The plain reading of Scripture then Traditional

[GentleGospeller]

The plain reading of Scripture then Traditional

In reading the scripture, the "plain reading" mind you, I have never, ever once considered afterward going to the "Tradtional" (capital "T", mind you). Why would I? Jesus constantly spoke of the false traditions of mankind which sought to interpose themselves into the place of God's own plain words.

The word tradition in scripture is generally a reference to bad teachings of mankind. The few positives (mentioned by Paul) are plainly described in their context.

"tradition", "traditions" - bad sense

Mat.15:2,3,6
Mar. 7:3,5,9,13
Gal. 1:14
Col. 2:8
1 Pet. 1:18

The word "custom" simply means a positive habit, or repeated action (Luk. 4:16, likewise "manner" (Act. 17:2)).

Or as one "sitting at the receipt of custom" (Mat. 9:9; Mar. 2:14; Luk. 5:27), or giving "custom to whom custom" (Rom. 13:7) is due.

Also, it can mean a bad tradition, a wicked custom.

"custom" - evil or heathen sense

1 Sam. 2:13
Jhn. 18:39
1 Cor. 11:16

"customs" - wicked sense

Lev. 18:30
Jer. 10:3

There are two known places that the word "tradition" is utilized in a positive meaning.

"tradition" - good sense

2 Thes. 2:15
2 Thes. 3:6

Just read 2 Thes. 3.

2Th 3:6 Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us.
2Th 3:7 For yourselves know how ye ought to follow us: for we behaved not ourselves disorderly among you;
2Th 3:8 Neither did we eat any man's bread for nought; but wrought with labour and travail night and day, that we might not be chargeable to any of you:
2Th 3:9 Not because we have not power, but to make ourselves an ensample unto you to follow us.
2Th 3:10 For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.
2Th 3:11 For we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busybodies.
2Th 3:12 Now them that are such we command and exhort by our Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread.
2Th 3:13 But ye, brethren, be not weary in well doing.
2Th 3:14 And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed.
2Th 3:15 Yet count him not as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother.

 

[atpollard]

So for the first 1500 years, all Christianity believed in the literal flesh and blood reality of Jesus in the Eucharist.

Meh … for most of that 1500 years, the majority of the population (80%) were agrarian peasants being led by illiterate clergy practicing a combination of Christianity and local superstition. Around 1500 the Printing Press was invented, there was an explosion in literacy (priests and laity) and Bibles were printed in vernacular so people could read the actual Word of God for themselves. [access to books was restricted during the literate early church, and access to literacy was restricted during the Middle Ages.]

Most people believed bad air caused diseases and leeches would cure them, so there is that.

 

[GentleGospeller]

We can say with all safety and intellectual honesty, that all Christianity for the first 1500 years believed in the real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist, body, blood, soul and divinity

That is not even true on the face of it.

[1] Do not include me in your "We". I think your statement is blatantly dishonest, and misrepresentative, and a re-writing of sacred history.

[2] Do not use the word "Christianity", as it should be "Catholicity". Many Christians died in rejecting such an idea as you proclaim, and they are written in the Catholic records themselves. Catholics just called them heretics, schismatics, then proscribed them, burned them, harried them out of the land, arrested them, jailed them, killed them, tortured them, starved them, stole all their property, & then some.

[3] Even John Wycliffe, a Catholic, though later condemned as a heretic, and whose bones were dug up, cursed and burned and thrown into the river swift, demonstrated in his own research that transubstantiation was a 'modern' doctrine in hIs own day, and first proclaimed by Pope Innocent III, at the IV (4th) Lateran Council. (The Fourth Council of the Lateran or Lateran IV was convoked by Pope Innocent III in April 1213 and opened at the Lateran Palace in Rome on 11 November 1215.) See Canon 1 - Fourth Council of the Lateran - Wikipedia

[4] There is no documentable 1500 year history for the dogma of Transubstantiation. Catholicism does seriously try by bending words of many of the so called ECF (Easily Fellows) though. They often read into their statements things which do not exist there, thus arguing in a circle by their approval of their own a priori.

