The Mass

The following presentation is a production of Alpha and Omega Ministries Inc. and is protected by copyright laws of the United States and its international treaties. Copying or distribution of this production without the expressed written permission of Alpha and Omega Ministries Inc. is prohibited.

Good evening everybody. It's great to see the crowd that we have tonight. It keeps getting bigger every year and I am so delighted that there are so many people out there who are interested and concerned about doctrine.

And I know that I am very concerned about doctrine. I go to a church that is very, very concerned about doctrine and the purity of true biblical doctrine. In fact, I was just discussing that with my pastor the other day during one of our head shaving ceremonies and I said, I said, why is it, oh king of the great planet Zetox, that we have such a great deal of concern over the biblical teachings.

But he answered in Zetoxian and you wouldn't understand the translation. Anyway, my name is Chris Ornzen. I am with WMCA radio and I am thrilled to see you folks out here. And before we get underway, there are a lot of people that need to be thanked who made this event possible.

And first I'd like to thank Mike Rotolo of Reformation Press who has just come out with James White's latest book and to make sure that when you go over to the book table over there in the book room, they will be giving a free gift away for every purchase.

I'd also like to thank Calvary Press, Christian Publishing. I'd like to thank Monsignor James Lasanti of St. Thomas the Apostle Roman Catholic Church in West Hempstead. I'd like to thank Arnold Pilsner and the Americans United for the Pope organization in Massapequa, Long Island.

I'd like to thank Pastor Vince Sawyer and Faith Baptist Church of Corona, New York. Faith Reform Baptist Church of Matta-Tuck, New York. The Worldwide Church of God in Amityville, New York. The Orthodox Presbyterian Church of Franklin Square.

The Orthodox Presbyterian Church of Bohemia, Long Island. North Shore Baptist Church of Bayside, Queens. Wantoah Baptist Church of Wantoah, Long Island. Hope Reform Baptist Church of Farmingville, Long Island.

Grace Reform Baptist Church of Merrick and Amityville, Long Island. Bible Baptist Church of Syosset, New York. West Sayville Reform Bible Church. Grace Gospel Church of Patchogue, New York. Timothy Hill Children's Ranch in Riverhead, New York.

The Olive Branch Christian Bookstore, New Hyde Park, Long Island. The Rock Christian Bookhouse, Wantoah, New York. Maria Monte Roman Catholic Gift Shop in Huntington, New York. The Wanderer Roman Catholic Newspaper.

National Catholic Register. Envoy Catholic Magazine. Andy Anderson of WMCA Radio. Hank Hanegraaff of the Christian Research Institute. Tim Kimball of Tim Kimball Live. Bruce Clark and Ken Grimble of WFRS Family Radio.

WFME Family Radio. Good Old Gold. And I want to tell you something about Good Old Gold, one of our newest sponsors, who says there's anything sinful about commercialism. If I didn't have these commercials, ladies and gentlemen, you wouldn't be here.

And these people deserve our thanks and they deserve our patronage. My good friends at Good Old Gold, it's a Christian-owned store in the Busy Bee Mall, Bassett-Pequa Park, Long Island. They are giving away for every purchase today.

Actually, I think they're just giving them away period, right? That's right. No purchase necessary. A coupon for a free jewelry repair up to $10. And also, if you're interested in buying a diamond, even if you don't get it from them, they want you to know the facts about buying a good diamond.

So see Good Old Gold in the room adjoining here during a break or afterwards. Smith Brothers Landscaping is also one of our newest clients. I'm using them. I just bought a house and this summer they're going to be doing the landscaping and the masonry design.

They're not just mowing lawns here. They're architectural landscape designers and they do great work. We have some people in here who can testify to that. They're good Christian people who own this company.

Bethany House Publishers, unique printing of Ronkonkoma who helped us out immensely with all kinds of printed material. Dantona Industries of Wantoa, New York. The Lachman Foundation, publishers of the New American Standard Bible Update.

And last but not least, one of my dearest friends in the world, Dan Badafuco of Badafuco and Associates. Let me tell you something right now. This Calvinist has a warning for all of you. If any of you Roman Catholics or Arminian Protestants seek to do me bodily harm, I've got this number memorized.

