Things Catholics base on Tradition and not scripture.

[googie]

googie in Christ,

I’ll take your comments one at time.

First of all I showed you in scripture where it says that the power to forgive sin was “given to men” per Matthew 9:6-8. Until you show a passage to the contrary you will have to concede the point.

You claim there are no priests in the NT which is utterly false. That point was already established by reference to the term “presbyters” in my previous post quoting from James 5:14-15. There is, however, even more evidence that contradicts your opinion. Please be advised that both the OT and the NT refer to those that are members of God’s family as a “priestly people”[see 1 Peter 2:9 for the NT reference]. Likewise, we know that the ministerial priesthood of the Levites existed within Judaism right along side the general priesthood of the people. Likewise, the OT ministerial priesthood had a High Priest. Likewise, the NT has a High Priest in Jesus.

The OT makes it clear that the Levitical priesthood had duties, responsibilities, authority, and power reserved to the ministerial priesthood. Likewise, the NT church has a ministerial priesthood with powers reserved to it that are not shared by the non-ministerial priesthood of Christian believers.

The OT predicts the coming of Jesus. Isaiah and Jeremiah frequently refer to Jesus as the “Branch” of David and they are prophetic in describing Him. Jeremiah makes reference to an unending ministerial priesthood patterned after the Levitical priesthood as it relates to Jesus.

Jeremiah 33:14-18 says:

We also see an important prophecy concerning the mass and Eucharist in Malachi 1:11-12 which says:

It is important to note that there is only one pure offering that has ever been given to God. That offering was Jesus Christ upon the cross. Nevertheless, this prophecy says that in every place from the rising to the setting of the sun this perfect offering will be made. It then refers to the Lord’s table and the food that is upon it. Only the Catholic mass and the Eucharist fit this prophecy. Likewise, such offerings and sacrifices are by definition offered by priests. Moreover, these priests are always of the ministerial priesthood.

There is another pattern in the NT tied to the OT Levitical priesthood. Korah’s rebellion involved the usurpation of the ministerial priesthood.

In Jude 1:10-11 it says:

Korah’s rebellion was about the usurpation of the ministerial priesthood[see 16:1-33].

For someone to perish in Korah’s rebellion in the NT church means that they would have to be attempting to usurp or otherwise abuse the ministerial priesthood. The ministerial priesthood is also attested to through the laying on of hands which we see in the Book Acts and in Paul’s letters. In fact, the letters of Paul demonstrate three generations of priests through the laying on of hands. We see this in Paul’s reference to the laying on of hands/ordination of Timothy. Paul warns Timothy to be careful in “laying on of hands”. So the apostles are the first generation. Timothy is an example of the second generation, and those that Timothy ordains are a third generation and so it goes.

You do not see miracles. Well I have seen some miracles and the Church has an unmatched treasury of miracles. Simply do some research. Moreover, and most importantly, Catholics witness and participate in the greatest of miracles at the Catholic mass where heaven and earth are joined in the real presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist.

Likewise, the Catholic Church itself is an incredible miracle in having survived from Pentecost until now despite the many attacks from within and without over her more than two thousand years of history. No other Christian group can show that heritage and bona fides and no other Church claims to be the one true Church established by Christ beginning at Pentecost.

You seem to believe that hierarchy within the Catholic Church is another gospel. Well, try reading scripture and what it says about the bishop. Likewise, look at the actions of the first council of Jerusalem as outline in the book of Acts. There was a hierarchy then, and there is a hierarchy now.

God bless.

Why does the RCC still make an offering for sin at the mass. Heb 10:12-18 says that there is no more sacrifice for sin. This is very plain in this scripture, do you not believe what Jesus said. Blessings.

 

[googie]

Then you deny that Christ said this to the Apostles (Men)…
Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.” And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.” (John 20:21-23)

And if we come to the Father only “by Jesus”, why is it that Christ taught us to pray, not “through Him” but directly to "the Father?

Look again at the Quote from John, As the Father send Jesus, so Jesus sent the Apostles. This means with His same authority, which includes the ordination of successors. Without this ability to appoint successors there would have been none with temporal authority to make determination and canonization of the NT writings.

Sorry but I’m going to have to see a Bible passage for this contention that the authority stopped with the Apostles. Using an extra-biblical source (your observation) as your proof is no more convincing than what you see as extrabiblical sources to support ours.

