Replying to Avatar Liberty Gal

I do think some things are clearly literal, some are more questionable, but can be logically determined, and some are clearly figurative.

When Jesus says, "I am the vine ..." he clearly was not physically a vine. His disciples were looking at Him and could tell. He then explains how he is like a vine.

Similarly, when Jesus claims to be the bread/wine:

"24and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” 25In 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.” 26For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes." (1 Corinthians 11:24-26)

The statements "do this in remembrance of me," "This cup is the new covenant in My blood"(covenant), and "For as often as you ... , you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes" all suggest something more figurative, although it isn't crystal clear in its meaning.

On the other hand, in Genesis, God goes out of His way to make sure people understand it as a literal description.

God defines day (yom) "God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day." (Genesis 1:5)

He then repeats with every numbered day, "And there was evening and there was morning, a second day, " "There was evening and there was morning, a third day.," etc. He knew we would question whether these events were literal 24 hour days, so He went out of His way to give us every clue (numbering the days, saying "evening and morning", etc.) In Exodus 20 when He commands the Sabbath, "For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day and made it holy." (Exodus 20:11) He says why He created the universe in six days and rested on the seventh to give an example to us. (He could have created everything in a millisecond.)

There is absolutely no Biblical reason to take these six days as anything other than six 24 hour days. It is only when someone puts man's word over the Bible that a person can think that it is a longer period of time. (Spoken as one who used to believe the day age theory, although I didn't know that is what it was called at the time because I came up with the idea on my own based on what I had learned in science class and what I had read in the Bible, not based on some person's theory. Now that I know the Bible better and the science better, that theory seems ridiculous to me, but it seemed like absolute, unassailable truth in my past.).

Sorry if this is too much. I want to help; I want to encourage; but sometimes I get carried away because of my passion for biblical truth. I want everyone to be as close to God as quickly as possible and to be as perfectly informed in the Bible as possible and sometimes I can throw too much at people. I know that is one of my faults. It is meant to be for your good.

You don't have to apologize to me for disagreeing with me. I'm an adult; I can handle it.

But I think this discussion sort of highlights my scepticism about the "literally" thing, because the schism in the Church is partially an artefact of which parts some faction took literally. Catholics tend to take everything Jesus said directly to His disciples absolutely literally because the people of the Early Church took them literally and the New Testament was put together years later, under their direction and divine inspiration.

These things Jesus said, with emphasis, are the Biggest Biblical Claims because they're the metaphysical claims. They're the wildest, most-outrageous parts of the whole Library, but they're also the parts that are impossible to disprove on Earth.

You can't go dig in the ground and find Heaven, but you might find Eden. In other words. But who really cares about Eden, when there is _literally_ Heaven?

And, like, Jesus said Mary is our mother, but y'all are like, He didn't mean that literally. Yes, He did! He legit took a break from dying to make the point. Seems like He thought it was an important point and that we should remember it and maybe even, eventually, write it down.

Determining what is _literally_ true, is what the Church has been fighting over for a couple of millennia, and we haven't even managed to reach universal consensus on Baptism.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

When you say Jesus said Mary is our mother, what are you referring to? Are you just referring to His statement to John?

"26When Jesus then saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing nearby, He *said to His mother, “Woman, behold, your son!” 27Then He said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother!” From that hour the disciple took her into his own household." (John 19:26-27).

If so, I disagree strongly. He was not making Mary all of our mother. He was being a good son and making sure His widowed mother was taken care of since He [Jesus] wouldn't be there on earth to take care of her. " From that hour the disciple took her into his own household."

Maybe there is some other verse that I don't remember.

He's making it clear that Mary is not "merely" His mother, which would already make her worthy of veneration, but that she's also John's mother and John is a stand-in for all Christians. He didn't forget about her, at The End. He emphasized her and reminded us all of her importance.

She is the Immaculate Conception and the Ark of the Covenant, after all. Even the angels greet her like a Queen. And remember Luke 1:

And Mary said:

“My soul glorifies the Lord

and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,

for he has been mindful

of the humble state of his servant.

From now on all generations will call me blessed,

for the Mighty One has done great things for me — holy is his name.

No where in the Bible is the immaculate conception mentioned. She was a faithful young woman. She was blessed by God. She is an example of a servant of God, but even she admits she is blessed because, "the Mighty One has done great things for me — holy is his name." She never claims to be holy herself.

There is nothing written in the Bible about calling her mother. There is not one verse saying we should pray to her or through her. In fact the Bible says,

"For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus," (1 Timothy 2:5)

The Bible even specifically tells people to not consult the dead, but to consult God:

"When they say to you, “Consult the mediums and the spiritists who whisper and mutter,” should not a people consult their God? Should they consult the dead on behalf of the living?" (Isaiah 8:19)

I'll admit that my two biggest disagreements with the Catholic church are putting the Pope above the Bible and praying to Mary (and saints) like they are little gods. (I know people like you don't consider them gods, but mediators, but the actions seem like they are being treated as gods. It seems to me like a form of idolatry.)

I hate all of the splits in the church, but understand why they happen. One thing that can be seen in all human organizations, including the church, is that the low level workers work hard on the mission (serving Christ). Those that seek leadership tend to be those who care more about wealth and power than the mission. Over time the leadership gets taken over by the least Christian in the Church. They start leading the church/denomination in the wrong direction. Those who are still faithful to God and His word, then leave because the church/denomination has drifted from the path.

Although for every generalization, there are plenty of exceptions, my experience has shown the older the denomination, the more likely for it to have been corrupted. Even the earliest Protestant denominations (Lutheran, Presbyterian, Methodist, etc.) that used to be very biblical denominations have become terribly corrupted. There may be a few decent churches left, but the denominations are totally messed up.

The Catholic church started out really good. They then dealt with some true heresies, but overcorrected. Their initial reactions were not terrible, but led to future generations being led astray. As the Catholic Church got more rich and powerful, ungodly men sought leadership. I think there were many Popes, including the current one, that are not Christians. When I was younger, it seemed like every Catholic I met didn't really have Christian beliefs. It felt like they used Catholicism as a "don't witness to me" card. Today, I know a bunch of Catholics who I believe are strong Christians. I can't be sure, but it seems that even though the leadership has become more and more liberal and anti-biblical, many of the members have become more devout and more biblical (even if I disagree strongly on certain points). Maybe I just met the wrong Catholics when I was younger and the right Catholics when I got older or maybe God has been calling His Catholic brothers and sisters back to Him. I don't know.

Although being part of a Christian church and participating in certain group callings like the Lord's Supper (Eucharist) and Baptism, we need to all go to the Bible for our theology, not men. We need to be like the Bereans:

"Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so." (Acts 17:11)

I think the Cafeteria Catholics have simply wandered off because they couldn't remember why they were there.

I guess I have a name for them now. LOL.