Conclusion from Peru and Mexico

I think

that even if I believed as you do . . . about the elements of The Lord’s Supper . . .

I’d still say that pride . . . is the enemy’s GREATEST tool.

Good points.

Oh, really now. Name the body of believers? Aren’t you getting ridiculous? There were churches at Corinth for one. Thessalonica, and at least five the other churches named in the Bible. I’ll look them up for you if you can’t. The body of believers is the ONE TRUE CHURCH but no use in telling you that since you believe the heretical Roman church has that distinction. Wrong.

= = =

TRUE. TRUE. TRUE.

THX

I always thought he spoke to a large crowd. The scripture I was reading yesterday though didn’t indicate that, but of course, it might be hard to know for sure.

Thank you. Mxxx

***The layman is taught that the Holy Spirit only discerns to the Magisterium on all matters of faith and morals. The layman is locked out. You seem to be describing some sort of conscientious objector status that would allow the layman to know he is OK even if his priest says he wasn’t. I see no evidence of that ever happening. How could it? Are those wacky Catholic nuns who are ordaining themselves as priests seen as conscientious objectors in good standing? No way. ***

The Church is the teaching institution for the Holy Spirit to use on earth. We defer to Him. There is no teaching that the HS does not inspire individuals; as a matter of fact, we teach that the HS comes into the individual through the process of baptism.

***They KNEW they could trust their priests. If the Holy Spirit would have clued in the hypothetical guy above, then certainly He would have done so for those parents. But it doesn’t work like that. The average Catholic layman is taught to trust the clergy without question. Proof is that it took more than 30 years to flush out the well known scandal.***

This is not proof, since the victims’ groups are nowing targeting the Southern Baptists, unless you are labeling the Baptists with also trusting the clergy without question.

***God promised that I need to confess my sins to one of your priests to have them forgiven? ***

Firstly, they are not my priests, they are God’s. Secondly, we have Jesus instructing the Apostles.

John 20:
21
(Jesus) said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, so I send you.”
22
And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the holy Spirit.
23
Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained.”

Matt 16:
18
And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, 13 and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.
19
I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. 14 Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Matt 18:
18
Amen, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Seems pretty Scriptural to me.

***If free will didn’t matter, why did Jesus spend so much time telling us what to do?

Sanctification and perseverance.**

I’m not sure what you’re saying here. If all we need comes to us from the indwelling Holy Spirit, then none of Scripture is worth anything, since the HS will inform the Reformed elect perfectly of anything that they need to know and there will be no mistake or translational error.

***God could have snatched us all away at the point of belief if He wanted to, but He obviously had different plans. Those include sanctification and spreading His word to others as His instruments.***

If one does not already have the Reformed Holy Spirit causing one to believe, then of what use is it to tell anyone of the Good News? It will only be a seed thrown onto rocky ground, right? God does not ‘plan’ anyway. He exists always and everywhen.

***Man does not have to have ULTIMATE controlling power to be responsible for his own sin.***

How can you be responsible for something that you have no power over?

***I think the Catholic view is that UNLESS man has the ultimate controlling power over events, then the only one left to blame is God. ***

Man is to walk the Way, not get elected to the limo ride.

***What seems a little funny is that you’re OK on putting responsibility on people for their own sins, but you give God a total pass on His responsibility for His own creation BASED ON SCRIPTURE. That is, you say that God created all men, and then you say that scripture says that God loves all men, and that all men are God’s children. Yet, under the Catholic view what did God do? He took a vacation and let man run loose to do whatever he wanted. If some decided to do enough works to be saved then good for them, but God doesn’t interfere.***

Works don’t get you to heaven, but evil works without repentence get you to hell. God is hardly on vacation. He is constantly, either through the Church or not, working to get us to want to be saved. God desires that no man shall perish.

***We are often accused of being the arrogant ones because we do not submit to your men. Yet, you believe that you and they are better compared to adult children of God who are old and wise enough to know what’s best for you (AND EVERYONE ELSE! :). ***

Running around saying that you have the indwelling Spirit and therefore know better than any other man who doesn’t seems pretty arrogant to me, especially when no evidence is required other than one’s say so. That by itself seems a little odd, but when you combine with that the fact that nearly everyone who has this Reformed indwelling Spirit belongs to different groups (or is a loner) that believe different things.

