Enoch and Elijah question

[Benadam]

I too see God working within the order He established; but there is a clear difference between what they are and what has been revealed:

 

[jcrichton]

You’ll forgive me if I doubt someone had a private vision from Mary. Especially when “Mary” tries to interpret Scripture to people.

Though not a Marianite (or whatever it is called), how do you know that? We have the writings of what someone claimed was told by Mary… does that automatically translates to what Mary said, understood or was revealed to her?

But no, Enoch and Elijah are they who are to come. They are the Two Witnesses. This is a very old interpretation from the Church Fathers, and I think it has merit to it. Hippolytus and Tertullian are two that did.

Just my two coppers

Exactly my point. You dismiss what is claimed as a revelation from Mary while asserting what others thought (though they are Church Fathers), could be the identity of the two witnesses.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Crimson_Seraph]

Though not a Marianite (or whatever it is called), how do you know that? We have the writings of what someone claimed was told by Mary… does that automatically translates to what Mary said, understood or was revealed to her?

Exactly my point. You dismiss what is claimed as a revelation from Mary while asserting what others thought (though they are Church Fathers), could be the identity of the two witnesses.

Maran atha!

Angel

I see nothing wrong with this. I can claim Mary spoke to me too and said that she didn’t want people to pray to her, but would you honestly believe me? I rather doubt it.
Just because someone claims Mary spoke to them doesn’t mean you should automatically believe what they say without testing them and holding fast that which is good.

Two, I like to weigh the interpretations of Scripture by various commentators. Tertullian and Hippolytus are just that to me, commentators who’s interpretation of this passage of Scripture makes sense to me, and reflects an older Jewish belief of Elijah coming before the Day of the Lord, which was partially fulfilled in John the Baptist, but the Day of the Lord wasn’t at that time.

Just my two coppers.

 

[jcrichton]

I see nothing wrong with this. I can claim Mary spoke to me too and said that she didn’t want people to pray to her, but would you honestly believe me? I rather doubt it.
Just because someone claims Mary spoke to them doesn’t mean you should automatically believe what they say without testing them and holding fast that which is good.

I may have misread your intent… but since you placed Mary in quotations and expressed that she was interpreting Scriptures I could only surmise that you have a little problem with Mary…

Two, I like to weigh the interpretations of Scripture by various commentators. Tertullian and Hippolytus are just that to me, commentators who’s interpretation of this passage of Scripture makes sense to me, and reflects an older Jewish belief of Elijah coming before the Day of the Lord, which was partially fulfilled in John the Baptist, but the Day of the Lord wasn’t at that time.

Just my two coppers.

…and that is their interpretation of Scripture… yet, you presented this as fact.

…as for the Day of the Lord… unless you will fault Jesus, you must accept that the Day of the Lord came and went!

…that Judgment will follow… well that’s obvious since the Lamb of God will return as the Lion of Israel!

…Jewish belief… take it for what it is: caught in a time bubble: deny Jesus as the Messiah, the world is OK! But that bubble will burst the second it is realized that all the Messianic prophecies have been fulfilled by Christ Jesus.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Crimson_Seraph]

I may have misread your intent… but since you placed Mary in quotations and expressed that she was interpreting Scriptures I could only surmise that you have a little problem with Mary…

…and that is their interpretation of Scripture… yet, you presented this as fact.

…as for the Day of the Lord… unless you will fault Jesus, you must accept that the Day of the Lord came and went!

…that Judgment will follow… well that’s obvious since the Lamb of God will return as the Lion of Israel!

…Jewish belief… take it for what it is: caught in a time bubble: deny Jesus as the Messiah, the world is OK! But that bubble will burst the second it is realized that all the Messianic prophecies have been fulfilled by Christ Jesus.

Maran atha!

Angel

I have no problem with Mary, just some people’s representations of her. Her appearing in dreams and giving out special revelations is one of them.

I don’t doubt the Lord, but the Day of the Lord has not come yet because it is clear from the Old Testament that it has not. As for your claim that all Messianic prophecies being already fulfilled, I have to strongly disagree with you on that. There are a number of them that are yet to be fulfilled, but which shall be fulfilled in the future.

Are you a Praeterist?

 

[Chaldean_Rite]

Since Jesus’ human nature is forever united to his divine nature, the Cross therefore is outside of time. Hence, it extends backwards and forwards from our perspective. In fact, the only reason the just of old could do anything was because of this.

