Questions For A Catholic

[mcorba]

The problem is that the Bible's opinion trumps human opinion every time, and that's where the disagreement lies, not with human opinions.

Pope... Catholics found this on human tradition, Protestants point to no evidence in the Bible.
Bowing... Catholics say it's for "respect", Protestants point to the Bible saying not to do it.
Idols... Catholics say it's an "image", Protestants point to the Bible saying not to do it.
Mary... Catholics say she's especially honored, Protestants point to no evidence in the Bible.
Praying to Dead... Catholics say it's OK, Protestants point to the Bible which repeatedly condemns any communication with any dead.

There's a conflict here, between Bible opinion vs human opinion. And therein lies the disagreement.

This conflict will only ever be resolved if both sides come to one side or the other. IE, either the Protestants need to say fallible human opinion is higher than that of Inspired Apostles, or the Catholics need to acknowledge the Inspired works are higher than fallible humans. One is laughable and the other is Scriptural.


I don't know what claiming the RCC is the only denomination with the true fullness of the gospel would be. There's been numerous "RCC is holier than thou" type posts in here and it's rubbish. One hand doesn't seem to know what the other is doing.

You think there have been a lot of RCC holier than thou comments?
Compared to scathing comments attacking it?
I would seriously question your judgement on that - the Catholic responses, have, on the whole
tried to not get into bitching and attacks, the same cannot be said of the hijack brigade!

Many with an impartial view have made comments to this effect. Just because we havent chosen to
respond in kind to all of the attacks, doesnt mean we couldnt pick holes in your arguments. Thats the nature of opinion.

Are you saying that RCC is worthless because it has certain elements that dont rely on soley on scripture?

IF so, am sure that many of us here could look at a lot of processes in most other non-Catholic denominations and critique the same way you guys have.

 

[TexUs]

Just because we havent chosen to
respond in kind to all of the attacks, doesnt mean we couldnt pick holes in your arguments. Thats the nature of opinion.

LOL, yeah... That's it.

I wonder how that tactic would work in a court of law? "I cannot disprove what you're saying, but I could, but I can't, so I win".

Are you saying that RCC is worthless because it has certain elements that dont rely on soley on scripture?

No, stop putting words in my mouth.
If one soul is saved through the ministry of the RCC, it's worth it. However:
The question is how many are lost due to the RCC's false teachings. If I were a new believer in an RCC I'd certainly have the thought that all the "traditions" were my faith, not my relationship with Christ.
"Screw communicating directly with God, I'll go the round about ritualistic way and go through the saints".
"Screw lifting my hands to the Most High, let me bow to this statue".
"Screw focusing my attention on Christ, let's dig up dead saints in honor of THEM".

In case you missed the entire purpose of Christ's work on the cross, the veil was TORN. No more tradition and no more works, we've got direct access to God.

IF so, am sure that many of us here could look at a lot of processes in most other non-Catholic denominations and critique the same way you guys have.

And here comes your denomination-promotion back to the surface once again after you just denied it.
You are not hearing what I and others are saying, or you'd realize we'd be right in line condemning the flaws in the other denominations, as well.

 

[WhiteKnuckle]

There was a time when I was strinctly against the RCC, and even publicly cursed it.

Now, I admit, there's manythings that I don't fully understand about the Catholic doctrine. There's many things that I personally disagree with. However, There's many things I don't agree with in many other denominations. Infact, I'm hard pressed to give you any one specific denomination, person, or so called non denomination that I think has it right.

To be perfectly honest, I feel that my beliefs are perfectly correct, although, there's still manythings that I don't understand.

What does make me different in some ways is the fact that I leave open to the idea that maybe, just maybe, what I believe and what I understand isn't completely correct. So, in other words, I'm open to learning. I trust God whole heartedly, that even through my mistakes, misunderstandings, or what ever, He will lead me to the truth, as He will with anyone that is open to consideration of His will.

At this time, I don't want my kids to learn the ways of the Catholics. This is meant as no offense to people who are Catholic. I just don't agree and understand many of the rituals and ideals put forth from the RCC. It's a shame this thread didn't work out, I do have many questions.

At the same time, though, I feel it only right to stand up for anyone's beliefs the best I can, in a way that I understand the meanings or the innocense in what people do.