***I am not smart or wise enough to make the right decisions on my own, using my free will. I just hope that you will try to rely on God for at least some things and that your Church will allow you to have a child-like faith. That is the kind of faith that is dependent on God. ***

Nobody gets to heaven with Jesus and the Grace of God. That is the whole idea of the Footprints poem. He helps, supports and sometimes carries us, but it’s us that has to walk there. God provides no limos.

***The grown-up, Apostolic faith is apparently a faith of a different sort.***

It is the faith of the Apostles, the ones who walked with Jesus. It should be the only sort.

He was speaking primarily to the Apostles; the crowds nearby would have overheard.

Well, that's progress. 8~)

Since from the text we learn the crowds followed Him up the mountain and then back down the mountain, it certainly seems likely He knew His entire audience.

***I am using "personality" to show that God is "of or relating to a person". That person is identifiable and knowable to a certain extent. That person is also rational.*** Anthropomorphizing, aren't we? Answers.com says that: Dictionary: personality (pûr'sə-năl'ĭ-tē) n., pl. -ties. The quality or condition of being a person. The totality of qualities and traits, as of character or behavior, that are peculiar to a specific person. The pattern of collective character, behavioral, temperamental, emotional, and mental traits of a person: Though their personalities differed, they got along as friends. Distinctive qualities of a person, especially those distinguishing personal characteristics that make one socially appealing: won the election more on personality than on capability. God isn't a person; Jesus was and had His own human personality. The Holy Spirit sure isn't a person. ***What are you saying? Is it that God revealed the truth to Peter, and then Peter used his free will to verbalize it?*** No, I'm saying that Peter had the truth revealed and then chose to act upon it. Belief without action doesn't mean much. He didn't choose to not act, and he didn't choose to forget it or dismiss it. ***So, I would agree (I think) with you that this knowing has nothing to do with free will.*** Belief is something that we do; like love or hate. ***I refuted that with showing that free will did not concern coming to believe.*** Without the Grace of God, noone will believe. With the Grace of God, we CAN believe.

Wait.

You mean there AREN'T pink Unicorns of Jupiter?

I'm going to lose a lot of bar bets....

***That’s about as credible as saying there are pink unicorns on Jupiter.***

You mean there aren’t?

Isn’t it interesting debating with folks who claim that their facts swell out of their bosoms and their points of view were robotically implanted by a Reformed Holy Spirit waiting in ambush for them.

***First you are assuming that what we do, what defines us, is divine in origin and, second, you are assuming that it is a favor. ***

Without the Church, how does one recognize the brightest star in the sky?

I hear you.. Why cant we just get along?..

If you think I'm pulling a Rodney King then I'm afraid you actually do not hear me.

What I said could be rephrased, "If he knew what we really teach about the Eucharist he might not be so very against it, certainly not in the same manner and with the same arguments as those being brought forward now."

I do think that there is very great good in working together to delineate precisely our differences and I think the normal atmosphere of debate and gotcha is strictly speaking vicious and also useless. This is not like a criminal matter in the respect that I don't think an adversarial approach will bring the truth to light, even the sort of second level truths that I'm talking about.

For one thing, an adversarial approach encourages NOT understanding what one's adversaries are saying but only looking for ways to twist it. I can't see any good coming out of that at all.

Moses "dissuades" God from burning up the murmuring Israelites. But do we really think God was upset and Moses calmed Him down or talked Him out of it? Not me.

Yup, I totally agree. God always encourages prayer, but as someone famous once said "not mine but your will be done".

"...we were bold in our God to speak unto you the gospel of God with much contention.
For our exhortation was not of deceit, nor of uncleanness, nor in guile:
But as we were allowed of God to be put in trust with the Gospel, even so we speak; not as pleasing men, but God, which trieth our hearts." -- 1 Thess. 2:2-4

[ "If he knew what we really teach about the Eucharist he might not be so very against it, certainly not in the same manner and with the same arguments as those being brought forward now." ]

I already know what transubstantiation is.. and is not..
Assuming I do not know is, well, assumptive..

It is a best weird and at worse cultish... to be nice..
Transubstantiation is only one of hundreds of questionable(to me) practices of the RCC and others.. The protestants are not without felony either, according to me.. But I tolerate some of it because its at heart a lack in human nature generally.. As is many pagan practices..

Of course you might disagree, but you are probably wrong about other things as well.. Jesus didnt call us to be smart but just sheep.. Sheep are known for not being smart..

I like to say God is AT LEAST personal, and in no way LESS than personal.

Amen. Scripture reveals to us a personal God. And the alternative is unthinkable.

