S
SamH
Guest
Or we could be realistic.We can only assume the best and pray for the rest.![]()
Or we could be realistic.We can only assume the best and pray for the rest.![]()
Ah yes, however, the CATHOLIC Church is a lot more universal now - isn’t it?Back then, that was the Church as a whole.
There was no implied interpretation. The wording of the other poster reminded me of the wording in that passage, which was very close.Ah yes, however, the CATHOLIC Church is a lot more universal now - isn’t it?
Thus your implied interpretation must be redefined in it’s obvious limitations. No?
If I may:When we express hope and compassion, it shows that we have hope and compassion within ourselves.![]()
He is the origin of hope and compassion. If we express hope and compassion, we have hope and compassion in us, or it can be said, ‘He is with us.’If I may:
It shows we surrender to HIS hope and HIS compassion.![]()
There was no implication on your part?There was no implied interpretation. The wording of the other poster reminded me of the wording in that passage, which was very close.
There was no implication on your part?
Really?
Then may I ask, what exactly did the wording of the other poster imply to you in relevance to that scriptural passage?
To each according to their need…
The emphasis is mine. I hope you can see the similarities. It was those similarities that brought the scripture to mind. I could only guess at any implication. The poster didn’t say. Rather than guess, I shared the scripture it brought to mind.Act 2:45 Their possessions and goods they sold and **divided them to all, according as every one had need. **
Well and good.I didn’t ask for personal thanks.![]()
All the more reason we must openly recognize HIM as the source of our Hope and Compassion.He is the origin of hope and compassion. If we express hope and compassion, we have hope and compassion in us, or it can be said, ‘He is with us.’
So your subconscious implication is that Karl Marx derived his godless political philosophy from an accurate understanding of scripture?The emphasis is mine. I hope you can see the similarities. It was those similarities that brought the scripture to mind. I could only guess at any implication. The poster didn’t say. Rather than guess, I shared the scripture it brought to mind.
It’s all food for thought…
Where exactly do I imply that other nations of the Allies were helpless?Well and good.
And neither do I.
We should not let ourselves b splintered.
I know you mean well but I would ask you, in all humility ,to put aside notions of gratitude that you and I do not deserve.
We are the beneficiaries of that great generation and we should never underestimate their sacrifice.
We should not throw their efforts away.
I will never understate what the American men and women sacrificed for world peace but I will not stand by and accept that the men and women elsewhere were like helpless maidens on a railtrack.
NO.
That is a Hollywood lie,
And it is VERY disrespectful
That is something you have speculated. It is certainly nothing I have conveyed.So your subconscious implication is that Karl Marx derived his godless political philosophy from an accurate understanding of scripture?
You crack me up.Originally Posted by SamH forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif
To each according to their need…
Originally posted by Prodigal Son1
Quote:
Act 2:45 Their possessions and goods they sold and divided them to all, according as every one had need.
Glorious linking of bible and Marx** you get extra beet ration **may the spirit of Lenin (peace be upon him) always remain with you.
In the meantime: commandante Chavez had $2 billion what a guy
Given the source of the two quotes, my speculation seems quite logical. No?That is something you have speculated. It is certainly nothing I have conveyed.
I have explained it, as best as I can. I apologize if you cannot see the similarities.Given the source of the two quotes, my speculation seems quite logical. No?
Perhaps you can correct my speculation with clarification?
If I may ask, what exactly ARE you conveying?
The quote Prodigal provided reminds me ofGiven the source of the two quotes, my speculation seems quite logical. No?
Perhaps you can correct my speculation with clarification?
If I may ask, what exactly ARE you conveying?
All I see is the original Scripture, and a bastardization of the context by Marx (a godless socialist philosopher).I have explained it, as best as I can. I apologize if you cannot see the similarities.
I didn’t even recognize who the author of the other saying was.All I see is the original Scripture, and a bastardization of the context by Marx (a godless socialist philosopher).
Only Saints are chosen to be incorruptible by their holiness during their whole lives.
That’s actually a valid point outside of the context of WWII.Not nearly so great as the number of Russian lives sacrificed to appease the paranoia of Joseph Stalin.