Once again I’d have to see the Bible passage that said they don’t.

Peace
James

You should not try to override the scriptural statement that Christ said, :“no one comes to the Father, but by Me”. He is our intercessor, we must go through Him to get to the Father, there is no other way. Blessings

 

[davidv]

What has this got to do about “who is boss”. This is rejection of Gods word by those who will not listen. These are God’s words, so if people reject these words, they are rejecting God, not me. God is still the boss. Blessings.

What don’t you understand about it. Jesus appointed his Apostles to be in charge and gave them authority until He returned. That authority exists today in the Church’s Bishops. Why do you deny this authority?

 

[Lampo]

You know something, if you take away the “hierarchy” and all the tradition of the RCC, you will be in a position where you will be lead by the Holy Spirit and God can use you, think about it. Blessings.

If we did what you say, that means we’d have to get rid of the Bible since that is part of the Tradition of the Catholic Church. Is that what you are suggesting?

 

[JRKH]

No I really can’t describe specifically how I opened myself up to the Spirit because the journey spread out over some 30-35 years. There were a number of stops and starts, rejecting and embracing of faith, twists and turns etc over that time.

I can say that I stopped attending any church by the time I was 19. Later I began reading the bible, especially the Gospels, occasionally attended this or that other church community and talked to “evangelizers” etc., read things on eastern mysticism, prayed a lot, asked the Spirit many questions, broke down beliefs and structures (Catholic tradition and protestant tradition) to find the cores and followed where the Spirit led.
At the end, and by the Grace of God, I found myself back in the Catholic Church.

Am I “right back where I started with all the tradition and hierarchy”? Not at all. For now, I understand better the purpose for the traditions and the reasons for the heirarchy. I know now that the Roman Catholic Church (Along with the EO) is the most biblically based and most clearly fulfills the Church that the Bible NT describes.

Will tradition and Heirarchy get one to heaven? Of course not. Why would you assume I think it would?
Will reading the Bible and listening to a preacher get you to heaven. Nope.
Faith is what gets one to heaven. The other things are aids to that faith.
Tradition and Hierarchy are aids to faith just as the bible and your preacher/minister are aids to your faith.

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

You should not try to override the scriptural statement that Christ said, :“no one comes to the Father, but by Me”. He is our intercessor, we must go through Him to get to the Father, there is no other way. Blessings

Then explain to me why Jesus taught us to skip him and go directly to The Father when he taught us to pray.
Please explain why the Lords Praye contains no reference to this supposed intercessory requirement.

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

Why does the RCC still make an offering for sin at the mass. Heb 10:12-18 says that there is no more sacrifice for sin. This is very plain in this scripture, do you not believe what Jesus said. Blessings.

Please explain what you think is this “offering for sin” that Catholics make at mass…

Peace
James

 

[Pax]

You should not try to override the scriptural statement that Christ said, :“no one comes to the Father, but by Me”. He is our intercessor, we must go through Him to get to the Father, there is no other way. Blessings

googie in Christ,

I don’t think you have a clue as to what I have written in my post. I have done nothing to any way that suggests overriding the scriptural statement you’ve quoted. My point is that you have misapplied that scripture and that our beliefs are in complete harmony with that quote. If you think that anything that I have written is not supported by scripture, then you must carefully refute what I’ve said by way of scripture. Thus far, you have not done so, and this latest retort does nothing for your case.

God bless.

 

[Pax]

Why does the RCC still make an offering for sin at the mass. Heb 10:12-18 says that there is no more sacrifice for sin. This is very plain in this scripture, do you not believe what Jesus said. Blessings.

googie,

Read Malachi 1:11 below:

For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name is great among the nations, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a pure offering; for my name is great among the nations, says the Lord of hosts. But you profane it when you say that the Lord’s table is polluted, and the food for it may be despised.

That is the sacrifice we offer and in accordance with that prophecy we find the reason for doing so. Moreover, and most importantly, the sacrifice we offer for sin at the mass is the “re-presentation” of the once and for all sacrifice of Jesus. Notice in the book of Revelation chapter 5 that Jesus stands before the altar as a “lamb that has been slain.” Likewise, we see in Hebrews many things concerning Jesus’s once and for all sacrifice. Along with these we see two very significant things in Hebrews.