So God is a person, but I'm not so sure about whether I am, but I am LIKE a person.

To borrow an Obamaism, "you're personal enough, MD". :) But seriously, we can be sure of our personality since we were created in the image of God. That's why I think it is so important to understand that we have a personal-infinite God. That tells us so much about ourselves. I am really glad we agree on this stuff, MD. :)

Forest Keeper, that was a BRILLIANT, EXHILERATING post! Enough solid theology to fill an entire Sunday School lesson.

Within God's all powerful sovereignty He COULD have turned over the decision to men as to who would be saved and who would be lost. He COULD have just left it up to each man's free will. BUT, if He did that, then by definition it would mean that He didn't CARE who individually was in and who was out. IF He actually cared, then in His sovereignty He could do something about it. But for you guys, He just sits back and waits for the results to come in, and then writes down the names as His elect.

THAT is not the God I have a personal relationship with. My God loves ME and cares about ME and gave His life for ME. I'm not some random number to Him that He "hopes" will make good decisions and do enough good deeds. I am His son. And as my Father, He isn't going to let me play in traffic when it means certain death. He protects ME because He loves ME. It's personal. It's family.

Wonderfully-written! That is the Gospel, straight-away!

"[It is God] who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began" -- 2 Timothy 1:9

God "called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace."

And God granted that grace to His family from "before the world began." It is ALL of and by and for Him, as your post so clearly states.

As promised, the Holy Spirit is given to each member of His family. At a time of God's choosing, the Holy Spirit will give us new ears and new eyes so that when we read God's word it will come alive in our renewed mind and in our new heart, and we will know our salvation has been won by Christ on the cross.

That's just how God has purposed life to be -- for His glory and the merciful welfare of His family.

I already know what transubstantiation is.. and is not.. Assuming I do not know is, well, assumptive..

(The assumption is another doctrine altogether, Oh wait, you mean ...)

Who assumed? I concluded -- tentatively, from the use of such phrases as
Transubstantiation is only one of hundreds of questionable(to me) practices ...

(Hint: It's not a "practice".)

You said
Eucharist is Jesus becoming once again flesh to be consumed by the flesh.. an insult to the Holy Spirit.. in essence.. and in reality.. It flys in the face of the Holy Spirit performing spiritually.,. The Eucharist raises the flesh to preposterous import.. and reduces the spirit/Spirit to figurative character..

There may be an indication I'm not able to see that you understand the doctrine, but I sure don't see it. "Flesh"? Precluding the spiritual work of the Spirit, when the "body" in question is a "spiritual body"?

I don't see, though I could be wrong, how someone could at once understand the teaching and use language like that. So, conclusion, not assumption.

""I’d still say that pride . . . is the enemy’s GREATEST tool""

I agree.It is pride that allows the enemy to work within,thus the result of this pride is what is written by someone like John Calvin's prideful misrepresentation of Melchizedek in his chapter 18

Calvin did not understand the Bible through typology and the early church fathers.He was either a lousy historian or hated the early Church Fathers as well,so he took it upon himself to create his own religion out of hatred of the Catholic Church.

St. Irenaeus describes typology well in his Adversus haereses (Against the Heresies), Book IV, Chapter 26:

1. If any one, therefore, reads the Scriptures with attention, he will find in them an account of Christ, and a foreshadowing of the new calling (vocationis). For Christ is the treasure which was hid in the field, that is, in this world (for “the field is the world” ); but the treasure hid in the Scriptures is Christ, since He was pointed out by means of types and parables. Hence His human nature could not be understood, prior to the consummation of those things which had been predicted, that is, the advent of Christ.

And therefore it was said to Daniel the prophet: “Shut up the words, and seal the book even to the time of consummation, until many learn, and knowledge be completed. For at that time, when the dispersion shall be accomplished, they shall know all these things.”

But Jeremiah also says, “In the last days they shall understand these things.” For every prophecy, before its fulfilment, is to men full of enigmas and ambiguities. But when the time has arrived, and the prediction has come to pass, then the prophecies have a clear and certain exposition. And for this reason, indeed, when at this present time the law is read to the Jews, it is like a fable; for they do not possess the explanation of all things pertaining to the advent of the Son of God, which took place in human nature; but when it is read by the Christians, it is a treasure, hid indeed in a field, but brought to light by the Cross of Christ, and explained, both enriching the understanding of men, and showing forth the wisdom of God and declaring His dispensations with regard to man, and forming the kingdom of Christ beforehand, and preaching by anticipation the inheritance of the holy Jerusalem, and proclaiming beforehand that the man who loves God shall arrive at such excellency as even to see God, and hear His word, and from the hearing of His discourse be glorified to such an extent, that others cannot behold the glory of his countenance, as was said by Daniel: “Those who do understand, shall shine as the brightness of the firmament, and many of the righteous as the stars for ever and ever.’’

