I apologize in advance for a long post... but I want do deal with this subject in full. The background on Jesus is meant for ZC.
If you want to follow Christ, don't you think it would be a good thing to know who He is and why He came? Who He is is both simple and complex. Simply He is the Word made flesh, God dwelling among His people. He is the second person of the Holy Trinity. The complexity of His nature is beyond our understanding.
He isn't someone foreign to the Old Testament dreamed up to fulfill the Law and the prophets in the New Testament. His coming was foretold throughout the Old Testament--first in Genesis, actually, when God chastised the serpent. Jesus also spoke directly through the prophet Isaiah...
Isaiah 48:12
"Listen to Me, O Jacob, even Israel whom I called;
I am He, I am the first, I am also the last.
13 "Surely My hand founded the earth,
And My right hand spread out the heavens;
When I call to them, they stand together.
14 "Assemble, all of you, and listen!
Who among them has declared these things?
The LORD loves him;
he will carry out His good pleasure on Babylon,
And His arm will be against the Chaldeans.
15 "I, even I, have spoken; indeed I have called him,
I have brought him, and He will make his ways successful.
16 "Come near to Me, listen to this:
From the first I have not spoken in secret,
From the time it took place, I was there.
And now the Lord GOD has sent Me, and His Spirit."
Here in the Old Testament, you have God speaking in the first person. He makes it clear who is the speaker with the identifiers of creation and infinity (alpha and omega). He ends the discourse showing that although He is God Himself, God has sent Him and His Spirit. Jesus speaking first person in the Old Testament... Old Testament Trinity.
So Jesus is God. He is the God of the New and Old Testament--the One Who came to fulfill the Law and the prophets. The next question is WHY did he come? The simple answer is that He came to die for our sins. Have you ever looked deeply into what that statement means? It means He didn't come for the purpose of preaching and teaching. He came to die.
God sent His messengers throughout history to preach His Word. He didn't come Himself to repeat it. He repeated it and explained it to show His identity for the fullness of His sacrifice. The Greatest Commandment discourse makes this clear. Here, a rabbi comes to Jesus to trap Him with a question...
Matt 22:34 But when the Pharisees heard that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered themselves together. 35 One of them, a lawyer, asked Him a question, testing Him, 36 "Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?" 37 And He said to him, " 'YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND.' 38 "This is the great and foremost commandment."
Was this new? Nope.
Deut 6:4 "Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD is one! 5 "You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might.
So Jesus didn't come to teach. He came to die...
Isaiah 52:13
Behold, My servant will prosper,
He will be high and lifted up and greatly exalted.
14 Just as many were astonished at you, My people,
So His appearance was marred more than any man And His form more than the sons of men.
15 Thus He will sprinkle many nations,
Kings will shut their mouths on account of Him;
For what had not been told them they will see,
And what they had not heard they will understand.
Isaiah 53:1
Who has believed our message?
And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?
2 For He grew up before Him like a tender shoot,
And like a root out of parched ground;
He has no stately form or majesty
That we should look upon Him,
Nor appearance that we should be attracted to Him.
3 He was despised and forsaken of men,
A man of sorrows and acquainted with grief;
And like one from whom men hide their face
He was despised, and we did not esteem Him.
4 Surely our griefs He Himself bore,
And our sorrows He carried;
Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken,
Smitten of God, and afflicted.
5 But He was pierced through for our transgressions,
He was crushed for our iniquities;
The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him,
And by His scourging we are healed.
6 All of us like sheep have gone astray,
Each of us has turned to his own way;
But the LORD has caused the iniquity of us all
To fall on Him.
7 He was oppressed and He was afflicted,
Yet He did not open His mouth;
Like a lamb that is led to slaughter,
And like a sheep that is silent before its shearers,
So He did not open His mouth.
8 By oppression and judgment He was taken away;
And as for His generation, who considered
That He was cut off out of the land of the living
For the transgression of my people, to whom the stroke was due?
9 His grave was assigned with wicked men,
Yet He was with a rich man in His death,
Because He had done no violence,
Nor was there any deceit in His mouth.
10 But the LORD was pleased
To crush Him, putting Him to grief;
If He would render Himself as a guilt offering,
He will see His offspring,
He will prolong His days,
And the good pleasure of the LORD will prosper in His hand.
