The context of the Eucharist from Passover Seder : sacrifice, real presence, priest, unblemished lamb

[mikepec]

The context of the Eucharist is everywhere in scripture.

As one time protestant it was noticeable how myopic the reformers were.
The cherrypicking of single verses made them lose the big picture.

A few pointers
Blood sacrifice was part of the old covenant .
It was a sacrifice in a temple done only by a priest.
It was eaten in a ceremony

The old covenant had a Passover sacrifice.

Only unblemished animals “ not a bone broken” note the crucifixion.
Abraham was challenged to sacrifice his only son.

Jesus was born in Bethlehem translation “ house of bread”
Jesus was placed in an EATING trough.

The institution of the Eucharist was a Passover Seder.
The third cup of the Eucharist , after eating flesh of the sacrificial lamb , was called the cup of blessing.
Jesus elsewhere is called the lamb.

Paul says “ is not the cup of “blessing “ we bless, a sharing in the blood of Jesus”
If you do not study holistically, via rabbinic sources you would miss how specific Paul’s phrase was referring to the third cup of the 4 cup Seder,.

He said “ some are sick, some have died”, profaning it, so NOT a aymbol
You cannot profane a symbol,

Jesus said “ this IS my body “ not “ represents”
He said this “ this is my blood”not represents

He used the word meaning “ gnaw “ ( as of meat ) not consume in saying “ unless you eat my body,
And Jesus clearly makes eating his body a condition of eternal life!

( OSAS believers please note - He tells you to stuff, not just say I believe !)

A cup is always metaphor for sacrifice. Jesus and Paul use the word “ cup “

Then parts people miss, unless they study holistically,

The Seder does not end in the 3rd cup of blessing , it ends in the fourth, which was not taken in the upper room.

Jesus said he would not drink of the vine again until the kingdom comes

On the cross He says I thirst, and is given wine vinegar on hyssop, hyssop also refers back to Passover
He drinks wine, then says “ it is finished”

So what is finished?

Clearly he has not resurrected yet.
He means the Passover Seder and sacrificeis ended in the fourth cup and his death!
“ for this I was born “
The kingdom has come!

So the Eucharist as new covenant version of Passover sacrifice of an unblemished lamb is everywhere in scripture,

ALL the early fathers are united in saying that the Eucharist is a sacrifice, real flesh and blood valid only if done by someone authorised by bishop in succession.

An endless series of validated Eucharistic miracles show that it really is the flesh of Jesus. Onky the Catholic Church and orthodox have a valid Eucharist. Only the Catholic Church has valid Eucharist theology.

Catholics do not resacrifice Christ, they understand the Eucharist the same way the first fathers did.
They are participating in the once , eternal , never ending sadrifice that is the mass : marriage supper of the lamb.

The symbolic Eucharist is one more piece of the apostasy that was rhe reformation .

It’s also why I went back to the Catholic Church .

 

[TomL]

The context of the Eucharist is everywhere in scripture.

As one time protestant it was noticeable how myopic the reformers were.
The cherrypicking of single verses made them lose the big picture.

A few pointers
Blood sacrifice was part of the old covenant .
It was a sacrifice in a temple done only by a priest.
It was eaten in a ceremony

The old covenant had a Passover sacrifice.

Only unblemished animals “ not a bone broken” note the crucifixion.
Abraham was challenged to sacrifice his only son.

Jesus was born in Bethlehem translation “ house of bread”
Jesus was placed in an EATING trough.

The institution of the Eucharist was a Passover Seder.
The third cup of the Eucharist , after eating flesh of the sacrificial lamb , was called the cup of blessing.
Jesus elsewhere is called the lamb.

Paul says “ is not the cup of “blessing “ we bless, a sharing in the blood of Jesus”
If you do not study holistically, via rabbinic sources you would miss how specific Paul’s phrase was referring to the third cup of the 4 cup Seder,.

He said “ some are sick, some have died”, profaning it, so NOT a aymbol
You cannot profane a symbol,

Jesus said “ this IS my body “ not “ represents”
He said this “ this is my blood”not represents

He used the word meaning “ gnaw “ ( as of meat ) not consume in saying “ unless you eat my body,
And Jesus clearly makes eating his body a condition of eternal life!

( OSAS believers please note - He tells you to stuff, not just say I believe !)

A cup is always metaphor for sacrifice. Jesus and Paul use the word “ cup “

Then parts people miss, unless they study holistically,

The Seder does not end in the 3rd cup of blessing , it ends in the fourth, which was not taken in the upper room.

Jesus said he would not drink of the vine again until the kingdom comes

On the cross He says I thirst, and is given wine vinegar on hyssop, hyssop also refers back to Passover
He drinks wine, then says “ it is finished”

So what is finished?

Clearly he has not resurrected yet.
He means the Passover Seder and sacrificeis ended in the fourth cup and his death!
“ for this I was born “
The kingdom has come!

So the Eucharist as new covenant version of Passover sacrifice of an unblemished lamb is everywhere in scripture,

ALL the early fathers are united in saying that the Eucharist is a sacrifice, real flesh and blood valid only if done by someone authorised by bishop in succession.

An endless series of validated Eucharistic miracles show that it really is the flesh of Jesus. Onky the Catholic Church and orthodox have a valid Eucharist. Only the Catholic Church has valid Eucharist theology.

Catholics do not resacrifice Christ, they understand the Eucharist the same way the first fathers did.
They are participating in the once , eternal , never ending sadrifice that is the mass : marriage supper of the lamb.

The symbolic Eucharist is one more piece of the apostasy that was rhe reformation .

It’s also why I went back to the Catholic Church .

Do you deny the Roman Catholic church views the mass as a sacrifice?

Where do you see in the bible that any were given the power to call Christ down from heaven and sacrifice him?