[5] There are several theological, practical, prophetical, typological, etc issues with the Catholic "Mass" and "Transubstantiation" and especially with physically eating the blood, body, soul and divinity of the Son of God and believing that one does.

 

[Cathode]

That is not even true on the face of it.

[1] Do not include me in your "We". I think your statement is blatantly dishonest, and misrepresentative, and a re-writing of sacred history.

[2] Do not use the word "Christianity", as it should be "Catholicity". Many Christians died in rejecting such an idea as you proclaim, and they are written in the Catholic records themselves. Catholics just called them heretics, schismatics, then proscribed them, burned them, harried them out of the land, arrested them, jailed them, killed them, tortured them, starved them, stole all their property, & then some.

[3] Even John Wycliffe, a Catholic, though later condemned as a heretic, and whose bones were dug up, cursed and burned and thrown into the river swift, demonstrated in his own research that transubstantiation was a 'modern' doctrine in hIs own day, and first proclaimed by Pope Innocent III, at the IV (4th) Lateran Council. (The Fourth Council of the Lateran or Lateran IV was convoked by Pope Innocent III in April 1213 and opened at the Lateran Palace in Rome on 11 November 1215.) See Canon 1 - Fourth Council of the Lateran - Wikipedia

[4] There is no documentable 1500 year history for the dogma of Transubstantiation. Catholicism does seriously try by bending words of many of the so called ECF (Easily Fellows) though. They often read into their statements things which do not exist there, thus arguing in a circle by their approval of their own a priori.

[5] There are several theological, practical, prophetical, typological, etc issues with the Catholic "Mass" and "Transubstantiation" and especially with physically eating the blood, body, soul and divinity of the Son of God and believing that one does.

As pages turn, chapters end and books close, men make their choices.

If you were to take an oath, a solemn oath for absolute surety of your soul, what would you base it on?

“ This is my Body “

“ My flesh is real food and my blood is real drink “

I take an oath before all of you.

May I never look upon The Holy Face of God if Jesus words are untrue.

Heaven and earth will pass away, but Jesus own words will never pass away.

Jesus words are the invitation to the paschal feast, Jesus is pure Life.

Was it enough the Passover Lamb be slain ? No, it must also be eaten.

“ Unless you eat the flesh of the son of man and drink His blood, you have no life in you “

All of Scripture invites you to receive Jesus Himself in the Eucharist, if not, you have missed the entire purpose and point of Scripture.

 

[GentleGospeller]

As pages turn, chapters end and books close, men make their choices.

If you were to take an oath, a solemn oath for absolute surety of your soul, what would you base it on?

“ This is my Body “

“ My flesh is real food and my blood is real drink “

I take an oath before all of you.

May I never look upon The Holy Face of God if Jesus words are untrue.

Heaven and earth will pass away, but Jesus own words will never pass away.

Jesus words are the invitation to the paschal feast, Jesus is pure Life.

Was it enough the Passover Lamb be slain ? No, it must also be eaten.

“ Unless you eat the flesh of the son of man and drink His blood, you have no life in you “

All of Scripture invites you to receive Jesus Himself in the Eucharist, if not, you have missed the entire purpose and point of Scripture.

Please look at my response. - The plain reading of Scripture then Traditional

The word (G2076; εστιν):

Jesus said:

"Take, eat; this is (G2076; εστιν) my body." (Matthew 26:26; Mark 14:22)

"This is (G2076; εστιν) my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me." (Luke 22:19)

"Take, eat: this is (G2076; εστιν) my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me." (1 Corinthians 11:24)

"For this is (G2076; εστιν) my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins." (Matthew 26:28)

"This is (G2076; εστιν) my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many." (Mark 14:24)

"This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you." (Luke 22:20)

"This cup is (G2076; εστιν) the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me." (1 Corinthians 11:25)

"Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day." (John 6:54)

"For my flesh is (G2076; εστιν) meat indeed (G230; αληθως), and my blood is (G2076; εστιν) drink indeed (G230; αληθως)." (John 6:55)

"He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him." (John 6:56)​

Jesus also said by inspiration through Moses:

Exodus 12:11 KJB - And thus shall ye eat it; with your loins girded, your shoes on your feet, and your staff in your hand; and ye shall eat it in haste: it is the LORD'S passover.

