The Eucharist is NOT the body of Christ

  • Thread starter Thread starter ajk19
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
You should not be confused. He is wrong about the incense. According to scripture, incense is used in the temple worship and in the very presence of God.
Yes, this is an outstanding example of the inability of people to understand scripture outside of the light of the Church. God goes to great lengths to tell his people not only how and when to use incense, but even how to make it, and how to make the containers for it. And, as you say, it is used not only on earth but also in heaven.

So obviously one cannot pluck a single verse out of Isaiah and claim that God abhors incense. That’s one of the best examples of the failure, the unworkability, of personal interpretation (and of cherry-picking verses to make a point).
 
It’s either a sacrifice and it is offered to the Father (in which case he would be offering his forgiveness to the Father? :confused:) or it’s not a sacrifice. And when I say sacrifice I really mean a sacrifice, not some figurative sense that English language added to it.

So, what is Jesus, Eternal High Priest in Heaven, sacrificing in heaven?

Or is he a High Priest in Heaven without make any sacrifices there?

What would be the point? How could he be a High Priest?
No more sacrifices need be made, he made one sacrifice for us all, ONE.
 
No more sacrifices need be made, he made one sacrifice for us all, ONE.
It’s not a re-sacrifice. The sacrifice offered at the Mass makes presence the sacrifice of the cross in an unbloody manner. The sacrifice of the cross 2,000 yrs ago, which was bloody which brought forth the death of Jesus Christ in order to destroy our death in sin is Once and For All.

The sacrifice at the Mass is a living sacrifice.

If you bother to read the article which Gandalf provided you would at least get an understanding. I will have to extract some quotes from the article to make the point.

Concerning the Sacrifice offered at the Mass

**The Catholic Church specifically says Christ does not die again—his death is once for all. It would be something else if the Church were to claim he does die again, but it doesn’t make that claim. Through his intercessory ministry in heaven and through the Mass, Jesus continues to offer himself to his Father as a living sacrifice, and he does so in what the Church specifically states is “an unbloody manner”—one that does not involve a new crucifixion. **

**The Old Testament predicted that Christ would offer a true sacrifice to God using the elements of bread and wine. In Genesis 14:18, *Melchizedek, the king of Salem *(that is, Jerusalem) and a priest, offered sacrifice under the form of bread and wine. Psalm 110 predicted Christ would be a priest “after the order of Melchizedek,” that is, offering a sacrifice in bread and wine. We must look for some sacrifice other than Calvary, since it was not under the form of bread and wine. The Mass meets that need.

Furthermore, “according to the order of Mel-chizedek” means *“in the manner of Melchizedek.” *(“Order” does not refer to a religious order, as there was no such thing in Old Testament days.) The only “manner” shown by Melchizedek was the use of bread and wine. A priest sacrifices the items offered—that is the main task of all priests, in all cultures, at all times—so the bread and wine must have been what Melchizedek sacrificed. **
 
**
Fundamentalists sometimes say Christ followed the example of Melchizedek at the Last Supper, but that it was a rite that was not to be continued. They undermine their case against the Mass in saying this, since such an admission shows, at least, that the Last Supper was truly sacrificial. The key, though, is that they overlook that Christ said, “Do this in remembrance of me” (Luke 22:19). Clearly, he wasn’t talking about a one-time thing.

“Do this in remembrance of me” can also be translated as “Offer this as my memorial sacrifice.” The *Greek term *for “remembrance” is anamnesis, and every time it occurs in the Protestant Bible (whether in the New Testament or the Greek Old Testament), it occurs in a sacrificial context. For example, it appears in the Greek translation of Numbers 10:10: “On the day of your gladness also, and at your appointed feasts, and at the beginnings of your months, you shall blow the trumpets over your burnt offerings and over the sacrifices of your peace offerings; they shall serve you for remembrance [anamnesis] before your God: I am the Lord your God.” Thus the Eucharist is a remembrance, a memorial offering we present to God to plead the merits of Christ on the cross.

Fundamentalists disbelieve claims about the antiquity of the Mass’s sacrificial aspects, even if they think the Mass, in the form of a mere commemorative meal, goes all the way back to the Last Supper. Many say the Mass as a sacrifice was not taught until the Middle Ages, alleging Innocent III was the first pope to teach the doctrine.

But he merely insisted on a doctrine that had been held from the first but was being publicly doubted in his time. He formalized, but did not invent, the notion that the Mass is a sacrifice. Jimmy Swaggart, for one, goes further back than do many Fundamentalists, claiming, “By the third century the idea of sacrifice had begun to intrude.” Still other Fundamentalists say Cyprian of Carthage, who died in 258, was the first to make noises about a sacrifice.

