Eucharist scripture challenge

[Brian_Culliton]

sure. But obviously their is the passion/Calvary .
This is the one and last sacrifice that the Eucharist is and continues to be.
This is the one sacrifice we show our faith in by participating in the Eucharist while offering praise and thanks. Rememberance/thanks/ praise / sacrifice of lamb / eating lamb and unleavened bread and drinking wine were parts of the Passover/firstfruits.
The Eucharist is rememberance/thanks praise / Jesus/lamb of eucharistic bread and wine.

The Eucharist is not that sacrifice, it’s the remembrance of that sacrifice. “Do this in remembrance of Me.” Other than that nice post, Panevino!

 

[Ecoclimber]

It is within the power of all, therefore, in every Church, who may wish to see the truth, to contemplate clearly the tradition of the apostles manifested throughout the whole world; and we are in a position to reckon up those who were by the apostles instituted bishops in the Churches, and [to demonstrate] the succession of these men to our own times; those who neither taught nor knew of anything like what these heretics] rave about. For if the apostles had known hidden mysteries, which they were in the habit of imparting to “the perfect” apart and privily from the rest, they would have delivered them especially to those to whom they were also committing the Churches themselves. For they were desirous that these men should be very perfect and blameless in all things, whom also they were leaving behind as their successors, delivering up their own place of government to these men; which men, if they discharged their functions honestly, would be a great boon [to the Church], but if they should fall away, the direst calamity.

Since therefore we have such proofs, it is not necessary to seek the truth among others which it is easy to obtain from the Church; since the apostles, like a rich man [depositing his money] in a bank, lodged in her hands most copiously all things pertaining to the truth: so that every man, whosoever will, can draw from her the water of life.For she is the entrance to life; all others are thieves and robbers. On this account are we bound to avoid them, but to make choice of the thing pertaining to the Church with the utmost diligence, and to lay hold of the tradition of the truth.
For how stands the case? Suppose there arise a dispute relative to some important question among us, should we not have recourse to the most ancient Churches with which the apostles held constant intercourse, and learn from them what is certain and clear in regard to the present question? For how should it be if the apostles themselves had not left us writings? Would it not be necessary, [in that case,] to follow the course of the tradition which they handed down to those to whom they did commit the Churches?

Heretics follow neither tradition nor scriptures. Such was the horror which the apostles and their disciples had against holding even verbal communication with any corrupters of the truth; as Paul also says, “A man that is an heretic, after the first and second admonition, reject; knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself

As I have already observed, the Church, having received this preaching and this faith, although scattered throughout the whole world, yet, as if occupying but one house, carefully preserves it…the Catholic Church possesses one and the same faith throughout the whole world, Irenaeus

Justin Marty
And this food is called among us Εὐχαριστία [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have **we been taught **that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh. For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, “This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body;” and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, “This is My blood;” and gave it to them alone. Which the wicked devils have imitated in the mysteries of Mithras, commanding the same thing to be done. For, that bread and a cup of water are placed with certain incantations in the mystic rites of one who is being initiated, you either know or can learn.

As mentioned previously, In support of this perpetual sacrifice, the word translated “memorial” or “remembrance” used at the Last Supper (Luke 22:19; 1 Cor.11:24-25) is the Greek word “anamnesis.” It is also used in the Septuagint in connection with sacrifice (Lev.24:7). “Anamnesis” translates the Hebrew word “azkarah,” which is used seven times in the OT in reference to sacrifice (Lev.2:2,9,16; 5:12; 6:15; Num. 5:26). It is also significant that “anamnesis” is only used four times in the NT, the fourth time appearing in Hebrews 10:3 also in reference to a memorial sacrifice. Hence, Jesus’ use of “anamnesis” in Luke 22:19 specifies the sacrificial dimension of the Eucharist. In effect, Jesus would be saying, “Whenever you do this, do it as a memorial sacrifice of me.” The use of “anamnesis” in Luke 22:19 is even more significant in denoting sacrifice since there was another Greek word Luke could have used for a non-sacrificial memorial (“mnemosunon,” cf., Mt.26: 13; Mk.14:9; Acts 10:4).

 

[Tomb54]

The Eucharist is not that sacrifice, it’s the remembrance of that sacrifice. “Do this in remembrance of Me.” Other than that nice post, Panevino!

1 Corinthians
27Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
28But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
29For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.

so can you tell me how a symbol or a remembrance only can senf you to hell? How can a symbol only make you guilty? Sounds kind of serious for only a symbol don’t you think? So lets see you say it is a symbol but the verse above says if you do not discern the Body of the Lord you are damned not sure I would take the view it is not His Body in my opinion.
I think you need to look deeper into the original word for this remembrance and not the translated word – look to see how the Jews viewed this word in the passover meal because that is the other time this word was used the same way.

