Sorry, I just haaaveee to ask.

[Unveiled Artist]

1. Is it me or is saying as an example only as the claim Catholics pray to priest to get to God the same as some protestants go to the Bible to get to Christ?

2. From a non christian (Muslim and Jewish) perspective, even more so isn't Catholics going to the priest to get to God the same as christians going to Christ?

IF the claim is true that Catholics go to the priest to get to God why would it not be true for protestants (1st question) or christians (2nd question)?

The point is whether the two actions are the same concept NOT whether one is true and the other false.

I hate doing clauses.

 

[Desert Snake]

1. Is it me or is saying as an example only as the claim Catholics pray to priest to get to God the same as some protestants go to the Bible to get to Christ?

2. From a non christian (Muslim and Jewish) perspective, even more so isn't Catholics going to the priest to get to God the same as christians going to Christ?

IF the claim is true that Catholics go to the priest to get to God why would it not be true for protestants (1st question) or christians (2nd question)?

The point is whether the two actions are the same concept NOT whether one is true and the other false.

I hate doing clauses.

I believe that what is actually happening when people go to Jesus for deity, ideally, and in the sense of religion, the traditional belief, is that, they are praying to the 'man version' of God. Jesus is not a "middleman", for many Xians, He is actually God. So, go to Jesus, one would be going to God.

 

[Jean-Pierre Chatelaine]

Well this depends on whether you are Catholic or Protestant.

According to the Roman Catholic Church, if you are not one of them you cannot get to god. Priests are your intermediary ... you are told to ask Mary to pray for you as well as sundry saints. In essence this means that you have several helpers you use to reach god. Therefore you cannot have a personal relationship with god.

Now according to Protestants, none of the above are necessary to have a relationship with god. You remove all these "helpers" who stand between you and god ... except Jesus ... & your relationship with god is a lot more personal.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

That would mean there is no Son of God. It would also mean He is His Father.

Since Jesus is also separate as human from the Father and the diciples talked to Jesus "to get to" the father, Jesus would be a middleman or intemediary as He calls it between God ans He. No one can get to God except the Father.

Im keeping the "Jesus is not God" out of the question and just saying since Jesus was Gods Son and the only way to get to the Father is throgh Him isnt that the same r similar claimnas anti catholics say about catholics about the priest to gd

I believe that what is actually happening when people go to Jesus for deity, ideally, and in the sense of religion, the traditional belief, is that, they are praying to the 'man version' of God. Jesus is not a "middleman", for many Xians, He is actually God. So, go to Jesus, one would be going to God.

 

[Desert Snake]

That would mean there is no Son of God. It would also mean He is His Father.

Since Jesus is also separate as human from the Father and the diciples talked to Jesus "to get to" the father, Jesus would be a middleman or intemediary as He calls it between God ans He. No one can get to God except the Father.

Im keeping the "Jesus is not God" out of the question and just saying since Jesus was Gods Son and the only way to get to the Father is throgh Him isnt that the same r similar claimnas anti catholics say about catholics about the priest to gd

I should have prefaced my comments with 'generally speaking'. Because Protestantism does vary. Although Jesus is the son of god, this is somewhat metaphorical, because Jesus literally is the incarnation of God. The 'man', Jesus, is the ''son''; but in Spirit form, Jesus literally is God. God manifested through Mary as a man, and hence, no one getting to the father, except through Jesus, is literal; it means, Jesus, being the manifestation of God, and having authority as such, to deny Jesus is to deny God.
No middleman, here, because there is no 'middle', in the Godhead. There is no separation between the ''father'', and His, /JHVH, human incarnation.

 

[metis]

Jesus often differentiated God from himself, such as when dealing with the "end times". It's highly unlikely that the apostles saw Jesus as being God, more likely instead to believe that Jesus was on the same page as God. IOW, there's a difference between "being god" versus "being of God", and the latter is more logical when viewed in both context and logic.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Middleman doesnt mean separation in some cases. Jesus is the middleman to a christian and God as a man. As God (because of the relationahip with his father) He would be One (same blood in family; same nature in Godhead) and only one in between a person and God because His Father is God/the Creator.

