Posted on 06/13/2009 5:00:57 PM PDT by bdeaner
Amen.
God bless you too!
This catholic stuff is just so bogus, I’m sorry, but why the need for a hokey religion, stick with the facts and keep all the mysticism out of it, no wonder folks are leaving in droves, the Main things are the Plain things. Christ died on the cross for our sins, you accept it or reject it. Why do you chase after dragons?
“When the priest announces the tremendous words of consecration, he reaches up into the heavens, brings Christ down from His throne, and places Him upon our altar to be offered up again as the Victim for the sins of man...The priest brings Christ down from heaven, and renders Him present on our altar as the eternal Victim for the sins of man, not once but a thousand times!
Hmmm...
Hebrews 10: "12 But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, 13 waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet. 14 For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.
Either Scripture is wrong, or John O'Brien.
A screwdriver can become a hammer, in every sense of each word. It’s literally transformed into a hammer, if it’s *used* as a hammer, thus it literally becomes a hammer, even though it still *appears to be* a screwdriver.
This is the fundamental concept behind “transubstantiation”. It’s not that, through some kind of magical means, the bread takes on the appearance of flesh; the wine takes on the appearance of blood.
No. The substance of the species is changed; it’s reality is changed. Not it’s appearance, which would be just some magic trick.
JUST as a screwdriver can be literally transformed into a hammer, even though it may still appear to be a screwdriver, the two literally become flesh and blood, even though they appear to be still just bread and wine.
Thank you for explaining this. I apologize for imputing to you the very common belief that Genesis was adapted from "earlier" pagan mythologies.
However, we still have the troubling problem of you insisting that Genesis is free only from "theological" error. As you may know, while this is a perfectly legitimate interpretation of current Catholic teaching it has not always been taught that way. Prior to the twentieth century it was conventionally taught that the Bible was free from all error whatsoever on any subject. This was taught by Leo XIII as well as the early Popes of the twentieth century as you may see for yourself in places where this is expounded such as Living Tradition or Robert Sungenis' web site (unfortunately Sungenis has become a lunatic anti-Semite and he has strange ideas about the Genesis genealogies as well, but at least he can provide quotes from earlier sources). So what we have here is your admission that you believe in limited rather than full inerrancy. Limited inerrancy is a new doctrine. It is new because Catholicism is constantly evolving, however slowly (which may be why it is so fond of evolution).
As to Augustine, the fact is that you have to invoke him because he is the only one you can. Augustine's bias against Genesis is well-known and has been dealt with by others. This is a case of giving one church father the authority to overturn all the others because he's the only one you can find.
But the point I am trying to make is that if you allow science to modify ancient teachings on Genesis, then you must allow it to modify other teachings as well--including transubstantiation. Thus your invoking of church fathers as an authority on transubstantiation is hypocritical because most of those same fathers interpreted Genesis literally, yet you dismiss their teachings as "naive." Once science proves that transubstantiation does not occur you will reject their teaching on that as well--unless you hold on to it simply because "those people" don't believe it.
I reiterate--your belief in limited inerrancy is acceptable now because Catholicism has changed (just as Raymond Brown said it did). It was not acceptable decades ago.
Why you Catholics are so fond of the universe forming "naturally" is absolutely beyond me.
Scripture is not wrong, John O’Brien is. In fact I find it so hard to believe that someone could actually believe...
“The priest speaks and lo! Christ, the eternal and omnipotent God, bows His head in humble obedience to the priest’s command.”
First, I am not Catholic. And second, the Catholic Church may be mystical in some ways, but it is very "scientific" and skeptical when it comes to the Bible. Shame on them.
You obviously believe Genesis was "inspired." That is a poor understanding of the truth.
Genesis (and the rest of the Torah) was not written by any human being whatsoever. Not even Moses is the author (much less your obviously held theory of JEPD).
The Torah was written by G-d 974 generations before the Creation in letters of black fire upon a scroll of white fire. Then in the 26th generation of the world (974+26=1000) it was dictated to Moses letter for letter, who took it down as a stenographer. The Torah pre-existed the universe because it was the pattern, the blueprint, the DNA of creation (what you Notzerim call the "logos").