 

[mikepec]

Do you deny the Roman Catholic church views the mass as a sacrifice?

Where do you see in the bible that any were given the power to call Christ down from heaven and sacrifice him?

THE church , Christs church , the early fathers spoke of the mass as a sacrifice since the beginning.
That is TRUE doctrine passed by the succession since the beginning.

Even The earliest known Christian documents c50-70 in the decades after Christ like the didache speak of the mass as a sacrifice,
“On the Lord's day, come together, break bread and give thanks, having first confessed yoursins, so that your sacrifice may be pure”

Only the Protestant apostasy of the Middle Ages sought to challenge that. Just like it wrecked most of the true faith.

But You should listen instead to those “ sent” to preach, “the pillar of truth”, instead of “leaning on your own understabding” ( all Bible references)


The answer to the riddle is in the concept of time which is not the same in heaven.
The sacrifice is once, but also continuing and forever.
The mass joins to it, it does not resacrifice.

The correct translation of rev 13:8 is “ the lamb slain from the foundation of the world” so the sacrifice - slaying was long before Calvary in earth time.!!
How does that fit with your view?
So your last sentence is nonsense.

The fundamental duty of a priest is in making the Passover sacrifice (, in Jesus case He is both priest and sacrificial lamb offering himself as victim) , but we know hebrews 7:3 that He is “a priest forever”, sacrificing forever
, so suffering “ repeatedly since the foundation of the world “ Hebrew 9:26 so the sacrifice is CONTINUING , “ once for all” means just that. A sacrifice Once. But From the beginning, continuing forever.

The problem is protestabt theology is both shallow and wrong. Born of the idea that all such as you can make up your own meabing for scripture. You can’t, and that’s why you all disagree on all essentials including this .
So,listen to the “ pillar of truth” given the power to “ bind and loose” the true meaning.

It’s like reading books on relativity or quantum theory. If you disagree it’s because YOU don’t understand, not they don’t understand.

Indeed Christ in Eucharistic miracles comes to reinforce the truth. It really is HIS flesh.
Another doctrine of THE church , whic Protestants apostasized.

 

[TomL]

THE church , Christs church , the early fathers spoke of the mass as a sacrifice since the beginning.
That is TRUE doctrine passed by the succession since the beginning.

Even The earliest known Christian documents c50-70 in the decades after Christ like the didache speak of the mass as a sacrifice,
“On the Lord's day, come together, break bread and give thanks, having first confessed yoursins, so that your sacrifice may be pure”

Only the Protestant apostasy of the Middle Ages sought to challenge that. Just like it wrecked most of the true faith.

But You should listen instead to those “ sent” to preach, “the pillar of truth”, instead of “leaning on your own understabding” ( all Bible references)


The answer to the riddle is in the concept of time which is not the same in heaven.
The sacrifice is once, but also continuing and forever.
The mass joins to it, it does not resacrifice.

The correct translation of rev 13:8 is “ the lamb slain from the foundation of the world” so the sacrifice - slaying was long before Calvary in earth time.!!
How does that fit with your view?
So your last sentence is nonsense.

The fundamental duty of a priest is in making the Passover sacrifice (, in Jesus case He is both priest and sacrificial lamb offering himself as victim) , but we know hebrews 7:3 that He is “a priest forever”, sacrificing forever
, so suffering “ repeatedly since the foundation of the world “ Hebrew 9:26 so the sacrifice is CONTINUING , “ once for all” means just that. A sacrifice Once. But From the beginning, continuing forever.

The problem is protestabt theology is both shallow and wrong. Born of the idea that all such as you can make up your own meabing for scripture. You can’t, and that’s why you all disagree on all essentials including this .
So,listen to the “ pillar of truth” given the power to “ bind and loose” the true meaning.

It’s like reading books on relativity or quantum theory. If you disagree it’s because YOU don’t understand, not they don’t understand.

Indeed Christ in Eucharistic miracles comes to reinforce the truth. It really is HIS flesh.
Another doctrine of THE church , whic Protestants apostasized.

The question was


Where do you see in the bible that any were given the power to call Christ down from heaven and sacrifice him?

I do not see an answer

and as for Rev 13:8 and and your claim of a continuing sacrifice

the idea is plainly unbiblical

Hebrews 7:27 (KJV 1900) — 27 Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.

Hebrews 9:25–28 (KJV 1900) — 25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others; 26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: 28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

Hebrews 10:5–10 (KJV 1900) — 5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: 6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure. 7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God. 8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law; 9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. 10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

 

[mikepec]

The question was


Where do you see in the bible that any were given the power to call Christ down from heaven and sacrifice him?

I do not see an answer

and as for Rev 13:8 and and your claim of a continuing sacrifice

the idea is plainly unbiblical

Hebrews 7:27 (KJV 1900) — 27 Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.

Hebrews 9:25–28 (KJV 1900) — 25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others; 26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: 28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

Hebrews 10:5–10 (KJV 1900) — 5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: 6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure. 7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God. 8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law; 9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. 10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

As I demonstrated your question is nonsense born of your own misunderstanding of scripture and the mass

Now read what I wrote instead. All explained

 

[TomL]

As I demonstrated your question is nonsense born of your own misunderstanding of scripture and the mass

Now read what I wrote instead. All explained

Afraid not

You did not answer my question nor did you address the scriptures I provided showing Jesus was sacrificed once not continually

The question was


Where do you see in the bible that any were given the power to call Christ down from heaven and sacrifice him?

I do not see an answer

and as for Rev 13:8 and and your claim of a continuing sacrifice

the idea is plainly unbiblical

Hebrews 7:27 (KJV 1900) — 27 Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.