11 As a result of the anguish of His soul,
He will see it and be satisfied;
By His knowledge the Righteous One,
My Servant, will justify the many,
As He will bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore, I will allot Him a portion with the great,
And He will divide the booty with the strong;
Because He poured out Himself to death,
And was numbered with the transgressors;
Yet He Himself bore the sin of many, And interceded for the transgressors.
Havoc, you claim that Catholics live and believe outside of Biblical teachings. On the contrary, our Protestant friends have to discard and obscure what is plainly spoken to deny the truth. I'll show you that clearly in the eucharist...
You want to believe that Jesus was speaking metaphorically, not literally in the Eucharistic discourse of John 6. If He's speaking metaphorically, you want us to believe with you that Jesus intends that we digest His words and Himself as The Word made flesh. Your theology breaks down here. It breaks down because it doesn't recognize why Jesus came. He didn't come to teach us, He came to save us. He saved us through His sacrifice on the cross. His words and His life show His identity and the authenticity of His sacrifice. Here is what the Bible has to say about the Eucharist:
The Eucharistic Discourse:
John 6:48 "I am the bread of life. 49 "Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. 50 "This is the bread which comes down out of heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. 51 "I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh." 52 Then the Jews began to argue with one another, saying, "How can this man give us His flesh to eat?" 53 So Jesus said to them, "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 yourselves. 54 "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 55 "For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink. 56 "He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. 57 "As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me, he also will live because of Me. 58 "This is the bread which came down out of heaven; not as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live forever."
Words to the Disciples
59 These things He said in the synagogue as He taught in Capernaum. 60 Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this said, "This is a difficult statement; who can listen to it?" 61 But Jesus, conscious that His disciples grumbled at this, said to them, "Does this cause you to stumble? 62 "What then if you see the Son of Man ascending to where He was before? 63 "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life. 64 "But there are some of you who do not believe." For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him. 65 And He was saying, "For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father."
Peter's Confession of Faith
66 As a result of this many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore. 67 So Jesus said to the twelve, "You do not want to go away also, do you?" 68 Simon Peter answered Him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have words of eternal life. 69 "We have believed and have come to know that You are the Holy One of God."
Later, Jesus institutes His sacrifice as rite...
Matt 26:26 While they were eating, Jesus took some bread, and after a blessing, He broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said, "Take, eat; this is My body." 27 And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you; 28 for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins.
Finally, the Apostles understood and passed on what they had learned. The Apostle Paul makes it very clear in his letter to the Corinthians...
1 Cor 11:23 For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread; 24 and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, "This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me." 25 In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me." 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until He comes. 27 Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. 28 But a man must examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly.
Can the institution of the Eucharist be any clearer? Oh, but the Eucharist is just from Catholic tradition and we only go by the written Word, not tradition...
1 Cor 11:2 Now I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you.
2 Thessalonians 3:6 Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from every brother who leads an unruly life and not according to the tradition which you received from us.
The Word was passed by tradition before these writings were compiled. The Epistles were written to shore up the faith which had been already shared. They dealt with issues of faith, not the whole faith. What wasn't covered wasn't an issue.
History also speaks to the Eucharist in the early Church. Are you aware the early Christians were spoken of as "cannibals" by the Romans? They were called thus because they ate the Body and drank the Blood of their Lord.
My Protestant friends have to go to great lengths to ensure the Catholic Church doesn't seem right to them (even discounting history and books of the Bible--like the Book of James). Catholics, on the other hand, have a faith and tradition that includes the entirety of the Bible and the original Deposit of Faith from Jesus.
Catholics and Protestants are not enemies but one perspective is very clearly more greatly supported by Scripture.
Stop feeding this anti-Catholic troll. Some cases only improve by prayer and fasting. That is what it will take to drive the anti-Catholic demon out of Havoc.
You know, sometimes I feel as if I may as well give up. None of you people are processing a single word I have typed if you think I don't know the claims of chr*stianity. Do I have to keep stating these things over and over?
I grew up a convinced chr*stian of the Fundamentalist Protestant variety. I converted to Catholicism as an adult. I understand both of these positions (though it took me a very long time to do so). There is not a single claim that any of you can make about J*sus "fulfilling the prophecies" that I not only have not heard, but which I also have not once subscribed to. I used to believe all this stuff myself. I grew up believing it. I believed it till I was 33 years old. Are you beginning to understand now?
So you can quote verses all you want (just as Protestants quote Genesis and Paul to prove Protestantism is true over Catholicism). When I converted to Catholicism I learned that none of the verses that I thought taught Protestantism actually taught it, but that I had been imposing a Protestant message onto them from the outside.