Adding here, At no time in my entire life, have I ever met fellow believers that were more genuinely concerned for the well being of another, and genuinely happy and joyfull to help another human being, and devote time and effort to good causes, and the embetterment of civilization, as I have with people from the Catholic Church. Although, not to discount many others not of the Catholic Faith.

 

[Selene]

I'm curious about communion.

I've heard that Catholics believe that the bread becomes the actual flesh of Jesus and the wine becomes the actual blood of Jesus. Anyone care to elaborate?

Hello WhiteKnuckle,

Chapter 6 of the Gospel of John began with the miracle of the fish and loaves. Then in John 6:30 we find Jesus at the synagogue in Capernaum. The Jews asked Jesus what sign He could perform so that they might believe in Him. As a challenge, they noted that "our ancestors ate manna in the desert." Could Jesus top that? He told them the real bread from heaven comes from the Father. "Give us this bread always," they said. Jesus replied, "I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me will never hunger, and whoever believes in me will never thirst." At this point the Jews understood him to be speaking metaphorically.

Jesus first repeated what he said, then summarized: "‘I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.’ The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, ‘How can this man give us His flesh to eat?’" (John 6:51–52). His listeners were stupefied because now they understood Jesus literally—and correctly. He again repeated His words, but with even greater emphasis, and introduced the statement about drinking His blood: "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; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him" (John 6:53–56).

Jesus made no attempt to soften what He said, nor any attempt to correct any "misunderstandings," for there were none. Our Lord’s listeners understood Him perfectly well. They no longer thought He was speaking metaphorically. On other occasions when there was confusion, Christ explained just what He meant (cf. Matt. 16:5–12). Here, where any misunderstanding would be dispel, there was no effort by Jesus to correct. Instead, He repeated himself for greater emphasis.

In John 6:60 we read: "Many of His disciples, when they heard it, said, ‘This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?’" These were His disciples - people who just witnessed His many miracles such as the opening of this chapter when He fed thousands with a few fish and loaves. He warned them not to think carnally, but spiritually: "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" (John 6:63; cf. 1 Cor. 2:12–14). But He knew some did not believe. After this, many of his disciples drew back and no longer went about with Him" (John 6:66). This is the only record we have of any of Christ’s followers forsaking him for doctrinal reasons. If it had all been a misunderstanding, if they erred in taking a metaphor in a literal sense, why didn’t He call them back and straighten things out? Both the Jews, who were suspicious of him, and His disciples, who had witnessed His many miracles accepted everything up to this point. They would have remained with Him had He said He was speaking only symbolically. But they left because they understood that He was speaking literally.

Jesus did not correct these protesters. Twelve times He said He was the bread that came down from heaven, and four times He said they would have "to eat my flesh and drink my blood."

However, our Protestant brothers assert that Christ was speaking only metaphorically by comparing verses like John 10:9 ("I am the door") and John 15:1 ("I am the true vine"). The problem is that there is no connection to John 6:35, "I am the bread of life." "I am the door" and "I am the vine" make sense as metaphors because Christ is like a door—we go to heaven through Him—and He is also like a vine—we get our spiritual sap through Him. But Christ takes John 6:35 far beyond symbolism by saying, "For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed" (John 6:55). He continues: "As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me" (John 6:57). The Greek word used for "eats" (trogon) is very blunt and has the sense of "chewing" or "gnawing." This is not the language of metaphor.

Others point to John 6:63: "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." They say this means that eating real flesh is a waste. But does this make sense? Are we to understand that Christ had just commanded His disciples to eat His flesh, then said their doing so would be pointless? Is that what "the flesh is of no avail" means? "Eat my flesh, but you’ll find it’s a waste of time" -is that what He was saying? I don't think so.

The fact is - Christ’s flesh avails much! If it were of no avail, then the Son of God incarnated for no reason, He died for no reason, and He rose from the dead for no reason. Christ’s flesh profits us more than anyone else’s in the world. If it profits us nothing, so that the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Christ are of no avail, then "your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. And those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished" (1 Cor. 15:17b–18).

In John 6:63 "flesh profits nothing" refers to mankind’s inclination to think using only what their natural human reason would tell them rather than what God would tell them. Thus in John 8:15–16 Jesus tells His opponents: "You judge according to the flesh, I judge no one. Yet even if I do judge, my judgment is true, for it is not I alone that judge, but I and he who sent me." So natural human judgment, unaided by God’s grace, is unreliable; but God’s judgment is always true. Thus, in John 6:63, "flesh" does not refer to Christ's own flesh, but to mankind's inclination to think on a natural human level.