Of course you deny this dogmatically. Very well. But whine and bawl when scholars tear your gospels to shreds just as you have done to the Holy Torah!
A screwdriver used as a hammer is still a screwdriver. Based on my experience, it often becomes a screwdriver held in a bloody hand, after it slips to one side and my fingers hit the nail.
If you call the tail of a horse a leg, the horse still has FOUR legs.
And why would we drink the blood of Christ for a Passover? Why don’t we splash the ‘blood’ above the doors?
You wrote:
“Because of transubstantiation? What does that even mean?”
Have you developed a case of amnesia? Here’s what you wrote: “He used quotes from ancient church authorities to defend transubstantiation but he obviously rejects the church fathers as “men of their time” when it comes to Genesis because he invokes Gilgamesh.” (Post #69)
“Anytime someone says Genesis “reads like Gilgamesh” I don’t have to know anything more about his other motivations.”
Why? If someone says the Book of Mormon reads like the King James Bible does that mean the KJV is some how less inspired? No. And, if you’ve ever read Gilgamesh, you would know there are some interesting parallels. I have always believed those parallels exist in Gilgamesh because they were taken from the oral history of the Hebrews before being inscripturated by Moses.
Besides bdeaner said in post #29 “Genesis is more in the style of Gilgamesh, whereas the Gospels are more in the style of biography.” bedeaner did not say Genesis was taken from Gilgamesh nor did he say that they read the same. He said it had similar style. bdeaner is not alone in seeing that: http://amath.colorado.edu/carnegie/humn/PDFdocs/Flood.pdf
“If you think the literal truth of Genesis is important then why are you attacking me and defending bdeaner?”
I am not attacking you. You, however, have repeatedly falsely accused me of saying something I never said or thought. Who is attacking who here then? Also, why wouldn’t I defend bdeaner when you’re going off on him and are in the wrong in several ways?
“Why are you implying one position is as good as the other?”
I implied no such thing. I did - clearly - point out that both are permissable at this time and bdeaner said exactly the same thing.
“Is it a mere “circling of the wagons” among Catholics? I could understand that up to a point, but to do so when a co-religionist is saying that Genesis “reads like Gilgamesh?””
That’s not what he said. Again, this is what he said, “Genesis is more in the style of Gilgamesh, whereas the Gospels are more in the style of biography.”
“I notice you have not replied to the information on traditional Jewish chronology. That is good, as I assume that you accept this as Jewish chronology, whether you personally agree with it or not. Here are a couple little gems for you: when Noach died Abraham was 58 years old. This is alluded to in Noach’s name (nun-chet) which has the numerical value of 58. Oh, and after Cain killed Abel Adam lived apart from Eve for 120 years, so during that time only the Cainites multiplied. He was shamed back into joining her (and producing Shet) after presiding at the trial of Lemekh). Oh, and when Adam died Metushelach was 243 years old. All very nice bits of information, and didactic as well as factual.”
Interesting. I can’t say that I have heard of these details before. I don’t know how much stock I would put into them IF THEY are ONLY Jewish traditions. How do you know that the 120 years of Adam you mentioned is not a corruption of the 120 years lifespan dictated by God? (Genesis 6:3)
You wrote:
“Why you Catholics are so fond of the universe forming “naturally” is absolutely beyond me.”
Who EXACTLY is “you”? You’re doing it again. You’re saying I, or every Catholic out there, believes something that another person may have said. That’s just wrong and completely unfair.
“You obviously believe Genesis was “inspired.” That is a poor understanding of the truth. Genesis (and the rest of the Torah) was not written by any human being whatsoever. Not even Moses is the author (much less your obviously held theory of JEPD).”
No. Moses was the inspired author. He was inspired by God.
Exodus 24:4: “And Moses wrote down all the words of the Lord. Then he arose early in the morning, and built an altar at the foot of the mountain with twelve pillars for the twelve tribes of Israel...Then he took the Book of the Covenant and read it in the hearing of the people; and they said, ‘All that the Lord has spoken we will do, and we will be obedient!’”
