Truly truly I say to you...

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nebuchadnezzar
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
From the bloody animal sacrifices of the old covenant…

"Now this is what you shall offer upon the altar: two lambs a year old day by day continually. One lamb you shall offer in the morning, and the other lamb you shall offer in the evening;
Exodus 29:38-39

"Besides the morning holocaust which you shall always offer. So shall you do every day of the seven days for the food of the fire, and for a most sweet odour to the Lord, which shall rise from the holocaust, and from the libations of each.
Numbers 28:23-24

“And he shall offer every day for a holocaust to the Lord, a lamb of the same year without blemish: he shall offer it always in the morning. And he shall offer the sacrifice for it morning by morning, the sixth part of an ephi: and the third part of a hin of oil to be mingled with the fine flour: a sacrifice to the Lord by ordinance continual and everlasting. He shall offer the lamb, and the sacrifice, and the oil morning by morning: an everlasting holocaust.”
Ezekiel 46:13-15

“And it was magnified even to the prince of the strength: and it took away from him the continual sacrifice, and cast down the place of his sanctuary. And strength was given him against the continual sacrifice, because of sins: and truth shall be cast down on the ground, and he shall do and shall prosper. And I heard one of the saints speaking, and one saint said to another I know not to whom, that was speaking: How long shall be the vision, concerning the continual sacrifice, and the sin of the desolation that is made: and the sanctuary, and the strength be trodden under foot?”
Daniel 8:11-13

“And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall defile the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the continual sacrifice: and they shall place there the abomination unto desolation.”
**Daniel 11:31 **

“And from the time when the continual sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination unto desolation shall be set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred ninety days.”
Daniel 12:11

Elucidation:

In all of the above verses, notice the recurring theme regarding sacrifice:
You shall always offer, offer every day, continual and everlasting, morning by morning, an everlasting holocaust, the continual sacrifice.
Holy Scripture clearly has said that sacrifice is to be offered in continuum every day, and will be everlasting for all time.
Yes, Christ did away with this as it clearly states in the Book of Hebrews, you are ignoring these verses completely:

**

Hebrews 10

11 And every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. 12 But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God, 13 from that time waiting till His enemies are made His footstool. 14 For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified.

**

Then answer me what does the above mean? Are you part of the old covenant? Holy Scripture clearly states Christ did away with the daily sacrifices, that is why the curtain in the temple broke, from top to bottom.

I have proved from Scripture already that no more daily sacrifice is needed.
 
A summary of what we have learned according to the words of Holy Scripture:
  1. Holy Scripture has shown us that a sacrificial offering to GOD for atonement of sin has been performed by mankind ever since the time of Abraham.
  2. Holy Scripture has said that those sacrifices are on a continuous daily basis, and will go on until the end of time.
  3. The bloody animal sacrifices of the Old Testament will be superceded by a new sacrifice with a clean oblation.
  4. Jesus Christ is both the High Priest and the sacrificial victim of the New Covenant.
  5. The New Testament sacrifice of Jesus Christ is an unbloody re-presentation of His bloody crucifixion on Calvary. He is the clean oblation of Malachi 1:11.
Yes, and as I stated it is one sacrifice, done at calvary 2000 years ago, no other daily is needed as I showed it states in Hebrews 10, which you ignore.
  1. Bread and wine will be transubstantiated into the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ, as He Himself did at the Last Supper. The authorized priest acting “In Personna Christi”, calls down the Word with his word. The bread and the wine thus become the Holy Eucharist by the power of the Holy Spirit.
No, here you are not telling the truth, Scripture does not teach transubstantiation. It is not there at all. This was taught centuries later.
  1. Jesus Christ taught that we have to eat His Body and drink His blood or we will have no life within us. He did not say we have to eat symbols of His Body and Blood. A symbol is not a reality, has no power, and cannot impose spiritual life.
Nothing to do with real presence in the communion table.
  1. Those who have refused to believe His words, have called Him a liar.
I believe His words, but after looking at how you forced number 6 to say it came from scripture, then you have to look at yourself.

