"I wish to register a complaint...."
Posted on 10/31/2010 11:59:22 AM PDT by RnMomof7
In Christ Alone lyrics
Songwriters: Getty, Julian Keith; Townend, Stuart Richard;
In Christ alone my hope is found He is my light, my strength, my song This Cornerstone, this solid ground Firm through the fiercest drought and storm
What heights of love, what depths of peace When fears are stilled, when strivings cease My Comforter, my All in All Here in the love of Christ I stand
In Christ alone, who took on flesh Fullness of God in helpless Babe This gift of love and righteousness Scorned by the ones He came to save
?Til on that cross as Jesus died The wrath of God was satisfied For every sin on Him was laid Here in the death of Christ I live, I live
There in the ground His body lay Light of the world by darkness slain Then bursting forth in glorious Day Up from the grave He rose again
And as He stands in victory Sin?s curse has lost its grip on me For I am His and He is mine Bought with the precious blood of Christ
The catholic comments on this thread are an amazing attack on the word of God.
Did Jesus tell them to do something they could not do? Remember there was no 'institution" of the Lords Supper when He said that
So maybe it is that this quote is out of the context of the discourse..
The first thing we need to know is Jesus was on His way to celebrate the passover in Jerusalem ...the celebration that would include a celebration of the miracles that freed the jews from slavery, it would include the wine and the bread in memory of the blood of the Lamb and the manna in the desert. Along the journey He taught the crowds
With that in mind we read the scripture
Jesus preformed a miracle where thousands were fed bread. He then went away from the crowd.
The crowd followed him, but not because they sought Christ as teacher or Savior, not because they knew he was the Christ, but because they wanted to get their stomachs full of bread.
Read the rebuke of Christ to them
Jhn 6:25 And when they had found him on the other side of the sea, they said unto him, Rabbi, when camest thou hither?
Jhn 6:26 Jesus answered them and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled.
It was then He began to teach that they were looking for a miracle that would fill their stomachs ( as did the nation of Israel in the desert) and not for His presence or teaching. They only wanted their temporal needs met.
Jhn 6:27 Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed.
Jhn 6:28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?
Jhn 6:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.
Jesus laid out that salvation was by FAITH, and that Faith was a work of the Father
Then then decided to put Christ to a test ...Give us PROOF. It was THEY that brought up the manna (bread) Not Christ
Jhn 6:30 They said therefore unto him, What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee? what dost thou work?
Jhn 6:31 Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat.
Jesus clarified where salvation comes from;
Jhn 6:32 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven
He was pointing out that the "bread from heaven " that kept their fathers only gave them physical life.. HE on the other hands was sent from the Father to give them eternal spiritual life.
They did not "get it" they were looking for REAL bread to give them physical life as had happened in the desert, they were looking for tangible bread like manna, justy as they were looking for an earthly savior not a divine salvation.
Jhn 6:34 Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this bread.
Jesus then patiently explained to them that His flesh is life for the world.. His crucified body was what was going to bring eternal life, not a temporal one
Jhn 6:35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.
Jhn 6:36 But I said unto you,That ye also have seen me, and believe not.
Jhn 6:37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
Jhn 6:38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.
Jhn 6:39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.
Jhn 6:40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.
The entire message is on salvation by faith .
The listeners did not get it , they were hung up on another point .
Jhn 6:41 The Jews then murmured at him, because he said, I am the bread which came down from heaven.
Jhn 6:42 And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven?
Notice the focus of the crowd was not on Him being the BREAD or eating Him but that He said he came down from heaven ( a claim of divinity )
Jhn 6:43 Jesus therefore answered and said unto them, Murmur not among yourselves.
Jhn 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
Jhn 6:45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.
Jhn 6:47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.
Jhn 6:48 I am that bread of life.
Jhn 6:49 Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead.
Jhn 6:50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.
Jhn 6:51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.
Jesus here declares that the manna was a TYPE of Christ.. The manna gave physical life, His flesh is for the eternal life of men
Jhn 6:52 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us [his] flesh to eat?
Jhn 6:53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
Jhn 6:54Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
Jhn 6:55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. Jhn 6:56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.
Jhn 6:57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.
Jhn 6:58 This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.
Keep in mind He had already taught at some length that He that believed on Him would be saved. He has already taught that the man that is taught by the Father comes to him and are saved. So to interpret this as other than a metaphor of being saved by His soon to be broken body and his shed blood, by internalizing the fact of the atonement in faith is not a good reading and it is not the understood by the new church
Jhn 6:60 Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard [this], said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?
61 But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples murmured at it, said to them, "Do you take offense at this?
62 Then what if you were to see the Son of man ascending where he was before?
THIS IS A CLAIM OF DIVINITY, that was blasphemy to the Jews ,now see their reaction
63 It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.
64 But there are some of you that do not believe." For Jesus knew from the first who those were that did not believe, and who it was that would betray him.
65 And he said, "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father."
Men can not save themselves GOD has to grant it to them
66 After this many of his disciples drew back and no longer went about with him.
It was not the bread, that they understood that as an analogy, that Jesus was saying He was like the manna that fed their ancestors. But then He made it clear that he had come from the Father and would return there.