And believe me, I am not kidding when I tell you I will sue the Coral House for everything they do. Seriously, Dan Badafuco is a fine Christian man. He's a dear brother in Christ and people need these services when if you're in an accident and somebody's refusing to pay for your damages, you need a lawyer.

So thank God for Dan Badafuco. I'd also like to let you folks know that tomorrow from two to four p .m., I will be hosting the Andy Anderson Show. The people at WMCA Radio have lost their minds. I was able at a company party to pour some Jack Daniels in the punch and before you knew it, I got the job hosting Andy's show.

Tomorrow from two to four p .m., please call in with your questions, whether you're Catholic or Protestant. The discussion is going to be on ecumenicalism. And James White will be on with me and Pastor Larry Carino of Grace Gospel Church and Pastor Rich Jensen of Hope Reform Baptist Church.

And we are going to be talking about ecumenicalism. We're not going to be talking about necessarily debating whether Protestantism and Roman Catholicism, which one is the true faith. We're really going to be discussing if we are passionate about the doctrines that we believe, is ecumenicalism a good thing or a bad thing or how far can you go with it?

A lot of things like that that will be brought up. Also, there is a rumor going around. I'd like to squash it today. There is a rumor going around that I am a double agent for a secret organization of Mormon assassins.

And it started because James White, I got him on this huge speaking floor, which people are really convinced that I'm trying to cause him to die of a coronary arrest. He is speaking at ten churches all over Long Island.

You want to mark your calendars for, in particular, Wednesday, May 12th, he is debating a Muslim, Hamza Abdul-Malik, who may even be here tonight. He's come to a couple of the other debates. He is debating Mr. Malik at Bible Baptist Church in Syosset on the question, does the New Testament teach the deity of Christ?

He is also going to be debating on Saturday, May 15th, at the Medford Avenue Elementary School, a oneness Pentecostal, also called Jesus-only Pentecostalism. They will be debating, does the New Testament teach the Trinity?

And we hope that as many of you can come out to this as possible. I would like to apologize to everybody right up front for something that I'm about to do and say. It's been welling up in me for four years to do this.

And I realize that this is a very solemn and serious event that we've got here. It's a very important event. And I know that people are going to say, Chris, you're a juvenile idiot, but they do anyway.

So this has been welling up inside me. And I ask your apologies beforehand, Mr. White, Mr. St. Janice, and our moderator, but I've just got to do this. It's been welling up for four years. Let's get ready to rumble!

On tonight's card from the Coral House in Baldwin, quarrel at the quarrel for, tonight we've got, defending Catholicism, the people bull, Robert St. Janice, to defend the doctrines of Protestantism. Here he is, James White, a .k .a. Arriva Dirty Roma!

I'm sorry, I had to get that out of my system. I will never do it again, I promise. I'll never do it again. I'll never do it again. I am terribly sorry. You know, my wife said to me the other day, Chris, what are you doing these debates for?

You are living proof that both Roman Catholicism and Protestantism are true. And I said, what are you, kidding me? Where did you get that ecumenical drivel from? You're my wife! What are you talking about?

She said, every single day that I'm with you, you remind me of the Roman Catholic teaching of invincible ignorance and the Calvinistic teaching of total depravity. By the way, just a quick announcement, next year's debate has been changed because of the Y2K situation.

We are going to be having a debate between the cave dwellers and the tree people. Before I move on, though, I'm sorry, I just have to tell you a real quick story about Y2K. Just real quick, real quick, don't worry about it.

This husband says to his wife, you know, this Y2K is serious business. The computers are going to go crazy. They're going to trigger off a nuclear war. Mostly everyone on the planet is going to be destroyed.

But you know what me and you are doing, honey? We're building a bunker beneath the house. We're going to supply it with three years' worth of food and water. Then we're going to sell, right now, we're selling everything we own.

Every stick of furniture, every piece of jewelry, we are selling and we're taking every dime out of the bank and we're putting it all into gold and we're going to wait in the bunker for three years. After the nuclear holocaust is finished, we're going to emerge as the richest people on the planet and the few surviving people that still remain.

We are going to rule over these people and be rulers of the entire world. And his wife said, well, you know something? I don't believe that this Y2K is that serious and I don't believe it's going to start a nuclear holocaust.