Exodus 12:11 Origen's Hexapla - οὕτως δὲ φάγεσθε αὐτό· αἱ ὀσφύες ὑμῶν περιεζωσμέναι, καὶ τὰ ὑποδήματα ἐν τοῖς ποσὶν ὑμῶν, καὶ αἱ βακτηρίαι ἐν ταῖς χερσὶν ὑμῶν· καὶ ἔδεσθε αὐτὸ μετὰ σπουδῆς· πασχα ἐστὶν (G2076) κυρίῳ.​

Is the natural lamb, the actual "passover" or is it a symbol, a type, a shadow. It says, "estin".

Jesus, speaking of John the Baptist (Matthew 11:13), said:

Matthew 11:14 KJB - And if ye will receive it, this is (G2076; εστιν) Elias, which was for to come.

Matthew 11:14 GNT TR - και ει θελετε δεξασθαι αυτος εστιν (G2076) ηλιας ο μελλων ερχεσθαι​

So, is John the Baptist literally, naturally and actually Elijah/Elias? or is it spiritual, symbolic? Do we have to guess?

Luk_1:17 And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.​

Jesus said:

John 19:26 When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son!​

Is John the Apostle the natural, physical son of Mary?

Jesus said:

John 15:1 I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.

John 15:5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.​

Is Jesus a physical vine of greenery? the disciples branches of green leafy tree?

Jesus said:

John 10:7 Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep.

John 10:9 I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.​

Is Jesus a physical, natural door of wood? Are the Disciples physically or naturally sheep?

Jesus said:

Matthew 4:13 Ye are (G2075; εστε) the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men.​

Are Christians literally a grain of natural salt?

Matthew 5:14 Ye are (G2075; εστε) the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid.​

Are Christians literally, naturually a particle/waveform? a natural metropolis of mortar, brick, and metal?

Jesus said:

Matthew 13:38 The field is (G2076; εστιν) the world; the good seed are (G1510; εισιν) the children of the kingdom; but the tares are (G1510; εισιν) the children of the wicked one;​

field?, seed?, tares? Jesus is speaking after the parable is over.

Jesus said:

John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

Mark 14:38 Watch ye and pray, lest ye enter into temptation. The spirit truly is ready, but the flesh is weak.​

Since Jesus said, "the flesh profiteth nothing", why does Roman Catholicism say/teach the opposite, that the 'host' (Roman Catholicism Eucharist) must be believed to be actual "flesh" (and blood) of Jesus, and that it "profits"? According to Jesus which is that which quickeneth (makes alive)? What then was "spirit" according to Jesus? Flesh or words?

John 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.​

Jesus spake in reference to the bread, "this is my body". He did not say in reference to the bread, "this is my blood". Why does Roman Catholicism say other that what Jesus said in regards to their 'host', for they teach it is "Christ is present in the sacrament with His Flesh and Blood, Body and Soul, Humanity and Divinity" - CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: The Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist

When Jesus said, "Take eat, this is my body", "Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.", Jesus had not yet died upon the Cross. How could it be an actual sacrifice that Thursday Night (6th day, not on Sabbath (the 7th day) or Sunday (the first day))? Did anyone think to take a bite out of Jesus while He was on the earth, alive, before or after Calvary?

Paul under inspiration of the Holy Ghost, said:

1 Corinthians 10:4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was (G2258; ην) Christ.​

Is Jesus a natural piece of flint?

What about the phrase "This cup":

Luk 22:20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.​

Does any Catholic take that literally as it reads, or do they assume something instead? Jesus did not say what was "in the cup", but clearly said "this cup". What Catholic accepts that? None. They instead have to say that what is "in" the cup, and not "the cup" itself.

You can swear any oath you want, and you have bound yourself to it, foolishly I might add, but that doesn't make what you think about those words true or accurate or even logical.

Jesus used the natural things of the world, to convey heavenly/spiritual things. I provided that in the linked response above.

Catholicism reverses those things, as many before them also did.

