What is the salvific effect of the Cross?

It is the same sacrifice. That is what Jesus said, "Drink from it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins."

The contents of the cup, the wine, is his blood of the covenant that is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.
FOLLOW ALONG
if the forgiveness of sin took place at the Last Supper than the Cross become meaningless..

When was the penalty of sins paid for? Take a swing: What is you answer?

1 Corinthians 15:3
Christ died for our sins, according to Scriptures

1 Peter 3:18
Christ died for sins, once for all”

Hebrews 9:15
15 Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant


Isaiah 53:
because he poured out his life unto death,
and was numbered with the transgressors.
For he bore the sin of many,
and made intercession for the transgressors
------------------
 
But Catholicism makes it a sacrifice.
Well, what is it if not the sacrifice?
They keep resacrificing Jesus in their Mass.
How can we re-sacrifice Christ when there is ONE sacrifice of Christ? The Mass is a representation, not a re-sacrifice. You Protestants have such trouble understanding the difference. There is ONE sacrifice of Christ. The Mass is our encounter with it.
Jesus died ONCE. Jesus offered a single sacrifice of Himself for the sins of the whole world.
Correct: in his earthly flesh, Jesus died once, never to die again. Your mistake is in thinking that the Cross itself is the sacrifice, rather than Christ. Jesus offers himself in the Mass but does not die.
No, but then, what Catholics need to do is actually believe the clear scriptural witness--that Jesus died ONCE for ALL time, a single sacrifice, never to be repeated.
We do not teach that Jesus DIES again. We teach that Jesus offers himself in the Mass sacramentally---and does not die.
Why won't you believe this clear Scriptural witness? I know--what your popes and magisterium teach is more important to Catholics than what the Bible actually says.
I believe the Scriptures just fine. You just don't understand the Mass.
A single sacrifice for ALL time. Not over and over and over again in the Eucharist.
Yes, ONE sacrifice for all time that is made present in the Mass without Christ dying again.
 
CCC 1367 The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice: "The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priests, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different." "And since in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner. . . this sacrifice is truly propitiatory."
 
CCC 1367 The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice: "The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priests, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different." "And since in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner. . . this sacrifice is truly propitiatory."
Sorry, but this is doublespeak. Your church is trying to have it both ways: "Oh, the two sacrifices are one sacrifice"--even though the priest holds up the wafer and asks God to accept "this sacrifice."

One Catholic on here years ago tried to tell me that the Priest's "sacrifice" sort of taps into the original one, like a sort of time machine.

Jesus died once. He sacrificed Himself once. For all time. ONE SINGLE PERFECT SACRIFICE, never to be repeated--even in the Eucharist.

The Lord's Supper is sacramental, not sacrificial.
 
Sorry, but this is doublespeak. Your church is trying to have it both ways: "Oh, the two sacrifices are one sacrifice"--even though the priest holds up the wafer and asks God to accept "this sacrifice."

One Catholic on here years ago tried to tell me that the Priest's "sacrifice" sort of taps into the original one, like a sort of time machine.

Jesus died once. He sacrificed Himself once. For all time. ONE SINGLE PERFECT SACRIFICE, never to be repeated--even in the Eucharist.

The Lord's Supper is sacramental, not sacrificial.
But Jesus words disagree with you. Jesus said, "“Drink from it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins."

The contents of the cup, the wine, is sacrificial - according to the words of Jesus.
 
Well, what is it if not the sacrifice?

Why would the Eucharist need to be since Jesus sacrificed Himself ONCE and made purgation ONCE, no need to be repeated.
How can we re-sacrifice Christ when there is ONE sacrifice of Christ? The Mass is a representation, not a re-sacrifice. You Protestants have such trouble understanding the difference. There is ONE sacrifice of Christ. The Mass is our encounter with it.

How? By what Catholic priests do with the Eucharist every single Mass, asking that God accept the "sacrifice" of the Eucharist.
Correct: in his earthly flesh, Jesus died once, never to die again. Your mistake is in thinking that the Cross itself is the sacrifice, rather than Christ. Jesus offers himself in the Mass but does not die.