Have you ever lied in your life? How many lies does it take to be a liar. I am a liar, but I am not lying about this.

I would be careful about claiming not to be a liar

**

Rev 21:8

But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”

**

Are you claiming that you never lied?
  1. Those who partake of the Holy Eucharist, and do not believe it truly is His Body and Blood, have brought judgment upon themselves.
I partake of the communion table, I believe in God, and His Son Jesus. You are passing judgment on me, it is not God’s judgement. You claim to know Him, but keep harping that He is being constantly sacrificed, ignoring Scripture. What does Hebrews 9 and 10 mean then?
Does your sect offer sacrifice every day? How about once a month? Twice a month? Yearly?
Christ’s sacrifice was enough for all time. The only sacrifice required is ourselves.
Does your sect have authorized priests to even offer sacrifice?
Yes, we are all priests.

**

1 Peter 2

4 Coming to Him as to a living stone, rejected indeed by men, but chosen by God and precious, 5 you also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.

**
Does your sect abide by the commands of Holy Scripture?
YES, It is the Word of God, and authoritative.
Does your sect offer sacrifice at all, seeing that Holy Scripture demands it as the supreme act of worship?
Yes, sacrifices of ourselves. And built on the living stone of Christ, as Peter himself called Him.

**

Hebrews 13 (Teaches what sacrifice is required as well)

15 Therefore by Him let us continually offer the sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of our lips, giving thanks to His name. 16 But do not forget to do good and to share, for with such sacrifices God is well pleased.

**

There is no more sacrifice for sin, because if you cannot offer yourself as a sacrifice, then:

**

Hebrews 10:26
For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins27 but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries.

**

Scripture clearly teaches there is no more sacrifice for sin.
If not, then why are you where you are, and not in the one and only Church which Jesus Christ founded?
I grew up in in the roman catholic church, did all the required sacraments, and I assure you I knew not Christ until He saved me.

I ask you to examine yourself and your church. I am in the church Jesus Christ founded now. The church is the collective body of believers.
 
Yes, Christ did away with this as it clearly states in the Book of Hebrews, you are ignoring these verses completely:

Hebrews 10

11 And every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices
, which can never take away sins. 12 But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God, 13 from that time waiting till His enemies are made His footstool. 14 For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified.

Then answer me what does the above mean? Are you part of the old covenant? Holy Scripture clearly states Christ did away with the daily sacrifices, that is why the curtain in the temple broke, from top to bottom.

I have proved from Scripture already that no more daily sacrifice is needed.
it is the same sacrifice. not a new one daily. perpetual for all generations before and after. the same.

we will have to agree to disagree on that.

But my question for protestants that don’t believe is why did God let the entire church teach error for 1500 plus years? there were many men who knew the bible very well some of them were direct pupils of the writers of the bible. Why did they teach error? what was their motive? And what makes the bible christians today think that they understand scripture better than the earliest church fathers?
 
I was not speaking for you. I asked a question.

Here it is again.

After all it is only symbolic? Yes or No? Is it just a superficial pious gesture?
Yes, I already told you, that communion does have meaning to me. I proclaim the cross and remember the sacrifice God made. He ordered us to do this in rememberence of Him. Why would it not mean a thing to me?
 
This is not true. Baptism is important. But for example, the criminal on the cross, who genuinely repented, would have asked to be baptized if He could, but obviously, the Lord will not hold that against Him.
Baptism of Desire and Baptism of Blood.
Romans 6:4 said:
Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
40.png
rbarcia:
This is why full immersion is important. Symbolizing going into the water, burying our old self, and coming out, being resurrected with Christ. Jesus’s Baptism Himself was Full Immersion.