 

[severntofall]

With God ALL things are possible or perhaps they were in the anteroom of heaven.Holy Scripture says it so it must be true.

If god could choose to exempt to Enoch and Elijah from the consequences of original sin, why couldn’t he exempt us all? Believers in the failed theology of OS claim that god could not open the gates of heaven until there was an appropriate sacrifice made for Adam’s fruit eating sin. So, was Jesus’ sacrifice necessary or not? Was humanity denied entrance into heaven prior to god’s brutal killing of his own son or weren’t we? Furthermore, Catholics love to claim that Mary was born without original sin: how? If God could exempt her from OS, then why can’t he exempt us? After all, none of us were even alive when Adam ate that piece of fruit (how stupid is it that eating a peice of fruit is mankinds greatest sin?), so if god could exempt Mary from OS then why couldn’t he exempt the rest of us?

 

[Benadam]

If god could choose to exempt to Enoch and Elijah from the consequences of original sin, why couldn’t he exempt us all? Believers in the failed theology of OS claim that god could not open the gates of heaven until there was an appropriate sacrifice made for Adam’s fruit eating sin. So, was Jesus’ sacrifice necessary or not? Was humanity denied entrance into heaven prior to god’s brutal killing of his own son or weren’t we? Furthermore, Catholics love to claim that Mary was born without original sin: how? If God could exempt her from OS, then why can’t he exempt us? After all, none of us were even alive when Adam ate that piece of fruit (how stupid is it that eating a peice of fruit is mankinds greatest sin?), so if god could exempt Mary from OS then why couldn’t he exempt the rest of us?

Sometimes, God just doesn’t do things our way. Maybe it’s to let us know who’s boss. I don’t know is your God bigger than my God?

 

[severntofall]

Sometimes, God just doesn’t do things our way. Maybe it’s to let us know who’s boss. I don’t know is your God bigger than my God?

My god doesn’t require me to believe in completely fictional fairey tales. Have you ever noticed just how stupid religious beliefs sound when they aren’t your’s? That’s how the rest of us feel about OS and the death of Jesus. The notion that an all powerful being could create two adult humans and then totally freak out when they ate a piece of his fruit and then feel it necessary to brutually kill his own son before he could allow himself to forgive us for adam and eve’s fruit eating sin.

 

[Benadam]

My god doesn’t require me to believe in completely fictional fairey tales. Have you ever noticed just how stupid religious beliefs sound when they aren’t your’s? That’s how the rest of us feel about OS and the death of Jesus. The notion that an all powerful being could create two adult humans and then totally freak out when they ate a piece of his fruit and then feel it necessary to brutually kill his own son before he could allow himself to forgive us for adam and eve’s fruit eating sin.

I see the measure of truth in other faiths. I can do this because I hold it in it’s fullness. I don’t expect you to believe me because I speak from a perspective you have no experiencial knowledge of. The silliest position is to think the profound intelllects of religion would teach that eating an apple is the reality of Original sin. I can’t but wonder if you are that dull of mind or if you are being deliberately deceptive.

You think by eliminating God as known by Christians or other sincere religions you eliminate some archaic obsolete need within man based on fear. No, you will worship something and it will be forming what you believe and that in turn will be constructing the reality you respond to with every act.

Take out God and what you worship isn’t ‘nothing’ as you might think. You my friend will worship ‘everything’.

Mark my words …You are being formed by something outside of yourself. It’s not that worshipping something is an obsolete practice it’s that you are as unable to not woship as you are to not breath. You can worship unconscious of what has it’s hands on your soul shaping it into what it will be or you can worship the God who has made Himself known to our conscious minds.

 

[severntofall]

I see the measure of truth in other faiths. I can do this because I hold it in it’s fullness. I don’t expect you to believe me because I speak from a perspective you have no experiencial knowledge of. The silliest position is to think the profound intelllects of religion would teach that eating an apple is the reality of Original sin. I can’t but wonder if you are that dull of mind or if you are being deliberately deceptive.

Apparently I am that dull of mind; please enlighten me as to just what it was that caused god to eject Adam and Eve from Eden (and condemn all subsequent humans) after they ate an apple from the tree of life (a tree whose only observable purpose was to serve as a trap so God could justify condemning humanity). At least to all non-Christians the notion that god had to brutally kill his own son before he could even consider permitting humans to avoid going to hell upon their death (none-the-less, most still do) is laughable (seriously, we all laugh about it…even the Muslims). In fact, many Christians acknowledge the absurdity of the theology and have abandoned it.

