Religious Discussion Welcome Thread

[hokiefan33]

I totally agree with your concerns and questions!

This is just one of the issues where the Roman Catholic Church is way off base and completely contradictory to the teachings of Christ.

Christ saves...
not Mary
not the 'Church'
not 'works' or sacraments

Absolutely right. The term used to describe what the Catholic church holds to about communion actually "becoming" the body and blood of Jesus is called transsubstantiation. While most Christian churches believe communion to be a "symbol" of His body and blood, Catholics believe that it "actually" becomes His body and blood. Not sure where they derive that thinking from, though, so can't speak to that.

And there was no such term as "Catholic" in Jesus' day, so He obviously wouldn't have excluded a non-Catholic from communion.

 

[hokiefan33]

Btw, the idea on works is that if you accept Jesus as savior, you will do good works. Kind of like a cause and effect.

This is true, that is the way it works, according to the Bible.

Lastly, there are other religions who believe that you are required to be baptized to go to heaven. It all depends on how you look at verses in the bible. That goes for works too... James said works were required... baptizing is always spoke about as well.

Hold up now. It is true, there are other religions who believe that baptism is a requirement for salvation, not just an act you do after salvation to identify yourself with the body of believers. And it does depend on how you interpret several verses of Scripture. I personally do not believe that baptism is a requirement for salvation, for various Biblical reasons. However, please point where James says that works are required. I'm not sure it says that. He says that works will show that you are saved and have faith ("Faith without works is dead"), but that doesn't mean that without works you aren't saved, it means that if you're not exhibiting works, which a saved person would naturally want to do, you're probably NOT saved. Different meaning entirely.

Anyone who believes that you are taking the body & blood of Christ (and truthfully that comes from reading into the bible saying that Jesus was not saying it was a symbol of him when he broke bread with them... that he said "This is my body, given up for you" meaning it WAS his body) is allowed to share in communion in the churches that believe in transubstansiation.

Exactly. This comes from reading something into the Bible that clearly wasn't intended. Communion is symbolic, not actually eating body or drinking blood.

 

[JoeEpcotRocks]

I totally agree with your concerns and questions!

This is just one of the issues where the Roman Catholic Church is way off base and completely contradictory to the teachings of Christ.

Christ saves...
not Mary
not the 'Church'
not 'works' or sacraments

Amen, and well said.

Salvation is a gift from God to us. (Jesus already paid the price in FULL.)

We need only accept it and confess it. No strings attached.

 

[helenabear]

Exactly. This comes from reading something into the Bible that clearly wasn't intended. Communion is symbolic, not actually eating body or drinking blood.

I'm going to be blunt with you...

I have read many of your posts on religious discussions, so this isn't a one time thing for me.

We are talking about a book that has been translated 50 times over (figuratively, but I am sure you know what I am saying) and I do NOT appreciate you quoting me and then twisting my words to fit what you feel is right. I did NOT say I am reading into the bible in that way. I read the bible and when I read the last supper, I read it that the communion IS the body and blood of our Lord, Jesus Christ. That is fine that you don't read it that way. But don't go quoting me and then twisting my words.

I know we don't agree on religion. Only because I am willing to admit that I *could* be wrong. but I sure as heck don't go saying that all others are as well.

God is almighty and we can never fully understand Him and His intentions.

I won't debate the works thing... we actually think WAY more alike than you want to admit. We just said the same thing differently. You may just have misunderstood what I was saying and my point. If you don't do good works, you most likely cannot be "saved" because if you truly were accepting and "saved" then you would be guided to do good. Trust me, same thing!

I have my beliefs based on how I read and interpret the scripture... you said yourself it is all how it is read.

I don't get why Christians go fighting against Christians... we are all the same with the same core beliefs... if you believe in Jesus as your savior, you will enter into the kingdom of heaven once your bodily life ends. The rest is truthfuly far too trivial to waste energy fighting over.

 

[goofygirl]

Just a question: what exactly is a "recovering Catholic?" Heard the term many times, but what is meant by this?

 

[hokiefan33]

I'm going to be blunt with you...

I have read many of your posts on religious discussions, so this isn't a one time thing for me.

