Why won’t all other Christians recognize the Roman Catholic Pope as their leader?

[brkn1]

HI,brkn
Why do you ignore the word is ? You know of course you are essentially removing is, from the word of the Lord.

The greek word is ANAMNESIS and the Hebrew word is ZIKARON, essentially the same meaning that of, making heavenly things present.

Peace, OneNow1

Hi OneNow1,

“is” is another subject.
Let’s stick to “remembrance” for now.

Replacing the original Greek ANAMNESIS with a Hebrew word is a bad way of interpretting scripture as I see it.

anamnesis (G364)

from (G363); recollection: --remembrance (again)

There is no honest way of getting past the recollective remembrance of recalling to memory an event that happened in the past. My redundancy is intended.
While God is not limited by time, we are right now. Therefore the term remembrance is part of the Bible’s vocabulary and should not be twisted into another meaning than what God intended it to be. God knew the original word would be written in Greek when He said remembrance.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Hi OneNow1,

“is” is another subject.
Let’s stick to “remembrance” for now.

Replacing the original Greek ANAMNESIS with a Hebrew word is a bad way of interpretting scripture as I see it.

anamnesis (G364)

from (G363); recollection: --remembrance (again)

There is no honest way of getting past the recollective remembrance of recalling to memory an event that happened in the past. My redundancy is intended.
While God is not limited by time, we are right now. Therefore the term remembrance is part of the Bible’s vocabulary and should not be twisted into another meaning than what God intended it to be. God knew the original word would be written in Greek when He said remembrance.

But Jesus spoke Aramaic. What have you concluded in the Aramaic translation?

 

[brkn1]

But Jesus spoke Aramaic. What have you concluded in the Aramaic translation?

There is no need for me to conclude an Aramaic translation to understand what is written by God through Luke.
It is written in Greek and it translates as remembrance; which you can not get around or accept because it does not fit your conclusions or that of the RCC.
You have to invent a new meaning for the biblical word remembrance.

 

[Jimmy_B]

Hi OneNow1,

“is” is another subject.
Let’s stick to “remembrance” for now.

Replacing the original Greek ANAMNESIS with a Hebrew word is a bad way of interpretting scripture as I see it.

anamnesis (G364)

from (G363); recollection: --remembrance (again)

There is no honest way of getting past the recollective remembrance of recalling to memory an event that happened in the past. My redundancy is intended.
While God is not limited by time, we are right now. Therefore the term remembrance is part of the Bible’s vocabulary and should not be twisted into another meaning than what God intended it to be. God knew the original word would be written in Greek when He said remembrance.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

This picture (above) depicts a CATHOLIC scribe. It was CATHOLIC monks/scribes and the CATHOLIC CHURCH who translated and who wrote and rewrote the Books of the Bible for the first fifteen hundred years of Christianity, before any protestant religion! Why don’t we ask the original CATHOLIC translators or scribes what they think the true interpretation is…Oh that’s right… we can’t, I guess we will have to take the Catholic Church’s word for it….

Hello brkn1,

Can you explain how it is that people apposed to Catholic doctrine and beliefs can use a “Catholic Book”, the Bible, to argue against Catholicism?

How it is that opponents of Catholicism can on one hand, claim that the Catholic Church and that Catholic Popes, who put together and authorized the Bible in the first place, “got it right” and yet on the other hand, use the Bible against Catholicism?

Either the early Christian (Catholic) Church was guided by the Holy Spirit or it wasn’t.

This is the error, which occurs when people ignore early Christian traditions, Christian history and take things out of context.

If you were a Christian for the first fifteen hundred years of Christianity you were a Catholic. The Roman Catholic Church and Roman Catholic Popes existed before the Bible as we know it today, Are you disputing this fact?

For the first 500+ years of Christianity there was no Bible and the regular lay Catholic, did not have access to a Bible, until after the advent of the printing press in the 16th century.

I appreciate your argument here but they all must originate from the fact that one has to assume, that when it came to the Bible that the Catholic Church was guided by the Holy Spirit and “got it right”.