I mistake nothing. I know perfectly well that Jesus is the sacrifice, not the two wooden beams Jesus died upon. But the cross is just shorthand for Jesus' sacrifice of Himself on the cross for the forgiveness of sins and raised from the dead for our justification.
We do not teach that Jesus DIES again. We teach that Jesus offers himself in the Mass sacramentally---and does not die.

I never said you teach that Jesus died again. But that is the conclusion we make since your priests ask God to accept the "sacrifice" of the Eucharist.
I believe the Scriptures just fine. You just don't understand the Mass.

No, you don't really believe the Scriptures "just fine." The Scriptures clearly teach that Jesus died once for all time and there is no need for any more sacrifice for sins. The Lord's Supper is sacramental not sacrificial, and is for the forgiveness of our sins.
Yes, ONE sacrifice for all time that is made present in the Mass without Christ dying again.
Really? But then, since you think it is the same sacrifice, in the Eucharist, then that means you are keeping Jesus on the cross and resacrificing Him over and over again, without realizing it, albeit in a non-bloody manner.

Many years ago, on this board, a Catholic named Gusano told me that Jesus' sacrifice on Calvary all those many hundreds of years ago only covered the sins of those alive upon the earth at that time. And that is why the Eucharist is so important to Catholics and done so much in your church through the millennia--so that His sacrifice will cover the sins of those born AFTER the first century, through the Eucharist. What do you think of this reasoning?
 
Sorry, but this is doublespeak. Your church is trying to have it both ways: "Oh, the two sacrifices are one sacrifice"--even though the priest holds up the wafer and asks God to accept "this sacrifice."

One Catholic on here years ago tried to tell me that the Priest's "sacrifice" sort of taps into the original one, like a sort of time machine.

Jesus died once. He sacrificed Himself once. For all time. ONE SINGLE PERFECT SACRIFICE, never to be repeated--even in the Eucharist.

The Lord's Supper is sacramental, not sacrificial.

The Didache

“Assemble on the Lord’s day, and break bread and offer the Eucharist; but first make confession of your faults, so that your sacrifice may be a pure one. Anyone who has a difference with his fellow is not to take part with you until he has been reconciled, so as to avoid any profanation of your sacrifice [Matt. 5:23–24]. For this is the offering of which the Lord has said, ‘Everywhere and always bring me a sacrifice that is undefiled, for I am a great king, says the Lord, and my name is the wonder of nations’ [Mal. 1:11, 14]” (Didache 14 [A.D. 70]).
 
But Jesus words disagree with you. Jesus said, "“Drink from it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins."

No, they do not. I don't see the word "sacrificial" there.

Jesus did indeed pour out His blood on the cross. He instituted that at His Last Supper.

But then, Jesus' own words disagree with Catholics that the bread and wine are ONLY Jesus' body and blood after the priest consecrates it. You know, when He said in Matthew, Mark, and Luke right after He said "Drink of it, all of you" etc. that "I will not drink THIS/THE fruit of the vine again until I drink it anew in My Father's kingdom."

Right there, is the dual nature of the wine and by extension, the bread. The wine is both Jesus' blood and the "fruit of the vine" at the same time. The bread is both Jesus' body and also fully bread, at the same time, after the minister consecrates if for the Lord's Supper.
The contents of the cup, the wine, is sacrificial - according to the words of Jesus.
Again, show me the word "sacrificial" in what Jesus said. He also said that BEFORE He was nailed to the cross. When Jesus actually shed His blood, it was sacrificial. But the Eucharist is sacramental, not sacrificial.
 
No, they do not. I don't see the word "sacrificial" there.

Jesus did indeed pour out His blood on the cross. He instituted that at His Last Supper.

But then, Jesus' own words disagree with Catholics that the bread and wine are ONLY Jesus' body and blood after the priest consecrates it. You know, when He said in Matthew, Mark, and Luke right after He said "Drink of it, all of you" etc. that "I will not drink THIS/THE fruit of the vine again until I drink it anew in My Father's kingdom."