 

[Brian_Culliton]

1 Corinthians
27Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
28But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
29For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.

so can you tell me how a symbol or a remembrance only can senf you to hell? How can a symbol only make you guilty? Sounds kind of serious for only a symbol don’t you think? So lets see you say it is a symbol but the verse above says if you do not discern the Body of the Lord you are damned not sure I would take the view it is not His Body in my opinion.
I think you need to look deeper into the original word for this remembrance and not the translated word – look to see how the Jews viewed this word in the passover meal because that is the other time this word was used the same way.

“Now, if ‘everything that entereth into the mouth goes into the belly and is cast out into the drought,’ even the meat which has been sanctified through the word of God and prayer, in accordance with the fact that it is material, goes into the belly and is cast out into the draught, but in respect of the prayer which comes upon it, according to the proportion of the faith, becomes a benefit and is a means of clear vision to the mind which looks to that which is beneficial, and it is not the material of the bread but the word which is said over it which is of advantage to him who eats it not unworthily of the Lord. And these things indeed are said of the typical and symbolical body. But many things might be said about the Word Himself who became flesh, and true meat of which he that eateth shall assuredly live for ever, no worthless person being able to eat it; for if it were possible for one who continues worthless to eat of Him who became flesh. who was the Word and the living bread, it would not have been written, that ‘every one who eats of this bread shall live for ever.’” (Origen)

 

[panevino]

hi Brian,
back to Irenaeus for a second.

Originally Posted by Brian Culliton View Post
I disagree with your interpretation of Irenaeus (with all due respect). Take a closer look at the context of what you are quoting.

“For it behooves us to make an oblation to God, and in all things to be found grateful to God our Maker, in a pure mind, and in faith without hypocrisy, in well-grounded hope, in fervent love, offering the first-fruits of His own created things. And the Church alone offers this pure oblation to the Creator, offering to Him, with giving of thanks, [the things taken] from His creation.” (4:18:4)

Do you see what he is saying? “… Offering the first-fruits of His own created things.” Is Jesus a created thing?

…

i then posted below from Irenaeus

. Originally Posted by Panevino
AH4:17:5-6
Again, giving directions to His disciples** to offer to God the first- fruits(5) of His own, created things**–not as if He stood in need of them, but that they might be themselves neither unfruitful nor ungrateful–He took that created thing, bread, and gave thanks, and said, “This is My body.”(6) And the cup likewise, which is part of that creation to which we belong, He confessed to be His blood, and taught the new oblation of the new covenant; which the Church receiving from the apostles, offers to God throughout all the world, to Him who gives us as the means of subsistence the first-fruits of His own gifts in the New Testament, concerning which Malachi, among the twelve prophets, thus spoke beforehand: “I have no pleasure in you, saith the LORD Omnipotent, and I will not accept sacrifice at your hands. For from the rising of the sun, unto the going down [of the same], My name is glorified among the Gentiles, and in every place incense is offered to My name, and a pure sacrifice; for great is My name among the Gentiles, saith the LORD Omnipotent;”(7)–indicating in the plainest manner, by these words, that the former people [the Jews] shall indeed cease to make offerings to God, but that in every place sacrifice shall be offered to Him, and that a pure one; and His name is glorified among the Gentiles.(8)
6. But what other name is there which is glorified among the Gentiles than that of our Lord, by whom the Father is glorified, and man also?And because it is [the name] of His own Son, who was made man by Him, He calls it His own…

AH3:19:3

Wherefore also the Lord Himself gave us a sign, in the depth below, and in the height above, which man did not ask for, because he never expected that a virgin could conceive, or that it was possible that one remaining a virgin could bring forth a son, and that what was thus born should be" God with us," and descend to those things which are of the earth beneath, seeking the sheep which had perished, which was indeed His own peculiar handiwork, and ascend to the height above, offering and commending to His Father that human nature (hominem) which had been found, **making in His own person the first-fruits** of the resurrection of man; that, as the Head rose from the dead, so also the remaining pan of the body--[namely, the body] of every man who is found in life--when the time is fulfilled of that condemnation which existed by reason of disobedience, may arise

it seems to me Irenaeus is saying that the human flesh of man was made by God,
and this “manhood” of jesus was the firstfruits of believers.
this being reflected by Irenaeus when the eucharist/firstfruits is offered as the body/blood of jesus.

jesus is a firstfruits (as recorded by Paul in 1cor15 and by Irenaeus AH3:19:3)
the most important first-fruits for the salvation of men.
so this ‘first fruits’ is offered according to Irenaeus via the created things of bread and wine,
obviously bread and wine alone are not the “firstfruits”

i also posted prior to above

1Cor15:20 KJV - But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. 21For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. 22For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive

 

[panevino]

cont’d from previous post

i also posted the following

The following is interesting (ie: lamb/firstfruits/bread/offering)

Lev 23:9 kjv

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, 10Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye be come into the land which I give unto you, and shall reap the harvest thereof, then ye shall bring a sheaf of the firstfruits of your harvest unto the priest: 11And he shall wave the sheaf before the LORD, to be accepted for you: on the morrow after the sabbath the priest shall wave it. 12**And ye shall offer that day when ye wave the sheaf an he lamb without blemish **of the first year for a burnt offering unto the LORD. 13And the meat offering thereof shall be two tenth deals of fine flour mingled with oil, an offering made by fire unto the LORD for a sweet savour: and the drink offering thereof shall be of wine, the fourth part of an hin. 14And ye shall eat neither bread, nor parched corn, nor green ears, until the selfsame day that ye have brought an offering unto your God: it shall be a statute for ever throughout your generations in all your dwellings.