Jesus died so that we might have eternal life. We have to die to the world so that Christ may be born again in us.
40.png
rbarcia:
And the fact that He used the word Truly twice, or verily twice depending on the translation is a writing style of John.
Yes, it indicates that he is warning us to listen very carefully to what he is saying.
John 10:1:
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber.
This means that Jesus is the literal door to heaven. No one comes to the Father except through the Son. That’s why he said Truly, truly.
John 10:7:
Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep.
Yes, and, literally speaking, sheep really do only listen to voice of their shepherd. Ask a real life shephard if you doubt me. If someone comes along who does not have their shepherd’s voice, the sheep will become scared and run away from the strange voice. This really does happen in real life, and it’s the analogy that Jesus’s is trying to convey here.

The same thing can be understood when Jesus says in John 18:37, “You are right in saying I am a king. In fact, for this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me.”

This is literally true, and not merely a symbolic truth. And the same ‘listening to the shepherd’ dynamic can be understood from the voices of the apostles too…
1 John 4:6:
We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood.
This means that Christ literally is our Shepherd. Whoever listens to God listens to Jesus as a sheep would listen to their shepherd. And whoever listens to Jesus listens to us too, just as a sheep would listen to their shepherd.

These things are literally true. Not merely symbolic.
40.png
rbarcia:
Where is the sacrament of the literal door. Where is the sacrament where we enter though a sheep’s door? Shouldn’t we celebrate it then if He verily, verily.
The sacrament is called baptism, the very point by which we enter into Jesus death so that he may give us eternal life. Jesus is literally the door to heaven…literallly. There is no other way by which someone can enter into heaven except through Jesus Christ. This is a literal truth.
John 12:5 said:
Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.
40.png
rbarcia:
Where is the sacrament of the corn of wheat? Do Catholics celebrate a holiday where you drop a piece of corn. Then based on your logic, you should, he said verily twice.

The whole analogy is that it has to die first before if can grow and bear fruit…
1 Corinthians 15:36-38:
How foolish! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. When you sow, you do not plant the body that will be, but just a seed, perhaps of wheat or of something else. But God gives it a body as he has determined, and to each kind of seed he gives its own body.
Paul elaborates further…
1 Corinthians 15:42-44:
So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.
This comes right back to Romans 6:4 by the way…
Romans 6:4:
Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
In other words, just as what you sow does not come to life unless it dies, so too do we not come to eternal life unless we are buried in Christ – dying to the world – so that we may be raised in him.

So, to answer your question, “Where is the sacrament of the corn of wheat?”, I can assure you, based on Jesus’ and Paul’s words, that this is talking about the Sacrament of Baptism.

Truly truly I say this to you…listen very carefully to what Jesus is saying.
 
Yes, Christ did away with this as it clearly states in the Book of Hebrews, you are ignoring these verses completely:

**

Hebrews 10

11 And every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices**, which can never take away sins. 12 But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God, 13 from that time waiting till His enemies are made His footstool. 14 For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified.

Then answer me what does the above mean? Are you part of the old covenant? Holy Scripture clearly states Christ did away with the daily sacrifices, that is why the curtain in the temple broke, from top to bottom.

I have proved from Scripture already that no more daily sacrifice is needed.
Then what about Malachi 1:11 “For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name is great among the nations, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a pure offering; for my name is great among the nations, says the LORD of hosts.”

This prophechy tells us that a pure offering will be made from morning until night. The pure offering is obviously Jesus. But he did not die from the rising of the sun until its setting, so this prophecy has not been fulfilled, correct? No, in the Catholic Church, the crucifixtion of Jesus is represented at every minute iof every day, 300 000 times a daythe chalice is lifted, 4 chalices per second, thus fulfilling this prophecy. (source - St. Joseph Communications)
 
Yes, Christ did away with this as it clearly states in the Book of Hebrews, you are ignoring these verses completely:
Hebrews 10:11-14:
And every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God, from that time waiting till His enemies are made His footstool. For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified/
Then answer me what does the above mean?
It means that by his one sacrifice, he wiped away the sins that kept man from God-- all people, past, present and future.
40.png
rbarcia:
Are you part of the old covenant?
We are the fulfillment of the Hebrew Scriptures-- and these covenants have not passed away. Christ fulfilled them for us. It is his life, death and resurrection that sustains the law of the old covenant and renews them in greater ways, amplifying the effectiveness of the law through his body and blood.

