Posted on 11/08/2014 8:35:21 PM PST by walkinginthedesert
But since we are quoting Scripture, let's look at this. If all sacrifice is dead and useless and really over and done with then why does Paul not three chapters later, say:
Through Jesus, therefore, let us continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise--the fruit of lips that openly profess his name. - Hebrews 13:15
What is there in “Do this in memory of me” that is so hard to comprehend? The words are so simple a 4 year child can understand it. Now one more time, nice and slow, and let it sink in.........
DO THIS.........IN MEMORY..........OF ME.
AMEN, metmom!
Those who now call themselves Catholic but truly desire Christ had better take heed.
Those who now call themselves Catholic but truly desire Christ had better take heed.
Spot on and a sad thing to witness. The deceit of the Catholic Church is sickening.
Spot on and a sad thing to witness. The deceit of the Catholic Church is sickening.
If Catholics think it’s real blood they put Christ, his apostles, and themselves in the position of breaking the law against eating blood. In that they put Jesus in the position of not being sinless.
Notice it doesn’t say “to continually sacrifice me”. Why is that so hard for Catholics to comprehend?
Christ died within the confines of time and the Holy Spirit tells us that in heaven, Jesus is seated at the right hand of the Father.
The Catholic church claim that events on earth are being eternally played out in eternity has NO basis in Scripture and is absolutely contrary to the clear statements of Scripture that tell us exactly what Christ IS doing in heaven.
And it isn't eternally dying over and over again.
Talk about trampling the blood of Christ underfoot.
Physician heal thyself.
It is a MEMORIAL service.
It remembers what happened. Not relives it.
http://catholicism.about.com/od/worship/p/The_Mass.htm
The Mass as the Central Act of Worship in the Catholic Church:
Catholics worship God in a variety of ways, but the chief act of corporate or communal worship is the Liturgy of the Eucharist. In the Eastern churches, Catholic and Orthodox, this is known as the Divine Liturgy; in the West, it is known as the Mass, an English word derived from the Latin text of the priest’s dismissal of the congregation at the end of the liturgy (”Ite, missa est.”). Throughout the centuries, the liturgy of the Church has taken a variety of regional and historical forms, but one thing has remained constant: The Mass has always been the central form of Catholic worship.
The Mass: An Ancient Practice:
As far back as the Acts of the Apostles and Saint Paul’s epistles, we find descriptions of the Christian community gathering to celebrate the Lord’s Supper, the Eucharist. In the catacombs in Rome, the tombs of martyrs were used as altars for the celebration of the earliest forms of the Mass, making the tie between the sacrifice of Christ on the Cross, its re-presentation in the Mass, and the strengthening of the faith of Christians explicit.
The Mass as “Unbloody Sacrifice”:
Very early on, the Church saw the Mass as a mystical reality in which the sacrifice of Christ on the Cross is renewed. Responding to Protestant sects who denied that the Eucharist is anything more than a memorial, the Council of Trent (1545-63) declared that “The same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross, is present and offered in an unbloody manner” in the Mass.
This does not mean, as some critics of Catholicism claim, that the Church teaches that, in the Mass, we sacrifice Christ again. Rather, the original sacrifice of Christ on the Cross is presented to us once more.
The Mass as a Re-presentation of the Crucifixion:
This re-presentation, as Fr. John Hardon notes in his Pocket Catholic Dictionary, “means that because Christ is really present in his humanity, in heaven and on the altar, he is capable now as he was on Good Friday of freely offering himself to the Father.” This understanding of the Mass hinges on the Catholic doctrine of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. When the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, Christ is truly present on the altar. If the bread and wine remained merely symbols, the Mass could still be a memorial of the Last Supper, but not a re-presentation of the Crucifixion.
The Mass as Memorial and Sacred Banquet:
While the Mass is more than a memorial, it is still a memorial as well as a sacrifice. The Mass is the Church’s way of fulfilling Christ’s command, at the Last Supper, to “Do this in remembrance of Me.” As a memorial of the Last Supper, the Mass is also a sacred banquet, in which the faithful participate both through their presence and their role in the liturgy and through the reception of Holy Communion, the Body and Blood of Christ.
While it is not necessary to receive Communion in order to fulfill our Sunday obligation, the Church recommends frequent reception (along with sacramental Confession).
