Why is Jesus never on the cross in a Protestant church?

[teadough]

No, there was no bait and switch. I have no idea what I posted that you would disagree with.

here is a great example of where you pulled that classic tactic.

Originally Posted by teadough
You would not be a Christian if it were not for the Jewish religion as well as Catholics.

Pwrlftr
The Jewish religion denies Christ. Do you disagree with that statement?

see. You are trying to twist things so as to try and make me say something that is completely besides the original remarks.There is no need for me to answer that. You did the same thing with the 1 Cor quote. You quoted one line and I asked you why since when one reads the entire chapter you obviously see Paul is summarizing. You pulled one line from Pauls statements.

I have seen you do this in multiple threads. You will run around the original question and then when asked about it you will throw something out that is not part of the whole thread. To be honest…you came into this thread 203 post after it started. Did you bother reading the entire thread or did you just want to come in and make a off the wall remark from a random post?

Forgive me if I come off the wrong way. It is hard to put thing into words without it sounding like I am being hard to get along with

 

[Pwrlftr]

1 Corinthians 15:17 and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins.

Seems pretty clear to me.

 

[2ndGen]

What exactly bothers you about the verse I posted? Can you show us that if Jesus hadn’t been resurrected our faith wouldn’t be in vain?

Faith in what?

What is that whole passage talking about?

The faith is that we too will be ressurected.

The verse (taken in context) is talking about “our” ressurections.

 

[2ndGen]

What exactly bothers you about the verse I posted? Can you show us that if Jesus hadn’t been resurrected our faith wouldn’t be in vain?

Take this post for example…we were originally talking about what was it that saves us, Jesus’ ressurection or His death. You used two lines out of a passage to try to say that it was His ressurecion, but that verse taken in context means faith that we will be ressurected (with Jesus as the example).

When I pulled up the entire passage, you then switched the conversation to faith being in vain.

 

[teadough]

1 Corinthians 15:17 and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins.

Seems pretty clear to me.

no,what’s clear is that if you read from the begining of the Chapter where Paul says he giving you a summary by “reminding” you. It is very clear Paul is giving a step by step summary. I don’t understand how you can’t see where you are pulling one line of scripture and running with it.

“1 Now I am reminding you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you indeed received and in which you also stand.”

 

[Pwrlftr]

here is a great example of where you pulled that classic tactic.

Originally Posted by teadough
You would not be a Christian if it were not for the Jewish religion as well as Catholics.

Pwrlftr
The Jewish religion denies Christ. Do you disagree with that statement?

see. You are trying to twist things so as to try and make me say something that is completely besides the original remarks.There is no need for me to answer that.

I have no idea why you posted “You would not be a Christian if it were not for the Jewish religion…”

Why did you post it?

You did the same thing with the 1 Cor quote. You quoted one line and I asked you why since when one reads the entire chapter you obviously see Paul is summarizing. You pulled one line from Pauls statements.

I really don’t see how anyone can object to the verse I posted.
1 Corinthians 15:14 14 And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain.

It’s re-stated in verse 17
1 Corinthians 15:17 17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins.

I could quote the rest of the NT and it wouldn’t change the meaning or understanding of either of these two verses.

What exactly do you find objectionable about either of the two verses? They seemed so straightforward that I assumed any Christian (Catholic or otherwise) wouldn’t object but apparently you think they are cherry picking.

I have seen you do this in multiple threads. You will run around the original question and then when asked about it you will throw something out that is not part of the whole thread.

2ndG’s post was part of the whole thread. Do you not feel it strange that he can “feel” God in two places of worship that absolutely deny Christ but yet can’t “feel” God in a Christian church?

To be honest…you came into this thread 203 post after it started. Did you bother reading the entire thread or did you just want to come in and make a off the wall remark from a random post?

No, I have other things to do than read 203 other posts.

Forgive me if I come off the wrong way. It is hard to put thing into word without sounding like I am being hard to get along with

Well, I guess I am partly to blame as well so all I guess we can do is get back on the right track. My apologies as well as it seems I mis-understood your tone.
I

 

[Pwrlftr]

no,what’s clear is that if you read from the begining of the Chapter where Paul says he giving you a summary by “reminding” you. It is very clear Paul is giving a step by step summary. I don’t understand how you can’t see where you are pulling one line of scripture and running with it.

“1 Now I am reminding you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you indeed received and in which you also stand.”

Okay, Paul is giving us a summary.

Can you explain your take on verses 14 and 17?

 

[2ndGen]

no,what’s clear is that if you read from the begining of the Chapter where Paul says he giving you a summary by “reminding” you. It is very clear Paul is giving a step by step summary. I don’t understand how you can’t see where you are pulling one line of scripture and running with it.

“1 Now I am reminding you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you indeed received and in which you also stand.”

That’s not even a complete verse, but just a fragment of the verse…without the first part of that verse, it doesn’t mean anything.

 

[2ndGen]

2ndG’s post was part of the whole thread. Do you not feel it strange that he can “feel” God in two places of worship that absolutely deny Christ but yet can’t “feel” God in a Christian church?

I never said I felt “Jesus” there…I said I felt “God” there.

I don’t feel Jesus or God in an unconsecrated building.

Matthew 5:17
“Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill.”

The Law (and The Temple that is part of The Law) is still in full effect. Jesus just opened it up to all mankind.

Besides, most Christians believe that Muslims believe in the same God that we do. That’s a solid 85%.

 

[Pwrlftr]

Faith in what?

What is that whole passage talking about?

The faith is that we too will be ressurected.

The verse (taken in context) is talking about “our” ressurections.

