If We Protestants Truly Hated Catholics...

[JesusIsFaithful]

Right here: For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.

And here : . 21 Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils

1 Corinthians 10:18 Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar?

The precedent is set when comparing to how Israel were partakers of the altar after the flesh. That was not trying to compare it as the same with having communion. when Paul is arguing here for treating communion in that way.

19 What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing? 20 But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils.

Again a reference to idolatry as Paul is arguing against using communion like Israel was after the flesh in the old system To do that is turning communion's table into the table of the devil while suggesting the priests has power as if stronger than He for when they can make Him and His one time sacrifice for sins "present" again as an offering, an unbloody one but an offering as if the bloody one was not good enough the first time to put that forever indwelling Holy Ghost in you since you had believed in Him and that God had raised Him from the dead.

21 Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils. 22 Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than he?

It is obvious to me that Paul was led by the Lord to speak against what the Mass is about before it became known as the Mass in the future.

And again taught here: Heb 13:10

We have an altar from which those who serve the tabernacle have no right to eat.

Peace!

Think about that for a moment, brother. It cannot apply to what you mean when obviously the priests do partake of the altar when serving in the Mass.

And it was taken out of context for what Paul was talking about in that chapter.

But if we are going to talk about what sacrifices God is pleased with;

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.

That is why communion is to be done in remembrance of Him for we are thankful for what He has done for us having saved us by since having believed in Him at the calling of the gospel.

 

[Philip James]

Again a reference to idolatry as Paul is arguing against using communion like Israel was after the flesh in the old system

That is incorrect. Paul is telling christians not to defile 'the table of the Lord' by also participating in the table of demons.
He demonstrates this by pointing out that those who eat of the table are partakers of the sacrafice just as Israel 'after the flesh' are partakers of the sacrifices of the old covenant.

Peace!

 

[Philip James]

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.

That is why communion is to be done in remembrance of Him for we are thankful for what He has done for us having saved us by since having believed in Him at the calling of the gospel.

And that is just what Mass is. We hold up the ONE sacrifice of Jesus on the cross, and to that we unite our praise and thanksgiving, our prayers and even our very selves!
And the Lord responds by giving us Himself, the Living Bread, uniting ourselves with Him!

And the two are made one flesh..

Alleluia!

 

[BreadOfLife]

Imagine that.
And the romanists made no effort to educate the general populace so that they could read the Bible.
God wanted them to have it all to themselves.
Oh nice and convenient.

First of all - your use of "Romanists" is stupid - but I'll ignore it so I can destroy your point.
"Made NO effort to educate"??

Preaching and celebrating mass, praying over the sick, marrying people, baptizing them - this is "NO effort"??

My FAVORITE thing about your posts, Rollo is that they're so ridiculously stupid that I don't really have to do or say anything to expose you. You do it ALL yourself . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

You calling me names again?
That's not nice.

Ummmmm, where did I call you a name??

What's your IQ, Rollo??

 

[BreadOfLife]

Surprising, such a vague answer from someone who is considered a holy scholar by many (that's surprising too).
Disobedient - a word you use often, yet you never apply it to yourself.
Do you see yourself as perfect, because you see yourself as a perfect catholic?
You can't be a perfect catholic unless you are a member of the Knights of Columbus

And that makes me wonder why you are not a Knights of Columbus member.
What is it they have against you?
I think I'll join the Knights of Columbus and find out why.

There is no such thing as a perfect ANYTHING - except for God.
However - my answer was anything but "vague".

YOU won't make it to Heaven if you are disobedient. You can "believe" all you want - but the proof is in your obedience (Matt. 7:21). Remember - even the DEMONS believe (James 2:19), so you're no better off than they are if that's all you do . . .

 

[JesusIsFaithful]

That is incorrect. Paul is telling christians not to defile 'the table of the Lord' by also participating in the table of demons.

When they practice like Israel, Paul is saying that the Gentiles are not making sacrifices unto God but unto devils. They say they are making sacrifices unto God but Paul says that they are not.

19 What say I then? that the idol is any thing, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing? 20 But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils.

See that underlined in that verse? This is Paul saying that the Gentiles were claiming they were making sacrifices unto God but they were not, but unto devils for taking after Israel in according to the flesh.

He demonstrates this by pointing out that those who eat of the table are partakers of the sacrafice just as Israel 'after the flesh' are partakers of the sacrifices of the old covenant.

Peace!

Paul was refuting that false notion that the Gentiles were offering sacrifices unto God by mirroring it after Israel in the flesh by the old system. Paul did not refer to how Gentiles formerly performed idolatry, but by referring to Israel in how the old system was, the Gentiles had thought they were doing the same thing, but Paul says they are offering unto the devil instead for doing communion in that way.

