The meaning of verse 57 of John 6 (Catholics & Protestants)

  • Thread starter Thread starter WatchfulPilgrim
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Tomster said:
If I may add to your statement: “Fallible, man-made doctrine” if such a thing could exist. In order for something to be a true doctrine it must be infallible. Protestants themselves will deny that they have the power to declare anything infallible except of course for the Bible. And even then they couldn’t get it right when they, how shall we say, misplaced a few books.
Click to expand...
Indeed you may.
Also, you inspire me to say the following:
I posit that while Catholics have doctrines, protestants actually only have “theories”, being that they may possibly be hard pressed to prove many of their doctrines, and that they can’t hold other protestants to the doctrines of their denomination. For they are certainly not theorems. If they were, they would have concrete evidence behind them. And you wouldn’t have protestants unable to agree upon things like the topic of this post:
Is Communion consubstantiated? symbolic? transubstantiated? can we use leavened bread? grape juice? what about milk and cookies?

Kind of a tenuous example with the theory bit… but I’m pressed for time to be on the forum tonight.
 
Tomster said:
Typical, so very typical.

Here is your dilemma Muze. A professed, fallible Protestant who is proclaiming what is fallible and what is infallible. A professed Protestant whose spiritual forefathers have infallibly (???) proclaimed him to be totally corrupt.

Tell us how this can be Muze.
Click to expand...
I dont’ see any need to be infallible to recognize what else may be fallible.
 
Muze said:
Unless, of course, it didn’t really come up until after the apostles were gone… And the first ones to deal with it got it wrong…
Click to expand...
Uhhhh, that couldn’t have happened.

Jesus said in John: 16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate to be with you always, 17 the Spirit of truth, which the world cannot accept, because it neither sees nor knows it. But you know it, because it remains with you, and will be in you. 18 I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you.

Are you saying that the early church was abandoned, and left to make errors?
 
Shannon9791 said:
Uhhhh, that couldn’t have happened.

Jesus said in John: 16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate to be with you always, 17 the Spirit of truth, which the world cannot accept, because it neither sees nor knows it. But you know it, because it remains with you, and will be in you. 18 I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you.

Are you saying that the early church was abandoned, and left to make errors?
Click to expand...
I’m saying that the Spirit of Truth was there, but those making this tradition weren’t listening.
 
Muze said:
I’m saying that the Spirit of Truth was there, but those making this tradition weren’t listening.
Click to expand...
So you’re saying that the Church apostatized immediately after the last apostle passed away?
 
Shannon9791 said:
So you’re saying that the Church apostatized immediately after the last apostle passed away?
Click to expand...
Apostasized? Of course not. One can be wrong about non-core doctrine without becoming apostate. The ECFs are clear evidence of that.
 
Muze said:
Apostasized? Of course not. One can be wrong about non-core doctrine without becoming apostate. The ECFs are clear evidence of that.
Click to expand...
You don’t think the Eucharist is “core doctrine?”

I’m really trying to wrap my head around what you’re saying, so bear with me as I continue to ask questions. Correct me if I’m wrong but what you’re saying is that after the last apostle died, those who learned the faith from the apostles made up all kinds of doctrines, the Eucharist being one of them, and started following them in a willie-nilly kinda way.

If that’s the case, when did the one true Church, that is the church of the Apostles, materialize and start teaching things the way the apostles did?
 
Muze said:
Apostasized? Of course not. One can be wrong about non-core doctrine without becoming apostate. The ECFs are clear evidence of that.
Click to expand...
pray tell, what are the core doctrines that all non-apostates agree on?
 
Shannon9791 said:
You don’t think the Eucharist is “core doctrine?”
Click to expand...
The nature of the eucharist, whether literally transubstantiated body and blood or a spiritual presence of the body and blood or just a symbol of the body and blood?

No, that’s not core doctrine.
I’m really trying to wrap my head around what you’re saying, so bear with me as I continue to ask questions. Correct me if I’m wrong but what you’re saying is that after the last apostle died, those who learned the faith from the apostles made up all kinds of doctrines, the Eucharist being one of them, and started following them in a willie-nilly kinda way.
Click to expand...
I dunno about “all kinds” of doctrine, but if you read the pre-nicene ECFs you find a lot of things to chuckle (or shake your head) at.

