I think the Pope is panicking right now(smells like it)...
(media.greatawakening.win)
PANICO in Vaticano!
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (103)
sorted by:
So when Jesus told Nicodemus he must be born again, He was saying that Nicodemus should be biologically born again? Almost everything Jesus said was spoken in parables, but why are these two fundamentals of Catholics (Peter is the first pope, and communion involves actual eating of Jesus flesh and blood), to be taken literally? I understand it's hard to realize and accept that a set of beliefs a person has had their whole life are wrong (it's what this site is about, right?), but if you break free, you will find great relief! No more wondering if you are saved. No more wondering if you "did enough to earn your way to Heaven". Etc., etc.
You said it, not me. 'Almost everything Jesus said was in parables.'
In John, Chapter 6, Jesus directly and explicitly states that he is the true manna from heaven. This creates a direct 'typology' link from the 'type' (the manna from Exodus) to Jesus, the fulfillment of the manna.
In every single other typology set in the entire Bible, the fulfillment in Jesus is greater than the original hint/foreshadowing (type) in the Bible.
The manna in the desert was a supernatural event (to sustain natural life), and Jesus directly and explicitly says he is the fulfillment of that event. So how does this fulfillment end up being a simple 'metaphor'? Answer: It doesn't, otherwise it would mean that Jesus' fulfillment was less than the original event.
Jesus was speaking of a supernatural event (to sustain our spiritual lives). It is a difficult teaching, which is why the crowd and many disciples walked away (And, as long as we're back to that - Why did the disciples walk away for a bad metaphor?)
With regard to Peter as the first Pope, look to the very beginning of Acts (1:12-20), where they had to replace the office that Judas had vacated. 'His office, let another take.' They knew - and followed - the structure that Jesus had set up for the Church. Apostolic succession.
Has this structure been abused? Yes, and often!
Has the structure of our government been abused? Yes, and often!
I don't give up on what is good because of the abuse of the few.
And, to clear up a misconception that you have -- I don't 'wonder if I am saved', nor do I think I 'earn my way into heaven'. I follow Paul's teaching. I have been saved, I am being saved, and I hope to be saved in the end - to 'finish the race well, lest I lose the imperishable crown'. If you have a problem with that theology, then argue with Paul, not me.
I just don't understand the desire to follow a church, rather than Jesus. What is the draw to follow a bunch of traditions of the Catholic church, rather than what is plainly written in the Bible? And while you're here, where does praying to Mary come from? I'm on my 10th or 11th read through the Bible now, and have yet to find where any scripture refers to praying to Mary. And just so you know (apparently many Catholics don't), Mary had other children. Why do you think the Catholic church only in the past few decades (if that long) had services in English, rather than latin? And why has there been, perhaps only until recently, an apparent avoidance of reading a Bible? Is it because the Catholic church was worried people would see how far the teachings of the Catholic church digress from what the Bible states?
So now comes the scatter gun approach? Just throw out all of the things that you (falsely) believe about the Church? You have not answered a single one of my Bible-based questions/statements. Just 'move on to a new topic' when confronted by Bible citations.
Your (new) questions betray a lack of understanding of first-century Hebrew, as well as church history (both before and after the Reformation).
I've learned (by talking to liberals) that this conversation is useless. You're going to just throw as much on the wall as possible -- without answering anything that is pending. Never an answer from you, just more accusations.
I'm done here. You've read and interpreted the Bible as you see fit. I, on the other hand, have read, interpreted, and can understand both sides of this argument.
It isn't me who has a 'lifetime of belief' to 'overcome'. I only came to faith several years ago. When I did, I spent years searching the entire Bible for what is true (not just the verses that I like).
God bless.
Just ask yourself these questions: "Am I pleasing God by confessing to a priest, instead of to Him?" "Am I pleasing God when I pray and invoke Mary, instead of Jesus?", "Am I pleasing God in believing that the bread and wine are magically turned into flesh and blood of Jesus, when it clearly is not?"
Sorry if I didn't address specific questions you had, but you didn't address what I stated either, so I guess we're even :) I became a Christian more than 30 years ago. I grew up going to an Episcopal church (Catholic-light :) ), but there really isn't a personal salvation experience associated with that church; you go through confirmation classes and then are "confirmed" as a Christian. It is clear that baptism is intended for believers to experience, not infants, yet the Catholic church still does infant baptisms in the false believe it results in salvation, correct? If you have accepted Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior, and repented of your sins, and accept this gift of free salvation, without any works required, and if you confess your sins to God, not to some Priest, then you will be welcomed into Heaven some day. I hope to see you there, but please, stop grieving the Holy Spirit by praying to Mary.