Accountability

Stella1000 said:
I'm pretty much spent on trying to figure out your question. Jesus gave Himself as the Lamb of God, the sacrifice for sin on the altar. It's an essential aspect of the Christian Remembrance. That's all I've got.
Click to expand...
Yes, you answered that. It is this scripture reference you posted reference the altar which was part of your answer to the very first question.
  • What was the altar and historically why was there one and its function? How was it used in the OT and the NT? As an FYI, the word is used 378 times in the OT and NT of the Bible.
Click to expand...
Ok I'll have a go. For the Jews the altar was for sacrificial purposes of atonement for sin.

For Christians the altar is for remembrance, thanksgiving and praise for the sacrifice that Jesus made, as per Paul to Corinthians...

1Cor11 23 For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took a loaf of bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” 25 In the same way he took the cup also, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.
Click to expand...
No altar mentioned here. Why the quote?
 
A new day said:
singular verb:
apologetics
the branch of theology concerned with the defense or proof of Christianity.


adjective: professional
engaged in a specified activity as one's main paid occupation rather than as a pastime

Are you being paid by the Rcc to engage in theological apologetics? If not, then your not a professional. Are you, yourself an ordained priest? No? then your not qualified to preach. Your just somebody posting online. The website does not belong to Rc's. Posting on someone else's website is a privilege, not a right.

Any time someone doesn't agree with you, they are accused of posting anti-catholic propaganda or they are accused of posting a personal attack. Rc's are no more professional debater's, than anyone else posting on carm. This section of the forums is set aside specifically for the discussion and debating of roman catholicism. In other words, engaging in Rc apologetics.
Click to expand...
Yep but the RCs like to think they are great at apologetics and get frustrated because they are not. If they were they would produce convincing defence of their beliefs and none of them do. It is their failures and the failure of their institution to live up to its claims that they are angry at. They then take this anger out on those of us they do not like. It is because we constantly point out the flaws in their arguments and post the facts about their institution and its false claims and doctrines. They also dislike the fact that we use scripture to reveal the failures in their doctrines.

And make snide comments like the one you are responding to. It shows they do not know what it means to love their neighbours.
 
A new day said:
singular verb:
apologetics
the branch of theology concerned with the defense or proof of Christianity.


adjective: professional
engaged in a specified activity as one's main paid occupation rather than as a pastime

Are you being paid by the Rcc to engage in theological apologetics? If not, then your not a professional. Are you, yourself an ordained priest? No? then your not qualified to preach. Your just somebody posting online. The website does not belong to Rc's. Posting on someone else's website is a privilege, not a right.
Click to expand...
That's what I'm saying. It isn't a professional apologetics site. Are you a professional apologist? Are any of the posters on here?

Any time someone doesn't agree with you, they are accused of posting anti-catholic propaganda or they are accused of posting a personal attack. Rc's are no more professional debater's, than anyone else posting on carm. This section of the forums is set aside specifically for the discussion and debating of roman catholicism. In other words, engaging in Rc apologetics.
Click to expand...
As I said, most posts don't conform to 'apologetics'. It's not an argument. It's just a fact that everyone can agree on.
 
RayneBeau said:
My "source" of course is the Holy Bible and if you'll open your Bible to Ephesians 4 Stella, read where Paul talks about following the methods dictated to men with the intellectual outlook of those who are spiritually lost. Read the whole 4th Chapter- it talks all about those who have no relationship with Christ have a vain mind and a darkened understanding.
Click to expand...
Where does Ephesians 4 forbid the altar of Remembrance?
 
  • What was the altar and historically why was there one and its function? How was it used in the OT and the NT? As an FYI, the word is used 378 times in the OT and NT of the Bible.
Ok I'll have a go. For the Jews the altar was for sacrificial purposes of atonement for sin.

For Christians the altar is for remembrance, thanksgiving and praise for the sacrifice that Jesus made, as per Paul to Corinthians...

1Cor11 23 For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took a loaf of bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” 25 In the same way he took the cup also, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.
Click to expand...
organgrinder said:
No altar mentioned here. Why the quote?
Click to expand...
I'm wondering where the altar is forbidden as part of the Remembrance since it has been part of the Remembrance since early Christianity. From a Christian source recording the history of the Christian altar.

