Loss of Rewards

[Julius_Caesar]

We don’t need a priest for the remembrance, for holding up last check

What did Jude say about statements like this?

 

[lanman87]

What did Jude say about statements like this?

Nothing, we are not Korah’s rebellion. There is no “Moses” or “Levitical Priest” to rebel against. Those offices are gone. Now we have the Gospel of Christ which changed the need for an intermediary with God to having direct access to the one Mediator, Jesus Christ.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Nothing, we are not Korah’s rebellion.

You go against Christ’s ministerial priesthood and His Sacrifice being made present and you are not Korah’s rebellion.

 

[lanman87]

You go against Christ’s ministerial priesthood

Which was not prescribed by the Apostles. But developed later as new doctrines emerged from the minds of theologians and Bishops/Elders/Presbyters.

So yes, we say that elders/presbyters/bishops do not hold the duties of a priest to intermediate or offer sacrifices between God and Man. We have direct access to the sacrifice of Christ with a direct relationship ie “Knowing Christ” in a personal manner.

 

[hope]

Which was not prescribed by the Apostles. But developed later as new doctrines emerged from the minds of theologians and Bishops/Elders/Presbyters.

It was NOT prescribed by the Apostles. it was instituted by Christ. Christ ordained the Apostles to be the fulfillment of the priesthood of the Old Testament. A fact denied later by those who wanted to create their own church. They close their eyes to Jesus giving us the most precious gift that of His onw Body and Blood. They explain away Jesus’ words

Matthew Chapter 16

And I also say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.
Matthew Chapter 16

I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven
John Chapter 6

Jesus therefore said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, ye have not life in yourselves.
John Chapter 6

He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life: and I will raise him up at the last day.
John Chapter 6

For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed
While they were eating, Jesus took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and giving it to his disciples said, “Take and eat; this is my body.”

 

[hope]

AS I disagree with you
Your premise does not explain the many many parables Jesus told .
The Parable of the Ten Virgins
The Unfaithfully Servant
The Unforgiving Servant
Parable of the Tenants
The judgement of the Nations when the sheep is separated from the Goats.
You believe it is better but it lacks what Christ said.
The original passover only saved the first born. The Passover of Jesus allows us to be saved. Jesus is the High Priest so again your position fails.

 

[mcq72]

Your premise does not explain the many many parables Jesus told .

Not sure which premise you mean:

better fulfillment, in Christ?
end to blood shedding for sin?
forever look back to Calvary in remembrance and thanksgiving?

You believe it is better

Not sure what you mean…if anything I am saying NT is better, even a bit more than you (CC)…are you saying I have gone too far in opining the efficacy of NT?

The original passover only saved the first born

Yes and no. Even non Christian Jews however see it as a setting free from Egyptian slavery for all captive Jews…it is not just a remembrance of the 10 th plague deliverance …it is as we both agree, a beautiful foreshadow of Calvary…and it is what many suppose was the setting for the Last Supper, and if it was the one Jewish sacrifice where the priest played the least role (or lay person the most), why would the Lord revert to ministerial distinctions as rightfully with other sacrifices?

Jesus is the High Priest

Yes, did not suggest otherwise. Yet others suggest a continuance of said office in representative yet jurisdictional fashion.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Which was not prescribed by the Apostles

It was prescribed by He who chose the Apostles.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

We have direct access to the sacrifice of Christ with a direct relationship ie “Knowing Christ” in a personal manner.

How can you be said to know Him when you try to take away from His clear meaning?

For 1500 years the Church had no problem taking the Sacrifice of Christ and His Real Presence. Makes you wonder who was preaching a different Gospel.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

forever look back to Calvary in remembrance and thanksgiving?

Calvary is made present in the Eucharist. We receive His Body and Blood.

why would the Lord revert to ministerial distinctions as rightfully with other sacrifices?

Jesus did this when He said, “Do this in My Memorial.” Are you saying you know better than Jesus?

 

[mcq72]

What did Jude say about statements like this?

Actually he says nothing of this later development of only a priest presiding over the eucharist, and that as a sacrificial event.

If anything he exhorts of being true and steadfast to the grace of God. Grace, a word only a few of us have highlighted here lately.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Actually he says nothing of this later development of only a priest presiding over the eucharist,

He specifically says that the false teachers follow Korah’s error and are a blemish on their love feasts. Korah went against Moses and Aaron, God’s chosen leaders, like those in the Reformation did. Go figure.

If anything he exhorts of being true and steadfast to the grace of God

A grace obtained through His Body and Blood.

 

[mcq72]

Calvary is present in the Eucharist. That is how it was understood.

Well for sure, but just how that is understood today and in history is something else.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

but just how that is understood today and in history is something else.

Your understanding came 1500 years later.

 

[mcq72]

Calvary is made present in the Eucharist. We receive His Body and Blood.

Yes, understand, many re- represent the Lord in sacrificial maner and pray it be acceptable to the Father at every consecration.

Jesus did this when He said, “Do this in My Memorial.” Are you saying you know better than Jesus?

No. I just miss the part where he differentiates disciples who can and can’t do this.

He also taught the apostles how to pray. Is the Our Father meant only for ministerial priests also?

Was He not His own priest, yesterday, today and foerever, pre Law and post Law? Indeed He has His ministers amongst the saints but not sacrificially speaking, needing only one High Priest.

 

[mcq72]

He specifically says that the false teachers follow Korah’s error and are a blemish on their love feasts.

Actually he says false teachers are also like Cain and Balaam, fornicators of Sodom, unbelievers in the desert ungodly, lascivious, filthy dreamers, anarchists, and indeed a spot at any church festivity. He certainly must have been talking about differences in Real Presence and who should preside over the breaking of the one loaf.?

I guess Cain and Balaam and even Korah/ Core were alright guys, they just had a doctrinal problem ? Of course not.

But are we, the Catholic, and Orthodox and Protestant, better for all our rules on Communion and intermixing, avoiding such ungodly “blemishes”/participants on our doctrinally correct communions? Is that what you are implying? Are we Cains, and Sodomites, Balaams, and unbelieving and wandering Jews, Cores, really?

The same presumption is made with Ignatius and those whom he says deny the bread is His body, forgetting his context of said deniers not believing in His bodily death or resurection period.

 

[mcq72]

A grace obtained through His Body and Blood.

And just how gracious is that obtaining? What is the new Law on that, or even old one? What veil lies between the seeker and the Giver? Who has the keys to the Tabernacle, and who is His monstrance?

 

[lanman87]

Telling Peter that he was the rock on which the church is built is not instituting a Priesthood. It says something about Peter, that he was going to be the one who would lay the foundation for Christianity. It says nothing of a priesthood or the successors to Peter and the apostles being priest. That is simply reading later developments into that scripture.

 

[mcq72]

Your understanding came 1500 years later.

Well, to play fair, we have another 700 years of development/refinement to go, to match the 1200 development years of transubstantiation?

 

[lanman87]

He specifically says that the false teachers follow Korah’s error and are a blemish on their love feasts. Korah went against Moses and Aaron, God’s chosen leaders, like those in the Reformation did. Go figure.

Jude says “They are ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord.” v4

Non-Catholic Christians hold the same (and sometimes even stricter) morality than Catholics and do not deny Jesus Christ as the only Sovereign and Lord. Jude was not talking about us.