Posted on 03/26/2012 1:38:33 PM PDT by NYer
Sorry, Jews spoke Hebrew, although they had enriched the language with a few Aram words for which Hebrew had no equivalent.
Let me know when you acquire a masoretic scroll in Aram. Only a complete fool would believe that a 70 year stay in Babylon would change the Language of God’s people.
.
>> “Are you saying that the high priest could be only a dwarf, midget or small child?” <<
we went through that foolish misdirection earlier, and it wasn’t worth a laugh then, nor is it now. Not even worth a brown star.
Wrong. Most Jews at the time of Christ spoke Greek. The ones around the Holy Land mostly spoke Aramaic. The only Hebrew was by the priestly class.
Let me know when you acquire a masoretic scroll in Aram. Only a complete fool would believe that a 70 year stay in Babylon would change the Language of Gods people.
A more completely warped view of history than I was formerly led to believe.
And how did you handle it? By not handling it? The Ark was a small box.
Nobody except God entered it. Any particular reason you don't want to admit it?
Do you not realize that the ark was in its own “Holy of Holies,” a small room that had to be filled with smoke, when the shekina was present?
Is every catholic that ignorant? (yes, of course)
.
The oldest extant Hebrew manuscripts of the Gospels date to the 11th and 12th centuries. If you have any proof that Matthew, Mark, Luke or John wrote first in Henrew I would love to see it.
For the record, Aram is not a language. It is a region located in modern day Syria.
Logic has to prevail. Hebrew is the language given by God for his people. Everything of importance in God's word is measured in Jerusalem, and can be stated accurately only in his given language. The twelve tribes of Israel are the key to all end time associations and events.
Aram are a people, and Aram is also their language.
This confetti cannon of catholic error and confusion has become very tiring to the believers here, and it is time to educate the catholics in the ways of Christs true followers.
If you are one of his, you will soon be beckoned by his angels to come out of Babylon, and join his convocation.
I’m not sure what your position regarding the Eucharist is, but I detect hostility to the constant Tradition of Christ’s Church. If you will not listen to the Church...
From St. Paul through to the early Church Fathers to today, Catholics have seen the Eucharist the same way.
______________________________________________________________________________
Paul Confirms This
Paul wrote to the Corinthians: “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (1 Cor. 10:16). So when we receive Communion, we actually participate in the body and blood of Christ, not just eat symbols of them. Paul also said, “Therefore whoever eats the bread and drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. . . . For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself” (1 Cor. 11:27, 29). “To answer for the body and blood” of someone meant to be guilty of a crime as serious as homicide. How could eating mere bread and wine “unworthily” be so serious? Pauls comment makes sense only if the bread and wine became the real body and blood of Christ.
What Did the First Christians Say?
Anti-Catholics also claim the early Church took this chapter symbolically. Is that so? Lets see what some early Christians thought, keeping in mind that we can learn much about how Scripture should be interpreted by examining the writings of early Christians.
Ignatius of Antioch, who had been a disciple of the apostle John and who wrote a letter to the Smyrnaeans about A.D. 110, said, referring to “those who hold heterodox opinions,” that “they abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in his goodness, raised up again” (6:2, 7:1).
Forty years later, Justin Martyr, wrote, “Not as common bread or common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nourished, . . . is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus” (First Apology 66:120).
Origen, in a homily written about A.D. 244, attested to belief in the Real Presence. “I wish to admonish you with examples from your religion. You are accustomed to take part in the divine mysteries, so you know how, when you have received the Body of the Lord, you reverently exercise every care lest a particle of it fall and lest anything of the consecrated gift perish. You account yourselves guilty, and rightly do you so believe, if any of it be lost through negligence” (Homilies on Exodus 13:3).
Cyril of Jerusalem, in a catechetical lecture presented in the mid-300s, said, “Do not, therefore, regard the bread and wine as simply that, for they are, according to the Masters declaration, the body and blood of Christ. Even though the senses suggest to you the other, let faith make you firm. Do not judge in this matter by taste, but be fully assured by faith, not doubting that you have been deemed worthy
of the body and blood of Christ” (Catechetical Discourses: Mystagogic 4:22:9).
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/christ-in-the-eucharist
Do you not realize that you posted that the high priest entered the Ark, not any room? Is every antiCatholic in his cups that ignorant? Yes, of course.
Reality check.
Hebrew is the language given by God for his people. Everything of importance in God's word is measured in Jerusalem, and can be stated accurately only in his given language. The twelve tribes of Israel are the key to all end time associations and events.
Random phrases do not reality make.
Aram are a people, and Aram is also their language.
Neither do vain repetitions.
This confetti cannon of catholic error and confusion has become very tiring to the believers here, and it is time to educate the catholics in the ways of Christs true followers.
By your own admission, you are not even Christian. What education would you have we Christians learn?
If you are one of his, you will soon be beckoned by his angels to come out of Babylon, and join his convocation.
Put your analyst on danger money, baby.
Nice try but no cigar...So you 'interpret' it to mean something other than what it says...Now you can justify yourself...
Problem with your own definition is a three or four year old would have a rough time on only mother's milk for a couple of days...
No, I do not have enough hubris to believe that I can interpret it. I defer to those early Christians who heard the Word from those no less than one generation after the life and ministry of Jesus. The bottom line is that the Didache does not prohibit infant baptism as you attempted to interpret it for us.
Peace be to you.
Wrong!
By my own admission, I am very Christian, unfortunately you clearly are not, and have no respect for God’s word, or his things.
“entered TO the Ark”
(not into, as deranged demon posessed catholics see)
What you insist on calling “the church” is a herd of very lost men that have absolutely no knowledge, nor relationship with Jesus Christ.
Your “church” was created in the 4th century by the pharisees that had been displaced from Israel by the Roman army in 70 AD. That is why said “church” defies God’s word, and follows man made “traditions” as the pharisees always have.
The worship of Ishtar in the guise of Mary is another characteristic of the pharisees of Judea.
.
Must be some pretty heavy indoctrination, started at a young age, to make someone that amazingly naive.
-—Your church was created in the 4th century by the pharisees that had been displaced from Israel by the Roman army in 70 AD. That is why said church defies Gods word, and follows man made traditions as the pharisees always have.——
Can you find any historical evidence for Christians following your doctrines prior to Luther?
Yes, in the epistles of Paul; it is an exact fit.
Quid est veritas? That is the question that is written in the hearts of everyone.
If one looks inward for the answer they will never find it. That is particularly true of those who begin with their truth, that the Church instutited by Christ is evil, and then read Scripture and history to prove themselves correct.
We know that lies and discord are not fruits of the Holy Spirit so those trapped in this deceit need our prayers.
Bless ya, NL - there’s wisdom and clearly inspiration in your words. I know I’d be better off to scorn less and pity more - prayer is a very good answer in a case like this.
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.