Why water into wine?

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
"the problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence."
CharlesBukowski
"The problem with the world is too many people making false and stupid accusations without knowing the facts."
- BreadofLife
 

Marymog

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2017
11,283
1,633
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
i certainly see how we all come to this conclusion, even BreadofDeath, simply because it is what we are raised believing. But fwiw i could easily direct you to passages that are just being plain ignored, that would refute any belief you might have--Paul assured us that "wolves" would take over the churches as soon as he left, etc., so what about that, for instance?

So these might be considered, and we have not even broached that God is surely not interested in our religious rituals, but instead cares about the practical aspects of a spiritual walk, loving your neighbor, etc--"I desire mercy, not sacrifice."

Of course with someone raised with the assurance that seeking God can only be accomplished in a mortgaged building we now call "church," by a guy in a tie who has signed a Contract for Jesus, it is only natural to also assume that literal water must have been literally turned into wine, and so a different lesson will be taught, just like @ "communion," as long as it is perceived to be a dead religious ritual. So then all kinds of retarded doctrines that mean absolutely nothing--Transubstantiation, etc--must be developed, because the real communion is not even understood.

The Bible works fabulously to reveal hearts in other ways too, for instance if one insists upon a literal interpretation (reading history), a fair chunk of Scripture can now be immediately ignored by any new believer, who for instance is never encouraged to put themselves in the place of Cain or Esau, even though these parables are meant for spiritual instruction of the new seeker. But of course as long as the ego is allowed to dominate--and after all why shouldn't it, if one has just been assured that "I am going to heaven when i die"--we are encouraged to put ourselves in the place of Job, and everyone else in the place of the three friends; or put ourselves in the place of Jesus or Moses, etc.

And i suggest that the authors were not stupid, and even encourage this, so that the blind do not see, and reveal themselves, me surely being one of them.
I don't understand what you just wrote. I apologize.

Mary
 

Dcopymope

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2016
2,650
800
113
36
Motor City
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
i certainly see how we all come to this conclusion, even BreadofDeath, simply because it is what we are raised believing. But fwiw i could easily direct you to passages that are just being plain ignored, that would refute any belief you might have--Paul assured us that "wolves" would take over the churches as soon as he left, etc., so what about that, for instance?

So these might be considered, and we have not even broached that God is surely not interested in our religious rituals, but instead cares about the practical aspects of a spiritual walk, loving your neighbor, etc--"I desire mercy, not sacrifice."

Of course with someone raised with the assurance that seeking God can only be accomplished in a mortgaged building we now call "church," by a guy in a tie who has signed a Contract for Jesus, it is only natural to also assume that literal water must have been literally turned into wine, and so a different lesson will be taught, just like @ "communion," as long as it is perceived to be a dead religious ritual. So then all kinds of retarded doctrines that mean absolutely nothing--Transubstantiation, etc--must be developed, because the real communion is not even understood.

The Bible works fabulously to reveal hearts in other ways too, for instance if one insists upon a literal interpretation (reading history), a fair chunk of Scripture can now be immediately ignored by any new believer, who for instance is never encouraged to put themselves in the place of Cain or Esau, even though these parables are meant for spiritual instruction of the new seeker. But of course as long as the ego is allowed to dominate--and after all why shouldn't it, if one has just been assured that "I am going to heaven when i die"--we are encouraged to put ourselves in the place of Job, and everyone else in the place of the three friends; or put ourselves in the place of Jesus or Moses, etc.

And i suggest that the authors were not stupid, and even encourage this, so that the blind do not see, and reveal themselves, me surely being one of them.

"BreadofDeath"

HAHA!!!!
 

bbyrd009

Groper
Nov 30, 2016
33,943
12,081
113
Ute City, COLO
www.facebook.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States Minor Outlying Islands
I don't understand what you just wrote. I apologize.

