Passover vs Eucharist

[Behold]

Thank you....Who decides whom has been misled?

Curious

Thats been decided.
Its not an issue of Truth, its an issue of deception.

So, If Peter is the 1st Pope and the Rock upon which the Church is Built, then there is no need for Christ, as we already have the "rock".
Therefore, if that is true, then you are right.
If that isn't true, then you have some time left to find out what is really going on.

 

[Behold]

This forum welcomes all whom claim Christ.

There's a very wide variety of beliefs on here. Many people are here just to prove their point, some like the fellowship primarily, etc.

Yes.

 

[Behold]

According to scripture (John 1:42), the very first time Jesus met Simon (Peter), Jesus changed Simon' name to Cephas (Peter), which means "rock". Why did Jesus do that? He didn't even know Simon, Jesus had only just met him.

He changed his name after they had been together for a while.
Peter understood that Jesus was "the Son of God", the Messiah.
"rock" can man many things.

Jesus changed Saul's name to Paul.

Peter wrote 2 Chapters in the New Testament.
Paul wrote 73% of the New Testament.
In Acts 10,..... 10 yrs obo after Jesus is back in heaven, Peter does not know that Gentiles can be saved.
10 Yrs after Jesus is back in Glory, Peter does not yet know..>"the Gospel of the GRACE of God".
Paul was taught this Gospe from JESUS, and became the "gentile Apostle".
When we "preach the Gospel", we are preaching "Paul's Gospel".

 

[Behold]

Er, the Eucharist IS Jesus - you can't get any more focused than that.

A cookie from a pack is not Jesus.
A priest has no "power to turn a cookie into the Living Christ".

Jesus is in the body of every Born again Christian.
He does not leave the body and become a cookie.

Dont worship a cookie.
Worship the Risen One.

 

[RogerDC]

He changed his name after they had been together for a while

Nonsense. According to the Gospel of John, Jesus changed Simon's name the very first time they met ((John 1:42). These are the very first recorded words Jesus said to Simon: “You are Simon the son of Jonah. You shall be called Cephas” (which is translated 'rock'). Read it.

Why did Jesus do this? For the answer, all you have to do is read Matt 16 - after Jesus directly addresses Peter by name, he tells Peter ('rock') that on "this rock I will build my Church".

 

[RogerDC]

Peter in wrote 2 Chapters in the New Testament.
Paul wrote 73% of the New Testament

Devastating logic! How much of the NT did Jesus write?

 

[justbyfaith]

Devastating logic! How much of the NT did Jesus write?

Jesus only wrote on the ground; and it is unknown what He wrote exactly.

 

[justbyfaith]

The "Rock" on which Jesus will build His church, in the Greek, is a huge boulder; while Peter's name means "little stone".

It is more likely that the "Rock" on which Jesus will build His church is Peter's confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God.

 

[justbyfaith]

Peter wrote 2 Chapters in the New Testament.

Actually, eight.

 

[marksman]

The "communion" is not the Blood Atonement of Jesus.
How do you know?
Because God requires you to have Faith in Christ, after being given the Gospel.
The Gospel is not...."believe on the cup and the wine, and you shall be saved".Stop being foolish.

The Passover was the bonding agent that brought it about, through the blood of the lamb, that sacrifice. And so it was celebrated for thousands of years, and still is by Jews, as the sign of the Mosaic covenant.[/QUOTE]

And what they celebrate today is a Passover meal, not a eucharist. Meaning that it is a meal with several items on the menu and they only celebrate it once a year, not every week. And the NTC continued that tradition because it was a church made up of Jews who did not become Christians, they were members of a Judaistic sect known as The Way, so they would have no concept of a weekly eucharist for the simple reason when Jesus said "Do this in remembrance of me" he did not say " Do this every week in remembrance of me."

 

[Illuminator]

Nonsense. According to the Gospel of John, Jesus changed Simon's name the very first time they met ((John 1:42). These are the very first recorded words Jesus said to Simon: “You are Simon the son of Jonah. You shall be called Cephas” (which is translated 'rock'). Read it.

Why did Jesus do this? For the answer, all you have to do is read Matt 16 - after Jesus directly addresses Peter by name, he tells Peter ('rock') that on "this rock I will build my Church".

