Who can I defer to in the protestant sphere for the correct answer?

[PLeeD]

…when a poster is obviously an inept baiter

x2

 

[PLeeD]

…when a poster is obviously an inept baiter trying to play a game he doesn’t know how to play, why give him the satisfaction of hitting the ball back in his court even once? This thread is ridiculous.

x2

I appeal to the “Head Protestant”… honestly …to instruct his followers not to judge all Catholics by this forum…

Thanks for posting that, because after a while it gets too easy to assume this is a standard attitude among Catholics.

 

[JonNC]

You know, folks, when a poster is obviously an inept baiter trying to play a game he doesn’t know how to play, why give him the satisfaction of hitting the ball back in his court even once? This thread is ridiculous.

I appeal to the “Head Protestant”… honestly …to instruct his followers not to judge all Catholics by this forum…and not to play ball with Catholics who are in left field playing volleyball with a hockey puck.

I think the OP’s foundational point in this thread and in others he has authored, is that the hierarchical nature of the Catholic Church, led by the Bishop of Rome and those bishops in communion with him (Magisterium), lead to a unity of belief among all Catholics. OTOH, the many protestant communions lack that unity precisely because they lack a unified hierarchy.
While this is indeputable, my view is it assumes that, somewhere in the 1520’s, there was such a unity of doctrine and hierarchy, and this is not the case. I would contend that it existence of various “protestant” communions is as much a reflection on Rome as it is on Wittenburg or Canterbury, etc. But mostly, it is a reflection on human sin, on all of our parts - Luther and Leo included. ISTM that the sooner we reflect on our individual and collective guilt in the division and wounding of His Church and ministry, the sooner the Holy Spirit can lead us back together. In that way, I give thanks to God for the leadership of the Catholic Church since Vatican II do bring this about.

Jon

 

[pablope]

Jn 6:56
Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him.

For a full read on this go here see the attached

I would like to pay particular attention to this verse. Here is another version:

John 6:56 (New American Standard Bible) 56"He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood (A)abides in Me, and I in him.

Abide also means to remain in Him.

So to remain or to abide in Christ, this is what one must do…eat his flesh and drink his blood and to continue to do so. Isn’t it ever so clear? Where is the symbolism in the verse? It is quite literal and clear in what it is saying.

 

[JRKH]

Hi James,
It is so good to converse with you again. I hope your family is doing well.
I absolutely agree with your point,here. ISTM that in regards the real presence, Lutherans and Catholics are divided by our agreement on this truth. :whacky:
By this I mean that I believe the distinctions between Transub. and Sacramental Union, in the end, lack any true difference. We agree that, by the power of the Holy Spirit, when the words of institution are spoken, there is a real change in mere bread and wine, that they truly are His body and His blood.

Jon

John,
Yes it’s good to converse with you also. We are doing as well as can be expected. My DW continues to decline - each day becomes more precious. God has truly been present in our house though and for that I am greatful - For His Love and Patience.

Once again you hit the nail on the head, re our “disagreements”. As you had I have repeatedly discovered, the longer we speak in charity and curiousity with each other the closer we discover our views are…
I think that, with things like transubstantiation, there are those who are endlessly curious and others who try, in good faith, to give answers that are not simply, “well it’s a mystery”.
The problem isn’t with those asking, or with those responding. The problem lies in our common reliance on limited human understanding and “flawed human language”. The problem lies in that, each time we try to “explain” this, we must use language that, by it’s very nature, confines and defines something that is really undefinable.

In the end we can only do the best we can…

Peace
James

 

[scottm]

scottm:

There is no single leader for all branches of Protestantism. This is by design. By the design of God???

No, it is by the design of the Protestant movement. This is “Protestant 101.”

For a given branch, there is no timeless leader.

No one leader in the Protestant sphere was given the keys to bind and loose. I know. So your anser is: no one???

The “binding and loosing” isn’t even on the radar screen of Protestants. They don’t talk in that way. If you want to understand them you have to learn their language.

But yes, given one group – WELS, LCMS, SBC, GARB, whatever – there is no single leader for all time. Leadership changes because new groups can split off from “parent” groups, and several groups can merge together. Calvary Chapel, for example, is a split-off from the Foursquare movement, which is a split-off from the Pentecostal movement, which has no unifying leadership in the first place. Vineyard Christian Fellowships are a split-off from the SBC. Over the history of the USA the Lutheran denominations have split and combined and split and combined several times. So have the Baptists.

 

[JHow]

Which sounds remarkably like those disciples who John speaks of in Chapter 6 who murmmered "60 Many of his disciples, when they heard it, said, “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?”

I think this is an important clue. Compare the reaction here to Matt 4:18 and the call to Simon and Andrew to be “fishers of men”. Matt 4:18 is figurative language and it caused no misconception - otherwise, “Break out the nets and hooks!” Note too that in John 6 both the “Jews” and the disciples too are concerned. Both those that did not accept Jesus and those that did, had trouble with this saying.