 

[Cathode]

Please look at my response. - The plain reading of Scripture then Traditional

The word (G2076; εστιν):

Jesus said:

"Take, eat; this is (G2076; εστιν) my body." (Matthew 26:26; Mark 14:22)

"This is (G2076; εστιν) my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me." (Luke 22:19)

"Take, eat: this is (G2076; εστιν) my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me." (1 Corinthians 11:24)

"For this is (G2076; εστιν) my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins." (Matthew 26:28)

"This is (G2076; εστιν) my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many." (Mark 14:24)

"This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you." (Luke 22:20)

"This cup is (G2076; εστιν) the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me." (1 Corinthians 11:25)

"Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day." (John 6:54)

"For my flesh is (G2076; εστιν) meat indeed (G230; αληθως), and my blood is (G2076; εστιν) drink indeed (G230; αληθως)." (John 6:55)

"He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him." (John 6:56)​

Jesus also said by inspiration through Moses:

Exodus 12:11 KJB - And thus shall ye eat it; with your loins girded, your shoes on your feet, and your staff in your hand; and ye shall eat it in haste: it is the LORD'S passover.

Exodus 12:11 Origen's Hexapla - οὕτως δὲ φάγεσθε αὐτό· αἱ ὀσφύες ὑμῶν περιεζωσμέναι, καὶ τὰ ὑποδήματα ἐν τοῖς ποσὶν ὑμῶν, καὶ αἱ βακτηρίαι ἐν ταῖς χερσὶν ὑμῶν· καὶ ἔδεσθε αὐτὸ μετὰ σπουδῆς· πασχα ἐστὶν (G2076) κυρίῳ.​

Is the natural lamb, the actual "passover" or is it a symbol, a type, a shadow. It says, "estin".

Jesus, speaking of John the Baptist (Matthew 11:13), said:

Matthew 11:14 KJB - And if ye will receive it, this is (G2076; εστιν) Elias, which was for to come.

Matthew 11:14 GNT TR - και ει θελετε δεξασθαι αυτος εστιν (G2076) ηλιας ο μελλων ερχεσθαι​

So, is John the Baptist literally, naturally and actually Elijah/Elias? or is it spiritual, symbolic? Do we have to guess?

Luk_1:17 And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.​

Jesus said:

John 19:26 When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son!​

Is John the Apostle the natural, physical son of Mary?

Jesus said:

John 15:1 I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.

John 15:5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.​

Is Jesus a physical vine of greenery? the disciples branches of green leafy tree?

Jesus said:

John 10:7 Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep.

John 10:9 I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.​

Is Jesus a physical, natural door of wood? Are the Disciples physically or naturally sheep?

Jesus said:

Matthew 4:13 Ye are (G2075; εστε) the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men.​

Are Christians literally a grain of natural salt?

Matthew 5:14 Ye are (G2075; εστε) the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid.​

Are Christians literally, naturually a particle/waveform? a natural metropolis of mortar, brick, and metal?

Jesus said:

Matthew 13:38 The field is (G2076; εστιν) the world; the good seed are (G1510; εισιν) the children of the kingdom; but the tares are (G1510; εισιν) the children of the wicked one;​

field?, seed?, tares? Jesus is speaking after the parable is over.

Jesus said:

John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

Mark 14:38 Watch ye and pray, lest ye enter into temptation. The spirit truly is ready, but the flesh is weak.​

Since Jesus said, "the flesh profiteth nothing", why does Roman Catholicism say/teach the opposite, that the 'host' (Roman Catholicism Eucharist) must be believed to be actual "flesh" (and blood) of Jesus, and that it "profits"? According to Jesus which is that which quickeneth (makes alive)? What then was "spirit" according to Jesus? Flesh or words?

John 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.​

Jesus spake in reference to the bread, "this is my body". He did not say in reference to the bread, "this is my blood". Why does Roman Catholicism say other that what Jesus said in regards to their 'host', for they teach it is "Christ is present in the sacrament with His Flesh and Blood, Body and Soul, Humanity and Divinity" - CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: The Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist

When Jesus said, "Take eat, this is my body", "Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.", Jesus had not yet died upon the Cross. How could it be an actual sacrifice that Thursday Night (6th day, not on Sabbath (the 7th day) or Sunday (the first day))? Did anyone think to take a bite out of Jesus while He was on the earth, alive, before or after Calvary?

