Protestants, why?

[XianThinker]

Xian -

You believe that you are attending a church that follows the bible. In John 6, we can see Jesus explaining the importance of receiving his flesh and blood in the Eucharist. Does your church follow this biblical teaching?

45 Everyone who listens to my Father and learns from him comes to me.
46 Not that anyone has seen the Father except the one who is from God; he has seen the Father.
47 Amen, amen, I say to you, whoever believes has eternal life.
48 I am the bread of life.
49 Your ancestors ate the manna in the desert, but they died;
50 this is the bread that comes down from heaven so that one may eat it and not die.
51I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world.”
52 The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us [his] flesh to eat?”
53 Jesus said to them, “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.
54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day.
55 For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink.
56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him.*
57 Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me.
58 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your ancestors who ate and still died, whoever eats this bread will live forever.”

Jesus even speaks to receiving the Eucharist in the prayer he taught us :

Our Father, Who art in heaven
Hallowed be Thy Name;
Thy kingdom come,
Thy will be done,
on earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread,
and forgive us our trespasses,
as we forgive those who trespass against us;
and lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us from evil. Amen.

Do you know what “give us this day our daily bread” means?

Most churches I’ve been to have communion and understand that the bread and wine represent the body and blood of Jesus. I think “give us this day our daily bread” means to provide us food and meet our needs for the day.

 

[XianThinker]

Lets try this again.
A Catholic might say those denominations that don’t agree with the Catholic Church are not being led by the Spirit.
However YOU personalized it, not me or any other Catholic on this thread.
So again.
What makes you think YOU (the individual you) and the Holy Spirit are on the same page?

I think you are reading too much into what I wrote. “A Catholic might say those denominations that don’t agree with the Catholic Church are not being led by the Spirit.” If you are a Catholic and you agree with the Catholic Church, then you must also agree that those denominations that don’t agree with your beliefs are not being led by the Spirit since your beliefs are the same as those of the Catholic Church.

 

[JustaServant]

I think you are reading too much into what I wrote. “A Catholic might say those denominations that don’t agree with the Catholic Church are not being led by the Spirit.” If you are a Catholic and you agree with the Catholic Church, then you must also agree that those denominations that don’t agree with your beliefs are not being led by the Spirit since your beliefs are the same as those of the Catholic Church.

You still haven’t answered the question…

What criteria, what foundation do YOU, XianThinker use to reach the conclusion that YOU, XianThinker, are being led by the Holy Spirit and others are not?

 

[Porknpie]

Most churches I’ve been to have communion and understand that the bread and wine represent the body and blood of Jesus. I think “give us this day our daily bread” means to provide us food and meet our needs for the day.

Xian -

Your “I” biblical interpretation is wrong and does not reflect a bible alone understanding. You are inserting a man made tradition.

• Jesus was clear in his words. No where does he speak symbolically
• the disciples understood him speaking literally

60 Then many of his disciples who were listening said, “This saying is hard; who can accept it?”

66 As a result of this, many [of] his disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him.

• the Jews understood him to be speaking literally

52 The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us [his] flesh to eat ?

John 7:1 After this, Jesus moved about within Galilee; but he did not wish to travel in Judea, because the Jews were trying to kill him.

The early church understood him speaking literally as well.

“They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again.” Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to Smyrnaeans, 7,1 (c. A.D. 110).

“For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.” Justin Martyr, First Apology, 66 (c. A.D. 110-165).

 

[joe370]

Dear Friends,

My Mom and her family were Baptist. Then along the way, I know not which or how, everyone decided to became Catholic. I broke away from the Catholic Church on my road to whatever for lack of a better word. ;] I’ve been a member of the Baptist faith when I was trying to find my path long ago, studied and wondered why so many sects in the Baptist Church? Broke from it when a Southern Baptist person told me dancing was wrong and my Mother (being Mexican marrying my Caucasian Father was a sin) I also studied the Mormon Religion, know about Methodist, and Jehovah Witness on my path of truly finding what God wanted. Or trying to find His voice in the true Church. Here too, I believe totally that God gives us the free will to choose. Just my opinion. With all the denominations at my fingertips I flew back “Home”. To be a Catholic again. I knew I found my place in this world when I came “Home”.