Only the Lord can show you every word in what Paul is saying as lining up with his warning to beware idolatry in regards to communion.

 

[JesusIsFaithful]

And that is just what Mass is. We hold up the ONE sacrifice of Jesus on the cross, and to that we unite our praise and thanksgiving, our prayers and even our very selves!

You are not holding the one sacrifice of Jesus on the cross for that purpose when it is about receiving the sacrifice for sins.

And the Lord responds by giving us Himself, the Living Bread, uniting ourselves with Him!

How come it takes a celibate priests for that to happen in the Mass? More like they are making Him respond.

And the two are made one flesh..

Alleluia!

You only get married once. That happened when you had believed in the Lord Jesus Christ & that God had raised Him from the dead.

 

[Philip James]

See that underlined in that verse? This is Paul saying that the Gentiles were claiming they were making sacrifices unto God but they were not, but unto devils for taking after Israel in according to the flesh.

You realise Paul is talking about the pagan gentiles, yes?

Their altars had nothing to do with 'Israel after the flesh'. It is the pagain sacrifices, their tables to Athena , and jupiter, and all their other 'gods' that Paul is refering to here.
All christians know that these things are but idols... But partaking of their tables disgraces partaking of the Table of the Lord.

How you try to equate the 'Table of the Lord', that is, the Christian altar with the pagan tables is puzzling... Is this your own reading of these words, or did some other give you this interpretation?

Peace!

 

[Philip James]

You are not holding the one sacrifice of Jesus on the cross for that purpose when it is about receiving the sacrifice for sins.

Jesus' one sacrifice was not for our sins? Wow, just wow.

How come it takes a celibate priests for that to happen in the Mass? More like they are making Him respond.

There are married priests who offer the Mass. You are mistaken.

You only get married once. That happened when you had believed in the Lord Jesus Christ & that God had raised Him from the dead.

Amen!

 

[JesusIsFaithful]

You realise Paul is talking about the pagan gentiles, yes?

Nope. Gentile believers mirroring the old system of Israel in communion for why he was warning believers about idolatry at the onset of that topic.

Their altars had nothing to do with 'Israel after the flesh'. It is the pagain sacrifices, their tables to Athena , and jupiter, and all their other 'gods' that Paul is refering to here.

Paul made no other references except to how Israel had done it for why Gentiles were thinking they were making sacrifices unto God, but Paul was refuting them that they were not.

All christians know that these things are but idols... But partaking of their tables disgraces partaking of the Table of the Lord.

Making the bread & the wine becomes Him in the Mass is idolatry and suggesting celibate priests that makes this happen is stronger than the Lord.

How you try to equate the 'Table of the Lord', that is, the Christian altar with the pagan tables is puzzling... Is this your own reading of these words, or did some other give you this interpretation?

How you equate Israel's altar to the Table of the Lord is just as puzzling. Indeed, there is no mention of a christian altar, but Gentiles mirroring it after Israel's old system, the Gentiles have made communion a table of the devil. So Paul was rebuking making anything an idol in communion.

 

[JesusIsFaithful]

Jesus' one sacrifice was not for our sins? Wow, just wow.

We are talking about your claims about the Mass.

There are married priests who offer the Mass. You are mistaken.

Funny. Another Catholic in another forum said that married priests could only perform communion for why there are celibate priests so they can perform the Mass.

Since I cannot go back in tine and asked that Catholic for his source again, how about you provide a source material from a Catholic official site that says married priests are allowed to perform in the Mass. Seems legit when I read his link, but maybe they have changed things around.. I don't know.

Seeing married priests perform communion does not mean they were performing the Mass, FYI.

 

[Philip James]

How you equate Israel's altar to the Table of the Lord is just as puzzling. Indeed, there is no mention of a christian altar, but Gentiles mirroring it after Israel's old system, the Gentiles have made communion a table of the devil. So Paul was rebuking making anything an idol in communion.

Who has bewitched you with this nonsense?

I'm sorry that you can't see this. But I rejoice that you also call Jesus your Lord. Lay aside what some man has taught you here and find out what the Church has taught from the very beginning.

The Didache, Clement, Polycarp and Ignatius would be a good place to start.

May the Lord bless and keep you#

Pax

 

[JesusIsFaithful]

Who has bewitched you with this nonsense?

I'm sorry that you can't see this. But I rejoice that you also call Jesus your Lord. Lay aside what some man has taught you here and find out what the Church has taught from the very beginning.

You say that but what you said next convinced me that you learned the Mass as taught by these men below in your next quote.

The Didache, Clement, Polycarp and Ignatius would be a good place to start.