He says, stop being such a pessimist. Anyway, it's good to be here. And I'd like to introduce the folks that I have behind me, the reason why we're here, to hear a very serious issue debated. First, I'd like to introduce you to a man named James White.

And James White is a very good friend of mine. He is one of several pastors at Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church in Arizona and is the leading Protestant representative engaging Roman Catholic apologists in debates across the country.

James knows the issues well. In addition to being adjunct professor teaching New Testament Greek for Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary, he is director of Alpha and Omega Ministries, a theologically reformed Christian apologetics organization in Phoenix.

He has written over a dozen books, including Answers to Catholic Claims, The Roman Catholic Controversy, and Mary, Another Redeemer. James also serves as critical consultant for the New American Standard Bible Update version.

You can hear him every Thursday night at 10 o 'clock on the Voice of Sovereign Grace radio broadcast on WMCA. Here he is, Dr. James White. Perhaps some of you have heard of one of Dr. White's bestselling books, Is the Mormon My Brother?

Well, I just learned that he wrote a sequel to it that was actually a biography of me. Originally, I was touched, I was thrilled, I was excited, and that faded quickly into humiliation, depression, and disgust.

He wrote a biography of me, Is that Mormon, Is that Moron My Brother? I've got a copy of it right off the presses here. In fact, the full title is, Is that Moron My Brother? Does Chris Arnzen's existence prove beyond all doubt that God chooses the foolish things to confound the wise?

It's got some pretty interesting accolades in the back cover. Prison Inmate writes, please send me as many copies of Is that Moron My Brother as you can. The pages are so soft and absorbent. Mr. Rogers of Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood writes, if Arnzen was my neighbor, I'd burn his house down till he was sleeping in it.

Dr. J .I. Packer writes, although I have been growing increasingly more ecumenical as I age, I must loudly proclaim with all the boldness I can muster that I want no fellowship with this Arnzen fellow.

In fact, I pray someone drafts a document to ban Arnzen from all Christian fellowship. Just point me where I should sign and I will not delay in doing so. Chuck Colson of Prison Fellowship, he said something that I originally thought was nice and then I started to think about it.

Chuck Colson of Prison Fellowship writes, I hope one day soon Mr. Arnzen begins to receive many, many years of benefit from my ministry with Prison Fellowship. And finally, Robertson Jennis actually endorsed James's book, the only thing that could get me to consider leaving the Roman Catholic Church is if Chris Arnzen joins the Roman Catholic Church.

Now, ladies and gentlemen, the Roman Catholic debater that we have here for the first time, I'm very excited that he is here to debate James. His name is Robertson Jennis and he is the president of Catholic Apologetics International, an apostolate dedicated to teaching and defending the Roman Catholic Church.

CAI produces books, audiotapes, videotapes, and conducts conferences, seminars, and debates. Robert was born into a Catholic family but left the church at the age of 19. After spending the next 18 years in various Protestant churches, he returned to Catholicism in 1992.

His convergent story is included in the bestselling book, Surprised by Truth. Robert was educated at George Washington University where he received his bachelor's degree in religion and Westminster Theological Seminary where he received his master's degree.

He is presently pursuing his doctrinal degree at Maryvale Institute in Birmingham, England. Robert has written a number of books. Among them are Shockwave 2000, Not by Faith Alone, Not by Scripture Alone, How Can I Get to Heaven, the Catholic Apologetic Study Bible, and the most recent to be published by Queenship Publishing this winter, Not by Bread Alone, the Biblical and Historical Evidence for the Eucharist and the Sacrifice of the Mass.

In 1998, Robert was nominated by Envoy Magazine as the Envoy of the Year and Best New Evangelist. He has frequently appeared on Catholic radio and television and his 18-part series, Justification Not by Faith Alone, will begin airing on EWTN in June of 1999.

Here he is, Robert St. Genes. I've been speaking with Robert probably for the last month and beginning. I didn't know how we would click. We didn't really warm up to each other right away, but as the weeks went on and we began to talk and laugh and joke, I really began to appreciate my phone calls with him, although I must admit when he sent me a package recently, I did have my mother-in-law open it.