Mary
ha well that is hardly your fault, i doubt i could make any sense of it now myself lol. But i guess i was trying to kind of respond to "Scripture and Christian History are Truth and fact" with something similar to "history is written by the winners." And we were raised by the "winners," so to speak. Paul was very clear that "the wolves" would assume control of Christianity, "as soon as he left," and so that seems to deserve some reflection also, vis a vis "Christian history." Finally, i think it is important to understand that no one can state one, single, uncontested "truth" from Scripture, and i am convinced that that is not accidental, even if it is fantastic on its face.

But you would have to suspend the beliefs that you currently have, about truth being some absolute thing; and also that "facts" have much of anything to do with absolute truth--which is another pretty hard, i guess maybe impossible, thing for someone raised to think logically to even entertain.
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
ha, i guess that is pretty shallow of me, so now you mind me that that is an obvious and deliberate sin on my part, for which i apologize. It was an attempt to get BoL to look in the mirror, and after all that is not my job i guess.
I'm not surprised at ALL that you mocked Jesus by calling Him "Bread of Death".
Good job . . .
 

epostle1

Well-Known Member
Sep 24, 2012
3,326
507
113
72
Essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Final question - Do you think that someone can legitimately be saved and go to heaven without being Catholic?
Answer or not, I'm seriously done.
The answer is yes. Your question is based on urban legends that was never Church teaching, at a time when Protestants like you were taught that all Catholics were going to hell.
See the official teaching on the matter of non-Catholics CCC 817-820


quote-i-believe-in-god-not-in-a-catholic-god-there-is-no-catholic-god-there-is-god-and-i-believe-in-pope-francis-388028.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
um, there you go, thinking you are Jesus again?
i mean c'mon, you really wanna do that the rest of your life?
I never said I was Jesus.
Only Jesus is the Bread of Life that you mock.

I'm just His servant . . .
 

mjrhealth

Well-Known Member
Mar 15, 2009
11,810
4,090
113
Australia
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Only perrero can put Gods word to the test and come up with the right interpretation. No other man or Church can.
So denegrating,

1Co_2:10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.

But men are carnal

Luk_12:28 If then God so clothe the grass, which is to day in the field, and to morrow is cast into the oven; how much more will he clothe you, O ye of little faith?

So little faith so much religion.
 

Wormwood

Chaps
Apr 9, 2013
2,346
332
83
47
California
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Can you show me where the Bible says that the Bile is our "Final Authority"?
Of course you can't because the Bible NEVER makes this claim.

It DOES state, however -= the the CHURCH is the Final earthly Authority (Matt. 16:18-19, Matt. 18:15-18, Luke 10:16, John 16:12-15, John 20:21-23).

I have to disagree with you here. The NT, many times, indicates that the Scriptures are the final authority (John 10:35; 2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Peter 1:20). Jesus also makes this pretty plain as well in his debates with the Pharisees. Moreover, the Scriptures are continually cited in the NT as authoritative. Certainly you do not believe the NT is less inspired than the OT that the NT authors deemed so authoritative and unbreakable do you? I cannot imagine a Jew in the 1st century arguing that the Scriptures were not the ultimate authority. Personally, I don't believe the coming of the Spirit meant that the Scriptures would relinquish that authority to an institution...no matter how sacred.

It DOES state, however -= the the CHURCH is the Final earthly Authority (Matt. 16:18-19, Matt. 18:15-18, Luke 10:16, John 16:12-15, John 20:21-23).

These passages are talking about the message of the Apostles (which are recorded in the NT...aka Bible). For instance...

““I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you. All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you.” (John 16:12–15, ESV)

You are inserting "church hierarchy" into all the places where the word "you" is being used. You need to understand that this is a presupposition on your part that you are inserting into the text. The text doesn't actually say that. Now, maybe you are right. However, the text here is only saying that Jesus would empower these Apostles to remember his words and proclaim the truth to the world. In my opinion, this was done through the preaching of the Gospel and those words were preserved in the NT. So maybe I am wrong or maybe you are wrong. We both have an angle on this. However, I think it is clear that you are over stating your case that the Bible makes such a statement as you are suggesting. It simply does not.