And, it is not like Jesus didn’t at times distinguish between literal and figurative language, because he does, for example:

John 16:25 “These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs: but the time cometh, when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, but I shall shew you plainly of the Father.”

---

The other point I would like to make here, is even though many protestants may say that communion is a symbol, they often treat it more reverently than “just” a symbol. It obviously varies from denomination to denomination, but in some churches communion is a weekly affair, you will hear as well that “communion is the central part of our worship service”, they clearly understand that the ritual is established by Christ, and therefore is not to be taken lightly, when it comes to the actual ceremony, the words used are usually straight out of 1 Cor 11:23-25, many protestants would agree with Paul, that communion received in a sinful state is dangerous and can bring judgement on the recipient: “Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord”. Most protestants that I am familiar with also recognize the importance of using un-leavened bread (although there is the wine-grape juice thing!). Most place some restrictions on who can receive (members, the baptized - this does vary). In short, there is a reverence there that seems to exceed status of a symbol.

I would also ask what can we say is Paul’s understanding here?: “A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself”.

 

[joe370]

=Pregustator

;7198841]You know, folks, when a poster is obviously an inept baiter trying to play a game he doesn’t know how to play, why give him the satisfaction of hitting the ball back in his court even once? This thread is ridiculous.

I appeal to the “Head Protestant”… honestly …to instruct his followers not to judge all Catholics by this forum…and not to play ball with Catholics who are in left field playing volleyball with a hockey puck./]

I ask a sincere question that I pondered as a former protestant and you call me inept. Interesting reaction…

Thanks for your post friend…Sorry if you feel that this post is ridiculous…

 

[cooterhein]

joe370.

I’m going to give you a couple of suggestions.

You shouldn’t do this kind of thing anymore. But if you do, you should do it on a non-Catholic forum in the future. I don’t know what’s to blame for your extremely poor attitude toward non-Catholics, but I’m guessing it either had to do with a poor experience among Protestants or an unfortunate experience with whoever showed you the way across the Tiber. Please do as much as you can to fix that, but if part of that process involves slowly learning that these kinds of threads are unacceptable, don’t do it on this forum. You’re an embarrassment to the Catholics who share this forum with you. That’s what they’ve been telling you, anyway. I suggest that you listen to them.

That said, you should continue with more acceptable activitiy on this forum. And while you’re doing that, start paying more attention to the Catholics around you who are more spiritually mature than you, straight-up more mature than you, and willing to show you how to be a better Christian.

You have a lot of room for improvement. I suggest that you get started.

 

[joe370]

=cooterhein

;7200792]joe370.

I’m going to give you a couple of suggestions.

You shouldn’t do this kind of thing anymore. But if you do, you should do it on a non-Catholic forum in the future. I don’t know what’s to blame for your extremely poor attitude toward non-Catholics, but I’m guessing it either had to do with a poor experience among Protestants or an unfortunate experience with whoever showed you the way across the Tiber.

I love all protestant churches and have many protestant friends who do not react like you and Pleed and Pregustator when I ask a sincere question. If the question bothers you then just ignore it friend.

Please do as much as you can to fix that, but if part of that process involves slowly learning that these kinds of threads are unacceptable, don’t do it on this forum.

Yet you suggest I do it on a non-Catholic forum???

You’re an embarrassment to the Catholics who share this forum with you. That’s what they’ve been telling you, anyway. I suggest that you listen to them.

Another interesting reaction to a sincere question. Is that true catholics???

That said, you should continue with more acceptable activitiy on this forum.

Moderator has no problem with my threads. Instead of answering the following question: Who can I defer to in the protestant sphere for the correct answer?

You critique me. These are just honest questions that I asked myself as a former non-Catholic that led me to the CC.

And while you’re doing that, start paying more attention to the Catholics around you who are more spiritually mature than you, straight-up more mature than you, and willing to show you how to be a better Christian.

You have a lot of room for improvement. I suggest that you get started.

Wow, that was really rude. Take care…

 

[PJM]

=joe370;7197761]Is the bread at the Lord’s table only bread, or is it the Body of Christ? Zwingli will tell you one thing; Luther, another, and these were the very first leaders of the reformed church that spearhead the reformation. To whom can I defer in the protestant sphere for the correct answer?

**Protestants can’t give you RIGHT and TRUTHFUL ANSWER; but the bible can and DOES:

FROM THE KJ BIBLE**

Matt 26: 26-28: " And as they were eating, **Jesus **took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins."

**Mark: 14:22-24 **" And as they did eat, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake it, and gave to them, and said, Take, eat: this is my body. And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them: and they all drank of it. And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many."

