[vladimir998]

I have always said the Eucharist is a sacrifice. I have said it here at FR over the years. I used google and found these old posts in a matter of seconds. Thus, we all can see now who was right all along on this point. Hint: I am.

To: imardmd1
“Jesus instituted this as a memorial in the imperative sense as an ordinance. Since His body and blood were not quite yet offered up as a sacrifice, it was not sacramental.”

Yes, it was sacramental. Christ’s sacrifice was so momentous that it is beyond time and space. Hence, the bread really did become His flesh – just as He said.

“On another account, the ordinance was not first observed in the Roman language, as far as we know it was said in the Aramaic, Hebrew, and/or Koine Greek, not in Latin.”

What has that got to do with anything?

“Deny not that the main European religion of the first 1500 years attempted to obscure the reading of the Holy Scriptures…”

I’ll deny all that isn’t true – like the statement you just made there.

“…and of the spoken ritualosity by keeping the details from its congregants.”

No details were kept from anyone.

6 posted on 11/18/2013, 3:38:44 PM by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies | Report Abuse]

and

To: imardmd1
“Then some of His body and blood, miraculously extending himsel into components separated from his usual frame contents, was eaten, digested, and eliminated before they were given/spilled on the cross? No, I don’t and never will accept that silly idea.”

It’s no more silly than the virgin birth, the Incarnation of our Lord, the resurrection, Jesus walking on water, etc.

“I can and will accept that He was speakin figuratively, and that the blood of the grapes should symbolize the blood slated through His foreknowledge but yet to be shed.”

If he was speaking figuratively, then He was speaking nonsense. To devour someone’s flesh is to hate him, to slander him. That is the metaphoric content of a phrase like that. See Psalm 27:2 if you want confirmation on that.

“The symbolism of the supper, with its symbols reminding participants, as symbols, of His Passion, the whole tableau to be engaged in often; yes, of course, certainly. “Do this in remembrance of me.” In remembrance.”

Anamnesis is the word for “remembrance” in Luke. Ever look up “anamnesis”? Here’s how Robert Sungenis describes it:

In support of this perpetual sacrifice, the word translated “memorial” or “remembrance” used at the Last Supper (Luke 22:19; 1 Cor.11:24-25) is the Greek word “anamnesis.” It is also used in the Septuagint in connection with sacrifice (Lev.24:7). “Anamnesis” translates the Hebrew word “azkarah,” which is used seven times in the OT in reference to sacrifice (Lev.2:2,9,16; 5:12; 6:15; Num. 5:26). It is also significant that “anamnesis” is only used four times in the NT, the fourth time appearing in Hebrews 10:3 also in reference to a memorial sacrifice. Hence, Jesus’ use of “anamnesis” in Luke 22:19 specifies the sacrificial dimension of the Eucharist. In effect, Jesus would be saying, “Whenever you do this, do it as a memorial sacrifice of me.” The use of “anamnesis” in Luke 22:19 is even more significant in denoting sacrifice since there was another Greek word Luke could have used for a non-sacrificial memorial (“mnemosunon,” cf., Mt.26: 13; Mk.14:9; Acts 10:4).

“That’s all for you today and on this topic.”

In other words, you’ve got nothing.

14 posted on 11/19/2013, 6:39:56 AM by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies | Report Abuse]

and

To: imardmd1
“” , , , with its symbols reminding participants, as tokens of His Passion . . . “

St. Paul seems to think it is more than a token - or else he wouldn’t have been worried about people being harmed by receiving it unworthily (read 1 Cor. 11).

15 posted on 11/19/2013, 6:41:22 AM by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies | Report Abuse]

and

To: Old Yeller
You wrote:

“Christ is not re-sacrificed every time Catholics have a mass.”

Of course not. The one sacrifice was enough and it is exactly that sacrifice which is re-presented to the Father at every Mass.

13 posted on 5/26/2013, 8:55:58 PM by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies | Report Abuse]

and

To: Old Yeller
Re-presentation. Not representation. And the fact that it is Christ’s body does not mean it is a re-sacrificing of Christ.

15 posted on 5/26/2013, 9:01:43 PM by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies | Report Abuse]

and

To: CynicalBear
“No it’s not.”

Quoting a compiled source:

Robert Sungenis, in his Book, Not By Bread Alone gives us some clue that there are eight other words that Jesus could have used if only he wanted to say “Remember”. He writes:
The connection between sacrifice and anamnesis is made even stronger by taking into account that the neither Matthew, Mark, nor Luke (nor Paul actually) use any of the words which refer to some type of remembrance, but only the one with an exclusively sacrificial connotation is used at the Last Supper, that is anamnesis. [44]
He then spells out the words that Jesus could have used to say in the Eucharist, to “remember”, where it does not mean sacrifice. He does that in the footnotes. Unfortunately, he spells it out in Greek which I am unable to read. Therefore, using a Strong’s Concordance and the Biblical verses he points in his footnotes, which shows the other rendering of these words, and the English translation of those words, we can identify the words in Greek so we can read them with the translation given us, with the verses that are given. The starting point in this analysis are the verses he points to in footnote 105 on page 123 of his excellent book on the Eucharist.

: The Greek word found in the Strongs Concordance is also given with the English rendering of it. Since I have been using the Revised Standard Version in this article, if I see any discrepancy between the English rendering of the word in the King James Version as opposed to the RSV, I will give the RSV version of the verse, but if the word for remembrance is different in the KJV, I will give the KJV version of that specific Greek word in parenthesis. I will bold the English translation, italicize the Greek rendering of that word, and only if there is a discrepancy between the English translation of the King James Version and the RSV, I will put the King James Version of the English word in parenthesis. I will give thanks to Sungenis for the use of the verses that he points out which shows the use of these other words that could have been used instead of anamnesis:
#1 Another word that could have been used by Jesus if he did not want to say that the Eucharist is a Sacrifice is:
Mark 11:21
And Peter remembered anamimnesko (Strongs, #363) (KJV - calling to remembrance) and said to him, “Master, look! The fig tree which you cursed has withered.”
This word that that is used four times in the New Testament besides Mark 11:21 (Mark 14:72; 1 Cor. 4:17; 2 Cor. 7:15; 2 Tim. 1:6) that means remembered that Jesus could have used if he only wanted to ‘recall’ his death.

http://matt1618.freeyellow.com/sacrifice.html

In other words, you were wrong. Again.

79 posted on 02/08/2015 6:53:37 PM PST by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

[ealgeone]

Jello time again I see.