Matthew 5:17-18 said:
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.”

In Christ, Sheol became Purgatory and Circumcision became Baptism for example. Likewise, consider Christ’s fulfillment of the Sabbath-- leading toward the Lord’s Day.
40.png
rbarcia:
Holy Scripture clearly states Christ did away with the daily sacrifices, that is why the curtain in the temple broke, from top to bottom.
And yet Hebrews 4:4 says…
Hebrew 4:4:
And yet his work has been finished since the creation of the world. For somewhere he has spoken about the seventh day in these words: “And on the seventh day God rested from all his work.”
The one sacrifice made by Christ (who is eternal) transcends past, present and future-- and applies to all people who are saved by him-- Old Covenant or New Covenant. And he has been at work ‘saving us from our sins’ from the very beginning.
40.png
rbarcia:
I have proved from Scripture already that no more daily sacrifice is needed.
Has anyone actually claimed that more than one sacrifice was necessary?

No. We haven’t.

We’ve been saying that Christ’s one sacrifice reaches across past, present and future-- and that Christ has been at work since the beginning saving us.

There is no salvation without Christ’s saving grace. Never has there been a time of salvation without Christ’s saving grace. Never will there been a time of salvation without Christ’s saving grace.

Furthermore, the Eucharist is not a re-sacrificing of Christ. The Eucharist is a participation in Christ’s ‘one sacrifice’ from which all God’s grace comes.
 
Originally Posted by jonfan
Hi Rbarcia,
Why don’t you participate when the scripture tells you to do so?

1 cor 11:26. For as often as you shall eat this bread and drink the chalice, you shall show the death of the Lord, until he come

Merry Christmas,
Jon

I do participate in communion.
Why do you participate if you are claiming there needs to be no more participation?
 
Why is it when our Lord says the words “Truly truly” that Protestants believe the words after don’t really mean whay they say?
Not all prods by all means but a lot of them believe in reverse psychology. When the Lord said ‘truely truely’ what He really meant was ‘falsely falsely’
 
it is the same sacrifice. not a new one daily. perpetual for all generations before and after. the same.

we will have to agree to disagree on that.

But my question for protestants that don’t believe is why did God let the entire church teach error for 1500 plus years? there were many men who knew the bible very well some of them were direct pupils of the writers of the bible. Why did they teach error? what was their motive? And what makes the bible Christians today think that they understand scripture better than the earliest church fathers?
I am just a Christian, but what you are stating that early church members taught Transubstantiation and the sacrifice of the mass. But you cannot really claim this was the case in the first 3-4 centuries. You have a few writings of Early Church Members, that you interpret to mean this.

You cannot also claim that for 1500 years, that every Christian believed in Real Presence. You cannot claim to speak for early church members because you would have to interpret their writings the same way you would the Bible. What makes you think that you understand early church writings any better than the Bible? How do you know these early writings represent the leadership of the church at the time? You cannot claim any of this.

Even from the 4th century to 15th century, you cannot claim to know all the Christian beliefs. I would even dare to say, that most people cannot know how their own great grand parents thought throughout their life.

If some of these writing predate the gathering of the Canon Bible, and they contain important text that define catholic doctrine, then why were they not added to the Bible? If the leadership then thought it not important to add, then what makes you think they followed those writings? The Didache is a good example, if they were actual teachings from the Apostles, why is it not in the Bible given the importance of the 12.

You cannot prove this claim.

