http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/2664237/posts?q=1&;page=1comment #11 which ignores what Christ Himself said and substitutes Your Own Personal Interpretation of Scripture, an interpretation that intrinsically contains a refutation of a direct quotation of Christ.
You cannot deny words directly from the mouth of Christ Himself as reported in the Bible without believing one of the following things is true:
a) the Bible contains errors, in which case Christ lied because the Holy Spirit did not indwell those led to write the Scripture wherein Christ is quoted,
b) the Holy Spirit could not protect the Truth and His Word from the wiles of Satan and the weakness of men thereby allowing errors to be included in the Bible, in which Christ lied because the Gates of Hell did indeed prevail against His Church by prevailing against His Word even as portions of it were being written down,
c) or that Jesus Christ just told an outright lie.
The only alternative to the conclusion that the cited comment denies the deity of Christ outright is that the comment is based on a belief that Jesus Christ, incarnate in the flesh, God from God, was too stupid to say that He meant. That view, in turn, is just a more subtle denial of the deity of Christ since if Christ incarnate was stupid He could not possibly be The Word incarnate given that The Word is all Truth and all Wisdom, not only a portion thereof. So, even the claim that Christ was stupid rather than a liar is just a more subtle way of denying the deity of Christ and replacing it with the worship of The Most High and Holy Self.
A denial of the deity of Christ is part and parcel of the fantasy of "Scripture Alone" since it is a fantasy that always eventually leads to accepting a heresy within which is a denial of the deity of Christ, whether those who profess "Scripture Alone" realize they're accepting that denial or not. Some such folks have the sort of ego that helps them enjoy rewriting Scripture, even words from the very mouth of Christ Himself, in order feed to ego of the Most High and Holy Self they worship. Others simply do not realize what they're accepting and have been blinded sufficiently to not recognize the heresy intrinsic to what they accept.
In either case:
Titus 3:9 but avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law. For they are unprofitable and vain.
Titus 3:10 A man that is a heretic, after the first and second admonition, avoid:
Titus 3:11 Knowing that he, that is such an one, is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned by his own judgment.
Those who continue to deny the deity of Christ can fool themselves however they like, but they should get used to the idea of hearing, "I never knew you" from the very Jesus Christ they deny is God. Unless and until such an individual surrenders to Christ showing them the Truth in the Scriptures is just throwing pearls before swine.
There are other alternatives. One is not FORCED to conclude that CB was denying the deity of Christ, no matter how much someone wishes it were so. So, therefore that statement is not accurate.
But again, what I see here is a desperate, grasping at straws kind of desperation, attempt to discredit another FReeper by causing people who may not know any better yet, to think that CB actually does deny the deity of Christ, and therefore that can be used to conclude that nothing else he has to say about Christ or the Bible can be depended on.
Fortunately, we recognize tactics such as those and can counter them with the truth.
When Jesus had His discourse about bread He said this as well....
John 6:35 Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst.
So explain away why we should not take this passage literally as well and conclude that Jesus was made out of wheat or dough? In addition, please explain why people get hungry or thirsty again after taking communion in the Catholic church. After all, if they are literally eating the flesh and blood of Christ, they should also literally neither get hungry nor thirsty ever again. Jesus DID say that, didn't He? Or was He lying?
Of course, in addition Jesus said He was the door and the vine. Please explain why Catholics don't take that literally.... Should He not be made of wood or leaves? Or was He lying there as well?
Or perhaps you could explain why Catholics don't take THIS verse literally?
John 6:63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.
And as far as this verse in the same chapter....
Why do Catholics not take this literally?
John 6:29 Jesus answered them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent.”
And Jesus said this as well
John 10:27-29 27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. 28 I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand.
Why do Catholics not believe in the security of the believer? Or was Jesus lying that He would not lose one of His or that one who believed in Him would NEVER perish?
Those who continue to deny the deity of Christ can fool themselves however they like, but they should get used to the idea of hearing, "I never knew you" from the very Jesus Christ they deny is God.
And again, those words of Jesus are being taken out of context and used in a manner in which Jesus is not going to use them.
FAIL.....
Matthew 7:21-23 21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ 23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’
And again, those words of Jesus are being taken out of context and used in a manner in which Jesus is not going to use them. He's speaking here to people who were appealing to their works to gain salvation, and does not address at all their theology concerning who He is.
Clearly following the traditions of a church does not keep people from misinterpreting Scripture. Sola Scriptura cannot be blamed on that misinterpretation.
So you’re claiming that denying that Christ is literally and physically contained in the wafer is denying the deity of Christ? Surely you can’t be serious. I’m denying the deity of the wafer. Catholics claim a wafer is their deity. That’s not only making and “image” of God but claiming that “image” is in fact God. That is idolatry.