P
- Status
A
Anna_Scott
Guest
Luvtosew;8999482:
QUOTE]
This is actually Biblical.
Acts 2…44 Now all who believed were together, and had all things in common, 45 and sold their possessions and goods, and divided them among all, as anyone had need.
46 So continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they ate their food with gladness and simplicity of heart, 47 praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to the church[h] daily those who were being saved.
Daily Eucharist is ideal; but Catholics do not believe Christ is sacrificed daily or repeatedly.
Anna
E
Eric_Hilbert
Guest
The topic please…
K
KathleenGee
Guest
Luvtosew,
I recall your posts on another thread started by Christ Bearer.
The daily sacrifice is done to atone for daily sin.
Rev 22 is imagery of heaven united with the sacraments of baptism, the life-giving water flowing from God and the sacrificial Lamb, Christ, now ascended and glorified with the Father in heaven. The Eucharist is the Tree of Life on the other side of the river.
The Tree of Life was the only fruit that was named by God among all the edible fruits. But Adam and Eve chose the fruit of Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, of which they were warned that if they ate of it, they would die.
After the Fall, Adam and Eve were now forbidden to eat of the Tree of Life to remedy themselves, to heal themselves from death. Ch 3 of Genesis ends with, ‘When he expelled the man, he settled him east of the garden of Eden; and he stationed the cherubim and the fiery revolving sword, to guard the way to the tree of life’.
The Tree of Life was revealed with Christ, He the vine, we the branches, we receive our life and our regeneration and restoration with Him in His Word and in HIs Body and Blood…which we obtain at the Mass.
The Mass is mystical. The Mass is our initial encounter with the Divine.The Mass is the first step into heaven because the Ascended Christ, the Lamb of God, stands at the Mercy Seat with the Father, His marks of crucifixion remaining, but He triumphant, defeating death and sin, and is outside of time, but present in Being to past, present and future.
Ezekiel 47:12 speaks mystically of fruit trees along the river, whose leaves do not fade, nor fruit fail, every month bearing fresh fruit, watered by the flow from the sanctuary, their fruit serving for food, and the leaves for medicine.
It is interesting to note that for the human to enter into the divine, the way to do so is eating fruit. But which fruit…that of bad seed or the fruit of Jesus Christ and all His perfections (the virtues)…
Bible services and the Mass are very different concepts of worship. The understanding of the Mass actually has 3 levels. I doubt very much if such fundamentalist leaders even have much a concept of the Mass to denigrate it as they do. They don’t know what the Mass really is. So it is best they focus instead on bringing Christ to others through the Word, but let go of what they do not understand about our faith.
I recall your posts on another thread started by Christ Bearer.
The daily sacrifice is done to atone for daily sin.
Rev 22 is imagery of heaven united with the sacraments of baptism, the life-giving water flowing from God and the sacrificial Lamb, Christ, now ascended and glorified with the Father in heaven. The Eucharist is the Tree of Life on the other side of the river.
The Tree of Life was the only fruit that was named by God among all the edible fruits. But Adam and Eve chose the fruit of Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, of which they were warned that if they ate of it, they would die.
After the Fall, Adam and Eve were now forbidden to eat of the Tree of Life to remedy themselves, to heal themselves from death. Ch 3 of Genesis ends with, ‘When he expelled the man, he settled him east of the garden of Eden; and he stationed the cherubim and the fiery revolving sword, to guard the way to the tree of life’.
The Tree of Life was revealed with Christ, He the vine, we the branches, we receive our life and our regeneration and restoration with Him in His Word and in HIs Body and Blood…which we obtain at the Mass.
The Mass is mystical. The Mass is our initial encounter with the Divine.The Mass is the first step into heaven because the Ascended Christ, the Lamb of God, stands at the Mercy Seat with the Father, His marks of crucifixion remaining, but He triumphant, defeating death and sin, and is outside of time, but present in Being to past, present and future.
Ezekiel 47:12 speaks mystically of fruit trees along the river, whose leaves do not fade, nor fruit fail, every month bearing fresh fruit, watered by the flow from the sanctuary, their fruit serving for food, and the leaves for medicine.