Hebrews 9:25–28 (KJV 1900) — 25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others; 26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: 28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

Hebrews 10:5–10 (KJV 1900) — 5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: 6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure. 7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God. 8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law; 9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. 10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
Futher catholic doctrine hold the mass is a bloodless sacrifice and a bloodless sacrifice is not the sacrifice of Calvary
And that is another problem for catholic doctrine for
Hebrews 9:22 (KJV 1900) — 22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

 

[mikepec]

Afraid not

You did not answer my question nor did you address the scriptures I provided showing Jesus was sacrificed once not continually

The question was


Where do you see in the bible that any were given the power to call Christ down from heaven and sacrifice him?

I do not see an answer

and as for Rev 13:8 and and your claim of a continuing sacrifice

the idea is plainly unbiblical

Hebrews 7:27 (KJV 1900) — 27 Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.

Hebrews 9:25–28 (KJV 1900) — 25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others; 26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. 27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: 28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

Hebrews 10:5–10 (KJV 1900) — 5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: 6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure. 7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God. 8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law; 9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. 10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.
Futher catholic doctrine hold the mass is a bloodless sacrifice and a bloodless sacrifice is not the sacrifice of Calvary
And that is another problem for catholic doctrine for
Hebrews 9:22 (KJV 1900) — 22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

I answered that precisely, exactly as the early church taught by the apostles understood it.
The true faith was handed down by word of mouth in origin, which carried the meaning of what was then written

If your false interpretation was right - how can rev 13:8 speak of slain since the foundation of the world also be right?

In one corner we have the church , early fathers, apostolic succession and the teaching on Eucharist since the beginn8ng and ever since, named the “pillar of truth “ given the power to “ bind and loose” those SENT to teach. We have Jesus promise that the devil will not prevail against his church.

In the other corner are just TomH and others who think their own personal interpretation is right , when none of you even agree with each other, so you schism on doctrine again and again! Whatever you hear or teach on Sunday , you can be sure another Tom just down the road is teaching something else. How arrogant to believe you alone know the truth. You are misleading everyone else.
You can’t even get catholic doctrine right so your argument is a straw man,

As for your non question and straw man about what we believe.
Nowhere in the Bible does it say it has to be in the Bible to be true.
The pillar of truth is the church.
And if you don’t agree with church doctrine, the problem is YOUR understanding of scripture not christs church,

Anyway, I am called to tell you the truth. I’m not Called to make you believe it.

Sugges5 you read a book like “ mass of the early Christian’s “ or Hahns “ fourth cup”
You clearly need the true meaning of scripture explaining to you.

 

[TomL]

I answered that precisely, exactly as the early church taught by the apostles understood it.
The true faith was handed down by word of mouth in origin, which carried the meaning of what was then written

Actually there was a variety of opinions on the Eucharist

But you have not shown where any were granted the power to call Christ down from heaven and re-sacrifice him

Nor have you established Christ is continually sacrificed from scripture which notes he was sacrificed once

Nor can an unbloody sacrifice as your theology teaches be the same as the sacrifice at the cross

If your false interpretation was right - how can rev 13:8 speak of slain since the foundation of the world also be right?

In the plan of God

yet he was sacrificed once

Hebrews 7:27 (KJV 1900) — 27 Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.

Hebrews 9:12 (KJV 1900) — 12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

Hebrews 9:26 (KJV 1900) — 26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

Note how the text denies he suffered from the foundation of the world

Hebrews 9:28 (KJV 1900) — 28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

Hebrews 10:10 (KJV 1900) — 10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

Hebrews 10:12 (KJV 1900) — 12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;

Hebrews 10:14 (KJV 1900) — 14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

Your position denies the sufficiency of that sacrifice and attempts to equate his bloody sacrifice with an unbloody one contrary to scripture

Hebrews 9:22 (KJV 1900) — 22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

In one corner we have the church , early fathers, apostolic succession and the teaching on Eucharist since the beginn8ng and ever since, named the “pillar of truth “ given the power to “ bind and loose” those SENT to teach. We have Jesus promise that the devil will not prevail against his church.

Wrong

We have scripture and a mix of the apostolic fathers denying your view

Tertullian, “Against Marcion,” Bk 4, chapter 40:

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.

St. Augustine, “On Christian Instruction” (ca. AD 410), 3, 16, 24:

If a preceptive statement [in the Scriptures] forbids either vice or crime, or commands what is either useful or beneficial, it is not figurative. If, however, it seems to command vice or crime, or forbid what is either useful or beneficial, it is figurative. “Unless,” He says, “you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you shall not have life in you.” It seems to command crime or vice; therefore it is a figure prescribing that there be communication in the Lord’s passion and a grateful and salutary treasured remembrance that His flesh was crucified and wounded for us.

Both of these men clearly teach the Eucharist to be “figurative.” So does this mean not all early Christians and Fathers of the Church believed in the Real

Clement of Alexandria called the bread and the wine symbols of the body and blood of Christ

as did Eusebius of Caesarea

See William Webster: The church of Rome at the bar of history

 

[mikepec]

Actually there was a variety of opinions on the Eucharist

But you have not shown where any were granted the power to call Christ down from heaven and re-sacrifice him

Nor have you established Christ is continually sacrificed from scripture which notes he was sacrificed once

Nor can an unbloody sacrifice as your theology teaches be the same as the sacrifice at the cross



In the plan of God

yet he was sacrificed once

Hebrews 7:27 (KJV 1900) — 27 Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.

Hebrews 9:12 (KJV 1900) — 12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

Hebrews 9:26 (KJV 1900) — 26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

Note how the text denies he suffered from the foundation of the world

Hebrews 9:28 (KJV 1900) — 28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

Hebrews 10:10 (KJV 1900) — 10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

Hebrews 10:12 (KJV 1900) — 12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;

Hebrews 10:14 (KJV 1900) — 14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

Your position denies the sufficiency of that sacrifice and attempts to equate his bloody sacrifice with an unbloody one contrary to scripture

Hebrews 9:22 (KJV 1900) — 22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.