The early church history presents not just the Catholic view, but most of the views we find today: “There is the literal view of transubstantiation which could be that expressed by Chrysostom; the Lutheran view of consubstantiation, which could be taught by Irenaeus or Justin Martyr; the spiritual view of Calvin, which is closely aligned with Augustine; and the strictly symbolic view of Zwingli, which is similar to that expressed by Eusebius” (p. 122). To the “symbolic view” list, Webster adds Theodoret, Serapion, Jerome, Athanasius, Ambrosiaster, Macarius of Egypt, and Eustathius of Antioch. While they are not exactly household names for many of us, we do know how highly Augustine is esteemed among Catholics. Yet he was not a fan of literal transubstantiation: “'Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man,'says Christ, ‘and drink His blood, ye have no life in you.’ This seems to enjoin a crime or a vice; it is therefore a figure, enjoining that we should have a share in the sufferings of our Lord, and that we should retain a sweet and profitable memory of the fact that His flesh was wounded and crucified for us.” (On Christian Doctrine, 3.16.24; emphasis added)

Church history is fascinating and has value, but it’s a house of cards for anyone trying to construct infallible dogma or biblical doctrine. No Roman Catholic Church dogma was catholic (universal) among the early Church fathers. Even Pope Gelasius I (a.d. 492-496) denied transubstantiation. It was not officially recognized by Rome until a.d. 1215.
 
Why do you participate if you are claiming there needs to be no more participation?
You are twisting my words. I participate in communion because the Lord Jesus told us to do so, in rememberance of Him. Because we are to proclaim the cross.

And this makes it meaningful enough. There is no need for it to be a perpetuation of His sacrifice, nor is a sacrifice needed.

The communion is not a sacrifice in itself.
 
Then what about Malachi 1:11 “For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name is great among the nations, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a pure offering; for my name is great among the nations, says the LORD of hosts.”

This prophechy tells us that a pure offering will be made from morning until night. The pure offering is obviously Jesus. But he did not die from the rising of the sun until its setting, so this prophecy has not been fulfilled, correct? No, in the Catholic Church, the crucifixtion of Jesus is represented at every minute iof every day, 300 000 times a daythe chalice is lifted, 4 chalices per second, thus fulfilling this prophecy. (source - St. Joseph Communications)
Jesus offered Himself for us, we cannot offer Him.

**

John 10

17 “Therefore My Father loves Me, because I lay down My life that I may take it again. 18 No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This command I have received from My Father.”

**

The pure offering will be made by the Gentiles, day and night. The offering is the believer coming before God clean, living for God, through Jesus Christ.

**

Eph 5

1 Therefore be imitators of God as dear children. 2 And walk in love, as Christ also has loved us and given Himself for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling aroma.

Hebrews 13

14 For here we have no continuing city, but we seek the one to come. 15 Therefore by Him let us continually offer the sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of our lips, giving thanks to His name. 16 But do not forget to do good and to share, for with such sacrifices God is well pleased.

1 Peter 2

4 Coming to Him as to a living stone, rejected indeed by men, but chosen by God and precious, 5 you also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.

**

And not an offering for the remission of sins which is Christ.

**
Hebrews 10

18 Now where there is remission of these, there is no longer an offering for sin.

**
 
It means that by his one sacrifice, he wiped away the sins that kept man from God-- all people, past, present and future.
But this is not the same as saying that the one sacrifice is still happening constantly outside of time. Its result is eternal, the sacrifice itself is finished.
We are the fulfillment of the Hebrew Scriptures-- and these covenants have not passed away. Christ fulfilled them for us. It is his life, death and resurrection that sustains the law of the old covenant and renews them in greater ways, amplifying the effectiveness of the law through his body and blood.
But this has nothing to do with an ongoing sacrifice outside of time.
In Christ, Sheol became Purgatory and Circumcision became Baptism for example. Likewise, consider Christ’s fulfillment of the Sabbath-- leading toward the Lord’s Day.
No where did Jesus make Sheol into Purgatory. This is a man invention.
And yet Hebrews 4:4 says…
**
Hebrews 4