Paul under inspiration of the Holy Ghost, said:

1 Corinthians 10:4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was (G2258; ην) Christ.​

Is Jesus a natural piece of flint?

What about the phrase "This cup":

Luk 22:20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.​

Does any Catholic take that literally as it reads, or do they assume something instead? Jesus did not say what was "in the cup", but clearly said "this cup". What Catholic accepts that? None. They instead have to say that what is "in" the cup, and not "the cup" itself.

You can swear any oath you want, and you have bound yourself to it, foolishly I might add, but that doesn't make what you think about those words true or accurate or even logical.

Jesus used the natural things of the world, to convey heavenly/spiritual things. I provided that in the linked response above.

Catholicism reverses those things, as many before them also did.

All of traditional Christianity, all the Apostolic Churches from the beginning have believed Jesus words literally, that the Eucharist is Jesus flesh and blood.

This was unanimously and continuously held belief by all the churches for the first 1500 years. Then a small group deniers, denied Jesus word, by wrongly interpreting it as symbolic, something that had never been believed before.

The Apostolic Churches still hold that The Eucharist is Jesus flesh and blood, and it remains the majority belief of Christianity.

 

[Oseas3]

All of traditional Christianity, all the Apostolic Churches from the beginning have believed Jesus words literally, that the Eucharist is Jesus flesh and blood.

This was unanimously and continuously held belief by all the churches for the first 1500 years. Then a small group deniers, denied Jesus word, by wrongly interpreting it as symbolic, something that had never been believed before.

The Apostolic Churches still hold that The Eucharist is Jesus flesh and blood, and it remains the majority belief of Christianity.

The problem is not the ceremony of the Lord's Supper itself, but who is celebrating it.
Around 55AD or about 20 years after the ascension of JESUS, the Church of Corinth was being influenced by the apostasy and idolatries of the Church of Rome, so Paul Apostle wrote to the Church of Corinth: -->1Corinthians 10:14-21:
14 Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry.
15 I speak as to wise men; Judge ye what I say.
16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?
17 For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.

19 What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing?
20 But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice (offer), they sacrifice(offer) to devils, and not to GOD: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with demons.
So
21 Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of demons.

2Corinthians 6:11-17
11 O ye Corinthians, our mouth is open unto you, our heart is enlarged.
12 Ye are not straitened in us, but ye are straitened in your own bowels.
13 Now for a recompence in the same, (I speak as unto my children,) be ye also enlarged.

14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?
15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?

16 And what agreement hath the temple of GOD with idols? for ye are the temple of the living GOD; as GOD hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their GOD, and they shall be my people.

17 Wherefore COME OUT FROM AMONG THEM, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you.
18 And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

 

[GentleGospeller]

All of traditional Christianity...

There is the issue. "traditional", not "scriptural". Isa. 8:20; 1 Pet. 4:11 KJB.

So, let me ask you a few questions, if you please.

The 'mass' is based upon the sacrifice of Jesus, correct?

The 'mass' is based upon the words of Jesus at the last supper, correct?

The 'mass' is based upon the words of Jesus in John 6, correct?

All of those events are pre-glorification of Jesus' body, correct?

All of those events are referring to the 'flesh' (Rom. 8:3) of Jesus before His resurrection, correct?

All of those events are speakiong of a 'flesh' that is not immortal, is made of corruption, and subject to dying, correct?

At Calvary (and even from Gethsemane, even from the original circumcision 8 days after birth) the blood of Jesus was pouring upon the ground, correct?

You believe that the life of the flesh is in th blood, correct?

What eternal life is in any of those things?

When Jesus was resurrected and glorified, and later ascended into the 3rd Heaven to be seated at the right hand of the Majesty (Father) on High in heavenly places, His body no longer sees decay, is no longer subject to death and corruption, and cannot any longer be torn into pieces, or bleed, and it is always whole, correct?