All of these arguments would be similar to using a Webster’s dictionary to argue that the definitions of a word in that dictionary were wrong.

Your thoughts?

Peace.

 

[SyCarl]

Either the early Christian (Catholic) Church was guide by the Holy Spirit or it wasn’t. This is the error, which occurs when people ignore early Christian traditions, Christian history and take things out of context. If you were a Christian for the first fifteen hundred years of Christianity to were a Catholic.

I am sure that you did not intentionally mean to ignore the Orthodox, the Copts and the many other oriental churches in this statement. While they may be close to the Catholic Church in most matters, I doubt that they would agree with being lumped together with the church in Rome. In fact we owe the preservation of the Greek manuscripts of the Bible to the Orthodox. The manuscripts came west after the fall of Constantinople.

 

[Jimmy_B]

I just want to make one more point related to my post (#302).

One cannot “connect the (Christian) dots” and leave out the “Catholic dots”. Christian history and tradition is important to understand the meaning of words and phrases. Before there was “American Football”, “football” meant soccer. The efforts by some here to give a modern translation to ancient words, would be like going back in time, before American Football and arguing the “football” meant “American Football”.

Hindsight does work if one leaves out “parts” of the past; in this case, the Catholic “parts”. We cannot view ancient history through a modern lens. Continuity is important in understanding the past and the Roman Catholic Church, is Christian continuity.

 

[Jimmy_B]

I am sure that you did not intentionally mean to ignore the Orthodox, the Copts and the many other oriental churches in this statement. While they may be close to the Catholic Church in most matters, I doubt that they would agree with being lumped together with the church in Rome. In fact we owe the preservation of the Greek manuscripts of the Bible to the Orthodox. The manuscripts came west after the fall of Constantinople.

Hello Sycarl, my friend,

This is a different topic all together. Do you mean our sister catholic churches…nope…we already went over this somewhere else before, didn’t we? My comments were directed to protestant translations as interpretations.

Peace

 

[brkn1]

http://www.medievalscript.com/images/scribe.jpg

This picture (above) depicts a CATHOLIC scribe. It was CATHOLIC monks/scribes and the CATHOLIC CHURCH who translated and who wrote and rewrote the Books of the Bible for the first fifteen hundred years of Christianity, before any protestant religion! Why don’t we ask the original CATHOLIC translators or scribes what they think the true interpretation is…Oh that’s right… we can’t, I guess we will have to take the Catholic Church’s word for it….

Hello brkn1,

Can you explain how it is that people apposed to Catholic doctrine and beliefs can use a “Catholic Book”, the Bible, to argue against Catholicism?

How it is that opponents of Catholicism can on one hand, claim that the Catholic Church and that Catholic Popes, who put together and authorized the Bible in the first place, “got it right” and yet on the other hand, use the Bible against Catholicism?

Either the early Christian (Catholic) Church was guided by the Holy Spirit or it wasn’t.

This is the error, which occurs when people ignore early Christian traditions, Christian history and take things out of context.

If you were a Christian for the first fifteen hundred years of Christianity you were a Catholic. The Roman Catholic Church and Roman Catholic Popes existed before the Bible as we know it today, Are you disputing this fact?

For the first 500+ years of Christianity there was no Bible and the regular lay Catholic, did not have access to a Bible, until after the advent of the printing press in the 16th century.

I appreciate your argument here but they all must originate from the fact that one has to assume, that when it came to the Bible that the Catholic Church was guided by the Holy Spirit and “got it right”.

All of these arguments would be similar to using a Webster’s dictionary to argue that the definitions of a word in that dictionary were wrong.

Your thoughts?

Peace.

Hi Jimmy,

I did take the time to look up the Roman Catholic translation of (Luke 22:19) in the Douay Bible.

They used the word “commemoration” in place of remembrance.

I had no choice but use a dictionary to see if there was any difference in meaning. The definition was (call to remembrance) and (to mark by some ceremony or observation).