You think by eliminating God as known by Christians or other sincere religions you eliminate some archaic obsolete need within man based on fear. No, you will worship something and it will be forming what you believe and that in turn will be constructing the reality you respond to with every act.

I feel that by eliminating a belief in god I eliminate mankind’s greatest weakness. You are correct about something, I do worship one thing: the truth. Faith (i.e. belief in something despite the absence of evidence for it) is without a doubt the enemy of my god.

Take out God and what you worship isn’t ‘nothing’ as you might think. You my friend will worship ‘everything’.

True, a man who worships the truth does in a sense worship everything (everything that exists that is); whereas a man who bases his beliefs on faith will worship anything (anything you can convince him to worship).

Mark my words …You are being formed by something outside of yourself. It’s not that worshipping something is an obsolete practice it’s that you are as unable to not woship as you are to not breath. You can worship unconscious of what has it’s hands on your soul shaping it into what it will be or you can worship the God who has made Himself known to our conscious minds.

Mark my words, your life is based upon a lie, and the truth cannot found in your little book. There may be a “god” of some variety, but I can say confidently that it is not the fiction you worship.

 

[Benadam]

Apparently I am that dull of mind; please enlighten me as to just what it was that caused god to eject Adam and Eve from Eden (and condemn all subsequent humans) after they ate an apple from the tree of life (a tree whose only observable purpose was to serve as a trap so God could justify condemning humanity). At least to all non-Christians the notion that god had to brutally kill his own son before he could even consider permitting humans to avoid going to hell upon their death (none-the-less, most still do) is laughable (seriously, we all laugh about it…even the Muslims). In fact, many Christians acknowledge the absurdity of the theology and have abandoned it.

What is good comes from above or else we would know what is good unambiguously. If it does come from above then it is revelation that we must hold in faith untill reason ascents to it. Those who hold to a truth propagated outside of faith are scandalized by a deeper expression of it because it inherently contradicts mores and customs .

The fallacy of this age is that everyone’s opinion is equal in value. This divorced from faith concept becomes divorced from truth because it denies absolutes and how all things are relative to absolutes. In fact there is no such thing as truth with this false view and if you seek truth know that if it trully is a revelation it will be a contradiction to the status quo not just 'another ’ easily acceptable belief.

Mark my words, your life is based upon a lie, and the truth cannot found in your little book. There may be a “god” of some variety, but I can say confidently that it is not the fiction you worship.

You make a good example of a person who speaks out of their blindness because you teach out of what you say you don’t see. Namely truth in Sacred Scriptures. We expose ourselves and our disposition towards truth when we do this because it is a condition attached to those who aren’t able to expose error with Truth. If you held to Truth you could express it and it would implicate that Sacred Scripture does not express truth because truth doesn’t violate truth. You would also see the measure of Truth in all religions.

[/QUOTE]

 

[Crimson_Seraph]

Apparently I am that dull of mind; please enlighten me as to just what it was that caused god to eject Adam and Eve from Eden (and condemn all subsequent humans) after they ate an apple from the tree of life (a tree whose only observable purpose was to serve as a trap so God could justify condemning humanity). At least to all non-Christians the notion that god had to brutally kill his own son before he could even consider permitting humans to avoid going to hell upon their death (none-the-less, most still do) is laughable (seriously, we all laugh about it…even the Muslims). In fact, many Christians acknowledge the absurdity of the theology and have abandoned it.

I feel that by eliminating a belief in god I eliminate mankind’s greatest weakness. You are correct about something, I do worship one thing: the truth. Faith (i.e. belief in something despite the absence of evidence for it) is without a doubt the enemy of my god.

True, a man who worships the truth does in a sense worship everything (everything that exists that is); whereas a man who bases his beliefs on faith will worship anything (anything you can convince him to worship).

Mark my words, your life is based upon a lie, and the truth cannot found in your little book. There may be a “god” of some variety, but I can say confidently that it is not the fiction you worship.

cracks knuckles

I’ll take a swing at this.

1. Why did God punish Adam and Eve so? Adam and Eve had EVERYTHING that a person could possibly want. They had peace, they had eternal life, perfect happiness, and best of all they had direct communion with God Almighty when he came down in the cool of the evening and walked with them. He only asked that they did not eat of this one tree, this single tree. Why did he do this you ask? Because he wanted them to be holy I think. They were innocent, not knowing good or evil. To be holy is to have a choice between obeying God and disobeying God. When one rejects sin in favor of pleasing God it is holiness unto him. God had to give Adam and Eve a choice, and sadly they failed. Because they essentially said that God wasn’t enough for them he ejected them from paradise. Mankind came from two people, thus all of their seed were stained by their sin. This is the doctrine of Original Sin. Now I would disagree with my Catholic friends about Mary being free from OS, but we both agree that Jesus was for sure. Thus he was the perfect sacrifice to redeem us to God.