The Mass as an Application of the Merits of Christ:
“Christ,” Father Hardon writes, “won for the world all the graces it needs for salvation and sanctification.” In other words, in His Sacrifice on the Cross, Christ reversed Adam’s sin. In order for us to see the effects of that reversal, however, we must accept Christ’s offer of salvation and grow in sanctification. Our participation in the Mass, and our frequent reception of Holy Communion, brings us the grace that Christ merited for the world through His unselfish Sacrifice on the Cross.
I recall a Catechism teacher stating how when we sin Jesus is “back on the cross” suffering real pain because of what we did.
The Catholics are big on guilt and condemnation but never seemed to say much about His love.
So we have Christ offering an eternal sacrifice that somehow involves a mystical linkage between the cross and bread and wine. Now we go back to the Institution narratives and remember that Our Lord Himself made this explicit link at the Last Supper when he held aloft bread and wine and called it His Body and Blood, the very blood that would be shed the next day.
Mystical linkage??? In other words, you guys don't have any idea about the linkage but it must be there...
Heb 5:10 Called of God an high priest after the order of Melchisedec.
Heb 5:11 Of whom we have many things to say, and hard to be uttered, seeing ye are dull of hearing.
Heb 5:12 For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.
Heb 5:13 For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe.
Now you just read in a previous post of scripture that Jesus/Melchisedek made that offering one time, for all...Yet you insist on your own private interpretation which is contrary to the teaching of God...
So let's reject what God says, just go with that 'gift of reason'...
Isn't it amazing that they will take terms out of the bible like 'after the order of Melchisadek' and build a completely foreign doctrine on it and claim it is 'in the bible'...
The trick is to keep Catholics out of the bible and into their catechism...
So you want us to pay money to learn of your false doctrine of your false religion???
But or Rome, Scripture is relegated to being a servant to support her as needed, and thus must conform to what she autocratically decrees.
That is some much desperate special pleading, as it is not really applicable to the issue and would make any reference to beginnings and cessations meaningless.
For while it is true that God is outside time and space, we are dealing with His revelation which deals with us in time and space. In which He speaks of beginnings and culminations, including the creation of the universe and the work of atonement, while your hermeneutic here would make such parameters in revelation irrelevant.
The Holy Spirit repeatably states the atonement was a one time offering, but you make the Mass into an ongoing atonement, "a sacrifice of propitiation, by which God is appeased and rendered propitious," as by it He "offers himself a most acceptable Victim to the eternal Father, as he did upon the Cross," if you will be consistent with such RC teaching.
By “bloodless” sacrifice we mean that there is no *new* shedding of blood
But that Christ continues to offer it as an atonement, while Scripture states that was done and finished, and souls appropriate the benefits by effectual faith in the gospel of salvation, not be consuming physical food of any sort.
”This IS my body, this IS my blood”.
Which obviously, in the light of the rest of Scripture, did not mean Christ was in their stomach while He say before them, any more than David poured actual human blood out on the ground as an offering to the Lord, though he plainly stated,
And the three mighty men brake through the host of the Philistines, and drew water out of the well of Beth–lehem, that was by the gate, and took it, and brought it to David: nevertheless he would not drink thereof, but poured it out unto the Lord. And he said, Be it far from me, O Lord, that I should do this: is not this the blood of the men that went in jeopardy of their lives? therefore he would not drink it. These things did these three mighty men. (2 Samuel 23:16-17)
That's an understatement.
They also focus on his continually DYING, and not on His done death and resurrection.
Our sin put Jesus on the cross ONCE, not every time we sin.
Catholics also seem to have a hard time grasping the concept of *forgiveness* and what it really means.
Remember from what??? Did God tell you there is no past, present and future...That's not what God told the apostle John...
Rev 1:8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.
That shoots a massive hole in your theory...God lives outside of time and inside of time as well...
While God can gaze upon eternity, WE CAN'T...God doesn't make something present which requires a time line...For example, the Red Sea is not still wide open and the Earth is not being created, still...The sacrifice of Jesus required a time line...It happened once...That took care of the whole deal...It is finished...The result of that crucifixion is what is timeless...
When death occurred, the pain and suffering stopped...
Heb 12:2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.
Heb 12:3 For consider him that endured such contradiction of sinners against himself, lest ye be wearied and faint in your minds.
You guys don't seem to ever consider the ramifications of your belief...I guess you are taught not to...'Just believe as you are told' and don't ask any questions...
So is Jesus constantly going thru this bone breaking searing pain that never stops??? Does he die when you eat him???
Or is he in heaven and at the words of the priest turn a piece of his flesh into a little wafer that symbolized the suffering and death on the cross???
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.