Zone1 Why do Protestants always believe their pastors rather than the 2000 year old CHURCH Christ established?

[Meriweather]

Did they bow to a statue of Mary and pray to her? If so, you might want to reconsider your statement.

There is nothing to reconsider. We were there to worship and pray to God. If you were to walk into the church at the time and you saw several of us of different denominations at prayer, would you be able to point to the one who was Catholic and say, "Oh! That person is an idolator! However, all the non-Catholic Christians with her aren't."

I have a feeling if you saw all of us at prayer in a Catholic church you would assume all of us were Catholic and condemn everyone. Right?

 

[Hawkins]

Jesus promised

"I will build My Church and the gates of Hell will not prevail against it." (Mt 16:18)

I have read the entire Bible and have studied Catholicism and there is nothing contradictory between those 2. But people outside the Catholic Church have been taught to believe (by their human pastors) that there are massive contradictions between those 2 so they unthinkingly believe there are. Why do Protestants choose to believe some non=Catholic over a Catholic? Why is their protestant pastor more believable than the 2000 year old Church?

While not all Catholics understand their Faith, I happen to be one who does. I have knowledge of such things as:

The Ark of the Covenant (OT) ..and how it connects to the present day Tabernacles that house the consecrated Hosts (inside Catholic Churches), so that just as in the old days w/ the Ark of the Covenant and the light perpetually burning in the temple for the Israelites to signify the Presence of God, the tabernacles inside Catholic Churches now house Christ Himself. Transubstantiation is in the Bible.. See where Jesus held the Passover and said that all who ate his flesh, drank his blood (OMG, say the protestants) will have eternal life.. This is the HOST given Catholics at Mass..

Moot. The same token of false logic to say that, why the Catholics rather not believe the 6000 years old Judaism.

The answer is simple, when Judaism failed its role, God authenticated the Christians. When Catholicism failed its role, God authenticated the Protestants. That's why the end result is that, the Jews can have a legit OT Canon, the Catholics can only have a legit NT Canon, while only the Protestants have both a correct NT Canon and an OT one.

 

[Meriweather]

Observation. I'm listening to what you're saying as well.

Yet I have the impression you haven't heard a word I've said. You still believe I think statues have power! Takes us back to, "He who is convinced against his will is of the same opinion still."

If it satisfies you to judge Catholics as idolators even when they clearly are not, so be it. Truth is truth, and the truth is you believe Catholics are practicing idolatry. I regret not being able to show you another perspective, but no big deal. We see what we see and I understand that.

 

[hadit]

You know--and know very well--I am not. At the very least, I expect honesty from you.

You know that my argument to you all along is that the graven images commandment was direct to people of the time who actually believed an inanimate object had power. A symbol of holiness (like the cherubs on the ark, like the cherubs and faces of man in the Temple) have no power. They are symbols of holiness, directing ones thoughts to holiness and to God. God not only did not forbid holy symbols, He commanded them.

You're kneeling before a carved image and praying to someone other than God. That's a problem to me.

Tell me, do any Catholics world-wide bring Mary gifts to put at the foot of her statue? Do any of them burn candles, hoping they will catch the interest of someone other than God? This is where problems lie for me.

 

[Meriweather]

The answer is simple, when Judaism failed its role, God authenticated the Christians. When Catholicism failed its role, God authenticated the Protestants. That's why the end result is that, the Jews can have a legit OT Canon, the Catholics can only have a legit NT Canon, while only the Protestants have both a correct NT Canon and an OT one.

Perhaps you never attended a Catholic Mass?

 

[Meriweather]

You're kneeling before a carved image and praying to someone other than God. That's a problem to me.

Again, you are seeing what you wish to see. When you see me praying with a friend or family member, are you convinced I must be praying to my friend or family member?

 

[Meriweather]

Tell me, do any Catholics world-wide bring Mary gifts to put at the foot of her statue? Do any of them burn candles, hoping they will catch the interest of someone other than God? This is where problems lie for me.

I have never seen such, but if I did, it seems more likely that they are there to help the poor and Mary also prays for the poor. They join Mary in worship and prayer to God.

The burning candle represents us and our prayer to God, usually a special intention.

 

[hadit]

There is nothing to reconsider. We were there to worship and pray to God. If you were to walk into the church at the time and you saw several of us of different denominations at prayer, would you be able to point to the one who was Catholic and say, "Oh! That person is an idolator! However, all the non-Catholic Christians with her aren't."

