The Resurrection & The Eucharist

http://www.frksj.org/homily_ressurection_and_the_eucharist.htm ^

[Mrs. Don-o]

What is this "fullness of the Faith" that non-Catholics often lack? To summarize: Sacred Tradition; as generally found here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3275781/posts?page=331#331

Although you did, as I presume, read this when I posted it to you two days ago, I will list the items for your convenience: The most important part of "Sacred Tradition" would be

• the Bible, and most especially, the canon of the Bible.

We all depend on the canon of the Bible, and we all can thank God for providing that the Church, through Sacred Tradition, would preserve it through the centuries. It would have been lost, as the vast majority of ancient manuscripts of all sorts were lost, unless it were handed on (which is what "tradition" means: to hand on, tra - ducere.

) The other very important parts of Sacred Tradition would be

• Apostolic Succession,

• the basic forms of the Apostolic Hierarchy,

• the Seven Sacraments,

• the Sacred Liturgy, and

• the teachings of the Magisterium which the contain and communicate the truths of faith and morals God intended to make known for mankind's salvation.

None of these things are hidden, secret or esoteric. Thy are all in writing; they are all in the lived customs, heritage and legacy of living communities of Faith which have been out there "for all to see" since the times of the Apostles.

[verga]

Where would a Catholic be without a fast held misunderstanding of what sola Scriptura means no matter how many times they've been corrected?

STRAWM ARGUEMENT FALLACY.

Same challenge to any and all of you.

Pick a definition of Sola Scriptura, any definition and show it to me in the Bible.

And just so we are all clear on the meaning of the word DEFINITIONnoun

1. the act of defining, or of making something definite, distinct, or clear: We need a better definition of her responsibilities.

2. the formal statement of the meaning or significance of a word, phrase, idiom, etc., as found in dictionaries. An online dictionary resource, such as Dictionary.com, can give users direct, immediate access to the definitions of a term, allowing them to compare definitions from various dictionaries and stay up to date with an ever-expanding vocabulary.

3. the condition of being definite, distinct, or clearly outlined:

Just we are all clear I am looking for you to provide me with the definition of your choice of Sola Scriptura and then show me that exact same definition in the Bible.

Given that you all spend so much time in the word it should be no trouble at all.

[verga]

straw man argument fallacy, and red herring fallacy.

[verga]

Where did I say YOU made the absurd statement?

I said one of your fellow prots.

Words mean things.

Never let the facts get in the way of a good rant.

[CynicalBear]

Please show an infallible source other than scripture for what the apostles taught.

[verga]

The Catholics seem to do this a lot here...

You mean be correct and show the facts in spite of the prots bearing false witness on a minute by minute basis? Yes we absolutely do that.

[verga]

SIGH, I have been saying a Novena for you. I pray that God will chose to open your mind and soften your heart. I am also praying that if He chooses not to that He will have both pity and mercy on you.

[verga]

Why do you insist on using a tertiary definition when there was a perfectly good word Christ could have used if He had wanted to say “Born again”

[Mrs. Don-o]

Smvoice, thanks for these questions about the Mass and the Passover. You can find fuller information on the relationship between Eucharist and Passover Seder HERE (

I would also want to draw your particular attention tothis fine article on the "Todah," which is the Jewish sacrifice of thanks and praise so intimately connected with the Liturgy of the Eucharist.

Do get back to me with any quesitons, if you wish. http://www.catholiceducation.org/en/religion-and-philosophy/apologetics/from-jewish-passover-to-christian-eucharist-the-story-of-the-todah.html

[Iscool]

Why are you all so insistent on using the tertiary definition of the word?

You seem to be pretty knowledgeable about this stuff...

How many of the English words of the scriptures are there that used the tertiary meaning of the translated Greek and Hebrew words???

Oh ye of unsurpassed intellect and impeccable character, I leave it to you to discover what the Capital T represents in these words...

Joh 3:3

Jesus
answered T
and
said
unto him, T
Verily, T
verily, T
I say T
unto thee,
Except T
a man T
be born T
again, T
he cannot
see T
the
kingdom T
of God. T

[Legatus]

Worshipping that cracker is idolatry.

I understand what you've written, however from my side of the table you've committed blasphemy. Assuming we're around a table and not in opposing trenches.

And now I'm off to Mass where I'm going to commit "idolatry" in reparation for your "blasphemy".

[Springfield Reformer]

This looks like a variation on the etymological fallacy.  One cannot jump from the dictionary ranking to a statistical conclusion about a word's use in a given passage, i.e., "Because it can be seen as tertiary generally, it must be tertiary here" would be a non sequitur. 

Furthermore, one of the most widely respected modern lexicons, that goes beyond bare-bones etymology and investigates localized syntactic and idiomatic influence, suggests a reasonable basis for the preference for "born again." From Louw-Nida:

41.53 γεννάω ἄνωθεν (an idiom, literally ‘to be born again’); παλιγγενεσίαa, ας f: to experience a complete change in one’s way of life to what it should be, with the implication of return to a former state or relation—‘to be born again, to experience new birth, rebirth.’
γεννάω ἄνωθεν: ἐὰν μή τις γεννηθῇ ἄνωθεν ‘unless a person is born again’ Jn 3:3. It is also possible to understand ἄνωθεν in Jn 3:3 as meaning ‘from above’ or ‘from God’ (see 84.13), a literary parallel to the phrase ἐκ θεοῦ ἐγεννήθησαν in Jn 1:13. In Jn 3:3, however, Nicodemus understood ἄνωθεν as meaning ‘again’ (see 67.55) and γεννάω as ‘physical birth’ (see 23.52).
παλιγγενεσίαa: διὰ λουτροῦ παλιγγενεσίας καὶ ἀνακαινώσεως ‘new birth and new life by washing’ Tt 3:5. The metaphor of ‘new birth’ is so important in the NT that it should be retained if at all possible. In some languages ‘new birth’ can be expressed as ‘to cause to be born all over again’ or ‘to have a new life as though one were born a second time.’ See also 13.55.

