Riddle me this one, you Zwinglian Gnostic masquerading as a minister of Christ: If the New Covenant--the full revelation of God's love to all people, including the Gentiles--is in effect, why would it be less sacrificial than the Old? It makes no sense. You're gonna get bent out of shape about some candles and incense? Really? Moses would be furious. You just called him a Gnostic in your rush to give Jesus all the glory. Did Moses sin against God by doing what the LORD himself said? Stop being a moron, and do some covenant theology, for pete's sake. There's plenty new about the New Covenant, but here's a hint: it isn't what you think. Offer your bodies as living sacrifices. Pretty sure I read that...IN THE NEW COVENANT!
So what you're saying is, the glory of the New Covenant--greater than that of Moses--culminates in no actual sacrifice, no priests, and ugly churches with nothing in them? You're so bad off, I almost want to send you to Dr. Luther to get straightened out.
So what you're saying is, the glory of the New Covenant--greater than that of Moses--culminates in no actual sacrifice, no priests, and ugly churches with nothing in them? You're so bad off, I almost want to send you to Dr. Luther to get straightened out.
Comments
As to the other, though, there's no sense making an argument when there is an easy answer: Hebrews deals quiet nicely with who offers sacrifices and who is the sacrifice in the New Covenant. So, you can't really argue that any Protestants reject "sacrifices;" we do reject the Mass as a valid sacrifice.
(My dear friends, the Eastern Orthodox, deal with this nicely by their strong emphasize on the non-temporal nature of the one sacrifice which is manifested in the Divine Liturgy, incidentally.)
Mother Church believes and teaches that it is "non-temporal" in that same sense meant by the East. So this isn't a good objection.