K
kalt
Guest
The Lord’s day is Sunday.
- Status
K
kalt
Guest
This is merely opinion. You’ve decided what someone is like when they “know Jesus”. What have you based this on? How are you judging this?
Do you think that it’s possible that someone who knows Jesus could be someone who has a quiet personality?
Don’t seem to sin?
It would seem that those who think they “know Jesus” and also think that they don’t “seem to sin” are headed for trouble.You’ve come up with a list of traits that identify (to you) someone who knows Jesus. I have to ask you, then, about Luther. It seems to me that he had none of the traits you mentioned above. Did he know Jesus?
K
kalt
Guest
A very nice post.
And it goes both ways. Those here who claim that those who don’t have a certain set of personality traits don’t “know Jesus” are way off base in making that claim.
It’s not up to any of us to declare who “knows Jesus” and who doesn’t.
S
Sarah_Angel
Guest
Question:
How often have you spent time in Eucharistic Adoration in front of the tabernacle?
I pray that you will take back that statement.
J
JesusforMadrid
Guest
Hold on. I have no intention of demeaning the mystery of the Holy Eucharist and I regret if my comments were received as such. I accept the Real Presence.
What I don’t accept based on my experience, and here I am in consonance with Scripture and the ECFs, is that participating in the weekly Eucharist per se is sufficient to make you “know Jesus” in the sense of having your whole being transformed by Him. I do not mean to offend anyone by saying that. And yes, merely reading Scripture is not sufficient either (although the failure to do so, according to Jerome, leads to ignorance of Christ).
Since it seems you also agree with that, I don’t understand your objection to my question.
I hope that asking honest, perhaps uncomfortable questions in a thread doesn’t make me somebody’s “opponent” or “demeaning”.
K
kalt
Guest
Fit “that description” by whose definition. Who decides what someone who “knows Jesus” looks like?
J
JesusforMadrid
Guest
Sarah_Angel;56 said:
That was a completely unfair cut and paste of a fragment of my full sentence. Please don’t do that to me.
The benefit of an internet debate is that we can hopefully ask honest questions and make comments in a civilised, grace-filled manner, without having such misconstrued.
Yes, Scripture and the Early Church Fathers are full of references about how men look at externals, but God looks at the heart. So any religious act–participating in communion, “accepting Christ as your personal Saviour”, confession, reading Scripture, attending church, praying–is fairly meaningless if it is just a “vain repetition” and our heart doesn’t change, leading us to be more like Christ, a process often called sanctification.
H
happilycatholic
Guest
No, by oppenent I just meant you have an opposing view. I actually respect your view until you say the Eucharist is worthless if it doesn’t make a person Christlike and that’s where my objection comes in.
The Eucharist, just like anything else here on earth is not magic, unfortunately. It is however a (M)ystery and is the essence of the Holy Spirit so it cannot by nature be worthless whether or not you see evidence of something that pleases you.
That is not to say it doesn’t do it’s “job” (for lack of vocabulary on my part, please forgive). It emparts Grace upon the reciever. That person *should *then go and be Christlike. That doesn’t always happen, that is why we have confession.
But with that said, I don’t think ‘knowing Jesus’ necessarily means you have your “whole being transformed by Him”. I’m not sure what meaning you wish to convey. I’m not sure anyone, with the exception of those with stigmata have had their whole being transformed by any means of Grace, even Baptism. I was Baptized, but if I had my whole being transformed would I still be a sinner? IDK, maybe I misunderstand this part.
I am glad you are not trying to demean the Eucharist. Thank you sincerely for clearing that up. God Bless you.
J
JesusforMadrid
Guest
Not my list but rather St. Paul’s. See Gal. 5:22-23.This is merely opinion. You’ve decided what someone is like when they “know Jesus”. What have you based this on? How are you judging this?
Do you think that it’s possible that someone who knows Jesus could be someone who has a quiet personality?
Don’t seem to sin?