BreadOfLife, I do not know why you are so hostile toward Protestants. As I understand it, the Catholic Church does not consider Protestantism as alienated from the Body of Christ. I would also encourage you to not use constant bold print as it comes across as you are shouting and continually angry. Maybe that is how you want to be read, but it certainly doesn't encourage a kind and edifying exchange of ideas. Just something to think about.
 

bbyrd009

Groper
Nov 30, 2016
33,943
12,081
113
Ute City, COLO
www.facebook.com
Faith
Christian
Country
United States Minor Outlying Islands
Take it up with Him - not me.
ah--a swing anna miss, lol, surprised even you would go there, i mean did Christ name you or something?

good arguments for personal (Church) authority though, i think you guys both make some good points, even if maybe i define "Church" differently
 
Last edited:

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I have to disagree with you here. The NT, many times, indicates that the Scriptures are the final authority (John 10:35; 2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Peter 1:20). Jesus also makes this pretty plain as well in his debates with the Pharisees. Moreover, the Scriptures are continually cited in the NT as authoritative. Certainly you do not believe the NT is less inspired than the OT that the NT authors deemed so authoritative and unbreakable do you? I cannot imagine a Jew in the 1st century arguing that the Scriptures were not the ultimate authority. Personally, I don't believe the coming of the Spirit meant that the Scriptures would relinquish that authority to an institution...no matter how sacred.
Sorry, but NONE of the verses you cited tell us that the Scriptures are our SOLE authority.
They are authoritative because they are the written Word of God. HOWEVER, the verses I cited tell us that His Church is our final Authority on earth - not apart from the Scriptures but because of them (Matt. 16:18-19, Matt. 18:15-18, Luke 10:16, John 16:12-15, John 20:21-23).

By the way - a 1st century Jew would NEVER tell you that the written Word is the "ultimate" Authority. they relied on the ORAL Torah as well as the WRITTEN Torah. They relied on Tradition as much as they did Scripture.

Bottom line - the written Word of God IS authoritative - and that written Word tells us that His Church is our final Authority.
These passages are talking about the message of the Apostles (which are recorded in the NT...aka Bible). For instance...

““I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you. All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you.” (John 16:12–15, ESV)

You are inserting "church hierarchy" into all the places where the word "you" is being used. You need to understand that this is a presupposition on your part that you are inserting into the text. The text doesn't actually say that. Now, maybe you are right. However, the text here is only saying that Jesus would empower these Apostles to remember his words and proclaim the truth to the world. In my opinion, this was done through the preaching of the Gospel and those words were preserved in the NT. So maybe I am wrong or maybe you are wrong. We both have an angle on this. However, I think it is clear that you are over stating your case that the Bible makes such a statement as you are suggesting. It simply does not.

BreadOfLife, I do not know why you are so hostile toward Protestants. As I understand it, the Catholic Church does not consider Protestantism as alienated from the Body of Christ. I would also encourage you to not use constant bold print as it comes across as you are shouting and continually angry. Maybe that is how you want to be read, but it certainly doesn't encourage a kind and edifying exchange of ideas. Just something to think about.
First of all - I am not hostile towards Protestants. 9 of my 12 siblings are Protestants and I love them dearly.
What I have no tolerance for is anti-Catholic lies. I'm not accusing YOU of this because you are speaking in charity - not lies and hostility like bbyrd and Job and mjrhealth.

It's funny though - I never hear a sincere Protestant admonishing his brothers NOT to tell anti-Catholic lies. Why is that?? Whenever I hear a Catholic saying something untrue about a Protestant doctrine - I correct him. What can't you guys do the same??