Hebrews 12:22- 24 tells us the following:

But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable angels in festal gathering, and to the assembly of the first-born who are enrolled in heaven, and to a judge who is God of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks more graciously than the blood of Abel.

Then later we read this:

Hebrews 13:10
We have an altar from which those who serve the tent have no right to eat.

Study these in relationship to Malachi 1:11 and you begin to see how heaven and earth are joined in the mass through the sacrifice of Jesus. Likewise, you can put two and two together to see how the altar and the gift on that altar is to be consumed by those on earth. It is the pure sacrifice and offering of Jesus himself that is re-presented in time to nourish us on the Christian journey.

I hope this helps and God bless.

 

[Pax]

I only have one answer for all that you wrote. The pope is not my boss, the minister of my church is not my boss, the priest is not my boss, I only have to answer to God. At the last day I will stand in front of Him and no one else, and I will not be able to plead that: “this is what man told me”, He will say to you, “I left you my word”, and the Holy spirit to guide you" and what did you do with them. We answer directly to God through Jesus Christ, He is our intercessor, for He is seated at the right hand of the Father for this reason. Blessings

googie in Christ,

There are many problems here. First of all, there is a hierarchy and scripture tells us that we are to be obedient to the leadership.

Please note that Jesus gave authority and power to the apostles that He did not give to others. This is made quite clear in Matthew 16:19, Matt 18:18, Mark 3:15, John 20:21, and John 20:23. Moreover, the NT church clearly has positions and lines of authority as outlined by the following passages:

Pauls says:

Titus 1:7-11
For a bishop, as God’s steward…… must hold firm to the sure word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to confute those who contradict it. For there are many insubordinate men, empty talkers and deceivers….they have no right to teach.

Hebrews 13:17
Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account. Let them do this joyfully, and not sadly, for that would be of no advantage to you.

2 Cor 13:10
I write this while I am away from you, in order that when I come I may not have to be severe in my use of the authority…

Titus 2:15
Declare these things; exhort and reprove with all authority. Let no one disregard you.

3 John 1:9
I have written something to the church; but Diotrephes, who likes to put himself first, does not acknowledge my authority.

Acts 14:23
And when they had appointed elders for them in every church, with prayer and fasting, they committed them to the Lord in whom they believed.

Acts 15:2
And when Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and debate with them, Paul and Barnabas and some of the others were appointed to go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and the elders about this question.

1 Cor 12:28-30
And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, then healers, helpers, administrators, speakers in various kinds of tongues. Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret?

1 Tim 3:1-5
THE SAYING is sure: If any one aspires to the office of bishop, he desires a noble task. Now a bishop must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, sensible, dignified, hospitable, an apt teacher, no drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, and no lover of money. He must manage his own household well, keeping his children submissive and respectful in every way; for if a man does not know how to **manage his own household, how can he care for God’s church? **

This is but a smattering of the available verses that indicate that there are various positions of authority within the Church by way of scripture.

God bless.

 

[googie]

Jesus never held up a door or a vine and said that it was His body and that if we ate a door or a vine it would be His flesh and blood. But He DID do that in John 6 and the other Gospels with bread and wine. I receive Jesus Christ in the Eucharist and the other Sacraments, in His Word, and in those whom I serve, to name a few. If you want to know how I was born again, that happened at my baptism (John 3:5). My surrender to Jesus Christ, and my declaration that He is Lord and Savior of my life came much later, and continues daily.

By the way, baptism will not take away sin. Water will not take away sin, only the blood of Christ can do that. You can not receive Jesus Christ in the Eucharist, God is spirit and you must receive Him spiritually. Study the scriptures and you will see how to be born again. If baptism was the way to be born again, then why not just baptize everyone and get it over with, it should work, right. You are also right, Jesus did not hold up a door or a vine, but He said; I “am” the door, and I “am” the vine, so was He either of these. Blessings.

 

[Pax]

…
…
We answer directly to God through Jesus Christ, He is our intercessor, for He is seated at the right hand of the Father for this reason. Blessings

googie in Christ,

First of all, we are all intercessors for one another whenever we pray for one another. Likewise, anyone that evangelizes is an intercessor. You should check scripture on the importance of intercession within Christian life. Please check out 2 Cor 1:11, 2 Cor 9:13-14, & 2 Cor 13:9 as just a few examples. There are many more verses that I can bring to bear on this topic, but those should suffice to make the point.