We are talking about a book that has been translated 50 times over (figuratively, but I am sure you know what I am saying) and I do NOT appreciate you quoting me and then twisting my words to fit what you feel is right. I did NOT say I am reading into the bible in that way. I read the bible and when I read the last supper, I read it that the communion IS the body and blood of our Lord, Jesus Christ. That is fine that you don't read it that way. But don't go quoting me and then twisting my words.

I know we don't agree on religion. Only because I am willing to admit that I *could* be wrong. but I sure as heck don't go saying that all others are as well.

God is almighty and we can never fully understand Him and His intentions.

I won't debate the works thing... we actually think WAY more alike than you want to admit. We just said the same thing differently. You may just have misunderstood what I was saying and my point. If you don't do good works, you most likely cannot be "saved" because if you truly were accepting and "saved" then you would be guided to do good. Trust me, same thing!

I have my beliefs based on how I read and interpret the scripture... you said yourself it is all how it is read.

I don't get why Christians go fighting against Christians... we are all the same with the same core beliefs... if you believe in Jesus as your savior, you will enter into the kingdom of heaven once your bodily life ends. The rest is truthfuly far too trivial to waste energy fighting over.

I would hope that everyone is always blunt. It is MUCH easier to understand.

I quoted your exact words, there was no twisting. Now, if your words didn't exactly represent what you wanted them to, there is nothing I can do about that. However, if you feel that I took your words out of context, I will apologize for that. I interpreted your words to mean what I said I thought they meant, but again, if that was not what you meant, I'm sorry.

I'm not sure we think way more alike than I want to admit. It may be that we think way LESS alike than you want to admit I'd have to know more about what you specifically believe about various things, and you would have to know much more about what I specifically believe about various things in order for us to validate that assumption. I assume you may be Catholic (but maybe not), and I am Baptist, so I think we have many differences.

As to the "works" thing, I looked simply at what you said, which is that James said works are required. Now, you may have meant that they are required to show you have been saved, but not required per se for salvation, and I would agree with that. But the way it was stated, that wasn't clear. Again, if I mistook what you wrote, I apologize.

Scripture isn't necessarily "all" in how it is read, I do believe that there is a correct way to view all of Scripture based upon the Bible in its entirety. I definitely don't believe that just b/c someone reads something a different way than someone else, both ways are right, b/c that could lead to an infinite number of interpretations of Scripture, which I don't believe in.

I do agree with some of your last statement, specifically your point about the one belief all must hold in order to get into Heaven. That is correct. However, I don't believe that "we are all the same with the same core beliefs." I wish this were true, but I don't believe it is, even for Christians. You have to realize, there are many Christians who don't even understand what they believe, b/c they never open their Bible, and some who have severe misunderstandings about what it takes to go to Heaven, b/c they just don't have the Biblical basis to know it.

 

[disneymom3]

Exactly. This comes from reading something into the Bible that clearly wasn't intended. Communion is symbolic, not actually eating body or drinking blood.

That was extremely rude and uncalled for. Jesus' words in the Bible DO say "This IS my body" NOT "This represents my body"

Helenabear, that was a lovely post and very well said.

The term recovering Catholic is mostly a tongue in cheek way to say you used to be Catholic and are now practicing in another faith. Some times people mean it in a very negative way. Generally that is someone who had a very negative experience growing up. That is too bad as I think Catholicism is a beautiful faith. Just doesn't work for me with kids right now.

 

[POB14]

James 2 on works:

2:14 What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?
2:15 If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food,
2:16 And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?
2:17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
2:18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
2:19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
2:20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
2:21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
2:22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
2:23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.
2:24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.
2:25 Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?
2:26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.​

Jesus on works: (Matthew 7)

7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.​

 

[hokiefan33]

That was extremely rude and uncalled for. Jesus' words in the Bible DO say "This IS my body" NOT "This represents my body"

Helenabear, that was a lovely post and very well said.

The term recovering Catholic is mostly a tongue in cheek way to say you used to be Catholic and are now practicing in another faith. Some times people mean it in a very negative way. Generally that is someone who had a very negative experience growing up. That is too bad as I think Catholicism is a beautiful faith. Just doesn't work for me with kids right now.