That depends. Are some kneeling before a statue representing the European Middle Ages version of what they thought Mary looked like chanting her name and asking her to pray for them while others are standing with bowed heads praying only to God Himself?

I have a feeling if you saw all of us at prayer in a Catholic church you would assume all of us were Catholic and condemn everyone. Right?

Would you go into a non-Catholic Church and experience God's presence with all the non-Catholics, no statues, no candles, no robes or hats, no stained glass and still pray to God along with all the other congregants? Would you take communion with someone who says the bread and wine only represent the body and blood of Christ?

My wife, a devout Christian who loves God intensely, attended mass with a friend of hers, a devout Catholic. Her friend told her she was not allowed to take communion because she was not Catholic. My wife left the building in tears. Was that a Church sanctioned refusal? Should her friend be applauded or condemned? If condemned, where do you think she got that idea?

There is no prohibition against a Christian taking communion because of the name on the door that I'm aware of, and a denomination that would deny a fellow Christian access to the shared sacrament of communion to me is clearly in the wrong. They are basically saying that the name on the door is more important than the blood of Christ.

 

[Meriweather]

My wife, a devout Christian who loves God intensely, attended mass with a friend of hers, a devout Catholic. Her friend told her she was not allowed to take communion because she was not Catholic. My wife left the building in tears. Was that a Church sanctioned refusal? Should her friend be applauded or condemned? If condemned, where do you think she got that idea?

It is a matter of belief (or non-belief) about the Eucharist. Did your wife's friend believe in the True Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Would she have received communion with the faith and belief of Christ's True Presence?

 

[hadit]

It is a matter of belief (or non-belief) about the Eucharist. Did your wife's friend believe in the True Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Would she have received communion with the faith and belief of Christ's True Presence?

Okay, so it sounds like you're saying a Christian cannot take communion unless they believe the bread and wine actually become the body and blood of Christ, even though absolutely no one believes they are a cannibal when they take communion.

 

[ding]

...the bread and wine actually become the body and blood of Christ, even though absolutely no one believes they are a cannibal when they take communion.

It's hard for me to explain but it is both a humbling and joyous experience for me at the exact same time. But let me say this, if one does not believe that Christ manifests himself in the host for no other reason than we ask him to and have faith that he will, then he probably doesn't at least not for them anyway. It is the mystery of faith.

I must be the rare individual who believes he is consuming the body and blood of Christ.

 

[ding]

My wife, a devout Christian who loves God intensely, attended mass with a friend of hers, a devout Catholic. Her friend told her she was not allowed to take communion because she was not Catholic. My wife left the building in tears. Was that a Church sanctioned refusal? Should her friend be applauded or condemned? If condemned, where do you think she got that idea?

There is no prohibition against a Christian taking communion because of the name on the door that I'm aware of, and a denomination that would deny a fellow Christian access to the shared sacrament of communion to me is clearly in the wrong. They are basically saying that the name on the door is more important than the blood of Christ.

I feel her pain, man. It's not something I agree with. I believe it is placing the form of religion above the Holy Spirit. If it were up to me I wouldn't prevent anyone from devouring the flesh of Christ and drinking the blood of Christ as long as they were aware that that was what they were doing.

 

[hadit]

It's hard for me to explain but it is both a humbling and joyous experience for me at the exact same time. But let me say this, if one does not believe that Christ manifests himself in the host for no other reason than we ask him to and have faith that he will, then he probably doesn't at least not for them anyway. It is the mystery of faith.

I must be the rare individual who believes he is consuming the body and blood of Christ.

Our experience in communion is that we share the bread and wine with each other to remember His sacrifice, the bread to represent His body and the wine His blood. It is a very sober and joyous experience, especially when we're reminded that we are doing this as a foreshadowing of doing it with Christ in person.

 

[ding]

Our experience in communion is that we share the bread and wine with each other to remember His sacrifice, the bread to represent His body and the wine His blood. It is a very sober and joyous experience, especially when we're reminded that we are doing this as a foreshadowing of doing it with Christ in person.

After performing the miracle to feed the masses. Jesus tells them that he came down from heaven and is the bread of life. They grumble about this. He then proceeds to tell them that he was sent by God and reinforces that he is the bread of life. Jesus then shocks the crowd by telling them that the bread is his flesh. The Jews argue over this. They give Jesus every opportunity to soften his statement; to make his statement more symbolic. What does Jesus do? He doubles down. He tells them in very explicit terms that unless they eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood they won't have life in them. So what do many of them do? They leave because they found it offensive.