You’ve come up with a list of traits that identify (to you) someone who knows Jesus. I have to ask you, then, about Luther. It seems to me that he had none of the traits you mentioned above. Did he know Jesus?
The OP wanted to know why some Non-Catholics have this view about Catholics not “knowing Jesus”. I am merely trying to explain what Non-Catholics may mean by “knowing Jesus”. Of course it is my opinion.
K
kalt
Guest
Here is a little info on the Lord’s Day, which is Sunday.
catholic.com/library/Sabbath_or_Sunday.asp
K
kalt
Guest
But that didn’t answer the questions.
If it’s your opinion, why not explain it further?
Do you think that someone who doesn’t display the infectious joy you describe might know Jesus?
Do you believe that you can tell who really knows Jesus based on their outward personality? You said that “too few” Catholics fit the description. Have you decided, then, that these Catholics don’t “know Jesus”?
This seems more of the OSAS thinking. People who believe in OSAS think that they know who is saved by how they behave, but when the person’s behavior goes bad (murder, for example), those who believe in OSAS say that he was obviously never saved.
It seems to me that these outward personality traits aren’t reliable indicators of a person’s spiritual condition. Maybe we should leave the determination up to God and not pretend that we can tell.
Looking at reserved Catholics and deciding that they don’t “know Jesus” is what’s “worthless”.
J
JesusforMadrid
Guest
Those who are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. (See Galatians 5). Clearly there are outward signs of an inward change, according to St. Paul.But that didn’t answer the questions.
If it’s your opinion, why not explain it further?
Do you think that someone who doesn’t display the infectious joy you describe might know Jesus?
Do you believe that you can tell who really knows Jesus based on their outward personality? You said that “too few” Catholics fit the description. Have you decided, then, that these Catholics don’t “know Jesus”?
This seems more of the OSAS thinking. People who believe in OSAS think that they know who is saved by how they behave, but when the person’s behavior goes bad (murder, for example), those who believe in OSAS say that he was obviously never saved.
It seems to me that these outward personality traits aren’t reliable indicators of a person’s spiritual condition. Maybe we should leave the determination up to God and not pretend that we can tell.
Looking at reserved Catholics and deciding that they don’t “know Jesus” is what’s “worthless”.
These things were spoken to us by Christ, so that His joy may remain in us and that our joy may be full (see John 15). It seems pretty clear that the Christian life should be one of joy, however expressed.
It is not my intention here or ever to say who is or will be “saved”. I am sure there are other threads that take up OSAS. I have only written here about what I think Non-Catholics mean when they refer to “knowing Jesus”.
M
mark_a
Guest
Easy for you to say. And pretty arrogent too.
Will a Christian survivor of the Darfur genocide or the Chinese government’s suppression of Christianity necessarily be full of joy “however expressed”?
Was Jesus joyful at the agony in the garden?? As he took up his cross??
J
JesusforMadrid
Guest
Be careful who you insult by calling arrogant.
That is a direct quote from Christ, put in the 1st person.
If you have a Bible, I suggest you read John 15:11.
Yes I thing there is tremendous joy in suffering as a Christian (St. Paul says by doing so we glorify God). Christians in China are arguably the most joyful in the world. See Brother Yun’s The Heavenly Man.
See also the life of St. Paul, St. Clement, Justin, or, for a modern example, St. Maxamillian Kolbe.
T
Tezza
Guest
Yeah, if you were protestant and didn’t know Jesus, you blame yourself. If you were Catholic and didn’t know Jesus, you blame the Church.Can someone PLEASE explain this to me?
I just read a “testimony” by someone who used to be really involved in the Catholic Church but didn’t “truly know Jesus” until he became Protestant.
I tend to hear this a lot from people…when they’re speaking either about themselves, or others.
In my experience though, I got to know God better and in a closer way once I became Catholic! Can we be any closer to Him than the Eucharist? that’s receiving Jesus physically into ourselves!
if there are Catholics who aren’t really close to God… that’s perhaps cause they weren’t properly catechized, or whatever, but it’s not because Catholicism somehow prevents people from “having a relationship with Jesus”. It doesn’t prevent…quite the contrary! those who HAVE followed the Church teachings well, became Saints…and if you read anything they wrote, it’s so obvious they were very close to God.