1 Therefore, since a promise remains of entering His rest, let us fear lest any of you seem to have come short of it. 2 For indeed the gospel was preached to us as well as to them; but the word which they heard did not profit them,[a] not being mixed with faith in those who heard it. 3 For we who have believed do enter that rest, as He has said:
Code:
  “ So I swore in My wrath,

  ‘ They shall not enter My rest,’”
although the works were finished from the foundation of the world. 4 For He has spoken in a certain place of the seventh day in this way: “And God rested on the seventh day from all His works”;

**
The one sacrifice made by Christ (who is eternal) transcends past, present and future-- and applies to all people who are saved by him-- Old Covenant or New Covenant. And he has been at work ‘saving us from our sins’ from the very beginning.
We are not discussing that the result of His sacrifice is not applicable for all time. We are discussing an ongoing sacrifice you claim is happening.

This just furthers the fact that Christ’s one sacrifice in time, is enough for all time. And that those in the past received the promise by faith (Hebrews 11).

But nothing here shows an on going sacrifice outside of time.
Has anyone actually claimed that more than one sacrifice was necessary?
I was responding to this post: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=1752292&postcount=150

Where Joey claimed it to be 2 sacrifices. In my response forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=1752334&postcount=151
I said that not even catholics believe that.
No. We haven’t.
We’ve been saying that Christ’s one sacrifice reaches across past, present and future-- and that Christ has been at work since the beginning saving us.
But Christ’s work to save us happened in time. The work was enough to save all throughout time. Saying the work saves throughout time, is not the same as saying the work is happening.

**

John 4

34 Jesus said to them, “My food is to do the will of Him who sent Me, and to finish His work.

**

and then when He died, He said,

**

John 19:30
So when Jesus had received the sour wine, He said, “It is finished!” And bowing His head, He gave up His spirit.

**

So the work is done. No longer happening. Those in the past, present, and future receive it my faith (Hebrews 11), through the grace of God.
There is no salvation without Christ’s saving grace. Never has there been a time of salvation without Christ’s saving grace. Never will there been a time of salvation without Christ’s saving grace.
That is right, there is no other name given to men that we must be saved. This has nothing to do with an ongoing sacrifice outside of time.
Furthermore, the Eucharist is not a re-sacrificing of Christ. The Eucharist is a participation in Christ’s ‘one sacrifice’ from which all God’s grace comes.
In your words it is not, but in your actions it is. No where in the Bible does it say God offers Grace through the communion.
 
Rbarcia said: I am just a Christian, but what you are stating that early church members taught Transubstantiation and the sacrifice of the mass. But you cannot really claim this was the case in the first 3-4 centuries. You have a few writings of Early Church Members, that you interpret to mean this.
“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 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.” Justin Martyr, First Apology, 66 (A.D. 110-165).

“He acknowledged the cup (which is a part of the creation) as his own blood, from which he bedews our blood; and the bread (also a part of creation) he affirmed to be his own body, from which he gives increase to our bodies.” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, V:2,2 (c. A.D. 200).

"Then, having taken the bread and given it to His disciples, He made it His own body, by saying, ‘This is my body,’ that is, the figure of my body. A figure, however, there could not have been, unless there were first a veritable body. An empty thing, or phantom, is incapable of a figure. If, however, (as Marcion might say,) He pretended the bread was His body, because He lacked the truth of bodily substance, it follows that He must have given bread for us. It would contribute very well to the support of Marcion’s theory of a phantom body, that bread should have been crucified! But why call His body bread, and not rather (some other edible thing, say) a melon, which Marcion must have had in lieu of a heart! He did not understand how ancient was this figure of the body of Christ, who said Himself by Jeremiah: ‘I was like a lamb or an ox that is brought to the slaughter, and I knew not that they devised a device against me, saying, Let us cast the tree upon His bread,’ which means, of course, the cross upon His body. And thus, casting light, as He always did, upon the ancient prophecies, He declared plainly enough what He meant by the bread, when He called the bread His own body.” Tertullian, Against Marcion, 40 (A.D. 212).