I assume you read my last post to Helenabear, in which I apologized if I took anything she said out of context, even though I only used what she said exactly as she stated it. But that is neither here nor there.

I think your point that it was "rude and uncalled for" proves my point - we have differing viewpoints on the Bible. She is entitled to hers, you are entitled to yours, and I am entitled to mine. You state your viewpoint as fact ("this is my body" doesn't mean a representation, but you view it as literal), and I state mine as fact (it is a representation, a symbol, but not the literal body and blood. Isn't it just as "rude and uncalled for" for you to say my viewpoint isn't true? What's the difference? The Bible also says that Jesus made the disciples "fishers of men." Do you think they ACTUALLY fished for human beings, or do you think that is a term that Jesus was using to prove a point? Based on what I think your answer probably will be to that question, you can see that what is "said" isn't always what is "exactly" meant; there is a lot of symbolism in the Bible.

 

[hokiefan33]

James 2 on works:

2:14 What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?
2:15 If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food,
2:16 And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?
2:17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
2:18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
2:19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
2:20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
2:21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
2:22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
2:23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.
2:24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.
2:25 Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?
2:26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.​

Jesus on works: (Matthew 7)

7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.​

Thank you for our KJV fixture for the day. And what was the context that Matthew 7 was written in, do you know? Who it was being said to, said about, and the purpose of it?

 

[Puffy2]

My question to any "practicing Catholics" is When Jesus was seated at the the last supper as well as any other meal, did He make the same request? Did they have to be Catholics to receive the "body and blood" of Christ?
During both of their "masses" it was announced by the priest that only Roman and Byzantine(sp) Catholics, who were prepared, could receive the holy eucharist. (body and blood of Jesus) (thin wafer and wine or grape juice)

Well, you went through Confirmations so technically you are supposed to know the answer to this question.

Only Catholics who have recieved first communion are invited to participate in the eucharist because they are the ones that are supposed to fully understand what it means to take communion in a Catholic Mass. Others who have not had the sacrament of first communion have not been properly prepared. The eucharist for Catholics is not a piece of bread and drop of wine - it is the literal body and blood of Christ. Those who do not share that belief would be disrepectful to particpate by accepting the communion. They (everyone) ARE, however, encouraged to come forward for a blessing by the priest.

The Catholic Church takes the eucharist VERY seriously. That is the sole purpose of the mass - preparing for the eucharist. There are strict rules and regulations associated with the handling and care of the eucharist. I don't think that most people outside the church can fully understand the magnitude that the Church places on the eucharist - and, unfortunately, a great deal of Catholics don't get it either (and this is the fault of poor Catholic education).

Finally, you can't take the notion of "tradition" out of it because most of Catholicism is based on tradition - knowledge that has been passed down since Peter - and as a confirmed Catholic, you should know that too.

 

[Miss Jasmine]

Thank you for our KJV fixture for the day. And what was the context that Matthew 7 was written in, do you know? Who it was being said to, said about, and the purpose of it?

Do you always have to be a condescending jerk?

I'm sure Jesus is so very pleased with the way you represent Him.

 

[Toby'sFriend]

I do agree with much of what you said Puffy2. This subject has come up for debate several times on the CB and many times and I really "don't get" why so many Catholics seem -- I guess offended -- by the views of other Christians regarding the differences in the services.

I think however, and I'm reading alot into your post here, that maybe some Catholics get the viewpoint that Christian sects who practice Open Communion feel that the importance we place on Communion is somehow of less magnitude? That perhaps because we say "anybody can participate" it is somehow less special? I don't think I can agree with that point.

 

[Rex Rules]

This is just one of the issues where the Roman Catholic Church is way off base

This is your opinion. I don't want to be flamed, but I feel strongly that no one person should judge someone else's religion. You disagree, well you are entitled - go to a different church or denomination.

 

[Rella Bella]

Adam, aka Bid Dude, I can so understand your feelings of frustration. Especially being back in the Catholic Church for two such emotion filled services. The fact that you have joined a Protestant church and are happy there says something about the choices you’ve made as an adult Christian, as does the fact that you talk with your family about your faith. Searching and questioning are always good. As for the specific Catholic question you asked. Technically it was answered by the quote Lisa made from the US Council of Bishops. BUT that may not answer your emotional question… and let’s face it WE ALL get very emotional when it comes to our faith.