Syriac Christianity (Syriac: ܡܫܝܚܝܘܬܐ ܣܘܪܝܝܬܐ‎ / Mšiḥāyuṯā Suryāyṯā; Arabic: مسيحية سريانية‎, masīḥīat surīānīa) is the form of Eastern Christianity whose formative theological writings and traditional liturgy are expressed in the Syriac language, which, along with Latin and Greek, was one of "the three most important Christian languages in the early centuries" of the Common Era. Syriac Christianity - Wikipedia

Syriac (/ˈsɪriæk/; ܠܫܢܐ ܣܘܪܝܝܐ[a] Leššānā Suryāyā), also known as Syrian/Syriac Aramaic, Syro-Aramaic or Classical Syriac,[9][10][11] is a dialect of Middle Aramaic of the Northwest Semitic languages of the Afroasiatic family that is written in the Syriac alphabet, a derivation of the Aramaic alphabet. Having first appeared in the early first century AD in Edessa,[12] classical Syriac became a major literary language throughout the Middle East from the 4th to the 8th centuries,[13] preserved in a large body of Syriac literature. Indeed, Syriac literature comprises roughly 90% of the extant Aramaic literature.[14] Syriac was once spoken across much of the Near East as well as Anatolia and Eastern Arabia.[3][4][15] Syriac originated in Mesopotamia and eventually spread west of Iraq in which it became the lingua franca of the region during the Mesopotamian Neo-Assyrian period.[16][17] http://www.malankara.com/church/sites/default/files/file/The Eucharistic Liturgy of the Syriac Orthodox Church(1).pdf

Aramaic:
ܐܴܦ݂ ܐܷܢܳܐ ܐܴܡܰܪ ܐ̱ܢܳܐ ܠܴܟ݂ ܂ ܕܱ݁ܐܢ̄ܬ݁ ܗ̄ܽܘ ܟܻ݁ܐܦ݂ܳܐ ܂ ܘܥܰܠ ܗܳܕ݂ܶܐ ܟܻ݁ܐܦ݂ܳܐ ܐܷܒ݂ܢܶܝܗ ܠܥܺܕ̱݁ܬ݁ܝ܂ ܘܬ݂ܱܪ̈ܥܶܐ ܕܱ݁ܫܝܽܘܠ ܠܴܐ ܢܶܚܣܢܽܘܢܳܗ

English:
“Again I say to you that you are the Rock (Kepha), and upon this Rock (Kepha) I will build my Church, and the gates of Sheol will not subdue it.”

In both places we see the same word, ܟܺܐܦܳܐ ...which is just what we were expecting based on the arguments we’ve seen made about what Jesus would have actually said in Aramaic. I think this fact corroborates the argument, already made by others, that the disparity in gender between Peter’s name and the “this rock” upon which Jesus promised to build His Church is based on the demands of Greek noun inflection. It may also explain the frequency of references to Peter as Cephas in Paul’s letters. The Greek transliteration of the Aramaic/Syriac word ܟܺܐܦܳܐ is κῆφα. Our word “Cephas” is the Latin transliteration of the Greek word.
The Two “Rocks” of Matthew 16:18 in the Syriac Peshitta

Matt. 16:17 – to further demonstrate that Jesus was speaking Aramaic, Jesus says Simon “Bar-Jona.” The use of “Bar-Jona” proves that Jesus was speaking Aramaic. In Aramaic, “Bar” means son, and “Jonah” means John or dove (Holy Spirit). See Matt. 27:46 and Mark 15:34 which give another example of Jesus speaking Aramaic as He utters in rabbinical fashion the first verse of Psalm 22 declaring that He is the Christ, the Messiah. This shows that Jesus was indeed speaking Aramaic, as the Jewish people did at that time.

Matt. 16:18 – also, in quoting “on this rock,” the Scriptures use the Greek construction “tautee tee” which means on “this” rock; on “this same” rock; or on “this very” rock. “Tautee tee” is a demonstrative construction in Greek, pointing to Peter, the subject of the sentence (and not his confession of faith as some non-Catholics argue) as the very rock on which Jesus builds His Church. The demonstrative (“tautee”) generally refers to its closest antecedent (“Petros”). Also, there is no place in Scripture where “faith” is equated with “rock.”

The Passover was the bonding agent that brought it about, through the blood of the lamb, that sacrifice. And so it was celebrated for thousands of years, and still is by Jews, as the sign of the Mosaic covenant.

And what they celebrate today is a Passover meal, not a eucharist. Meaning that it is a meal with several items on the menu and they only celebrate it once a year, not every week. And the NTC continued that tradition because it was a church made up of Jews who did not become Christians, they were members of a Judaistic sect known as The Way, so they would have no concept of a weekly eucharist for the simple reason when Jesus said "Do this in remembrance of me" he did not say " Do this every week in remembrance of me."

The Jehovah's Witnesses teach the same thing as you.
Matt. 6:11; Luke 11:3 – in the Our Father, we ask God to give us this day our daily bread, that is the bread of life, Jesus Christ.
Acts 2:46 46Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts,

There are other hungers- for love, for immortality for life, for affection, for being cared, for forgiveness, for mercy. This hunger can be satiated only by the bread that comes from above. Jesus himself is the living bread that gives life to the world (cf. Jn 6:51). His body offered for our sake on the cross, his blood shed for the pardon of the sins of humanity is made available to us in the bread and wine to the Eucharist transformed in the consecration.