Wrong

We have scripture and a mix of the apostolic fathers denying your view

Tertullian, “Against Marcion,” Bk 4, chapter 40:

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.

St. Augustine, “On Christian Instruction” (ca. AD 410), 3, 16, 24:

If a preceptive statement [in the Scriptures] forbids either vice or crime, or commands what is either useful or beneficial, it is not figurative. If, however, it seems to command vice or crime, or forbid what is either useful or beneficial, it is figurative. “Unless,” He says, “you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you shall not have life in you.” It seems to command crime or vice; therefore it is a figure prescribing that there be communication in the Lord’s passion and a grateful and salutary treasured remembrance that His flesh was crucified and wounded for us.

Both of these men clearly teach the Eucharist to be “figurative.” So does this mean not all early Christians and Fathers of the Church believed in the Real

Clement of Alexandria called the bread and the wine symbols of the body and blood of Christ

as did Eusebius of Caesarea

See William Webster: The church of Rome at the bar of history

There are not a valid “ variety of opinions”

There is one correct one taught by the “pillar of truth” the church since the earliest of times, given the power by Jesus to declare true doctrine “bind and loose”
Ignatius / polycarp were taught by John the apostle, who wrote John 6 , and knew exactly what Jesus meant and the church has been consistent ever since. It really is body and blood. But only if presided by bishop in succession .

Then There is yours - apostate of the reformation , whose core doctrine , sola scriptura “ scripture can mean what I want it to mean “ is provably false.

Tertullian does not speak for the church . He was not taught by apostles, Was Tertullian even a priest? He was not a bishop in succession , had no power to bind and loose, which can only be done by successors as group or Peter alone
Nicea spoke for the church and confirmed true doctrine.

In apostate protestabt world all your opinions have equal weight. None speak with authority

And you can’t even research catholic belief properly, we do not nor we have ever claimed to resacrifice Jesus at the mass, a straw man.

 

[TomL]

There are not a valid “ variety of opinions”

There is one correct one taught by the “pillar of truth” the church since the earliest of times, given the power by Jesus to declare true doctrine “bind and loose”
Ignatius / polycarp were taught by John the apostle, who wrote John 6 , and knew exactly what Jesus meant and the church has been consistent ever since. It really is body and blood. But only if presided by bishop in succession .

Then There is yours - apostate of the reformation , whose core doctrine , sola scriptura “ scripture can mean what I want it to mean “ is provably false.

Tertullian does not speak for the church . He was not taught by apostles, Was Tertullian even a priest? He was not a bishop in succession , had no power to bind and loose, which can only be done by successors as group or Peter alone
Nicea spoke for the church and confirmed true doctrine.

In apostate protestabt world all your opinions have equal weight. None speak with authority

And you can’t even research catholic belief properly, we do not nor we have ever claimed to resacrifice Jesus at the mass, a straw man.

Sorry I just gave evidence that claim is false

Actually there was a variety of opinions on the Eucharist

But you have not shown where any were granted the power to call Christ down from heaven and re-sacrifice him

Nor have you established Christ is continually sacrificed from scripture which notes he was sacrificed once

Nor can an unbloody sacrifice as your theology teaches be the same as the sacrifice at the cross



In the plan of God

yet he was sacrificed once

Hebrews 7:27 (KJV 1900) — 27 Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.

Hebrews 9:12 (KJV 1900) — 12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

Hebrews 9:26 (KJV 1900) — 26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

Note how the text denies he suffered from the foundation of the world

Hebrews 9:28 (KJV 1900) — 28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

Hebrews 10:10 (KJV 1900) — 10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

Hebrews 10:12 (KJV 1900) — 12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;

Hebrews 10:14 (KJV 1900) — 14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

Your position denies the sufficiency of that sacrifice and attempts to equate his bloody sacrifice with an unbloody one contrary to scripture

Hebrews 9:22 (KJV 1900) — 22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.







Wrong

We have scripture and a mix of the apostolic fathers denying your view

Tertullian, “Against Marcion,” Bk 4, chapter 40:

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.

St. Augustine, “On Christian Instruction” (ca. AD 410), 3, 16, 24:

If a preceptive statement [in the Scriptures] forbids either vice or crime, or commands what is either useful or beneficial, it is not figurative. If, however, it seems to command vice or crime, or forbid what is either useful or beneficial, it is figurative. “Unless,” He says, “you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you shall not have life in you.” It seems to command crime or vice; therefore it is a figure prescribing that there be communication in the Lord’s passion and a grateful and salutary treasured remembrance that His flesh was crucified and wounded for us.

Both of these men clearly teach the Eucharist to be “figurative.” So does this mean not all early Christians and Fathers of the Church believed in the Real

Clement of Alexandria called the bread and the wine symbols of the body and blood of Christ

as did Eusebius of Caesarea

See William Webster: The church of Rome at the bar of history

Now you deny the mass is a sacrifice and accuse me of not being able to properly research Catholic doctrine