“He likewise, when mentioning the cup and making the new testament to be sealed ‘in His blood,’ affirms the reality of His body. For no blood can belong to a body which is not a body of flesh. If any sort of body were presented to our view, which is not one of flesh, not being fleshly, it would not possess blood. Thus, from the evidence of the flesh, we get a proof of the body, and a proof of the flesh from the evidence of the blood. In order, however, that you may discover how anciently wine is used as a figure for blood, turn to Isaiah, who asks, ‘Who is this that cometh from Edom, from Bosor with garments dyed in red, so glorious in His apparel, in the greatness of his might? Why are thy garments red, and thy raiment as his who cometh from the treading of the full winepress?’ The prophetic Spirit contemplates the Lord as if He were already on His way to His passion, clad in His fleshly nature; and as He was to suffer therein, He represents the bleeding condition of His flesh under the metaphor of garments dyed in red, as if reddened in the treading and crushing process of the wine-press, from which the labourers descend reddened with the wine-juice, like men stained in blood. Much more clearly still does the book of Genesis foretell this, when (in the blessing of Judah, out of whose tribe Christ was to come according to the flesh) it even then delineated Christ in the person of that patriarch, saying, ‘He washed His garments in wine, and His clothes in the blood of grapes’–in His garments and clothes the prophecy pointed out his flesh, and His blood in the wine. Thus did He now consecrate His blood in wine, who then (by the patriarch) used the figure of wine to describe His blood." Tertullian, Against Marcion, 40 (A.D. 212).

“He once in Cana of Galilee, turned the water into wine, akin to blood, and is it incredible that He should have turned wine into blood?” Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, XXII:4 (c. A.D. 350).

“Having learn these things, and been fully assured that the seeming bread is not bread, though sensible to taste, but the Body of Christ; and that the seeming wine is not wine, though the taste will have it so, but the Blood of Christ; and that of this David sung of old, saying, And bread strengtheneth man’s heart, to make his face to shine with oil, ‘strengthen thou thine heart,’ by partaking thereof as spiritual, and “make the face of thy soul to shine.”” Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, XXII:8 (c. A.D. 350).

“Then having sanctified ourselves by these spiritual Hymns, we beseech the merciful God to send forth His Holy Spirit upon the gifts lying before Him; that He may make the Bread the Body of Christ, and the Wine the Blood of Christ; for whatsoever the Holy Ghost has touched, is surely sanctified and changed.” Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, XXIII:7 (c. A.D. 350).
 
'Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man,'says Christ, ‘and drink His blood, ye have no life in you.’ This seems to enjoin a crime or a vice; it is therefore a figure, enjoining that we should have a share in the sufferings
of our Lord, and that we should retain a sweet and profitable memory of the fact that His flesh was wounded and crucified for us."
A novel and sincere thought no doubt but St Paul certainly believed in the Real Presence [1 Corinthians11:27-30].

The Lord said ‘I am the true vine’ was He saying He was a plant? No, this was His classic use of hyperbole. In the context of His body in the Eucharist, when he told His followers they must eat Him, some left Him. He could have called after them and said ‘hey you guys, I did not mean it literally’ but no, He said 'I tell you in truth, in very truth unless you eat the Son of man and drink His blood…'etc etc. Why did He say this if He did not mean it?
 
I ask the critic of Transubstanitation if they have ever met the Risen Christ in the Real Presence?

If the answer is ‘no’ then I suggest you suspend your preconceived ideas, believe then honour and worship Him in the presence of the ‘Wafer’.

Your eyes will be opened and your heart made clear. You will enter a level of love that you had previously not thought possible

Amen, Praise to Jesus Christ praise for ever more, in Him, in His Father and in the Holy Spirit Amen
 
But this is not the same as saying that the one sacrifice is still happening constantly outside of time. Its result is eternal, the sacrifice itself is finished.
Yes. It is. That’s exactly what we’re saying.