Thus, then, I have shown it to be, if any one read the Scriptures. For thus it was that the Lord discoursed with, the disciples after His resurrection from the dead, proving to them from the Scriptures themselves “that Christ must suffer, and enter into His glory, and that remission of sins should be preached in His name throughout all the world.” And the disciple will be perfected, and rendered like the householder, “who bringeth forth from his treasure things new and old.”

The typology of the Eucharist is overwhelming and the Early Christians were so confidant of this- that they believed it as absolute fact.

I ‘ll repost this again and have since added more information to it for RCIA teaching

Why do you suppose Scripture puts focus on Bread and Wine?

Genesis 14.17-20, says....

After his return from the defeat of Chedorlaomer and the kings who were with them, the king of Sodom went out to meet him at the Valley of Shaveh, (that is the King’s Valley). And Melchizedek king of Salem brought out BREAD and wine; he was priest of God Most High. And he blessed him and said,

“Blessed be Abram by God Most High,
maker of heaven and earth;
and blessed be God Most High,
who has delivered your enemies into your hand!”

This is the first time in the Bible that anyone is addressed by the word coen, the Hebrew word for priest. As a “priest of God Most High,” Melchizedek “brought out bread and wine.”

What do we know about Melchizedek

1.he came from “nowhere”
2.he was a priest of the God Most High
3.he offered bread and wine
4.he was King of Jerusalem (Jerusalem means “Peace”)
Abraham paid tribute to him
5.Melchizedek is an obvious type of the antitype Christ, 6.Who is the High Priest (explicity after the order of Melchizedek).

Remember that the type (usually found in the Old Testament) is always inferior to the antitype (usually in the New Testament) that it prefigures: manna is inferior to the Eucharist; the Sabbath practices and sacrifices are inferior to the Mass

What about this....

Jesus said “Your ancestors ate manna in the wilderness and died...I am the living BREAD that came down from heaven...unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man you will not have life within you.”

Jesus was born in “Bethlehem” which, in Hebrew, literally means “house of Bread”

A manger was not a place where animals stayed. It was a trough where food was put to feed the animals. Mary laid Jesus in a place where food was placed
At the last supper, which was a passover meal, Jesus said “take this and eat it, this is my body.”

“I Am The BREAD of Life”
John 6:48

Scripture says “For indeed Christ our Passover was sacrificed for us. Therefore, let us keep this feast.” (1 Cor 5:7-8) This relates to Exodus 12:1-42. The Passover meal saved from the angel of death who was striking the first born children in Egypt. At a traditional Passover supper, the Jews ate the sacrificial lamb.

Paul is saying that this feast should continue. They don’t think that he was “re-sacrificing” Christ when he kept this feast.

We see the Eucharistic formula throughout Scripture. At table, Jesus takes . . . blesses . . . breaks . . . and gives the bread. He also took a cup of wine; after giving thanks to God, He gave it to His disciples saying, “This is My blood . . . of the [new] covenant.” Matthew 26:26-29; Mark 14:22-25; Luke 22:15-20. This is the same formula Jesus uses during the first Eucharistic celebration after the resurrection when He encountered two disciples on the road to Emmaus (see Luke 24:13-35). When the Corinthians drift from the proper Eucharistic formula, Paul corrects them.(1 Corinthians 11:23-29)

“Give us this day our daily bread.”
Matthew 6:11

This is from the prayer that Jesus taught us, the “Our Father”.

It means in totality, bread as food for our bodies and spiritual bread as food for our souls.

We are to continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God.

Every day in every place a clean oblation is offered.
What, or who, is the sacrifice and what is a clean oblation?

It is an offering of praise to GOD, in the Holy Eucharist, the Body, and the Precious Blood of Christ. The Catholic/Orthodox Church offers the sacrifice of praise to GOD all over the world, every day in the Mass.

It has replaced the bloody animal sacrifices of the Old Testament.

That is why it is called a clean oblation.

In Matthew 26:26, didn’t Jesus take bread and say, “Take and eat; this is my body”?