It just occurred to me, I better call her. I never found out how that... Anyway, over the past three years, we have had the privilege of a friend of mine, Robert Unger, who is a Jewish attorney who was moderating our debates in the past.

Robert couldn't make it tonight. In fact, I don't think he likes me much anymore. One of the reasons I got that impression was I was over his house recently sitting in the living room while he and his wife were in the kitchen.

All of a sudden, his son came out of the kitchen and he says to me, where's the Chinese food? I said, what are you talking about? Where's the Chinese food? He said, yeah, my father said that there was some dumb goy out here.

But in all serious note, Bob Unger is still a very dear friend of mine and I love the guy and he could not make it, but I am thrilled that we have another dear friend of mine who, believe it or not, is a Roman Catholic.

I picked the Roman Catholic moderator. Can you believe it? His name is Frank Russo. He is the New York director of the American Family Association and he is involved in something that I think is one of the arenas where Catholics and Protestants can do things together and that is through the political system, fighting some of the social ills that are in this country.

I do not believe in theological ecumenicalism, but this is one area where I believe that we can legitimately cooperate. I would have probably voted for Pat Buchanan a few years ago if he had won the primaries, even though he's Roman Catholic.

So, I mean, these are ways I believe we can work together and I'd like to introduce you to him now. Here is my dear friend, Dr. Frank Russo. There is one ground rule that I must make right now for everybody.

This is actually a ground rule more for you in the audience than for the debaters. If the Roman Catholics win tonight, you are all forbidden to sing, We Are the Champions. And if the Protestants win tonight, you are all forbidden, the Protestants are forbidden to sing, Another One Bites the Dust.

So, just keep this in mind. Keep this in mind. I would like you all now to very seriously, I know that I like to start things off on a light note and there is a reason for that. I mean, we walk in here with a very serious issue at hand and sometimes I feel like people want to put on brass knuckles and start cracking heads and I think we have to diffuse the atmosphere a little bit.

But I don't want you to ever think for a minute that my humor is in any way belittling or taking less seriously the tremendously important and vital issue that we are talking about tonight. In fact, this is probably the most important debate that we have done in this past four year series because it addresses the very issues of salvation.

And I want to tell you that I am a Protestant who loves Roman Catholics. I'm going to give my benefit of the doubt to Mr. St. Genes. I believe that he is probably here out of a love for Protestants. But the thing is here, one of us in this room, one of the groups in this room, whether you be Protestants or Roman Catholics, one of us is committing a very, very serious heresy.

And we hope that tonight this debate will help reveal the truth of who is in error here. And even as a Protestant, I say many of you Protestants in this room may be in serious error when it comes to the atonement which is going to be touched on in this discussion today on the mass.

So I want you to seriously consider what's being said and before we have the debaters begin, I would like us all to bow in a silent word of prayer. Now I'd like to turn the event over to my friend Frank Russo of the American Family Association.

Thank you very much.

The Debate Format and the Christian Stakes of the Mass

Good evening everyone. I'm just going to take one minute to tell you about the American Family Association. It's a nationwide organization with approximately half a million members which promotes the biblical ethic of decency in American society with primary emphasis on building strong families.

The AFA believes that most of society's basic problems, the drug abuse, the poverty, the violent crime, the educational problems are due not to a lack of public spending but rather a lack of public morals.

Special attention is focused on the effects and influence of the media and academia in particular. The AFA has about 30 statewide chapters. I'm a director here in New York and in New York our membership is roughly 50 -50 between Protestants and Catholics.

The AFA of New York focuses on the production and airing of a weekly public access cable TV program which you may have seen. We've been on now this our fifth year. We're on throughout New York State with access to five million people believe it or not each week.

There's a newsletter we put out locally. It's free for the asking. I brought about 30 or 40 copies out by the front desk. You're welcome to take a copy. If you'd like to get on a mailing list just fill out the the part in the back and send in your name and address.

The National Organization issues a monthly journal to some half million people every month. There's a small charge for that. I thank you for listening to that. We will now begin and the procedure is going to be Robert Sungenis is going to open with 30 minutes.

Jim White will follow with his opening statement for 30 minutes and then each will have a rebuttal of 12 minutes. We'll then take a break of 10 minutes and we'll proceed to cross examinations. Each one will have a chance to cross examine the other.