Now, I know too and truly understand that Jesus when He was on the earth was cut and dry, no grey areas about the Holy Father and what we were to believe. It made sense to me. I thought, God is my Supreme parent who tells us His rules through Christ since He made the world and they are such and such. Like my earthly parents. Do it my way or the highway to put it bluntly. Yet, some mankind said I refuse and I’m going to believe what I want to believe on the basis that I have a brain and can think for myself and Catholicism is too strict.

Furthermore, I will not deny that man also stepped in to convert some of God’s rules or leave out to suit themselves. That they listen to man because God sure didn’t say worship idols. Protestants believe Catholics worships idols, the Virgin Mother is equal to God and we worship saints because of our statues.

Plus, a lot of it is misinterpreting the Bible. Let me ask you this. How many times has a teacher read a paragraph out of a book and asks what is your take on it? And everyone had the exact perceptive when responding. Not always.

Oh moreover, another biggie Catholics get criticized over is that we ask our departed love ones for intervention in our prayer life. I don’t know about you but I think the thought of people who are CLOSER to God than I am have a hand up on the prayer line to Our Heavenly Father and I truly like the part that I can pray for intervention through our Holy Mother who by the way was born without sin so she’s High on the corporate ladder of the Prayer chain–metaphorically speaking. You ask for people to pray for you on earth, why not in Heaven? If you truly believe beloveds are in Heaven then communication with Jesus is open. Oh too, I know we can go to God directly and Jesus but Jesus did say, “When two or more are gathered in His Name. He is in our midst.” Fortifies our prayer with power. I believe that is for persons on earth and for whoever we pray to in Heaven.

""The Bible says that he has helpers that participate in His ministry by His invitation. We believe he has invited Christians on both sides of heaven to do that. When a saint enters into the joy of their Master, they are “put in charge of many things” (Mat 25:21) Saints are serious prayer warriors. I don’t think that praying with the Saints detracts from the worship of God anymore than praying with friends detracts from worship of God, which I do a lot. Saints are not all knowing, but they know a heck of a lot more about this spiritual game than me. They are creatures. This does not take away the tremendous benefit we can get from communing with them. Catholics think “their intercession is their most exalted service to God’s plan. We can and should ask them to intercede for us and for the whole world” (Catechism 2683) “” I read this from a site that I forgot the name of. Please know I do not take credit for it.

One more thing, I must say I love being a Catholic. I finally got confirmed when I was in my 40s. (Missed that one when I was young) And have never looked back. I’m heading towards my 60’s now. Yet, if I ever look back, it will to be to grab “your willing hand” and say, “Come along with me. You are in for the BEST ‘ride’ of your life.”

Love ya’ll lots,
Sheila is my real name and I’m going to love everyone in the world. Yes siree bob.

From the Southwest and I love it. yeehaww!:tiphat:

Awesome post. Thanks so much for sharing.

 

[PRmerger]

Matches mine.

GKC

 

[PRmerger]

I think you have to realize that some doctrines are more important than others. Many Protestants believe the Bible is clear on important, essential matters like salvation. In other less important matters, Christians are free to disagree with each other. I’ve heard many Protestants say Jehovah’s Witnesses aren’t Christians because they don’t believe in the Trinity. But I’ve never heard any Protestant curse anyone because of his choice of music or his opinion on the rapture.

And yet these Christians can’t even agree on what these “important, essential” matters are, and what the Bible says about them.

Incidentally, the Bible makes no mention of what’s an essential, important belief and what’s a secondary belief.

In order to determine that, XT, you need to rely on the discernment of men. Fallible men.