What is the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass?​

Mission Lab January 12, 2018

The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is not only a ritual which reminds us of the sacrifice of Calvary, but through the ministry of ordained priests, Christ continues, until the end of time, His sacrifice of the Cross in an unbloody manner.
The Holy Mass is the sacrifice by which the Church not only remembers Jesus Christ, but really brings Him, His saving Death, and His Resurrection into the present, so that His followers might become part of it. The Church can do this because Jesus is united to His Church in the Holy Spirit. When the Catholic Church celebrates the Eucharist, Jesus is truly there, and it is He Who does once more what He did at the Last Supper.
At the Last Supper, our Lord instituted the Eucharistic Sacrifice of His Body and Blood, to continue for all time by His sacrifice of the Cross until He would come again. In the Mass, Jesus gave His Church a remembrance of His Death and Resurrection, which is a true sacrifice. In the name of the whole Church, the priest offers the Sacrifice of Jesus in an unbloody and sacramental manner in the Holy Eucharist. The priest, acting in the Person of Christ, brings about the Eucharistic Sacrifice and offers it to the Father in the name of all the people.
The Mass is a prayer to the Father, in which we give Him thanks and praise for the merciful redemption He has offered us in His Son, Jesus Christ. We also ask forgiveness for our sins and beg the Father’s blessing upon ourselves and our fellowman.
The Mass is a sacrifice because it makes present our Lord’s own offering of Himself to His Father, on the Cross. When we participate in the Mass, in memory of Him, we enter into that offering and become a part of it.

https://afc.org/fc_question/what-is-the-holy-sacrifice-of-the-mass/

Lesson 24: On the Sacrifice of the Mass​

Q. 916. When and where are the bread and wine changed into the body and blood of Christ?
A. The bread and wine are changed into the body and blood of Christ at the Consecration in the Mass.

Q. 917. What is the Mass?
A. The Mass is the unbloody sacrifice of the body and blood of Christ.

Lesson 24: On the Sacrifice of the Mass

www.catholicnewsagency.com

Maybe it is you who has not understood the body of doctrine you signed on to

 

[mikepec]

Sorry I just gave evidence that claim is false

Actually there was a variety of opinions on the Eucharist

But you have not shown where any were granted the power to call Christ down from heaven and re-sacrifice him

Nor have you established Christ is continually sacrificed from scripture which notes he was sacrificed once

Nor can an unbloody sacrifice as your theology teaches be the same as the sacrifice at the cross



In the plan of God

yet he was sacrificed once

Hebrews 7:27 (KJV 1900) — 27 Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.

Hebrews 9:12 (KJV 1900) — 12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

Hebrews 9:26 (KJV 1900) — 26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

Note how the text denies he suffered from the foundation of the world

Hebrews 9:28 (KJV 1900) — 28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

Hebrews 10:10 (KJV 1900) — 10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

Hebrews 10:12 (KJV 1900) — 12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;

Hebrews 10:14 (KJV 1900) — 14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

Your position denies the sufficiency of that sacrifice and attempts to equate his bloody sacrifice with an unbloody one contrary to scripture

Hebrews 9:22 (KJV 1900) — 22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.







Wrong

We have scripture and a mix of the apostolic fathers denying your view

Tertullian, “Against Marcion,” Bk 4, chapter 40:

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.

St. Augustine, “On Christian Instruction” (ca. AD 410), 3, 16, 24:

If a preceptive statement [in the Scriptures] forbids either vice or crime, or commands what is either useful or beneficial, it is not figurative. If, however, it seems to command vice or crime, or forbid what is either useful or beneficial, it is figurative. “Unless,” He says, “you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you shall not have life in you.” It seems to command crime or vice; therefore it is a figure prescribing that there be communication in the Lord’s passion and a grateful and salutary treasured remembrance that His flesh was crucified and wounded for us.

Both of these men clearly teach the Eucharist to be “figurative.” So does this mean not all early Christians and Fathers of the Church believed in the Real

Clement of Alexandria called the bread and the wine symbols of the body and blood of Christ

as did Eusebius of Caesarea

See William Webster: The church of Rome at the bar of history

Now you deny the mass is a sacrifice and accuse me of not being able to properly research Catholic doctrine

What is the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass?​

Mission Lab January 12, 2018

The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is not only a ritual which reminds us of the sacrifice of Calvary, but through the ministry of ordained priests, Christ continues, until the end of time, His sacrifice of the Cross in an unbloody manner.
The Holy Mass is the sacrifice by which the Church not only remembers Jesus Christ, but really brings Him, His saving Death, and His Resurrection into the present, so that His followers might become part of it. The Church can do this because Jesus is united to His Church in the Holy Spirit. When the Catholic Church celebrates the Eucharist, Jesus is truly there, and it is He Who does once more what He did at the Last Supper.
At the Last Supper, our Lord instituted the Eucharistic Sacrifice of His Body and Blood, to continue for all time by His sacrifice of the Cross until He would come again. In the Mass, Jesus gave His Church a remembrance of His Death and Resurrection, which is a true sacrifice. In the name of the whole Church, the priest offers the Sacrifice of Jesus in an unbloody and sacramental manner in the Holy Eucharist. The priest, acting in the Person of Christ, brings about the Eucharistic Sacrifice and offers it to the Father in the name of all the people.
The Mass is a prayer to the Father, in which we give Him thanks and praise for the merciful redemption He has offered us in His Son, Jesus Christ. We also ask forgiveness for our sins and beg the Father’s blessing upon ourselves and our fellowman.
The Mass is a sacrifice because it makes present our Lord’s own offering of Himself to His Father, on the Cross. When we participate in the Mass, in memory of Him, we enter into that offering and become a part of it.

https://afc.org/fc_question/what-is-the-holy-sacrifice-of-the-mass/

Lesson 24: On the Sacrifice of the Mass​

Q. 916. When and where are the bread and wine changed into the body and blood of Christ?
A. The bread and wine are changed into the body and blood of Christ at the Consecration in the Mass.

Q. 917. What is the Mass?
A. The Mass is the unbloody sacrifice of the body and blood of Christ.

Lesson 24: On the Sacrifice of the Mass

www.catholicnewsagency.com

Maybe it is you who has not understood the body of doctrine you signed on to

Worse than have no clue, you don’t seem to care what Jesus handed down to apostles, and what they provably taught , and were given the power to bind and loose.
If you want to know the true faith read ignatius to smyrneans.
It’s clearly what John taught polycarp and ignatius.