First one 14 minutes then the other 14 minutes and then they'll repeat that again two 14 minute cross examinations. After that there'll be a closing of seven minutes each. After that we'll go to questions from you folks.

Okay we'll begin again the opening topic or the topic being discussed and debated by these two fine Christian gentlemen. How biblical and ancient is the mass?

And we're going to begin with Robert Sungenis' opening statement. Chris I want to thank you for that opening. It was very nice of you to call me the papal bull. I hope you don't mean that in a double entendre though.

But I am here because I am convicted that the Catholic Church does have the truth on this issue and every other issue that it proclaims. This doctrine is 2 ,000 years old has never changed in the Catholic Church has been taught consistently.

And the Council of Trent and I make no apologies for saying this called my opponent's view a heresy. And one of the reasons why is the testimony of the early fathers which I will start with first. And I will just read a selection of these.

There's hundreds that I could choose from but I'm just I don't have the time to read them all. I will just read what I think is most pertinent tonight. Ambrose 340 to 397 said this, but the bread is bread before the words of the sacrament.

When consecration has been added from bread it becomes the flesh of Christ. The sacraments book four. Ambrose again, for that sacrament which you receive is made what it is by the word of Christ. If the word of Elijah had such power as to bring down fire from heaven, shall not the word of Christ have power to change the nature of the elements?

Aphrates 280 to 345 said this, but he ate of his own body and drank of his own blood. With his own hands the Lord presented his own body to be eaten. And before he was crucified he gave his blood as drink.

Athanasius 295 to 319 said this, but after the great and wonderful prayers have been completed the bread is become the body and the wine the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. Sermon to the newly baptized.

Augustine 354 to 430 said this, what you see is the bread and the chalice. That is what your eyes report to you, but what your faith obliges you to accept is that the bread is the body of Christ and the chalice the blood of Christ.

Augustine again, for Christ was carried in his own hands. When referring to his own body he said, this is my body. For he carried that body in his hands on the Psalms. John Chrysostom 344 to 407 said this, this sacrifice no matter who offers it, be it Peter or Paul, is always the same as that which Christ gave his disciples and which priests now offer.

Homilies on the second epistle of Timothy. The council of Ephesus in 431 said this, we offer the unbloody sacrifice in the churches. Having received his holy flesh and the precious blood of Christ and not as common common flesh do we receive it, but as it truly is the life-giving and very flesh of the word himself, the council of Ephesus.

Cyprian of Carthage said this from 258, the priest who imitates that which Christ did truly takes the place of Christ and offers there in the church a true and perfect sacrifice to God the Father. Cyprian to the Ephesians.

Gregory of Nanzianzus 315 to 367 said this, cease not to pray and plead for me when you draw down the word by your word when in an unbloody cutting you cut the body and blood of the Lord using your voice for a sword.

Letter to Amphicolus. Gregory of Nyssa 335 to 394 said this, he offered himself for us victim and sacrifice and priest as well and lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. When did he do this?

When he made his own body food and his own blood drink for his disciples. Gregory of Nyssa. Ignatius of Antioch said this from around the year 110, they abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the same flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father in his graciousness raised from the dead.

Irenaeus of Lyons 140 to 202 said this, he taught the new sacrifice of the new covenant which Malachi one of the 12 prophets had signified beforehand. He's referring to Malachi chapter 1 verses 10 and 11.

Justin Martyr, another early father from 110 to 165 said this, for we do not receive these things as common bread or common drink but as Jesus Christ our Savior being incarnate by God's word took flesh and blood for our salvation so also we have been taught that the food consecrated by the word of prayer which comes from him from which our flesh and blood are nourished by transformation is the flesh and blood of that incarnate Jesus.

First apology. There's many more I could read but I think you get the point. That's why we Catholics are convinced that the Father's taught this doctrine. There's another quote I would like to read for you.

Christ presents himself before the Father as the perfect oblation on behalf of his people. His work of intercession then is based on his works of atonement. Intercession is not another or different kind of work but is the presentation of the work of the cross before the Father.