Exodus 34:27: “Then the LORD said to Moses, ‘Write down these words, for in accordance with these words I have made a covenant with you and with Israel.’ “
Dt 31:9 “So Moses wrote this law and gave it to the priests, the sons of Levi who carried the ark of the covenant of the LORD, and to all the elders of Israel.”
Dt 31:24-26 “And it came about, when Moses finished writing the words of this law in a book until they were complete, that Moses commanded the Levites who carried the ark of the covenant of the LORD, saying, ‘Take this book of the law and place it beside the ark of the covenant of the LORD...’ “
The idea that Moses didn’t write down things under inspiration is simply wrong.
“The Torah was written by G-d 974 generations before the Creation in letters of black fire upon a scroll of white fire. Then in the 26th generation of the world (974+26=1000) it was dictated to Moses letter for letter, who took it down as a stenographer.”
So say you. Again, you seem to be accepting a Jewish tradition.
“The Torah pre-existed the universe because it was the pattern, the blueprint, the DNA of creation (what you Notzerim call the “logos”).”
I call Christ the Logos.
“Of course you deny this dogmatically. Very well. But whine and bawl when scholars tear your gospels to shreds just as you have done to the Holy Torah!”
I have never torn the Old Testament to shreds. Again, you claim something I have never said or done or attempted or even thought of. And apparently you’re doing it based on some sort of pseudo-mystical Jewish belief.
You wrote:
“Why don’t we splash the ‘blood’ above the doors?”
That’s the blood on the Cross. That’s why the Cross is called the doorway to heaven.
This always makes me think of the Dream of the Rood:
Listen! The choicest of visions I wish to tell,
which came as a dream in middle-night,
after voice-bearers lay at rest.
It seemed that I saw a most wondrous tree
born aloft, wound round by light,
brightest of beams. All was that beacon
sprinkled with gold. Gems stood
fair at earth’s corners; there likewise five
shone on the shoulder-span [ 1 ]. All there beheld the Angel of God [ 2 ],
fair through predestiny [ 3 ]. Indeed, that was no wicked one’s gallows,
but holy souls beheld it there,
men over earth, and all this great creation.
Wondrous that victory-beam—and I stained with sins,
with wounds of disgrace. I saw glory’s tree
honored with trappings, shining with joys,
decked with gold; gems had
wrapped that forest tree worthily round.
Yet through that gold I clearly perceived
old strife of wretches [ 4 ], when first it began
to bleed on its right side. With sorrows most troubled,
I feared that fair sight. I saw that doom-beacon [ 5 ]
turn trappings and hews: sometimes with water wet,
drenched with blood’s going; sometimes with jewels decked.
But lying there long while, I,
troubled, beheld the Healer’s tree,
until I heard its fair voice.
Then best wood spoke these words:
“It was long since—I yet remember it—
that I was hewn at holt’s end,
moved from my stem. Strong fiends seized me there,
worked me for spectacle; cursèd ones lifted me [ 6 ].
On shoulders men bore me there, then fixed me on hill;
fiends enough fastened me. Then saw I mankind’s Lord
come with great courage when he would mount on me.
Then dared I not against the Lord’s word
bend or break, when I saw earth’s
fields shake. All fiends
I could have felled, but I stood fast.
The young hero stripped himself—he, God Almighty—
strong and stout-minded. He mounted high gallows,
bold before many, when he would loose mankind.
I shook when that Man clasped me. I dared, still, not bow to earth,
fall to earth’s fields, but had to stand fast.
Rood was I reared. I lifted a mighty King,
Lord of the heavens, dared not to bend.
With dark nails they drove me through: on me those sores are seen,
open malice-wounds. I dared not scathe anyone.
They mocked us both, we two together [ 7 ]. All wet with blood I was,
poured out from that Man’s side, after ghost he gave up.
Much have I born on that hill
of fierce fate. I saw the God of hosts
harshly stretched out. Darknesses had
wound round with clouds the corpse of the Wielder,
bright radiance; a shadow went forth,
dark under heaven. All creation wept,
King’s fall lamented. Christ was on rood.