The Douay Bible had a note to explain that the word “commemoration” in no way takes away from the Real Presence, etc.
The fact that a note was needed does show that they saw the same problem that many others do with that word in the verse.
Their dismissive explanation of commemoration is less than adequate.
You can not get around the true meaning of either remembrance or commemoration without being inventive.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

There is no need for me to conclude an Aramaic translation to understand what is written by God through Luke.
It is written in Greek and it translates as remembrance; which you can not get around or accept because it does not fit your conclusions or that of the RCC.
You have to invent a new meaning for the biblical word remembrance.

I am sorry brkn1, Iam glad you didnt take the trouble to find the symbolic translation of “eat flesh” or “drink blood” because if you did, you will find that Jesus did not intend these words to be taken symbolically in his aramaic tongue. Because when you apply the symbolic meaning of the words in Aramaic, they say "you must eat my flesh and drink my blood =(symbolically in Aramaic) means, “whoever persecutes and assaults me will have eternal life”, this symbolic meaning in Aramaic which Jesus spoke makes nonsense of the passage!

rememberance, commemorate, are words translated to the best one can translate in our english language to understand the original context.

In hebrew thought man = body. Jesus clearly defines in the last supper this is his body, take and eat, if salvation is to reach man this communion with the savior must be a communion of body.

This mystical Mactation = reenactment is the new covenant between man and God. To make a covenant with God reguired a sacrafice, and a meal. The Eucharist suffices this fulfilled Law of God in the covenant in his blood.

This eschatological liturgy is made present = memorial of the past and the hope of the future, in the reality of the Atoning death of Jesus and the glorified body of Jesus.

How are our future generations going to enter into this New and everlasting covenant with God if they dont obey his words, to eat his body and drink his blood?.

This Eucharist presents the atoning blood of Jesus, his body, soul and divinity, to all generations, it is here in the Eucharist that the words of our Savior come to light, John 6:40 For this is the will of my Father, that EVERYONE WHO SEES THE SON and believes in him may have eternal life,… every one who LISTENS to my Father and learns from him COMES TO ME.

Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him, for any one WHO APPROACHES GOD must believe HE EXISTS.(We approach God at every Mass, we see Jesus according to God’s will in Holy Communion.)

Hebrews 7:25 Therefore, he is always able to save those who approach God through him, since he lives forever to make intercession for them. 26 It was fitting that we should have such a high priest: 18 holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners, higher than the heavens.

Romans 10:17 Thus faith comes from what is HEARD, and what is HEARD comes THROUGH THE WORDS OF CHRIST. (We hear Jesus words at every Eucharistic celebration “Do this in memory of me”

Revelations 2:17 '"Whoever has ears ought to hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To the victor I shall give some of the hidden manna;

This is what happens at Mass, Hebrews 12:22 No, you have approached Mount Zion and the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and countless angels in festal gathering,
23 and the assembly of the firstborn enrolled in heaven, 6 and God the judge of all, and the spirits of the just made perfect,
24 and Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and the sprinkled blood that speaks more eloquently 7 than that of Abel. 25 See that you do not reject the one who speaks. For if they did not escape when they refused the one who warned them on earth, how much more in our case if we turn away from the one who warns from heaven.
28 Therefore, we who are receiving the unshakable kingdom should have gratitude, with which we should offer worship pleasing to God in reverence and awe.
29 For our God is a consuming fire.

Hebrews 10:19 Therefore, brothers, since through the blood of Jesus we have confidence of entrance into the sanctuary 20 by the new and living way he opened for us through the veil, that is, his flesh, 21 and since we have “a great priest over the house of God,” 22 let us approach with a sincere heart and in absolute trust, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience 12 and our bodies washed in pure water. 23 Let us hold unwaveringly to our confession that gives us hope, for he who made the promise is trustworthy. 24 We must consider how to rouse one another to love and good works. 25 We should not stay away from our assembly, 13 as is the custom of some, but encourage one another, and this all the more as you see the day drawing near.