you also wrote

Irenaeus continues,

“When, therefore, the mingled cup and the manufactured bread receives the Word of God, and the Eucharist of the blood and the body of Christ is made, from which things the substance of our flesh is increased and supported, how can they affirm that the flesh is incapable of receiving the gift of God, which is life eternal, which [flesh] is nourished from the body and blood of the Lord, and is a member of Him?”

The fact that Irenaeus never separates out that which is of the creation, i.e. the bread and cup, from the Eucharist is further evidence that he believed the elements are sanctified, not changed materially. This also clarifies what he meant when he said the Eucharist consists of two realities, earthly and heavenly.

i responded

i think this relates more to his dispute with the group who disagree in the ability of divine to dwell with matter/flesh.

you also wrote

“For when the Greeks, having arrested the slaves of Christian catechumens, then used force against them, in order to learn from them some secret thing [practised] among Christians, these slaves, having nothing to say that would meet the wishes of their tormentors, except that they had heard from their masters that the divine communion was the body and blood of Christ, and imagining that it was actually flesh and blood, gave their inquisitors answer to that effect. Then these latter, assuming such to be the case with regard to the practices of Christians, gave information regarding it to other Greeks, and sought to compel the martyrs Sanctus and Blandina to confess, under the influence of torture, [that the allegation was correct]. To these men Blandina replied very admirably in these words: ‘How should those persons endure such [accusations], who, for the sake of the practice [of piety], did not avail themselves even of the flesh that was permitted [them to eat]?’” (Irenaeus, Fragment 13)

sure, there is no piece of steak. the body and blood are mysteriously present in the bread and wine.

i also note the follwoing in James 1:18
Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.
I’ve understood the eucharist to be our participation in christs sacrifice in some mysterious way, offering oursleves through christs sacrifice, along with our thanksgiving/praise. and being able to do this by being part of the royal priesthood…1Peter2:4

got to go

 

[bona_fides_1]

The Eucharist is not that sacrifice, it’s the remembrance of that sacrifice. “Do this in remembrance of Me.” Other than that nice post, Panevino!

Billions of Catholics who have participate in the Eucharistic celebration for 2,000 years find your statement laughable and absurd. In fact no Christian until the 16th century would permit you in their company for making this statement. You have no concept of historical Christianity and what was and still is actually believed. You are just spewing nonsensical historical revisionism in here.

You might go back and do an etymology review on the underlying Hebrew in the word that means “remembrance” to get a clue as to what it really means.

 

[Tomb54]

“Now, if ‘everything that entereth into the mouth goes into the belly and is cast out into the drought,’ even the meat which has been sanctified through the word of God and prayer, in accordance with the fact that it is material, goes into the belly and is cast out into the draught, but in respect of the prayer which comes upon it, according to the proportion of the faith, becomes a benefit and is a means of clear vision to the mind which looks to that which is beneficial, and it is not the material of the bread but the word which is said over it which is of advantage to him who eats it not unworthily of the Lord. And these things indeed are said of the typical and symbolical body. But many things might be said about the Word Himself who became flesh, and true meat of which he that eateth shall assuredly live for ever, no worthless person being able to eat it; for if it were possible for one who continues worthless to eat of Him who became flesh. who was the Word and the living bread, it would not have been written, that ‘every one who eats of this bread shall live for ever.’” (Origen)

[Christ] has declared the cup, a part of creation, to be his own Blood, from which he causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of creation, he has established as his own Body, from which he gives increase to our bodies."

Source: St. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies, 180 A.D.:

“So too the the sacred meaning of the Pasch lies essentially in the fact, laid down in Exodus, that the lamb - slain as a type of Christ - should be eaten in one single home. God says the words: ‘In one house shall it be eaten, ye shall not cast its flesh outside.’ The flesh of Christ and the Lord’s sacred body cannot be cast outside, nor have believers any other home but the one Church.”,

-“The Unity of the Catholic Church”. Ch.8, circa 249-258 A.D
St. Cyprian of Carthage

“The priest who imitates that which Christ did, truly takes the place of Christ, and offers there in the Church a true and perfect sacrifice to God the Father.”,

Source: St. Cyprian wrote to the Ephesians circa 258 A.D:,

 

[panevino]

thought i’d also throw this in
1 cor 5:6 Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump? 7Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: 8Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

 

[genesiusj]

What happened? The discussion ended.

I am searching for some other ECF quotes.

Thanks and God Bless,
Genesius - “I have a passion for helping others to learn.”
“I will walk by faith and not by sight.” 2 Corinthians 5:7

“No one heals himself by wounding another.” St. Ambrose 340-397 AD