The following paragraph is illustrative of a Catholic Church mindset:
Was Jesus human (Yes - 1 Timothy 2:5)? Was He a sacrifice (Yes - Romans 3:25)? Was He a human sacrifice (Had to be if He was human)? Is human sacrifice allowed by God’s law (No - Deuteronomy 12:30-31)? Apparently you have another “contradiction” to deal with. God does what He wants, how He wants, when He wants, and with or to whomever He wants.
Instead of picking at each of your missaplicatuions of The Word of God, I will offer this simple to follow reasoning:
The Bible, all the way back in Genesis, tells us the Life of the creature is in the blood. The blood is not the Life, the LIFE is in the blood.
If you are a descendant of Adam your Life in the Blood is inherited from a man with a sin nature which was activated in the Garden by disobeying God.
What Life did Jesus inherit IN HIS BLOOD? HINT: it was not the sin nature bloodline of Adam. The LIFE in the blood of JESUS was God Life, not Adamic life. Hence Jesus would not be a 'human sacrifice' since the Life in the blood was what was sacrificed on the cross for you and for me.
The Catholic Church inculcates its adherents to the belief that the Catholic Priest brings JESUS from Heaven to the Catholic Altar, to continue the 'human sacrifice' JESUS finished at Calvary.
1) The life in Jesus's blood was not human in origin so it carried no sin nature throughout His flesh. Jesus Himself verified this to His disciples when He said that Satan was coming for Him but there was nothing in HIM that satan could latch hold on. The Resurrection proved absolutely that there was nothing in Jesus which satan could lay claim to, no sin nature inherited from Adam; Jesus did not sin for His seed remained within HIM, the God seed of God LIFE in the blood of Jesus.2) Jesus asserted that no man takes His life from Him, hence only GOD can make the sacrifice which JESUS accomplished on the Cross of Calvary; no Catholic or any other priest can make the sacrifice or direct the sacrifice be continued because it is not a human sacrifice it is GOD sacrificing HIS LIFE IN HIS BLOOD of Jesus for our redemption. And He tells us He did it ONCE, for all, forever ... the God-life need not be continually sacrificed because God-Life has its origin in the Eternal One, not a carnal nature. The flesh of Jesus was inherited from Adam, but the Life in the Blood of Jesus was from GOD ONLY.
3) JESUS taught His disciples, before He went to the Cross, to break bread and sip the wine as a remembrance for what He was about to do for us all the next day. JESUS never told His disciples that the bread and wine were the means to get HIS GOD LIFE in them. He gave thatunfathomable misdirection to the seekers after signs (quoted by Catholics often, always misapplied as their proof text for the pagan ritual satan has mutated the Remebrance into for Catholiciism). HE did teach them that by faith they are born from above; eating the body, blood, soul, and DIVINITY of GOD, to renew the life of God in someone is a fraudulent twist satan has applied to the REMEBRANCE Jesus established even before He sacrificed The God-Life in His blood for us. It implies God cannot keep His Life in someone born from above, so the faithful must do it for God by obedience to Catholic Church dogma on the sacramental trail of institutionalized religion. That is the fraud of works based religion.
And finally: "God does what He wants, how He wants, when He wants, and with or to whomever He wants." This absurdity is offered in defense of Catholic argument that God countermanded HIS directive to not eat the blood of the creature. Hence the apologist is defending a notion that God is double-minded and does not know the end from the beginning because He changes His Mind. Clearly, without the Catholic mindset, the assertion in that sentence is ONLY possible if God obeys the Catholic Church commands to God to come from Heaven and be continually sacrificed on the Catholic Altar so Catholic Priests can be empowered by feeding the god to the faithful followers of Catholiciism.
“Have been extremely busy, but I’m sure you haven’t missed my response which is coming ...”
I didn’t miss it because I knew what was coming.
“The following paragraph is illustrative of a Catholic Church mindset:”
Yes, irrefutable truth and logic.
I wrote: “Was Jesus human (Yes - 1 Timothy 2:5)? Was He a sacrifice (Yes - Romans 3:25)? Was He a human sacrifice (Had to be if He was human)? Is human sacrifice allowed by God’s law (No - Deuteronomy 12:30-31)? Apparently you have another “contradiction” to deal with. God does what He wants, how He wants, when He wants, and with or to whomever He wants.”
You wrote: “Instead of picking at each of your missaplicatuions of The Word of God, I will offer this simple to follow reasoning:”
I “misapplied” exactly nothing. Not a single one of the verses I posted says anything different than what I said: Jesus became a man, therefore, He was human. He was a sacrifice. The OT prohibits human sacrifice. Thus, using your logic about consuming the Eucharist, a violation of the law has taken place, and NOT ONLY THAT, but it was God Himself who violated His own law. This is all according to your logic.
“The Bible, all the way back in Genesis, tells us the Life of the creature is in the blood. The blood is not the Life, the LIFE is in the blood.”
