The Earliest Writings on the Eucharist
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 бер 2023
- Many Christians believe in the Real Presence and the sacrifice of the Mass. But many others reject them. Both appeal to Scripture to try to prove their case. But what did the early Church Fathers believe? In this fascinating talk, Jimmy Akin (author of The Fathers Know Best) looks at writings from the dawn of Christian history to explore what the Church Fathers actually taught- and why!
Jimmy Akin presents the earliest writings on the Eucharist in his talk given at the 2022 Catholic Answers Conference, "The Eucharist - I Am with You Always." To attend this year's conference in person and meet your favorite apologists, visit: catholicanswersconference.com
The Holy Mass existed before the first Gospel was composed! The Didache makes clear how the Apostles instructed the first Christians to celebrate Christ's life, the Liturgy of the Word and Eucharist as Church on Sunday. The Catholic Church is the only church that conforms to the instructions of Christ's Apostles to their ordained successors and the faithful.
The didache has little else but liturgy in regard to the eucharist. Your claim is false because there's not enough on the eucharist in the didache to claim that the catholic church conforms to the apostles instructions. The didache was and is rejected even by Cathoics because it cannot be traced back to the apostles .
You are deceived and/or dishonest. There is nothing in scripture of "successors" and instructions from the Apostles to these supposed men.
If you claim Timothy, that was Paul. He was not one of the 12 Apostles. Timothy was his own person, not a successor of Paul.
@@joycegreer9391sorry, you are blind and deceived. We know absolutely that the Apostles taught and ordained their successors, the Bishops, and they in turn passed on those teachings. And btw, St. Paul was (is) an Apostle to the Gentiles chosen by the Risen Jesus Christ. Who do you think you are to deny the teachings of Scripture and The Church?
@@ImtoolVideos The Didache (Teachings of the 12 Apostles) is not rejected by faithful Catholics. Historians also accept it and dated to c. 70 AD. Have you read it? It appears you haven't since it clearly mentions the Eucharist and how to celebrate the Lord's Supper.
@@joycegreer9391 you speak dishonestly. And and St. Paul was chosen by the Risen Christ to be an Apostle to the Gentiles. The Apostles taught and ordained their successors, The Bishops, and they in turn taught and ordained their successors all the way to this day in The Church.
I find it interesting that Gavin Orland, James White and other protestant opologist suggest early church fathers believed in solo scriptura and sola fide when clearly they are Catholic thru and thru. The early church fathers had a strong theology in the Eucharist. Protestant apologist fail to see that the early church fathers practiced and believed in Catholic traditions.
Pride blinds them to the truth.
@WeaponOfChoice dang. That's interesting. I'm gonna chew on this one a while. Thanks for commenting.
*apologists, not opologist(s).
*Ortlund, not Orland.
*sola scriptura, not solo scriptura.
... Good comment, though. Yes.
@@clarekuehn4372 Thank you for the corrections. I don't always look at what I write.
@Robert Stephenson ”Jesus and his apostles would never have taught the real presence”, and yet the early christians and the church fathers believed and preached it. Are you saying they were wrong? Where were the other believers during that time that have the same belief as yours who should have spoken against the “real presence” to defend “the truth”?
God wanted a pure offering, unblemished , He was angered by the second rate spastic sacrifices offered to Him at the Temple ....
Jesus is the pure, unblemished, not a bone broken, Sacrificial Lamb of God , offered at the Holy Mass . 🙏🙏🙏✝️
AMEN.
Now do the same thing for the papacy, Mary, saints, etc. Very well done! So concise and to the point. A new classic sharable video on the topic.
Attending a Catholic Mass is like being invited to The Last Supper with Jesus and His apostles. During The Consecration, God opens Heaven and gives Himself to us. Receiving our God and Savior in Holy Communion is the most beautiful, powerful and intimate union with God we can have on earth. The only place on earth The Transubstantiation occurs is in a Catholic Mass. Beautiful Faith!!!
The Mass is also the crucifixion on Calvary.
That's why we call it the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
This is more easily recognized in the traditional Latin Mass.
pagan nonsense
@@justjoe4260 The Catholic Church is not pagan, Anti Catholic UA-cam troll!
@@justjoe4260 I'm Catholic because God lead me to the Catholic church
It's actually being at Calvary.. there in person. This is why Mary is at every Mass kneeling on the altar
If Jesus can turn water into wine, why is it so hard for Protestants to believe that the Eucharist can become the body and blood of Christ?
Water visibly changed to wine while the Eucharist does not visibly change.
It's not a denial that he can not but that he clearly (to them) does not.
Because Protestants can’t be catholic
If Catholics didn’t believe in real presence then Protestants would believe it
This is how satan works in Protestantism his greatest achievement
I debated a Protestant on line last year. He kept telling me horrible things about the RCC. He asked, why won't you engage with what Justin Martyr wrote? I told him, Justin Martyr's descriptions of the early church service are exactly what the Holy Mass is today. It is the same!
My only regret is that I didn't have this video. I would have loved to give him this link so he could hear it from an expert, instead of a novice Catholic such as myself.
THE EUCHARIST IS UNBIBLICAL.
@@lupelo8819 You might want to return your Bible to the shop. Looks like they forgot to put John 6 in it!
@@lupelo8819 It's not a matter of opinion, you are just wrong.
The Eucharist is in Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, one of Paul's letters to the Corinthians, the writings of Justin Martyr, the Didache, and the writings of other early church fathers. You should really study up before you make comments like that, because such comments prove you are uninformed and should be disregarded.