But the Eucharist does not end with the partaking of the bread and blood of the Lord. It leads us to solidarity with others. The communion with the Lord is necessarily a communion with our fellow brothers and sisters. And therefore the one who is fed and nourished by the very body and blood of Christ cannot remain unaffected when he sees his brothers suffering want and hunger. Pope Francis (Homily for the Feast of Corpus Christi, 5-30-13)
​

Therefore the Eucharistic Celebration is much more than simple banquet: it is exactly the memorial of Jesus’ Paschal Sacrifice, the mystery at the centre of salvation. “Memorial” does not simply mean a remembrance, a mere memory; it means that every time we celebrate this Sacrament we participate in the mystery of the passion, death and resurrection of Christ. The Eucharist is the summit of God’s saving action: the Lord Jesus, by becoming bread broken for us, pours upon us all of his mercy and his love, so as to renew our hearts, our lives and our way of relating with him and with the brethren. . . . the bread that is the Body of Jesus Christ who saves us, forgives us, unites us to the Father.

The Gospel writers refer to the consecrated / transubstantiated element as “bread” too:

Matthew 26:26
Mark 14:22
Luke 22:19
Here is St. Paul doing the same thing:
1 Corinthians 10:16-17

.Thus, Pope Francis is using the language of appearances used by Jesus, Paul, Matthew, Mark, and Luke.
No, Pope Francis Did Not Deny Transubstantiation

Marksman, you don't HAVE TO be ripped off.

​

 

[Behold]

Devastating logic! How much of the NT did Jesus write?

The reason that Paul wrote most of the NT< and all of the "church Doctrine" is because Jesus chose this Apostle to receive all the revelation that is related to "the time of the Gentiles".
Peter is not the Gentile apostle, and he's not a Pope.
He's a slightly unsophisticated fisherman that denied Jesus then later was crucified.
This apostle made more mistakes then all the other's combined.
Even Paul had to correct his for his carnal behavior many years after Jesus was ascended back into Glory.

 

[Behold]

Actually, eight.

And Peter said that Paul's letters, at that time, = were equal to the TORAH.
in other words, this apostle recognized that Paul's letters, in that day, were equal to SCRIPTURE. = They were SCRIPTURE.
Later, the NT is mostly Paul.
Peter understood this 2000 yrs ago.

 

[justbyfaith]

And Peter said that Paul's letters, at that time, = were equal to the TORAH.
in other words, this apostle recognized that Paul's letters, in that day, were equal to SCRIPTURE. = They were SCRIPTURE.
Later, the NT is mostly Paul.
Peter understood this 2000 yrs ago.

No doubt.

The warning also of Peter was that unstable and untaught people would distort what Paul preached in his letters to their own destruction.

 

[Marymog]

Thats been decided.
Its not an issue of Truth, its an issue of deception.

So, If Peter is the 1st Pope and the Rock upon which the Church is Built, then there is no need for Christ, as we already have the "rock".
Therefore, if that is true, then you are right.
If that isn't true, then you have some time left to find out what is really going on.

Ummmm....That doesn't make sense to me.

If it's an issue of deception (deceiving from the Truth) then it IS an issue of truth.

Mary

 

[RogerDC]

For example...The Pope, in Past History, and with the Catholic church consenting, burned people, while they were alive.

The errors and sins of certain Catholics - even a Pope - doesn’t prove that the Catholic Church is not the one, true Church that Jesus founded, or disprove any Catholic doctrine.

 

[RogerDC]

I didnt ask them if they were a denomination, i asked them ... "are you SAVED"

As for me,
I would never ask anyone, “Are you saved?”, as I don’t want to make a fool of myself. “Are you saved?” is the dumbest and most absurd question you could possibly ask anyone - no one can possibly answer that question - only God can know if someone is saved, and Christ doesn’t make that decision until after we die and face Him on Judgement Day.

All these people taught me that the Bible is the authority

And all those people were WRONG - blind guides leading the blind. The CHURCH is the authority, not the Bible. Does the Bible says the Bible is the “pillar and foundation of the truth” (1Tim 3:15) and that the Bible is the “fullness” of Christ (Eph 1:22-23)? No, it says the CHURCH is.

All these people taught me that the Bible is the authority, not man, unless the man is in the Bible.

By trusting the Bible, you are trusting “man”, because “man” wrote the Bible.

Secondly, just a God inspired men to write his infallible words in the Bible, God inspires men to infallible lead his Church and to infallibly determine and develop doctrine - as Eph 4:4-14 points out:

”And He (Christ) gave … APOSTLES … PROPHETS … EVANGELISTS … PASTORS and TEACHERS, for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, until we all attain the unity of faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; ; so that we may no longer be children tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine by the wickedness of men, by cunning craftiness, by which they lie in wait to deceive” (Eph 4:4-14).
Notice how there is no mention of the Bible being the source of knowledge or authority in that passage - everything comes from man - ie, the Church.