And did he not beseech us to say in the Lords Prayer:

“Give us this day out daily bread”, (both physical for the body, and spiritual for the soul).
Matthew 6:11

How many non-Catholic ecclesial communities offer daily sacrifice, a clean oblation, as is clearly commanded for us to do by Holy Scripture? How many do not even offer sacrifice?

“Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, as you really are unleavened.
For Christ, our paschal lamb, has been sacrificed.”
1Corinthians 5:7

“Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children. And walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God.”
Ephesians 5:1-2

“I have received full payment, and more; I am filled, having received from Epaphroditus the gifts you sent, a fragrant offering, a sacrifice acceptable and pleasing to God.”
Philippians 4:18

Jesus Christ is the “food” which sustains the spiritual soul which lives forever. He is the “bread come down from heaven” as we saw in John chapter six.

Can a mere “symbol” sustain the spiritual soul to eternal life?

Since the manna was the type or symbol of the New Testament reality, that question can be answered by another basic rule of typology

“An Old Testament type (symbol) never points to a New Testament symbol, but to a reality.”

So obviously the “food which endures to eternal life” cannot be a symbol, but a New Testament reality. It also cannot be a symbol, for another reason. It would violate yet a second basic rule of typology which we have previously discussed:

“The New Testament reality is far superior to the Old Testament type.”

So does this mean that Christ is sacrificed over and over again in the Eucharistic Celebration?

Again, what does Holy Scripture say?

“For Christ also died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit;”
1Peter 3:18

“The former priests were many in number, because they were prevented by death from continuing in office; but he holds his priesthood permanently, because he continues for ever. Consequently he is able for all time to save those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them. For it was fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, blameless, unstained, separated from sinners, exalted above the heavens. He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people; he did this once for all when he offered up himself.”
Hebrews 7:23-27

Christ was sacrificed only once and for all time. He is both the High Priest and the victim.

Catechism of the Catholic Church # 1366
“The Eucharist is thus a sacrifice because it re-presents (makes present) the sacrifice of the cross, because it is its memorial and because it applies its fruit: (Christ), our Lord and God, was once and for all to offer himself to God the Father by his death on the altar of the cross, to accomplish there an everlasting redemption. But because his priesthood was not to end with his death, at the Last Supper ‘on the night when he was betrayed,’ (he wanted) to leave to his beloved spouse the Church a visible sacrifice (as the nature of man demands) by which the bloody sacrifice which he was to accomplish once for all on the cross would be re-presented, its memory perpetuated until the end of the world, and its salutary power be applied to the forgiveness of the sins we daily commit.
(Council of Trent (1562): DS 1740; cf. 1 Cor 11:23; Heb 7:24,27.)”

We must remember that GOD is outside of time. Time is a measure of change for the things He has created. Since He never changes, He Himself is outside of time.

Consequently, everything from creation, and before, and for all eternity is now with GOD, including the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross. It is a continuous, never ending sacrifice.

How can something that never ends be repeated?

God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.”
And he said, “Say this to the people of Israel, ‘I AM has sent me to you.’”
Exodus 3:14

Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.”
John 8:58

“And getting into a boat he crossed over and came to his own city. And behold, they brought to him a paralytic, lying on his bed; and when Jesus saw their faith he said to the paralytic, “Take heart, my son; your sins are forgiven.” And behold, some of the scribes said to themselves, “This man is blaspheming.” But Jesus, knowing their thoughts, said, “Why do you think evil in your hearts? For which is easier, to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Rise and walk’? But that you may know that the Son of man has authority on earth to forgive sins”—he then said to the paralytic—”Rise, take up your bed and go home.” And he rose and went home. When the crowds saw it, they were afraid, and they glorified God, who had given such authority to men.”
Matthew 9:1-8

These classic verses graphically show the connection between healing of the body and healing of the soul. Jesus first cleansed the paralytic’s soul, and then He cleansed his body. Pay especial attention to the last line. To whom was authority given? Notice that the very last word in the verses is plural.