Right there, is the dual nature of the wine and by extension, the bread. The wine is both Jesus' blood and the "fruit of the vine" at the same time. The bread is both Jesus' body and also fully bread, at the same time, after the minister consecrates if for the Lord's Supper.

Again, show me the word "sacrificial" in what Jesus said. He also said that BEFORE He was nailed to the cross. When Jesus actually shed His blood, it was sacrificial. But the Eucharist is sacramental, not sacrificial.
Jesus said, referring to the contents of the cup, that it was his blood of the covenant that is pour out for many for the forgiveness of sins. That is sacrificial.

Also, using your same argument we don't see the word "sacramental" there.
 
Amos 5:10
They hate him that rebuketh in the gate,
and they abhor him that speaketh uprightly
.

Isaiah says
Bind up the testimony, seal the law among my disciples.
..
To the law and to the testimony:
if they speak not according to this word,
it is because there is
no light in them.

and Oh how Great is that darkness

and Arch says
The Didache
Arch Stanton said:


“Assemble on the Lord’s day, and break bread and offer the Eucharist; but first make confession of your faults, so that your sacrifice may be a pure one. Anyone who has a difference with his fellow is not to take part with you until he has been reconciled, so as to avoid any profanation of your sacrifice [Matt. 5:23–24]. For this is the offering of which the Lord has said, ‘Everywhere and always bring me a sacrifice that is undefiled, for I am a great king, says the Lord, and my name is the wonder of nations’ [Mal. 1:11, 14]” (Didache 14 [A.D. 70]).
================ end Arch post

this Didache fails the test miserably.
not even good for toilet paper for a bird Cage

but then again
"the Dogs lick the Blood of Jezzie-Bellie"

as peter says as dog returns to his own vomit
 
Amos 5:10
They hate him that rebuketh in the gate,
and they abhor him that speaketh uprightly
.

Isaiah says
Bind up the testimony, seal the law among my disciples.
..
To the law and to the testimony:
if they speak not according to this word,
it is because there is
no light in them.

and Oh how Great is that darkness

and Arch says
The Didache
Arch Stanton said:



“Assemble on the Lord’s day, and break bread and offer the Eucharist; but first make confession of your faults, so that your sacrifice may be a pure one. Anyone who has a difference with his fellow is not to take part with you until he has been reconciled, so as to avoid any profanation of your sacrifice [Matt. 5:23–24]. For this is the offering of which the Lord has said, ‘Everywhere and always bring me a sacrifice that is undefiled, for I am a great king, says the Lord, and my name is the wonder of nations’ [Mal. 1:11, 14]” (Didache 14 [A.D. 70]).
================ end Arch post

this Didache fails the test miserably.
not even good for toilet paper for a bird Cage

but then again
"the Dogs lick the Blood of Jezzie-Bellie"

as peter says as dog returns to his own vomit
I thought your Bible had Malachi. ?
 
Buzzard said:
Amos 5:10
They hate him that rebuketh in the gate,
and they abhor him that speaketh uprightly
.

Isaiah says
Bind up the testimony, seal the law among my disciples.
..
To the law and to the testimony:
if they speak not according to this word,
it is because there is
no light in them.

and Oh how Great is that darkness

and Arch says
The Didache
Arch Stanton said:
“Assemble on the Lord’s day, and break bread and offer the Eucharist; but first make confession of your faults, so that your sacrifice may be a pure one. Anyone who has a difference with his fellow is not to take part with you until he has been reconciled, so as to avoid any profanation of your sacrifice [Matt. 5:23–24]. For this is the offering of which the Lord has said, ‘Everywhere and always bring me a sacrifice that is undefiled, for I am a great king, says the Lord, and my name is the wonder of nations’ [Mal. 1:11, 14]” (Didache 14 [A.D. 70]).
================ end Arch post

this Didache fails the test miserably.
not even good for toilet paper for a bird Cage

but then again
"the Dogs lick the Blood of Jezzie-Bellie"

as peter says as dog returns to his own vomit

and Arch says
I thought your Bible had Malachi. ?
Arch Stanton said:
I thought your Bible had Malachi. ?
===================== end Arch post


Gen. 3:3
But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden,
God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

It does, and this is what Isaiah says about
that tree which is in the midst of the garden,

Isaiah 66
I also will choose their delusions,
..
They that sanctify themselves, and purify themselves
in the gardens behind one tree in the midst,
eating swine's flesh, and the abomination, and the mouse,

shall be consumed together, saith the Lord.