67 Jesus said to the twelve, "Do you also wish to go away?"
68 Simon Peter answered him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life;
69 and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God."
Now does Peter talk about the bread? NO he addresses what the others left over, the divinity of Christ, Peter heard the message that one would be saved by BELIEVING in Christ, just as Christ had taught in this discourse.
It opened because the crowd wanted PROOF, a SIGN, and so they asked for food. Jesus made the transition to the manna because of the demand of the crowd for food to prove what he said. This discourse is on faith without signs , it is on being saved by faith.
Jhn 6:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent
Jhn 6:40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day. Jhn 6:47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.
PETER HEARD WHAT CHRIST WAS TEACHING. HE MADE A PROFESSION OF FAITH, HE DID NOT ASK FOR BREAD
They did not like hearing that salvation had to be given them and much like the manna in the desert, it was totally a gift of the Father. They could not do anything on their own to earn it, they only had access to it by faith ( remember the Jews could only gather enough manna for the one days meals, and for 2 days on the day before the sabbath, they had to have faith in God to provide what was necessary for their life) . The idea that salvation was all of God and not found in law keeping was blasphemy to the law oriented Jews that felt their salvation was based on their will, their law keeping etc
To make an attempt to make this a teaching on the Lords supper misses the mark. Christ was still alive and in His flesh and he was, by your reckoning , telling them to do something they could not do because the Lords Supper had not been instituted yet,it is a spiritual eating and drinking that is here spoken of, not a sacramental.
This was clearly a metaphorical teaching to Jews looking for a Physical savior like Moses, and for physical bread to meet their physical hunger. Jesus always used symbols that the Jews understood to make spiritual points.
Reading scripture in proper context is important.
Hear Peter one more time 1Pe 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed,[u] but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever
This is news to you? Any Catholic who obstinately denies defined doctrine becomes a heretic.
The early church Fathers did not teach this.
St. Irenus--Against Heresies--180 AD: "Where the Church is, there also is the Spirit of God, and where the Spirit of God is there is the Church, and every grace: for the Spirit is truth"
What Church Father ever said a Christian could choose which doctrines to believe or reject? That is Protestantism. Church Fathers fought wars over the purity of doctrine.
It is like talking to a wall ...The pope says there was always a papacy and he is infallible (because he says so) therefore if he says it , it must be true..even though history says something else all together .
When the blind lead the blind they all Literally all fall into the pit
The Infallible Council declared Honorius guilty of HERESY!
Was the Council in error?
I’m really beginning to think that there is no REAL beginning to any of this. Like ooze rising from the swamplands, it’s just suddenly there.
Thank you for posting the Catholic Church's Catechism and confirming exactly what I've been saying. Christ did NOT offer himself on the cross as a living "victim". He offered himself as a living "sacrifice". I would suggest you do a study in the difference between a victim and a sacrifice. Christ readily laid down his life as a ransom for many. He sacrificed himself. He wasn't a victim. A little training in the English language never hurts before you go calling people liars.
BTW-It doesn't surprise me that the Catholic Church DELIBERATELY change the scriptures. You may also wish to look up the word "deliberately".
Where is the body of John the Baptist ..Jesus said of him that he was the greatest PERSON EVER BORN OF A WOMAN (so I am assuming greater than Mary)
Where are his bones? Maybe he was also assumed
The inability to locate a grave under centuries of rubble does not make the assumption a truth ...
"I wish to register a complaint...."
And the multiple sets of Peter's bones proves what?
Is not tradition equal to scripture in the catholic church ?
Jimmy Hoffa's bones have never been found. Are we to assume a bodily assumption?
So there are a few flaws in apostolic succession I take it?
So she was cleaned before she was conceived?
Your answer to OLD REGGIE illustrates the circular reasoning that I've been talking about. Of course they didn't say Honorius' letter was infallible, for the simple reason that they didn't believe in papal infallibility! The concept was unknown to them, as evidenced by several hundred years of church history after Honorius. You have post 19th century glasses on which render you apparently unable to see the historical facts that Councils and Popes subsequent to Honorius, as Philip Schaff puts it, "... believed that a Pope may err ex cathedra in a question of faith and that one of them at least had so erred in fact."
Your interpretation of the historical facts is anachronistic. Your defense amounts to, as I've said, a "he didn't really mean it infallibly" excuse.
Cordially,
Poor Mary always a bridesmaid never the bride.. only her cloak is around to heal people ... The dance just continues..no we have no proof..but not having proof is proof..
The implicit doctrine of Papal infallibility has been operational since the time of Christ. That doctrine became explicitly defined in 1870. The Infallible Council declared Honorius guilty of HERESY! Was the Council in error?
No. The heresy of Honorius was not infallible because it did not meet the requirement of an ex cathedra statement, as I previously demonstrated with the quote from the Catholic Encyclopedia.
Yes, it does speak volumes: Si falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.
Cordially,
It's a miracle ...call the Pope ...LOL
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.