Sola scriptura-Eucharist, Christmas and Easter celebration question

[808Catholic]

Thanks for the explanation I see where you coming from and it is a interesting analogy… Because if you read it like that it will seem as if Jesus says we must literally eat his flesh and drink his blood, but if you read the whole chapter and the see context of it you will notice that it has nothing to do with the communion of Christ or the eucharist, and like you say the reason why the Jews were shocked at the way Jesus was speaking is because they too took what Jesus said in a literal way, and they knew that if they literally ate his flesh and drank his blood that it would mean that Jesus and them would be breaking the law that God gave to Moses, like you said the Jews knew this. We also know that Jesus said that he didn’t come to abolish the law of Moses.
The diciples also took what Jesus said literally that’s why they were shocked at what he said like John 6:60 says - When they heard this, many of his disciples said: “This speech is shocking; who can listen to it?”
Then Jesus asks them in verse 61 - But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples were murmuring about this, said to them: “Does this stumble you?"
He then answers them in verse 63 and says - “It is the spirit that is life-giving; the flesh is of no use at all. The sayings that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life.”
So based on that answer it’s clear that Jesus says he was speaking in a spiritual (figurative) sense and not a literal sense as believed by many christians today.

Like if it all is literal like Jesus says his flesh is real food then that would mean when Jesus says in verse 35 that “I am the bread of life” that Jesus is literally bread… That whole chapter is in a figurative sense.
Or how do you not believe Jesus words in verse 63 when he says its all spiritual and that the flesh is of no use at all?

I believe Jesus gave the imagery of the Real Presence when He said “The sayings that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life.” In other words, His Divine nature is in the bread or the substance just as Jesus is God Incarnate: totally God and totally human at the same time.

If the flesh is truly of no use, why did the early Christian church fight the Arian heresy? Wasn’t their claim that Jesus was only a creature created by God and not truly Incarnate? Then there’s the Gnostics who went the other direction: Jesus was only spirit made to look like man. Neither were correct.

Could it be just as simple as Jesus said in John 6:55 “For my flesh is true food and my blood is true drink”?

 

[ChosenOne7]

I believe Jesus gave the imagery of the Real Presence when He said “The sayings that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life.” In other words, His Divine nature is in the bread or the substance just as Jesus is God Incarnate: totally God and totally human at the same time.

If the flesh is truly of no use, why did the early Christian church fight the Arian heresy? Wasn’t their claim that Jesus was only a creature created by God and not truly Incarnate? Then there’s the Gnostics who went the other direction: Jesus was only spirit made to look like man. Neither were correct.

Could it be just as simple as Jesus said in John 6:55 “For my flesh is true food and my blood is true drink”?

what Jesus had in mind must have been eating and drinking in a figurative sense, by exercising faith in the value of his perfect human sacrifice.
Jesus often spoke in this sense, look at John 4:4 - “Whoever drinks from the water that I will give him will never get thirsty at all,+ but the water that I will give him will become in him a spring of water bubbling up to impart everlasting life.” that cant be literal too.

but lets say it was about the eucharist and that it was literal, if you recall that only 11 diciples was with Jesus on the night he died and who took part of that communion, would you say the other diciples who didnt eat his flesh or drink of his blood that night wouldnt get everlasting life?

 

[JonNC]

Do you believe that if it isn’t in the Bible that it makes it acceptable for us to do? Or would u say we as humans can and have the right to decide what is and isn’t acceptable to God?

Here you provide a false choice. I would suspect that you and I countless times daily do things not explicitly proscribed in scripture. The issue then becomes things we do in regards to the faith specifically. The short answer, from this Lutheran’s perspective, is the Church has established the church calendar, has provided for specific celebrations and festivals, which are directly drawn from scripture itself. The birth of Christ, His incarnation, the Transfiguration, the Passion, etc. are all scriptural. Celebrations and commemorations of these events do not do harm to the Gospel. And that is the basis: does a celebration or action serve the Gospel? If it does, then it is not wrong to do it. If it does harm to the Gospel, then it should not be done. and in keeping with scripture and sola scriptura, Lutherans depend on the church to decide these things.
Virtually all Christians through time have celebrated/commemorated these events found in scripture, and to claim that doing so is pagan puts you in the position of demonstrating how celebrating the birth of the Incarnate Word, for example, is pagan, and which pagan god it honors instead of Christ.