I say this not to be mean, but to explain how you are perceived by people who know you are wrong.
@@lupelo8819 I'm Catholic period
Why debate a Protestant
It’s like debating Satan a liar , the father of lies
Would love to see a future debate with Jimmy Akin and James White on the priesthood and perhaps another on the Sacraments
👏👏👏 thank you for the Catholic experience
Thank you Yahweh for this son of yours Jimmy ,he is a great teacher.
An excellent, concise presentation. Every Christian needs to see this!
Hearing Jimmy on CAL on a Boston radio station is a huge part of what brought me back into the Church. I had already renounced the atheism-adjacent agnosticism that I'd fallen into in my 20s, and was definitely returning to Christianity, but I'd probably be an evangelical today if not for Jimmy Akin et al.
A simple 'thank you.'
These letters from early church Fathers are soooo clear about the Eucharist, i wonder if these are included in the NT canon, would Protestants believe in the real presence, that Eucharist is not merely symbolic.
I’m not sure if you read these comments Jimmy but this should be complied in a single book.
🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻 thank you
Love the book Jimmy. Helped me float more quickly across the Tiber
Excellent beloved Brother & thank you very much for this as it is Very Much needed to Unify the BODY of Christ according to St. John Chapter 6 and Chapter 17.
Dr. Stephen
India
Imagine my surprise in 1998 when I realized the Early Church Fathers weren’t Baptist. 😂
2000 convert ✊🏼
Congrats. Imagine my surprise, as a former episcopalian, when realized King Henry VIII was once a devout Catholic, but later started his own church to justify his own adultery and murdering of some of his former wives.
They weren't RCC either.
@@johns1834 Wow, you were sure ignorant of history. Still not accurate. He tried and tried to get his first marriage annulled. The reason was to marry another woman to bear him a legitimate son/heir. He wasn't concerned about adultery and ordering executions.
He didn't literally start his own church either. The church continued with him as the head instead of the pope, just leadership change.
@@joycegreer9391 Have you read the documents from the first several hundred years of Christianity? If interested, there’s a great 3 vol. set Faith of the Early Fathers, ed. by Jurgens.
@@sandraelder1101 Yes, I have.
Fantastic talk ! Now I know what the Didache is about. And the first/ second Century AD early Christian history.
Thank you so much Jimmy Akin , from Malaysia .... God Bless !
Wow, well done! Thank you
So good!
Thank you!!!!
THANK you Jimmy
This is an outstanding resource. Thank you very much.
I don't just want to share this video but also the PowerPoint presentation. Is it possible to have that for free?
Thanks Jimmy and Catholic Answers! One day very soon I'll be a full pledge apologist like you...
pwd, i full screen mo, then, crl+prtsc.
Jimmy Aikens thank you
Great video!
I love the Malachi 1.11 prophecy.
Same here.
The mayority of my Catholic knowledge, I learn from this profet, Jimmy Akin...😇
Ut benedicat tibi Deus 🙏
FALSE prophet SINNER jimmy Akin❤
Excellent as always
Didache 9.1 - (AD 100) Now, concerning the Eucharist, practice it as follows. " First, concerning the cup: We give thanks to you, our Father, for the holy vine of David your son, which you made known to us through Jesus your son, glory to you forever a Next, concerning the broken bread: We give thanks to you, our Father, for the life and knowledge which you made known to us through Jesus your son, glory to you forever b4 Just as this broken bread was being scattered over the mountains and being brought together it became one; likewise bring together your church from the ends of the earth into your kingdom, so that yours is the glory and the power through Jesus Christ forever cs But none shall eat or shall drink from your Eucharist but those baptized in the name of the Lord; for also concerning this the Lord has said,
"Do give not what is holy to the dogs."
The Didache (AD 100): “On the Lord’s day assemble and break bread and give thanks, having first confessed your sins, that your sacrifice may be pure. If any have a dispute with his fellow, let him not come to the assembly till they be reconciled, that your sacrifice be not polluted. For this is the sacrifice spoken of by the Lord; ‘In every place and at every time offer to me a pure sacrifice; for I am a great king, said the Lord, and my name is wonderful among the Gentiles; (Mal. i. 11, 14).”
This doesn’t refer to Jesus’ sacrifice, but to “your sacrifice.” The same Greek word for “sacrifice” (thusia) is used of Jesus’ sacrifice (Heb. 5:1), but it is also used of doing good deeds, praise, and financial giving (Heb. 13:15-16; Phil. 4:18). The same book also refers to the supper as the “cup” and the “bread,” and a means of remembering Jesus’ sacrifice in thanksgiving (Didache, 9).
Dear Heavenly Father please enlighten all who believe in the risen Lord Jesus Christ. May we be united and deliver us from deception, lies and untruths to know, understand and reverence You and Your holy truths through Christ our Lord amen.
This is just excellent sir! Being a fellow Gen Xer you and I speak the same language "Now THIS dude here..." well done!
Great lesson. Thanks. Good to see 'proof' our Sunday service hasn't changed in 2,000 years.
Apart from it not having existed 2000 yr...lol.
@@joycegreer9391 You can believe anything you want Miss Joyce. That's why Jesus said; "not everyone who cries Lord Lord, will enter the kingdom of heaven". Have a super day.
@@johns1834 Apparently you don't even know math. 2000 yr equals 23 AD. Jesus hadn't even started His ministry yet.