 

[prochrist1]

If all us so called protestants need to learn the “essentials” from the R.Catholic church then when us protestants read comments from an early pope St. Clement who made this startling statement about the Phoenix, a mythical bird used in pagan myth to promote as a symbol the resurrection of Jesus

ewtn.com/library/patristc/anf1-1.htm

One has to question their intent and study further before joining such organization

Peter says that when we are to proclaim the gospel “we have not followed cunningly devised fables” (2Pet. 1:16).

 

[joe370]

If all us so called protestants need to learn the “essentials” from the R.Catholic church then when us protestants read comments from an early pope St. Clement who made this startling statement about the Phoenix, a mythical bird used in pagan myth to promote as a symbol the resurrection of Jesus

ewtn.com/library/patristc/anf1-1.htm

One has to question their intent and study further before joining such organization

Peter says that when we are to proclaim the gospel “we have not followed cunningly devised fables” (2Pet. 1:16).

What’s wrong with Clement of Rome making a connection between the phoenix and that of Christ’s resurrection (of course it was never declared an official teaching)? He is simply drawing a parallel by employing the phoenix as a symbol of Christ’s resurrection, and the resurrection of all those who follow Him.

Is it safe to conclude that PRmerger is right about the Bible making no distinction between essential teachings and non-essential teachings, meaning that sola scriptura advocates should steer clear of that idea just as they steer clear of the assumption of Mary? Seems logical to me.

 

[prochrist1]

What’s wrong with Clement of Rome making a connection between the phoenix and that of Christ’s resurrection (of course it was never declared an official teaching)? He is simply drawing a parallel by employing the phoenix as a symbol of Christ’s resurrection, and the resurrection of all those who follow Him.

Is it safe to conclude that PRmerger is right about the Bible making no distinction between essential teachings and non-essential teachings, meaning that sola scriptura advocates should steer clear of that idea just as they steer clear of the assumption of Mary? Seems logical to me.

You do realize he said emblem right ?

em·blem
   [em-bluhm] Show IPA
noun
1.
an object or its representation, symbolizing a quality, state, class of persons, etc.; symbol: The olive branch is an emblem of peace.
2.
a sign, design, or figure that identifies or represents something: the emblem of a school.

 

[joe370]

You do realize he said emblem right ?

em·blem
   [em-bluhm] Show IPA
noun
1.
an object or its representation, symbolizing a quality, state, class of persons, etc.; symbol: The olive branch is an emblem of peace.
2.
a sign, design, or figure that identifies or represents something: the emblem of a school.

History confirms that Clement of Rome (1st century bishop of the catholic church) was in fact a disciple of the apostle Paul. Did saint Clement and saint Paul both belong to the same catholic church? Just curious… Many non-catholics insist that the catholic church was founded by someone other than Jesus, in the 4th century.

 

[Porknpie]

If all us so called protestants need to learn the “essentials” from the R.Catholic church then when us protestants read comments from an early pope St. Clement who made this startling statement about the Phoenix, a mythical bird used in pagan myth to promote as a symbol the resurrection of Jesus

ewtn.com/library/patristc/anf1-1.htm

One has to question their intent and study further before joining such organization

Peter says that when we are to proclaim the gospel “we have not followed cunningly devised fables” (2Pet. 1:16).

Prochrist,

The analogy of the Phoenix is pretty cool. The next chapter relates that we, like the Phoenix, “will rise again”. He’s using a symbol (emblem definiton in this case is a symbol) that a pagan people understood to make a point about our salvation in Christ. That’s called relating to your audience.

Chap. XXV. The phoenix an emblem of our resurrection.