Now please pay very careful attention to what I am about to say, pgyanke, because though this seems simple to me you may not catch it.
If Catholicism could teach me that I was interpreting Paul "out of context" and "imposing" alien notions onto it, Judaism could very easily teach me the same things about Isaiah. Do you understand? Why is it so hard for you to understand that a person can be converted from the "Protestant Paul" but not from the "chr*stian Isaiah?"
As I said before, you know absolutely nothing about Torah. One of the most elementary concepts is yeridat hador, that the highest revelation was given first and that all succeeding revelations have continued to recede in holiness (in other words, where do you get off with your assumption that "everyone understood" that the Torah was temporary, that Isaiah's prophecy was "higher," or that any prophet ever foretold a future "revelation" that would supercede the Holy Torah, the absolute Wisdom of G-d through which the world was created?)? This concept of yeridat hador is the exact opposite of your chr*stian concept of "progressive revelation," which is nothing more than a very early and primitive form of "progressivism"/dialecticalism. True, orthodox chr*stianity stopped the progress at a certain point (which was hypcritical), but this idea of a very low, basic Torah after which revelation grew higher and more explicit contained within it the seeds of Teilhard de Chardin.
Now, do you understand where I'm coming from? Am I making any sense? Is your mind processing these letters?
And incidentally, it is the vast majority of Catholics who attack Fundamentalist Protestants for interpreting the Bible literally even while they defend post-Biblical miracles and other things which Fundamentalists find hard to accept. Catholics have always "baptized" pagan beliefs and practices with ease; the Bible has always been more problematic. Otherwise why would Dave Armstrong attack Fundamentalist converts to Catholicism for being "insufficiently converted" (in this link here)? Why do Catholics who can "baptize" Irish paganism and totem poles evince such hostility to "rednecks" whose "totem pole" consists of simply accepting the literal truth of the Bible? Would you care to answer that for me?
The whole point of my participation in this thread is that I once walked in the path that Mr. Giles now walks. I experienced it in my own person. And I fear that he will be forced to eventually choose between continuing to believe in Biblical inerrancy and the simple literal truth of the Biblical events and the historical "infallible" church. I had to make that choice. Because this thread hits so close to home I chose to post to it.
At least Protestants who hate Catholics don't pretend to be anything other than simple "uneducated" people. Catholic anti-Fundamentalism always and only comes from the left and insists on presenting itself as hyper-intellectual and sophisticated and "too good" to even breathe the same air as an unwashed hillbilly. That has always disgusted me.
If you can't understand this post, then good bye.
PS: Perhaps one day you or someone will explain to me why the American church goes to such lengths to "understand" and incorporate the loud, exuberant worship and simple theology of Blacks but looks down its European nose at poor whites who have the exact same things??? Perhaps they can stomach Blacks worshipping and believing in that way but feel it is "unbecoming" for whites to do so?
Christianity is essentially Judaism without the need for blood sacrifice removed and Physical penalty of the law no longer hanging over our heads. Faith in God is believing him and believing in him. There's that issue again - believing what God has said. Faith is believing what God has said. The work of God is believing on him whome God has sent because he SPEAKS what GOD gave him to say. IE, believing Him is believing God because it's God's words, not his own. Both of those come from John.
John 12:49 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.
[50] And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.
John 6:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.
Luther for all his failings got at least one thing right without question - it's all about faith. But to say that nullifies all need for a hierarchic clergy. To note that the position of priest was removed from a select few and placed in all of us shatters the entire basis of your system at ground level. Christ made us a spiritual kingdom of priests. Gee, where'd all the mystery go all of a sudden..
So, you might check your truth in advertising section and re-examin what you thought you were buying into if you wanted Christianity, cause you didn't get it. If you wanted an imposing, burdensome and legalistic hierarchical religion that would make you feel good about yourself, then perhaps you got what you were looking for. Perhaps it was something else you sought. Who knows. But don't try to tell me you're Christian becaus a Roman Emperor thought someone did something silly and misinterpreted it on it's face once upon a time. If Simon Magus hadn't been documented as having tried to buy the Holy spirit and being rebuked for it, I'm sure Catholicism would be selling the Holy spirit for a donation just as they did indulgeances. I feel a running theme coming on so I'll quit and let you ponder.. or look for something to get mad about - whichever suits you.