If you had any wisdom, any discernment YOU would heed that verse you quoted. It is YOU who is judging falsely, arrogantly. It is YOUR religion that claims faith is not enough, you also need works. Those are the kind of people Jesus is talking about, not those of us who believe in the Gospel and Jesus alone and the Word of God alone and NOT word of man.
@@joycegreer9391 Right. Seriously.
What type of Church do you attend?
I guessing Baptist.
2 Peter 3:8 But do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day.
@@johns1834 What?? We live in real time. Everything on earth has historical dates. We are not God, even if poopy pope thinks he is.
No, not Baptist.
This “Last Supper” which Jesus shared with His disciples is the model for the Lord’s Supper, which Jesus’ followers kept after Hid death and resurrection. This meal was the Christian Passover, in which the New Covenant sealed by Jesus’ death and resurrection fifty days after His resurrection was remembered and renewed.
Because the Greek word for “give thanks” is Eucharistein.
Many Christians since the second century have called the Lord’s Supper the “Eucharist.”
THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT KIND OF BLUNDER
Happy Eshtar to all my catholic friends .
Easter, aka Pascua
Aka "Resurrection Day"
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation:
00:00 *🍞 Early Christian Views on the Eucharist*
- Early Christians interpreted scriptures like Malachi's prophecy to shape their understanding of the Eucharist.
- The words of institution varied slightly across different accounts, showing early church comfort with diverse liturgical forms.
- The acceptance of variations in liturgical practices led to the development of different rites in the Church.
09:32 *📜 Early Eucharistic Beliefs in the Didache*
- The Didache, possibly dating back to the 50s or 60s AD, provides insight into early Eucharistic practices.
- It emphasizes Sunday as the Lord's Day, confession before communion, and the Eucharist as a sacrifice.
- Baptism is regarded as a prerequisite for receiving the Eucharist, indicating a closed communion practice.
20:13 *📝 Eucharistic References in First Clement*
- First Clement, likely written around AD 70, addresses the importance of orderly worship and designated priesthood.
- Comparisons with Jewish practices suggest a timeframe before the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple in AD 70.
- Clement emphasizes the seriousness of removing blameless bishops from their offices, highlighting the significance of proper Eucharistic administration.
25:45 *🍞🍷 Christian ministers offer sacrifices, echoing the concept of sacrifice in Christianity and referencing Malachi's prophecy about a pure offering among the Gentiles.*
- Christian ministers comparable to the Jewish priesthood offer sacrifices.
- Implicit reference to the Eucharist and Malachi's prophecy suggests a belief in the real presence.
26:40 *📜 Ignatius of Antioch's significance and beliefs*
- Ignatius was a bishop who personally knew apostles and wrote letters to churches.
- He battled against the docetists, affirming the physical reality of Jesus and his sacrifice.
- Ignatius emphasized the importance of the Eucharist for eternal life and unity in his letters.
35:16 *💡 Insights from Justin Martyr*
- Justin Martyr, a mid-second-century apologist, discusses Eucharistic practices.
- Describes the structure of early Christian worship services, including the Liturgy of the Word and Eucharistic celebration.
- Affirms belief in the real presence, Eucharistic sacrifice, and the role of ordained priests in administering communion.
Evangelical arguments against the Catholic Church and the Pope are very similar to the arguments of Korah and his gang against Moses, as in the book of Numbers 16.
Jimmy! Note on pronunciation of Greek-διδαχή is pronounced with a "k" sound almost identical to ours. χ and κ were only distinguished by aspiration until relatively late, at which point chi becomes pronounced more like the German (alveolar fricative) and less like the German (velar fricative) or Scottish/ Scots
the last words "dude, wow!!!!!, yes, they summarized this talk.... wow,,,
In the Greek translation it is not “take, eat” but “receive, eat”
very similar.
And St. Jerome's Vulgate says "Accipite", "accept".
We receive and accept a gift, this wonderful gift from God, whereas we take something that we deserve, that is owed to us.
Please turn on closed captioning.
Activated😎
BTW at minute 30:30 is a typo - to the Philippians , not Philadelphians.
Sorry, it's not a typo. I have since followed a Bible study of Book of Revelation .
check out the diatessaron (a harmony of the gospels) by tatian (c. 150-160)
Can you put Indonesiaan substitle bro
Hello! I’m seeking for help. I’m spending this years holy week in DC! Anyone knows a good parish that I could attend?? Thanks!!
St Louis Parish in Alexandria VA is a wonderful church and it should only be about 30-ish minutes out of DC for you
@@Adaelgilliam thanks!! I’ll check it out if possible
St. Joseph in the Capital Hill neghborhood.
@@lyndavonkanel8603 thank you!!!
GO TO A BAPTIST CHURCH FOR TRUTH OF GOD'S WORD.
My attempt at harmonizing all the statements recorded in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. It includes every word, in the order they are given:
“Take, eat; this is My body, which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me,”
“This cup is the new covenant in My blood; which is being poured out for you, drink of it, all of you, and do this, as often as you might drink it, in remembrance of Me. For this is My blood of the covenant, which is being poured out for many, for forgiveness of sins.”
And this illustrates why it is important to read all in context...it is the Body and Blood of Jesus not a symbol. Each highlight different aspects and convey more meaning of this profound sacrifice Jesus has done for us.
Samuel Mintah-Darko
Well, your attempt is not honest. You rejected the Gospel of John, chapter 6.