When Jesus stated that He was going to the 3rd Heaven, He spake of how He would return to earth bodily, in John 14, and other places like Acts 1; 1 Thessalonians 4 and in Revelation, and even by the Holy Ghost in the OT, as in Job 14, & other places, correct?

Is there any place in those texts that speaks of Jesus returning bodily as the 'mass' teaches?

When Jesus speaks of how He would be with His disciples after He ascended, in John 17 and other places, by the Holy Ghost His substitute, beingthe One in the place of Christ on Earth, as His representative, did Jesus mention anything about the 'mass' in that location?

What say you?

 

[Cathode]

There is the issue. "traditional", not "scriptural". Isa. 8:20; 1 Pet. 4:11 KJB.

So, let me ask you a few questions, if you please.

The 'mass' is based upon the sacrifice of Jesus, correct?

The 'mass' is based upon the words of Jesus at the last supper, correct?

The 'mass' is based upon the words of Jesus in John 6, correct?

All of those events are pre-glorification of Jesus' body, correct?

All of those events are referring to the 'flesh' (Rom. 8:3) of Jesus before His resurrection, correct?

All of those events are speakiong of a 'flesh' that is not immortal, is made of corruption, and subject to dying, correct?

At Calvary (and even from Gethsemane, even from the original circumcision 8 days after birth) the blood of Jesus was pouring upon the ground, correct?

You believe that the life of the flesh is in th blood, correct?

What eternal life is in any of those things?

When Jesus was resurrected and glorified, and later ascended into the 3rd Heaven to be seated at the right hand of the Majesty (Father) on High in heavenly places, His body no longer sees decay, is no longer subject to death and corruption, and cannot any longer be torn into pieces, or bleed, and it is always whole, correct?

When Jesus stated that He was going to the 3rd Heaven, He spake of how He would return to earth bodily, in John 14, and other places like Acts 1; 1 Thessalonians 4 and in Revelation, and even by the Holy Ghost in the OT, as in Job 14, & other places, correct?

Is there any place in those texts that speaks of Jesus returning bodily as the 'mass' teaches?

When Jesus speaks of how He would be with His disciples after He ascended, in John 17 and other places, by the Holy Ghost His substitute, being the One in the place of Christ on Earth, as His representative, did Jesus mention anything about the 'mass' in that location?

What say you?

Jesus established the Eucharist so that He be in Covenant Communion not just with those of His time on Earth, but for all time onward.

Jesus makes Himself available to all of us personally to sustain us throughout this life.

Is there any place in those texts that speaks of Jesus returning bodily as the 'mass' teaches?

“Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, yet they died. This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that anyone may eat of it and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And this bread, which I will give for the life of the world, is My flesh.”

Manna was the daily bread sent directly by God to sustain the people of Israel till they reached the promised Land.

The Eucharist at Mass is the new manna, the new daily bread that comes down from Heaven, this bread has the force of the resurrection because it is the Living Flesh of The Resurrected Jesus that gives life to the whole world.

When Jesus was resurrected and glorified, and later ascended into the 3rd Heaven to be seated at the right hand of the Majesty (Father) on High in heavenly places, His body no longer sees decay, is no longer subject to death and corruption, and cannot any longer be torn into pieces, or bleed, and it is always whole, correct?

We see in John 6 an astounding miracle of Jesus in which He prefigures the miracle of The Eucharist, multiplying bread and fish which fed a large multitude.

“Then Jesus took the loaves and the fish, gave thanks, and distributed to those who were seated as much as they wanted. And when everyone was full, He said to His disciples, “Gather the pieces that are left over, so that nothing will be wasted.”

Each piece of the Eucharist is Jesus whole and entire.

“Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. Just as the living Father sent Me and I live because of the Father, so also the one who eats Me will live because of Me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your fathers, who ate the manna and died, the one who eats this bread will live forever.”

Jesus born and laid in a manger, a feeding troth for sheep.

Jesus who said to Peter “ Feed my sheep “.

The Eucharist is Jesus who comes to us in great love at this covenant feast to give us His own eternal life.