Let us consider that wonderful sign [of the resurrection] which takes place in Eastern lands, that is, in Arabia and the countries round about. There is a certain bird which is called a phoenix. This is the only one of its kind, and lives five hundred years. And when the time of its dissolution draws near that it must die, it builds itself a nest of frankincense, and myrrh, and other spices, into which, when the time is fulfilled, it enters and dies. But as the flesh decays a certain kind of worm is produced, which, being nourished by the juices of the dead bird, brings forth feathers. Then, when it has acquired strength, it takes up that nest in which are the bones of its parent, and bearing these it passes from the land of Arabia into Egypt, to the city called Heliopolis. And, in open day, flying in the sight of all men, it places them on the altar of the sun, and having done this, hastens back to its former abode. The priests then inspect the registers of the dates, and find that it has returned exactly as the five hundredth year was completed.

Chap. XXVI. We shall rise again, then, as the Scripture also testifies.

Do we then deem it any great and wonderful thing for the Maker of all things to raise up again those that have piously served Him in the assurance of a good faith, when even by a bird He shows us the mightiness of His power to fulfil His promise ? For [the Scripture] saith in a certain place, "Thou shalt raise me up, and I shall confess unto Thee; " and again, "I laid me down, and slept; I awaked, because Thou art with me; " and again, Job says, “Thou shalt raise up this flesh of mine, which has suffered all these things.”

 

[PRmerger]

If all us so called protestants need to learn the “essentials” from the R.Catholic church then when us protestants read comments from an early pope St. Clement who made this startling statement about the Phoenix, a mythical bird used in pagan myth to promote as a symbol the resurrection of Jesus

ewtn.com/library/patristc/anf1-1.htm

One has to question their intent and study further before joining such organization

Peter says that when we are to proclaim the gospel “we have not followed cunningly devised fables” (2Pet. 1:16).

Why does it seem suspect to you that a pope mentions the phoenix?

I don’t understand your objection to that.

Is there something inherently evil about a mythical bird?

 

[JustaServant]

Why does it seem suspect to you that a pope mentions the phoenix?

I don’t understand your objection to that.

Is there something inherently evil about a mythical bird?

Because fundamentalists are incapable of seeing a world different from the cookie-cutter vision they have. An ECF spoke of a phoenix, so therefore that disqualifies him from being the kind of Christian they envision.
Obviously he hasn’t read Augustine’s City of God. He speaks extensively on “antipods”.
I’d be willing to bet some of his Protestant heros had some pretty outdated ideas themselves.

 

[PRmerger]

Because fundamentalists are incapable of seeing a world different from the cookie-cutter vision they have. An ECF spoke of a phoenix, so therefore that disqualifies him from being the kind of Christian they envision.
Obviously he hasn’t read Augustine’s City of God. He speaks extensively on “antipods”.
I’d be willing to bet some of his Protestant heros had some pretty outdated ideas themselves.

Ah, I see.

So then do these Christians realize that St. John used a pagan concept–the logos–to describe Jesus?

And what about any Scriptural references to a temple? Isn’t a temple a pagan concept? It would seem consistent, then, for these Christians who object to St. Clement (who sat at the feet of the apostles) referencing a phoenix, to reject the Book of Hebrews, which speaks of a “earthly temple” (Hebrews 8:5)

 

[JustaServant]

Ah, I see.

So then do these Christians realize that St. John used a pagan concept–the logos–to describe Jesus?

And what about any Scriptural references to a temple? Isn’t a temple a pagan concept? It would seem consistent, then, for these Christians who object to St. Clement (who sat at the feet of the apostles) referencing a phoenix, to reject the Book of Hebrews, which speaks of a “earthly temple” (Hebrews 8:5)

Exactly.
Just because an historical figure uses, or even believes something we know today as a myth does not mean they were not intelligent or spiritual. That’s the problem with revisionism. It insists all people in all ages think like 21st century man, because we are oh, so superior to them.
As for big birds, many Native Americans north and south spoke of something that sounds an allful lot like a pterosaur. The Chinese spoke of “dragons”.
There are more things in Heaven and earth…

 

[XianThinker]

And yet these Christians can’t even agree on what these “important, essential” matters are, and what the Bible says about them.