In fairness, I believe that you meant to say that there is only “one mediator” and that Jesus is the only one that fits that title. That is true in so far as salvation is won only by the work and merits of Jesus Christ on the cross. No other person’s efforts or blood can bring about the atonement, redemption, and expiation for the sins of men before God. Only the man Jesus, who is God, could offer a redemptive sacrifice of “infinite” value because Jesus is God. Likewise, Jesus is our champion for salvation because he is also a man. For salvation Jesus is truly the “one mediator” between man and God.

The mediation of Jesus as the “one mediator” between God and man in no way negates other forms of mediation that are subordinate to the work of Jesus, but are, nevertheless, important to salvation. The preaching of the gospel by men other than Jesus is absolutely essential to salvation in order to bring people to faith and repentance. That preaching of the gospel is mediation. Paul puts it this way:

2 Cor 6:1
We then, as workers together with him[Jesus], beseech you also that ye receive not the grace of God in vain.

[KJV]

Here are a couple of other translations that help make my point:

– The Living Bible translation uses the term "As God’s partners…"

– The Simple English translation uses the phase "As God’s co-workers…"

Please note that none of these translations are Catholic versions. Nevertheless, they make it clear that there is mediation by men that occurs in God’s plan of salvation. Jesus is the “one mediatior” between God and man as explained, but there is clearly subordinate mediation that has a place in God’s plan of salvation.

I hope this helps and God bless.

 

[inkaneer]

I only have one answer for all that you wrote. The pope is not my boss, the minister of my church is not my boss, the priest is not my boss, I only have to answer to God. At the last day I will stand in front of Him and no one else, and I will not be able to plead that: “this is what man told me”, He will say to you, “I left you my word”, and the Holy spirit to guide you" and what did you do with them. We answer directly to God through Jesus Christ, He is our intercessor, for He is seated at the right hand of the Father for this reason. Blessings

I’m sorry but Jesus doesn’t see it your way. He established one chief streward of his kingdom and it isn’t you. Do I need to remind you that Jesus told the jews to do what the phariseestold them to do because, according to Jesus, those Pharisees sat in Moses seat .

"1 Then said Jesus to the crowds and to his disciples, 2 “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat; 3 so practice and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do; for they preach, but do not practice. 4 They bind heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with their finger.”
[Mt 23:1-4 RSV]

As much as Jesus despised the Pharisees and scribes He recognized that they were in authority over the people and He told both the Jews as well as his disciples to do as the Pharisees and scribes told them to do. Jesus had no problem with the Pharisees and scribes in that regard but He railed at them because what they bound the people to do they, themselves, did not do. That is why Jesus called them hypocrits and rightfully so. Yeah, Jesus will say to you, “I left you my word.” But He will also say, "In 1Timothy 3:15 My word says that the church is the pillar and bulwark of truth, not you. He will add, “In Matthew 16:18My word says that I established that church on a man I renamed Rock and I promised that hell would never prevail over that Church.” Jesus wil then say, "And just as those Pharisees had authority to bind the people so too this man I called Rock will be able to bind and loose on earth as well as in heaven. Then Jesus may rebuke you saying, “I never sent the Holy Spirit to guide you into truth I sent the Holy Spirit to guide my Church into all truth. That is why my word calls the church the pillar and bulwark of truth.” Then He might ask you this question, "Why do you think I told my Apostles that whoever hears them hears Me and who ever rejects them rejects Me?

P.S. Jesus is more correctly called the Mediator between God and Man rather than the Intercessor. Other people can intercede with God for you just by praying for you. But they cannot mediate with God for you.

 

[inkaneer]

By the way, baptism will not take away sin. Water will not take away sin, only the blood of Christ can do that. You can not receive Jesus Christ in the Eucharist, God is spirit and you must receive Him spiritually. Study the scriptures and you will see how to be born again. If baptism was the way to be born again, then why not just baptize everyone and get it over with, it should work, right. You are also right, Jesus did not hold up a door or a vine, but He said; I “am” the door, and I “am” the vine, so was He either of these. Blessings.

