R
Robintrinket
Guest
As the Church, with the authority given to it by God has revealed to us.
- Status
R
Robintrinket
Guest
If doctrine taught by the Catholic Church was true in the Middle Ages, it is still true now. If it is false today, then it always was false. If that is the case, then Christ hasn’t kept His promise to protect His Chruch from teaching error.
Truths are set in stone. The human soul has not changed since the Middle Ages.
On a thread in the Scripture forum you said condescending things about converts to Catholicism. It would seem to me *you *are the one who does not accept the Church’s authority.
I
itinerant1
Guest
One problem you have with your interpretation is that it does not account for Jesus speaking of “today.” The Resurrection, however, is at the end of time, and not “today” during 33 A.D, when Christ was crucified with the two thieves. So, you still need address the plain sense of the text, which conveys an immanence.
The Jews were about the least speculative of peoples, while the Greeks were the most speculative. This is why there are various theories of soul coming from Greek philosophers while the Jews retained a simpler view. The extreme dualism of Plato is not the best theory to come out of Greek speculation.
S
StAnastasia
Guest
Itinerant1, that would be true only if you think of eternity as sort of an infinite extension of time, which is isn’t. Eternity stands completely outside of time, as I understand it from my philosophy colleagues. So when Jesus and the repentant thief both died on Good Friday afternoon, they both passed directly into eternity and into the life of the resurrection. (For anyone who has died it is already eternity; they don’t have to wait around for the ten or a hundred billino years it will take the univere to run down to its entropic heat death!).
For this reason, it makes sense why Jesus was raised by God as a whole person, not just a disembodied soul. The good thief would be raised at the same time as a whole person in the new creation, and there was no need for him to put in an appearance to the disciples as Jesus did. The fact that Jesus appeared through locked doors testifies to his other-worldly character; the fact that he had a wound in his side and that he ate fish in John 21:10-12 testifies to his non-soul-only, but whole person eschatological character.
StAnastasia
I
itinerant1
Guest
Proof for the spirituality or immortality of the soul would not be a strictly scientific proof. By “scientific” I mean the natural sciences. Science studies the quantitative aspects of matter and energy. The kind of knowledge produced by the “special experience” of science is what we call perinoetic. Thus science, when it remains within its proper scope and competence, observing a methodological naturalism, does not address non-physical reality.
Philosophy, on the other hand investigates the determinations of being (essence, existence, substantial matter and form, act and potency, etc.) This type of knowledge we call dianoetic. It belongs to philosophy to demonstrate the nature of the soul.
This statement begs the question. You have defined Homo sapiens as merely another mammal. However, the question remains as to whether the mind of *Homo sapiens *differs in “degree” only from other mammals, as Darwin tried to prove in his Descent of Man, or whether the evidence supports a difference that is a radical difference in kind…
The particular point in time of hominisation is not the kind of event that will manifest itself in physical evidence. For example, What archeological evidence could exist to indicate when a species first has a conscious awareness of and relationship with its Creator?
I am not sure what you mean. Whatever your meaning, I will point out that Homo sapiens may not be the first creature with a rational soul. The defining characteristic to look for is genuine abstract thinking (universal concepts). Do artifacts, i.e. tools of an earlier species suggest the ability to think abstractly?
Philosophical concepts are not necessarily tied to a specific state of the natural sciences. For example, Aristotle’s philosophical demonstrations for the existence of an Unmover Mover, which we call God, is not tied to his mistaken physics or astronomy. Likewise, with the application of the hyle-morphic theory to organisms.
Philosophy is not revolutionary as is science. This is why we can speak of a philosophia perennis. When a philosophical truth is attained, it is added to the heritage or patrimony of philosophical knowledge and remains true regardless of the advances or radical changes in scientific understanding.
J
JReducation
Guest
Of course theology can be locked. In fact, all of dogmatic theology is locked. For example, there is no further argument on whether or not Mary was conceived without Original Sin. You can explain the Immaculate Conception using contemporary language to make it easier for people to understand, but you cannot change the teaching. That is a locked theological point.
Another example is the Hypostatic Union. It is no longer up for argument whether or not human nature and Divine nature in Jesus were blended. The Church established once and for all, that the two natures co-exist in the one person without blending, Each nature is full, complete and independent of the other. This model is locked by the Catholic Church, the Orthodox and the Protestants. It is not open for debate. The only thing that can be done is to explain what the terms mean. That’s all that theology can do here.
Like these two examples, there are many theological points and models that the Church locks, meaning that she has decided that it will never change.
I’ll give you another example that has nothing to do with dogma. When our Father Francis wrote our rule, he wrote that it must never be changed, discarded or edited and that all Franciscans who followed were bound to obey the rule as he commanded. To ensure that this rule was not changed he asked Pope Honorius III to place a Papal Bull on it. That papal action locked the rule (which is a theologicalo document) to this day. No one can delete it, add to it or discard it without committing grave sin. It has been presented to four popes all who have said that it cannot be touched, but that Franciscans are bound, under pain of grave sin to obey Francis and his rule. This is 800 years later.
When the Church accepted that animals had material souls and only humans have imortal souls, she locked this theological point. It can be explained in new words so that it can be understood by the people of the time. But the foundation, material soul and imortal soul, cannot be changed.
Theology is to be in dialogue with culture to enrich culture and to influence culture according to the faith, not to be influenced by culture. This has been repeated by John Paul II and Benedict XVI more than once. There are theological questions on which the Church not taken any position. Those are open for discussion and the paradigms can change.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
I
itinerant1
Guest
Jesus body was resurrected as the type of our resurrection. The Gospels only speak of Jesus body no longer being in the tomb, and only of Jesus being resurrected so far.