The Christian altar consists of an elevated surface, tabular in form, on which the Sacrifice of the Mass is offered. The earliest Scripture reference to the altar is in St. Paul (1 Corinthians 10:21); the Apostle contrasts the "table of the Lord" (trapeza Kyriou) on which the Eucharist is offered, with the "table of devils", or pagan altars. Trapeza continued to be the favourite term for altar among the Greek Fathers and in Greek liturgies, either used alone or with the addition of such reverential qualifying terms as iera, mystike, The Epistle to the Hebrews (13:10) refers to the Christian altar as thysiasterion, the word by which the Septuagint alludes to Noah's altar. This term occurs in several of the Epistles of St. Ignatius (Ad Eph. v; Magnes. iv, 7; Philad. 4), as well as in the writings of a number of fourth and fifth century Fathers and historians; Eusebius employs it to describe the altar of the great church at Tyre (Church History X.4.44). Trapeza, however, was the term most frequently in use. The word bomos to designate an altar. was carefully avoided by the Christians of the first age, because of its pagan associations; it is first used by Synesius, Bishop of Cyrene, a writer of the early fifth century. The terms altare, mensa, ara, altarium, with or without a genitive addition (as mensa Domini), are employed by the Latin fathers to designate an altar. Ara, however, is more commonly applied to pagan altars, though Tertullian speaks of the Christian altar as ara Dei. But St. Cyprian makes a sharp distinction between ara and altare, pagan altars being aras diaboli, while the Christian altar is altare Dei [quasi post aras diaboli accedere ad altare Dei fas sit (Ep. lxv, ed. Hartel, II, 722; P.L., Ep. lxiv, IV, 389)]. Altare was the word most commonly used for altar, and was equivalent to the Greek trapeza.
 
Stella1000 said:
I'm wondering where the altar is forbidden as part of the Remembrance since it has been part of the Remembrance since early Christianity. From a Christian source recording the history of the Christian altar.

The Christian altar consists of an elevated surface, tabular in form, on which the Sacrifice of the Mass is offered. The earliest Scripture reference to the altar is in St. Paul (1 Corinthians 10:21); the Apostle contrasts the "table of the Lord" (trapeza Kyriou) on which the Eucharist is offered, with the "table of devils", or pagan altars. Trapeza continued to be the favourite term for altar among the Greek Fathers and in Greek liturgies, either used alone or with the addition of such reverential qualifying terms as iera, mystike, The Epistle to the Hebrews (13:10) refers to the Christian altar as thysiasterion, the word by which the Septuagint alludes to Noah's altar. This term occurs in several of the Epistles of St. Ignatius (Ad Eph. v; Magnes. iv, 7; Philad. 4), as well as in the writings of a number of fourth and fifth century Fathers and historians; Eusebius employs it to describe the altar of the great church at Tyre (Church History X.4.44). Trapeza, however, was the term most frequently in use. The word bomos to designate an altar. was carefully avoided by the Christians of the first age, because of its pagan associations; it is first used by Synesius, Bishop of Cyrene, a writer of the early fifth century. The terms altare, mensa, ara, altarium, with or without a genitive addition (as mensa Domini), are employed by the Latin fathers to designate an altar. Ara, however, is more commonly applied to pagan altars, though Tertullian speaks of the Christian altar as ara Dei. But St. Cyprian makes a sharp distinction between ara and altare, pagan altars being aras diaboli, while the Christian altar is altare Dei [quasi post aras diaboli accedere ad altare Dei fas sit (Ep. lxv, ed. Hartel, II, 722; P.L., Ep. lxiv, IV, 389)]. Altare was the word most commonly used for altar, and was equivalent to the Greek trapeza.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your answer. What is the source material you copied this from, please?
 
Stella1000 said:
I'm wondering where the altar is forbidden as part of the Remembrance since it has been part of the Remembrance since early Christianity. From a Christian source recording the history of the Christian altar.
Click to expand...
post where the early Christians (after the cross) had one in sctripture.