This is pure unadulterated hogwash. Scripture says quite clearly that Baptism saves one. If it did not then why wasn’t John’s Baptism just as good as that of Jesus? But scripture says that baptism by the authority of John was only a baptism of repentance. But Baptism by the authority of Jesus [in the name of the Trinity] was a baptism of salvation.

You say we cannpot receive Jesus in the Eucharist. But Jesus says, “This is my Body…” 2,000 years of Christianity agrees with Jesus. I do think you have big problems as far as salvation is concerned and I fear that your soul is in extreme jeopardy.

 

[Pax]

By the way, baptism will not take away sin. Water will not take away sin, only the blood of Christ can do that. You can not receive Jesus Christ in the Eucharist, God is spirit and you must receive Him spiritually. Study the scriptures and you will see how to be born again. If baptism was the way to be born again, then why not just baptize everyone and get it over with, it should work, right. You are also right, Jesus did not hold up a door or a vine, but He said; I “am” the door, and I “am” the vine, so was He either of these. Blessings.

googie in Christ,

You’re setting up more problems without solving the problems you already face. I’ll touch on baptism later in another post, but for the moment I’ll address your point concerning “I am the door” and “I am vine.”

Please note that Jesus sometimes speaks in parables and that he sometimes does not. It is important to figure out when he does and when he does not. I’ll help you understand why it is that in John 6 Jesus is not speaking in terms of a parable, and the language does not resemble that of a parable, as it does in the two examples you gave. Moreover, in John 10 when Jesus refers to himself as “the door” he not only uses a long narrative that is clearly a parable, but we have John telling us in verse 6 the following:

This figure Jesus used with them, but they did not understand what he was saying to them.

Other translations use the following phrasing:

– King James
John 10:6 This parable spake Jesus unto them

– American Standard
John 10:6 This parable spake Jesus unto them: but they understood not what things they were which he spake unto them.

– Living Bible
John 10:6 Those who heard Jesus use this illustration

– Simple English
John 10:6 Jesus used this **example **,

– New Jerusalem with Apocrypha
John 10:6 Jesus told them this **parable **

– Young’s Bible
John 10:6 This **similitude **spake Jesus to them,

– Darby’s Bible
John 10:6 This allegory spoke Jesus to them,

– Weymouth’s New Testament
John 10:6 Jesus spoke to them in this figurative language,

– Webster’s Bible
John 10:6 This **parable **spoke Jesus to them

Your examples are obvious parables and are definitely and clearly using figurative language, but that is not the case in John chapter 6 and the discourse on the bread of life. In my next post or two I will demonstrate by way of scripture just how it is that we know Jesus was speaking literally about a promised miracle concerning consuming his flesh and blood and why it is not to be taken as figurative language.

 

[Pax]

googie in Christ,

Jesus was born in Bethlehem which means “house of bread.”

Jesus was laid in a manger which is a feeding trough.

These two things are signs pointing us to a greater reality.

In John’s gospel we read about Jesus working three miracles prior to the discourse on the bread of life in John 6. The three miracles are the changing of the water into wine at the marriage feast of Cana, the feeding of the five thousand with the multiplication of the loaves and fishes, and finally Jesus walking on water. There are no parables ahead of or subsequent to the discourse on the bread of life. Instead, there are only miracles.

These three miracles are a preparation for the discourse in John 6 to enable the listeners to believe Jesus words in the discourse. The first two miracles demonstrate what Jesus can do with food, and the third shows what he can do with his body. The connection to food and his body in this series of miracles is illuminating. Moreover, right after the miracle at Cana when Jesus is questioned about giving a sign demonstrating his authority to drive the money changers from the temple, he speaks of the future miracle of his resurrection. We see this in John 2:19 where Jesus says,

“Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”

Jesus goes on in John 5:28-29 to speak of another future miracle. That miracle references the general resurrection on the day of judgment.

Then later, in the actual discourse on the bread of life itself, Jesus references even more miracles. He compares giving his body and blood as true food and true drink to the miraculous food of the manna in the desert. The manna was true food and it was a miracle. Likewise, Jesus references another miracle in the discourse in verse 62. When the Jews did not believe Jesus promise of the Eucharist, he asked,

“Then what if you were to see the Son of man ascending where he was before?”