And were the disciples to understand the line "The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life" as nothing but a circumlocution for "symbolic"? "The words I have spoken to you are spirit" does not mean "What I have just said is symbolic." The word "spirit" is never used that way in the Bible. The line means that what Christ has said will be understood only through faith; only by the power of the Spirit and the drawing of the Father (cf. John 6:37, 44–45, 65). I hope that answers your question.

In Christ,
Selene

 

[Selene]

Dear me Selene, truth is not high on your agenda is it. Hebrews 12:1 is a follow on from the previous chapter about all the witnesses tha are held up as examples to us. You have to draw a very long bow to suggest that chapter 11 talks about them all being in heaven. In fact you will find that there are verses which say they are not.

Hello Marksman,

According to St. Paul, those clouds of witnesses are around them. St. Paul is not saying that they are held up as examples to us. He says that they are around them. The Greek word for compassed about is "perekami", which means to be surrounded.

Hebrews 12:1 Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset [us], and let us run with patience the race that is set before us,

As for Rev 7:9 a perfect example of proof texting, ignoring the rest of the chapter which asks the question "who are all these" and the reply is "those that have come out of the tribulation." Obviously you don't know that the tribulation hasn't happened yet, so these people probably haven't been born yet.

Marksman, the entire book of Revelation shows that St. John was able to speak to an angel in Heaven. As a matter of fact, the Book of Revleations shows that St. John even spoke to one of those Saints in Heaven (See Rev. 7:13). He was not speaking to a dead person. The Tribulation has occured and is still occuring. These are the people who have been washed in the blood of the Lamb. Jesus already died and resurrected by the time St. John wrote Revelations and since Jesus' death, there were many Christians persecuted in His Name and still are today. Christ's blood of redemption does not just reach the people who were living at that time, but also affected the people of the past who were born before Christ appeared walking on the earth. Before Christ's death and resurrection, the gates of Heaven was closed to mankind (See John 3:13). With Christ's resurrection, mankind can now enter Heaven. When a person who believes in Christ Jesus dies, where does their spirit go according to your belief?

The Book of Revelations shows that there are LIVING people in Heaven because Christ did promise that all who die believing in Him will have eternal life in His kingdom. This is what we believe, and this is why we believe that there are living people in Heaven.

 

[mcorba]

WhiteKnuckle - well put, your balance and consideration is appreciated here.
You would be welcome to critique every aspect in the measured way that you express yourself here.
This is the point that many others are missing - its not that we mind disagreements, but there are ways to put things!

Naturally, its an awful lot easier to be critical if one doesnt subscribe to a particular denomination - the issue we have had has been with the nature and manner of the criticism. I certainly dont spend all my time worshipping the saints, I also go directly to Christ in my prayer - I look to the words of the bible firstly before any tradition, and I dont worship Mary, and find bone collecting distasteful, so perhaps am a bad Catholic!

Wherever 2 or more gather in His name, that is the church. This is my doctrine too.
I do appreciate why many have such issue with some of the issues raised, but once again, this thread was meant to be about responding to civil unprejudiced manner of questions.

If Christians dont support each other, we are truly lost.

 

[Selene]

Anastacia, on 18 December 2010 - 11:30 PM, said:

Selene, your Catholic brother, aspen, says the Catholic church calls Mary the Mother of God, the Father. See aspen's post below:



Quote aspen: Spliting the divine and human aspects of Jesus is a heresy within the early church. It is not my "nerve" that is claiming this fact - it was defined as a heresy by First Council of Ephesus in 431



Selene, what you have shown from your answer to my statement here....you have shown that you lie and twist the truth like you "Fathers," all your spiritual "Fathers" from the Catholic Church.

All I see from the quote is "Splitting the divine and human aspects of Jesus is a heresy within the early church. It is not my "nerve" that is claiming this fact - it was defined as a heresy by First Council of Ephesus in 431." Where does it even say Mary in this quote? :blink: I do not see the name "Mary" in here. Is the word "heresy" supposed to be "Mary?" Or maybe it's the word "splitting?" Or maybe the word "aspect" is Mary? Which one?

