Skip to comments.Following the Truth: A Biblical Roadmap To The One, True Church (Catholic or Open)
Posted on 11/28/2011 8:12:49 AM PST by Salvation
click here to read article
This is my last post on this thread, as Jesus is not being glorified by this arguing.
I look forward to meeting all of you in heaven some day and we can discuss our differences with the One who knows all the answers. I look forward to that day.
Blessings to you all!
I agree that only Jesus can provide everlasting spiritual nourishment.
But he also gives me his body, blood, soul and divinity every day at Mass. I love the fact that the Catholic Church has Mass every day. Every single day I receive our Lord.
How amazing is that?
Close to Jesus? You bet.
I’m glad you feel that way and take comfort in your church services, but I’m only interested in discussing the proper interpretation of scripture.
Im glad you feel that way and take comfort in your church services, but Im only interested in discussing the proper interpretation of scripture.
Well of course you are. You are a Protestant. I used to be as well.
God led me to the Catholic Church and I thank Him every day for making me Catholic.
But since the Bible came to you through the Catholic Church it would be a good idea if you at least looked at the Church’s interpretation.
**It’s clear from the context of John 6 that Jesus was speaking of spiritual and not physical nourishment.**
You might be mistaken there, for people sometimes fasting have survived for months with just the host for nourishment and water.
Yes, it is probably a miracle, but nevertheless, it has happened.
I thank God everyday for my salvation. I once was lost but now am found. I’m glad that you have found peace in the Catholic Church.
I have more than looked at the Catholic church’s view on this topic. I have studied all relevant passages, prayed about it, asked the Holy Spirit for guidance, studied various discussions on the topic, and honestly the only interpretation that makes sense to me is that Jesus was using figurative language in John 6.
I understand that Catholics take a different view, but I’m just as convinced in the validity of my position as you are in your position.
Mock me if you please, but I don’t think that will be very fruitful in trying to convince me that my understanding of the passages I cited is incorrect. I offered what I thought was a well-reasoned analysis of relevant scripture and was hoping for the same.
No, it’s clear from the context that Jesus was referring to spiritual nourishment. He used the metaphor of food and drink to contrast the temporary relief of food with eternal spiritual life. Jesus said, “Do not labor for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to everlasting life, which the Son of Man will give you, because God the Father has set His seal on Him.
Eternal life can only be found by believing in Christ: “Jesus answered and said to them, This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent.
I’m trying to point out to you that you are thinking as humans think and not as God thinks.
Several saints have survived on only the Holy Eucharist and water — I believe during Lent.
Now think as God might seeing these people make that sacrifice, please.
This is a really good video.
**its clear from the context that Jesus was referring to spiritual nourishment.**
You are putting your own spin on this —
Scripture. It just doesn’t work with me and the Holy Spirit.
YOPIOS — not the way to study scripture, at least not for me.
Bump for a later Wednesday read.
I’m not putting my own spin on anything. I have carefully studied scripture and based upon the context and leading of the Holy Spirit, I have come to the conclusions that I shared.
So far noone has responded with any analysis that refutes my points. Instead, you are asking me to simply trust the official Catholic viewpoint without adequately explaining how my analysis was wrong.
Until someone can offer a detailed explanation of why my viewpoint doesn’t align with the context of the passages I remain unchanged.
That’s great that people have survived eating only wafers and drinking water during Lent. However, that still has nothing to do with the context of John 6. Jesus was contrasting material food with spiritual food.
Your rebuttal is not an adequate arguement from the scriptures.
“Thats great that people have survived eating only wafers and drinking water during Lent. However, that still has nothing to do with the context of John 6. Jesus was contrasting material food with spiritual food.
Your rebuttal is not an adequate arguement from the scriptures.”
In the aforementioned Scriptures, Moses went without food and water for a total of eighty days.
“It is not the present teaching of the Catholic Church that anyone who is not a Catholic necessarily goes to Hell.”
Could you show me where they rescind the articles of anathema in the report of The Council Of Trent?
What does Moses going without food and water have anything to do with the context of John 6? The theme of John 6 is true belief in Christ - Jesus used the metaphor of eating and drinking following the miracle of feeding the 5 thousand. Jesus contrasted the futility of only seeking temporary, physical satisfaction (bread) with the eternal peace of knowing Him.
His statement about eating His flesh and drinking His blood was alluding to the truth that only abiding in Him will bring eternal life. He used such a strong metaphor to test the faith of the crowd, who were only interested in miracles and not spiritual truth.
“What does Moses going without food and water have anything to do with the context of John 6? The theme of John 6 is true belief in Christ - Jesus used the metaphor of eating and drinking following the miracle of feeding the 5 thousand. Jesus contrasted the futility of only seeking temporary, physical satisfaction (bread) with the eternal peace of knowing Him.”
And who do you think was with Moses on Mt. Sinai to vividly illustrate Jesus’ point that He was making in your statement?
When I get back from Mass this morning I’ll try to find it online to copy and paste here so I don’t have to retype long passages.
I really have no idea what point you are trying to make. Can you please simply state what you are trying to have me understand?
“Your salvation is your business.
I just know that my sins are forgiven and forgotten because God is the one who forgives them.”
If its just my business, why did you bother to post this article? If someone came up to you on the street and asked about their salvation, would you just say “that’s your business!”?
For example, if someone told me they were saved because they attended the right church, went through a particular ceremony, and used a specific word formula, I would have no problem gently and lovingly telling them that they shouldn’t place their faith in such things.
Four times I have asked a simple question that you refuse to answer directly - I will reword:
If someone claims a geniune salvation and faith in Jesus Christ, sealed by the Holy spirit, yet they are not catholic, what does your theology say about their eternal destiny?
If you don’t get it, there’s no use of my explaining any further. Get to know the Bible and its Author and you’ll understand.
“When I get back from Mass this morning Ill try to find it online to copy and paste here so I dont have to retype long passages.”
Please don’t waste your time and mine bringing me something from a “mass”.
Get what? Explain what?
You never explained anything - all you said is that Moses went without food and water for 80 days, and somehow that is supposed to put everything into perfect context?
I recommend you show some humility and examine whether you adequately demonstrate whatever points you were trying to make before assuming that others don’t know the Bible and its Author....that’s a pretty quick judgment on your part after only having a very brief conversation with me.
If Catholics want me to embrace their official position on any topic it would be beneficial for them to be able to have an honest, detailed discussion on Biblical passages. So far that hasn’t happened....
“Jesus fulfilled the Old Covenant in the New Covenant of his Word.”
So you think G-d lost all his power to do things his way under the “New Covenant”?
Friend, I was not going to bring you back something from the mass; I just meant that after I returned, I was going to look the material up online and try to copy and paste it in a response. I have arthritis in my hands, you see, and typing out the material printed in my Catechism is painful. I devoted some time to looking it up for you. But just to judge by your post and the quotation marks you put around the word “mass,” I don’t get the sense that you’d be particularly receptive. Am I wrong? Are you interested in a real dialogue or are you just dead-set against anything I might post here? If the latter case, I don’t want to waste any more time or finger-power.
“Jesus wasnt meaning to be literal, as he stated in John 16:25. Which Ive said several times.
Though I have been speaking figuratively, a time is coming when I will no longer use this kind of language but will tell you plainly about my Father”
You have stated this incorrectly several times. Read John 16 in context again. 16:25 refers to 16:21 where Jesus is speaking figuratively about “...as a woman in labor...feels pain...”.
Christ is clearly talking about what He cannot tell the Apostles about the pain he will endure, he doesn’t think they can accept it...and the fact they he is leaving them, “a little while and you will not see me, and a little while you will see me”