 

[Cathode]

In reading the scripture, the "plain reading" mind you, I have never, ever once considered afterward going to the "Tradtional" (capital "T", mind you). Why would I? Jesus constantly spoke of the false traditions of mankind which sought to interpose themselves into the place of God's own plain words.

The word tradition in scripture is generally a reference to bad teachings of mankind. The few positives (mentioned by Paul) are plainly described in their context.

You are already following a man made traditions if you follow scripture alone and faith alone as invented by Luther.

Neither Scripture or Apostolic Tradition teaches either of these. Pure man founded traditions of men.

 

[GentleGospeller]

You are already following a man made traditions if you follow scripture alone and faith alone as invented by Luther.

Neither Scripture or Apostolic Tradition teaches either of these. Pure man founded traditions of men.

Isa 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

1Pe 4:11 If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

 

[Cathode]

Isa 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

The word is both spoken and written to the Jews, the Jews never were “ scripture alone “.

No one believed the scripture alone heresy until Luther, a false tradition of man.

1Pe 4:11 If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

The Apostles were the Oracles of God that’s why we follow Apostolic Tradition in interpreting Scripture.

Not the thousands of confused and conflicted interpretations of Bible alone Protestantism, which is the definition of traditions of men.

 

[Cathode]

There is the issue. "traditional", not "scriptural". Isa. 8:20; 1 Pet. 4:11 KJB.

So, let me ask you a few questions, if you please.

The 'mass' is based upon the sacrifice of Jesus, correct?

The 'mass' is based upon the words of Jesus at the last supper, correct?

The 'mass' is based upon the words of Jesus in John 6, correct?

All of those events are pre-glorification of Jesus' body, correct?

All of those events are referring to the 'flesh' (Rom. 8:3) of Jesus before His resurrection, correct?

All of those events are speakiong of a 'flesh' that is not immortal, is made of corruption, and subject to dying, correct?

At Calvary (and even from Gethsemane, even from the original circumcision 8 days after birth) the blood of Jesus was pouring upon the ground, correct?

You believe that the life of the flesh is in th blood, correct?

What eternal life is in any of those things?

When Jesus was resurrected and glorified, and later ascended into the 3rd Heaven to be seated at the right hand of the Majesty (Father) on High in heavenly places, His body no longer sees decay, is no longer subject to death and corruption, and cannot any longer be torn into pieces, or bleed, and it is always whole, correct?

When Jesus stated that He was going to the 3rd Heaven, He spake of how He would return to earth bodily, in John 14, and other places like Acts 1; 1 Thessalonians 4 and in Revelation, and even by the Holy Ghost in the OT, as in Job 14, & other places, correct?

Is there any place in those texts that speaks of Jesus returning bodily as the 'mass' teaches?

When Jesus speaks of how He would be with His disciples after He ascended, in John 17 and other places, by the Holy Ghost His substitute, beingthe One in the place of Christ on Earth, as His representative, did Jesus mention anything about the 'mass' in that location?

What say you?

The manna in the desert is the prefigurement of Jesus in the Eucharist the daily life giving food direct from God.

Jesus flesh is real food and His blood is real drink.

It was not enough that the Passover Lamb be sacrificed, but it also had to be eaten.

Jesus indicates that His flesh was to be like the daily manna, but that a man may eat it and not die but have eternal life.

Jesus is the Life and Word of God.

“ He who eats me, will live because of me. “

“ He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood, abides in me and I in him. “

All of Scripture is the invitation to the Eucharistic feast.

“ You search the scriptures thinking that in them you will have life, the scriptures bear witness to me, yet you refuse to come to me that you might live. “

Although the invitation is sent out to all in Scripture, not all will take up this invitation.

Of what good is it if a man believes the menu, but refuses to come and eat.

 

[Cathode]

If a man is prepared to receive the Eucharist, he is prepared for death and Heaven.

In fact, the Eucharist is a foretaste of Heaven, Covenant unity with The Lord in this world.

This Covenant we keep is not for the timid, it is total abandonment in Faith, Faith in Jesus Words.

It requires Faith granted by The Father to believe.

Face Jesus words in Faith, not in human rationalism.

