Do you disagree with the now Pope that we are able to discuss such issues? As I said the Catechism is only de fide when it states such. It is the teaching of The Church that we are able to discuss (speculate) on matters that are not de fide, just like we discussed the opinions of Galileo.Is that what they are teaching these days? I can understand speculation on evolution but don’t you think that entertaining the idea that satan can likewise be speculated upon is somewhat reckless? The catechism posted here is crystal to me.
If their was no satan, then their was no fall. So no. That is a very silly question, considering he is what draws temptation to us./QUOT
I know what the prevailing opinion is, but I’m looking for actual de fide Church documents that support that opinion. Otherwise it’s just a myth.
I know what the prevailing opinion is, but I’m looking for actual de fide Church documents that support that opinion. Otherwise it’s just a myth.If their was no satan, then their was no fall. So no. That is a very silly question, considering he is what draws temptation to us.
The Devil possesses a certain dominion over mankind by reason of Adam’s sin. **(De Fide).I know what the prevailing opinion is, but I’m looking for actual de fide Church documents that support that opinion. Otherwise it’s just a myth.
Dr. Ott does not site a particular reference within the Council of Trent; therefore I must side with The Church in saying that this is not de fideThe Devil possesses a certain dominion over mankind by reason of Adam’s sin. **(De Fide).
**This is from Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, by Dr. Ludwig Ott, Section 2, Chapter 3, #31 - The Power of the Bad Angels.
It was NEVER an OT belief ; ask any Jewish person if they believe in Satan.Could it be that the Church has not seen a need to formally express a belief that has been generally accepted since OT times? I am not denying you have the freedom to debate the nature of the evil one, I’m just questioning the wisdom to do it.
I’m amazed by Don Bosco’s writings, and believe in The Creed; neither of which mention Satan. Jesus came to save us from sin not from Satan; read your Bible.I believe in God, the Father almighty, Creator of heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried; he descended into HELL; on the third day he rose again from the dead; he ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of God the Father almighty; from there he will come to judge the living and the dead. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and life everlasting. Amen.
The creed tells you Jesus descended into Hell. That’s clear enough.
If Jesus is the Judge what does he do with the people he finds to be unrepentent sinners?
You have a lot of studying to do. Read up on Fatima. Read up on what Don Bosco said about Hell.
Each year at Church we are asked to recite our Faith. “Do you reject Satan? and all his lies and empty promises?”
It’s de fide and there is no question about that. Why would Jesus come to earth to be crucified if He wasn’t trying to save us from Satan?
“The Satan” was never the personification of evil, merely an accuser appointed by God, just as a prosecuting barrister is today. Seriously ask any Jewish person if they believe in an actual Satan.Regarding the jews in the OT, you are right to point out that they didn’t believe in a person called satan. But the fact of the personification of evil was there, whether you call him the accuser, as in Job, or satan as christians came to understand him through our Lord Jesus.
Not at all. Just because a theory is taught in a graduate theology program does not make it so.Hi everyone,
As I’m sure most of you are aware our modern conceptualisation of Satan is the product of theological evolution.
I believe you’ve seriously misread the part of Satan. I presume you’re referring to Job here. God never asked Satan to afflict or tempt Job. Satan asked, and God allowed him to do so. To read into that a righteous mission on the part of Satan is dangerous delusion.In the Old Testament “Satan” was merely a righteous angel of God sent by God to test the faith of individuals; in fact the correct translation is “The Satan” (the adversary), and was a role that could be delegated to any angel.
The Gospels are De Fide:For the most part The Church accepts that Satan represents a single being who is the absolute personification of evil; however I have seen nothing to suggest that the belief in a personal being called Satan is De Fide.
Ask any Jewish person if they believe Jesus of Nazareth was the Son of God as well. We are not Jews, we are Christians with similar, but distinct beliefs.“The Satan” was never the personification of evil, merely an accuser appointed by God, just as a prosecuting barrister is today. Seriously ask any Jewish person if they believe in an actual Satan.
As I said earlier to another poster, I respect your opinion, but unless your opinion is supported by Church documents the issue is very much open for discussion.Not at all. Just because a theory is taught in a graduate theology program does not make it so.
I believe you’ve seriously misread the part of Satan. I presume you’re referring to Job here. God never asked Satan to afflict or tempt Job. Satan asked, and God allowed him to do so. To read into that a righteous mission on the part of Satan is dangerous delusion.
"Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!" Isaiah 5:20
The Gospels are De Fide:
Who do you suppose tempted Christ in the wilderness? And why does Christ neglect to say “thank you” to Satan, if he was simply a righteous angel doing what God ordered? In fact, the temptation in the wilderness was powerful testimony to Christ’s divinity…so why does Jesus tell Satan to leave him alone, if Satan was only trying to help?
Matthew 4:1-11
Mark 1:12-13
Luke 4:1-13
The reason why Christ did not thank Satan for tempting Him can be found in Mark 1:21-27. Christ rebukes the demon and orders him to keep silent, after the demon calls Him the “Holy One of God”. Why? Because demons (and Satan their leader) are evil and Jesus didn’t want or need any assistance from them. He is totally opposed to evil.
He highlights this point, and specifically names Satan as the ruler of the demons, when the Pharisees accuse Him of casting out demons using Satan’s power:Matthew 12:22-29
And as a previous poster asked already, if your theory is that the office of “tempter” was sanctioned and approved by God, how do you explain God’s curse on the serpent, who was the first tempter? If He was doing God’s will, shouldn’t God have praised him? This idea clearly does not hold water.
If we didn’t accept Jewish Tradition we wouldn’t have included the OT in our BibleAsk any Jewish person if they believe Jesus of Nazareth was the Son of God as well. We are not Jews, we are Christians with similar, but distinct beliefs.
We accept Jewish Tradition in the spirit of Christ’s revelation to us, not in the way Jews themselves do.If we didn’t accept Jewish Tradition we wouldn’t have included the OT in our Bible