If God wants all to know Him

[steve_b]

Why does He place so many obstacles in our path?

From the old Baltimore Catechism

6. Q. Why did God make you?
A. God made me to know Him, to love Him, and to serve Him in this world, and to be happy with Him for ever in heaven.

How do we find out how well we do that? God gives us tests. Not for His knowledge of us, but for our own knowledge about how well we individually, know love and serve Him. He did not leave us alone to do that. He gave us the Catholic Church, the pillar and foundation of truth. **#34 **And after the test is over,

2 Corinthians 5:10
we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive good or evil, according to what he has done in the body.
T:

Why are some things in the Bible so unclear and why does it take so many sophisticated explanations on various topics to get to the bottom of things?

Like what for example?
T:

Why couldn’t the Bible have been inspirationally written more clearly so as to leave fewer doubts and questions?

What doubts do you have?

 

[Thorns]

Like what for example?

What doubts do you have?

See post #19.

 

[esieffe]

He left us with the Sacraments to strengthen us in holiness and fill us with grace. This grace allows us to overcome all obstacles. ******

God does not “put obstacles in our path”. Obstacles are the result of sin. Sin is not of God.

---

A HUGE and important distinction in your answer to this question! Really this is the most asked question there is among seekers of all ilks. I found a great definition and examination on the word Grace I would like to share:
newadvent.org/cathen/06689x.htm

 

[steve_b]

See post #19.

okay
T:

Effort and loving others isnt the problem.

Whats complicated are the explanations and defenses given for certain topics. Regarding violence and brutality in the OT for example, theres all kinds of arguments from just wars, to being allegorical, to God using humans to carry out killing people, to God not actually instructing that etc. All of these arguments stretch what is plainly written.

It’s often suggested or thought that, the God of the OT was different than the God of the NT. For example why was Abraham so greatly considered a man of faith in our terms, when he didn’t trust God that He and Sara would have a child together, so he has his first born son (a title for a son which has huge advantage in that day) with his servant Haggar. REALLY!!!

So how is THAT explained given the NT teaching on no adultery? Or how about Cain killing Abel? What about THAT?

Paul answers that and many other questions you raise in your post Romans 5:13 ] .The “law” didn’t come till Moses. Someone will say yeah but what about Adam & Eve, they were thrown out of the Garden for what they did, before the law was given. What’s up with THAT? I would say not so fast. God told them NOT to eat the fruit from THAT tree and He gave them a consequence if they disobeyed. God gave them a command with consequences if they disobeyed, and they disobeyed.

So sin that we go by in NT terms, really needs to be looked at as Paul says, after the law was given. And as we know, people didn’t quite understand the law either in the OT nor in the NT. We also can’t lose sight, the OT is a type and shadow of what will be its fulfillment in the NT. The OT is not the fullfilment nor the be all to end all understanding of salvation history. If anything it demonstrates why we needed the NT
T:

Then we have those apologists who insist on looking at the passage in Greek when the argument becomes too much for them, which to me, is another stretch. If Greek is more accurate, why are the Bibles allegedly being erroneously misprinted in english?

Sometimes Greek DOES bring clarity over the English.

For example: When Jesus says

Lk 22:"31 And the Lord said,c] “Simon, Simon! Indeed, Satan has asked for you, that he may sift you as wheat. 32 But I have prayed for you, that your faith should not fail; and when you have returned to Me, strengthen your brethren.” (KJV)

We know “You” in English can mean either singular or plural. Can you tell from that passage in the KJV translation, if you is singular or plural in any of those spots in that short passage? No.

The Greek would tell you that answer. And there are also translations in English that make that distinction between singular and plural either in the actual way a passage is written, or as a footnote . The following does it as a footnote

LK 22:31 “Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you,d] that he might sift youe] like wheat, 32 but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren.” (RSV-CE)

The footnote clarifies where “you” is singular and where “you” is plural. If you’re trying to make a point with someone about this who is using only the KJV, you would have to go to the Greek source to make that point.
T:

Jesus said He would rebuild the temple in three days, He hasnt. We justify that by saying he was alluding to his resurrection, but if he was, why didnt he just plainly say that instead of speaking in riddles?

Remember the story of Job? He had questions for God as well. And what did God say to Job? Job 38 : 1-41
T:

Jesus said he would return soon, he hasnt. We justify that with our modified interpretations yet again, when we all can see what is plainly written. All of this is a stretch, an obstacle, and doesn’t quite always flow. Why? The Truth is always simple.

We are immortal beings from our conception. That means once our souls are created by God we live forevermore. Even the word “forever” we can’t get our heads around. Can you quantify it? Can you explain it?

For God a billion years in our time could be soon to Him. God is outside of time. Everything to Him is the eternal present. There is no past present and future with Him. Those are terms we understand because for a little while, we are in time and space. The clock for us in this life is ticking. Outside of time there is no clock. So let me ask you. Looking forward, you will live for ∞. What would a billion years from now look like in eternity? Soon perhaps? A second maybe? Or would a billion years from now, be sooooo small a time comparitively speaking, that it doesn’t even show up? And certainly “soon” falls in that category.