While eternity is indeed above time, the N.T. definitely points to a sequence of events in time often referred to as the End Times. The end times includes such events as the coming of the Anti-Christ, the Parousia, the final Conflagration, the General Resurrection, Final Judgment, the transformation or renewing of the cosmos, etc.
While the events above are mentioned in the New Testament, what is not supported is your claim that there is a resurrection of the saved prior to the end of the world or the end of time. Hence, your hypothesis does not fit with end times chronology.
R
Robintrinket
Guest
:tsktsk:We are not supposed to talk about that subject.
R
Robintrinket
Guest
You do not have the Holy Spirit protecting you from teaching error as the Catholic Church does.
S
StAnastasia
Guest
(1) You have to understand the bigger picture. I did not say “there is a resurrection of the saved prior to the end of the world or the end of time.” I said that eternity is outside of time, so that the resurrection of Jesus and of everyone else “takes place” (if you will) outside of time.
(2) The “end times” items to which you refer are symbolic. Humanity will go extinct with other macro-scale plant and animal in another half billion years when the increasing solar winds of the swelling sun first strips away the atmosphere and then boils the oceans. Life on earth will continue in bacterial form for another few billion years until either the red giant sun swallows up the earth, or the planet cools to a frozen balls when the sun collapses to the state of a brown dwarf.
(3) Cosmologists see no evidence that the universe will re-collapse into a reverse Big Bang; indeed, the expansion of the universe appears to be accelerating, leading to its eventual entropic heat death tens of billions of years from now.
It seems that we must either accept what astronomers and cosmologists tell us and jettison a literal interpretation of biblical eschatology, or insist on a literalist eschatology and junk modern science. Of course, we could always choose both to accept science and to interpret eschatology in a way that distinguishes between the temporal and the eternal.
StAnastasia
S
StAnastasia
Guest
Indeed, I did not mention the deplorable word.
S
StAnastasia
Guest
“Locked in” based on what evidence other than “because we said so”? What is the actual supporting evidence that all Homo sapiens and only Homo sapiens have immortal souls? Can you offer any?
A
armalanon
Guest
I am not surprised to see that you are confused as heck they were far from the truth on more then one subject in the middle ages .I must say that many are finding it very difficult to accept the answer is because they are experiencing God every day in these forms God help us from living in that time of the middle ages they even burned people because they saw the truth. so with me included we have eyes to see that God is loving us even from these forms God is love and he loves you from forms and places that many can’t accept because they cant see Iam speakink about dogs I have 3 and if they have material soul but they also have divine love sometimes you won’t even find it in humans and that love can’t die because its Divine they have material soul that dies with them and you can say they have Divine love that lives with them .
A
armalanon
Guest
I am not surprised to see that you are confused as heck they were far from the truth on more then one subject in the middle ages .I must say that many are finding it very difficult to accept the answer is because they are experiencing God every day in these forms God help us from living in that time of the middle ages they even burned people because they saw the truth. so with me included we have eyes to see that God is loving us even from these forms God is love and he loves you from forms and places that many can’t accept because they cant see Iam speakink about dogs I have 3 and if they have material soul but they also have divine love sometimes you won’t even find it in humans and that love can’t die because its Divine they have material soul that dies with them and you can say they have Divine love that lives with them .
A
armalanon
Guest
For all those that need to rest their hearts on (Do animals have souls? )I suggest they visit this site franciscansoflife.org/indek.html there is a prayer among others for anImals by St Francis of Assisi the respect and love we have to give to this creation where one day everything is going to be restored back as it was to its perfection , they have material souls that is going to die with them but its plain to see that every thing and every thing means even animals is going to be restored back to perfection that means everlasting life for every single ,small, big, insignificant for us or significant is going to wake up back to that eternal life .No one can limit God he gave humans a soul he gave us the will to choose but it doesn’t mean that because animals have material souls which dies with them God in his greatness didn’t think of something else to bring them back to life if he brought them to life here on this earth and he is their creator what makes us doubt that he can’t do do the same in his Kingdom because if we open more on this subject I have a question this material soul what gave her life the materia or God because if you answer me the materia then God is not her creator and thats what we are implying if we say that animals won’t wake up again because the one that gave them life here is going to give them life on the other side
S
StAnastasia
Guest
Armalanon – all I get is a “page not found” error. Are you sure about this site?
K
kimmielittle
Guest
J
JReducation
Guest
There is no evidence. The Church, as you know, has the authority to lock many points of faith and morals on her own authority. In other words, “because she says so.” You’re a Catholic. You know this. How many dogmas do we believe that have absolutely no proof and cannot be proven? The answer is hundreds.
What evidence do we have for the following:
- God created the universe
- Jesus has two natures
- Mary was conceived without sin on her soul
- The soul is created at the same time as the body
- Bread and wine become the body and blood of Jesus
- When a bishop places his hands on the candidate for ordination to the diaconate, priesthood or bishop, his soul is ontologically changed
- After a male religious makes solemn vows, God will not unite him in marriage to anyone, no matter who witnesses the marriage, even a pope. It can only be valid when the Church says that the solemn vows are not present.
- Mary is physically in heaven
- Jesus rose from the dead
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
J
JReducation
Guest
R
RosaryFan
Guest
No, they most certainly do not. Only people have souls. That’s precisely what sets us apart from animals.
- Status