As for John 16:12-15 - Jesus was speaking to His Apostles - the LEADERS of His Church. Acts 1:20 assures us, as does in Acts 15:24, 2 Tim. 1:12-14 and 2 Tim. 2:2 that their offices were successive.

when Jesus taught the crowds - He was teaching ALL of us.
When He instructed His Apostles - He was instructing the leaders of His Church.[/QUOTE]
 
Last edited:

Peanut

Active Member
Jul 19, 2017
172
56
28
goodbye
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Wine was tradition in Jewish weddings of the time. It would be contrary to practice to omit wine during the wedding at Cana. Which is why Jesus needed to change the casks of water into wine. Because the wine for the occasion had already run out.
 

Wormwood

Chaps
Apr 9, 2013
2,346
332
83
47
California
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Sorry, but NONE of the verses you cited tell us that the Scriptures are our SOLE authority.
They are authoritative because they are the written Word of God. HOWEVER, the verses I cited tell us that His Church is our final Authority on earth - not apart from the Scriptures but because of them (Matt. 16:18-19, Matt. 18:15-18, Luke 10:16, John 16:12-15, John 20:21-23).

Luke 10:16, John 16:12-15 and John 20:21-23 do not even reference "the Church." IMO, Jesus gave authority to the Apostles in their preaching and the local church leaders in dealing with conflicts and sin. I don't see these verses saying anything about an ongoing hierarchy that would extend beyond the local congregation.

The Scriptures are the FINAL authority because they are the Word of God. I don't think God's authority is subject to a human hierarchy. The Pharisees and Scribes also considered themselves to be the authority in interpretation and understanding the will and Word of God because of their position and education. However, though the position of the High Priest was honored and a legitimate position of authority, that did not excuse him or those in their positions from misusing the Word of God.

What I have no tolerance for is anti-Catholic lies. I'm not accusing YOU of this because you are speaking in charity - not lies and hostility like bbyrd and Job and mjrhealth.

I understand. I have see some of the comments and they have been less than kind and considerate from many people on here toward Catholics. I assure you I am not anti-Catholic. However, I would highly encourage you to no bold and increase font in your comments. It seems as though you are screaming at people and I am sure that this plays into the back and forth that is continually going on in these discussions on Catholic and Protestant doctrine.

It's funny though - I never hear a sincere Protestant admonishing his brothers NOT to tell anti-Catholic lies. Why is that?? Whenever I hear a Catholic saying something untrue about a Protestant doctrine - I correct him. What can't you guys do the same??

I have often encouraged cordial discussions for those challenging Catholic doctrines. I am not an expect on Catholicism but I am familiar with some of the beliefs. Again, I think if you took more of a kind, humble approach to your responses as a means of educating those who say these things...it would be better. Using bold print and multiple punctuations makes it sound very combative.
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Luke 10:16, John 16:12-15 and John 20:21-23 do not even reference "the Church." IMO, Jesus gave authority to the Apostles in their preaching and the local church leaders in dealing with conflicts and sin. I don't see these verses saying anything about an ongoing hierarchy that would extend beyond the local congregation.

The Scriptures are the FINAL authority because they are the Word of God. I don't think God's authority is subject to a human hierarchy. The Pharisees and Scribes also considered themselves to be the authority in interpretation and understanding the will and Word of God because of their position and education. However, though the position of the High Priest was honored and a legitimate position of authority, that did not excuse him or those in their positions from misusing the Word of God.
The problem with this view is that Scripture itself never makes this claim about itself.
As I showed - it makes this claim about the Church (Matt. 16:18-19, Matt. 18:15-18, Luke 10:16, John 16:12-15, John 20:21-23).

Furthermore - if these verses DON'T point to the Church - then why did the Early Church Fathers say that they DID??

For example - why do we read in The Didache (Teachings of the Twelve Apostles), a document written while the Apostles were still alive, say that we must confess our sins to the Church as prescribed in John 20:21-23?
This is what the Early Church - some of whom knew the Apostles had to say on the matter of Church Authority:

Ignatius of Antioch
For as many as are of God and of Jesus Christ are also with the bishop. And as many as shall, in the exercise of penance, return into the unity of the Church, these, too, shall belong to God, that they may live according to Jesus Christ (Letter to the Philadelphians 3 [A.D. 110]).