WhiteKnuckle - well put, your balance and consideration is appreciated here.
You would be welcome to critique every aspect in the measured way that you express yourself here.
This is the point that many others are missing - its not that we mind disagreements, but there are ways to put things!

Naturally, its an awful lot easier to be critical if one doesnt subscribe to a particular denomination - the issue we have had has been with the nature and manner of the criticism. I certainly dont spend all my time worshipping the saints, I also go directly to Christ in my prayer - I look to the words of the bible firstly before any tradition, and I dont worship Mary, and find bone collecting distasteful, so perhaps am a bad Catholic!

Wherever 2 or more gather in His name, that is the church. This is my doctrine too.
I do appreciate why many have such issue with some of the issues raised, but once again, this thread was meant to be about responding to civil unprejudiced manner of questions.

If Christians dont support each other, we are truly lost.

Yes, I am a bad Catholic too. I have not spoken to St. Theresa, St. Judas Thaddeus, St. Mark, St. Anthony, or any of the Saints in Heaven. When I pray, it is always to God the Father, God the Son, and now I found a prayer to the Holy Spirit. So, I can now pray to God the Holy Spirit whom I always seem to forget.

In Christ,
Selene

 

[marksman]

IF so, am sure that many of us here could look at a lot of processes in most other non-Catholic denominations and critique the same way you guys have.

In other words, because non catholics are not perfect, and they are not, it is OK for us to preach heresy.

Yes, I am a bad Catholic too. I have not spoken to St. Theresa, St. Judas Thaddeus, St. Mark, St. Anthony, or any of the Saints in Heaven. When I pray, it is always to God the Father, God the Son, and now I found a prayer to the Holy Spirit. So, I can now pray to God the Holy Spirit whom I always seem to forget.

And where in scripture does it say to pray to the Holy Spirit? Just a straight forward answer of specific verses would be appreciated, not some waffle about, this that and the other.

This is the point that many others are missing - its not that we mind disagreements, but there are ways to put things!

That wouldn't be any chance your way would it, so like the rcc which has its people saying the same thing over and over and over again. And please don't say they don't. I have been in enough catholic meetings to know that they do.

In case you missed the entire purpose of Christ's work on the cross, the veil was TORN. No more tradition and no more works, we've got direct access to God.

AMEN TO THAT A 100 TIMES!!!! :

 

[marksman]

Catholics don’t have a monopoly on twisting the written Word of God, to make it say what he or she wishes it to say. From my expierance Protestant Churches may use that tools to twist the Word even more than the Catholics.

ANOTHER CASE of 'because you are not perfect we don't have to be and we can misrepresent scripture as much as we like.'

The Tribulation has occured and is still occuring.

You missed out the punchline to the joke.

Wherever 2 or more gather in His name, that is the church. This is my doctrine too.

No its not. Your version is where two or three are gathered together with someone who is authorised to serve communion....

The Book of Revelations shows that there are LIVING people in Heaven because Christ did promise that all who die believing in Him will have eternal life in His kingdom. This is what we believe, and this is why we believe that there are living people in Heaven.

No you don't. You believe that you go to purgatory so that you can earn enough brownie points to be acceptable to heaven. It is called working for your salvation, which makes a mockery of the sacrifce on calvary.

 

[marksman]

According to St. Paul, those clouds of witnesses are around them. St. Paul is not saying that they are held up as examples to us.

Then why did he write about them? and you will note that we are told in Heb 12:2 looking to Jesus the Author and Finisher of our faith, who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and sat down at the right of the throne of God.

Look To JESUS!!!! Not St. Trinians; St. Bernard; St. Kilda; St. Jack or St. Jill.

I do appreciate why many have such issue with some of the issues raised, but once again, this thread was meant to be about responding to civil unprejudiced manner of questions.

And which has now become an anti catholic thread in case you had not noticed.

Hebrews 12:1 Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset [us], and let us run with patience the race that is set before us,

Again, you are the spinmeister of the rcc. To paraphrase, "seeing as we are surrounded by a big cloud of witnesses, WHO ARE OUR EXAMPLE, let us lay aside every weight and the sin which so easily snares us..."

I would seriously question your judgement on that - the Catholic responses, have, on the whole tried to not get into bitching and attacks, the same cannot be said of the hijack brigade!

And your telling us that you are not as good at bitching and attacks. I hope not as we can see from these quuotes......