Ignatius , taught by John , in the succession spoke about YOU., when he said of apostates
“They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes”
You are perishing and you seem thrilled to bits about it. Now read John 6 again.


Nowhere have you challenged it. The councils have spoken. They are the magisterium
You could have quoted THOUSANDS supporting the real flesh. The teaching of the church has not changed .

Instead you scrape the barrel to twist a falsehood you happen to believe.

So who do you say apostasized? Jesus or John ( or you…) it’s the last!

A matter of fact.
Tertullians opinion is just his own, is that how little you know about catholicism? For you to think tertullians opinion carries weight?
You even creatively interpret tertullian , it’s called clutching at straws.

Definitely good protestant material, becayse all that matters to you is your own false opinion of what scripture means.
That is why you all disagree with each other. Calvinists disagree with Calvin , who disagreed with all early fathers
The entire reformation apostasy is built on such as you.

Meanwhile the true faith is what I said.
Eucharistic miracles prove it.

Tell me in your fantasy world…
Where does the Bible say it has to be in the Bible?
Where did Jesus say “ read this” or “ write this”.
He did say do this ( eucharisy) for eternal life


Scripture does say the pillar of truth is the church! And that some ( not you) were given the Power to bind and loose meaning.
Some ( not you) were sent to preach.

You were born with two ears and two eyes , only one mouth.
Suggest you use them in that ratio.

 

[TomL]

Worse than have no clue, you don’t seem to care what Jesus handed down to apostles, and what they provably taught , and were given the power to bind and loose.
If you want to know the true faith read ignatius to smyrneans.
It’s clearly what John taught polycarp and ignatius.

Nowhere hace you challenged it.
Tertullians opinion is just his own, is that how little you know about catholicism?


So who do you say apostasized? Jesus or John ( or you…) it’s the last!

Definitely good protestant material, becayse all that matters to you is your own false opinion of what scripture means.
That is why you all disagree with each other. Calvinists disagree with Calvin , who disagreed with all early fathers
The entire reformation apostasy is built on such as you.

Meanwhile the true faith is what I said.
Eucharistic miracles prove it.

Tell me in your fantasy world…
Where does the Bible say it has to be in the Bible?
Where did Jesus say “ read this” or “ write this”.
He did say do this ( eucharisy) for eternal life


Scripture does say the pillar of truth is the church! And that some ( not you) were given the Power to bind and loose meaning.
Some ( not you) were sent to preach.

You were born with two ears and two eyes , only one mouth.
Suggest you use them in that ratio.

Nowhere was anyone given power to call Christ down from heaven and offer him up in sacrifice

Acts 3:21 (NASB 2020) — 21 whom heaven must receive until the period of restoration of all things, about which God spoke by the mouths of His holy prophets from ancient times.


Christ is ensconced in heaven until the time of the restitution of all things

 

[mikepec]

Nowhere was anyone given power to call Christ down from heaven and offer him up in sacrifice

Acts 3:21 (NASB 2020) — 21 whom heaven must receive until the period of restoration of all things, about which God spoke by the mouths of His holy prophets from ancient times.


Christ is ensconced in heaven until the time of the restitution of all things

But then no catholic “calls down Christ from heaven to offer him up in sacrifice”

You are lost in a maze of your own invention. Why is it all Protestants don’t like the faith Jesus handed them
so they reinvent it In THEIR OWN image not Gods?

 

[TomL]

But then no catholic “calls down Christ from heaven to offer him up in sacrifice”

You are lost in a maze of your own invention. Why is it all Protestants don’t like the faith Jesus handed them
so they reinvent it In THEIR OWN image not Gods?

Sorry but apparently you do not know Catholic doctrine as well as you should

Will you deny the real presence?

Will you deny the mass is a sacrifice?

The Holy Eucharist​

The greatest of the seven sacraments is the Holy Eucharist. The Catholic Church teaches that in the Eucharist, Our Lord Jesus Christ, true God and true man, is really present under the appearances of bread and wine. Our Lord is not merely symbolized by the bread and wine; nor is he present only through the faith of those present. Rather, the two material things, bread and wine, are completely changed into the body and blood of Jesus Christ, leaving behind only their sensible appearances. Thus, through the words of consecration spoken by the priest, Jesus, without ceasing to be present in a natural way in heaven, is also present sacramentally, body, blood, soul and divinity, in many places throughout the world.
The Eucharist is not only a sacrament but also a sacrifice. In it Jesus, acting through the priest, makes present again in an unbloody manner the sacrifice which he offered once for all by shedding his blood on Calvary. In Holy Communion, by obeying Jesus' command to eat his flesh and drink his blood, the faithful are also united spiritually with Jesus himself, and they unite their own prayers, works and sufferings to his perfect sacrifice.

 

[mikepec]

So for anyone unlike Tom, who cares what the Catholics actually teach on the mass, instead of the much repeated fallacious nonsense he echoes.

It’s all there from 1322 on In Our catechism read it.

Unlike Tom we don’t make up our theology from our own opinions,

We don’t “ resacrifice”anyone, indeed we don’t do anything. it is Christ who presides to make present the once and for all sacrifice He himself changes bread and wine into His body and blood

The liturgy of Christs church, that is Catholic Church, has not changed in substance and has changed little in detail since it was first noted in the earliest Christian documents.

The service is not a rock band, it did not revolve around a long homily or an altar call. All modern inventions.

The mass was readings of scripture and then the breaking of bread, whose significance is described in disciples of John who write John 6 , and the liturgy described by Justin martyr not long after . “ the real flesh”

Tgere is far more scripture in the mass, than any Protestant service.


