P
PRmerger
Guest
Perhaps that’s why you’re still an atheist. If you read Aquinas you might find his arguments so sublime you would be compelled to think your way back into Christianity.
- Status
L
Leela
Guest
30And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
This didn’t happen.
The definition of generation seems pretty clear to me. It also seems clear to me that the early Christians took it to mean that Jesus would be returning pretty darn soon. I guess if you try you can take the words of the Bible to mean anything you want.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Sounds like a great description of the Ascension to me.
Why do you say that?
At any rate, the early Christians did not expect Christ to rise and ascend again. Pointing out what the early Christians “took it to mean” is irrelevant. They were wrong about that.
I guess if you try to be obstinate and refuse to see, you’ll never see.
CS Lewis provides a great description of this in “The Last Battle”. Check out the dwarves refusing to see what’s before their very eyes.
T
twb1621
Guest
25:46] The discourse of the fifth book, the last of the five around which the gospel is structured. It is called the “escha tological” discourse since it deals with the coming of the new age (the eschaton) in its fullness, with events that will precede it, and with how the disciples are to conduct themselves while awaiting an event that is as certain as its exact time is unknown to all but the Father (⇒ Matthew 24:36). The discourse may be divided into two parts, ⇒ Matthew 24:1-44 and ⇒ Matthew 24:45-⇒ 25:46. In the first, Matthew follows his Marcan source (⇒ Mark 13:1-37) closely. The second is drawn from Q and from the evangelist’s own traditional material. Both parts show Matthew’s editing of his sources by deletions, additions, and modifications. The vigilant waiting that is emphasized in the second part does not mean a cessation of ordinary activity and concentration only on what is to come, but a faithful accomplishment of duties at hand, with awareness that the end, for which the disciples must always be ready, will entail the great judgment by which the everlasting destiny of all will be determined.
2 [2] As in Mark, Jesus predicts the destruction of the temple. By omitting the Marcan story of the widow’s contribution (⇒ Mark 12:41-44) that immediately precedes the prediction in that gospel, Matthew has established a close connection between it and ⇒ Matthew 23:38, “. . . your house will be abandoned desolate.”
3 [3] The Mount of Olives: see the note on ⇒ Matthew 21:1. The disciples: cf ⇒ Mark 13:3-4 where only Peter, James, John, and Andrew put the question that is answered by the discourse. In both gospels, however, the question is put privately: the ensuing discourse is only for those who are disciples of Jesus. When will this happen . . . end of the age?: Matthew distinguishes carefully between the destruction of the temple (this) and the coming of Jesus that will bring the end of the age. In Mark the two events are more closely connected, a fact that may be explained by Mark’s believing that the one would immediately succeed the other. Coming: this translates the Greek word parousia, which is used in the gospels only here and in ⇒ Matthew 24:27, ⇒ 37, ⇒ 39. It designated the official visit of a ruler to a city or the manifestation of a saving deity, and it was used by christians to refer to the final coming of Jesus in glory, a term first found in the New Testament with that meaning in ⇒ 1 Thes 2:19. The end of the age: see the note on ⇒ Matthew 13:39.
Continued
T
twb1621
Guest
4 [4-14] This section of the discourse deals with calamities in the world (⇒ Matthew 24:6-7) and in the church (⇒ Matthew 24:9-12). The former must happen before the end comes (⇒ Matthew 24:6), but they are only the beginning of the labor pains (⇒ Matthew 24:8). (It may be noted that the Greek word translated the end in ⇒ Matthew 24:6 and in ⇒ Matthew 24:13-14 is not the same as the phrase “the end of the age” in ⇒ Matthew 24:3 although the meaning is the same.) The latter are sufferings of the church, both from within and without, that will last until the gospel is preached . . . to all nations. Then the end will come and those who have endured the sufferings with fidelity will be saved (⇒ Matthew 24:13-14).
5 [6-7] The disturbances mentioned here are a commonplace of apocalyptic language, as is the assurance that they must happen (see ⇒ Daniel 2:28 LXX), for that is the plan of God. Kingdom against kingdom: see ⇒ Isaiah 19:2.
6 [8] The labor pains: the tribulations leading up to the end of the age are compared to the pains of a woman about to give birth. There is much attestation for rabbinic use of the phrase “the woes (or birth pains) of the Messiah” after the New Testament period, but in at least one instance it is attributed to a rabbi who lived in the late first century A.D. In this Jewish usage it meant the distress of the time preceding the coming of the Messiah; here, the labor pains precede the coming of the Son of Man in glory.