But there eager ones came from afar
to that noble one. I beheld all that.
Sore was I with sorrows distressed, yet I bent to men’s hands,
with great zeal willing. They took there Almighty God,
lifted him from that grim torment. Those warriors abandoned me
standing all blood-drenched, all wounded with arrows.
They laid there the limb-weary one, stood at his body’s head;
beheld they there heaven’s Lord, and he himself rested there,
worn from that great strife. Then they worked him an earth-house,
men in the slayer’s sight carved it from bright stone,
set in it the Wielder of Victories. Then they sang him a sorrow-song,
sad in the eventide, when they would go again
with grief from that great Lord. He rested there, with small company.
But we there lamenting a good while
stood in our places after the warrior’s cry
went up. Corpse grew cold,
fair life-dwelling. Then someone felled us
all to the earth. That was a dreadful fate!
Deep in a pit one delved us. Yet there Lord’s thanes,
friends, learned of me,. . . . . . . . . . .
adorned me with silver and gold.
Now you may know, loved man of mine,
what I, work of baleful ones, have endured
of sore sorrows. Now has the time come
when they will honor me far and wide,
men over earth, and all this great creation,
will pray for themselves to this beacon. On me God’s son
suffered awhile. Therefore I, glorious now,
rise under heaven, and I may heal
any of those who will reverence me.
Once I became hardest of torments,
most loathly to men, before I for them,
voice-bearers, life’s right way opened.
Indeed, Glory’s Prince, Heaven’s Protector,
honored me, then, over holm-wood [ 8 ].
Thus he his mother, Mary herself,
Almighty God, for all men,
also has honored over all woman-kind.
Now I command you, loved man of mine,
that you this seeing [ 9 ] tell unto men;
discover with words that it is glory’s beam
which Almighty God suffered upon
for all mankind’s manifold sins
and for the ancient ill-deeds of Adam.
Death he tasted there, yet God rose again
by his great might, a help unto men.
He then rose to heaven. Again sets out hither
into this Middle-Earth, seeking mankind
on Doomsday, the Lord himself,
Almighty God, and with him his angels,
when he will deem—he holds power of doom—
everyone here as he will have earned
for himself earlier in this brief life.
Nor may there be any unafraid
for the words that the Wielder speaks.
He asks before multitudes where that one is
who for God’s name would gladly taste
bitter death, as before he on beam did.
And they then are afraid, and few think
what they can to Christ’s question answer [ 10 ].
Nor need there then any be most afraid [ 11 ]
who ere in his breast bears finest of beacons;
but through that rood shall each soul
from the earth-way enter the kingdom,
who with the Wielder thinks yet to dwell.”
I prayed then to that beam with blithe mind,
great zeal, where I alone was
with small company [ 12 ]. My heart was
impelled on the forth-way, waited for in each
longing-while. For me now life’s hope:
that I may seek that victory-beam
alone more often than all men,
honor it well. My desire for that
is much in mind, and my hope of protection
reverts to the rood. I have not now many
strong friends on this earth; they forth hence
have departed from world’s joys, have sought themselves glory’s King;
they live now in heaven with the High-Father,
dwell still in glory, and I for myself expect
each of my days the time when the Lord’s rood,
which I here on earth formerly saw,
from this loaned life will fetch me away
and bring me then where is much bliss,
joy in the heavens, where the Lord’s folk
is seated at feast, where is bliss everlasting;
and set me then where I after may
dwell in glory, well with those saints
delights to enjoy. May he be friend to me
who here on earth earlier died
on that gallows-tree for mankind’s sins.
He loosed us and life gave,
a heavenly home. Hope was renewed
with glory and gladness to those who there burning endured.
That Son was victory-fast [ 13 ] in that great venture,
with might and good-speed [ 14 ], when he with many,
vast host of souls, came to God’s kingdom,
One-Wielder Almighty: bliss to the angels
and all the saints—those who in heaven
dwelt long in glory—when their Wielder came,
Almighty God, where his homeland was.