However, it is true the expression can refer to some kind of "above-ness." But which one? Place, or Time.  From the Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon (IGEL):

ἄνωθεν, -θε, (ἄνω) Adv. of Place, from above, from on high, Hdt., Trag., etc.; ὕδατος ἄνωθεν γενομένου, i.e. rain, Thuc.: from the upper country, from inland, Id.
2. = ἄνω, above, on high, Trag.; οἱ ἄν. the living, opp. to οἱ κάτω, Aesch.:—c. gen., Hdt.

II. of Time, from the beginning, Plat., Dem.:—by descent, Theocr.; τὰ ἄν. first principles, Plat.
2. over again, anew, N.T.

This is something one has to respect when dealing with the Greek.  They have a very flexible way of reusing parts of speech in both temporal and spatial settings, and within those categories there can be a wide range between the concrete and the abstract.  In this case, as the IGEL entry demonstrates, "anothen" can be either spatial above-ness (simple "above"), or temporal above-ness, i.e., going back to Time Zero and starting over, from which we get the simplified "again."

In John 3, the conversational dynamic cannot be ignored in sorting this out.  Whatever Jesus meant by anothen (or its Hebrew or Aramaic spoken equivalent), Nicodemas didn't pick up on the spatial meaning "above" at all.  He is clearly thinking of a temporal reset, but it is degenerate from what is meant by "born again," because, as an idiom, and especially among evangelicals, it implies both the temporal and spatial aspects, i.e., being born again is both from above and a second birth event. Therefore it seems likely it was something of a double meaning, where Nicodemas got derailed by taking it as strictly temporal, and strictly concrete, and Jesus had to rebuke Him for his lack of insight into the Old Testament teaching on the spiritual aspects of the new birth, which Jesus unfolds as birth by water and by "pneuma" (spirit or wind), as these passages testify:

Thus saith the LORD that made thee, and formed thee from the womb, which will help thee; Fear not, O Jacob, my servant; and thou, Jesurun, whom I have chosen. For I will pour water upon him that is thirsty, and floods upon the dry ground: I will pour my spirit upon thy seed, and my blessing upon thine offspring: And they shall spring up as among the grass, as willows by the water courses.
(Isaiah 44:2-4)

And

Then said he unto me, Prophesy unto the wind, prophesy, son of man, and say to the wind, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they may live. So I prophesied as he commanded me, and the breath came into them, and they lived, and stood up upon their feet, an exceeding great army.
(Ezekiel 37:9-10)

Whether Jesus was thinking of these specific passages I cannot say, but clearly whatever Nicodemas missed, it was something Jesus considered obvious teaching of the OT, something no true teacher of Israel should have missed, concerning the new birth.

Bottom line, all this is rather difficult to render in the English. We don't have a perfect replica of the dual-use "above/again" construct (at least that I can think of). So we have to pick one or the other and let the potential dual use come out in teaching the passage.  As the English idiom "born again" carries both meanings quite well, it is probably a superior translation choice in this case.

I will have to leave it at that for now.  Other duties call.

Peace,

SR

[CynicalBear]

I can’t take you seriously since your dispute is with the Catholic Church who uses the term “born again” in it’s own Bible. If you are a Catholic you must conform to it’s use of “born again”.

[Iscool]

We all depend on the canon of the Bible, and we all can thank God for providing that the Church, through Sacred Tradition, would preserve it through the centuries. It would have been lost, as the vast majority of ancient manuscripts of all sorts were lost, unless it were handed on (which is what "tradition" means: to hand on, tra - ducere.

Your religion gets this idea of tradition (specifically ORAL tradition) from an idea pilfered from the scriptures...

2Th_2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

In the history of your religion, who first speaks of this oral tradition that was handed down from the apostles and when and to whom was was it given...And when and where is this tradition first recorded in writing as acknowledged to have been handed down by oral tradition???

Seems to be a big blank there as if this stuff just showed up without any explanation...Like someone invented it...

Your religion continues to invent its tradition...If a new dogma shows up tomorrow, by the next day it's Catholic tradition...

[RnMomof7]

Thank you for the excellent post... Have a blessed Lords day

Ping to 572 for my FR friends

[redleghunter]

Thank you. A most blessed post.

[CynicalBear]

As I read through some of those sites my heart hurts for the deception Catholics have fallen for. All built on still sacrificing. There is only one "sacrifice" that remains.

Hebrews 13:15 By him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his name. 16 But to do good and to communicate forget not: for with such sacrifices God is well pleased.

The more I learn about the Catholic religion the more abhorrent it becomes.

[RnMomof7]

I understand what you've written, however from my side of the table you've committed blasphemy. Assuming we're around a table and not in opposing trenches.
And now I'm off to Mass where I'm going to commit "idolatry" in reparation for your "blasphemy".

Anyone reading this thread, will not be able to stand before God on judgement day and say they were never told ...everyone has been warned..

You see Legatus, every pagan believed that his idol was really a god.. so the fact that catholics believe that that cracker is really jesus does not help on judgement day ...that very belief is what will damn

[RnMomof7]

Then the question becomes, "Why did the CATHOLIC CHURCH use the phrase "born again" in it's approved Douay-Rheims translation of the Bible that it translated itself?"

And then try to co-op it to apply to baptism ...

[CynicalBear]

>> however from my side of the table you've committed blasphemy.<<

I have no doubt you feel that way. When your god becomes a cracker or is encased in a cracker that cracker is what you worship. God said not to make any images of Him or bow down to some formed thing.