Aphikomen or Eucharist?

[nicholas]

then he instituted something entirely non-Jewish

56 For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed.

57 He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood abideth in me: and I in him.

Not nonJewish. Divine, big difference. That does not sound Jewish to me. It is biblical though. Your problem is with God and his bible and his church.

[Guest jimraboin]

Are you willing, Nicholas?

Jim

[nicholas]

The first reaction we have when faced with the possibility we have adopted wrong ideas is to get defensive.

Wrong, you assume that this is the first time I have heard this and therefore it is new and challenging to me. This is not my first rodeo. I just want more proof from you on an even playing field. If you just believe Solo Scriptura or if your will take historical documents and reason and logic into play. Regardless, you have bucked scripture, history, the Catholic documents and every logic to fight the Catholic Church with some Jewish website. I find that hallarious.

[nicholas]

If the tradition of Eucharist truly came from the original believers, then it would have broken the matzah, hidden a portion and consumed the other.

In the Catholic Church there is always a portion hidden in the tabernacle. Not all is consumed during the mass.

Catholicism when formed at Nicaea needed to silence the true meaning of the bread in order to insert its own

Your trying to tell everyone that the Church at Nicaea silenced the truth, but long before Nicaea everyone already believe in the true presence of Christ in the Eucharist.

These are just a few before Nicaea in May of 325.

"They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again"

Ignatius of Antioch,Epistle to Smyrnaeans,7,1(c.A.D. 110),in ANF,I:89

"For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour,having been made flesh and blood for our salvation,so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word,and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished,is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh."

Justin Martyr,First Apology,66(A.D. 110-165),in ANF,I:185

"[T]he bread over which thanks have been given is the body of their Lord, and the cup His blood..."

Irenaeus,Against Heresies,IV:18,4(c.A.D. 200),in ANF,I:486

"He acknowledged the cup (which is a part of the creation) as his own blood,from which he bedews our blood; and the bread (also a part of creation) he affirmed to be his own body,from which he gives increase to our bodies."

Irenaeus,Against Heresies,V:2,2(c.A.D. 200),in NE,119

"But what consistency is there in those who hold that the bread over which thanks have been given is the Body of their Lord,and the cup His Blood,if they do not acknowledge that He is the Son of the Creator of the world..."

Irenaeus,Against Heresies,IV:18,2(c.A.D. 200),in JUR,I:95

"For the blood of the grape--that is, the Word--desired to be mixed with water, as His blood is mingled with salvation. And the blood of the Lord is twofold. For there is the blood of His flesh, by which we are redeemed from corruption; and the spiritual, that by which we are anointed. And to drink the blood of Jesus, is to become partaker of the Lord's immortality; the Spirit being the energetic principle of the Word, as blood is of flesh. Accordingly, as wine is blended with water, so is the Spirit with man. And the one, the mixture of wine and water, nourishes to faith; while the other, the Spirit, conducts to immortality. And the mixture of both--of the water and of the Word--is called Eucharist, renowned and glorious grace; and they who by faith partake of it are sanctified both in body and soul."

Clement of Alexandria,The Instructor,2(ante A.D. 202),in ANF,II:242

"Then, having taken the bread and given it to His disciples, He made it His own body, by saying, 'This is my body,' that is, the figure of my body. A figure, however, there could not have been, unless there were first a veritable body. An empty thing, or phantom, is incapable of a figure. If, however, (as Marcion might say,) He pretended the bread was His body, because He lacked the truth of bodily substance, it follows that He must have given bread for us. It would contribute very well to the support of Marcion's theory of a phantom body, that bread should have been crucified! But why call His body bread, and not rather (some other edible thing, say) a melon, which Marcion must have had in lieu of a heart! He did not understand how ancient was this figure of the body of Christ, who said Himself by Jeremiah: 'I was like a lamb or an ox that is brought to the slaughter, and I knew not that they devised a device against me, saying, Let us cast the tree upon His bread,' which means, of course, the cross upon His body. And thus, casting light, as He always did, upon the ancient prophecies, He declared plainly enough what He meant by the bread, when He called the bread His own body. He likewise, when mentioning the cup and making the new testament to be sealed 'in His blood,' affirms the reality of His body. For no blood can belong to a body which is not a body of flesh. If any sort of body were presented to our view, which is not one of flesh, not being fleshly, it would not possess blood. Thus, from the evidence of the flesh, we get a proof of the body, and a proof of the flesh from the evidence of the blood. In order, however, that you may discover how anciently wine is used as a figure for blood, turn to Isaiah, who asks, 'Who is this that cometh from Edom, from Bosor with garments dyed in red, so glorious in His apparel, in the greatness of his might? Why are thy garments red, and thy raiment as his who cometh from the treading of the full winepress?' The prophetic Spirit contemplates the Lord as if He were already on His way to His passion, clad in His fleshly nature; and as He was to suffer therein, He represents the bleeding condition of His flesh under the metaphor of garments dyed in red, as if reddened in the treading and crushing process of the wine-press, from which the labourers descend reddened with the wine-juice, like men stained in blood. Much more clearly still does the book of Genesis foretell this, when (in the blessing of Judah, out of whose tribe Christ was to come according to the flesh) it even then delineated Christ in the person of that patriarch, saying, 'He washed His garments in wine, and His clothes in the blood of grapes'--in His garments and clothes the prophecy pointed out his flesh, and His blood in the wine. Thus did He now consecrate His blood in wine, who then (by the patriarch) used the figure of wine to describe His blood."

