Posted on 06/01/2021 7:45:34 PM PDT by MurphsLaw
Thank you for that. very interesting.
.
“Today many non-Catholic Christians ...”
Nope. non Roman Catholic Christians.
Bookmark
What do you have before 100 ad?
While tha Apostles were alive on earth?
Didache
Lost my interest in the second sentence. Then I wrote this.
Unfortunately, a Jewish document that was altered as a Christian document of unknown dating - and unknown number of alterations.
The “this” is the post.
That’s that.
Translated into modern English by Catholic apologists who have an agenda. If Transubstantiation didn't get formally defined by the Roman Catholic religion until the thirteenth century, I doubt Justin Martyr would recognize what he is credited as documenting.
Chapter 14. Christian Assembly on the Lord’s Day. But every Lord’s day gather yourselves together, and break bread, and give thanksgiving after having confessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure. But let no one who is at odds with his fellow come together with you, until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice may not be profaned. For this is that which was spoken by the Lord: “In every place and time offer to me a pure sacrifice; for I am a great King, says the Lord, and my name is wonderful among the nations.”
Chapter 9. The Eucharist. Now concerning the Eucharist, give thanks this way. First, concerning the cup:
We thank thee, our Father, for the holy vine of David Thy servant, which You madest known to us through Jesus Thy Servant; to Thee be the glory for ever..
And concerning the broken bread:
We thank Thee, our Father, for the life and knowledge which You madest known to us through Jesus Thy Servant; to Thee be the glory for ever. Even as this broken bread was scattered over the hills, and was gathered together and became one, so let Thy Church be gathered together from the ends of the earth into Thy kingdom; for Thine is the glory and the power through Jesus Christ for ever..
But let no one eat or drink of your Eucharist, unless they have been baptized into the name of the Lord; for concerning this also the Lord has said, “Give not that which is holy to the dogs.”
The Didache dated to circa 55 AD
No.
“ Many English and American scholars once dated the text to the late 2nd century AD,[4] a view still held by some today,[14] but most scholars now assign the Didache to the first century.[15][16]
“The document is a composite work, and the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, with its Manual of Discipline, has provided evidence of development over a considerable period of time, beginning as a Jewish catechetical work which was then developed into a church manual.[17]
“Two uncial fragments containing Greek text of the Didache (verses 1:3c–4a; 2:7–3:2) were found among the Oxyrhynchus Papyri (no. 1782) and are now in the collection of the Sackler Library in Oxford.[18][19][20] Apart from these fragments, the Greek text of the Didache has only survived in a single manuscript, the Codex Hierosolymitanus. Dating the document is thus made difficult both by the lack of hard evidence and its composite character. The Didache may have been compiled in its present form as late as 150, although a date closer to the end of the first century seems more probable to many.[21]
Wiki
LOL, really? Here's the same passage, translated by Philip Schaff (a Swiss Protestant):
And this food is called among us Εὐχαριστία [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh. For the apostles, in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and when He had given thanks, said, “This do ye in remembrance of Me, this is My body;” and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, “This is My blood;” and gave it to them alone.
What's his "agenda"?
Also read the book, Four Witnesses by Bennett.
Excellent section on Justin Martyr.
Why not address my actual statement? I said:
Even your unlinked quote from Schaff doesn't line up the same as the OP. So there have obviously been changes over time with the exact wording Justin Martyr used lost to history. My main point was that Roman Catholic apologists cherry pick early church fathers then they often try to shoehorn novel/modern Catholic dogmas back into their writings as if what they believed and taught two thousand years ago is identical to today.
Nowhere will you find Justin Martyr, for example, writing about the bread and wine of the Lord's Supper observance/Eucharist (thanksgiving) being an "expiatory" sacrifice. He says those who partake are believers in Christ and live in holiness out of obedience to God. Nothing about the bread and wine of the observance changing into the LITERAL flesh, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus while the "accidents" of the elements remain unchanged. Did the word "transubstantiation" make it into any of his writings?
I've said this over and over that the bread and wine used in the ordinance of the Lord's Supper are taken reverently - though they are not ever worshipped. They do indeed represent the body and blood of our Savior just as we believe He took on real human flesh and blood in order to be the perfect Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. Jesus told us that as often as we participate together in this sacrament, we "do so in remembrance of Him" and we "do show the Lord's death until He comes". It is a testimony of our faith that we participate in His death for our sins.
I know Catholicism places the Eucharist as the pinnacle of the entire liturgy - that it is the whole reason for the Mass. The early Christians didn't do that. It was certainly a part of their fellowship and worship times together but it was not the only nor even main reason for it. But you guys can believe whatever you want. Where I think you are off base is in asserting ONLY the way Catholics observe the Lord's Supper is correct and only Catholics are the one, true church because of it. Instead, what matters is faith in Jesus Christ that He died for our sins and was raised for our justification. Joining with fellow believers in a local congregation in worship, giving thanks, sharing of resources, evangelization and learning about the Lord through His sacred word is how we identify as members of His body. My beliefs compare very closely to those of the early Christians because they are based upon the word of God.
Dude - the “Roman Catholics” are Catholics in the city of Roma, Italy.
The Catholic Church is the worldwide community of Christ founded in 33 AD at the Pentecost.
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.