Jon

 

[ChosenOne7]

Here you provide a false choice. I would suspect that you and I countless times daily do things not explicitly proscribed in scripture. The issue then becomes things we do in regards to the faith specifically. The short answer, from this Lutheran’s perspective, is the Church has established the church calendar, has provided for specific celebrations and festivals, which are directly drawn from scripture itself. The birth of Christ, His incarnation, the Transfiguration, the Passion, etc. are all scriptural. Celebrations and commemorations of these events do not do harm to the Gospel. And that is the basis: does a celebration or action serve the Gospel? If it does, then it is not wrong to do it. If it does harm to the Gospel, then it should not be done. and in keeping with scripture and sola scriptura, Lutherans depend on the church to decide these things.
Virtually all Christians through time have celebrated/commemorated these events found in scripture, and to claim that doing so is pagan puts you in the position of demonstrating how celebrating the birth of the Incarnate Word, for example, is pagan, and which pagan god it honors instead of Christ.

And that’s what I’m saying… It’s a man made ideal… Based on man’s own ideas they deciding what is an isn’t acceptable to God… We won’t need to add anything to praise and worship God to what the Bible says already… But if true Christians really wished to celebrate an occasion in honor of Jesus Christ, matters should be presented truthfully. Jesus said at John 4:23 that true worshipers shall worship “in spirit and truth”. So anything to which Christ’s name is attached should therefore be factual. Christmas really does not measure up to this primary identification of Christ’s teachings and true Christians. There’s nothing factual about Christmas… Many of the details of Jesus’ birth that are widely accepted as heartwarming facts are untrue and are actually sinister in nature.
Was Jesus born on the 25th? Not biblical
Was it 3 “wise men” that visited Jesus? the Bible writer Matthew does not specify how many of these men came, nor does he call them “wise men,” much less “three kings.” He uses the Greek word ma’goi, which means “astrologers.” This alone should give us a clue that something evil is at work here, for astrology is an art that God’s Word condemns and that faithful Jews scrupulously avoided. (Deut. 18:10-12; Isaiah 47:13, 14)
What about Santa? Who does he represent? Santa, stars, solar worship, birthdays of Gods, tree worship… they are all idols that were and are still used by non-Christian worshipers. Many of these are still used by Satan worshipers today. (1 Cor. 11:14)
The celebration of Christmas has also promoted the worship of Jesus in place of his Father, He directed all worship to his Father, saying: “It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.” (Matthew 4:10)

Those who honestly wish to be true worshippers of God would do well to consider - Would the “God of truth” (Ps. 31:5) really appreciate having people worshiping Him with so many lies and distortions?

 

[exnihilo]

Jesus said at John 4:23 that true worshipers shall worship “in spirit and truth”. So anything to which Christ’s name is attached should therefore be factual. Christmas really does not measure up to this primary identification of Christ’s teachings and true Christians. There’s nothing factual about Christmas… Many of the details of Jesus’ birth that are widely accepted as heartwarming facts are untrue and are actually sinister in nature.
Was Jesus born on the 25th? Not biblical

The Church is not saying Jesus was definitely born on Dec. 25. Rather, this is the day we celebrate. Although it could certainly be that He was born on this day. If people have wrong impressions about other aspects of the Nativity, such as there being only three wise men, that doesn’t make celebrating Christmas wrong. It just makes their notions wrong. What if people have wrong notions about weekly worship? Does that then mean weekly worship is wrong? It just doesn’t follow that something is made invalid because certain associated but inessential aspects are.

 

[JustaServant]

That’s also one of the reasons why we as Jehovah’s Witnesses don’t celebrate Christmas or Easter, because like you said it’s not found in the Bible.

