How Evangelical Christians Handle Difficult Verses Part 2

In Part 1 we looked at the first 5 verses listed on the meme titled, “10 Biblical Verses That Protestants Cannot Accept (Without Becoming Catholic)”. In this second part, we’ll examine the rest. Bear in mind that the so-called “Protestant” accepts these verses since they supposedly believe in Sola Scriptura. But they allow extra-biblical sources to influence the interpretation.

John 6:53-58 and 66-67

As all Catholics know, these verses are the strongest statement in the New Testament concerning the Eucharist. The Lord states very clearly that if we don’t partake of Communion, we have no life in us. The article that immediately preceded this series examined the implications of this in detail, so I won’t go further in that aspect here.

But what do the Evangelical Christians do with these verses? Pretty much ignore them or attempt to spiritualize them to change what they are talking about. John Gill’s handling is very common among apologists and preachers. In his commentary on these verses says, “…this is not to be understood of eating and drinking in the Lord's supper, which, as yet, was not instituted…”. Based upon what authority does he make this pronouncement? His reasoning would exclude many things that the Old Testament prophets said about Messiah…after all He hadn’t come yet. It would also negate many things that they Lord Himself said about His own death, burial, resurrection and second coming.

Misinterpreting the verses, he then goes on to directly contradict what the Lord says here by saying, “and some, without participating of this, have spiritual life in them now, and will enjoy eternal life hereafter;” The Lord says that those who don’t partake have no life, but Gill says they do. Why? Because they obeyed the man-made doctrines of Protestant theology!

John Wesley, the founder of Methodism and all the splinters that came off from that movement, clearly says in his commentary of verse 53: “Unless ye eat the flesh of the Son of man - Spiritually: unless ye draw continual virtue from him by faith. Eating his flesh is only another expression for believing.”

1 Corinthians 11:27

“Whosoever shall eat this bread unworthily - That is, in an unworthy, irreverent manner; without regarding either Him that appointed it, or the design of its appointment. Shall be guilty of profaning that which REPRESENTS the body and blood of the Lord.” John Wesley

“…the bread and wine in it are REPRESENTATIONS of the body and blood of Christ…” John Gill

Despite the Lord’s Words to the contrary they teach that the bread and wine of Communion only REPRESENT the Body and Blood of the Christ. He says, “this IS” and they say, “this REPRESENTS”. By what authority do they override the clear Words of our Savior? Certainly not within the context of what is supposed to be their “sole authority on matters of faith and doctrine” (Sola Scriptura) for it encourages no such interpretation.

James 5:14-15

It’s a small wonder that Martin Luther considered Saint James’ letter “an epistle of straw” … for it directly flies in the faith of Sole Fide (faith alone). If he had his way, he would have removed it from the Bible just as he did the Deuterocanonical Books in the Old Testament, and as he wanted to with several other New Testament books that countered his doctrines.

Basically, since they disregard John 20:23 and believe that authority was not given by the Lord to the Apostles alone but to all believers in all ages of the church, they reinterpret these verses to pretty much include everybody and their brother/sister in “the elders”. John Gill does exactly that in his commentary:

“By these may be meant, either the elder members of the church, men of gravity and soundness in the faith, persons of long standing and experience; who have the gift and grace of prayer, and are not only capable of performing that duty, but of giving a word of counsel and advice to the sick.”

In keeping with their misinterpretation of John 20:23 they completely ignore the forgiveness of sins in these verses.

Colossians 1:24

Simply put, you will never hear a sermon on this verse in any Evangelical Christian denomination…ever! Since they define “works” as “anything we do” they don’t believe in meritorious suffering. Thus to infer that there is anything “lacking”, as the Apostle says here, is heresy to them. The commentators bury this verse in useless non-sequiturs. In fact, in reading John Gill’s comments I’m reminded of the old saying, “If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullxxxx.”

James 2:17-26

These final verses are generally misinterpreted based solely on Luther’s false doctrines of Sola Scriptura and Sole Fide. Again, small wonder Luther wanted this book out of the Bible! Since to them salvation is achieved by “only believe” any notion that works is involved is anathema. Therefore, they put the cart before the horse and say that salvation occurs first and then works. Yet, that runs completely contrary to what the Apostle says here. Faith minus works is dead. To say that salvation comes first is to say that salvation results from DEAD faith. That’s complete nonsense and runs counter to everything taught in the New Testament on the subject.

Conclusion

Just as Protestants assume that if Catholics would only read the Bible they would no longer be Catholics, so do some, such as the author of this meme, also assume that if Protestants are only shown certain verses that they will immediately become Catholic. Neither case is true. There is no magic shortcut in evangelism. The Evangelical Christian must be shown from the Scripture why these interpretation of the Scriptures are wrong. Just flashing a meme at them won’t do the trick.