Annotations
[ 1 ] shoulder-span. OE eaxlegespanne. Of this hapax legomenon, Swanton writes: “It would be tempting to identify this with the ‘axle-tree’ or centre-piece of the cross, although ‘axle’ in this sense of wheel-centre is not otherwise recorded before the thirteenth century. . . . It might . . . simply refer to the beam of the gallows along which Christ’s arms were stretched, although the ‘crux gemmata’ normally has jewels along all four arms.” [Return to text]
[ 2 ] All . . . God. Most editors assume that engel ‘angel’ is the subject of the sentence, but I follow Swanton in treating ealle ‘all’ as subject and engel as object. Swanton considers this to cause difficulties about identifying the engel, but the OE word can carry the sense ‘messenger,’ which obviously suggests that the Cross itself is the engel dryhtnes ‘angel/messenger of God.’ [Return to text]
[ 3 ] fair . . . predestiny. OE fægere þurh forðgesceaft, an ambiguous phrase, forðgesceaft being used elsewhere to mean both ‘creation’ and ‘future destiny.’ See Swanton for a discussion of the possibilities. My translation indicates that I take it to mean ‘what is preordained.’ Thus the Rood is part of an eternal plan, like “the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world” (Rev. 13:8). [Return to text]
[ 4 ] old strife of wretches. OE earmra ærgewin, lit. ‘of wretches ere-strife.’ The phrase, in this context, appears to refer to the whole battle between Christ and Satan, Good and Evil; more immediately, of course, it refers to Christ’s Passion, viewed as battle. [Return to text]
[ 5 ] doom-beacon. OE fuse beacen. Considering that “the word fus is commonly associated with death,” Swanton notes: “Clearly, within the poet’s vision we must recognize not simply the church year hastening to its sacrificial end, but a concrete symbol of death and the doom to come. This beacen is at once an emblem of death (Christ’s) and of doom (that of the dreamer and world). At Judgement Day it is this symbol that will be seen again in the heavens. . . .” [Return to text]
[ 6 ] cursèd . . . me. As Swanton observes, the syntax could conceivably support the rendering “made me lift cursèd ones.” [Return to text]
[ 7 ] both . . . together. OE unc butu ætgædere ‘we two both together.’ Unc is dual in number, underscoring the close relationship—the near identification—of Cross and Christ in the poem. [Return to text]
[ 8 ] holm-wood. OE holmwudu, a hapax legomenon and obscure. Swanton notes three possible ways to find meaning in the term: (1) interpret it as ‘sea-wood’ (either ‘ship’ or—more understandably—lignum vitae ‘tree of life,’ which grows by the waters of Paradise); (2) emend to holtwudu ‘forest wood’; or (3) take holm in the OS sense ‘hill,’ providing a “powerful oblique reference to the gallows of Golgotha.” [Return to text]
[ 9 ] seeing. OE gesyhð ‘thing seen, vision’ (> NE sight), clearly referring to the dreamer’s vision of the Cross. B. Huppé, Web of Words, entitles this poem “Gesyhþ rodes.” [Return to text]
[ 10 ] Christ’s . . . answer. More literally: “what they may begin to say to Christ.” [Return to text]
[ 11 ] most afraid. OE unforht, usually emended to anforht ‘fearful’; Swanton retains the MS reading un- as an intensive: ‘very afraid.’ [Return to text]
[ 12 ] small company. See line 69. This is one of the numerous echoes set up to link Christ, Cross, and Dreamer. [Return to text]
[ 13 ] victory-fast. I.e., secure in or sure of victory. [Return to text]
[ 14 ] with . . . good-speed. OE mihtig ond spedig ‘mighty and successful’ (the latter being the original meaning of speedy). [Return to text]
Ahhhh! Here’s the site: http://faculty.uca.edu/jona/texts/rood.htm
Didn't matter what they knew or didn't know...Jesus knew...And Jesus said get the room for the passover meal...And they did...