Oh, there we go. You said you would, “offer this simple to follow reasoning”, but instead you’re actually going to create a new argument trying to defend your previous mistake. You clearly can’t deal with the argument I post. And, let me remind you, I had said, “…there’s an excellent chance you’ll just dismiss it because you have no actual response that doesn’t expose your own claim of “contradiction” to be nonsense …”
Well, to me, it was pretty obvious how you wouldn’t actually address what was posted, so, since I have already addressed your only real argument about the Eucharist, I’ll just see if you can get together whatever it is you need to reply to what I posted:
“Was Jesus human (Yes - 1 Timothy 2:5)? Was He a sacrifice (Yes - Romans 3:25)? Was He a human sacrifice (Had to be if He was human)? Is human sacrifice allowed by God’s law (No - Deuteronomy 12:30-31)? Apparently you have another “contradiction” to deal with. God does what He wants, how He wants, when He wants, and with or to whomever He wants.”
“This absurdity is offered in defense of Catholic argument that God countermanded HIS directive to not eat the blood of the creature.”
Deuteronomy 12:30-31.
“Hence the apologist is defending a notion that God is double-minded and does not know the end from the beginning because He changes His Mind.”
No. No one here is defending that. It’s hysterical watching you tie yourself into bizarre knots to avoid the obvious: God’s laws for man do not apply to God. And, if He so wishes, He can dispense with an OT law in NT times (hence, we can eat pork).
“Clearly, without the Catholic mindset, the assertion in that sentence is ONLY possible if God obeys the Catholic Church commands to God to come from Heaven and be continually sacrificed on the Catholic Altar so Catholic Priests can be empowered by feeding the god to the faithful followers of Catholiciism.”
There’s only one sacrifice. And it is re-presented. You’ll keep posting falsehoods, however. After all, “To Protestantism False Witness is the principle of propagation.” (John Henry Newman, Lecture 4. True Testimony Insufficient for the Protestant View)
Oh, and thanks so much for proving me 100% correct on the fact that you wouldn’t deal with the issue of Deuteronomy 12:30-31.
Oh, and I noticed you - perhaps out of desperation? - called in the anti-Catholic cavalry. That’s okay. Someone in your position might feel like he or she had no other choice but to throw out 7 or more lifelines when (apparently) unable to deal with verses from scripture.
The way I look at it, if you can’t (apparently) bring yourself to deal with those verses, then I am certainly under no obligation to wait around forever. You (apparently) waited around for two days before you posted the non-answer that posted, so it isn’t looking too good for the idea that you might actually engage what was posted. Maybe you’re hoping one of your confederates will take up your case?
Actually on this aspect there is no contradiction, for what Deuteronomy 12:30-312 (cf. Dt. 18:10; Le 18:21; 20:2; Jer 7:31; 32:35) forbids is man making children sacrifices in their ignorance or regardless of their will, which is not the same as a Son choosing to die, and not by self-inflicted mortal means, but by voluntarily allowing men to do what they will.
The captain of a army may determine to rescue men from a POW camp, which will someone to infiltrate its headquarters to kill the commander as well as create a distraction and keep enemy forces focused on him as long as he can, and face certain death in so doing, so that others of his team can launch an attack on the rest and free the POWS.
The one who chooses to be that man does not do so out of compulsion, or ignorance, but freely chooses to lay down his life, knowing what the enemy will do. This is not what the prohibition of child sacrifice is against
The Catholic Church inculcates its adherents to the belief that the Catholic Priest brings JESUS from Heaven to the Catholic Altar, to continue the 'human sacrifice' JESUS finished at Calvary.
And they affirm it is the same but deny that Jesus is still being offered continually as a sacrifice.
And forasmuch as, in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the mass, that same Christ is contained and immolated in an unbloody manner, who once offered Himself in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross; the holy Synod teaches, that this sacrifice is truly propritiatory...For the victim is one and the same, the same now offering by the ministry of priests, who then offered Himself on the cross, the manner alone of offering being different. - Trent The Twenty-Second Session, cp. 2; http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct22.html
1265. What is the Sacrifice of the Mass?...Christ, the eternal High Priest, in an unbloody way offers himself a most acceptable Victim to the eternal Father, as he did upon the Cross.
1269. How does the Mass re-present Calvary? The Mass re-presents Calvary by continuing Christ’s sacrifice of himself to his heavenly Father. In the Mass, no less than on Calvary, Jesus really offers his life to his heavenly Father.
1277. Does the Mass detract from the one, unique Sacrifice of the Cross? The Catechism of the Council of Trent: The Mass in no way detracts from the one, unique Sacrifice of the Cross because the Mass is the same Sacrifice as that of the Cross, to continue on earth until the end of time...The Mass, therefore, no less than the Cross, is expiatory for sins; but now the expiation is experienced by those for whom, on the Cross, the title of God’s mercy had been gained. (John Hardon, The Question and Answer Catholic Catechism (Garden: Image, 1981).
We, therefore, confess that the sacrifice of the Mass is one and the same sacrifice with that of the cross...That the holy sacrifice of the Mass, therefore, is not only a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, or a commemoration of the sacrifice of the cross; but also a sacrifice of propitiation, by which God is appeased and rendered propitious.. (The Catechism of the Council of Trent, Published by Command of Pope Pius the Fifth (New York: Christian Press, 1905), pp. 173-175).