But I would mention one other reality. And this is how it applies to each individual. All of us are only 1 heartbeat away from what we’re talking about. Soon takes on a whole other meaning. For 100’s of thousands of people each day on this planet, they know the meaning of “soon”.

 

[MacQ]

See post #19.

Typical of Thorns’ posts … “someone else do it for me”…including God. God should have made it easier for her. God should make her behave and not sin. She told Him to.

 

[Thorns]

Typical of Thorns’ posts … “someone else do it for me”…including God. God should have made it easier for her. God should make her behave and not sin. She told Him to.

Such patience and charity, thanks for that. I’m a he btw.

I wasnt just asking this for myself either, but for those who we aspire to evangelize. Its so hard to explain all of this to them, because they require huge explanations and quite frankly to a non believer, it is a lot to accept all at once. This is an obstacle. I wish it were easier to bring those to the Church, not easier just for me.

 

[Thorns]

It’s often suggested or thought that, the God of the OT was different than the God of the NT. For example why was Abraham so greatly considered a man of faith in our terms, when he didn’t trust God that He and Sara would have a child together, so he has his first born son (a title for a son which has huge advantage in that day) with his servant Haggar. REALLY!!!

So how is THAT explained given the NT teaching on no adultery? Or how about Cain killing Abel? What about THAT?

Paul answers that and many other questions you raise in your post Romans 5:13 ] .The “law” didn’t come till Moses. Someone will say yeah but what about Adam & Eve, they were thrown out of the Garden for what they did, before the law was given. What’s up with THAT? I would say not so fast. God told them NOT to eat the fruit from THAT tree and He gave them a consequence if they disobeyed. God gave them a command with consequences if they disobeyed, and they disobeyed.

So sin that we go by in NT terms, really needs to be looked at as Paul says, after the law was given. And as we know, people didn’t quite understand the law either in the OT nor in the NT. We also can’t lose sight, the OT is a type and shadow of what will be its fulfillment in the NT. The OT is not the fullfilment nor the be all to end all understanding of salvation history. If anything it demonstrates why we needed the NT

I believe this to be inaccurate. There was God’s Law when Adam and Eve were in the Garden, Adam and Eve were married just as validly as anyone else who got married after their time, so there was indeed such a thing as adultery. These laws were also around during Abraham’s time, of course, since they were passed on through Tradition. The Moasaic Law was Moses’ interpretation of God’s Law *due to the hardness of men’s hearts *, so he let a lot slide. But as we know, Jesus set the record straight with that and said it was never so from the beginning.

Remember the story of Job? He had questions for God as well. And what did God say to Job? Job 38 : 1-41

God is basically telling Job “don’t question me.” That doesn’t solve the apparent issue of Jesus’ claim to rebuild the temple within 3 days, and thousands of years later it is not rebuilt. We reconcile that by saying Jesus was speaking about HImself. That is fine, but why do we have to put words in the Lord’s mouth? It appears to me, that He meant what He said about the actual temple. If He didn’t mean that, why was He vague and why didn’t He just come right out and say exactly what temple He was referring to?

We are immortal beings from our conception. That means once our souls are created by God we live forevermore. Even the word “forever” we can’t get our heads around. Can you quantify it? Can you explain it?

For God a billion years in our time could be soon to Him. God is outside of time. Everything to Him is the eternal present. There is no past present and future with Him. Those are terms we understand because for a little while, we are in time and space. The clock for us in this life is ticking. Outside of time there is no clock. So let me ask you. Looking forward, you will live for ∞. What would a billion years from now look like in eternity? Soon perhaps? A second maybe? Or would a billion years from now, be sooooo small a time comparitively speaking, that it doesn’t even show up? And certainly “soon” falls in that category.

I am certain there are other example where Jesus uses time literally. Why did He not use time literally in this instance and why is it wrong to take what He said at face value? This was Jesus the man talking, stating such in the temporal realm. One would assume He was speaking literally and by our perception of time.

 

[steve_b]

I believe this to be inaccurate. There was God’s Law when Adam and Eve were in the Garden, Adam and Eve were married just as validly as anyone else who got married after their time, so there was indeed such a thing as adultery.

What did Paul mean when he said Romans 5:13 ] ? The “law” wasn’t always there. Sin was in the world i.e. Satan was already here. His first casualties were Adam & Eve. But the “law” had not been given till Moses.

Moses received the 10 commandments on Siani. Then there is the Mosaic “law” which is the 10 commandments dispursed into the Mosaic Laws. jewfaq.org/613.htm
Look at those 613 laws. Look through them. Where were THOSE laws prior to Moses?

When Paul refers in his letters to “law” and “works of law” what is Paul talking about?
T:

These laws were also around during Abraham’s time, of course, since they were passed on through Tradition.

Do you have a reference?

