Commentary on Revelation- through the centuries

  • Thread starter Thread starter COPLAND_3
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

COPLAND_3

Guest
I have just finished up a commentary on Revelation that is made up of quotes from Catholic writers and commentators from nearly every century. I still have some finishing touches such as cross references to the Catechism, but all the footnotes are pretty well done. Here is the link ocsb.wetpaint.com/page/Revelation
 
Dear Copland3,

I have once again accepted your invitation to visit your website. I was once again disturbed that you have not corrected your error in the commentary there on Genesis 3:22 in which you assert that God kicked Adam and Eve out of the Garden of Eden to prevent them from eating once AGAIN from the Tree of Life.

It is generally understood by most Christians that the Tree of Knowledge and the Tree of Life are two distinctly different trees, and that Adam and Eve only ate of the Tree of Knowledge, but never of the Tree of Life.

Do you dispute this common scriptural knowledge?

Are you inadvertently misquoting Thomas Aquinas?

Does the RCC somehow agree with your unusual belief?

Respectfully,

jomoco
 
jomoco said:
Dear Copland3,

I have once again accepted your invitation to visit your website. I was once again disturbed that you have not corrected your error in the commentary there on Genesis 3:22 in which you assert that God kicked Adam and Eve out of the Garden of Eden to prevent them from eating once AGAIN from the Tree of Life.

It is generally understood by most Christians that the Tree of Knowledge and the Tree of Life are two distinctly different trees, and that Adam and Eve only ate of the Tree of Knowledge, but never of the Tree of Life.

Do you dispute this common scriptural knowledge?

Are you inadvertently misquoting Thomas Aquinas?

Does the RCC somehow agree with your unusual belief?

Respectfully,

jomoco
Click to expand...
The error that jomoco notes in Copland3’s blog appears to be valid, as shown in Sacred Scripture as shown in the New American Bible.

In Genesis 2:9, the text reads: “Out of the ground the LORD God made various trees grow that were delightful to look at and good for food, with the tree of life in the middle of the garden and the tree of the knowledge of good and bad.”

In Genesis 2:16-17, it says, " The LORD God gave man this order: “You are free to eat from any of the trees of the garden except the tree of knowledge of good and bad. From that tree you shall not eat; the moment you eat from it you are surely doomed to die.”

In Genesis 3:1-5, the text shows:
"Now the serpent was the most cunning of all the animals that the LORD God had made. The serpent asked the woman, “Did God really tell you not to eat from any of the trees in the garden?”
The woman answered the serpent: “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden; it is only about the fruit of the tree in the middle of the garden that God said, ‘You shall not eat it or even touch it, lest you die.’”
But the serpent said to the woman: “You certainly will not die!
No, God knows well that the moment you eat of it your eyes will be opened and you will be like gods who know what is good and what is bad.”

So the tree in the middle of the garden is the Tree of Life. The location of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Bad is not clear in Scripture. It may have been also in the middle of the garden, or not.

Scripture shows that Eve was confused. God told Adam (Eve was not made yet) not to eat from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Bad (Genesis 2:16). Eve tells the serpent incorrectly that God told them not to eat from the middle of the garden (the confirmed location of The Tree of Life but a probable location of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Bad). The serpent took advantage of Eve’s confusion, and Eve and Adam ate from the forbidden Tree of Knowledge of Good and Bad.

I would support jomoco’s point of clarification, since we can’t know for sure that the Tree of Knowledge was in the middle of the garden, but we know that God only said that the Tree of Knowledge was the forbidden tree.

And, jomoco, it would be charitable of you in not naming the Catholic Church as the “RCC.” Not all Catholics are in the Roman (Latin or Western) rite of liturgy, any more than all Christians are “evangelical”, “right-wing”, or some other over-classification or stereotype. We are simply “The Catholic Church.”
 
I have answered this at least two times before! jomoco, did you ever read my responses that I gave before, you never did respond. jomoco’s point before was that I never did point out the distinctions between the two trees, in which I responded that I gave the distinctions but in the chapter and verse (2:9) where commentary on it actually calls for a distinction to be made.

I would appreciate if you would **respond to my responses first **instead of saying the same thing everytime, instead of derailing a thread like this one. So let me AGAIN quote the footnote I have for Gen 2:9 to clear up your hang-up that you continue to have.
2:9 The tree of life is a material tree, and so called because its fruit was endowed with a life-preserving power. Yet it had a spiritual signification; as the rock in the desert was of a material nature, and yet signified Christ. In like manner the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was a material tree, so called in view of future events; because, after eating of it, man was to learn, by experience of the consequent punishment, the difference between the good of obedience and the evil of rebellion. It may also be said to signify spiritually the free-will. (St. Thomas Aquinas)
Click to expand...
Now verse 3:22 does not mention both trees, only the tree of life. The footnote for 3:22 that I provide is St. Thomas’ explanation that concerns what the tree of life did, saying
3:22 God prevents Adam from eating again of the tree of life in order that he may not live forever. Eating of the tree of life warded off corruption of the body. (St. Thomas Aquinas)
Click to expand...
 
Dear Copland3,

Please provide your source for Thomas Aquinas stating that Adam and Eve ever ate of the Tree of life.

Respectfully,

jomoco
 
Thank you Copland3,

My reasons for bringing this up in this thread are as follows:

If you are capable of such a fundamental error in Genesis(Alpha), and then attributing YOUR error to a dead man(Thomas Aquinas) who cannot defend himself, what would keep you from making similar errors in Revelations?(Omega)

I read your source materials, and concluded that your error is both fundamental, and your own.