7 [9-12] Matthew has used ⇒ Mark 13:9-12 in his missionary discourse (⇒ Matthew 10:17-21) and omits it here. Besides the sufferings, including death, and the hatred of all nations that the disciples will have to endure, there will be worse affliction within the church itself. This is described in ⇒ Matthew 24:10-12, which are peculiar to Matthew. Will be led into sin: literally, “will be scandalized,” probably meaning that they will become apostates; see ⇒ Matthew 13:21 where “fall away” translates the same Greek word as here. Betray: in the Greek this is the same word as the hand over of ⇒ Matthew 24:9. The handing over to persecution and hatred from outside will have their counterpart within the church. False prophets: these are Christians; see the note on ⇒ Matthew 7:15-20. Evildoing: see ⇒ Matthew 7:23. Because of the apocalyptic nature of much of this discourse, the literal meaning of this description of the church should not be pressed too hard. However, there is reason to think that Matthew’s addition of these verses reflects in some measure the condition of his community. …
To save space, Refer to the remaining interpretations at
vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__PVX.HTM
5 [6-7] The disturbances mentioned here are a commonplace of apocalyptic language, as is the assurance that they must happen (see ⇒ Daniel 2:28 LXX), for that is the plan of God. Kingdom against kingdom: see ⇒ Isaiah 19:2.
6 [8] The labor pains: the tribulations leading up to the end of the age are compared to the pains of a woman about to give birth. There is much attestation for rabbinic use of the phrase “the woes (or birth pains) of the Messiah” after the New Testament period, but in at least one instance it is attributed to a rabbi who lived in the late first century A.D. In this Jewish usage it meant the distress of the time preceding the coming of the Messiah; here, the labor pains precede the coming of the Son of Man in glory.
7 [9-12] Matthew has used ⇒ Mark 13:9-12 in his missionary discourse (⇒ Matthew 10:17-21) and omits it here. Besides the sufferings, including death, and the hatred of all nations that the disciples will have to endure, there will be worse affliction within the church itself. This is described in ⇒ Matthew 24:10-12, which are peculiar to Matthew. Will be led into sin: literally, “will be scandalized,” probably meaning that they will become apostates; see ⇒ Matthew 13:21 where “fall away” translates the same Greek word as here. Betray: in the Greek this is the same word as the hand over of ⇒ Matthew 24:9. The handing over to persecution and hatred from outside will have their counterpart within the church. False prophets: these are Christians; see the note on ⇒ Matthew 7:15-20. Evildoing: see ⇒ Matthew 7:23. Because of the apocalyptic nature of much of this discourse, the literal meaning of this description of the church should not be pressed too hard. However, there is reason to think that Matthew’s addition of these verses reflects in some measure the condition of his community. …
To save space, Refer to the remaining interpretations at
vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__PVX.HTM
T
twb1621
Guest
Following is one of many prophacies of the Messiah long before the events and His birth;
Is 52:13—53:12
See, my servant shall prosper,
he shall be raised high and greatly exalted.
Even as many were amazed at him
so marred was his look beyond human semblance
and his appearance beyond that of the sons of man
so shall he startle many nations,
because of him kings shall stand speechless;
for those who have not been told shall see,
those who have not heard shall ponder it.
Who would believe what we have heard?
To whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?
He grew up like a sapling before him,
like a shoot from the parched earth;
there was in him no stately bearing to make us look at him,
nor appearance that would attract us to him.
He was spurned and avoided by people,
a man of suffering, accustomed to infirmity,
one of those from whom people hide their faces,
spurned, and we held him in no esteem.
Yet it was our infirmities that he bore,
our sufferings that he endured,
while we thought of him as stricken,
as one smitten by God and afflicted.
But he was pierced for our offenses,
crushed for our sins;
upon him was the chastisement that makes us whole,
by his stripes we were healed.
We had all gone astray like sheep,
each following his own way;
but the LORD laid upon him
the guilt of us all.
Though he was harshly treated, he submitted
and opened not his mouth;
like a lamb led to the slaughter
or a sheep before the shearers,
he was silent and opened not his mouth.
Oppressed and condemned, he was taken away,
and who would have thought any more of his destiny?
When he was cut off from the land of the living,
and smitten for the sin of his people,
a grave was assigned him among the wicked
and a burial place with evildoers,
though he had done no wrong
nor spoken any falsehood.
But the LORD was pleased
to crush him in infirmity.
If he gives his life as an offering for sin,
he shall see his descendants in a long life,
and the will of the LORD shall be accomplished through him.
Because of his affliction
he shall see the light in fullness of days;
through his suffering, my servant shall justify many,
and their guilt he shall bear.
Therefore I will give him his portion among the great,
and he shall divide the spoils with the mighty,
because he surrendered himself to death
and was counted among the wicked;
and he shall take away the sins of many,
and win pardon for their offenses.
L
Lettyd
Guest
Hey Guys, I’m new, this is my first post…
so go easy! lol…
Delighted to have found this site too…I’ve been lurking for a while!
It seems to me that the thread has “evolved” somewhat into Catholics apologising and explaining their “belief” or “faith” in Catholicism, and with gusto too I might add…! It’s all been said, whether it has registered is another story!.. That Jesus was the good guy and the final Testament with God’s people on earth was the sacrifice of his only son for our salvation…! Well, of course it was…it only makes logical sense! lol…
So, back on topic. “Four Year Olds”.???
Should we pass on as parents our values to our children?? Ehhh…doesn’t everybody?
I would like to ask any atheist the same question?
Says it all really! Of course they do…! Go on …deny it???
Or are you proslytizing on behalf of the Atheist “faith”!