Random things not “found in the Bible”.
Cars
Airplanes
Computers
Online forums
TVs
Movies
Trains
Radios
Jehovah’s Witnesses.
Kingdom Halls.
False prophecies by founders of a certain religion.
Where do you find “Bible” in the Bible?
Which I might add, was put together by the Catholic Church.

Is it possible that…maybe…just maybe…you are using the Bible in a way it was never intended to be used?

 

[ChosenOne7]

The Church is not saying Jesus was definitely born on Dec. 25. Rather, this is the day we celebrate. Although it could certainly be that He was born on this day. If people have wrong impressions about other aspects of the Nativity, such as there being only three wise men, that doesn’t make celebrating Christmas wrong. It just makes their notions wrong. What if people have wrong notions about weekly worship? Does that then mean weekly worship is wrong? It just doesn’t follow that something is made invalid because certain associated but inessential aspects are.

You still overlooking the point… Is Christmas man made ideal or biblical? They definitely sure he wasn’t born in December, according to the bibles account of what happend that night…
You also say it’s not bout those things like the wise men but that is what they teach isn’t it? So why teach something which the Bible doesn’t mention, why be part of that celebrations if you yourself know it’s false teachings and that it’s not biblical, does that not make you wonder? There’s a scripture that’s asks “What does righteousness share with that which is outside the Law? What relationship does light have with darkness?”
Becareful for the traditions of man… Apostle Paul warned

 

[JustaServant]

In an effort to divorce themselves from ALL pagan practices, the early Christians refused to set aside a date marking Jesus’ birth.

Documentation?

 

[exnihilo]

You still overlooking the point… Is Christmas man made ideal or biblical? They definitely sure he wasn’t born in December, according to the bibles account of what happend that night…
You also say it’s not bout those things like the wise men but that is what they teach isn’t it? So why teach something which the Bible doesn’t mention, why be part of that celebrations if you yourself know it’s false teachings and that it’s not biblical, does that not make you wonder? There’s a scripture that’s asks “What does righteousness share with that which is outside the Law? What relationship does light have with darkness?”
Becareful for the traditions of man… Apostle Paul warned

The Nativity is God made. God made Himself to be born. As for the date it is celebrated we have to pick a day. The Church has the authority to regulate worship. We have the duty to follow the Church.

There were wise men that came to see the Christ child. That is recorded in scripture. We know there were more than one but not absolutely how many. The idea of three comes from the number of gifts but is also rooted in tradition. I guess it might be possible that there were only two wise men. So if there were only two you are saying thinking there were three is a grave sin? Or if there were more than three thinking there were only three is a grave sin? That doesn’t seem to me to be a big deal. But more importantly I don’t think the Church has definitively declared the number of wise men. So the private count of Church members in no way affects the validity of the Church.

The church teaches all sorts of things not mentioned, or explicitly at least, in the Bible. For instance it teaches that abortion is wrong. I’m glad the Church is not constrained unreasonably.

 

[benjohnson]

I would say that as a witness to the incarnation of Christ, and knowing that in Him all things are possible - even salvation from my own sin and deprivation, that my reaction to that would be to throw a party. :extrahappy:

Heck, I might even splurge and go for a festival so that I can share this with other people.
:grouphug:

I think it would be impossible for me to hide the light of the Holy Spirit that dwells in me under a basket.

(Note: for my Lutheran friends, this doesn’t mean that I’m going Charismatic so put away those pitchforks.)

 

[steido01]

(Note: for my Lutheran friends, this doesn’t mean that I’m going Charismatic so put away those pitchforks.)

http://www.juice.ph/cms_images/74935/costumes_hipsterariel.jpg

 

[Sirach2]

Although the Bible doesn’t say in direct words that we can’t celebrate birthdays, but the Bible’s direct references to birthdays are helpful in how true Christians should view them.

I’m very glad to see you again, C.O.7, for I have been praying daily for you.
With regard to birthdays, you are correct that there is nothing in scripture that forbids them, but it is a product of man’s wrong understanding to forbid them. It might put your mind at ease to read 1 Tim. 4:4-5, “For everything God created is good,** and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving,** because it is consecrated by the word of God and prayer.”