Interpretations of the Bible differ from group to group, sometimes from person to person. Because of Tradition, the Catholic Church ‘officially’ chooses to take their interpretation of the specific scriptures regarding Eucharist very literally. ‘Unofficially’, priests and other Catholic leaders live this out in different ways according to their conscience. To say that other denominations do not agree that this is the ‘correct’ interpretation is to state the obvious… that is part of what they are ‘Protest’ing (that’s why they are called Protestants). However, in my experience every denomination is equally literal about certain specific topics that other denominations would dispute… thus 10,000+ denominations.

The reason the Catholic Church teaches both tradition and the scripture is because the Bible came from Tradition. The authors of the Gospels lived Christian tradition and only wrote after many years of the stories being passed on as oral tradition; thus the idea that tradition can interpret them. (This does not discount in anyway the idea that the Scripture was ‘written by God’. It is just evidence that tradition is a valid measure in deciding the meaning of what has been written.) For hundreds of years after Jesus death, there was only one Church, there was no division over what was taught, and since all Christians agreed, and most people didn’t read, they didn’t write things down. If something came into question, then they would come together and say ‘what have we always believed?’. To us today, when we see these things written down so many years later it looks like they came up with “new” ideas, but in reality it was making concrete what all Christians already believed.

The best way to find out why someone does something is to ask them. So if this really bothers you why not talk to a priest or one of the lay-staff at your parent’s church or any local Catholic Parish. I’m sure if you’re looking for an honest discussion they would be welcoming and open to you. Don’t expect things to change… but if you really want to see things from the other perspective this may help. Or there is a great book by Scott Hahn: “The Lamb’s Supper, The Mass as Heaven on Earth” He is a protestant minister who converted to the Catholic faith and has great insight into why Catholics celebrate as they do.

I’ll leave you with something to ponder: Why were the early Christians rumored to be cannibals? (See the Book of Acts) Could it have been because they really believed the bread & wine became Christ’s Body… and told others that was what they were eating. Or was it because they simply drank wine and ate bread that ‘represented’ Jesus?

 

[Wishing on a star]

Okay,

To try to be respectful, and to try to keep this thread on-topic.

The very idea that the Catholic Church (and ONLY the Catholic Church) is able to offer the 'blood and body of Christ' is just another point where the Catholic Church has crossed every Biblical line.

Just the idea that I would have to turn to a sinful and fallible helpless human being in order to accept Christ into my being.

Just the fact that they think that a sinful, mortal, human being has the power to conjure up and to offer the blood and body of Christ.

The Bible tells me that ONLY Christ is Holy.
The Bible says to put none other before Him.

Not the Holy eucharist.
Not Holy Mary Mother of God.
Not ANY man.
Not ANY 'tradition'.

 

[Rella Bella]

Just the idea that I would have to turn to a sinful and fallible helpless human being in order to accept Christ into my being.

Just the fact that they think that a sinful, mortal, human being has the power to offer the blood and body of Christ.

Respectfully, I think these are more ideas you believe about Catholics than what Catholics really believe.

 

[phillybeth]

The very idea that the Catholic Church (and ONLY the Catholic Church) is able to offer the 'blood and body of Christ' is just another point where the Catholic Church has crossed every Biblical line.

Way to be respectful...

The Bible tells me that ONLY Christ is Holy.
The Bible says to put none other before Him.

Not the Holy eucharist.

The eucharist IS Jesus. That is what Catholics (with a big C) believe. How can we put it before him when it is him?

 

[phillybeth]

Just the idea that I would have to turn to a sinful and fallible helpless human being in order to accept Christ into my being.

Aren't you that already? Aren't we all?

 

[cardaway]

I don't get why Christians go fighting against Christians... we are all the same with the same core beliefs... if you believe in Jesus as your savior, you will enter into the kingdom of heaven once your bodily life ends. The rest is truthfuly far too trivial to waste energy fighting over.

Another day, another victim.