That aside, wouldnt people who think Catholics are going through priest to be with God do the same with their bibles?

With non christians, muslims and jews (and whomever) who dont believe Jesus is God see a christians relationship to Jesus as a Catholic to the priest?

I should have prefaced my comments with 'generally speaking'. Because Protestantism does vary. Although Jesus is the son of god, this is somewhat metaphorical, because Jesus literally is the incarnation of God. The 'man', Jesus, is the ''son''; but in Spirit form, Jesus literally is God. God manifested through Mary as a man, and hence, no one getting to the father, except through Jesus, is literal; it means, Jesus, being the manifestation of God, and having authority as such, to deny Jesus is to deny God.
No middleman, here, because there is no 'middle', in the Godhead. There is no separation between the ''father'', and His, /JHVH, human incarnation.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

True. Do you feel that christians are placing Christ as a middleman "as" a Catholic (or Rabbi) are "claimed" (not true) to between that person a nd God?

Jesus often differentiated God from himself, such as when dealing with the "end times". It's highly unlikely that the apostles saw Jesus as being God, more likely instead to believe that Jesus was on the same page as God. IOW, there's a difference between "being god" versus "being of God", and the latter is more logical when viewed in both context and logic.

 

[Desert Snake]

Middleman doesnt mean separation in some cases. Jesus is the middleman to a christian and God as a man. As God (because of the relationahip with his father) He would be One (same blood in family; same nature in Godhead) and only one in between a person and God because His Father is God/the Creator.

That aside, wouldnt people who think Catholics are going through priest to be with God do the same with their bibles?

With non christians, muslims and jews (and whomever) who dont believe Jesus is God see a christians relationship to Jesus as a Catholic to the priest?

I assume many would. It is probably even true for some Xian denominations or whatnot. I just gave a Xian perspective that explains why that is not the case for many Xians.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Thats not true. Catholics do not need to go to the priest to get to God. Without God thered be no Church, no priest, no members. The Church doesnt teach to pray to anyone but Christ. I cant speak for what some people do.

Well this depends on whether you are Catholic or Protestant.

According to the Roman Catholic Church, if you are not one of them you cannot get to god. Priests are your intermediary ... you are told to ask Mary to pray for you as well as sundry saints. In essence this means that you have several helpers you use to reach god. Therefore you cannot have a personal relationship with god.

Now according to Protestants, none of the above are necessary to have a relationship with god. You remove all these "helpers" who stand between you and god ... except Jesus ... & your relationship with god is a lot more personal.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

oooh. I can see why for and againts Jesus being God. I just found a similarity in arguments with Christians who can only know Jesus by scriture. Some people say without scripture (the bible) no Christ.

They feel catholics are saying the same, witbout the priest no one can come to God. Neither is true. Its interesting nonetheless

I assume many would. It is probably even true for some Xian denominations or whatnot. I just gave a Xian perspective that explains why that is not the case for many Xians.

 

[metis]

True. Do you feel that christians are placing Christ as a middleman "as" a Catholic (or Rabbi) are "claimed" (not true) to between that person a nd God?

For most Christians, more of the idea of Jesus actually being God, thus not so much as a "middleman".

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

No, we do not pray to priests! Where are you getting that from? Priests are just our spiritual leadership and give us the Sacraments.

@Jean-Pierre Chatelaine

You're completely wrong. The Saints are our friends who pray for us and help us in times of need. They don't get inbetween us and God. God the Son is directly present to us in the Holy Eucharist and the Holy Spirit lives within.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

For most Christians, more of the idea of Jesus actually being God, thus not so much as a "middleman".

I hear a lot that Christ is the only intermediary between God and man. So, in the sense, He would be a middleman and Him being the same nature as God (or to many Christians, is God), makes Him the perfect person to be the go between the Creator and man.

If there were no middleman or intermediary between God and Man (Christ in the flesh), according to Christianity (majority denominations), there would be no edit salvation.