In summery

1. The body needs physical food in order to survive or else it will die.
2. The spiritual soul needs spiritual food in order to avoid spiritual death, the separation from GOD.
3. Spiritual food cannot be a symbolic gesture, simply because a mere symbol could not possibly feed the spiritual soul. Spiritual food is as much a reality as is physical food. It is the anti type of its Old Testament type of the manna in the desert. Recall that an O.T. type never points to a N.T. symbol.
4. Scripture tells us that there will be offered sacrifice every day in every place, a clean oblation.
How can symbolism of a sacrifice be a sacrifice in itself?
5. The bread come down from heaven, Jesus Christ, is that clean oblation, His sacrifice on the cross.
6. Jesus Christ was sacrificed once on the cross for all eternity.
7. Jesus Christ is both the High Priest and the victim, the Paschal Lamb of sacrifice.
8. Since He is High Priest forever (Heb 7:17), He is also the sacrificial Lamb forever (Rev 5:13-14).
9. Since GOD is outside of time, everything is now with Him. That one sacrifice at Calvary, which is always now for GOD, is made present for us during the Eucharistic celebration of the Mass.
10. The Mass is a re-presentation of that one sacrifice. We are re-presented at Calvary.

Here is another good Scriptural explanation of this...

Eucharist in Scripture
http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/scrip/a6.html

Here is what some of the Early Church Fathers say about Our Blessed Lord in the Eucharist

ST. IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH
St. Ignatius became the third bishop of Antioch, succeeding St. Evodius, who was the immediate successor of St. Peter. He heard St. John preach when he was a boy and knew St. Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna. Seven of his letters written to various Christian communities have been preserved. Eventually, he received the martyr’s crown as he was thrown to wild beasts in the arena.

“Consider how contrary to the mind of God are the heterodox in regard to the grace of God which has come to us. They have no regard for charity, none for the widow, the orphan, the oppressed, none for the man in prison, the hungry or the thirsty. They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead.”

“Letter to the Smyrnaeans”, paragraph 6. circa 80-110 A.D.

“Come together in common, one and all without exception in charity, in one faith and in one Jesus Christ, who is of the race of David according to the flesh, the son of man, and the Son of God, so that with undivided mind you may obey the bishop and the priests, and break one Bread which is the medicine of immortality and the antidote against death, enabling us to live forever in Jesus Christ.”

-”Letter to the Ephesians”, paragraph 20, c. 80-110 A.D.

“I have no taste for the food that perishes nor for the pleasures of this life. I want the Bread of God which is the Flesh of Christ, who was the seed of David; and for drink I desire His Blood which is love that cannot be destroyed.”

-”Letter to the Romans”, paragraph 7, circa 80-110 A.D.

“Take care, then who belong to God and to Jesus Christ - they are with the bishop. And those who repent and come to the unity of the Church - they too shall be of God, and will be living according to Jesus Christ. Do not err, my brethren: if anyone follow a schismatic, he will not inherit the Kingdom of God. If any man walk about with strange doctrine, he cannot lie down with the passion. Take care, then, to use one Eucharist, so that whatever you do, you do according to God: for there is one Flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup in the union of His Blood; one altar, as there is one bishop with the presbytery and my fellow servants, the deacons.”

-Epistle to the Philadelphians, 3:2-4:1, 110 A.D.

ST. JUSTIN MARTYR
St. Justin Martyr was born a pagan but converted to Christianity after studying philosophy. He was a prolific writer and many Church scholars consider him the greatest apologist or defender of the faith from the 2nd century. He was beheaded with six of his companions some time between 163 and 167 A.D.

“This food we call the Eucharist, of which no one is allowed to partake except one who believes that the things we teach are true, and has received the washing for forgiveness of sins and for rebirth, and who lives as Christ handed down to us. For we do not receive these things as common bread or common drink; but as Jesus Christ our Savior being incarnate by God’s Word took flesh and blood for our salvation, so also we have been taught that the food consecrated by the Word of prayer which comes from him, from which our flesh and blood are nourished by transformation, is the flesh and blood of that incarnate Jesus.”

” First Apology”, Ch. 66, inter A.D. 148-155.

“God has therefore announced in advance that all the sacrifices offered in His name, which Jesus Christ offered, that is, in the Eucharist of the Bread and of the Chalice, which are offered by us Christians in every part of the world, are pleasing to Him.”

“Dialogue with Trypho”, Ch. 117, circa 130-160 A.D.

Moreover, as I said before, concerning the sacrifices which you at that time offered, God speaks through Malachias, one of the twelve, as follows: ‘I have no pleasure in you, says the Lord; and I will not accept your sacrifices from your hands; for from the rising of the sun until its setting, my name has been glorified among the gentiles; and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a clean offering: for great is my name among the gentiles, says the Lord; but you profane it.’ It is of the sacrifices offered to Him in every place by us, the gentiles, that is, of the Bread of the Eucharist and likewise of the cup of the Eucharist, that He speaks at that time; and He says that we glorify His name, while you profane it.”