Has such as Tom ever considered
1/ that he rides roughshod over what all Christians did, believed and taught since the first.
And
2/ he holds Christ in so little esteem , that like calvin he thinks they all went off the rails, and so he thinks Christ was impotent to keep his church on track, when Christ promised he would keep the gates of hell from prevailing against “ the pillar of truth” that is His Church. So Tom thinks Christ doesn’t even keep promises!

What an appallingly low view of Christ such as Tom have.

Tom thinks christ is impotent and it needs Tom to reveal the real truth.
The arrogance of protestabrs beggars belief. It’s part of why I left!

They all think it is all about their own interpretation of scripture in their designer religions in their own image
, And they can’t even agree on the essentials of their religions. They are all different which is why they schism. . They all have a different religion, and it certainly isn’t Christianity as taught and understood by the first Christian’s who were charged with handing the true faith down.

So I suggest all of you read the catechism , and the references.
It is a disgrace that Tom seeks to challenge what he has never studied.

 

[TomL]

So for anyone unlike Tom, who cares what the Catholics actually teach on the mass, instead of the much repeated fallacious nonsense he echoes.

It’s all there from 1322 on In Our catechism read it.

Unlike Tom we don’t make up our theology from our own opinions,

We don’t “ resacrifice”anyone, indeed we don’t do anything. it is Christ who presides to make present the once and for all sacrifice He himself changes bread and wine into His body and blood

The liturgy of Christs church, that is Catholic Church, has not changed in substance and has changed little in detail since it was first noted in the earliest Christian documents.

The service is not a rock band, it did not revolve around a long homily or an altar call. All modern inventions.

The mass was readings of scripture and then the breaking of bread, whose significance is described in disciples of John who write John 6 , and the liturgy described by Justin martyr not long after . “ the real flesh”

Tgere is far more scripture in the mass, than any Protestant service.


Has such as Tom ever considered
1/ that he rides roughshod over what all Christians did, believed and taught since the first.
And
2/ he holds Christ in so little esteem , that like calvin he thinks they all went off the rails, and so he thinks Christ was impotent to keep his church on track, when Christ promised he would keep the gates of hell from prevailing against “ the pillar of truth” that is His Church. So Tom thinks Christ doesn’t even keep promises!

What an appallingly low view of Christ such as Tom have.

Tom thinks christ is impotent and it needs Tom to reveal the real truth.
The arrogance of protestabrs beggars belief. It’s part of why I left!

They all think it is all about their own interpretation of scripture in their designer religions in their own image
, And they can’t even agree on the essentials of their religions. They are all different which is why they schism. . They all have a different religion, and it certainly isn’t Christianity as taught and understood by the first Christian’s who were charged with handing the true faith down.

So I suggest all of you read the catechism , and the references.
It is a disgrace that Tom seeks to challenge what he has never studied.

Um this is catholic doctrine

The Holy Eucharist​

The greatest of the seven sacraments is the Holy Eucharist. The Catholic Church teaches that in the Eucharist, Our Lord Jesus Christ, true God and true man, is really present under the appearances of bread and wine. Our Lord is not merely symbolized by the bread and wine; nor is he present only through the faith of those present. Rather, the two material things, bread and wine, are completely changed into the body and blood of Jesus Christ, leaving behind only their sensible appearances. Thus, through the words of consecration spoken by the priest, Jesus, without ceasing to be present in a natural way in heaven, is also present sacramentally, body, blood, soul and divinity, in many places throughout the world.
The Eucharist is not only a sacrament but also a sacrifice. In it Jesus, acting through the priest, makes present again in an unbloody manner the sacrifice which he offered once for all by shedding his blood on Calvary. In Holy Communion, by obeying Jesus' command to eat his flesh and drink his blood, the faithful are also united spiritually with Jesus himself, and they unite their own prayers, works and sufferings to his perfect sacrifice.

The Holy Eucharist | EWTN

EWTN is a global, Catholic Television, Catholic Radio, and Catholic News Network that provides catholic programming and news coverage from around the world.

www.ewtn.com

J. POHLE

Therefore, the actual sacrifice of Christ on the cross and the sacrifice of the Mass are inseparably united as one single sacrifice: The Council of Trent in response to Protestant objections decreed, “The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priests, who then offered Himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different,” and “In this divine sacrifice...

The Sacrifice of the Mass – CERC - Catholic Education Resource C…​

www.catholiceducation.org/en/culture/catholic-contributions/the-sacrifice-of-th…

See also

Sacrifice of the Mass

Mass, SACRIFICE OF THE.—A. The Dogmatic Doctrine of the Mass.—The word Mass (missa) first established itself as the general designation for the Eucharistic Sacr...

www.catholic.com

 

[mikepec]

Um this is catholic doctrine

The Holy Eucharist​

The greatest of the seven sacraments is the Holy Eucharist. The Catholic Church teaches that in the Eucharist, Our Lord Jesus Christ, true God and true man, is really present under the appearances of bread and wine. Our Lord is not merely symbolized by the bread and wine; nor is he present only through the faith of those present. Rather, the two material things, bread and wine, are completely changed into the body and blood of Jesus Christ, leaving behind only their sensible appearances. Thus, through the words of consecration spoken by the priest, Jesus, without ceasing to be present in a natural way in heaven, is also present sacramentally, body, blood, soul and divinity, in many places throughout the world.
The Eucharist is not only a sacrament but also a sacrifice. In it Jesus, acting through the priest, makes present again in an unbloody manner the sacrifice which he offered once for all by shedding his blood on Calvary. In Holy Communion, by obeying Jesus' command to eat his flesh and drink his blood, the faithful are also united spiritually with Jesus himself, and they unite their own prayers, works and sufferings to his perfect sacrifice.