Oh yes! it might appear pagan to the ignorant but that is because the devil created pagan religions to look similar to what is good and true as a means of decieving people. and Marskman has fallen for it hook, line and sinker.

To whom it may concern
I'm not talking anymore with ignorant trolls who can't even be bothered to read a post properly and spend all their time making fun of type-o's especially when they have dyslexia. Very low isn't it but God is watching and he will sort the sheep from the goats and the chaff from thw wheat.

it is just going to give more ammunition to the trolls who think it is all some big joke.

 

[Anastacia]

All I see from the quote is "Splitting the divine and human aspects of Jesus is a heresy within the early church. It is not my "nerve" that is claiming this fact - it was defined as a heresy by First Council of Ephesus in 431." Where does it even say Mary in this quote? :blink: I do not see the name "Mary" in here. Is the word "heresy" supposed to be "Mary?" Or maybe it's the word "splitting?" Or maybe the word "aspect" is Mary? Which one?



Yes, I am a bad Catholic too. I have not spoken to St. Theresa, St. Judas Thaddeus, St. Mark, St. Anthony, or any of the Saints in Heaven. When I pray, it is always to God the Father, God the Son, and now I found a prayer to the Holy Spirit. So, I can now pray to God the Holy Spirit whom I always seem to forget.

In Christ,
Selene

Even though you say you are a bad Catholic, you are still guilty of standing up for the Catholic religion and going against the Word of God.

You say you found a prayer to the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God and Jesus!
As for you pretending to not know what aspen said about calling Mary the Mother of God the Father.....that is what he said. And since you say Mary is not the Mother of God the Father, then and according to aspen and your Catholic religion---that makes you a heretic.

 

[marksman]

Chapter 6 of the Gospel of John began with the miracle of the fish and loaves. Then in John 6:30 we find Jesus at the synagogue in Capernaum. The Jews asked Jesus what sign He could perform so that they might believe in Him. As a challenge, they noted that "our ancestors ate manna in the desert." Could Jesus top that? He told them the real bread from heaven comes from the Father. "Give us this bread always," they said. Jesus replied, "I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me will never hunger, and whoever believes in me will never thirst." At this point the Jews understood him to be speaking metaphorically.

METAPHORICAL

Jesus first repeated what he said, then summarized: "‘I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.’ The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, ‘How can this man give us His flesh to eat?’" (John 6:51–52). His listeners were stupefied because now they understood Jesus literally—and correctly. He again repeated His words, but with even greater emphasis, and introduced the statement about drinking His blood: "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; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him" (John 6:53–56).

NOT METAPHORICAL

When are you going to pull the rabbit out of the hat?

I said to a senior member of the rcc, when you drink the wine it turns into blood. Is that right?

Yes, that is right.

What does blood taste like?

Wine.

Oh brother, they are having a lend of you all right.

According to St. Paul, those clouds of witnesses are around them. St. Paul is not saying that they are held up as examples to us. He says that they are around them. The Greek word for compassed about is "perekami", which means to be surrounded.

Are you saying we should follow the teaching of scripture?

 

[marksman]

Jesus said, "this is my boy," and "this is my blood..... go ahead, explain away!

Jesus said "this is my BOY".....go ahead, explain away.

 

[marksman]

-- From your experience? So if I say that "from my experience" just the opposite is true, does that negate your statement.
After all, it carries just as much weight as your statement.

Of course it does TexUs. We can't both be right so it must be us because we are not into all this fairy story stuff and we don't preach a gospel of convoluted twistology.

I also believe that the Eucharist is truly the body and blood of Jesus. I believe that because the Holy Spirit told me it was.

The Holy Spirit will NEVER, EVER tell you something that is contrary to the revealed word of God.

But we do have hope of the resurrection when the dead will be resurrected back to life. John 5: 28 Do not be amazed at this, because a time is coming when all who are in the graves will hear His voice 29 and come out—those who have done good things, to the resurrection of life, but those who have done wicked things, to the resurrection of judgment.

But you claimed all these saints are alive in heaven already. If that is the case, why do they need to be ressurected back to life?

 

[marksman]

The mystical body of Christ include all believers who believe in God our Father and our Lord Jesus Christ and we are all one in Christ (1 Corinthians 12:27).

The verse you have quoted has nothing whatsoever to do with being all one in Christ Jesus as you apply it. It is talking about the operation of the gifts of the spirit in the church, and which the rcc totally ignores. But then that should not surprise us as context is something that you don't understand and are not interested in as has been pointed out many times.