And..

May the Lord bless and keep you#

Pax

I know the Lord is keeping you, but as far as blessing you in what you are doing in the Mass, I can't say that, brother.

 

[Helen]

Imagine that.
And the romanists made no effort to educate the general populace so that they could read the Bible.
God wanted them to have it all to themselves.
Oh nice and convenient.

Correction. :)
In England it was actually all the blue bloods, Princes, Dukes, Barons, and the hierarchy that kept the surfs under...they did not want them "thinking" or learning. They were only good for cannon fodder and field work.

What a great uproar there was when people did learn to read...and in fact, it was probably the monks who taught them, because they were not amongst the hierarchy, but mixed with the surfs and peasants!!

 

[Phoneman777]

The spurious copies were usually in the vernacular and were unauthorized translations. By the time of the Synod of Toulouse in 1229, the Gnostic heresy of Catharism had already taken root because of unauthorized translations of Scripture being distributed.

If it hadn't been for the Church - YOUR Protestant Reformation in the 16th century would probably never have happened the way it did. Instead, there would have been an even bigger explosion of heresy and perverse doctrines floating around - and a LOT earlier.

BOL, you are so unbelievably mistaken. Protestantism didn't rely on the RCC Western MSS family Latin, or rely on the Alexandrian MSS family, which was compiled in Satan's living room - Alexandria - which families have been proven to be are just two birds of a feather when compared scholarly...Protestantism ultimately derived its teachings from the Byzantian family MSS which were not part of Catholic Canon, but were carried West and into the heart of the Papal Beast from the region where Christianity was born - Palestine.

The great scholar Erasmus published a revolutionary Bible in which he had printed passages in both Greek and Latin on the same page side by side which for the first time allowed learned men to compare the faithfully preserved Byzantian Greek with the butchery of Rome's Latin, a language that even then was as dead as the dead bread of the Eucharist.

The Byzantian Greek of Luke 13:3 reads, "I tell you, Nay: but, except ye REPENT ye shall all likewise perish" which demands we do nothing but turn from obedience to sin and put our faith in God to as our Savior by the blood of Jesus, and as our Lord to which we render obedience which is the "reasonable service" of the saved Christian.

The corrupted Latin translation reads, "...except ye DO PENANCE ye shall all likewise perish" which demands works on the part of man for his salvation - a Satanic falsehood which is the scarlet thread binding all pagan religions of the world together with the paganism of Catholicism.

 

[Phoneman777]

Sooooo, the listing in Deut. 5 is "garbage"??
It was inspired by the Holy Spirit, so I would be careful if I were YOU by calling it "garbage" . . .

I'm not surprised that this would be your response - but that's what I get for attempting to have an intellectual conversation with an "unarmed" person.

Anyway - ALL of the Scriptural, historical and linguistic facts are laid out in my last post.
You cannot get around the fact that the last 2 Commandments about coveting are actually TWO separate Commandments, as I educated you. You must take Deut. 5 in CONTEXT with Exod. 20.

Your arguments, not your Scriptures, are garbage, meaning they aren't worth anything factually or otherwise. They ignore the facts of history, Biblical scholarship, and the very claims and teachings of your own church.

How long will it take for you to admit that your claim that the reference "Roman Catholic Church" was made up by Protestants and not used by the church is wrong? - or did you miss my post where the pope's own encyclical uses the phrase "Roman Catholic Church"???

 

[Triumph1300]

What a great uproar there was when people did learn to read..

It's only since roughly the early 1800's that most people knew how to read and write.
Heck, I know people today who can't read or write.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Your arguments, not your Scriptures, are garbage, meaning they aren't worth anything factually or otherwise. They ignore the facts of history, Biblical scholarship, and the very claims and teachings of your own church.

How long will it take for you to admit that your claim that the reference "Roman Catholic Church" was made up by Protestants and not used by the church is wrong? - or did you miss my post where the pope's own encyclical uses the phrase "Roman Catholic Church"???

Then I need for you to show me where my post on the numbering of the Ten Commandments goes "against" the teachings of my own Church. CAN you do that??

As for the use of "Roman Catholic Church" - it was a derogatory term invented by the Church of England during the time of Henry VIII. Any use of it by a Catholic official refers to the RITE - and NOT the title.

YOU can whine all you want but it is NOT the official title of the Church.
the official title is: "The Catholic Church".

 

[Enoch111]

the official title is: "The Catholic Church".

And is it not true that the church of Rome was not the same as the church at Constantinople, Alexandria, Jerusalem, Antioch etc. So if the church of Rome is Catholic, how can you object to Roman Catholic?
And if the bishop of Rome is the Pope, how can you object to Roman Catholic?