood. Says who? Says Christ.

I said more to do with salvation, than the Lord’s supper…the Lord’s supper reference is really only in the aspect that Christ is pointing to the cross with the flesh and blood scenario in John 6 and in the Lords supper we are keeping this great truth in mind or remembrance.

 

[Realcatholicgk]

Why are there many divisions within the Catholic church?

**Hi Non,

How have you been? It is true that there are 220 sects of the Christian church. It has to do with regional differences dating back 2000 years old. The strange thing is that even after 2,000 years all these churches still agree that they are all part of the real church.

This is unlike the 61,000 Protestant groups that have developed in the past 500 years who deny that the other 60,999 other groups are the correct way to Salvation. **

within this forum? within all denominations? You will have to ask a Protestant in regards to your question.

What is Christian to you? Are you posting like one?
**
A christian is someone who follows Jesus, through His church which He established before He died for the sins of all mankind.

A real Christian desires to save Satan’s followers from eternal damnation. To share the truth as Jesus taught so Satan can not possess their soul for eternity.

No one can be saved by a “personal” relationship with Jesus without His church. There is no such thing! You can blindly go along believing that you are talking to Jesus as the Devil whisper
lies in your ears.

To follow yourself, or a false counterfeit church’s teachings, is to be lead into damnation! Do not be fooled!

Do not think it is Christian to allow others to be damned without attempting to save them! That is not the Christian thing to do! We must attempt to get them to believe the truth! Just like the Devil has the Protestants attempt to get people to follow his false teachings, the RCC attempts to have people follow Jesus’ real teachings!

I hope that clears it up for you! **

 

[Protestant101]

Guess you keep missing, "eat my flesh’, “drink my blood”. “feed on me”.

And guess what, did Christ say we should study the Bible to be saved?

That’s the trouble - you keep wanting to “guess what” with matters of salvation.

Plenty of texts are being shown to forum members here that also show other things 'required for salvation" than the Lord’s Supper. Christ is always present through His Word, and through His Word Christians “feed” on Him even today.

The word of the living God is not merely written, but spoken. The Bible is God’s voice speaking to us, just as surely as though we could hear it with our ears. If we realized this, with what awe would we open God’s word, and with what earnestness would we search its precepts! The reading and contemplation of the Scriptures would be regarded as an audience with the Infinite One. The Bible describes itself, quite fittingly, as “Food For The Soul;” whether or not Catholics like the idea! See Spiritual Food

Joh 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

 

[benedictus2]

I said more to do with salvation, than the Lord’s supper…the Lord’s supper reference is really only in the aspect that Christ is pointing to the cross with the flesh and blood scenario in John 6 and in the Lords supper we are keeping this great truth in mind or remembrance.

But the flesh and blood scenario on the cross is not about eating and drinking his body and blood. John 6 and the last supper on the other hand do speak of eating and drinking his body and blood.

What do you think after he said This is my Body they did not eat the bread? John 6 and the institution of the Eucharist narrative go hand and hand.

 

[Protestant101]

Guess you keep missing, "eat my flesh’, “drink my blood”. “feed on me”.

And guess what, did Christ say we should study the Bible to be saved?

Joh 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

 

[benedictus2]

That’s the trouble - you keep wanting to “guess what” with matters of salvation.

Plenty of texts are being shown to forum members here that also show other things 'required for salvation" than the Lord’s Supper. Christ is always present through His Word, and through His Word Christians “feed” on Him even today.

Way to go! Pennies are finally dropping. Yes, there are **also other **things “required” for salvation but eating and drinking his blood is one of them. We are not saying that just because you received Christ in the Eucharist you are therefore assured of salvation.

The word of the living God is not merely written, but spoken.

Pray tell what is the spoken word of God that is separate to the written Word.

The Bible is God’s voice speaking to us, just as surely as though we could hear it with our ears.

Could not agree with you more. So why do you refuse to listen to Jesus when he speaks.

If we realized this, with what awe would we open God’s word, and with what earnestness would we search its precepts! The reading and contemplation of the Scriptures would be regarded as an audience with the Infinite One. The Bible describes itself, quite fittingly, as “Food For The Soul;” whether or not Catholics like the idea! See Spiritual Food

Yes, yes, and another yes to that. And we have never ever, said otherwise. Scripture is indeed food for the soul. But Christ is very clear, that His body and His blood are true food and true drink indeed. And it will give you eternal life.

And where is that written? In the Bible.

 

[NonCatholic]

Read John 17 again. Nowhere does it say that to be saved one must have a personal relationship with Christ.

John 17:20-21 How you ever known anyone that was saved that did not have a personal relationship with Christ? If you honestly think this is not so or not important, than you are worse than I thought.