**Luke 22: 19-21 ** “And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.”

John [READ All Chapter Six] 47-55
" Verily, verily,[Means “truly, truly] I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life. I am that bread of life. This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die. I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. ** 55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.”**

**Paul 1 Cor. 11:23-27 **
"For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come. Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. "

There ya go and directly from your own King James Bible.

May God you unto the truth of HIS VERY OWN WORDS!

 

[joe370]

Hey JonNC…

Jon, thanks for your feedback friend. It seems to me that each protestant church simply defers to their respective church leadership for the answer to the question just as Christians belonging to the CC do. I was just hoping to establish some sort of consensus in the non-Catholic sphere regarding the OP but I guess the question is considered ridiculous to a few non-Catholics. Oh well…I had a few other questions on my mind for non-Catholics but I think I am going to hold off; they seem to evoke hostility to a few.

Take care Jon…

This is interesting, Joe, because even Lutherans do not defer to some leader in the “Protestant sphere”. In the Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Melanchthon defers to three sources: Christ’s own words, the teachings of the early Church, both east and west, and the ECF’s.

So, to answer your question regarding Lutherans, simply turn to the likes of Vulgarius and Cyril, and the canon of the Mass, as Melanchthon did.

Jon

 

[cooterhein]

I love all protestant churches and have many protestant friends who do not react like you and Pleed and Pregustator when I ask a sincere question. If the question bothers you then just ignore it friend.

It wasn’t a sincere question. It’s an awkward attempt at proselytism, and you’ve chosen one of the worst ways of going about it.

Yet you suggest I do it on a non-Catholic forum???

Indeed I do, and I told you exactly why I made that suggestion. When I gave the reason, you referred to it as…

Another interesting reaction to a sincere question. Is that true catholics???

I suppose you could call it in interesting reaction, but it’s also the reason I suggested that you do it somewhere else. As to whether or not they’re true Catholics, why don’t you ask them. They posted on your thread.

Moderator has no problem with my threads.

That doesn’t necessarily mean you don’t have a problem.

Instead of answering the following question: Who can I defer to in the protestant sphere for the correct answer?

I know it’s not a sincere question.

You critique me.

You better believe you need to be critiqued.

These are just honest questions that I asked myself as a former non-Catholic that led me to the CC.

They aren’t honest questions. They probably were for you at one time, but you eventually concluded that there’s no good answer to them and therefore you must become a Catholic. You’ve settled on that as the appropriate response, and now you’re pretending to look for a different one. In reality, you’re trying to convince Protestants of the accuracy of your conclusion.

That’s why most of your recent threads are neither sincere nor honest.

Wow, that was really rude. Take care…

Meh.

 

[JHow]

… As to whether or not they’re true Catholics, why don’t you ask them. They posted on your thread.

Point of grammar: I think joe370 meant: “Is that true, Catholics?” Missing a comma - not questioning the faith of Catholics who criticzed him.

 

[joe370]

cooterhein you said:

You better believe you need to be critiqued.

This is so irrelevant to the thread. Instead of addressing my question you criticize me. Oh well…What’s your answer to the OP? I am hoping to find a consensus in the protestant churches regarding this question, and yes it is a sincere question.

 

[joe370]

Point of grammar: I think joe370 meant: “Is that true, Catholics?” Missing a comma - not questioning the faith of Catholics who criticzed him.

Oops…I forgot the comma…

 

[cooterhein]

Point of grammar: I think joe370 meant: “Is that true, Catholics?” Missing a comma - not questioning the faith of Catholics who criticzed him.

I think you’re right. I misunderstood. The triple question mark should have been enough of a clue.

Either way, though, not really a question I can answer.

 

[SyCarl]

Is the bread at the Lord’s table only bread, or is it the Body of Christ? Zwingli will tell you one thing; Luther, another, and these were the very first leaders of the reformed church that spearhead the reformation. To whom can I defer in the protestant sphere for the correct answer?

Why is it necessary to defer to anyone one. Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper. As long as we do what Jesus directed we don’t need to understand it. We can trust God to do what He intended when it is celebrated whatever we may believe. That is one of the reason that the early church referred to such things as Mysterys.

 

[cooterhein]

This is so irrelevant to the thread. Instead of addressing my question you criticize me. Oh well…What’s your answer to the OP? I am hoping to find a consensus in the protestant churches regarding this question, and yes it is a sincere question.

Again, I know very well that it’s not a sincere question. You do not hope to find a consensus among Protestants; you hope to demonstrate that Protestantism is worthless and the Catholic Church is far superior.

So go ahead; state the premise of your argument and make your conclusions. Out with it. If you do that, I’ll give it some serious consideration and see if the argument is at least valid.

 

[joe370]

SyCarl;7200954]Why is it necessary to defer to anyone one. Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper. As long as we do what Jesus directed we don’t need to understand it. We can trust God to do what He intended when it is celebrated whatever we may believe. That is one of the reason that the early church referred to such things as Mysterys.

That seems like a reasonable perspective; thanks for the feedback…