In thanksgiving for God having given us life and allowing us to be, and to come to know Him for eternal life, it is a very worthy practice to give honor to Him that day and consecrate if with prayer. Jesus taught often, that there is nothing that can defile a man from the outside, but the things that come out of a man from the inside are what defiles him. Mark 7:15. If our intention is pure, this is pleasing to God. Since pagans of old defiled a couple of birthday celebrations, that does not automatically exclude all Christians from using a worthy practice to honor God.

Do you celebrate Mother’s Day? Father’s Day? Do you honor a decedent on his day of death and entrance to eternity?
Do you celebrate Presidents’ Day, or Martin Luther King Day, in remembrance of those who served us and have passed on?
How about Memorial Day, to honor all who gave their very lives so we could be free?

You call all of this “sinful?” … “pagan?” I seriously doubt that Our Father views it that way. Remember, it depends on our purity of intention, for in itself, none of this is unclean and capable of defiling.

Since we as Christians imitate Christ it is also significant that the Bible never mentioned that Jesus - the greatest man who ever lived and all Christian’s exemplar - ever celebrated his birth, nor did the early Christians. Christians of the first century did not celebrate the festival honoring the birth of Jesus - for the same reason they honored no other birthday anniversary.

Do you have proof that Jesus or the early Christians did not give special thanks to God on their anniversary of their birth?

 

[808Catholic]

what Jesus had in mind must have been eating and drinking in a figurative sense, by exercising faith in the value of his perfect human sacrifice.
Jesus often spoke in this sense, look at John 4:4 - “Whoever drinks from the water that I will give him will never get thirsty at all,+ but the water that I will give him will become in him a spring of water bubbling up to impart everlasting life.” that cant be literal too.

but lets say it was about the eucharist and that it was literal, if you recall that only 11 diciples was with Jesus on the night he died and who took part of that communion, would you say the other diciples who didnt eat his flesh or drink of his blood that night wouldnt get everlasting life?

@Chosen
“would you say the other diciples who didnt eat his flesh or drink of his blood that night wouldnt get everlasting life?”
I believe that’s exactly what we’re discussing right now. It is my belief that Christ makes it possible for us, today, to eat His Flesh and drink His Blood. If not, how can we get everlasting life? To those who believe they eat His Flesh and drink His Blood “symbolically”: will that grant them everlasting life? If all it takes is consumption of oyster crackers and grape juice and remembering Jesus, there’s going to be a rush on crackers and grape juice. Not to be facetious but “salvation on sale in Aisle 7!”

The Eucharist continues today as it was started by Christ in the upper room. We gather around His table and He takes, breaks, blesses, and gives His Body and Blood to each each Sunday. If it’s not Christ in the species of bread and wine, we are all lost. Only the 11 Apostles are saved.

 

[JustaServant]

Documentation?

Chirp…Chirp…Chirp…Chirp…Chirp…Chirp…Chirp…

 

[PJM]

=ChosenOne7;13246977]To be honest with you I don’t really fully know or understand what the eucharist is, I was merely stating what we believe and practice.

But let me ask do you believe that the diciples literally ate Jesus body and literally drank his blood?

Do Catholics have the same view with regards to the celebration of Christmas and Easter like Protestants?

My friend your GREAT questions seems not yet to be addressed, so permit me to at least try to do it for you.

To be honest with you I don’t really fully know or understand what the eucharist is, I was merely stating what we believe and practice.

But let me ask do you believe that the diciples literally ate Jesus body and literally drank his blood?

Do Catholics have the same view with regards to the celebration of Christmas and Easter like Protestants?

The answer to your welcomed 1st question AS YOU WORDED it is both “yes” & “No.”
Allow me to explain as best as I can in this limited space. IF you desire more information please send me a Private Message.

Part of the problem with Protestants is the lack of right understanding stems frankly from a lack of grace and through iGrace; true Faith. I’m NOT slamming non-Catholics here. BUT one has to accept all the grace God makes available in order to grasp this Truth which is a MYSTERY. And that “mystery” factor; the fact that Christ can NOT be seen or touched or head in the Eucharist; a very HUMAN [unfaithed] response, and is the root problem. Conversions ARE God’s exclusive territory; we are only conduits to His Divine Will.