The Holy Eucharist | EWTN

EWTN is a global, Catholic Television, Catholic Radio, and Catholic News Network that provides catholic programming and news coverage from around the world.

www.ewtn.com

J. POHLE

Therefore, the actual sacrifice of Christ on the cross and the sacrifice of the Mass are inseparably united as one single sacrifice: The Council of Trent in response to Protestant objections decreed, “The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priests, who then offered Himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different,” and “In this divine sacrifice...

The Sacrifice of the Mass – CERC - Catholic Education Resource C…​

View attachment 896
www.catholiceducation.org/en/culture/catholic-contributions/the-sacrifice-of-th…

See also

Sacrifice of the Mass

Mass, SACRIFICE OF THE.—A. The Dogmatic Doctrine of the Mass.—The word Mass (missa) first established itself as the general designation for the Eucharistic Sacr...

www.catholic.com

Now actually READ it this time.

And keep reading it till you understand it

Makes “ present again” not “ sacrifice again”


Tell me.

How does it feel to believe that just you know better than all of Christs church for 1500 years and most of it since.
To believe Christ got it wrong not you, and that He is so impotent he needs Tom to “ correct” his church.

He doesn’t!

The arrogance of Protestants like you beggars belief.
Too arrogant to let the truth in.

I asked you once.
How does YOUR UTTER NONSENSE of assuming a one point of time sacrifice at Calvary square with rev13:8 - the lamb slain BEFORE the foundation of the world?

Answer the once for all sacrifice is EVER presents, mass joins it, re presents it, it does not repeat it.

 

[TomL]

Now actually READ it this time.

And keep reading it till you understand it

Makes “ present again” not “ sacrifice again”


Tell me.

How does it feel to believe that just you know better than all of Christs church for 1500 years and most of it since.
To believe Christ got it wrong not you, and that He is so impotent he needs Tom to “ correct” his church.

He doesn’t!

The arrogance of Protestants like you beggars belief.
Too arrogant to let the truth in.

I asked you once.
How does YOUR UTTER NONSENSE of assuming a one point of time sacrifice at Calvary square with rev13:8 - the lamb slain BEFORE the foundation of the world?

Answer the once for all sacrifice is EVER presents, mass joins it, re presents it, it does not repeat it.

Again it is a sacrifice - an unbloody sacrifice

An unbloody sacrifice is not the sacrifice Christ offered up

further did you fail to consider the consecration of the priest who changes the bread and wine into the spirital body and blood of Christ

And once again the entire church did not hold to this doctrine

as for revelation it cannot contradict

Hebrews 10:12 (KJV 1900) — 12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;

Hebrews 7:27 (KJV 1900) — 27 Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.

Hebrews 9:12 (KJV 1900) — 12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

Hebrews 9:26 (KJV 1900) — 26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

Hebrews 9:28 (KJV 1900) — 28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

Hebrews 10:10 (KJV 1900) — 10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

Now consider other translation

Revelation 13:8 (ESV) — 8 and all who dwell on earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain.

Revelation 13:8 (LEB) — 8 And all those who live on the earth will worship him, everyone whose name is not written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slaughtered.

Revelation 13:8 (UASV) — 8 And all those who dwell on the earth will worship it, everyone whose name is not written from the foundation of the world in the scroll of life of the Lamb who was slaughtered.

Revelation 13:8 (NASB 2020) — 8 All who live on the earth will worship him, everyone whose name has not been written since the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who has been slaughtered.

and consider which translation are consistent with the verses quoted from Hebrews

 

[mikepec]

Again it is a sacrifice - an unbloody sacrifice

An unbloody sacrifice is not the sacrifice Christ offered up

further did you fail to consider the consecration of the priest who changes the bread and wine into the spirital body and blood of Christ

And once again the entire church did not hold to this doctrine

as for revelation it cannot contradict

Hebrews 10:12 (KJV 1900) — 12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;

Hebrews 7:27 (KJV 1900) — 27 Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.

Hebrews 9:12 (KJV 1900) — 12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

Hebrews 9:26 (KJV 1900) — 26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

Hebrews 9:28 (KJV 1900) — 28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

Hebrews 10:10 (KJV 1900) — 10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

Now consider other translation

Revelation 13:8 (ESV) — 8 and all who dwell on earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain.

Revelation 13:8 (LEB) — 8 And all those who live on the earth will worship him, everyone whose name is not written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slaughtered.

Revelation 13:8 (UASV) — 8 And all those who dwell on the earth will worship it, everyone whose name is not written from the foundation of the world in the scroll of life of the Lamb who was slaughtered.

Revelation 13:8 (NASB 2020) — 8 All who live on the earth will worship him, everyone whose name has not been written since the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who has been slaughtered.

and consider which translation are consistent with the verses quoted from Hebrews

Now study Christs church, and what he handed down , through apostolic succession that was proclaimed true church doctrine and held by all except apostates. Ignatius tells you what it is.he got it from John, who got it from Christ.,

Your opinions, on meanings are utterly irrelevant. You were not sent. You have no power to bind truth,

The priest does nothing, Christ acts through him.
It is the real body and blood, not spiritual.

 

[TomL]

Now study Christs church, and what he handed down , through apostolic succession that was proclaimed true church doctrine and held by all except apostates. Ignatius tells you what it is.he got it from John, who got it from Christ.,

Your opinions, on meanings are utterly irrelevant. You were not sent. You have no power to bind truth,

The priest does nothing, Christ acts through him.
It is the real body and blood, not spiritual.

I already told you not all held that position

And certainly they all did not deny the efficiency of Christ's one sacrifice if any did at all

Try finding all Father's speaking of re-presenting Christ's sacrifice or equating Christ's bloody sacrifice with an unbloody one

Ps The bible still states Christ remains in the heavens until the restoration of all things

sitting at the right hand of the father until all enemies are made his footstool