This reference is to his later/future ascension into heaven. Thus Jesus has compared his promised miracle of the Eucharist to an OT miracle of food and to a future NT miracle of his bodily ascension. Jesus clearly connects food and his body in two miracles. This is indicative that his body and blood will be given as miraculous true food and true drink.

Jesus does not speak in parables subsequent to the discourse on the bread of life, but there are subsequent mentions of miracles in general and a specific reference to Jesus healing the blind man using his spittle and earth to make a salve of clay to cure the blindness[see Jn 9:6]. Once again, Jesus uses common material in a miracle. It isn’t until Chapter 10 that we see any metaphors. Jesus is not speaking metaphorically in John 6. The fact that the discourse on the bread of life is bracketed by immediate miracles including the mention of future miracles, along with references to two miracles within the discourse itself, indicates that he is speaking of a miracle in his promise of giving his body and blood as true food and true drink.

This, however, is only the beginning of how we know Jesus is speaking literally and not figuratively. In the discourse Jesus tells the disciples four different times and in slightly different ways that his body and blood are true food and true drink and that as such they give eternal life. Jesus uses two Greek terms. One is *phago *and the other is trogo. The former is a generic term “to eat.” The latter is much more graphic and means “to gnaw or chew.” Jesus goes from the weaker term to the stronger term in emphasizing his meaning to the disciples.

Here is the sequence:

1. Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died.[ate/phago]
2. This is the bread which comes down from heaven, that a man may eat of it and not die.[eat/phago]
3. I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh."[eats/phago]
4. The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”[eat/phago]
5. So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you;[eat/phago]
6. he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.[eats/trogo]
7. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
8. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.[eats/trogo]
9. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me.[eats/trogo]
10. This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live for ever." [eats/trogo]

cont. on next post

 

[Pax]

cont. from prior post

It is also important to note what is said in verse 51. It says

“and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.”

Jesus tells us that the bread that is true food that he will give us is the same flesh that will hang upon the cross for our salvation. If the bread of life that is true food is Jesus flesh that will hang upon the cross then it must be literal and cannot be metaphorical. If Jesus was speaking metaphorically about giving us his body as true food, then he had to be talking metaphorically about his body being hung upon the cross for our salvation. No one believes the latter and no one should therefore doubt the former. You simply can’t have it both ways.

Another very important point to be made about John 6:53 pertains to the use of the word “life.” Once again the verse says:

"Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you;”

The Greek word for “life” used in John 6:53, is “zoen” which means, “divine life of God imparted to us”. There are other Greek words for “life” that St. John could have chosen, such as “bios” which simply means “life”. The fact that he chose the word that he did, lends great credibility to the literal meaning of this verse and with not a hint of symbolism.

The OT prefigures the NT and is but a shadow of the good things that come in the NT. The manna is true food but is a lesser miracle than the Eucharist and this is made clear by the comparison in the discourse. Likewise, the ascension of the Lord in the NT is a true miracle and it is compared with the greater miracle of the Eucharist.

In verse 63 Jesus says

“It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.”

He is not telling us that “his” flesh avails nothing for it is “his” flesh that will hang upon the cross for our salvation. He is using the term flesh the way Paul does. It means human effort avails nothing. Attempting to carnally understand in a weak “fleshy” manner will not lead to belief in his promise. His words are spirit and life and require a spiritual man with spiritual discernment to understand and believe. Jesus rightly says that his words are spirit and life. One simply needs to read the words he spoke and believe them in faith rather than understanding them without faith and then walking away like the disciples did. If they had misunderstood Jesus and were walking away Jesus would have explained his meaning. This is the only occasion that Jesus let anyone walk away, and he would not have done so if they “misunderstood” him.

The words of Jesus at the Last Supper could not be more clear and they coincide with the literal message of John 6. One cannot nuance Jesus words “This is my body.” Likewise, Paul reiterates the literalness of Jesus words in 1 Cor 10:16-17 when he says:
Quote:
The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.”

Then again in 1 Cor 11:23-30 Paul says this:

For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself. That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died.”