It is interesting to note that for the human to enter into the divine, the way to do so is eating fruit. But which fruit…that of bad seed or the fruit of Jesus Christ and all His perfections (the virtues)…
Bible services and the Mass are very different concepts of worship. The understanding of the Mass actually has 3 levels. I doubt very much if such fundamentalist leaders even have much a concept of the Mass to denigrate it as they do. They don’t know what the Mass really is. So it is best they focus instead on bringing Christ to others through the Word, but let go of what they do not understand about our faith.
O
onemangang
Guest
The root of Revelation is in Jewish Worship. John is writing how this is completed in the Mass, but that is not ALL the book of Revelation is about
John is writing about the, “BOTH” “AND” in regards to the actual events to take place** and Jewish Worship made Complete in Christ**.
The whole read the Lambs Supper by Dr Scott Hahn bit, is well and good, but you would only be getting one dimension of the multifaceted book of Revelation.
John was also speaking of real events. I will give an overview of some of the events that have transpired, but it will take a bit of time to compile
I will do an overview of the Mass, Revelation, and Jewish Liturgy, but it will take some time as well
Revelation and the Mass is not a new Catholic invention, but very old, dating all the way back to John. You will see how John used a very known Jewish Liturgy to show how it has been made complete through Christ in the New Covenant!
Peace and Love in Christ
N
Nine_Two
Guest
You’re right. The Early Church had significantly more. Both epistles from other Bishops, and added books in the OT.
O
onemangang
Guest
Many books were circulated throughout the universal (catholic) Church, before 393 A.D.
Here are a few that were widely circulated and often disputed. I think that you may be surprized not only what books were “in” but what books were often left “out”
Shepherd of Hermas
The Shepherd of Hermas (Greek: Ποιμήν του Ερμά; Hebrew: רועה הרמס; sometimes just called The Shepherd) is a Christian literary work of the 1st or 2nd century, considered a valuable book by many Christians, and considered canonical scripture by some of the early Church fathers such as Irenaeus. The Shepherd had great authority in the 2nd and 3rd centuries. Along with the Apocrypha, it was bound with New Testament in the Codex Sinaiticus, and it was listed between the Acts of the Apostles and the Acts of Paul in the stichometrical list of the Codex Claromontanus.
Didache
The Didache ( /ˈdɪdəkiː/; Koine Greek: Διδαχή) or The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles (Didachē means “Teaching”) is a brief early Christian treatise, dated by most scholars to the late first or early 2nd century. The first line of this treatise is “Teaching of the Lord to the Gentiles (or Nations) by the Twelve Apostles” (Διδαχὴ κυρίου διὰ τῶν δώδεκα ἀποστόλων τοῖς ἔθνεσιν).
The text, parts of which constitute the oldest surviving written catechism, has three main sections dealing with Christian ethics, rituals such as baptism and Eucharist, and Church organization. It is considered the first example of the genre of the Church Orders.
The work was considered by some of the Church Fathers as part of the New Testament
Epistle of Barnabas
The Epistle of Barnabas (Greek: Επιστολή Βαρνάβα, Hebrew: איגרת בארנבס) is a Greek epistle containing twenty-one chapters, preserved complete in the 4th century Codex Sinaiticus where it appears at the end of the New Testament. It is traditionally ascribed to Barnabas who is mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles, though some ascribe it to another Apostolic Father of the same name, a “Barnabas of Alexandria”, or simply attribute it to an unknown early Christian teacher. A form of the Epistle 850 lines long is noted in the Latin list of canonical works in the 6th century Codex Claromontanus. It is not to be confused with the Gospel of Barnabas.
Toward the end of the 2nd century Clement of Alexandria cites the Epistle. It is also appealed to by Origen of Alexandria. Eusebius, the first major church historian, however, recorded objection to it, see Antilegomena, and ultimately the epistle disappeared from the appendix to the New Testament, or rather the appendix disappeared with the epistle. In the West the epistle never enjoyed canonical authority (though it stands beside the Epistle of James in the Latin manuscripts). In the East, the Stichometry of Nicephorus, the list appended by the 9th century Patriarch of Jerusalem to his Chronography, lists the Epistle of Barnabas in a secondary list, of books that are antilegomena— “disputed”— along with the Revelation of John, the Revelation of Peter and the Gospel of the Hebrews.