2 Peter 3 His divine power has bestowed on us everything that makes for life and devotion, through the knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and power. 4 Through these, he has bestowed on us the precious and very great promises, so that through them you may come to share in the divine nature,

1John 4:2 This is how you can know the spirit of God…every spirit that acknowledges Jesus Christ COME (present tense implied) in the flesh belongs to God.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

I am sure that you did not intentionally mean to ignore the Orthodox, the Copts and the many other oriental churches in this statement. While they may be close to the Catholic Church in most matters, I doubt that they would agree with being lumped together with the church in Rome. In fact we owe the preservation of the Greek manuscripts of the Bible to the Orthodox. The manuscripts came west after the fall of Constantinople.

This is interesting, all are Catholic who are in communion with Rome, and have apostolic succession. We are all in one faith, one baptism, one Lord. I see no difference. Did not Rome speak Greek, When you say Orthodox leading to the first 10 centuries I take it to mean all of Christendom including Rome, when you speak of Orthodox from the 10 century on, I take you to mean Eastern Orthodoxy. These historical comments can be very tricky.

 

[brkn1]

rememberance, commemorate, are words translated to the best one can translate in our english language to understand the original context

This mystical Mactation = reenactment is the new covenant between man and God. To make a covenant with God reguired a sacrafice, and a meal. The Eucharist suffices this fulfilled Law of God in the covenant in his blood.

This Eucharist presents the atoning blood of Jesus, his body, soul and divinity, to all generations, it is here in the Eucharist that the words of our Savior come to light, John 6:40 For this is the will of my Father, that EVERYONE WHO SEES THE SON and believes in him may have eternal life,… every one who LISTENS to my Father and learns from him COMES TO ME.

Hebrews 7:25 Therefore, he is always able to save those who approach God through him, since he lives forever to make intercession for them. 26 It was fitting that we should have such a high priest: 18 holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners, higher than the heaven

Hebrews 10:19 Therefore, brothers, since through the blood of Jesus we have confidence of entrance into the sanctuary 20 by the new and living way he opened for us through the veil, that is, his flesh, 21 and since we have “a great priest over the house of God,” 22 let us approach with a sincere heart and in absolute trust, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience 12 and our bodies washed in pure water.

Hi Gabriel of 12,

I erased a bit of your post in this quote so that I could respond to some of what you said.

You mentioned that God required a sacrifice and a meal to make a covenant between God and man.
I do not see this happenning in the Old Covenant between God and Abraham. See (Genesis ch. 15).
There is no meal described there.
In fact, although Abraham obeyed God in the preparation, it was only God that performed the actual covenant ceremony. Abraham did not also pass between the the sacrificial pieces the way men did it in Abraham’s day when making a covenant between each other.

The New Covenant was completely performed between just the Father and the Son. Man had nothing to do with that covenant making either. There was no meal at that covenant making.

As far as seeing Jesus in (John 6:40), do you not recall Jesus saying that those, who believe without physically seeing Him, are blessed?

I like that you are quoting out of Hebrews.
Hebrews points us to the only High Priest that we need for salvation. By JESUS alone: “Let us come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.”
There is no other, but the Lord Jesus Christ whereby we can be saved. No other.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Hi Gabriel of 12,

I erased a bit of your post in this quote so that I could respond to some of what you said.

You mentioned that God required a sacrifice and a meal to make a covenant between God and man.

**They are to numerous to mention, the two of importance is the messianic banquets Isaiah 25:6, it is implied in the parable in Luke 14:15-24, the last supper is presented as the messianic banquet in anticipation:Matthew 26:29, Lk.22:16,18, 22:29, see also Revelations 3:20, 19:9.

The many covenants that you may or may not know was made not only in the form of man and God, but man to man with God. God served as testator to the covenants. that is why there are so many. A meal is shared, upon the new covenants, with a sacrifice. Many of the rituals to honor the covenant with God, shared in the sacrificial meals of bread and wine, beginning with Melchizedeck to Jesus, including King David.**

**Remember God shared in the sacrificial meals, by consuming the holocaust with fire from heaven.

This is probably why you cant see them. It goes along with Hebrew Oral Traditions also.