@@c.Ichthys John 6 is not Jesus speaking at the Last Supper, I was trying to harmonize what He said at that occasion.
@@beowulf.reborn oh but John 6 is about the institution of His Body and Blood which is part of the other Gospels.
Blessed Mother Mary appeared to over a million people of all faiths in Zeitoun Egypt in the 1960s! Interesting! Read about it!
C,A. needs to start teaching how to refute and answer heretical and liberal Catholics which may include some clergy. Protestantism isn't the only challenge that the laity is NOW facing.
It seems as if C.A. are unware of the Crisis in the Church. Talking about history. what we're are gong through currently is historic!
Strongly agree. Our unity is beginning to be sorely tested with provocative heresies being trotted out by some in leadership who wield real power.
That is brought about by politicization of Catholic. Any serious Catholic must desist dividing the Church as liberal and conservative. That basically is the work of the devil.
Some of them do. Trent Horn, for instance (who works at Catholic Answers) spends a significant number of his videos dealing with liberal Catholics like Fr. Martin and the German Bishops. His podcast is technically part of Catholic Answers I believe, so I do think they are doing more than you give them credit for.
@@gunsgalore7571
My point, today, many Bishops and Priest are the religious adversaries of Catholics, more than Protest.
CA needs to call out the ERRORS promptly and fervently ;they need not mention any names of Bishops and the people can figure out the origins of the error.
I think this way the office of Bishopric is respected.
Bad Bishop and Priest have far greater impact than, let’s say, a James White.
Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle against the snares of the Devil.
Blessed Mother, pray for us.
Lord Jesus Christ, you are the King of my heart because I love you so much.
Baptists would want to know why the Didache is not included in the NT if so important. I personally am trying to convice my relative about the Catholic belief of John 6, the Didache, and the the writings of the early fathers but my relative stand on the fact that it should be included in the Bible.
Ask your relative in this manner, "Who says *everything* has to be in Sacred Scripture; where does SS say that?
Where does Sacred Scripture say that you must pray with your hands clasped together and be on your knees?
Where does Sacred Scripture say the words, 'Holy Trinity', despite it being a dogma?
Finally, which Church gave us the biblical canon in the first place at the Council of Rome in AD 382? Nearly four centuries after Christ's death and resurrection.
Why would you assume God would give us the Word, but not the Church?
How much do you actually know of Christian history to say definitively whether or not the Apostles and their successors got it wrong?"
Better yet, have this relative watch these videos with you. But, first, you need a proper lure. Something they're actually interested in and why the Church agrees or disagrees with their premise. Use that topic as a starting-line.
For example: if they say, "The Holy Bible is the inerrant word of God", ask them why they believe that and which Church declared that when they compiled the biblical canon".
You know them best, so, you probably know how to reach them better than I.
If they're an atheist, atheists love history. That's your ticket in.
@@batmaninc2793They say that God inspired which books to be included or not included and nothing more is needed
@@scottdufour Right, but you do have to drive home that He declared so, through His Church (St Matthew 16:18-19), who declared it so. And how Christ, in 16:18, says that the gates of Hell shall never prevail against it.
One tip I've seen is to focus, first, on the arguments against the Pope.
Even St Paul lived with St Peter for thirteen days.
Start with St John 1:42, Cephas, the Aramaic word and root word kepha (rock).
Lead into how St John is writing for the Koine Greek with "Petros", which is from "petra" (rock). How the word-play is intentional from St. John 1:42 to St Matthew 16:18 and addressed as Cephas elsewhere.
Even throw in how in French, Pierre (Peter) means "rock" (pierre); and how even in French the translation reads as You are Rock, and upon this rock..."
How the Keys relate to the Key in Isaiah 22:22 and what it means to not just OT Jews but NT ones at the time of Christ, as well.
How this authority given to St Peter by Christ is even recognized at the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15 saying in verse 7, "And when there had been much disputing, Peter, rising up, said to them: Men, brethren, *you know, that in former days God made choice among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel, and believe".*
Finally, how the Early Church wrote about that authority.
@@batmaninc2793 I tried all this by saying there was oral tradition and teaching going on but they still said , if there was oral teaching, it was backed up by scripture and epistle and nothing more added
Eucharistic miracles are proven to be human heart tissue that has undergone dramatic stress.
No matter which video you look at (not critical of this one just commenting) they ALL claim to have scriptures to back up their point. Whether Catholic or Protestant! SO which one can we believe? So my conclusion is this each of us will be in favor or critical of the video based upon what we have heard in the past and what we already have accepted (to a point). Occasionally I will hear something that does resonate enough to start a change inside!
But this doesn't use Scripture, it uses history.
Eucharist in scripture
Typology reference to the blood covenant Jesus made at the new Passover during the last supper with the apostles. Many passages in the Old Testament provide foreshadowing of the Eucharist.
Exodus 24:8 (RSVCE): 8 And Moses took the blood and threw it upon the people, and said, “Behold the blood of the covenant which the Lord has made with you in accordance with all these words.”
Exodus 16:4 (RSVCE): 4 Then the Lord said to Moses, “Behold, I will rain BREAD FROM HEAVEN for you; and the people shall go out and gather a day’s portion every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law or not.