Sure, God could has just winked at sin like the god of Islam does and just forgive, but that would not be just. God is good, God is love, but he is also Holy and he is Just. Without the shedding of blood their is no remission of sins.

You consider this belief to be laughable, but that is in itself Scripture. St. Paul says that He (God) would use the foolish things to confound the wise, and that he would use the foolishness of preaching. You and the world may find the Christian faith to be foolishness, but we who have been redeemed don’t think so.

Just my two coppers.

 

[severntofall]

severntofall;4752299:

The apple is able to open eyes and cause another beauty to be seen. This apple is an alternative vision of reality that was pleasing to the eye. Genesis as a literary form is mythic. If one insists on a literal translation the true depth of what is expressed is lost.

I’m not sure exactly what you are claiming here. Are you saying that Genesis is one allegory after another? The Catholic doctrine of OS seems to take a very literal view of the fruit eating sin. IMO, it would be absurd to develop as the central doctrine of one’s faith a theology that is based upon an incident that didn’t really happen. It’s bad enough if you just aren’t aware of the fact that the tale isn’t in fact true, but to acknowledge it and maintain the doctrine at the same time is just silly.

The fact that you reduce it to that kind of surface value indicates that a conversation about my religion would be as with someone who is vaguely aquainted with what I really believe. I am reluctant to do that with someone who doesn’t want to learn what my faith really is.

Trust me I have plenty of knowledge of the Catholic faith, you pick up a thing or two after 4 years of seminary. Years that served me well, as the theology classes made me abundant aware of the absurdity of my faith.

You make a good example of a person who speaks out of their blindness because you teach out of what you say you don’t see. Namely truth in Sacred Scriptures. We expose ourselves and our disposition towards truth when we do this because it is a condition attached to those who aren’t able to expose error with Truth. If you held to Truth you could express it and it would implicate that Sacred Scripture does not express truth because truth doesn’t violate truth. You would also see the measure of Truth in all religions.

There may be references to actual historical events in your book of scripture, but the central points made by the book are blatantly false. The bible is no more valid than the scriptures of other faiths; that is to say, it’s no more valid than any other book of fiction.

 

[Benadam]

cracks knuckles*

I’ll take a swing at this.

 

[Benadam]

Benadam;4752413:

There may be references to actual historical events in your book of scripture, but the central points made by the book are blatantly false. The bible is no more valid than the scriptures of other faiths; that is to say, it’s no more valid than any other book of fiction.

Severn I think you are new here so you probably can be excused for wandering off topic. I have no excuse for derailing a thread. The OP deserves a thread that discusses the topic.

If you wish to prove the christian faith a lie you will have to start your own thread or find one more suitable to discuss your issues.

 

[jcrichton]

I have no problem with Mary, just some people’s representations of her. Her appearing in dreams and giving out special revelations is one of them.

I agree with you that anyone can claim anything… the Church is very stringent when it comes to any claim of revelation or apparition; hence, I am confident that all past claims have been thoroughly investigated, this holds true for any future claims (will be thoroughly investigated)… if you are stating that you do not believe that they happen… that is totally your prerogative; my concern is not with the validity of the messages but with their interpretations…

I don’t doubt the Lord, but the Day of the Lord has not come yet because it is clear from the Old Testament that it has not. As for your claim that all Messianic prophecies being already fulfilled, I have to strongly disagree with you on that. There are a number of them that are yet to be fulfilled, but which shall be fulfilled in the future.

…so if you do not doubt Christ, then how do you maintain that the Messianic Prophecies were not fulfilled by Him?

Are you a Praeterist?