Here's what Our Lord actually said: [Matthew 26:17-19] 17 Now the first day of the feast of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover? 18 And he said, Go into the city to such a man, and say unto him, The Master saith, My time is at hand; I will keep the passover at thy house with my disciples. 19 And the disciples did as Jesus had appointed them; and they made ready the passover.
If you folks that have King James' version will notice, the words in Italics make this passage extremely misleading. The words "Day of the Feast" are not in the original Greek......so this was NOT the first day of the Feast as many have falsely taught....and evidently believe. As I said in my earlier post, sometimes it took as many as two full days to "Prepare" for Passover but in this instance it appeared that one day was going to be satisfactory and this is what the disciples had set out to do in verse #19....to begin making ready for the Passover.
As sundown occurred that day, the 13th.....it began the Day of Preparation [Leviticus 23:5] which is itself called Passover (the 14th). Passover precedes the seven Day Feast of Unleavened Bread (verse 6) but the entire eight day observance is called... sometimes, "The Days of Unleavened" much as we refer to the days before and following Christmas as the Christmas season.
To reiterate.....Passover is the day of Preparation. This is the day the home is prepared for the feast. This is the day the lamb is slaughtered and this was the day of Our Lord's death. That is confirmed in all gospel accounts:
[Matthew 27:62] Now the next day )(the 15th), that followed the day of the preparation (the 14th), the chief priests and Pharisees came together unto Pilate. Our Lord has now been buried and the Chief Priests are asking Pilate to secure the tomb. This is the day after the Preparation (the 14th)....this was the day the Passover is to be eaten (the 15th). No one at the Last Supper.....the night before (the 14th) had eaten a Passover meal.
[Mark 15:42-46] 42 And now when the even was come, because it was the preparation (the 14th), that is, the day before the sabbath, 43 Joseph of Arimathaea, an honourable counsellor, which also waited for the kingdom of God, came, and went in boldly unto Pilate, and craved the body of Jesus. 44 And Pilate marvelled if he were already dead: and calling unto him the centurion, he asked him whether he had been any while dead. 45 And when he knew it of the centurion, he gave the body to Joseph. 46 And he bought fine linen, and took him down, and wrapped him in the linen, and laid him in a sepulchre which was hewn out of a rock, and rolled a stone unto the door of the sepulchre. As you can see Our Lord has been entombed... it is still the Day of Preparation and no one as yet has eaten the Passover.
[Luke 23:50-54] 50 And, behold, there was a man named Joseph, a counsellor; and he was a good man, and a just: 51 (The same had not consented to the counsel and deed of them;) he was of Arimathaea, a city of the Jews: who also himself waited for the kingdom of God. 52 This man went unto Pilate, and begged the body of Jesus. 53 And he took it down, and wrapped it in linen, and laid it in a sepulchre that was hewn in stone, wherein never man before was laid. 54 And that day was the preparation (the 14th), and the sabbath drew on. Again....Our Lord will be shortly entombed on this Day of Preparation.....and no one has yet eaten the Passover.
[John 18:28-29] 28 Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment: and it was early; and they themselves went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the passover. 29 Pilate then went out unto them, and said, What accusation bring ye against this man? The Lord has been arrested, it is now the morning of the 14th (Passover), He has been before the Sanhedrin, now before Pilate and soon to be crucified.
[John 19:13-16] 13 When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he brought Jesus forth, and sat down in the judgment seat in a place that is called the Pavement, but in the Hebrew, Gabbatha. 14 And it was the preparation of the passover (the 14th), and about the sixth hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King! 15 But they cried out, Away with him, away with him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Shall I crucify your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar. 16 Then delivered he him therefore unto them to be crucified. And they took Jesus, and led him away. Our Lord is about to be crucified, it is still the Day of Preparation.....and no one as yet (including Our Lord and the Disciples) has eaten the Passover.
[John 19:31] 31 The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation (the 14th), that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) (the 15th) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away. Our Lord is now dead.....being crucified, it is still the Day of Preparation and no one has yet eaten the Passover.