Malachi echo's the same

so you keep right eating that
"Flesh of Swine"

and he wasn't speaking of Ham on Rye,
nor Pork chops for breakfast
 
and Arch says

Arch Stanton said:
I thought your Bible had Malachi. ?
===================== end Arch post


Gen. 3:3
But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden,
God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

It does, and this is what Isaiah says about
that tree which is in the midst of the garden,

Isaiah 66
I also will choose their delusions,
..
They that sanctify themselves, and purify themselves
in the gardens behind one tree in the midst,
eating swine's flesh, and the abomination, and the mouse,

shall be consumed together, saith the Lord.

Malachi echo's the same

so you keep right eating that
"Flesh of Swine"

and he wasn't speaking of Ham on Rye,
nor Pork chops for breakfast
From the rising of the sun to its setting,

my name is great among the nations;

Incense offerings are made to my name everywhere,

and a pure offering;

For my name is great among the nations,

says the LORD of hosts.
 
Why would we offer bread and wine, the fruit of the ground, to God? Cain made that same mistake.

Genesis 4:3-5, "In the course of time Cain brought to the Lord an offering of the fruit of the ground, and Abel for his part brought of the firstlings of his flock, their fat portions. And the Lord had regard for Abel and his offering, but for Cain and his offering he had no regard. So Cain was very angry, and his countenance fell."
You think the problem was what Cain offered?????????????????
 
Jesus said, referring to the contents of the cup, that it was his blood of the covenant that is pour out for many for the forgiveness of sins. That is sacrificial.

But the word "sacrificial" or "sacrifice" isn't there in the text. However, I will state this--calling the Eucharist the original Sacrifice of Jesus on the cross does not bother me nearly as much as the idea that Catholics teach that the bread and wine are no longer bread ans wine, but ONLY Jesus' body and blood.
Also, using your same argument we don't see the word "sacramental" there.
No, we don't, but we both believe it is a Sacrament, do we not? :) That is a word simply used to describe something Jesus Himself commanded, connected to a physical element or elements, with a promise attached--the forgiveness of sins.
 
Last edited:
The dragon, the Devil was a murder from the beginning
and the Father of it

And in process of time it came to pass,
that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground
an offering unto the Lord.

4 And Abel,
he also brought of the firstlings of his flock
and of the fat thereof.
And the Lord had respect unto Abel and to his offering:

5 But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect.
And Cain was :mad: very wroth, :mad:



Now Posters ----- Pay Attention ------

Ahhhh; just following in the footsteps of
a Child of the Serpent --- Cain
Christ said

Not every one that saith unto me,
Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven;
but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven
.

22 Many will say to me in that day,
Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name?
and in thy name have cast out devils?
and in thy name done many wonderful works
?

23 And then will I profess unto them,
I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity
.

Cain was offering all his hard work tilling the ground

Look Lord, at all the good works I have done for you​

same as these folks were saying
have we not prophesied in thy name?
and in thy name have cast out devils?
and in thy name done many wonderful works
?

then when Cain and Able were; shall we say;
discussing these things
he did What ???????
and it came to pass, when they were in the field,
that Cain rose up against Abel his brother,
and slew him.​

for those that have a Faith + Works Salvation
welllllllllll welcome to your future;

and there shall be
"Wailing and Wailing and Knashing of teeth;
every mans sword against his brother

Amos 5:13
Therefore the prudent shall keep silence in that time;
for it is an evil time
.
=========================
 
Last edited:
But the word "sacrificial" or "sacrifice" isn't there in the text.

No, we don't, but we both believe it is a Sacrament, do we not? :) That is a word simply used to describe something Jesus Himself commanded, connected to a physical element or elements, with a promise attached--the forgiveness of sins.
But we believe it is a Sacrament even though the word is not in scripture. So your argument fails.
 
Back
Top