John 3:9 Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be? 10 Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things? 11 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness. 12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things? 13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. 14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: 15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
Jesus was speaking to Nicodemus of SPIRITUAL birth Nicodemus tried to focus upon the carnal, just as the seekers after signs did in John 6. You assume Nic didn't get it. Did you know he paid for the spices and ointments to be used when the women went to the tomb?
So you still conclude that Jesus established His New Covenant by violating the very Laws He says will not pass away. And pleading to the ECF is not going to commend that. As to trying to make Polycarp your expert witness. He did not mention such a specific in his extensive letter to the Philadelphians. And the bread taken in the Remembrance is the metaphor for the real body Jesus sacrificed on the Cross for us. It is assumed by modern Catholics that Polycarp believed he ingested the real flesh and blood of Jesus, rather than eating the bread and sipping the wine, assenting to the Grace of God made available to us by the ultimate sacrifice for us, proclaimed every time we break the bread and sip the wine IN REMEMBRANCE.
Because the catholic church has crafted a powerful org with a priesthood to empower it the more, it is not unlikely that the meaning of ECFs can be skewed to support fabricated dogmas and doctrines. I still ask you would God establish His New Covenant violating His own Laws against eating real human flesh and drinking real blood as the foundational Truth for this new covenant? ... Perhaps Mrs Don-o can help you with that one ...
Jesus assured His disciples that where two or more are gathered in His name, there is He in the mist of them ... His real Presence but not sensed directly by those limited to three variables of space and one of time. Your religion teaches people that The Real Presence of Jesus in the Mass is to have people violate the Laws of God against eating human flesh and drinking blood. These Jesus took to the Cross for us and for our salvation, not for a happy meal a priesthood can dole at a ritual meant to show the magic power of the catholic priesthood.
BTQ, Jesus said that as often as we take the bread and wine symbolizing His sacrifice for us we are to do it in REMEMBRANCE. HE did not tell His disciples to do it often or as often as possible so the striving chain seeking salvation will not be broken. Yet that is the emphasis catholiciism places upon the Mass. FRiend, that empowers the org, more than the adherents. The many times per week some here take Mass is a point of pride they are eager to share when questioned too closely about the vagaries of catholiciism.
Meant to ping you. ,,, The REAL Presence of Jesus at the gathering to partake in the Remembrance is to be ‘transubstantiated into a wheat wafer’ as He stands there in the midst of believers gathered in His name, according to the religion of catholiciism. What a spectacle that congers, Jesus standing in the midst of people taught to violate the laws of God against eating real human flesh and drinking blood of a living being!
Did you even read the two links I submitted to you regarding the charge of cannibalism? You keep insisting that the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist is a violation of the Mosaic Law against cannibalism.
Also, do you consider Ignatius of Antioch a “modern Catholic”?
In going back over this thread, to make sure I have not erred in a way that would leave wiggle room for the blasphemies of catholiciism, I realized I made an error: “As to trying to make Polycarp your expert witness. He did not mention such a specific in his extensive letter to the Philadelphians.” Actually, I meant to write Letter to The Philippians. Ignatius wrote to the Philadephians. Polycarp might have, but we don’t have that Letter to consult.