The “NO!” part stems from it being NOT the cardinal body of Jesus; BUT Rather HIS GLORIFIED; unlimited Power transformed GLORIFIED Body that we receive in Catholic Holy Communion.

**The “Yes: part **is that the Glorified and Risen Body of Jesus Christ is “truly; really and Substanually” present in Catholic Holy Communion. [the entire Jesus]. Because of this Reality; this Sacrament of the Eucharist [a word meaning THANKSGIVING] “is the SUM & and the Summit” of Catholicism [and for that matter, in that we ARE united through a common Baptism [Jn 3:5], of all Christianity. Even IF NOT recognized as such.

Sacramentally; Jesus is “RE-PRESENTED” meaning: the same Jesus that Died on the Cross and Rose from the Dead; THAT same One Jesus is made miraculously made present Time & Time Again [THUS the Miracle; which by definition means its BEYOND humanities ability to comprehend without Faith-through Grace Offered by the Holy Spirit, then Received and then rightly applied.] NOTE I said “RE-PRESENED”; NOT “represented”.

There are 3 evidences of the Grace; this Gift of Jesus Himself

1. Five different N T bible authors testify to its reality
   Mt. 26-26-28; Mk. 14: 22-24; Lk. 22: 17-19; all of John 6: here are V 56-57 “ For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in him”; [which expresses precisely what takes place in Catholic Holy Communion] and 1st. Cor 11:23-30
2. Is the FACT that the Very Early Church instituted the practice of the Transubstantiation [a theological term not yet invented to explain it] VERY soon after the Resurrection of Jesus. It at first termed “the Breaking of the THEE Bread”
   Acts 2:42 “And they were persevering in the doctrine of the apostles, and in the communication of thebreaking of bread, and in prayers”
3. Is: Eucharistic Miracles; which God accomplishes and permits to SOFTEN hardened minds and hearts: therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/a3.html]
   I pray this brief explanation will at least prompt you to seek the necessary graces so that you are enable to actually come to belief its Beauty; Magesty; Love and Truth.

God Bless you,

Patrick

 

[JonNC]

=ChosenOne7;13248480]And that’s what I’m saying… It’s a man made ideal… Based on man’s own ideas they deciding what is an isn’t acceptable to God… We won’t need to add anything to praise and worship God to what the Bible says already.

Wait. Christ said He would build a Church. Scriptural. That Church is given authority. Scriptural. The Church is made up of men. Scriptural, and obvious. So it stands to reason, scripturally, that the authority is granted to men, as long as the decisions can be held accountable to scripture. And giving praise and thanksgiving to God is scriptural.

Psalm 69:30 I will praise the name of God with song, And shall magnify Him with thanksgiving.

Psalm 95:1-6 – O Come, let us sing for joy to the LORD; Let us shout joyfully to the rock of our salvation. Let us come before His presence with thanksgiving; Let us shout joyfully to Him with psalms.

Psalm 98 Oh sing to the Lord a new song, for he has done marvelous things!
His right hand and his holy arm have worked salvation for him.
The Lord has made known his salvation; he has revealed his righteousness in the sight of the nations.
He has remembered his steadfast love and faithfulness to the house of Israel.
All the ends of the earth have seen the salvation of our God.

A new song!!! A new one. The new song, to the Lord who makes known His salvation in Christ, the Savior. Why would we not make a new song unto the Lord for the birth of the Incarnate Word, the Word made flesh?

But if true Christians really wished to celebrate an occasion in honor of Jesus Christ, matters should be presented truthfully. Jesus said at John 4:23 that true worshipers shall worship “in spirit and truth”. So anything to which Christ’s name is attached should therefore be factual. Christmas really does not measure up to this primary identification of Christ’s teachings and true Christians.

Really? Was it not Christ born of a virgin. Were it not the angels and shepherds who were the first to celebrate His birth?