Hence the "all separate but all are one" idea.

 

[Awoon]

"Peacemakers" will be called The Sons of God. A lot of literal peacemakers throughout Human history.
Stop a fight , U B Son of God. No ands, ifs, or buts. That's the way it is. Religious people make Jesus' teaching ridiculously hard.
His disciples were illiterate, yet people have to go to college for years and years today to get letters of approval to be called, Minister, Teacher, Priest, Imam, Mullah.

His method of getting to God is laid out in Matthew 5, that's all that is needed. Throw the rest of the NT away.

Btw, Jesus didn't say the peacemakers had to "believe" in him or any God or any religion to be called Sons of his God. Did he? LOL NO !!!!!

 

[metis]

I hear a lot that Christ is the only intermediary between God and man. So, in the sense, He would be a middleman and Him being the same nature as God (or to many Christians, is God), makes Him the perfect person to be the go between the Creator and man.

If there were no middleman or intermediary between God and Man (Christ in the flesh), according to Christianity (majority denominations), there would be no edit salvation.

Hence the "all separate but all are one" idea.

If one views Jesus as literally being God, then Jesus cannot be considered a "middleman". However, many people are not always very consistent, and I have heard some say both as well, even though it really doesn't make much sense.

The issue of Jesus being the "final sacrifice" makes little sense it taken literally, but can make sense if taken figuratively. As far as the last sentence is concerned, I don't see how that fits into what's being discussed, so maybe you can explain?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

The last sentence, I went on a trinity tangent. Dismiss.

The issue of Jesus being the "final sacrifice" makes little sense it taken literally, but can make sense if taken figuratively. As far as the last sentence is concerned, I don't see how that fits into what's being discussed, so maybe you can explain?

I agree, if it was figuratively, I understand the concept. It's seen literally, though. Since the spirit is alive after the flesh, it "makes sense" to an extent that before Jesus became flesh,He was there in spirit. He wasn't called Christ yet nor did He have the name Jesus. Just I AM. Then in the NT when He came in the flesh, that's where He got His name and blessing from the heavens to do what He already set Himself out to do.

It's a weird paradox. If I believed in a Creator, it wouldn't be Christian. I can't see beyond the paradox just how the two makes sense within themselves.

 

[metis]

The last sentence, I went on a trinity tangent. Dismiss.

I agree, if it was figuratively, I understand the concept. It's seen literally, though. Since the spirit is alive after the flesh, it "makes sense" to an extent that before Jesus became flesh,He was there in spirit. He wasn't called Christ yet nor did He have the name Jesus. Just I AM. Then in the NT when He came in the flesh, that's where He got His name and blessing from the heavens to do what He already set Himself out to do.

It's a weird paradox. If I believed in a Creator, it wouldn't be Christian. I can't see beyond the paradox just how the two makes sense within themselves.

But it still makes no sense if Jesus is viewed as the "final sacrifice" if taken in the literal sense. For example, which part of Jesus' nature was that "sacrifice": the human or the divine? If it's the human part, the scriptures do not allow for human sacrifices, and if it's the supposed divine part, how can God be sacrificed for God?

Anyhow, the point either way is moot to me simply because I see him as a man born to a woman fathered by a man. However, if we take the "I am Thou" approach, then we're all a part of the divine.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

You're turning me Jewish. I agree completely.

But it still makes no sense if Jesus is viewed as the "final sacrifice" if taken in the literal sense. For example, which part of Jesus' nature was that "sacrifice": the human or the divine? If it's the human part, the scriptures do not allow for human sacrifices, and if it's the supposed divine part, how can God be sacrificed for God?

Anyhow, the point either way is moot to me simply because I see him as a man born to a woman fathered by a man. However, if we take the "I am Thou" approach, then we're all a part of the divine.

 

[metis]

You're turning me Jewish. I agree completely.

LOL! OK, now you have to pay your dues, and I'm the official Jewish treasurer. Check or Mastercard?