I just don’t understand why people say things like this and it’s really bothering me… sorry about the rant
I understand if some people disagree with Catholic doctrine and think the Church is wrong on points. But they seem to go even further, and say that Catholics don’t “really know” God. How come this is not said about other Protestant denominations, even though they have different doctrines too? how come Catholics don’t say things like that about other Christians? even if we think their doctrines are heretical, we still admit they can be saved and know God and they’re still Christians… why all this anti-Catholicism?
I have some Protestants friends who go on missions to evangelize Catholics…and bring them into “Bible believing” churches as they’re called… I hear so much about how Catholics “dont know God”, and to be honest, it’s just gotten to the point that it’s both puzzling and hurtful.
thanks for reading my rant…lol
(haven’t read through the whole thread, so forgive me if someone already pointed this out).
R
Reuben_J
Guest
Great, you are way ahead of us. At this rate where you known everything already, we have to wonder what’s the use of even discussing?
I know you are responding to a poster who may irk you but your response did not make two presumptions right.
The Roman Catholic Eucharist is NOT useless as much as what Evangelicals do are useless. How is that?
Alright on a more sane note. I have not seen any Catholic who goes for Eucharist every day, that is daily, does not change for the better from what he/she was. It is the sick who needs the doctor. Those Catholics who make the Eucharist as a devotion, none, I would say, who are not healed in one way or the other; none I would say who deteriorate and backslide due to his devotion to the Eucharist.
But if you continue to be mr knows all, well, there is not much that I can say. But this I know, you have to experience it to experience the power of the Eucharist. How do you as an Evangelical get to know Jesus? What’s the difference that you do compared to us? Did you do the things we did not do to improve our spiritual lives?
Do you pray? I can say that leave out prayer, your knowing Jesus is false. The Holy Eucharist is a prayer and a worship. How can a prayer and a worship is useless?
J
JesusforMadrid
Guest
Again, your and other RCs insistence on focusing on the Holy Eucharist (which I have explained previously that I by no means intend to demean) just shows that Evangelicals and Catholics have completely different ideas of what it means to “know Jesus”.
For the Evangelical, “knowing Jesus” is an inward, personal change due to conversion and absorbing God’s Word that leads to outward signs of holiness, especially the Fruits of the Spirit. You may not like this definition but I think it is basically what Non Catholics imply. Other Evangelicals may correct me.
For Roman Catholics, “knowing Jesus” means participating in the sacraments, especially the Eucharist. Less emphasis is placed on outward signs of holiness and more on the Mystery of the Eucharist and participating in the life of the Church.
I hope this is a charitable rendering of the different perspectives (in a thread notably lacking in charity, which for my part I can only ask forgiveness).
N
NotTooSmart
Guest
Against my better judgement I am returning to this thread even though to some (one) I am just going through the motions anyway and my whole Christian experience is a waste.
I tried to coin a phrase that well meant “personal” (as opposed to corporate), “decision” (like a choice…an conscious, heart-felt act of the will) and “Jesus Christ” like a person. If this is Christianese, I don’t know how to express this otherwise. But maybe that is why I am NotTooSmart.
Actually I tried to not make it Christianese. Christianese in my mind would have been “Accepting Jesus Christ as my personal saviour” or “Got saved”.
I tried to coin a phrase that well meant “personal” (as opposed to corporate), “decision” (like a choice…an conscious, heart-felt act of the will) and “Jesus Christ” like a person. If this is Christianese, I don’t know how to express this otherwise. But maybe that is why I am NotTooSmart.
Now I don’t want to get into infant baptism (I was baptized as an infant BTW), but I do want to observe that that is not the choice of the infant.
I guess the bottom line question for me is, that I personally know folks that were Catholics that say (in some way or another) that they “did not know Jesus” as a Catholic. Why should I disbelieve their stories.