Luke 2:
And in the same region there were shepherds out in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night. 9And an angel of the Lord appeared to them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were filled with great fear. 10And the angel said to them, “Fear not, for behold, I bring you good news of great joy that will be for all the people. 11For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. 12And this will be a sign for you: you will find a baby wrapped in swaddling cloths and lying in a manger.” 13And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying,

14“Glory to God in the highest,
and on earth peace among those with whom he is pleased!”

15When the angels went away from them into heaven, the shepherds said to one another, “Let us go over to Bethlehem and see this thing that has happened, which the Lord has made known to us.” 16And they went with haste and found Mary and Joseph, and the baby lying in a manger. 17And when they saw it, they made known the saying that had been told them concerning this child. 18And all who heard it wondered at what the shepherds told them.

Glory to God in the highest. A multitude? And you believe there is no scriptural precedent for a celebration of His birth?

There’s nothing factual about Christmas… Many of the details of Jesus’ birth that are widely accepted as heartwarming facts are untrue and are actually sinister in nature.
Was Jesus born on the 25th? Not biblical
Was it 3 “wise men” that visited Jesus? the Bible writer Matthew does not specify how many of these men came, nor does he call them “wise men,” much less “three kings.” He uses the Greek word ma’goi, which means “astrologers.” This alone should give us a clue that something evil is at work here, for astrology is an art that God’s Word condemns and that faithful Jews scrupulously avoided. (Deut. 18:10-12; Isaiah 47:13, 14)

Is this what you object to? Fine. There are indeed things not readily provable around the celebration of the birth of Christ. And if that is what keeps you from celebrating it, be my guest, but a celebration of the birth of the Christ is scriptural!

What about Santa? Who does he represent? Santa, stars, solar worship, birthdays of Gods, tree worship… they are all idols that were and are still used by non-Christian worshipers.

How many worship services do you know of incorporate Santa Claus?

The celebration of Christmas has also promoted the worship of Jesus in place of his Father, He directed all worship to his Father, saying: “It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.” (Matthew 4:10)

Not in the Lutheran setting. We promote the worship of the Triune God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Jon

 

[truetofaith]

Santa Claus is attributed to Saint Nicholas , who rode a donkey and put food & candy in poor children’s homes through the window.
No one worshipped him but through the years the Santa Claus image was born.

 

[JonNC]

Santa Claus is attributed to Saint Nicholas , who rode a donkey and put food & candy in poor children’s homes through the window.
No one worshipped him but through the years the Santa Claus image was born.

IOW, a truly historic figure.
Jon

 

[SalusaSecondus]

BECAUSE the somehow; despite FIVE different authors of the New Testament; Jesus Himself and immediate implementation after Christ resurrection; ad even Eucharistic Miracles; are still able to disavow that the REAL Presence IS the very Real Presence of Jesus Christ Himself.

Mt. 26
Mk. 14
Lk 22
JOHN 6
1st. Cor, 11

This flows form a Gross lack of Faith, as it relies on human understandings limits being sufficient to override what is cleanly evident to 1 BILLION Plus Catholics; Eastern Orthodox and others.

God Bless you and thanks for asking,

Patrick

Isaiah 55: 6-10 is too not understood.

[6]" Seek ye the Lord, while he may be found: call upon him, while he is near. [7] Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unjust man his thoughts, and let him return to the Lord, and he will have mercy on him, and to our God: for he is bountiful to forgive. [8] For my thoughts are not your thoughts: nor your ways my ways, saith the Lord. [9] For as the heavens are exalted above the earth, so are my ways exalted above your ways, and my thoughts above your thoughts. [10] And as the rain and the snow come down from heaven, and return no more thither, but soak the earth, and water it, and make it to spring, and give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater":

Actually many Protestants believe in the real presence.

 

[mommy_k]

Actually many Protestants believe in the real presence.

Yes, but the question is posed to protestants who don’t, and claim scripture over tradition.

The logic is not there for me.

Dare I venture to the directive of Jesus when he says from the Cross to John:
“Behold your Mother”-as He is giving Mary to mankind as a way to Him?

This seems like another scripture that is dismissed too, or individualized in the same manner. The Holy Family is displayed in many nativity scenes in protestant homes, yet the words of Jesus from the cross are ignored.