Even Augustine has some issues, as the council at Orange was never accepted as eccumenical, and isn’t accepted as infallible.
If that’s the case, when did the one true Church, that is the church of the Apostles, materialize and start teaching things the way the apostles did?
Click to expand...
The Church generally does teach the things of the apostles. The important stuff in written in the canon for us, and that has sustained the Church for over 2000 years, now, just as Peter said it would.

And the things we discuss here are the non-essential things that we should be able to disagree about and discuss.
 
ESMDHokie77 said:
pray tell, what are the core doctrines that all non-apostates agree on?
Click to expand...
Trinity as the nature of God
That all sin and stand condemned before God.
That the God the Son came as fully God and Fully man to make a propitiation for our sins. And did so.
That our salvation comes by grace from God through in Christ.
That we believe in a future and bodily resurrection to eternal life
That we participate in a communal church made up of all those who believe, and are commanded to love one another.
 
Muze said:
Trinity as the nature of God
That all sin and stand condemned before God.
That the God the Son came as fully God and Fully man to make a propitiation for our sins. And did so.
That our salvation comes by grace from God through in Christ.
That we believe in a future and bodily resurrection to eternal life
That we participate in a communal church made up of all those who believe, and are commanded to love one another.
Click to expand...
I’ll chime into this little off-topic conversation if I may 😉 (since I am the o.p…)

Probably one of the main reasons I have not committed myself to the Mennonite church yet is b/c of these non-essentials. The early church didn’t have all these things defined and all of these anathemas pronounced, yet I doubt that early church was somehow lacking or less spiritual.

I don’t know if the Eucharist is what the CC says it is, but I respect it no matter what church it is in. I think God is more concerned with our humility, our love for Him, and our willingness to serve Him than whether or not we understand what happens during the communion. I don’t think those who are more-capable of understanding or accepting these things are going to receive greater graces than those of us who are not.

It would be less-difficult on my family if I would simply remain Catholic. That is the primary reason I continue to seek. But I must say, I feel like it is a safer position to take in leaving, b/c I am not sure how God would see these definitions and anathemas if it is not His will that they exist in the first place.
 
WatchfulPilgrim said:
I’ll chime into this little off-topic conversation if I may 😉 (since I am the o.p…)

Probably one of the main reasons I have not committed myself to the Mennonite church yet is b/c of these non-essentials. The early church didn’t have all these things defined and all of these anathemas pronounced, yet I doubt that early church was somehow lacking or less spiritual.

I don’t know if the Eucharist is what the CC says it is, but I respect it no matter what church it is in. I think God is more concerned with our humility, our love for Him, and our willingness to serve Him than whether or not we understand what happens during the communion. I don’t think those who are more-capable of understanding or accepting these things are going to receive greater graces than those of us who are not.

It would be less-difficult on my family if I would simply remain Catholic. That is the primary reason I continue to seek. But I must say, I feel like it is a safer position to take in leaving, b/c I am not sure how God would see these definitions and anathemas if it is not His will that they exist in the first place.
Click to expand...
Oh, and I do really, really miss adoration. Don’t know if it’s b/c of the Eucharist, or just b/c I love the peaceful environment…
 
WatchfulPilgrim said:
Oh, and I do really, really miss adoration. Don’t know if it’s b/c of the Eucharist, or just b/c I love the peaceful environment…
Click to expand...
The Eucharist. Elevator music makes peaceful environments. 😉

Muze,

What is a communal Church?
 
How can we tell when Jesus was talking about something important, or not?
 
Muze said:
Trinity as the nature of God
That all sin and stand condemned before God.
That the God the Son came as fully God and Fully man to make a propitiation for our sins. And did so.
That our salvation comes by grace from God through in Christ.
That we believe in a future and bodily resurrection to eternal life
That we participate in a communal church made up of all those who believe, and are commanded to love one another.
Click to expand...
Who (what authoritative person/group) determined these are the core doctrines?
It’s not as tho all of these doctrines are upheld by all denominations who call themselves Christian.
 
This thread deserves further discussion, or rather, the Eucharist deserves a fuller discussion.
Muze said:
Trinity as the nature of God
That all sin and stand condemned before God.
That the God the Son came as fully God and Fully man to make a propitiation for our sins. And did so.
That our salvation comes by grace from God through in Christ.
That we believe in a future and bodily resurrection to eternal life
That we participate in a communal church made up of all those who believe, and are commanded to love one another.
Click to expand...
Why did you exclude Sacraments from your list?
Muze said:
A Church that exists in a united community, committed to loving one another.
Click to expand...
How do decisions get made in such a church?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top