And that is wonderful. So on the other hand, why should I disbelieve the stories of Catholics who say they are making ongoing personal decisions for Jesus Christ.
N
NotTooSmart
Guest
One final post and that is it.
My parents had me baptized as an infant in the Methodist church.
Now I know a lot of us evangelicals have a cow over infant baptism, but I look at it as them just being obedient to their teaching and doing what they felt was right for my Christianity. So I take it as a good thing.
I was as good of a Christian as a kid would be. When I was about 12 it was time for the “join the church” which was the next step in being raised a Methodist. I suppose this was the Methodist equivalent of confirmation.
Now again I know a lot of us evangelicals have a cow over confirmation, but for me this was a good thing at the time under my circumstance. Many years later my parents gave me the paperwork they got when I joined the church, and it was very interesting for me to read in this paperwork that yes, at that time I made a decision for Jesus Christ.
But the problem was that none of this stuck through the years that followed and by the time I got to college it was totally forgotten. So when I was in college, I made the personal decision for Jesus Christ that was persistent and has continued through this day.
And I date the beginning of my Christian walk to this point. But that having been said, I am really not sure how to interpret what happened when I was 12. I can’t remember much about it except that I sort of liked one of the girls who was doing this at the same time,. You see, in my current church I see a lot of kids make decisions for Jesus Christ when they are that age only to walk away from it later. Do I say (to be consistent) what happened to them at that age was not valid. So I have to assume that something happened at this time.
I can easily see a parallel universe scenario where what happened to me at 12 did stick through the following years, and having being raised in the Methodist church that I become a good Methodist for the rest of my life. And then I would have folks in the church down the street concerned about my soul because my story was not like their story and my Christian experience not like theirs Christian experience and my Christianese not like their Christianese.
But that is not the way that it happened.
This sort of reminds me of my story.
My parents had me baptized as an infant in the Methodist church.
Now I know a lot of us evangelicals have a cow over infant baptism, but I look at it as them just being obedient to their teaching and doing what they felt was right for my Christianity. So I take it as a good thing.
I was as good of a Christian as a kid would be. When I was about 12 it was time for the “join the church” which was the next step in being raised a Methodist. I suppose this was the Methodist equivalent of confirmation.
Now again I know a lot of us evangelicals have a cow over confirmation, but for me this was a good thing at the time under my circumstance. Many years later my parents gave me the paperwork they got when I joined the church, and it was very interesting for me to read in this paperwork that yes, at that time I made a decision for Jesus Christ.
But the problem was that none of this stuck through the years that followed and by the time I got to college it was totally forgotten. So when I was in college, I made the personal decision for Jesus Christ that was persistent and has continued through this day.
And I date the beginning of my Christian walk to this point. But that having been said, I am really not sure how to interpret what happened when I was 12. I can’t remember much about it except that I sort of liked one of the girls who was doing this at the same time,. You see, in my current church I see a lot of kids make decisions for Jesus Christ when they are that age only to walk away from it later. Do I say (to be consistent) what happened to them at that age was not valid. So I have to assume that something happened at this time.
I can easily see a parallel universe scenario where what happened to me at 12 did stick through the following years, and having being raised in the Methodist church that I become a good Methodist for the rest of my life. And then I would have folks in the church down the street concerned about my soul because my story was not like their story and my Christian experience not like theirs Christian experience and my Christianese not like their Christianese.
But that is not the way that it happened.
K
kalt
Guest
Then I think we agree that the expression of an inner change is not of a cookie cutter variety. While some may see an evangelical Christian who is demonstrative about his religion as one who “knows Jesus”, and a Catholic who is not demonstrative as one who doesn’t know Jesus, the opposite may be as likely to be true.
Another poster said that some people go through the motions of going to church but don’t really know Jesus. I’m sure there are those who go through the motions of knowing Jesus (doing and saying all the right things), but don’t “know Jesus”.
- Status