But Irenaeus, writing Against Heresies in the second century, beat out Cyprian when he wrote of the sacrificial nature of the Mass, and Irenaeus was beaten out by Clement of Rome, who wrote, in the first century, about those “from the episcopate who blamelessly and holily have offered its sacrifices” (Letter to the Corinthians 44:1).

Furthermore, Clement was beaten out by the Didache (a Syrian liturgical manual written around A.D. 70), which stated, “On the Lord’s Day . . . gather together, break bread and offer the Eucharist, after confessing your transgressions so that your sacrifice may be pure. Let no one who has a quarrel with his neighbor join you until he is reconciled, lest our sacrifice be defiled. For this is that which was proclaimed by the Lord: ‘In every place and time let there be offered to me a clean sacrifice. For I am a great king,’ says the Lord, ‘and my name is wonderful among the gentiles’ [cf. Mal. 1:11]” (14:1–3). **
 
JMJ_coder:
Hello,
If you were wrong on that (Resurrection), perhaps you are also wrong on this (Eucharist).
ajk19:
No…I don’t think so.
Let’s go back to the incense, shall we? Can you admit that you were wrong about that?

Revelation 8:1-4:
1When he opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven for about half an hour.
2And I saw the seven angels who stand before God, and to them were given seven trumpets.
3Another angel, who had a golden censer, came and stood at the altar. He was given much incense to offer, with the prayers of all the saints, on the golden altar before the throne. 4The smoke of the incense, together with the prayers of the saints, went up before God from the angel’s hand.
 
No more sacrifices need be made, he made one sacrifice for us all, ONE.
There is only one sacrifice, but you are not answering his question. He asked, and validly, if Jesus is the Eternal High Priest, then what is his offering?

For an Eternal High Priest must have a sacrifice. If the sacrifice is confined to the past as you say, then Jesus should have retired his priesthood on Calvary, but why is he still High Priest in heaven if it’s over and done with as you claim?

And why does the Lamb stand as if slain in Heaven?
 
Isn’t incense an abomination to God?

Isaiah 1:13
Bring no more vain oblations; incense is an abomination unto me; the new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting.
No need for name calling now, scripture says exactly what it says, and it says that incense is an abomination, bottom line.
The Apocalypse Of Saint John 8:1-5
And another angel came, and stood before the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given to him much incense, that he should offer of the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar, which is before the throne of God. And the smoke of the incense of the prayers of the saints ascended up before God from the hand of the angel. And the angel took the censer, and filled it with the fire of the altar, and cast it on the earth, and there were thunders and voices and lightnings, and a great earthquake.

So… even the angels use incense… how interesting.
 
i would agree. However you are going much farther in your claim to know what the relationship is between God-time and how that works.
Second Epistle Of Saint Peter 3:8
But of this one thing be not ignorant, my beloved, that one day with the Lord is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
 
Matthew 2:11
(NIV)

“On coming to the house, they saw the child with his mother Mary, and they bowed down and worshiped him. Then they opened their treasures and presented him with gifts of gold and of incense and of myrrh.”

The incense was accepted as a gift.
 
Matthew 2:11
(NIV)

“On coming to the house, they saw the child with his mother Mary, and they bowed down and worshiped him. Then they opened their treasures and presented him with gifts of gold and of incense and of myrrh.”

The incense was accepted as a gift.
(Those particular gifts were foreshadowings of his future sacrifice, I might add, as they were used not only in the Temple, but for Jewish burials.)
 
I’m not sure where I stand on that presently.
You are aware (as mariyka points out) that frankincense (meaning: “incense of the Franks”) was offered to Christ by the wise men - and accepted as a gift?
 
I’m not sure where I stand on that presently.
Have you read all the scripture passages showing that incense was used in Jewish temple worship - on God’s orders - and *is *used before the throne of God?
 
I’m not sure where I stand on that presently.
You do realize that we aren’t trying to be mean to you, right?

And I encourage you to pick up the books that I mentioned to you a bunch of posts back. As well as a few others. I would be glad to PM you with the titles, if you wish.
 
You do realize that we aren’t trying to be mean to you, right?

And I encourage you to pick up the books that I mentioned to you a bunch of posts back. As well as a few others. I would be glad to PM you with the titles, if you wish.
I concur. We aren’t trying to be mean. We are challenging you to understand the full context of the scriptures you’re quoting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top