-”Dialogue with Trypho”, [41: 8-10]

ST. IRENAEUS OF LYONS
St. Irenaeus succeeded St. Pothinus to become the second bishop of Lyons in 177 A.D. Earlier in his life he studied under St. Polycarp. Considered, one of the greatest theologians of the 2nd century, St. Irenaeus is best known for refuting the Gnostic heresies.

[Christ] has declared the cup, a part of creation, to be his own Blood, from which he causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of creation, he has established as his own Body, from which he gives increase to our bodies.”

Source: St. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies, 180 A.D.:

“So then, if the mixed cup and the manufactured bread receive the Word of God and become the Eucharist, that is to say, the Blood and Body of Christ, which fortify and build up the substance of our flesh, how can these people claim that the flesh is incapable of receiving God’s gift of eternal life, when it is nourished by Christ’s Blood and Body and is His member? As the blessed apostle says in his letter to the Ephesians, ‘For we are members of His Body, of His flesh and of His bones’ (Eph. 5:30). He is not talking about some kind of ‘spiritual’ and ‘invisible’ man, ‘for a spirit does not have flesh an bones’ (Lk. 24:39). No, he is talking of the organism possessed by a real human being, composed of flesh and nerves and bones. It is this which is nourished by the cup which is His Blood, and is fortified by the bread which is His Body. The stem of the vine takes root in the earth and eventually bears fruit, and ‘the grain of wheat falls into the earth’ (Jn. 12:24), dissolves, rises again, multiplied by the all-containing Spirit of God, and finally after skilled processing, is put to human use. These two then receive the Word of God and become the Eucharist, which is the Body and Blood of Christ.”

-”Five Books on the Unmasking and Refutation of the Falsely

Named Gnosis”. Book 5:2, 2-3, circa 180 A.D. “For just as the bread which comes from the earth, having received the invocation of God, is no longer ordinary bread, but the Eucharist, consisting of two realities, earthly and heavenly, so our bodies, having received the Eucharist, are no longer corruptible, because they have the hope of the resurrection.”

-”Five Books on the Unmasking and Refutation of the Falsely named Gnosis”. Book 4:18 4-5, circa 180 A.D.

ST. CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA
St. Clement of Alexandria studied under Pantaenus. He later succeeded him as the director of the school of catechumens in Alexandria, Egypt around the year 200 A.D.,

“The Blood of the Lord, indeed, is twofold. There is His corporeal Blood, by which we are redeemed from corruption; and His spiritual Blood, that with which we are anointed. That is to say, to drink the Blood of Jesus is to share in His immortality. The strength of the Word is the Spirit just as the blood is the strength of the body. Similarly, as wine is blended with water, so is the Spirit with man. The one, the Watered Wine, nourishes in faith, while the other, the Spirit, leads us on to immortality. The union of both, however, - of the drink and of the Word, - is called the Eucharist, a praiseworthy and excellent gift. Those who partake of it in faith are sanctified in body and in soul. By the will of the Father, the divine mixture, man, is mystically united to the Spirit and to the Word.”,

-”The Instructor of the Children”. [2,2,19,4] ante 202 A.D.,

“The Word is everything to a child: both Father and Mother, both Instructor and Nurse. ‘Eat My Flesh,’ He says, ‘and drink My Blood.’ The Lord supplies us with these intimate nutrients. He delivers over His Flesh, and pours out His Blood; and nothing is lacking for the growth of His children. O incredible mystery!”,

-”The Instructor of the Children” [1,6,41,3] ante 202 A.D.. ,

ST. CYPRIAN OF CARTHAGE
St. Cyprian of Carthage converted from paganism to Christianity around the year 246 A.D. Soon afterwards, he aspired to the priesthood and eventually was ordained Bishop of Carthage. He was beheaded for his Faith in the year 258 A.D., thus he was the first African bishop to have been martyred.,

“So too the the sacred meaning of the Pasch lies essentially in the fact, laid down in Exodus, that the lamb - slain as a type of Christ - should be eaten in one single home. God says the words: ‘In one house shall it be eaten, ye shall not cast its flesh outside.’ The flesh of Christ and the Lord’s sacred body cannot be cast outside, nor have believers any other home but the one Church.”,

-”The Unity of the Catholic Church”. Ch.8, circa 249-258 A.D.,

Description of an event in which an infant was taken to a pagan sacrifice and then the mother recovered it and brought it to Mass.