I respectfully ask you to either admit and correct your error, or provide credible source materials in which Thomas Aquinas or any other good Catholic, ever states that Adam or Eve ate from the Tree of Life.

Sincerely,

jomoco
 
jomoco said:
Thank you Copland3,

My reasons for bringing this up in this thread are as follows:

If you are capable of such a fundamental error in Genesis(Alpha), and then attributing YOUR error to a dead man(Thomas Aquinas) who cannot defend himself, what would keep you from making similar errors in Revelations?(Omega)

I read your source materials, and concluded that your error is both fundamental, and your own.

I respectfully ask you to either admit and correct your error, or provide credible source materials in which Thomas Aquinas or any other good Catholic, ever states that Adam or Eve ate from the Tree of Life.

Sincerely,

jomoco
Click to expand...
I had you pegged to be a troll from the beginning because you never once responded to any of my responses, you just keep repeating yourself that I am in error. I gave you direct links to the direct quotes that I used, and you either did not look at them, or you have no idea what to do with them. I think you are on this site to derail threads.

Questions for you. Did you ever look at those links I gave? Did you not see that they are word for word?
 
Dear Copland3,

Your error is in attributing an unknown suppositious theory thought to be of Augustinian origins to Thomas Aquinas’ commentary on it.

Your own source, newadvent.org/summa/1102.htm clearly states Aquinas’ own belief that the Tree of Knowledge is quite distinct and different from the Tree of Life. See reply to objection 4 in his first commentary.

Further, the Bishop of the Catholic Church in San Diego and I have discussed this exact topic together in depth and in person, and we both agree that these two trees of the OT are exactly as portrayed in scripture, distinctly different and separate from each other.

In fact, you my friend are the only Christian I’ve ever heard assert that Adam and Eve ever ate from the Tree of Life rather than the Tree of Knowledge.

Your friend still,

jomoco
 
jomoco said:
Dear Copland3,

Your error is in attributing an unknown suppositious theory thought to be of Augustinian origins to Thomas Aquinas’ commentary on it.

Your own source, newadvent.org/summa/1102.htm clearly states Aquinas’ own belief that the Tree of Knowledge is quite distinct and different from the Tree of Life.

Further, the Bishop of the Catholic Church in San Diego and I have discussed this exact topic together in depth and in person, and we both agree that these two trees of the OT are exactly as portrayed in scripture, distinctly different and separate from each other.

In fact, you my friend are the only Christian I’ve ever heard assert that Adam and Eve ever ate from the Tree of Life rather than the Tree of Knowledge.

Your friend still,

jomoco
Click to expand...
Again, you are in error by saying that my sources say that there is no distinction between the tree of Life and the tree of Knowledge of good and evil. HAVE YOU NOT READ the quotes I have given numerous times? The footnote on 2:9 gives the distinction!!! Please do me a favor and read it, this is getting rediculous! NOWHERE does any of my footnotes suggest that both trees are the same, and if you can point out where it even hints that then I would be thrilled to give a more clear footnote. Half the footnote comes from St. Ephrem (which I did forget to put his name at the end of the quote which made it look like that part came from Thomas, though I did correct).

And yes, the quote I gave for 3:22 from Aquinas is where he drew from Ps. Augustine’s questions on the Old Testament, in which I don’t have in order to verify, but I took the quote from Aquinas since he quoted it to make the point that the tree of life warded off corruption of the body.
 
jomoco said:
In fact, you my friend are the only Christian I’ve ever heard assert that Adam and Eve ever ate from the Tree of Life rather than the Tree of Knowledge.
Click to expand...
How can you possibly say this? His comments here should tell you that he believes no such thing. To everyone but you this is abundantly clear. It would be okay for you to believe that the author who themselves said that (St. Ephrem) believed it, but not COPLAND3.
 
My friend,

Surely you realise that your own website’s commentary on Genesis 3:22 stating that God booted Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden to prevent them from eating AGAIN from the Tree of Life is in direct opposition to OT scripture in an extremely fundamental sense?

Then attributing YOUR error to Thomas Aquinas, whom I hold in high regard in that his 13th century belief that science and Christianity can ultimately be reconciled, just happens to match my own 21st century belief in the same, kind of disturbed me a wee bit. Enough so that I felt obligated to point your error out for both Aquinas’ sake and other good Christians who do not share your unusual interpretation of Genesis 3:22.

Your friend in Christ,

jomoco
 
jomoco said:
My friend,

Surely you realise that your own website’s commentary on Genesis 3:22 stating that God booted Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden to prevent them from eating AGAIN from the Tree of Life is in direct opposition to OT scripture in an extremely fundamental sense?

Then attributing YOUR error to Thomas Aquinas, whom I hold in high regard in that his 13th century belief that science and Christianity can ultimately be reconciled, just happens to match my own 21st century belief in the same, kind of disturbed me a wee bit. Enough so that I felt obligated to point your error out for both Aquinas’ sake and other good Christians who do not share your unusual interpretation of Genesis 3:22.

Your friend in Christ,

jomoco
Click to expand...
Jomoco, you really need to go back and look at the commentary. You are sadly mistaken. That line is not attributed to St. Thomas Aquinas but to St. Ephrem: ocsb.wetpaint.com/page/Genesis+3. COPLAND 3 pointed this out earlier, he said he had accidentally left out the reference to St. Ephrem. Now you literally have no excuse to keep at this.
 
Thank you very much for the correction Copland3.

Respectfully,

jomoco
 
The Catechism Cross-References are now a part of the Revelation commentary, they are all linked to the spot in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top