Incidentally, the Bible makes no mention of what’s an essential, important belief and what’s a secondary belief.

In order to determine that, XT, you need to rely on the discernment of men. Fallible men.

I disagree. I think the Bible clearly states what is important and what isn’t. Even if it didn’t, it wouldn’t matter because the Bible doesn’t need to list what is important or essential because I think it is obvious to anyone who reads the Bible with the desire to learn the truth. When we die, the only thing that matters will be whether we go to Heaven or Hell so obviously salvation is the most important teaching. The fact that the Bible discusses salvation over and over, more than any other topic also confirms that it is important. I think the Bible’s teaching on salvation is very clear, so clear that anyone who desires to follow God can read the Bible and easily understand it. Issues related to salvation such as who is Jesus, his death on the cross, and faith are obviously important also.

Other issues, such as eating meat or the observance of holy days like the Sabbath or the observance of religious festivals that have no effect on one’s salvation are obviously less important. This is clearly stated in the Bible in Colossians where Paul teaches that salvation is more important than observing holy days. He clearly states in Romans that it makes no difference whether one considers one day more sacred or considers every day alike.

“When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross… Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ. (Colossians 2:13-17, NIV)”

“One person considers one day more sacred than another; another considers every day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind (Romans 14:5)”

 

[JustaServant]

You still haven’t answered the question…

What criteria, what foundation do YOU, XianThinker use to reach the conclusion that YOU, XianThinker, are being led by the Holy Spirit and others are not?

Xian,
Please answer the question.

 

[PRmerger]

I disagree. I think the Bible clearly states what is important and what isn’t.

Fair enough.

So if you could offer what these essentials are, the Bible verses that support this, and…

here’s the important part…

the verses that tell you that it’s an essential.

I have asked this question on the CAFs many, many times of different non-Catholic Christians, and each time I get a list of Bible verses that this poster believes are essential verses…

but no one has ever offered verses which tell us how they know that it’s an essential verse.

So, for example, someone might say, “John 3:16 is an essential doctrine”…but can’t offer a verse that tells them that John 3:16 is essential and not secondary.

If you could do that, I would be impressed!

 

[PRmerger]

Even if it didn’t, it wouldn’t matter because the Bible doesn’t need to list what is important or essential** because I think it is obvious to anyone who reads the Bible with the desire to learn the truth**.

Ok.

So I hope you will allow Catholics this same paradigm.

Do you object to our saying, “It doesn’t matter that the Bible doesn’t explicitly list the Assumption of Mary and her Immaculate Conception, or purgatory, because I think it is obvious to anyone who reads the Bible with the desire to learn the truth”?

We believe that it’s obvious.

Just like you believe that these “essentials” are obvious. (Except, peculiarly, no Christians here can agree on what these essentials are. Believe me–I’ve asked this and no one offers the same verses. Ever.)

because it’s When we die, the only thing that matters will be whether we go to Heaven or Hell so obviously salvation is the most important teaching. The fact that the Bible discusses salvation over and over, more than any other topic also confirms that it is important. I think the Bible’s teaching on salvation is very clear, so clear that anyone who desires to follow God can read the Bible and easily understand it. Issues related to salvation such as who is Jesus, his death on the cross, and faith are obviously important also.

Sure.

But what verses deal with salvation? Don’t they essentially ALL deal with our salvation? Is there one verse that we can dismiss as secondary?

And how do you know that this one can be regarded as not as important?

Other issues, such as eating meat or the observance of holy days like the Sabbath or the observance of religious festivals that have no effect on one’s salvation are obviously less important.

This is clearly stated in the Bible in Colossians where Paul teaches that salvation is more important than observing holy days. He clearly states in Romans that it makes no difference whether one considers one day more sacred or considers every day alike.

“When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross… Therefore do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ. (Colossians 2:13-17, NIV)”

I don’t believe that verse says what you think it says, XT.

It doesn’t say that worshipping on a different day is a secondary belief.

Not at all.