Are Protestants dead?

[zoidar]

It's not the Lords supper that saves, it's faith in Jesus Christ.

Are you a Christian you should partake in Lords supper, and that is what unbelievers don't do. It's not the Lords supper that would save them, it's believing in Christ sacrifice of his flesh and blood. So I believe what Jesus really was saying is: "If you don't believe in me you don't have life and then you won't partake in my supper."

 

[Eloy Craft]

So the Lord's supper is considered the gospel in Catholicism?

Paul said We preach Christ Crucified. That's Gospel central no?

 

[Eloy Craft]

If a friend asked you to remember him, would you frame a photograph of his bloody body at an accident scene, and stare at it? People (C or P) that are hooked up on that may just be missing everything Jesus lived for.

The Sacrifice that only God could accomplish. An act of Divine Love. Salvation. Compared to a car accident?

 

[thecolorsblend]

What if i dont believe that Catholics are the successors of the real apostles?

Then you're at a bit of a loss to explain who led the Church during the first and second centuries.

 

[Rubiks]

Fair enough, but other catholics were saying that Protestants dont partake of the real Lords supper. Right?

Whether the Lord's supper contains the real body of Christ is not dependent on whether someone believes it to be true.

 

[thecolorsblend]

Not false. Catholic Posters have said that to me on more than one occasion.

Is that what you do when your theology doesnt add up?

Oh no, my friend. The problem is questioning whether or not a member of CF who identifies as a Christian is actually a Christian violates CF's rules. And goodness knows I'm a stickler for obeying the rules. Law and order every time, that's me.

 

[thecolorsblend]

Obviously, the bread was not literally Christ's body.

Obvious to whom? It's not obvious to the 1 billion Catholics in the world today. It's not obvious to the 300'ish million Orthodox in the world today. It wasn't obvious to the early Church.

Seems plain to me, then, that when Jesus said, "This is my body," he meant the bread was representative of his body that would be sacrificed at Calvary.

Why didn't he say that then? He could've told the apostles to regard the bread as a metaphor of His body and then broken the bread. But He didn't say that. He broke the bread and then said that it was His body.

 

[W2L]

Then you're at a bit of a loss to explain who led the Church during the first and second centuries.

The first century was lead by the apostles. I have heard it said that the Catholic church didn't come into the picture until 400 years after Christ.

 

[W2L]

Whether the Lord's supper contains the real body of Christ is not dependent on whether someone believes it to be true.

Sounds agreeable.

 

[W2L]

Oh no, my friend. The problem is questioning whether or not a member of CF who identifies as a Christian is actually a Christian violates CF's rules. And goodness knows I'm a stickler for obeying the rules. Law and order every time, that's me.

Ok fair enough, but your lack of an answer is still the answer. You words already say what you believe. BTW, i wasnt looking to get you in trouble. I wouldn't have reported you for answering a question i asked.

 

[Jonathan Leo]

I started this thread as a spin off thread from another thread i have going. As i was discussing the Lords supper, I was told by Catholics that Protestants dont actually partake of the real Lords supper. If this is true then doesnt that mean that protestants are dead, according to John 6:53?

John 6:53 New King James Version (NKJV)
53 Then Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you.

When Jesus spoke this, He wasn’t referring to the traditions of taking communion, He was referring to the fact that unless anybody accepts that His body was crucified and His blood was spilled in order that anybody can enter the salvation from sin only through His sacrifice, they have no life in you, for you are condemned to Gods wrath

 

[W2L]

When Jesus spoke this, He wasn’t referring to the traditions of taking communion, He was referring to the fact that unless anybody accepts that His body was crucified and His blood was spilled in order that anybody can enter the salvation from sin only through His sacrifice, they have no life in you, for you are condemned to Gods wrath

Im sure it wasn't about communion. I cant believe a persons life or soul would hang on communion.

 

[zoidar]

I believe he meant both.

 

[W2L]

I believe he meant both.

Who and what?

 

[zoidar]

I believe it's the same with baptism, that you can be saved without baptism, but if you are a Christian you should get baptised if you are not. Both baptism and Lords supper are for Christians, not for other people. Salvation is in Christ, though if you are a Christian you should take Lords supper and get baptised. If you refuse to be baptised or refuse to take Lords supper, I'm sure there will be consequences.

 

[zoidar]

Who and what?

Sorry to be unclear. I believe Jesus talked both about the Lords supper and about the belief in his sacrifice of flesh and blood. Salvation comes through faith in his sacrifice, and when you have faith you take Lords supper. If you don't have faith you don't take the Lords supper. Like i tried to explain previously. If you aren't a believer you don't take the Lords supper, and then you don't have life either.

 

[W2L]

If you refuse to be baptised or refuse to take Lords supper, I'm sure there will be consequences.

There is so much division over such things that their meaning is lost.

 

[W2L]

Sorry to be unclear. I believe Jesus talked both about the Lords supper and about the belief in his sacrifice of flesh and blood. Salvation comes through faith in his sacrifice, and when you have faith you take Lords supper. If you don't have faith you don't take the Lords supper. Like i tried to explain previously. If you aren't a believer you don't take the Lords supper, and then you don't have life either.

So sacraments, as their called, are a salvation issue with you? I see it differently.

1 Corinthians 1:17-18 King James Version (KJV)
17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.

18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

 

[thecolorsblend]

The first century was lead by the apostles. I have heard it said that the Catholic church didn't come into the picture until 400 years after Christ.

If that were so, why is there so much doctrinal overlap between the Catholic Church and the Early Church? My sig contains a quote from St. Irenaeus from circa 189 AD that extols the importance of the bishop of Rome.

Friend, there's a lot of pseudo-history floating around Protestant Christian circles. I have my suspicions as to why that is but the main point is that reading the Church Fathers is an eye-opening experience for a lot of people.

Ok fair enough, but your lack of an answer is still the answer. You words already say what you believe. BTW, i wasnt looking to get you in trouble. I wouldn't have reported you for answering a question i asked.

Others would have. And who needs the grief, right?

I believe it's the same with baptism, that you can be saved without baptism, but if you are a Christian you should get baptised if you are not. Both baptism and Lords supper are for Christians, not for other people. Salvation is in Christ, though if you are a Christian you should take Lords supper and get baptised. If you refuse to be baptised or refuse to take Lords supper, I'm sure there will be consequences.

You say that one can be saved without being baptized... but there will be consequences if one isn't baptized?

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

I don't know, ask them.