Posted on 03/28/2015 12:21:36 PM PDT by RnMomof7
Ping
“In the final analysis, what makes the Mass literally unbelievable for fundamentalists is that they cannot conceive of a single act that is perpetuated through time. For them, what happened on Calvary happened there alone and remains in the dead past....”
That whole paragraph is wrong. That isn’t it at all. The Lord’s table is only for us to remember what he did. There is no extra grace bestowed at all. There is no trans-anything that happens.
Jews say of the passover why is THIS night different from all others...this is what the LORD has done for ME, not for my ancestors on some night long ago in history. The Lamb Who IS Slain From Before the Foundation of the World offers Himself in sacrifice both within and outside of time, is able and does so will to permit us to share in that and this one true perpetual sacrifice. Who can tell Him you can’t do that?
HOw do you know?
Christ's sacrifice is once and for all. At the Mass - faithful to his command - we become engaged with, we become part of His sacrifice, part of His Passion.
Think! The Passion of God is the greatest event in time and in eternity! God is not bound to time and space, and His great act of salvation is not tied up in a corner, hostage to a moment in time. Rather, it fills time like water fills a river. We just need to reach out and touch it.
Christ commands us to eat His Body and drink His Blood. His life, His death and His resurrection - the most important events that ever were or ever could be - are waiting for us at Mass.
Hope this is helpful.
If you believe the "outside of time" meme then you can not believe in free will either. Scripture says those who are written in the book of life were there before the creation of the world.
So the Jews said to Him, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?"Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am."
God is indeed outside of time and space.
Now, He knows how we will choose - whether we will follow Him or fall away from Him. But unless we make our choices then there is nothing - no act of faith or act of defiance or neglect - for God to see.
We are not predestined to be damned or saved - we have a choice. God does indeed see our choices - but only because we get to make them.
Luke 22:19King James Version (KJV)
19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.
A tremendous amount of space trying to discredit 2,000 years of Christian teaching and trying to justify a VERY bad decision.....
(bed time, goodnight to all)
But that was from RC apologist Karl Keating, employing one of his handy strawmen he uses in his deception of the simple.
God gives grace to obey Him, and blesses obedience, but the Lord's supper is not that of Catholicism.
How do you know? Is it on the basis of the weight of Scriptural substantiation or the premise of the ensured magisterial veracity of Rome?
It seems that the RC argument is that an assuredly (if conditionally) infallible magisterium is essential for determination and assurance of Truth (including writings and men being of God) and to fulfill promises of Divine presence, providence of Truth, and preservation of faith, and authority. (Jn. 14:16,26; 15:26; 16:13; Mt. 16:18; Lk. 10:16)
And that being the historical instruments and stewards of Divine revelation (oral and written) means that such is that assuredly infallible magisterium. Thus any who knowingly dissent from the latter must be in rebellion to God. Does this fairly represent what you hold to or in what way does it differ?
A tremendous amount of space of false teaching and trying to justify an erroneous tradition that was unseen and contrary to what the NT church believed according to Scripture, according to all that we read of the life of the church.
Take a shot at defending it.
I don't have to defend the truth which has been taught for 2,015 years....if you want to deny it, it is up to you to prove why it is wrong and try to explain why some of the greatest minds in human history disagree with you....and Luther, and Calvin, and HenryVIII, and Wesley, and Zwingley, and Knox, and Smyth, and Fox, and London, andCampbells, and Baker-eddy and myriad of others ALL of who think that they are right....
And some of the greatest minds in human history have been wrong, as they surely are here, disagreeing with the mind of Almighty God in Scripture, and perpetuating error thru traditions of men.
and myriad of others ALL of who think that they are right....
As does Rome, who is her own autocratic authority, while her own basis for that, that of the premise of perpetual ensured magisterial infallibility, is unScriptural, and unseen and unnecessary in the life of the church, as is her separate class of believers distinctively titled "priests," offering up "real" human flesh and blood as a sacrifice for sin, and literally consuming this to obtain spiritual life, around which act all else revolves, and looking to Peter as the first of a line of exalted infallible popes reigning over the church from Rome, and a separate class of believers distinctively titled "saints," and praying to created being in Heaven, and being formally justified by ones own sanctification/holiness, and thus enduring postmortem purifying torments in order to become good enough to enter Heaven, and saying rote prayers to obtain early release from it, and requiring clerical celibacy as the norm. Etc.
Revelation 13:8 All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.That is the only occurrence of the exact phrase in the entire Scripture, so this must be the one to which you refer. Yet the verb is not a present tense "IS"," as you have emphasized. Rather, the verb is "slain" (ἐσφαγμένου), in the perfect, which is one of a number of ways to express the past tense:
τοῦ ἀρνίου τοῦ ἐσφαγμένου ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου.Which translates as:
the lamb the [one] having been slain from [the] foundation of [the] worldThe perfect tense in Greek typically points to a completed event in the past. If the divinely inspired writer had wanted to convey some timeless nexus theory of the atonement, this would have been a great opportunity to simply use "esti(n)," "he is," as you attempted to suggest. But your suggestion has no basis in the text, because under the direction of the Holy Spirit, our author chose the perfect tense, and as if to remove all doubt of its priority, describes it as an event completed "before the foundation of the world."
Jude 1:14-15 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, (15) To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.When he says, "the Lord cometh," the Greek form is "ἦλθεν, past tense, "he came" (using the aorist in this case), even though it points to the future event of the second coming. The translators here used the present tense, really just to avoid confusing the typical English reader. But the fact remains that in Hebrew thought, the "prophetic perfect," as it is sometimes called, is a perfectly legitimate way to refer to events with two different time references, one the actual historical point in time, the other as an established event of the past, to indicate the certainty of the event in the divine plan.
Hebrews 10:9-13 then He said, "BEHOLD, I HAVE COME TO DO YOUR WILL, O GOD." He takes away the first that He may establish the second. (10) By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. (11) And every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. (12) But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God, (13) from that time waiting till His enemies are made His footstool.Again, the sanctification of the believer, their setting apart for the divine purpose, is spoken of here as an accomplished, past tense event. The word translated "once for all" is the adverb "ἐφάπαξ" "ephapax." It is also used here, and also in connection with Christ's death. Note the emphasis on the past tense nature of the event:
Romans 6:9-10 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him. (10) For in that he died, he died unto sin once : but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.Note the holy author is not saying He is dying once. He says "died once." It is a concluded event. So too in Hebrews, which the author there confirms in the following verses. If we were sanctified, past tense, by the offering of Christ's body on our behalf, the sanctification could not be complete unless the offering was complete, and that is the whole thrust of our author, that the sacrifices under Moses could not accomplish a complete expiation of sin, but the death of Jesus does, and has, past tense, accomplished that for us.
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.