For where there is division and wrath, God does not dwell. To all them that repent, the Lord grants forgiveness, if they turn in penitence to the unity of God, and to communion with the bishop (ibid. 8).

Tertullian
The Church has the power of forgiving sins. This I acknowledge and adjudge (ibid. 21).

Hippolytus
[The bishop conducting the ordination of the new bishop shall pray:] God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. . . pour forth now that power which comes from you, from your Royal Spirit, which you gave to your beloved Son, Jesus Christ, and which he bestowed upon his holy apostles. . . and grant this your servant, whom you have chosen for the episcopate, [the power] to feed your holy flock and to serve without blame as your high priest, ministering night and day to propitiate unceasingly before your face and to offer to you the gifts of your holy Church, and by the Spirit of the high priesthood to have the authority to forgive sins, in accord with your command (Apostolic Tradition 3 [A.D. 215]).

Origen
[A filial method of forgiveness], albeit hard and laborious [is] the remission of sins through penance, when the sinner . . . does not shrink from declaring his sin to a priest of the Lord and from seeking medicine, after the manner of him who say, "I said, to the Lord, I will accuse myself of my iniquity" (Homilies in Leviticus 2:4 [A.D. 248]).

Cyprian
Of how much greater faith and salutary fear are they who . . . confess their sins to the priests of God in a straightforward manner and in sorrow, making an open declaration of conscience. . . I beseech you, brethren; let everyone who has sinned confess his sin while he is still in this world, while his confession is still admissible, while the satisfaction and remission made through the priests are still pleasing before the Lord [I Cor. 11:27] (Letters 9:2 [A.D. 253])

John Chrysostom
Priests have received a power which God has given neither to angels nor to archangels. It was said to them: "Whatsoever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose, shall be loosed." Temporal rulers have indeed the power of binding: but they can only bind the body. Priests, in contrast, can bind with a bond which pertains to the soul itself and transcends the very heavens. Did [God] not give them all the powers of heaven? "Whose sins you shall forgive," he says, "they are forgiven them; whose sins you shall retain, they are retained." The Father has given all judgment to the Son. And now I see the Son placing all this power in the hands of men [Matt. 10:40; John 20:21-23]. They are raised to this dignity as if they were already gathered up to heaven (The Priesthood 3:5 [A.D. 387]).

This is the view of the Early Church - many of whom were butchered for the faith. They died believing things that the Protestant Revolt rejected.
HOW do you reconcile this by simply saying, "In MY opinion . . ."??
 
  • Like
Reactions: Marymog

Peanut

Active Member
Jul 19, 2017
172
56
28
goodbye
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Opponents of Sola Scriptura thanks to the Council of Trent's determination. Let their decision be anathema. A body that manifest "indulgences" in order for the Roman faithful to buy their loved one's souls out of a fictional creation called purgatory. How is it Protestants defend the truth of God in Christ against a facade of man , idols, and papal authority? :( A false church is a false church. And God is not mocked.

[Sic]SUMMARY EVALUATION OF THE COUNCIL

What evaluation can be given to the Council of Trent after eighteen years of meeting?

First, and foremost, it rejected the Protestant Reformation. While the initial impetus for the Reformation was the Indulgence Controversy, it quickly became apparent that the Reformers desired a thorough doctrinal reformation of the Church. They put forth the five great themes of sola scriptura, sola fide, solus Christus, sola gratia, and soli Deo Gloria. These five phrases encapsulate the Gospel: salvation is revealed in the Scriptures alone, purchased by Christ alone, received by faith alone, offered by grace alone, and is to the glory of God alone. This understanding of the Gospel was rejected by Rome. In its place was substituted a Gospel that was provided by the Church alone, mediated by the sacraments alone, and based on the authority of an enlarged canon: Scripture and tradition. What was lost at the Council of Trent was the Gospel of grace itself. No matter how the canons were framed, it made the individual dependent upon the Church for the knowledge and receiving of the Gospel that he so desperately needed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Helen