I am happy with who I am, and I accept all people for who they are. I pity you, and you are in my prayers.

If you accept people for who they are, you don't pity them or condescendingly say you are going to pray for them (as some inferior being).

We imitate Christ our brother who lived on this world 2000 years ago, but was not of this world. We can speak to all the Angels and Saints in Heaven simply because we are not of this world just as Jesus said (John 15:19 and John 17:14).

And how do you imitate Christ?

Only dead in body. The scond death ash no power over them so they aren't really dead even though their time in this realm is over. Unless you think people don't have souls and jsut die and that it.

The scond death ash no power over them so they aren't really dead....Were you drunk when you wrote this?

Another typical example of let's find a verse that will give some credence to what we want to believe.

Rev 2:11 He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. He who overcomes will not be hurt by the second death.

Rev 20:6 Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. The second death has no authority over these, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and will reign with Him a thousand years.

Rev 20:14 And death and hell were cast into the Lake of Fire. This is the second death.

Rev 21:8 But the fearful, and the unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, will have their part in the Lake burning with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.

What has the second death got to do with what you are saying? You are just making it up as you go along.

When I asked st George to intercede for me I wasn't communciating with the dead but simply talking to a fellow Christian who is alive in the church triamphna twhile I still belong to the church militant.

Another one of those covoluted twistology comments written whilst he was drunk and an attempt to avoid the issue with meaningless platitudes.

If a person dies, does this mean that he is no longer a member of the body of Christ. According to the Bible, the answer is no. We are all made alive in Christ (1 Corinthians 15:22)

Once again, you have taken the verse out of context to try and prove your convoluted twistology and avoid reality. The verse quoted has nothing whatsoever to do with what you are talking about. In Christ all will be made alive...after they are dead as in verse 29. But then we musn't take the context into consideration as it will ruin a good story.

 

[marksman]

I don't expect for one minute that everyone should just agree with the Catholics/Sacramentals on the forum because I believe God gave us different denominations of Christianity so that each could have his. I don't expect everyone here to be comfortable with all thsoe bones and bodies, but what I do expect is respect for other peoples cherished beliefs.

Where does it say in scripture that God approves of denominations?

And don't you get it that NOWHERE, and I MEAN NOWHERE in scripture are you told to do this!!!!!!

Chapter and verse please for what you are claiming here?

Sorry, I don't have Cahters in my bible. Is that the catholic version?

How do you know he is a better man than me? I would like some irrefutable evidence please. Otherwise retract the statement.

Since when has a dictionary been a commentary on the bible?

Still waiting for answers to these questions.....

 

[marksman]

I hope that answers your question.

No, not at all. As usual you have picked out those bits that support your convoluted twistology as these explanations show.

Joh 6:27 Do not labor for the food that perishes, but for that food which endures to everlasting life, which the Son of Man will give you. For God the Father sealed Him.

NB. Life means literally or figuratively so it can be taken literally or as a figure of speech.

Joh 6:35 And Jesus said to them, I am the bread of life. He who comes to Me shall never hunger, and he who believes on Me shall never thirst.

NB; Again, life means literally or figuratively.
Hunger means absolutely or comparatively.
Thirst means literally or figuratively.

Joh 6:51 I am the Living Bread which came down from Heaven. If anyone eats of this Bread, he shall live forever. And truly the bread that I will give is My flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

NB; Live means literally or figuratively
Eat means literally or figuratively
Give can be used in a wide application literally or figuratively
Flesh means human nature with its frailties physically or morally

Joh 6:53 Then Jesus says to them, Truly, truly, I say to you, Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink His blood, you do not have life in yourselves.

NB; Eat means literally or figuratively
Drink means imbibe literally or figuratively
Blood is of uncertain derivation, literally of men or animals, figuratively the juice of grapes; specifically the atoning blood of Christ

Joh 6:54 Whoever partakes of My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.

Flesh and drinks mean the same as previous verses

Joh 6:57 As the living Father has sent Me, and I live through the Father, so he who partakes of Me, even he shall live by Me

This is an intetesting one as it dispels the idea of eating Jesus flesh and drinking his blood. Jesus said he lived through the Father. Nowhere can we find that Jesus ate the flesh and drank the blood of his father. Therefore, if we partake of Jesus we will live by him, which using the corolary this verse means that we live by our relationship with Jesus. It has nothing to do with eating his flesh or drinking his blood literally.