By presenting his finished work on Calvary before the Father he assures the application of the benefits of his death to those for whom he intercedes. What father was that? That was no father that was James R. White in The Fatal Flaw pages 134 to 135.

Sounds pretty Catholic to me. Why does Mr. White insist that we must present that Christ must present his work continually to the Father to assure the applications of the benefits of the atonement if as he says on other pages Christ's death on the cross is perfect and complete.

Why must Mr. White do this? Because he has to answer Hebrews 7 verses 24 and 25 and Hebrews 9 23 and 24 two of the very passages upon which Catholicism bases his doctrine of the mass. On another page Mr. White criticizes the Catholic church for representing the blood of Christ to the Father and he writes quote if Christ's death actually saves those for whom it is made then obviously the mass is a contradiction to the work of Christ for there would be no need of a representation of his death since those for whom the atonement is made are perfected thereby.

The Fatal Flaw page 132. It seems that my opponent wants his cake and eat it too. He wants his religion to be able to present the death of to the Father in heaven for his side but he says that if we Catholics represent the death to the Father then we have a contradictory atonement.

On page 123 after quoting Hebrews 2 17 which reads this therefore he had to be made like the brethren in all things in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God to make propitiation for the sins of the people.

My opponent says this about that passage here the writer of Hebrews teaches that Jesus's role as high priest was so that he might make propitiation for the sins of the people. This means that Christ's death has atoned for sin.

There can be no other propitiation if Christ has already atoned for sin. I want to point out two outstanding features of this passage and especially the phrase to make propitiation for the sins of the people is the only time that this phrase of the sin follows propitiation in the New Testament.

This shows a shift from merely propitiating God to propitiation for that which is offensive to God and which must be completely cleansed to procure his complete favor. In the Catholic understanding the act of propitiating sin occurs in the sacrifice of the mass.

Number two the ongoing work of propitiation for the sins of the people is confirmed by the use of the present tense infinitive elaskethai to make propitiation presently and answers to the passage in the Hebrew epistle which specify Christ's ongoing work as priest.

Hebrews 5 verses 1 to 2, Hebrews 7 verse 24 and 25, Hebrews 8 1 to 3, Hebrews 9 23 to 24. Protestant Greek commentators don't know don't know what to do with this passage because they see a present propitiation occurring here but they don't know what to apply it to because they're used to thinking in a past propitiation.

The point my opponent misses is that if Christ's high priestly office is not over then his propitiation to the father is not over for that is what priests do. Christ's death on the cross does not automatically cover my future sins because one cannot propitiate sins that have not yet been committed.

When we repent of our sins we see how Christ will propitiate our future sins in such passages as Hebrews 9 22 to 24 which reads in fact the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.

It was necessary then for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these sacrifices but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. For Christ did not enter a man-made sanctuary that was only a copy of the true one he entered heaven itself now to appear for us in God's presence.

Notice several things in these passages first the blood of the old covenant sacrifices was required to make everything ceremonially clean and that shedding of blood and sprinkling of it on the people cleansed them and forgave their sins.

Thus it is no surprise to read in Leviticus 5 verses 9 and 10 this the priest is to sprinkle some of the blood of the sin offering against the side of the altar the priest shall then offer the other as a burnt offering in the prescribed way and make atonement for him for sin he has committed and he will be forgiven.

Their forgiveness though real was temporary and incomplete it like every other old covenant sacrifice depended on the ultimate sacrifice of Christ even on the cross for its temporary effectiveness. Second in the words with better sacrifices than these Paul who we understand as the writer of Hebrews uses the plural word sacrifices both for the old covenant animal sacrifices and of the new covenant sacrifices concerning Christ.

Third Christ's entrance into the heavenly sanctuary allows him to quote now appear for us in God's presence. Now here are the important connections between these three facts I just mentioned. First the text refers to the shedding of blood in both the old and new covenant but in doing so refers to Christ's work in heaven as that which incorporates the shedding of blood.

The implication is that in heaven there is a present shedding of blood or a presenting of the shed blood. Second the text specifies the plural sacrifices of Christ in heaven not a sacrifice. Sacrifices that allow him to now appear for us in God's presence hence there are sacrifices being continually presented to God by Christ in heaven.