The meal is eaten when the sundown of the 14th becomes the evening of the 15th. [Exodus 12:15] Seven days shall ye eat unleavened bread; even the first day ye shall put away leaven out of your houses: for whosoever eateth leavened bread from the first day until the seventh day, that soul shall be cut off from Israel. When Passover (Preparation) ends.... The Feast of Unleavened Bread begins, and this is when the Passover Lamb is eaten. Our Lord was Our Passover lamb [I Corinthians 5:7-8] and He was killed on the Day of Preparation.....before anyone, anywhere had eaten the Passover! The Lord's Supper was not a Passover Seder....it was a supper.
Now, I'm not even going to bother showing you that the Greek word for bread used in this "Last Supper" was not unleavened Bread....but regular bread. That is, of course, unless you continue to insist that the Apostles and Our Lord celebrated a Passover Seder in the upper room on the night of the 14th.
But that's NOT what the scripture says...The scripture says Jesus told them to get a room and prepare for the passover which Jesus planned on attending...And He did...And it was a one day deal...They didn't get the room for a week..
And.....that's exactly what they did. They began to prepare for the Passover. They also were using this room after the crucifixion/resurrection as a hideout [Luke 24:33-49][John 20:19-31] and continued using it for a week:[John 20:26] And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.
From what I've read, it is not necessary for the lamb to be killed in the temple..
Yes it was. If you were in Jerusalem....for the Passover, you procured your sacrificed lamb at the temple. No meat was eaten, no visit to the temple was noted and the feast would not be until the next evening anyway.
The scripture says they HAD eaten it...Likely it was for the feast of unleavened bread..
Well.....hopefully....now that you have read my post, your understanding of the events will help you see the error in your statement. The Feast of Unleavened Bread is when the Passover is eaten.....the night time of the 15th.
I am happy for this to be an ecumenical discussion, and all are welcome to contribute — Catholic or otherwise. The only thing I ask is that we all try to stick to evidence and rational argumentation, and avoid inflammatory language. I think everyone is doing a pretty good job of that. I’m learning a lot, and I’ve learned a few things I didn’t know from your posts — so thanks.
Is this Jewish Tradition? Duh. What are you, a "protestant?" If there is such a thing as an authentic oral interpretive tradition then obviously it lies with the original community to whom the Torah was given, not to some new religion that came along a thousand years later and paved the way for Protestantism by rejecting the Oral Torah.
This is the whole difference between liturgical and "bible-only" chr*stians--the former reject the traditions and ceremonial of the Hebrew Bible and replace them with their own; the latter reject the traditions and ceremonials of the Hebrew Bible and refuse to replace them with others on the very logical assumption that if there were an authentic tradition and a valid ceremonial it would be those of the Hebrew Bible.
As for my remark about bedeaner and transubstantiation, I pointed out that his invocation of church fathers whose views he rejects in other matters is the height of hypocrisy, and so it is.
Since both evolution and creation are equally permissible, why are you messing with the Kolbe Center? Why does the Kolbe Center even exist?
You wrote:
“Moses is not the author of the Torah, inspired or otherwise.”
Actually Moses was - as I already pointed out with verses.
“Is this Jewish Tradition? Duh. What are you, a “protestant?””
More apt in this case would be, “Am I a Jew?” And the answer is no. I put no great stock in Jewish traditions. I remember how my Lord looked at some Jewish traditions, for instance.
“If there is such a thing as an authentic oral interpretive tradition then obviously it lies with the original community to whom the Torah was given, not to some new religion that came along a thousand years later and paved the way for Protestantism by rejecting the Oral Torah.”
No. The authority falls to those whom Jesus gave it to. That’s the Church. Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to the Church - not the Jews who rejected Him.
“Since both evolution and creation are equally permissible, why are you messing with the Kolbe Center?”
I’m not messing with the Kolbe Center. I don’t mess with anything or anyone.
“Why does the Kolbe Center even exist?’
Look at their webpage to find out.
There is one thing which all chr*stians--from the most philo-Semitic and Biblicist to the the most classical, anti-Biblical, and liturgical, have in common: an a priori assumption of the truth of chr*stianity that rests on absolutely nothing but is simply assumed. I've learned this the hard way.
You are more than welcome to your groundless illusion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.