In reality, it’s a hard stretch, as shown, to place the Eucharist in the life of the NT church in Scripture, which is the judge of post Scriptural history, the latter of which testifies to the promise of perverse things being taught from within the church. (Acts 20:20)
I think it a much harder task to frame Holy Scripture and history of the Church into Evangelicalism that began in the 17th Century.
Rather, it a much harder task to frame Holy Scripture into Catholicism that began in the 2nd century. while evangelicalism began in the 1st, and the partial recovery of its became more manifest in the 17th. Thanks be to God.
I read Holy Scripture, the early Christian documents, the history of Roman catacombs, etc, etc. and it’s quite plain that the Holy Eucharist is the central worship of Christians from the beginning up to the current day.
That you see it in the history and teaching of life of the NT church in Scripture testifies to the deception that is Catholicism, as it simply is not there. Nonetheless, as the Lord saves those who are a broken (of pride) and contrite heart (Ps. 34:18) who cast all their faith on the risen Lord Jesus to save them by His sinless shed blood, some can be Christian despite holding to the Eucharistic error. I was one.
It’s there, very plainly, and the basic concept, the Real Presence in Holy Eucharist, was there until Zwingli over 1400 years after Christ.
No, it was not in the NT church, but it was in paganism from of old. Note also that according to one of your own "Real Presence" was originally an Anglican term for a different concept.
This history is very plain;
That the Eucharistic error did develop is indeed plain in post Scriptural history, in contrast to the life of the NT church in Scripture. That God latter corrected this error after Scripture regained its Scriptural primacy and was freely accessed (which Rome much hindered) is a testimony to its power, and God's mercy and grace.
Anyone can put together proof texts and partial snippets to prove whatever they wish
As Caths abundantly evidence.
but the Holy Eucharist is overwhelmingly there from the beginning and forever, whatever effort one makes to try to make it not so.
That assertion remains absurd, and once again i challenge you to show in the life of the NT church in Scripture, interpretive of the gospels, this central sacrament of sacrifice for sin at the hands of priest prelates whose primary active function is that of changing bread and wine into the "real" body and blood of Christ, to be consumed in order to obtain spiritual life. And that instead of RCs having to do this, that i put together proof texts and partial snippets to prove what is not the reality.
This is the core issue in your argument. I am persuaded otherwise.
Again, it’s a tough fit for the relatively recent innovation of Evangelicalism, 1700 years is a big gap.
But if you can make history fit this requirement, no doubt you can erase the Holy Eucharist as well. It takes a lot of effort, but if the motivation is there...
So, again, you’re welcome to your opinion. I’ll let you have the last word on this if you wish to.
May God bless you and yours...