Joh 6:58 This is the Bread which came down from Heaven, not as your fathers ate the manna, and died; he who partakes of this Bread shall live forever.

And what is this bread? The life and power of Jesus effected by our relationship with him.

Gal 2:20 I have been crucified with Christ, and I live; yet no longer I, but Christ lives in me. And that life I now live in the flesh, I live by faith toward the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself on my behalf.

This verse illustrates the point very well as it talks about Christ living in us, which is a common theme throughout the NT.

Thus, in John 6:63, "flesh" does not refer to Christ's own flesh, but to mankind's inclination to think on a natural human level.

Not so as the word for flesh in the Greek is 'sarx' which is the same word used for flesh in every occasion in these verses so Jesus flesh according to you interpretation is mankind's inclination to think on a natural human level.

As is usual, you take a word and make it say what you want it to say to promote heresy and don't worry about what the rest of scripture says if it spoils a good story. With the various meanings that can be drawn from the Greek, no one in his right mind would say that this talks about eating the flesh of Jesus and drinking his blood.

Apart from the very obvious consideration that Jesus does not have enough blood and flesh for billions of christians to eat and drink every week.

 

[Selene]

And where in scripture does it say to pray to the Holy Spirit? Just a straight forward answer of specific verses would be appreciated, not some waffle about, this that and the other.

The Holy Spirit is God. He is the third person in the Holy Trinity. The Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God; therefore, we pray to God.

If you accept people for who they are, you don't pity them or condescendingly say you are going to pray for them (as some inferior being).

Since when is it condescending to pray for others when the Bible clearly say that it is okay to pray for each other (James 5:16). The Bible even tells us to pray for those who persecute us and for those who are ill and suffering.

Even though you say you are a bad Catholic, you are still guilty of standing up for the Catholic religion and going against the Word of God.

You say you found a prayer to the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God and Jesus!
As for you pretending to not know what aspen said about calling Mary the Mother of God the Father.....that is what he said. And since you say Mary is not the Mother of God the Father, then and according to aspen and your Catholic religion---that makes you a heretic.

I see....so you think that the Holy Spirit is only the Spirit of God and Jesus. Christians believe in the Holy Trinity. God is three persons in one. That means that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. If you do not believe in the Holy Trinity, that is your belief. As I said before, I am happy with being a Catholic.

Are you saying we should follow the teaching of scripture?

Are you saying that we should NOT follow the teaching of Scripture?

 

[Selene]

WhiteKnuckle - well put, your balance and consideration is appreciated here.
You would be welcome to critique every aspect in the measured way that you express yourself here.
This is the point that many others are missing - its not that we mind disagreements, but there are ways to put things!

Naturally, its an awful lot easier to be critical if one doesnt subscribe to a particular denomination - the issue we have had has been with the nature and manner of the criticism. I certainly dont spend all my time worshipping the saints, I also go directly to Christ in my prayer - I look to the words of the bible firstly before any tradition, and I dont worship Mary, and find bone collecting distasteful, so perhaps am a bad Catholic!

Wherever 2 or more gather in His name, that is the church. This is my doctrine too.
I do appreciate why many have such issue with some of the issues raised, but once again, this thread was meant to be about responding to civil unprejudiced manner of questions.

If Christians dont support each other, we are truly lost.

I would expect disagreements, but the attacks and rude comments are uncalled for. It is sad to see that this thread is no longer a discussion where we can have an honest dialogue so that our Protestant brothers can at least comprehend why we do this and do that despite that they may disagree with it. I agree that if Christians don't support each other, we are lost.

 

[truthquest]

But you claimed all these saints are alive in heaven already. If that is the case, why do they need to be ressurected back to life?[/size]

"But we do have hope of the resurrection when the dead will be resurrected back to life. John 5: 28 Do not be amazed at this, because a time is coming when all who are in the graves will hear His voice 29 and come out—those who have done good things, to the resurrection of life, but those who have done wicked things, to the resurrection of judgment."

I think this quote was from a reply that I made to Selene. So it wasn't something that she said but what I had said in trying to explain what I thought the condition and state of the dead is. I was trying to say that a time is coming, but is not yet, when the dead would be raised back to life in the resurrection.