Please notice that Paul uses the same literal words of Jesus which he quotes from the Last Supper as revealed to him by Jesus. He does not make any reference to symbolism. Likewise, he says that if you receive the Eucharist unworthily that you will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord, and that if you eat and drink without “discerning” the body that you eat and drink judgment upon yourself. This can only be true of something literal. You cannot eat and drink judgment upon yourself by way of a symbol. It simply makes no sense.

I hope this helps, and God bless.

 

[Pax]

googie in Christ,

Let’s see what scripture tells us about baptism which is something commanded by Jesus. And please note that you are setting up a false contradiction by trying to pit Jesus work on the cross against baptism. There is absolutely no reason or justification for doing such a thing based on scripture.

ACTS 2:38
And Peter said to them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and **you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. **

ACTS 10:48
And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to remain for some days.

ACTS 19:1-7
While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul passed through the upper country and came to Ephesus. There he found some disciples. And he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” And they said, “No, we have never even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.” And he said, “Into what then were you baptized?” They said, “Into John’s baptism.” And Paul said, “John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in the one who was to come after him, that is, Jesus.” On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them; and they spoke with tongues and prophesied. There were about twelve of them in all.

ACTS 22:16
And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name.’

MATTHEW 28:19
Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

JOHN 3:5
Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

MARK 16:16
He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.

ROMANS 6: 3-4
Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.

GALATIANS 3:27
For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

COLOSSIANS 2:11-12
In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of flesh in the circumcision of Christ;
and you were buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead

EPHESIANS 4:5
one Lord, one faith, one baptism,

TITUS 3:4-8
but when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit,[baptism]

Heb 10:22
let us approach with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts **sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.
**
1 PETER 3:21
Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

I have a lot more on baptism if you would like me to continue, but it seems pretty clear from the above passages that Jesus intends baptism as a necessary component for the application of the benefits of his work on the cross. Baptism is, in fact, what Catholics consider to be the sacrament of faith, and even you would have to agree that faith is a necessary component for salvation. Our faith has no meaning if it were not for the death and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ. Likewise, baptism would have no meaning if it were not for the death and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.

You can no more pit the death and resurrection of Jesus against “baptism” for salvation, than you can pit the death and resurrection of Jesus against “faith” for salvation. Doing either of those things would be equally wrong and contrary to scripture.

I hope this helps and God bless.

 

[Church_Militant]

By the way, baptism will not take away sin. Water will not take away sin, only the blood of Christ can do that.

Really? Then why is this the message that the Holy Spirit sent to St. Paul at his conversion?

Acts 22:16] And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name.’

You can not receive Jesus Christ in the Eucharist, God is spirit and you must receive Him spiritually.

Really? The why does St. Paul very specifically tell us the following in 1st Corinthians 11? (Emphasis mine)

23] For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread,
24] and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.”
25] In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.”
26] For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.
**[27] Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. **
**28] Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup.
****29] For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself.
****30] That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died. **
And apparently you disagree with…

CHAP. VII.–LET US STAND ALOOF FROM SUCH HERETICS.

They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer,(7) 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. Those, therefore, who speak against this gift of God, incur death (11) in the midst of their disputes. But it were better for them to treat it with respect,(13) that they also might rise again. It is fitting, therefore, that ye should keep aloof from such persons, and not to speak of (15) them either in private or in public, but to give heed to the prophets, and above all, to the Gospel, in which the passion[of Christ] has been revealed to us, and the resurrection has been fully proved. (16) But avoid all divisions, as the beginning of evils.

Study the scriptures and you will see how to be born again.

Are Catholics Born Again & Assurance of Salvation?

If baptism was the way to be born again, then why not just baptize everyone and get it over with, it should work, right.

Take that up with the Author.

Acts 2:36] Let all the house of Israel therefore know assuredly that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified." 37] Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brethren, what shall we do?” 38] And Peter said to them, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39] For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, every one whom the Lord our God calls to him.”

 

[E.E.N.S]

Googie, you have such a fundamental problem with logic, language, and ego that I’m not sure you are even the slightest bit capable of understanding another point of view. Never before have I seen someone make such a mess of another person’s arguments quite so completely and perfectly; it’s like a learning disability, a psychotic delusion, and a malicious hate crime rolled into one ultimately insane enterprise.

Pity is the only appropriate response. I would correct your factual and logical errors in due course, but alas it would only serve to fall upon a hard heart that is seemingly unwilling to be intellectually honest with even himself.