This passage talks of a PURE offering, a perfect sacrifice… a prelude to the sacrifice of Jesus … a worthy sacrifice, a willing sacrifice, the new Adam … the lamb of God who would bring about the salvation of humanity … a return to holiness with God
Malachi 1:10-11 (RSVCE): 10 Oh, that there were one among you who would shut the doors, that you might not kindle fire upon my altar in vain! I have no pleasure in you, says the Lord of hosts, and I will not accept an offering from your hand. 11 For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name is great among the nations, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a PURE OFFERING; for my name is great among the nations, says the Lord of hosts.
Matthew 6:9-13 (RSVCE): 9 Pray then like this:
Our Father who art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. 10 Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, On earth as it is in heaven. 11 Give us this day our DAILY BREAD; 12 And forgive us our debts, As we also have forgiven our debtors; 13 And lead us not into temptation, But deliver us from evil.
The feeding of 5000, a foreshadow again of Jesus feeding people with a bread that will satisfy their hunger … their daily bread.
Matthew 14:17-20 (RSVCE): 17 They said to him, “We have only five loaves here and two fish.” 18 And he said, “Bring them here to me.” 19 Then he ordered the crowds to sit down on the grass; and taking the five loaves and the two fish he looked up to heaven, and blessed, and broke and gave the loaves to the disciples, and the disciples gave them to the crowds. 20 And they all ate and were satisfied
Now Jesus gets clear when he has the last supper
Matthew 26:26-28 (RSVCE): 26 Now as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” 27 And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink of it, all of you; 28 for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.
Mark 14:22-25 (RSVCE): 22 And as they were eating, he took bread, and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to them, and said, “Take; this is my body.” 23 And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, and they all drank of it. 24 And he said to them, “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many. 25 Truly, I say to you, I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.”
Luke 22:15-20 (RSVCE): 15 And he said to them, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer; 16 for I tell you I shall not eat it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.” 17 And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he said, “Take this, and divide it among yourselves; 18 for I tell you that from now on I shall not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.” 19 And he took bread, and when he had given thanks he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” 20 And likewise the cup after supper, saying, “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.
Now John wrote his gospel on this differently as there was heresy in the early church where people did not believe that the Eucharist was actually the flesh and blood of Jesus, that the talk was symbolic. John references the Old Testament that speaks of the bread of life … the bread that came down from heaven. The bread that gives eternal life. The need to eat of the body and blood of Christ to have him in you … his flesh and blood, the Eucharist.
John 6:47-59 (RSVCE): 47 Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life. 48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. 50 This is the bread which comes down from heaven, that a man may eat of it and not die. 51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.”
52 The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” 53 So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; 54 he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. 56 He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him. 57 As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me. 58 This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live for ever.” 59 This he said in the synagogue, as he taught at Capernaum.
In Luke after Jesus was resurrected on a journey to Emmaus two of them … one who was Cleopas who was not at the last supper … they only recognized Jesus after he Blessed the bread and broke it with them (communion).
Luke 24:30-31 (RSVCE): When he was at table with them, he took the bread and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to them. 31 And their eyes were opened and they recognized him; and he vanished out of their sight.
Paul writes extensively on the Eucharist and it being part of church mass. Why? Because it’s Christian’s partaking in Christ’s last supper … the new Passover where we eat of his body and drink of his blood and have everlasting life as Christ said “he who eats this bread will live for ever.” Jesus covenant with us.
1 Corinthians 10:2-4 (RSVCE): and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, 3 and all ate the same supernatural food 4 and all drank the same supernatural drink.
1 Corinthians 10:16-22 (RSVCE): 16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? 17 Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread. 18 Consider the people of Israel; are not those who eat the sacrifices partners in the altar? 19 What do I imply then? That food offered to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? 20 No, I imply that what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be partners with demons. 21 You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons. 22 Shall we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than he?
1 Corinthians 11:20 (RSVCE): When you meet together, it is not the Lord’s supper that you eat.
1 Corinthians 11:23-27 (RSVCE): 23 For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” 25 In the same way also the cup, 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.
27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord.
The importance of the Eucharist is scriptural. It was also recognized as being important by the church fathers from the start to today.
It boils down to who God gave authority to. Jesus said in Mathew 16:18-19 that He would build His Church upon the rock (Peter). Jesus changed Simon's name to the Aramaic Cephas which means rock. The Catholic Church was founded by Jesus in the first century AD. Protestantism did not begin until the 16th century. The Catholic Church also has Sacred Tradition along with Sacred Scripture. It was the Catholic Church that decided which books should be included in the Bible near the end of the 4th century. The Church only included books in the Bible that did not conflict with Sacred Tradition. The Catholic Church gave the Bible to the world and absolutely understands what it reveals. As far as Tradition is concerned 1 Cor 11:2 says hold fast to traditions I handed on to you. These Traditions are the teachings of the Church handed down through the centuries. They are not to be confused with human traditions. John 21:25 says not not everything Jesus said is recorded in Scripture. Bible alone is a false doctrine.
@CD McIntyre
Paul in 1 Timothy 3:15 said the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth. This Church is the Catholic Church Jesus founded upon Peter and the apostles. The Church Paul and all the writers of the New Testament belonged to. The Church that gave us the Bible and fully understands what the Bible teaches. Protestantism began in the 16th century. Protestantism does not even agree on salvation and baptism. Some Protestants believe you cannot lose salvation while some believe you can. Some Protestants believe Baptism is necessary for salvation while others do not. Obviously Protestantism is not the pillar and foundation of truth.
@@twoody9760 You believe what you want to believe I will respect your right to do so! I may or may not agree to what you believe.