“Listen to what happened in my presence, before my very eyes. There was a baby girl, whose parents had fled and had, in their fear, rather improvidently lift it in the charge of its nurse. The nurse took the helpless child to the magistrates. There, before the idol where the crowds were flocking, as it was too young to eat the flesh, they gave it some bread dipped in what was left of the wine offered by those who had already doomed themselves. Later, the mother recovered her child. But the girl could not reveal or tell the wicked thing that had been done, any more than she had been able to understand or ward it off before. Thus, when the mother brought her in with her while we were offering the Sacrifice, it was through ignorance that this mischance occurred. But the infant, in the midst of the faithful, resenting the prayer and the offering we were making, began to cry convulsively, struggling and tossing in a veritable brain-storm, and for all its tender age and simplicity of soul, was confessing, as if under torture, in every way it could, its consciousness of the misdeed. Moreover, when the sacred rites were completed and the deacon began ministering to those present, when its turn came to receive, it turned its little head away as if sensing the divine presence, it closed its mouth, held its lips tight, and refused to drink from the chalice. The deacon persisted and, in spite of its opposition, poured in some of the consecrated chalice. There followed choking and vomiting. The Eucharist could not remain in a body or mouth that was defiled; the drink which had been sanctified by Our Lord’s blood returned from the polluted stomach. So great is the power of the Lord, and so great His majesty!”,

-”The Lapsed” Ch. 25, circa 249-258 A.D.,

“The priest who imitates that which Christ did, truly takes the place of Christ, and offers there in the Church a true and perfect sacrifice to God the Father.”,

Source: St. Cyprian wrote to the Ephesians circa 258 A.D:,

“There was a woman too who with impure hands tried to open the locket in which she was keeping Our Lord’s holy body, but fire flared up from it and she was too terrified to touch it. And a man who, in spite of his sin, also presumed secretly to join the rest in receiving sacrifice offered by the bishop, was unable to eat or even handle Our Lord’s sacred body; when he opened his hands, he found he was holding nothing but ashes. By this one example it was made manifest that Our Lord removes Himself from one who denies Him, and that what is received brings no blessing to the unworthy, since the Holy One has fled and the saving grace is turned to ashes.”,

-”The Lapsed” Ch. 26, circa 249-258 A.D.,

As the prayer proceeds, we ask and say: ‘Give us this day our daily bread.’ This can be understood both spiritually and simply, because either understanding is of profit in divine usefulness for salvation. For Christ is the bread of life and the bread here is of all, but is ours. And as we say ‘Our Father,’ because He is the Father of those who understand and believe, so too we say ‘our Bread,’ because Christ is the bread of those of us who attain to His body. Moreover, we ask that this bread be given daily, lest we, who are in Christ and receive the Eucharist daily as food of salvation, with the intervention of some more grievous sin, while we are shut off and as non-communicants are kept from the heavenly bread, be separated from the body of Christ as He Himself declares, saying: ‘I am the bread of life which came down from heaven. If any man eat of my bread he shall live forever. Moreover, the bread that I shall give is my flesh for the life of the world.’ Since then He says that, if anyone eats of His bread, he lives forever, as it is manifest that they live who attain to His body and receive the Eucharist by right of communion, so on the other hand we must fear and pray lest anyone, while he is cut off and separated from the body of Christ, remain apart from salvation, as He Himself threatens, saying: ‘Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink His blood, you shall not have life in you.’ And so we petition that our bread, that is Christ, be given us daily, so that we, who abide and live in Christ, may not withdraw from His sanctification and body.”,

Source: St. Cyprian of Carthage, the Lord’s Prayer, 252 A.D., chapter 18:,

Amen. Scripture reveals to us a personal God. And the alternative is unthinkable.

Well, ultimately boring. All the neat stuff about Forest Keeper is at best irrelevant in the non-personal God view, I think.

I'd guess the basic Manichean deal ends up with a god whose worship involves the extinction of the self. And, of course, we have similar language when we talk about dying in Christ and so forth.

But "similar" is not "same" and the difference is HUGE.

My husband actually led a man to the Lord who was in a coma when he went to visit him, the man woke up, asked Jesus into his life, and slipped back into the coma. No works there. Only faith in our dear Lord and Savior. God’s grace is so wonderful.

I think the problem for those who disagree is they believe there are intermediaries between us and God and lack confidence in the Holy Spirit. In my limited experience I've seen Christians change over time. Of course there are ups and downs but the overall trend is discernible. The works follow Faith. They reflect it.