Epistles of Clement
The First Epistle of Clement, (literally, Clement to Corinth; Greek, Κλήμεντος πρὸς Κορινθίους, Klēmentos pros Korinthious) is a letter addressed to the Christians in the city of Corinth. The letter dates from the late 1st or early 2nd century, and ranks with Didache as one of the earliest — if not the earliest — of extant Christian documents outside the canonical New Testament. As the name indicates, also a Second Epistle of Clement is known, but this is a later work, not by the same author. In the case of the first epistle the scholarly consensus is overwhelmingly in favour of its authenticity, whereas by contrast it is widely accepted that the second epistle is not to be attributed to Clement. Many scholars believe 1 Clement was written around the same time as the Book of Revelation, c. 95-97 AD. Neither 1 nor 2 Clement was accepted in the canonical New Testament, but they are part of the Apostolic Fathers collection.
The Second Epistle of Clement, (literally, Clement to Corinth; Greek, Κλήμεντος πρὸς Κορινθίους, Klēmentos pros Korinthious) often referred to as 2 Clement, is an early Christian writing. 2 Clement was not accepted in the canonical New Testament, but was included in the Apostolic Fathers collection.
2 Clement was traditionally believed to have been epistle to the Christian Church in Corinth written by Clement of Rome sometime in the late 1st century. However, 4th-century bishop Eusebius, in his historical work, says Clement “has left us one recognized epistle”, so doubts about this work belonging to Clement of Rome are not new. Modern scholars believe that Second Clement is actually a sermon written around 140–160 CE by an anonymous author – one who was neither the author of 1 Clement nor Clement of Rome. Nonetheless, scholars still generally refer to the work by its traditional name “Second Clement”.
O
onemangang
Guest
Apocalypse of Peter
Apocalypse of Peter or Revelation of Peter is an example of a simple, popular early Christian text of the 2nd century; it is an example of Apocalyptic literature with Hellenistic overtones. The text is extant in two incomplete versions of a lost Greek original, one Koine Greek, and an Ethiopic version, which diverge considerably
Before that, the work had been known only through copious quotes in early Christian writings. In addition, some common lost source had been necessary to account for closely parallel passages in such apocalyptic literature as the (Christian) Apocalypse of Esdras, the Vision of Paul, and the Passion of Saint Perpetua.
The intellectually simple Apocalypse of Peter, with its Hellenistic Greek overtones, belongs to the same genre as the Clementine literature that was popular in Alexandria. Like the Clementine literature, the Apocalypse of Peter was written for a popular audience and had a wide readership. The Muratorian fragment, the earliest existing list of canonic sacred writings of the New Testament, which is assigned on internal evidence to the last quarter of the 2nd century (i.e., A.D. 175-200), gives a list of works read in the Christian churches that is similar to the modern accepted canon; however, it also includes the Apocalypse of Peter. The Muratorian fragment states: “the Apocalypses also of John and Peter only do we receive, which some among us would not have read in church.” The Muratorian fragment is ambiguous whether both books of Revelations were meant as not received, or just Peter’s. (It is interesting that the existence of other Apocalypses is implied, for several early apocryphal ones are known: see Apocalyptic literature.) Scholar Oscar Skarsaune makes a case for dating the composition to the Bar Kochba revolt (132-136).
Gospel of the Hebrews
The Gospel of the Hebrews
Writing in the early second century, Papias of Hierapolis recorded in his Expositions of the Oracles of the Lord that the Apostle Matthew “compiled the logia in the “Hebrew language”, and each interpreted them as best he could.” According to this account, Matthew’s Gospel was first written in the “Hebrew language” (which at the time was the closely related Aramaic; see also Aramaic of Jesus) and subsequently translated into Koine Greek. Irenaeus noted that this translation occurred at the same time as Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome.