John 4:14 [14] but whoever drinks of the water that I will give him will never be thirsty again. The water that I will give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life.”
And your point? We Catholics know this, and you received the NT from the Catholic Church. Thanks for quoting what you recieved from the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. Tell me, how did thousands upon thousands of people convert to Christianity before the NT became the written word?
@@c.Ichthys Incorrect, the roman catholic church did give us the NT.
@@c.Ichthys They came through the apostles that preached the gospel of Christ by the Holy Ghost way before roman Catholic Church.
@@timrosen1618 oh yes the Catholic Church did give the world the canon of the 73 books of the Holy bible. You throw out falsehoods and refuse to answer me when I asked you whom do you think gave us the canon of the bible. Your silence reveals you are unlearned.
@@timrosen1618 thank for acknowledging that and I quote you _"the Romans Catholic Church did give us the NT"_
How many times does that bald dude at the front get up and walk around? That was my key takeaway. Just kidding. Great talk! Very informative. And yes, I think I will read your book. :-)
Aside, I believe “loch” is Gaelic not English.
The word eucharist means “thanksgiving” not “sacrifice.”
The word catholic originally meant “orthodox” and then became used to mean “universal.”
In year 445, Emperor Valentinian III, supported Bishop Leo of Rome to become the authority of the western Roman Empire…
Thus, he became the first Bishop of Rome to have authority over the other Bishops, only in the west, not the east.
In October of 451, the Bishop of Constantinople was given authority over the eastern Roman Empire.
In 380, Emperor Theodosius issued an imperial command that made it mandatory to participate in the church/assembly, thus making it the official “religion” of the Roman Empire. This meant that the “faith” became political and people who didn’t have real faith used their political and financial powers to corrupt the true faith…
Why is it called, Roman catholic, because Christianity, the belief in Jesus Christ, the Son of God, was turned into a religion and was corrupted by political power…
Pray to the Heavenly Father, in the name of His Son, for the truth of the Holy Spirit.
Jesus said to pray to The Father, He prayed to The Father, nowhere in Scripture does it teach to pray to anyone other than our Heavenly Father.
Your hat….!
Ugh. Okay:
1.) Most Protestants *believe* the Eucharist is a sacrifice. This is true in Lutheran, Reformed, Anglican, and Methodist traditions. This is even true in many Baptist traditions. We believe it's a sacrifice of praise and Thanksgiving in which we participate in the body and blood of Jesus sacrificed on the cross. That was *never* the issue at the Reformation. Read Vermigli's disputation; it's why the Anglican liturgy (for example) still includes the proclamation of the Eucharist as a sacrifice and no one disputed this. The Reformers denied the *Roman* notion of sacrifice--namely, that the Eucharist accrued merit that covers the temporal debt of punishment. The dispute was over two things: a) whether the eucharist *renews* your Baptist en toto (the Protestant view) or whether it just accrues temporal merit and b) transubstantiation vs the real presence understood as mediated by the Spirit.
2.) Notice that you see *nothing* about the Eucharist accruing temporal merit to our account that covers the temporal debt of punishment. The language is predominantly that of giving thanks.
Let’s grant that all the denominations you listed view the Eucharist as a sacrifice of thanksgiving. Do they all view the Eucharist as making truly present the Body and Blood of Christ in a mysterious way, appearing to be bread and wine, but actually having become Christ’s Body and Blood?
@@michaeldulman5487 "Appearing to be bread or wine" is the one thing we'd all disagree with. But interestingly, *so would the East*--and yet their Eucharist is counted as valid. The East *doesn't* confess that the bread and wine cease to be bread and wine, but that it ceases to *merely* be bread and wine. And so do all of the Protestant denominations I just listed. And indeed, this is Irenaeus's view as well:
"For as the bread, which is produced from the earth, when it receives the invocation of God, is no longer common bread, but the Eucharist, consisting of two realities, earthly and heavenly; so also our bodies, when they receive the Eucharist, are no longer corruptible, having the hope of the resurrection to eternity."
It is no longer *common* bread but consists of *two realities, earthly and heavenly*, and *so also our bodies*.
Cool. Getting to the relevant point then, do the other denominations also believe Christ’s Body and Blood are actually present in some way in the Eucharist?
Anglican, Lutherans, etc do not believe the Eucharist is the Risen Body and Blood of Jesus. They believe that it is "represents" the Body and Blood of Jesus. Anglicans believe in Consubstantiation. Catholics believe in Transubstantiation. Watch on Utube SIGNS FROM GOD SCIENCE TESTS FAITH.
Protestants do NOT believe the Eucharist is a sacrifice. They believe that it is only a symbol. In any case Anglicans only have MINISTERS OF THE GOSPEL. They do not have a Priesthood so they cannot have the real Eucharist. Cranmer and Cromwell could not find a Catholic Bishop to ordain any Priests in the new Protestant "church" so they decided that they would have MINISTERS OF THE GOSPEL. That is what vicars of the C of E are. Article 31 of the 39 Articles of the Church of England states that THE MASSES FOR THE LIVING AND THE DEAD ARE A BLASPHEMOUS FABLE AND A DECEIT. No valid Priesthood. No Eucharist. Anglicans can't have the Mass AND the 39 Articles because they contradict each other.