In 1 Corinthians 10:16-17 Paul is reminding the early Christians that they aren't just symbolically drinking and eating the blood and body of Christ.

16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? 17 For we, though many, are one bread and one body; for we all partake of that one bread.

Partaking of the blood and body of Christ makes many different people into one body. It is how we participate in Christ's life and death. It is magical. There is nothing like it on the face of the earth. There is no experience that is more joyous. Participating in His suffering and death humbles the soul. Participating in His love for us makes the soul burst at its seams.

 

[notmyfault2020]

The Catholic Church created the crucifix centuries after Christ's death. The Bible does mention the cross, but never a crucifix.

sorry but this is just so clueless sounding!

It's the same thing! Or an image of the same thing, I should say. What..? You hate being reminded of what Jesus went through? That says more about you than it does about people who have crucifixes.

 

[notmyfault2020]

I care my brother.​

​

Psalm 37:8 ESV​

Refrain from anger, and forsake wrath! Fret not yourself; it tends only to evil.

How about this quote, the source of which escapes me

If you are not angry, you are not paying attention.

How about this from the Bible

Be angry [at your fellow man? at God? Both?] but sin not

 

[Meriweather]

It's the same thing! Or an image of the same thing, I should say. What..? You hate being reminded of what Jesus went through? That says more about you than it does about people who have crucifixes.

The crucifix reminds people of different things. Suffering is terrible. What the crucifix is to some of us is Jesus' obedience to God even when it meant death on a cross. Obedience. It is one of the things some people like to keep foremost in their faith.

 

[hadit]

After performing the miracle to feed the masses. Jesus tells them that he came down from heaven and is the bread of life. They grumble about this. He then proceeds to tell them that he was sent by God and reinforces that he is the bread of life. Jesus then shocks the crowd by telling them that the bread is his flesh. The Jews argue over this. They give Jesus every opportunity to soften his statement; to make his statement more symbolic. What does Jesus do? He doubles down. He tells them in very explicit terms that unless they eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood they won't have life in them. So what do many of them do? They leave because they found it offensive.

In 1 Corinthians 10:16-17 Paul is reminding the early Christians that they aren't just symbolically drinking and eating the blood and body of Christ.

16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? 17 For we, though many, are one bread and one body; for we all partake of that one bread.

Partaking of the blood and body of Christ makes many different people into one body. It is how we participate in Christ's life and death. It is magical. There is nothing like it on the face of the earth. There is no experience that is more joyous. Participating in His suffering and death humbles the soul. Participating in His love for us makes the soul burst at its seams.

The NIV has a different slant to those verses:

14 Therefore, my dear friends, flee from idolatry. 15 I speak to sensible people; judge for yourselves what I say. 16 Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ? 17 Because there is one loaf, we, who are many, are one body, for we all share the one loaf.

A "participation in" doesn't have the meaning you'd like to apply. Also note the command to flee from idolatry. That, to me, means I avoid even the appearance of idolatry. Hence, no kneeling before a statue of Mary and praying to her instead of directly to God.

 

[ding]

The NIV has a different slant to those verses:

14 Therefore, my dear friends, flee from idolatry. 15 I speak to sensible people; judge for yourselves what I say. 16 Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ? 17 Because there is one loaf, we, who are many, are one body, for we all share the one loaf.

A "participation in" doesn't have the meaning you'd like to apply. Also note the command to flee from idolatry. That, to me, means I avoid even the appearance of idolatry. Hence, no kneeling before a statue of Mary and praying to her instead of directly to God.

Interesting. Not really seeing a distinction with a difference. Especially since the point of the letter was that they were treating it as bread and wine and Paul was admonishing them at wasn't.

But you need to read the scripture of the first part of my post to see if you agree with my assessment that Jesus rejected the symbolic nature of the bread and wine.

 

[notmyfault2020]

The crucifix reminds people of different things. Suffering is terrible. What the crucifix is to some of us is Jesus' obedience to God even when it meant death on a cross. Obedience. It is one of the things some people like to keep foremost in their faith.

yeh, I sometimes wonder if I myself am in total obedience. I still haven't figured out what God wants from me. Someone told me years ago that we humans never really figure that out...

LOL but it seems to be true..