Origen wrote that Matthew’s Gospel “was published for believers of Jewish origin” and “was composed in Hebrew letters” (at the time both Hebrew and Aramaic were written in the same “square script”). Eusebius adds that the Apostle Bartholomew carried the Hebrew gospel to the Indies. Jerome (c. 347-420 A.D. provided the fullest account of this gospel, noting there was a copy in the library at Caesarea.
It is certain that this document was in circulation in the Early Church. Unlike hypothetical Gospels like Q et al., the Gospel of the Hebrews was known to the Church Fathers and was found in all the Catalogues of the Early Church.
Acts of Paul
The Acts of Paul is one of the major works and earliest pseudepigraphal (noncanonical) series from the New Testament also known as Apocryphal Acts, an approximate date given to the Acts of Paul is 160 A.D. The Acts were first mentioned by Tertullian. Tertullian found it heretical because it encouraged women to preach and baptize. The Acts were considered orthodox by Hippolytus, but were eventually regarded as heretical when the Manichaeans started using the texts. The author of the Acts of Paul is unknown and wrote out of respect for Paul, in Asia Minor. The author does not show any dependency on the canonical Acts, but uses oral traditions of Paul’s missionary work.
The discovery of a Coptic version of the text, demonstrated that the text was composed of
the Acts of Paul and Thecla
the Epistle of the Corinthians to Paul
the Third Epistle to the Corinthians
the Martyrdom of Paul - his death at the hand of Nero
Gospel of James
The Gospel of James, also known as the Infancy Gospel of James or the Protoevangelium of James, is an apocryphal Gospel probably written about A.D. 145, which expands backward in time the infancy stories contained the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, and presents a narrative concerning the birth and upbringing of Mary herself. It is the oldest source to assert the virginity of Mary not only prior to but during (and after) the birth of Jesus. The ancient manuscripts that preserve the book have different titles, including “The Birth of Mary”, “The Story of the Birth of Saint Mary, Mother of God,” and "The Birth of Mary; The Revelation of James.
Some indication of the popularity of the Infancy Gospel of James may be drawn from the fact that about one hundred and thirty Greek manuscripts containing it have survived. The Gospel of James was translated into Syriac, Ethiopic, Coptic, Georgian, Old Slavonic, Armenian, Arabic, Irish and Latin. Though no early Latin versions are known, it was relegated to the apocrypha in the Gelasian decretal, so it must have been known in the West by the fifth century. As with the canonical gospels, the vast majority of the manuscripts come from the 10th century or later. The earliest known manuscript of the text, a papyrus dating to the third or early 4th century.
Some books that we have in our New Testament today were highly disputed and often not circulated throughout the universal (catholic) Church pre 393 A.D. They are as follows
Epistle to the Hebrews
Epistle of James
2nd Epistle of John
3rd Epistle of John
2nd Epistle of Peter
Epistle of Jude
Revelation/Apocalypse
Apocalypse of Peter or Revelation of Peter is an example of a simple, popular early Christian text of the 2nd century; it is an example of Apocalyptic literature with Hellenistic overtones. The text is extant in two incomplete versions of a lost Greek original, one Koine Greek, and an Ethiopic version, which diverge considerably
Before that, the work had been known only through copious quotes in early Christian writings. In addition, some common lost source had been necessary to account for closely parallel passages in such apocalyptic literature as the (Christian) Apocalypse of Esdras, the Vision of Paul, and the Passion of Saint Perpetua.
The intellectually simple Apocalypse of Peter, with its Hellenistic Greek overtones, belongs to the same genre as the Clementine literature that was popular in Alexandria. Like the Clementine literature, the Apocalypse of Peter was written for a popular audience and had a wide readership. The Muratorian fragment, the earliest existing list of canonic sacred writings of the New Testament, which is assigned on internal evidence to the last quarter of the 2nd century (i.e., A.D. 175-200), gives a list of works read in the Christian churches that is similar to the modern accepted canon; however, it also includes the Apocalypse of Peter. The Muratorian fragment states: “the Apocalypses also of John and Peter only do we receive, which some among us would not have read in church.” The Muratorian fragment is ambiguous whether both books of Revelations were meant as not received, or just Peter’s. (It is interesting that the existence of other Apocalypses is implied, for several early apocryphal ones are known: see Apocalyptic literature.) Scholar Oscar Skarsaune makes a case for dating the composition to the Bar Kochba revolt (132-136).