Read Exodus 12 on, In the book of Leviticus you will see rituals of the covenant meals being perpetually set by God himself. In the Chronicles you will find King David making a covenant with bread and wine.**

The New Covenant was completely performed between just the Father and the Son. Man had nothing to do with that covenant making either. There was no meal at that covenant making.

Have you read the last supper discourses in all the synoptic Gospels? What do you think Jesus was doing with his disciples? When he told him in Lukes Gospel, drink my blood, this is the new and everlasting covenant.

God was the testator to the old covenant that man could not keep. So in not keeping the Covenant, one of the covenant makers must die inorder to fulfill the covenant. Jesus comes on the scene, and takes this old covenant renews it in his sacrificial body and blood, and all who enter into the New and everlasting covenant with God, must partake of the Sacrificial offering that is made eternally present to all peoples from the past, present and future. The high priest and his family members must eat the sacrificial offering of what is left on earth for them to eat, because God consumed the holocaust victim in the burnt offering. In other words, Jesus ascended into heaven, just as the old sacrifice in the form of smoke went into heaven, then what God gave to the high priest and his family was privieldged to consume in the secret place. That is in the Mass, the mysteries of God made known now for God dwells with the human race, where heaven and earth meet, in the Eucharistic sacrificial lamb wedding banquet of the Lord.

As far as seeing Jesus in (John 6:40), do you not recall Jesus saying that those, who believe without physically seeing Him, are blessed?

**Yes blessed are those who have not seen and have believed, This is not dealing with the heavenly liturgies where one approaches God in his Eucharist. Those on earth, like Thomas are blessed who have not seen him as Thomas has, and yet believed.

We see, approach, and commune with the living God. But not as Thomas doubted and was shown.**

I like that you are quoting out of Hebrews.
Hebrews points us to the only High Priest that we need for salvation. By JESUS alone: “Let us come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.”
There is no other, but the Lord Jesus Christ whereby we can be saved. No other.

You cannot have a high priest of God, and not have anything to offer and or sacrifice for God’s people. Jesus offers his eternal Eucharistic thanksgiving sacrafice to God, for all humanity who come to him and believe, and enter the holy of holies in the body, blood, soul and divinty of Jesus Christ.

 

[brkn1]

God never equated the Jewish Passover to His actual flesh and blood that would be sacrificed on the cross.

“I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.” John 6:51

(Luke 22:7) “Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover (lamb) must be killed.”

Jesus was the Lamb of God.
Unleaven symbolizes sinlessness when speaking of the bread.
How can you say that God did not relate the Passover to Jesus?

 

[brkn1]

You cannot have a high priest of God, and not have anything to offer and or sacrifice for God’s people. Jesus offers his eternal Eucharistic thanksgiving sacrafice to God, for all humanity who come to him and believe, and enter the holy of holies in the body, blood, soul and divinty of Jesus Christ.

My High Priest is Jesus.
He already did all that was required to redeem me or any other believer by His one Perfect Sacrifice.
This is the first time that I ever heard of a “thanksgiving sacrifice to God”.

 

[I_Believe]

Why won’t other Christians submit to Rome ?

Lot’s of reasons.

• they don’t understand apostolic succession
• they have been raised in non catholic homes
• they see faith in Christ as enough to ensure their Salvation
• all they know is the bible, and the interpretation of it offered by their pastor

It’s tough to grasp kneeling before a statue of Our Lady and praying the Rosary if one has not been raised Catholic.

It’s tough to understand the veneration of relics.

Catholicism isn’t easy. It’s not fun. Holy Mother Church won’t let us forget we are sinners, and the world is a filthy place.

It’s much easier to proclaim oneself a Christian, than to live as one, no matter what one’s denomination.

But the Church Christ willed to be built was built by Apostles whom He Himself ordained. And it is through Apostolic Succession His Church was established. Holy Mother Church traces Her roots to Christ Himself. HMC has withstood everything thrown at it as Christ promised.

Christ did not will division. HMC waits with open arms to honor His will of unity.

 

[onenow1]

Hi, again brkn1

Quote= brkn1. God knew the original word would be written in Greek when He said remembrance.