Why would Moses have to give them (the law) if they were already there? You’re not considering Romans 5:13 ]
T:

The Moasaic Law was Moses’ interpretation of God’s Law *due to the hardness of men’s hearts *, so he let a lot slide. But as we know, Jesus set the record straight with that and said it was never so from the beginning.

Moses did allow divorce and remarriage because men were killing their wives in order to “legally remarry”

But “from the beginning” is not meant from Adam. Why else would Paul write Romans 5:13 ? How do you interpret “before the law was given” if it was always there?
T:

God is basically telling Job “don’t question me.”

That too. What God really wants to hear from us is Okay, not why?
T:

That doesn’t solve the apparent issue of Jesus’ claim to rebuild the temple within 3 days, and thousands of years later it is not rebuilt. We reconcile that by saying Jesus was speaking about HImself. That is fine, but why do we have to put words in the Lord’s mouth?

You’re thinking temple as in a building, the one that was destroyed in 70 a.d. That’s NOT what Jesus was refering to. That’s why many Jews of the day and today didn’t get it then or now.
Particularly the sadducees, who didn’t believe in the resurrection of the dead.
T:

It appears to me, that He meant what He said about the actual temple. If He didn’t mean that, why was He vague and why didn’t He just come right out and say exactly what temple He was referring to?

I would suggest He did. But for sake of argument, Jesus also said Matthew 13:12-14 .
T:

I am certain there are other example where Jesus uses time literally. Why did He not use time literally in this instance and why is it wrong to take what He said at face value? This was Jesus the man talking, stating such in the temporal realm. One would assume He was speaking literally and by our perception of time.

While He was with them, and doing things with them literally in the flesh, He DID speak of time as it applied to them in the present. But time is also spoken of in it’s greater context

For example : a little while , what does that mean in actual time frame?

John 16:16 , that’c certainly true.
1 Peter 5:10 , and what is Peter refering to? Compared to eternity, this life is a blink in time
Revelation 20:3 , same idea. Compared to eternity, time spoken of here is a blink

 

[chefmomster2]

Effort and loving others isnt the problem. Whats complicated are the explanations and defenses given for certain topics. Regarding violence and brutality in the OT for example, theres all kinds of arguments from just wars, to being allegorical, to God using humans to carry out killing people, to God not actually instructing that etc. All of these arguments stretch what is plainly written. Then we have those apologists who insist on looking at the passage in Greek when the argument becomes too much for them, which to me, is another stretch. If Greek is more accurate, why are the Bibles allegedly being erroneously misprinted in english? Jesus said He would rebuild the temple in three days, He hasnt. We justify that by saying he was alluding to his resurrection, but if he was, why didnt he just plainly say that instead of speaking in riddles? Jesus said he would return soon, he hasnt. We justify that with our modified interpretations yet again, when we all can see what is plainly written. All of this is a stretch, an obstacle, and doesn’t quite always flow. Why? The Truth is always simple.

The Bible IS contradictory if you read it as literally as you seem to here. For instance, Christ was speaking of His resurrection. The Bible is very clear here: John 2:20 Jesus Cleanses the Temple
…19 Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” 20 The Jews then said, “It took forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?” 21 But He was speaking of the temple of His body.22 So when He was raised from the dead, His disciples remembered that He said this; and they believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had spoken.…"As you see, John made the teaching very clear. We always get into trouble when we selectively pull a single verse out of scripture. At least read the entire passage and not just a single thought.

Part of the problem is relying upon our own ability to interpret the bible. Truthful interpretation requires vast understanding of many things: ancient cultures, languages, history, politics, religions and more. This is largely due to the 2000 years since the Resurrection. Language and culture change monumentally over time. Most of us don’t have that sort of scholarship. It seems confusing because we just don’t have enough knowledge.

People read The oldest forms of the Bible in their original language to more certainly know the full meaning of what is being conveyed. Modern bibles may have clerical discrepancies, but they are not in error. All of the modern language translations took many years to compile and went through rigorous testing and examination. They are based on the early versions I described and are written to faithfully proclaim the teachings of scripture and do so infallibly.

Most of the teachings of Christ were perfectly understandable to the people Jesus taught personally. They actually loved riddles! Other concepts, such as the Resurrection, were understood after the gift of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. We have a different frame of reference due to the things I listed above.

I agree with the other posters who suggest that you study the Church’s teachings. I have read many of your posts and you seem to care deeply about the faith, but you seem to need more “book learning”. It has helped me tremendously. The Church is actually very consistent with scripture and tradition. What we lack is the knowledge required to understand the concepts. Try a Catholic Study Bible. I have been using the New American Bible, Revised and it contains tremendous resources to add to our understanding of the scripture. Read the Catechism, the Fathers of the Church, the Bible and doctrinally sound books on the topics that have you confused. But, make sure you do it with an open mind. You will discover that you are correct in many ways, but you will also find you are wrong, as we all are, in many others. Be prepared to expand and even change your understanding.

It is easy to get confused, but through diligence we can learn the concepts that make it easier. It is also extremely satisfying to do! I have recently taken courses in OT, NT, and Church History. They have been transformational!