Stella1000 said:
The Christian altar consists of an elevated surface, tabular in form, on which the Sacrifice of the Mass is offered. The earliest Scripture reference to the altar is in St. Paul (1 Corinthians 10:21); the Apostle contrasts the "table of the Lord" (trapeza Kyriou) on which the Eucharist is offered, with the "table of devils", or pagan altars. Trapeza continued to be the favourite term for altar among the Greek Fathers and in Greek liturgies, either used alone or with the addition of such reverential qualifying terms as iera, mystike, The Epistle to the Hebrews (13:10) refers to the Christian altar as thysiasterion, the word by which the Septuagint alludes to Noah's altar. This term occurs in several of the Epistles of St. Ignatius (Ad Eph. v; Magnes. iv, 7; Philad. 4), as well as in the writings of a number of fourth and fifth century Fathers and historians; Eusebius employs it to describe the altar of the great church at Tyre (Church History X.4.44). Trapeza, however, was the term most frequently in use. The word bomos to designate an altar. was carefully avoided by the Christians of the first age, because of its pagan associations; it is first used by Synesius, Bishop of Cyrene, a writer of the early fifth century. The terms altare, mensa, ara, altarium, with or without a genitive addition (as mensa Domini), are employed by the Latin fathers to designate an altar. Ara, however, is more commonly applied to pagan altars, though Tertullian speaks of the Christian altar as ara Dei. But St. Cyprian makes a sharp distinction between ara and altare, pagan altars being aras diaboli, while the Christian altar is altare Dei [quasi post aras diaboli accedere ad altare Dei fas sit (Ep. lxv, ed. Hartel, II, 722; P.L., Ep. lxiv, IV, 389)]. Altare was the word most commonly used for altar, and was equivalent to the Greek trapeza.
Click to expand...
the Latin signals that your source is the rcc.
 
dingoling. said:
No, I am not going to post an extensive, exhaustive explanation knowing that whatever is posted is going to be ignored.

Instead of me answering the question why not post what it is you are trying to get at.
Click to expand...
I am not ignoring Stella 1000s posts. I may not agree with everything she says, but disagreeing does not mean ignoring. . I even agree with Mysterium Fidei and romanpopishorganist on some statements-- very few mind you-- and disagree with many others, but I don't ignore them. You need to figure out the difference.
 
Stella1000 said:
It's from the Catholic Encyclopedia New Advent. My understanding is that Catholics are forbidden from linking to Catholic sites. "History of the Christian Altar"
Click to expand...
Thank you for the source. Perhaps in the future you could comply with both the rules of not linking and at the same time just saying where it came from? Makes everybody happy. Thank you again.
 
organgrinder said:
OK... you have zero answers to basic Roman Catholic need for the altar and its significance. You are afraid to answer so you are diverting yet once again. The point I am trying to make is that YOU can't answer a basic question that doesn't already have a pre-done answer for you to copy and/or paraphrase. This is an apologetics site. If you can't answer something easy as those three questions were, why are you even here?
Click to expand...
I have been here well over 10 years and I have answered numerous questions with extensive answers and have seen other Catholics do the same only to have them easily dismissed. It gets old after a while.

What does your questions have to do anyway with the bread and wine being the body and blood of Christ? Is your argument that because there is no altar therefore they have to be symbolic?
 
dingoling. said:
I have been here well over 10 years and I have answered numerous questions with extensive answers and have seen other Catholics do the same only to have them easily dismissed. It gets old after a while.

What does your questions have to do anyway with the bread and wine being the body and blood of Christ? Is your argument that because there is no altar therefore they have to be symbolic?
Click to expand...
If they are easily dismissed then the RCs used poor arguments that failed the scriptural tests. Yes the lack of scriptural knowledge demonstrated by RCs, the constant and incessant whinging, the diversions, the arrogance can be boring.
 
pilgrim said:
Pure blather.
We are born again and brought into a covenantal relationship with God at baptism, at which we become sons and daughters of God and members of the Church.
To leave the Church is to be a prodigal son or daughter. There is no salvation outside the Father's house.
Click to expand...
Leaving the RCC isn't the same thing as leaving God. More proof that Catholics seem to equate their church with God.

There is NO salvation outside of Jesus Christ. Remember what your supposed first pope said, in Acts 4? "There is salvation in no one else, for there is NO OTHER NAME under heaven given among mankind by which we MUST be saved."

What is that name, pilgrim? The Roman Catholic Church? OR Jesus Christ?
 
Bonnie said:
Leaving the RCC isn't the same thing as leaving God. More proof that Catholics seem to equate their church with God.

There is NO salvation outside of Jesus Christ. Remember what your supposed first pope said, in Acts 4? "There is salvation in no one else, for there is NO OTHER NAME under heaven given among mankind by which we MUST be saved."

What is that name, pilgrim? The Roman Catholic Church? OR Jesus Christ?
Click to expand...
excellent point and so true.
 
Bonnie said:
Leaving the RCC isn't the same thing as leaving God. More proof that Catholics seem to equate their church with God.

There is NO salvation outside of Jesus Christ. Remember what your supposed first pope said, in Acts 4? "There is salvation in no one else, for there is NO OTHER NAME under heaven given among mankind by which we MUST be saved."

What is that name, pilgrim? The Roman Catholic Church? OR Jesus Christ?
Click to expand...
The Church is the body of Christ.
How is one saved outside the body of Christ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top