This is the essence of the Catholic mass. Christ sheds his blood on the altar under the appearances of bread and wine and it's presented along with us his body to the father in heaven to appease him for our sins and to seek effectual graces.

Now after quoting Hebrews 8 verses 10 to 14 my opponent says but Christ well let me tell you what the verse says first it talks about the offering of his sacrifice and then sitting down at the right hand of God and on page 179 of the Roman Catholic controversy my opponent says this about that passage.

But Christ's sacrifice accomplishes its goal he does not stand repeatedly offering his work his work of atonement is completed instead he is seated his work is finished the one offering needed to perfect for all time.

There is no need for repetition or for representation. First if there is no need for representation we would ask again why Mr. White insisted in his previous book that quote the presentation of the work of the cross before the father by presenting his finished work on Calvary before the father he assures the application of the benefits of his death to those for whom he intercedes unquote.

And we would ask why he doesn't mention his own version of quote presentation to the father in his second book since it is such an important issue to the discussion. But we would also ask why Mr. White never quotes the last half of Hebrews 8 verses 1 to 2 the verse says this.

We do have such a high priest who sat down at the right hand of the throne of majesty in heaven and who serves in the sanctuary the true tabernacle. But Mr. White leaves out that part in his book and never mentions it.

It is clear from this passage that Christ does not merely take his seat at the right hand of God rather he continually serves as a priest in the most holy place and does the things that priests do which is according to Hebrews 5 .1 offer gifts and sacrifices for sins.

Likewise Hebrews 7 .24 says that Christ has a permanent priesthood for his priesthood did not stop when his life on earth was over and it will not stop until God makes it stop. Some may object however that the following verses in Hebrews 9 .25 to 27 do not support such an interpretation of Hebrews 9 .22 to 24 these verses read thus.

Nor did he enter heaven to offer himself again and again the way the high priest enters the most holy place every year with blood that is not his own. Then Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world.

But now he has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself. Opponents would claim that Christ does not have to keep appearing before God in order to offer sacrifice but that he offered a sacrifice once for all on the cross.

This however is a misreading of the text. The text does not say that Christ will not have to represent his sacrifice before God. It says that Christ's offering is not like the priest's offering of the old covenant who had to go in and out of the most holy place every year.

When Christ enters the most holy place he is there to stay. He does not have to go in and out which will require his suffering and death each time he entered he enters once never to leave again while in the most holy place however he continues his office of high priest.

Or as Hebrews 8 verse 2 says. Christ is he who serves in the sanctuary. And as Hebrews 9 24 says appears for us in the presence of God since he no longer dies. It is his resurrected body that appears on the altar and is consumed by his people which gives greater meaning to Paul's words in Romans 4 25 quote.

He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification. It is Christ's work of intercession which can now be accomplished because he is raised to life that completes our justification through his permanent priesthood.

On page 124 of the fatal flaw Mr. White wrote. Quote. John wrote. And if anyone sins we have an advocate with the father Jesus Christ the righteous. And he himself is a propitiation for our sins not for ours only but for the sins of the whole world.

Unquote. Jesus Christ is a propitiation for the sins. There is no other. Mr. White finishes his quote. What Mr. White misses here is that John is saying that if we should fall into sin Christ is presently the propitiation for that sin not merely a past propitiation.

In John 2. First John 2 verse 2 the propitiation is understood understood in terms of his present propitiatory advocacy with the father not just a past propitiation on the cross it is not propitiation which is now over and now there is only intercession left.

The intercession is the propitiation and it is past present and future. The negative of John's verse is that when a Christian falls into sin and does not seek the advocacy of Christ before the father and thus the propitiation is not applied to him although it may have been applied to previous sins he had committed.

And that's why first John 1 8 9 says. If we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgive them if we confess. But the reason Mr. White would not be inclined to apply a present propitiation is that he doesn't think we need one.

Mr. White believes that Christ only died for a select few people paid for all their past present and future sins by his death on the cross a decision in which they had no part nor can they leave even if they tried.

This is ironic because I just quoted his citing of first John 2 verse 1 in which John said he is the propitiation for the sense of the whole world. But how can Mr. White believe this if as he says in his book Christ only died for those he chose to die for and the rest of the human race he did not die for.