Those who rationalise have walked away in their hearts.

They do not believe Jesus flesh is real food and blood is real drink.

Do not believe because you can see, do not believe because you understand.

Believe because Jesus said it. Stand on Jesus words and not with trembling, but with complete Faith and Trust, you will not be put to shame.

Jesus our Lord said it. Believe.

 

[Cathode]

Meh … for most of that 1500 years, the majority of the population (80%) were agrarian peasants being led by illiterate clergy practicing a combination of Christianity and local superstition. Around 1500 the Printing Press was invented, there was an explosion in literacy (priests and laity) and Bibles were printed in vernacular so people could read the actual Word of God for themselves. [access to books was restricted during the literate early church, and access to literacy was restricted during the Middle Ages.]

There were many vernacular bibles before Luther, some very famous, look them up. Luther used a German translation to help him with his butchered translation.

You are labouring under prejudiced myths.

If you should find vernacular bible versions before the reformation, you need to realise that you were lied to. Then it is your duty to find out what else you were lied to about.

Most people believed bad air caused diseases and leeches would cure them, so there is that.

Bad air does cause diseases, and leeches are used medically today.

 

[atpollard]

Bad air does cause diseases, and leeches are used medically today.

The RCC ... advocating MEDICINE that remains unchanged since the Fifth Century!
What's not to love about it.

[Here is hoping the LEECHES were able to re-balance your humors and cure COVID for you.]

 

[Cathode]

The RCC ... advocating MEDICINE that remains unchanged since the Fifth Century!
What's not to love about it.

[Here is hoping the LEECHES were able to re-balance your humors and cure COVID for you.]

For you I recommend the hot brand applied anywhere, and large draughts of bear bile imbibed hourly. Your humours will take a long time to return. In fact, it will take a while before you can laugh about it.

 

[Cathode]

So the Eucharist is the New and Everlasting Manna such that “a man may eat and not die.”
The Eucharist does not sustain us to a promised earthly land like the Manna did for the Israelites, it sustains us for Heaven.

The Eucharist is how we are Resurrected for Heaven, our bodies are brought to life by Jesus own flesh and blood.

“He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. “

“ So he who eats me, will live because of me “

“ Unless you eat the flesh of the son of man and drink His blood, you have no life in you “

It’s Jesus own flesh and blood that gives life to our flesh and blood at the Resurrection.

Jesus never asked people to understand. What He required was for people to believe in Faith, Faith in His words, Faith above all else.

Jesus flesh is real food and blood is real drink.

Many reject this New Manna, this great gift of God.

Eat and drink, lest the journey be too long for you.

“So he got up and ate and drank. And strengthened by that food, he walked forty days and forty nights until he reached Horeb, the mountain of God.”

 

[37818]

So the Eucharist is the New and Everlasting Manna such that “a man may eat and not die.”
The Eucharist does not sustain us to a promised earthly land like the Manna did for the Israelites, it sustains us for Heaven.

The Eucharist is how we are Resurrected for Heaven, our bodies are brought to life by Jesus own flesh and blood.

“He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. “

“ So he who eats me, will live because of me “

“ Unless you eat the flesh of the son of man and drink His blood, you have no life in you “

It’s Jesus own flesh and blood that gives life to our flesh and blood at the Resurrection.

Jesus never asked people to understand. What He required was for people to believe in Faith, Faith in His words, Faith above all else.

Jesus flesh is real food and blood is real drink.

Many reject this New Manna, this great gift of God.

Eat and drink, lest the journey be too long for you.

“So he got up and ate and drank. And strengthened by that food, he walked forty days and forty nights until he reached Horeb, the mountain of God.”

You commit the error of conflating Jesus' teaching as the bread of life into the Passover remembrance.

 

[Cathode]

You commit the error of conflating Jesus' teaching as the bread of life into the Passover remembrance.

No, Jesus bread of life teaching was established by Jesus in reality at the Last Supper.

This was unanimously believed for over 1500 years until certain small traditions of men denied it on their erroneous interpretations of Scripture.

However, it still is the majority Christian belief today, all the Ancient Churches East and West and from the beginning believe this, and testify to this.