Gospel of the Hebrews
The Gospel of the Hebrews
Writing in the early second century, Papias of Hierapolis recorded in his Expositions of the Oracles of the Lord that the Apostle Matthew “compiled the logia in the “Hebrew language”, and each interpreted them as best he could.” According to this account, Matthew’s Gospel was first written in the “Hebrew language” (which at the time was the closely related Aramaic; see also Aramaic of Jesus) and subsequently translated into Koine Greek. Irenaeus noted that this translation occurred at the same time as Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome.
Origen wrote that Matthew’s Gospel “was published for believers of Jewish origin” and “was composed in Hebrew letters” (at the time both Hebrew and Aramaic were written in the same “square script”). Eusebius adds that the Apostle Bartholomew carried the Hebrew gospel to the Indies. Jerome (c. 347-420 A.D. provided the fullest account of this gospel, noting there was a copy in the library at Caesarea.
It is certain that this document was in circulation in the Early Church. Unlike hypothetical Gospels like Q et al., the Gospel of the Hebrews was known to the Church Fathers and was found in all the Catalogues of the Early Church.
Acts of Paul
The Acts of Paul is one of the major works and earliest pseudepigraphal (noncanonical) series from the New Testament also known as Apocryphal Acts, an approximate date given to the Acts of Paul is 160 A.D. The Acts were first mentioned by Tertullian. Tertullian found it heretical because it encouraged women to preach and baptize. The Acts were considered orthodox by Hippolytus, but were eventually regarded as heretical when the Manichaeans started using the texts. The author of the Acts of Paul is unknown and wrote out of respect for Paul, in Asia Minor. The author does not show any dependency on the canonical Acts, but uses oral traditions of Paul’s missionary work.
The discovery of a Coptic version of the text, demonstrated that the text was composed of
the Acts of Paul and Thecla
the Epistle of the Corinthians to Paul
the Third Epistle to the Corinthians
the Martyrdom of Paul - his death at the hand of Nero
Gospel of James
The Gospel of James, also known as the Infancy Gospel of James or the Protoevangelium of James, is an apocryphal Gospel probably written about A.D. 145, which expands backward in time the infancy stories contained the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, and presents a narrative concerning the birth and upbringing of Mary herself. It is the oldest source to assert the virginity of Mary not only prior to but during (and after) the birth of Jesus. The ancient manuscripts that preserve the book have different titles, including “The Birth of Mary”, “The Story of the Birth of Saint Mary, Mother of God,” and "The Birth of Mary; The Revelation of James.
Some indication of the popularity of the Infancy Gospel of James may be drawn from the fact that about one hundred and thirty Greek manuscripts containing it have survived. The Gospel of James was translated into Syriac, Ethiopic, Coptic, Georgian, Old Slavonic, Armenian, Arabic, Irish and Latin. Though no early Latin versions are known, it was relegated to the apocrypha in the Gelasian decretal, so it must have been known in the West by the fifth century. As with the canonical gospels, the vast majority of the manuscripts come from the 10th century or later. The earliest known manuscript of the text, a papyrus dating to the third or early 4th century.
Some books that we have in our New Testament today were highly disputed and often not circulated throughout the universal (catholic) Church pre 393 A.D. They are as follows
Epistle to the Hebrews
Epistle of James
2nd Epistle of John
3rd Epistle of John
2nd Epistle of Peter
Epistle of Jude
Revelation/Apocalypse
K
KathleenGee
Guest
Yes…these posts showing the many other books were discerned and not in according with the movement of the Holy Spirit for public revelation of the universal church.
As I understood it, only the Gospel of St. Thomas the Apostle was deemed inspired, but only for private revelation…just as approved Marian apparitions are. I have never come across this gospel…it is out there…
Is this used by Nestorian Christians??? Those approximating India???
As I understood it, only the Gospel of St. Thomas the Apostle was deemed inspired, but only for private revelation…just as approved Marian apparitions are. I have never come across this gospel…it is out there…
Is this used by Nestorian Christians??? Those approximating India???
- Status