More to point, we as Catholic are claiming that we are participating in the body and blood of Christ on the cross at Calvary-- his literal body and blood at that.
40.png
rbarcia:
But this has nothing to do with an ongoing sacrifice outside of time.
Yes it does.

Look at this message for a moment…
40.png
rbarcia:
It’s quite easy to defeat God. Every time we sin, we participate in his defeat. In fact, each time someone sins, they are effectively participating in the Lord’s crucifixion.

Therefore, when Adam sinned long ago, his sins were stretching across time and space, effectively hammering the spikes into the Lord’s wrists.

Likewise, when Peter sinned at the moment of Christ’s crucifixion, his sins were effectively hammering the spikes into the Lord’s wrists.

And when someone as yet unknown to us sins in the future, his sins are stretching across time and space, effectively hammering the spikes into the Lord’s wrists.

The problem with this is that when we defeat the Lord, we actually only end up defeating ourselves-- and God is not actually defeated after all.
And here…
…the crucfixion stands as the nexus point of all human history whereby God took on all our sins-- past, present and future. It’s the very means by which God triumphed over the devil and left him totally powerless and disarmed.
To us, since we are trapped in time and space, it may not appear as if the Lord were totally victorius yet. But that’s because we haven’t seen the end of human history yet. From God’s infinite perspective, however, it is finished-- because he already knows the outcome…
Hebrews 10:11-14 said:
Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties; again and again he offers the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins.
But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God.
Since that time he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool, because by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.

The Scriptures are very clear that by one sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy. They do not say are already holy. They say that we are being made holy.

The one sacrifice, however, is the defining moment in history whereby all all people who are made into a new creation, past, present, and future, begin to participate in the new creation. In this sense, the crucifixion is likened unto a singularity whereby all things break down in Christ-- God being omnipresent, all things for or against God’s will are juxtapositioned in contrast to this singular event, a kind of spiritual Big Bang so to speak.
 
40.png
rbarcia:
Nowhere did Jesus make Sheol into Purgatory. This is a man invention.
I would say that nowhere is now here.
40.png
rbarcia:
We are not discussing that the result of His sacrifice is not applicable for all time. We are discussing an ongoing sacrifice you claim is happening.
But no. That’s not what we’re saying. You’re the one who is saying that we sacrifice over and over again. We don’t.

We’re saying that his one sacrifice affects all human history, and that we have access to this sacrifice in the Eucharist-- literally his body and blood are present.
40.png
rbarcia:
This just furthers the fact that Christ’s one sacrifice in time, is enough for all time. And that those in the past received the promise by faith (Hebrews 11).
Yes. And this faith they had came from the ‘one sacrifice’ of Jesus on the cross. God has been progessively working from this unique position thoughout all human history. Even our father Abraham, according to John 8:56, rejoiced at the thought of seeing his day. In fact, he saw it and was glad.
40.png
rbarcia:
But nothing here shows an on going sacrifice outside of time.
Yes it does. And other passages of Scriptures make this very clear. For example, 1 Peter 3:18-20 clearly says that Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring us to God.

He was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit.

It was in the Holy Spirit through whom also he went and preached to the spirits in prison for example. These are those who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built.

It was by his one sacrifice that he was able to spiritually connect with all people, past present and future.
40.png
rbarcia:
In your words it is not, but in your actions it is. No where in the Bible does it say God offers Grace through the communion.
Sure it does. Your theology doesn’t allow you to see it through.

For example, one passage of Scriptures says it this way…
For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.
Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord.
A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup.
This is communion rbarcia. Once your eyes are open, this passage should stand out as such.

Some people say that seeing is believing.

I think that once a proper metanoia has occured by the Holy Spirit, it then become an inversed matter of the Spirit’s motion.

In other words, believing is seeing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top