I have to confess that I had to look up the term; I’m Catholic, of the Roman persuasion; I do not believe in replacement theology; rather I understand it as St. Peter, St. Paul and the other Disciples and Apostles did: the maturity of Judaism; here’s how Jesus put it:

21 Jesus said: Believe me, woman, the hour is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. 22 You worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know; for salvation comes from the Jews.
23 But the hour is coming – indeed is already here – when true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth: that is the kind of worshipper the Father seeks. 24 God is spirit, and those who worship must worship in spirit and truth. (St. John 4:21-24)

The New Covenant is in place, as determined by Yahweh God.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

If god could choose to exempt to Enoch and Elijah from the consequences of original sin, why couldn’t he exempt us all? Believers in the failed theology of OS claim that god could not open the gates of heaven until there was an appropriate sacrifice made for Adam’s fruit eating sin. So, was Jesus’ sacrifice necessary or not? Was humanity denied entrance into heaven prior to god’s brutal killing of his own son or weren’t we? Furthermore, Catholics love to claim that Mary was born without original sin: how? If God could exempt her from OS, then why can’t he exempt us? After all, none of us were even alive when Adam ate that piece of fruit (how stupid is it that eating a peice of fruit is mankinds greatest sin?), so if god could exempt Mary from OS then why couldn’t he exempt the rest of us?

…you seem to be quite angered… are you an atheist?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

My god doesn’t require me to believe in completely fictional fairey tales. Have you ever noticed just how stupid religious beliefs sound when they aren’t your’s? That’s how the rest of us feel about OS and the death of Jesus. The notion that an all powerful being could create two adult humans and then totally freak out when they ate a piece of his fruit and then feel it necessary to brutually kill his own son before he could allow himself to forgive us for adam and eve’s fruit eating sin.

…so why do you waste your time spewing your venon here?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Apparently I am that dull of mind; please enlighten me as to just what it was that caused god to eject Adam and Eve from Eden (and condemn all subsequent humans) after they ate an apple from the tree of life (a tree whose only observable purpose was to serve as a trap so God could justify condemning humanity). At least to all non-Christians the notion that god had to brutally kill his own son before he could even consider permitting humans to avoid going to hell upon their death (none-the-less, most still do) is laughable (seriously, we all laugh about it…even the Muslims). In fact, many Christians acknowledge the absurdity of the theology and have abandoned it.

Clearly you speak from a limited and flawed understanding… I will school you on a simple fact: the apple is a myth; I suspect that it has its origins on the ancient practice of decorating the tree (which came to be known as the Christmas Tree) with red (perhaps delicious) apples… the other errors are not as easily corrected; yet, if you truly are thirsty for knowledge I am willing to assist you on your quest.

I feel that by eliminating a belief in god I eliminate mankind’s greatest weakness. You are correct about something, I do worship one thing: the truth. Faith (i.e. belief in something despite the absence of evidence for it) is without a doubt the enemy of my god.

…again, you are speaking from a flawed perspective… we still have present proof of entities who have attempted to extinguish Yahweh God… their people have (and some still do) experienced the worst oppressions and crimes against humanity and nature that the world have ever seen; contrary to your misconception the strongest people in the world’s history have always been of the Judo-Christian Faith!

True, a man who worships the truth does in a sense worship everything (everything that exists that is); whereas a man who bases his beliefs on faith will worship anything (anything you can convince him to worship).

The problem you have is that your “truth” is forever changing… it is not truth at all but whatever is being portrayed as truth.

ie: a naturally fertilized human egg cannot produce anything other than a human child; yet, a truth arose that “science” claimed to know that conception is not the beginning of human life (though it is for all other non-human species on the planet); somehow, science has determined that unless a human being is produced through artificial means or in a laboratory’s incubator the creature is not self-sufficient so it is not a human being; imagine that!

…another?: while the “truth” (kill your babies and mutilate your bodies so that you will not be able to conceive) planned parenthood (and hollo-wood) is thrusting down the throats of non-whites world-wide is disguised as the cure for female health issues and perpetual poverty, white aflluent couples are employing an enormous amount of time and money in an effort to conceive–no doubt that some of these have exhausted their bodies’ natural abilities to procreate and are using another “truth” of science to impregnate themselves (some having as many children as a swine has piglets).

…still another?: dogs, cats, and other non-human creatures are “part of the family.”

Mark my words, your life is based upon a lie, and the truth cannot found in your little book. There may be a “god” of some variety, but I can say confidently that it is not the fiction you worship.

Your pretense is completely transparent as your contempt oozes out of you just as you breathe out CO2; I do not mean to be unkind… have you noticed how contradictive your statement is?:

• You are completely convinced that truth is not found in the Holy Bible
• You are not sure that God exists or does not exist
• You entertain the idea that there is a God
• You are convinced that God cannot be known to man through the Bible
• You have determined that you know better than God as you are the one to reveal where He actually dwells

May the Holy Spirit convict you of the Truth!

Maran atha!

Angel