Tertullian,Against Marcion,40(A.D. 212),in ANF,III:418-419

"For because Christ bore us all, in that He also bore our sins, we see that in the water is understood the people, but in the wine is showed the blood of Christ. But when the water is mingled in the cup with wine, the people is made one with Christ, and the assembly of believers is associated and conjoined with Him on whom it believes; which association and conjunction of water and wine is so mingled in the Lord's cup, that that mixture cannot any more be separated. Whence, moreover, nothing can separate the Church--that is, the people established in the Church, faithfully and firmly persevering in that which they have believed--from Christ, in such a way as to prevent their undivided love from always abiding and adhering. Thus, therefore, in consecrating the cup of the Lord, water alone cannot be offered, even as wine alone cannot be offered. For if any one offer wine only, the blood of Christ is dissociated from us; but if the water be alone, the people are dissociated from Christ; but when both are mingled, and are joined with one another by a close union, there is completed a spiritual and heavenly sacrament. Thus the cup of the Lord is not indeed water alone, nor wine alone, unless each be mingled with the other; just as, on the other hand, the body of the Lord cannot be flour alone or water alone, unless both should be united and joined together and compacted in the mass of one bread; in which very sacrament our people are shown to be made one, so that in like manner as many grains, collected, and ground, and mixed together into one mass, make one bread; so in Christ, who is the heavenly bread, we may know that there is one body, with which our number is joined and united."

Cyprian,To Caeilius,Epistle 62(63):13(A.D. 253),in ANF,V:362

[Guest yod]

There is no need for cynicism if you can explain your beliefs, Nicholas. It would do a lot to help your cause if you would be as respectful as most catholics I know. I think your last post answered my question about whether Protestants can be saved outside of the Catholic church. I find it hard to believe that anyone would accept that....especially since it isn't official dogma anymore. That's hard core, man.

It is a fact that the jewish people have enjoyed a relationship with God for about 6,000 years. It has not always been a "good" relationship but a relationship nonetheless.

It is also factual that the Catholic church has adopted many elements of the jewish faith into christianity. Any knowledgable Catholic theologian will tell you that the Eucharist originally comes from the Afikomen of the Pesach seder.

I'm not sure what the point of the thread is.

We will surely have differences about the symbolism vs the substance of this....

[Guest shiloh357]

The word afikomen means "he came." Traditional Judaism has desparately tried to interpret this custom apart from it symbolism of Yeshua. According to Rabbi John Fischer of Or Hadash, A Messianic Congregation, who founded the Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations, that there is evidence that early Jewish believers instituted this custom in obedience to Messiah's command to remember him in the partaking of Matzah at Passover. I have not personally been able to view the evidence, but Rabbi Fischer is qualified to make that assertion.

[Douay]

I'm not sure what the point of the thread is.

Me either.

There is no need for cynicism if you can explain your beliefs, Nicholas. It would do a lot to help your cause if you would be as respectful as most catholics I know.

I see nothing wrong with Nicholas' demeanor.

I think your last post answered my question about whether Protestants can be saved outside of the Catholic church. I find it hard to believe that anyone would accept that....especially since it isn't official dogma anymore. That's hard core, man.

I don't see how you got that from his posts(noting you probably meant 2 up and not last post of Nicholas')

[Guest yod]

Yes, it was a few posts up. More posts were added faster than I could type that one...

And I'm getting confused between this and another thread where I asked;

TO THE PROTESTANTS;

1. Can someone be Catholic and born again?

TO THE CATHOLICS

2. Can a Protestant be saved apart from the RCC?

I would just like to get everyone on record for that. I believe it would help up all to understand that we are united by something so much greater than our "religion"

[nicholas]

Yod,

Thanks for the concern of my cynical attitude, but if I came on this board day in and day out and posted that all Messianic Jews are a crock and here is why bla bla bla, with the same lies everytime, would you be cynical? What if there were hundreds of me doing so. I think so.

Why do I need to explain my beliefs to anyone here? I already know that they are rejected. I just like to show some people that their accusations are a crock and they have no real leg to stand on.

BTW I have no Idea what your talking about by your no salvation outside the CC spill. I don't know how you got that out of any of my posts.

[Guest yod]

I totally understand your frustration, Nicholas. I am the LAST person to throw stones from my glass house on the subject of being cynical...just trying to calm tempers here, ok?

You are not the "the" reason I asked those 2 questions...but you did say something about Christ and His church (meaning the RCC was "it"). I can understand why you have that belief (though I disagree) and thought it would be instructive for Protestants to know how you view their salvation.

It isn't a trick question....and I don't mean to hijack the thread.

But since I can't figure out what the point of the thread is anyway it wouldn't hurt us to get to know each other on a more personal level instead of a denominational one.