Eucharist in Greek means thanksgiving, read Ignatius’ full letter with this in mind. He was condemning the non believing in the humanity of Christ, that he literally came in the flesh and shed his blood and rose. And because they denied the humanity of Christ, therefore would not partake in the Eucharist, the thanksgiving, that is represented by the bread and fruit of the vine, that represents the flesh and blood of Jesus the Messiah. Nothing here about transubstantiation. Context.
Read John 6:53-56. That is the true flesh and true blood just as Jesus declared and taught. Read 1 Corinthians 11 as well. People became ill and even died for not discerning the Real Presence, the true Flesh and Blood of Christ. Btw, the Trinity is not mentioned in the bible but is a fact just as Transubstantiation is also a fact.
@@c.Ichthys The Trinity is in the scriptures, you just do t see it because Rome forbids you.
@@c.Ichthys You need the context of why they were ill, what has Paul been teaching on?
@@c.Ichthys Actually study all of John 6 and all of John, you need context. How can the woman at Jacob’s well have eternal life, according to Jesus?
@@timrosen1618 the word Trinity is not mentioned by name. The One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church gave the world the name of Trinity as well as the doctrine. Same with the word Transubstantiation. This truth is from Jesus and defined the word once again by the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. Oh and I have nothing to do with Rome. Learn history: Rome is a city. It is not the Catholic Church.
try the TRUE called -out believers including the APOSTLES ❤
" The Apostles met every day in the Temple, but they broke bread at home. " We too therefore can break bread at home. I f we wish. I personally believe the precious Blood of Christ is necessary as well as the Body in Eucharist, for the ordinary laity as well as the priests. This is to do EXACTLY and PRECISELY what Jesus said. Not just half and half. But the complete commandment. The bread and wine. Why should the priests only drink from the chalice? That does not seem right to me. I had a revelation and a strong conversion about this in 1986, and I have been obsessed with it ever since. The Blood of Jesus heals me.
If you are Catholic then you are aware the the smallest particle of the Sacred Host IS the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ, and there is no need for us to receive the Precious Blood.
The priest must consume both species in order that the Sacrifice be valid..
@@alhilford2345 Hello Al Hilford. Thanks for your reply. I don't go along with what you say or believe in this teaching. It doesn't coincide with what Jesus said in the Gospel that we should take bread and eat, and take wine and drink. I want to do PRECISELY and exactly what Jesus taught to a tee. Why should we do otherwise. ? You can pray for me if you think I am wrong.
Don't know which denomination u are in but in the Catholic Church the Priest and the entire Laity receive the Risen Body and Blood of Jesus. When the chalices are being prepared for the Consecration a drop of water and wine are put into the chalice containing the bread, and a tiny piece of bread is put into the chalice containing the wine. You cannot change the bread into Christ's Body by ur own prayers. It can only happen by the authority of a Catholic Priest who has received his authority to do so at his ordination from the High Priest Jesus. The Priest invites the Holy Spirit to come down on the unleavened bread and the wine and to change it into the Risen Body and Blood of Jesus. Only God can do that change - at the Priest's invitation. No other person on earth has that authority. Only a Catholic Priest.
@@Anon.5216 Hello Ditzy. Thanks for responding. I agree that the priests have authority and that it's the Holy Spirit working in them. I too am a devoted Catholic, I get daily mass online mostly since Covid. But it must be noted that the holy Apostles were not priests but ordinary laymen, fishermen married and the like. And they broke the Holy Bread at their homes. I don't agree with the current practice with the Catholic Church that the Bread Host is the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ. That's a lie surely. Jesus clearly instructed us to take Bread and eat " This is my body " , but ALSO said " Drink this wine, this is my blood, the blood of the new and everlasting covenant.... Do this in memory of me." Well clearly we should follow Jesus's teaching and do PRECISELY what He says. I want to follow Jesus's teachings to a tee. So when I come home after receiving sacred Host, I take a little sip of wine from my own personal chalice and commemorate Jesus and say many prayers and worship Him. Surely I am doing what's right and in accordance with the Gospel. Anyway I am celibate and a virgin like a priest.
Hello Ditzy 52. This is a song from U2 :
" We ate the Bread, we drank the Wine, Everybody havin a good time,
But you, you were talking about the End of the World ! "
What about the jewish point of view. The passover is nothing like the Roman catholic version.
Of course it's not.
Types
Old vs new
The new is always a much greater fulfillment of its ot type.
@@iggyantioch certainly not Mary as the ark. Jesus is the new covenent not the old of the ark or the priesthood and temple
I thought this was about the Eucharist?
Now switching to the predictable lists.
Lol
@@iggyantioch compare the exodus event's, the origin of the passover event. The blood of the lamb protected those households against the angel of death!! When l see the blood l.pass over you. The life is in the blood of the lamb. His sacrifice was for once and it is finished completed. The veil was torn and his sacrifice made the way for those under the blood
@@frederickanderson1860
I see your point.
However you still have to deal with St. Paul's throw down on the Corinthians.
See my previous comment.
The Church teaches this from the earliest times on the most precious Body Blood of our Lord and Savior . Not just a symbol but heavenly food for the Journey. Like the loves and fishes miraculously multiplying to the next day the bread of life discourse no doubt.
First century Jews understood. We on the other hand seem to want to put limits on The Saviors words and power.
The brave Protestant that comes to the fullness of the truth has to choose. The Church or stay in an imperfect relationship with the bride of Christ.
In the year 110. St Ignatius of Antioch said this on his way to the Roman collosium to be fed to the wild animals.