Yet it was important enough for Paul to state twice that if Jesus wasn’t resurrected our faith is in vain.

In verse 17 Paul states it even stronger

1 Corinthians 15:17 17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and **you are still in your sins. **

Not only is our faith in vain if Christ has not been raised but we are still in our sins.

Based on verse 17, the resurrection is pivotal in the cleansing of our sins. If Christ is not resurrected, we are still in our sins and our faith is futile.

 

[justinthemartyr]

What about it? I don’t understand. He predicted His death.

he predicted his death?

“I will draw all men unto myself through my being lifted up from the earth, this the way in which I will die”

He will draw all men unto himself through his crucifixion.

One other passage to keep in mind is Galatians 3:1, “O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified?” Did you catch that? Jesus was publicly portrayed, before their “eyes”, as being crucified. Sounds kind of like they may have been looking at a Crucifix, doesn’t it?

 

[teadough]

That’s not even a complete verse, but just a fragment of the verse…without the first part of that verse, it doesn’t mean anything.

Oh,I do see how that came off. I was trying to point out how Paul is clearly stating the he is giving a step by step summary of what he has already preached to them. I just wanted to emphasize what the first few words were that Paul spoke to point out how he is getting ready to,once again, preach to them the message he had done prior.

 

[2ndGen]

Oh,I do see how that came off. I was trying to point out how Paul is clearly stating the he is giving a step by step summary of what he has already preached to them. I just wanted to emphasize what the first few words were that Paul spoke to point out how he is getting ready to,once again, preach to them the message he had done prior.

No…I was using “his” using the fragment of the verse…not yours. Sorry if I didn’t explain it good enough.

You were quoting him!

 

[teadough]

I have no idea why you posted “You would not be a Christian if it were not for the Jewish religion…”
Why did you post it?

Because I thought you were talking as if the Jewish people were not important. I know you know they are. No need to explain

I really don’t see how anyone can object to the verse I posted.
1 Corinthians 15:14 14 And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain.

It’s re-stated in verse 17
1 Corinthians 15:17 17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins.

I could quote the rest of the NT and it wouldn’t change the meaning or understanding of either of these two verses.

What exactly do you find objectionable about either of the two verses? They seemed so straightforward that I assumed any Christian (Catholic or otherwise) wouldn’t object but apparently you think they are cherry picking.

I don’t find it objectionable at all but I also keep in mind that Paul is pointing this out to the people of Corinth because they obviously have a understanding of what significance it is as to Jesus being the Paschal Lamb.

The funny part about us debating Corinthians is the fact that Paul talks about there needs to be unity amongst the people and that there are too many disagreements. Why don’t you sign of for RCIA next year and we can just call it even

 

[po18guy]

I disagree. Through His resurrection we have the promise of eternal life in Him. It is Christ crucified and raised from the dead. Not Christ dead on the cross that promises life eternal through Him.

OK.

 

[Pwrlftr]

Why don’t you sign of for RCIA next year and we can just call it even

If I do, you guys aren’t going to break out the rubber hoses other nefarious instruments…are you?

 

[2ndGen]

If I do, you guys aren’t going to break out the rubber hoses other nefarious instruments…are you?

No…you’ll just be taken to a basement of an undidentifiable building with no landmarks around where you’ll be duely indoctrinated all the while, a clone of you will be sent to live your life until you are ready to serve The Magisterium as one of our robots.



Reminds me of History of The World Part I’s “The Spanish Inquisition” scene!

 

[graceandglory]

1 Corinthians 15:13-14 13 But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14 And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain.

Yep.

Let us not forget that without the resurrection our faith is in vain. If I choose to not have the corpus on the cross I wouldn’t think it should bother anyone other than the most bigotted of Catholics.

I wear a cross, not a crucifix, on a necklace. (My dad made if for me, it’s probably the favorite thing I own)

I use it as a “decoration,” an emblem, or a symbol, that I am a Christian. But in Church, there is historically no more powerful way to draw someone into God’s presence than seeing the cross and Christ crucified. :bowdown:

Catholics know where the risen Christ lives today. We KNOW the Ascension.

 

[graceandglory]

Yet it was important enough for Paul to state twice that if Jesus wasn’t resurrected our faith is in vain.

In verse 17 Paul states it even stronger

1 Corinthians 15:17 17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and **you are still in your sins. **

Not only is our faith in vain if Christ has not been raised but we are still in our sins.

Based on verse 17, the resurrection is pivotal in the cleansing of our sins. If Christ is not resurrected, we are still in our sins and our faith is futile.

Pwrlftr:

Your verses are great. Your argument however is weak. Catholics believe everything you are suggesting by these verses that we don’t. Your argument is called a “Straw Man Argument.”

A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent’s position.[1] To “set up a straw man” or “set up a straw man argument” is to create a position that is easy to refute and attribute that position to the opponent. Often, the straw man is set up to deliberately overstate the opponent’s position.[1] A straw man argument can be a successful rhetorical technique (that is, it may succeed in persuading people) but it is in fact a misleading fallacy, because the opponent’s actual argument has not been refuted.[2]

Get your facts straight, learn first of all what Catholics believe, then you can at least have a worthwhile discussion. Setting up a “straw man” and attempting to knock it down with Scripture that we Catholic believe will not persuade anyone with half a brain. Suggesting that Catholics don’t believe the Resurrection is hogwash.
Don’t forget that if it weren’t for Catholics, you wouldn’t have a Bible, and you wouldn’t know about the Resurrection.

 

[cradlecathlic26]

Thats the first time ive heard that “catholics dont believe in the Ressarection”!