Quote=OneNow1 Agreed, and that’s exactly why the Lord knew .future generations, would be able to translate the original context of the word into other languages, the concept and original meaning of the word.

God did not want us to just take a photograph, put it in our album and bring it out 20yrs. later; and thats why the Eucharist is the center and summit of the Catholic Church the
Body the Blood Soul and Divinity and I repeat once again please do not seperate Jesus Divine Body from the Eucharist. For you would be seperating His Divinity from His Humanity.

Luke 24.
38 And he said to them, “Why are you troubled, and why do questionings rise in your hearts?
39 See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself; handle me, and see; for a spirit has not flesh and bones as you see that I have.”
41 And while they still disbelieved for joy, and wondered, he said to them, “Have you anything here to eat?”
42 They gave him a piece of broiled fish

Take notice brkn1 in the above verses Jesus is still flesh and blood, now some how he is able to let us partake in it.

Peace,OneNow1

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

My High Priest is Jesus.
He already did all that was required to redeem me or any other believer by His one Perfect Sacrifice.
This is the first time that I ever heard of a “thanksgiving sacrifice to God”.

That is what Eucahrist comes from the Greek word Eucharista = Thanksgiving.

Now that you understand the who is our high priest, now all we need to do is follow the commands of our high priest, because where there is a high priest, there are other priest who operate in his stead. Guess what The Catholic church has this authority from Jesus hiimself to do this " in rememberance of him" our priests in persona Christi.

 

[brkn1]

Hi, again brkn1

Quote= brkn1. God knew the original word would be written in Greek when He said remembrance.

Quote=OneNow1 Agreed, and that’s exactly why the Lord knew .future generations, would be able to translate the original context of the word into other languages, the concept and original meaning of the word.

Peace,OneNow1

Hi OneNow1,
We agree that future generations would be able to translate the original context of the word remembrance into other languages.

The English translation using “remembrance” (KJV) and the Douay Bible word “commemoration” used by the RCC today, still carry the proper meaning and context, which proves the point.

I accept either word without feeling the need to add to the meaning or re-translating it.

 

[brkn1]

That is what Eucahrist comes from the Greek word Eucharista = Thanksgiving.

Now that you understand the who is our high priest, now all we need to do is follow the commands of our high priest, because where there is a high priest, there are other priest who operate in his stead. Guess what The Catholic church has this authority from Jesus hiimself to do this " in rememberance of him" our priests in persona Christi.

I agree that the Lord’s Supper is an act of thanksgiving in remembrance of what Jesus did for us when He died to redeem us with His precious Blood.

It seems that the RCC is confusing an act of thanksgivimg and blessing with the actual redeeming sacrifice for sins, which happened only once on the cross by the only High Priest who was capable of such a sacrifice, Jesus. The High Priest had to be a Perfect Man and Divine at the same time. Earthly priests do not qualify. They are not perfect or divine. The Bible never describes any man as such except for Jesus.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

I agree that the Lord’s Supper is an act of thanksgiving in remembrance of what Jesus did for us when He died to redeem us with His precious Blood.

It seems that the RCC is confusing an act of thanksgivimg and blessing with the actual redeeming sacrifice for sins, which happened only once on the cross by the only High Priest who was capable of such a sacrifice, Jesus. The High Priest had to be a Perfect Man and Divine at the same time. Earthly priests do not qualify. They are not perfect or divine. The Bible never describes any man as such except for Jesus.

The RCC is not confusing what you misunderstand about the eternal sacrifice, and the Thanksgiving offering to God in the Eucharist.

For one Jesus fulfilled the law and the prophets. Jesus fulfilled the Sedar meal, the Todah sacrificial meal, the Mazzoth, the show bread, the libations of wine and blood the lists goes on, I will just end with Jesus is our High Priest according to the order of Melchizedeck, Who offered sacrifice to God in the form of Bread and Wine, sound familiar. The RCC is not confused here, you have not entered into the mysteries of God, yet.

The priest hood is another aspect in entering into the Mysteries of God. I cannot take them up at this time.

will return.