His crime? Practicing Christianity and the holy sacrifice of the Mass.
Here's what the Bishop of Antioch , s disciple of St. John the Apostle, said.
Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God. . . . They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6:2-7:1 [A.D. 110]).
Blessings.
Good night ❤️
Yeah, it didn’t take long for Jimmy Akin to prove that he still thinks like a protestant
Sounds plenty Catholic to me.
I don't trust certain protestant converts being Catholic and having run a print Christian ad agency, LPI of St. Louis.
I was raised a Catholic by my devout Catholic mother (Peace be with her). Then I began to examine the dogma that was forced on me and discovered that it was all made up by other people whom I did not agree with.
So you invented your own religion - congrats!
@@fantasia55 You are absolutely correct, just like all the other protestants and mormons out there making up their own religions..
@@fantasia55 He sure did not say that...smh.
@@johns1834 He is absolutely correct. Catholicism is men making up their own doctrines and religious system.
Protestant is adherence to the Gospel only, Word of God not word of man.
@joycegreer9391 Sola Scriptura is not in the Bible.
I'm sure this guy is very well read and articulate.. but the cowboy hat is so ostentatious.. it's very hard for me to take him seriously.
Don't judge a book by it's cover, but Jimmy is mostly bald and he looks better wearing his hat than without it. Personally, I wish he would trim his beard, but that doesn't distract from how well he explains things.
I think that's a personal problem and not the speaker's problem. And not appropriate for this forum.
It's rather funny. The earliest Father, if you will, Jesus didn't teach the Last supper like the church does. Jesus is the one who established the Last Supper. The church just pulled a good out of the air. Just started teaching transubstantiation because it always changes what God says. How can Jesus teach transubstantiation if he had not yet been on the cross. The eucharist is the biggest hoax ever perpetrated by Satan. Of course using the catholic church as his puppet.
Why put restrictions on the Savior.
His will not ours.
And his will was for us to "do this"
You speak lies from the Devil. Read John 6:53-56. Very clear. Unless you are blinded by Satan and amongst those in John 6:66. No coincidence that number!
@@c.Ichthys great but Jesus had not yet been crucified and risen. So he's teaching transubstantiation before he came back. Only thing is I don't hear Jesus say that only the priest has the power to do the mass. I don't hear Jesus say that that priest has more power than seraphim and cherubim. Or more power than the virgin Mary. I don't hear Jesus tell the priest that he will bow his head in humble obedience to the commands of the priest. Where is that in John 6? And what happens to the left over wafers. Does the priest return Jesus to the spirit form and send him back to heaven? And if the wafers are really the body of Christ, why are the wafers made in some factory by nuns? If Jesus commanded that that you eat AND drink, why doesn't your church allow you to partake of his blood? Teach something and do another. I guess you don't have life. You are obeying Rome and disobeying God. Smart choice.
@@rbnmnt3341 you don't disrespect me with your deleterious attitude: you disrespect and dishonor Jesus, so shame on you. It's obvious you have not read the bible nor comprehend. Whom did Jesus chose specifically and open their minds to understand the scriptures and His teachings? Whom did Jesus say He will build His Church upon (hint: Cephas which Aramaic for Rock and translated into English is Peter). See also John 1:42. Whom did Jesus say that He would send the Advocate to guide and lead them to truth? Hint, wasn't you. Whom did Jesus give the keys to the kingdom of Heaven and promise that the gates of hades shall never prevail against? Whom were the 12 that Jesus *_breathed_* His Godly breath upon and declare "whose sins *_you_* forgive are forgiven and whose sins you retain are retained"? Hint: wasn't the angels or any non-Catholics, nor the laity.
@@rbnmnt3341 part 2: there are no wafers. So don't worry your little head over that. The consecrated Eucharist is the Real Presence just as Jesus declared: His true Flesh and true Blood. Just as St. Paul also warned those whom didn't discern this truth (and even died). Btw, we do partake of both species. Furthermore, Jesus is *fully present* in the Eucharist (Wine and Bread) which become His Body and Blood. You have chosen the mark of the devil's 666 as in John 6:66. I'm not here to convince you. I teach and share the truth. Take it or leave it, just as the Apostles and their successors taught (and teach) Jesus's truths. Did Jesus make the wine and the unleavened bread at Passover? No. Did the Aposltes bake the unleavened bread and trod grapes into wine when observing the Lord's Supper on Sundays? Do nuns make the unleavened bread now? Of course and they follow a specific recipe. Same with wine: it's not your typical on-the-shelf grocery wine.
Malachi and the shutting of the temple doors and the sacking of the temple in 70CE are pure coincidence. Apologetics at its best (or worst).Paul had no concept of a last supper, that was a later invention of the gospel writers.
You speak falsely and it's apparent you do not know the scriptures. St. Paul definitely knew of the Lord's Supper (aka Mass).
Roman Catholicism is so diabolical.
demons hated Catholic church, you hated the Catholic church by your words, so you must be a demon, a house divided can not succeed, you may solidify your hatred but the gates of hell will not prevail against the Church, its in the Gospels!!!
If RC is diabolical to you, then get the hell outta here.
You've got no business here. Go read your own Protestant crap.
Normie take, but we're glad you're here.
God bless you, Al.
@@lyterman who is the saint in your avatar?
Mfjh its all about they're hatred for the Catholic faith
On the cross?
Alive on the cross
Or
Dead on the cross
We as Catholic don't put strict limits on the Savior's perogative.