The leadership and authority of the Church is infallible, hence the Church is described as the “pillar and foundation of the truth” (1Tim 3:15) and the “fullness” of Christ (Eph 1:22-23).

the Holy Spirit taught and teaches me how to do this with verses

Says you. I wish I had a dollar for every Bible hack who claims the “Holy Spirit” teaches them! If there is only one Holy Spirit, how come he teaches so many different and conflicting doctrines? Protestantism and Sola Scriptura is a madhouse of confusion and delusion.

And you are deluded - many of your doctrines are totally incompatible with the doctrines of God’s one, true Church, so it was definitely not the Holy Spirit who taught you - the Holy Spirit does not teach error. What you need to do is swallow your pride, throw out all the false, man-made doctrines you’ve been taught, then join the Catholic Church and allow yourself to be taught God’s infallible doctrines.

Theology is important, because if your theology is wrong, it can actually put you at odds with God's Grace and the Cross itself.

Oh, the irony!

 

[RogerDC]

These pastors that discovered for me how to understand that God is Love and God is Light and God is both Holy and Jealous, and that God's love is unconditional, helped me a lot. They kept me away from Self Saving Legalism, which is the most important thing of all, as if that dark spiritually gets a foothold, it'll ruin your faith.

Disobeying God, by not striving for holiness by keeping God’s commandments - and teaching others to do the same - will certainly ruin your faith ... and maybe even any hope of salvation.

“Not every one who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord’ shall enter the kingdom of Heaven, but he who does the will of my Father” (Matt 7:21).

“And by this we may be sure that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. He who says ‘I know Him’ but disobeys His commandments is a LIAR, and the TRUTH IS NOT IN HIM; but whoever keeps His word, in him truly love for God is perfected. By this we may be sure that we are in Him …” (1John 2:3-5).

Leaving the wrong and believing the Right, is a process.
I show the way, but God gives the revelation.

Hilarious.

What are my Teaching books, aids, Library? I have a New Testament, and a Hebrew "God's promises", and 2 english "God's promises", little devotionals, and i have a couple of books on Christian Saints. (Early Church

Stop relying on your own (obviously fallible) power to learn about Christ and salvation - add the “Catechism of the Catholic Church” to your library.

I think that God sends us teachers, and all believers need to have good ones, and one of the ways that i discovered that i was called to Teach was that i could. I also noticed that i eventually knew as much or more, theologically, as my teachers, and that i could present teaching in a way that causes change.

Manifest delusion. God does not “call” false teachers to misled gullible souls with poisonous doctrines based on disobedience, lawlessness and sin.

 

[RogerDC]

Consider always, that what happens in Catholicism, is important only if you are a Catholic. I think 100% of Catholics are taught to believe that the "true" church, as founded by Peter ????? Is the literal body of Christ, and that any other idea of Church is "heresy".
So, This puts the Catholic Church under the definition of "cult" as all "cults' teach their members that they are the ONLY one.

That’s a poor argument. According to your logic, since Christianity claims to be the one and only true religion, that means Christianity fits the definition of a cult. Jesus claimed to the only Way, Truth and Life, so Jesus and his followers fit the definition of a cult.

Speaking of cults, what is the name of YOUR cult?

Now if you consider the Protestant "church".....They dont consider one denomination as being THE one.

… which makes perfect sense, because no Protestant church is “THE one” - only the Catholic Church is “THE one”.

So, that defines the "church"..Its the people who are born again.

The Church is the “pillar and foundation of the truth” (1Tim 3:15), which means the Church (whatever Church that is) teaches one “truth” - ie, one set of doctrines which all her members accept as infallible truth. The so-called “born again” and Christians who are outside the Catholic Church teach all sorts of doctrines that are often in conflict with each other, so what is the “truth” (ie, the Church) is all that confusion? Do you have the “truth”?

So, Im not a historian on The Catholic Church. But i am well acquainted with their theology. To answer your question...… Mary Worship has been around since about 300 AD

You claim to be “well acquainted” with Catholic theology, but you imply Catholics “worship” Mary - in which case, you’re wrong (again) - Catholics DON’T worship Mary.

Its just as wrong.

You wouldn’t know.

 

[RogerDC]

And yes, i know you will not hear this, as you been told your entire life, that Peter is the Rock.

Which one-and-only apostle did Jesus rename “Rock” the very first time they met (John 1:42)?

Which one-and-only apostle did Jesus give the “keys of the kingdom of God” to (Matt 16)?

Which one-and-only apostle did Jesus say this to? … “Satan demanded to have you, that he might sift you like wheat” (Luke 22:31).

Which one-and-only apostle did Jesus command three times to feed his sheep (John 21)?