Let me in on the secret, if you know more than we do…???
Jesus represented good, charity, forgiveness and understanding…
What does Richard Dawkins represent? The intellect? How very clever of him…with a side order of vitriol…
It’s strange that Catholics should justify “faith” in ultimate goodness…whereas this “intellect…” is a God onto itself…and displays fundamentalist properties!
I read the “God Delusion” and it seemed to me to be a work of vitriol and fundamentalism…incabable of telling the suicide bomber from Mother Theresa! One brush just aint gonna cut it! Neither for the atheist, ignostic or the person of “Faith”…
Yay, I have “Free Will”…it can only be given by God above…I celebrate my free God given will in Jesus!
so go easy! lol…Delighted to have found this site too…I’ve been lurking for a while!
It seems to me that the thread has “evolved” somewhat into Catholics apologising and explaining their “belief” or “faith” in Catholicism, and with gusto too I might add…! It’s all been said, whether it has registered is another story!.. That Jesus was the good guy and the final Testament with God’s people on earth was the sacrifice of his only son for our salvation…! Well, of course it was…it only makes logical sense! lol…
So, back on topic. “Four Year Olds”.???
Should we pass on as parents our values to our children?? Ehhh…doesn’t everybody?
I would like to ask any atheist the same question?
Says it all really! Of course they do…! Go on …deny it???
Or are you proslytizing on behalf of the Atheist “faith”!
Let me in on the secret, if you know more than we do…???
Jesus represented good, charity, forgiveness and understanding…
What does Richard Dawkins represent? The intellect? How very clever of him…with a side order of vitriol…
It’s strange that Catholics should justify “faith” in ultimate goodness…whereas this “intellect…” is a God onto itself…and displays fundamentalist properties!
I read the “God Delusion” and it seemed to me to be a work of vitriol and fundamentalism…incabable of telling the suicide bomber from Mother Theresa! One brush just aint gonna cut it! Neither for the atheist, ignostic or the person of “Faith”…
Yay, I have “Free Will”…it can only be given by God above…I celebrate my free God given will in Jesus!
P
PRmerger
Guest
Welcome to the forums, lettyd! :hug1: :tiphat:Hey Guys, I’m new, this is my first post…
L
Lettyd
Guest
blushes
Aw thanks PRmerger…
I’m having a great time reading all these philosophical debates around here…
There is just soooo much…!
Cool site! It’s good to talk…
Aw thanks PRmerger…
I’m having a great time reading all these philosophical debates around here…
There is just soooo much…!
Cool site! It’s good to talk…
M
miguel
Guest
The hindrance that disunity among his followers would have in spreading the truth was also a concern of Our Lord’s at the last supper:
John 17:20-21
And not for them (his apostles) only do I pray, but for them also who through their word shall believe in me. That they all may be one, as thou, Father, in me, and I in thee; that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
M
miguel
Guest
This is not a reference to the Ascension. It is a reference to the 2nd Coming. Leela’s observation that it didn’t happen is correct. It’s a prophecy that has yet to be fulfilled.
M
miguel
Guest
I think the miracles recorded in the Gospels by eyewitnesses is convincing that Jesus was who he claimed to be. We would expect the creator of nature to have dominion over nature. First and foremost his own resurrection, the raising of Lazurus from the dead, miraculous healings of all sorts (of the lame, lepers, the blind), calming the storm, walking on water, multiplying the loaves and the fishes (5000 people saw that one), the casting out of demons. Anyone could walk up to you on the street claiming to be God. Not just anyone could prove it. And Jesus, no doubt, knows how skeptical we all are. So he did prove it to his contemporaries. And they wrote down for posterity what they saw. And most of these eyewitnesses died martyrs deaths. Do people willingly undergo martyrdom for a lie?
P
PRmerger
Guest
Ok…
But I believe that Catholics may have a diversity of opinion regarding this text–yes?
M
miguel
Guest
Personally, I don’t think so but I have no control over people’s opinions. The Ascension wasn’t accompanied by the mourning of all the tribes of the earth. And the Son of Man coming is not the same as the Son of Man going. The Ascension was only witnessed by his apostles.
P
PRmerger
Guest
You mean that personally you don’t think my interpretation on this text is correct, or do you mean that you don’t think that we’re allowed as Catholics to have a diversity of opinion regarding this?
M
miguel
Guest
Please don’t take offense, but yes.
I think we have a responsibility to find out how the Church views it.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Not offended one bit! That’s just what I understand the text to mean. But who am I? Certainly not a Scripture scholar; certainly not the Magisterium!
Well, this is my point. Is there an official teaching by the Church on how to read that verse? * I don’t think there is*, which means that Catholics are allowed a diversity of opinion regarding that text.
M
miguel
Guest
Good.
The Catechism in the section explaining the Creed where it says “He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead.” refers to the passage in a footnote.
**671 **Though already present in his Church, Christ’s reign is nevertheless yet to be fulfilled “with power and great glory” by the King’s return to earth.556
556 Lk 21:27; cf. Mt 25:31.
vatican.va/archive/catechism/p1s2c2a7.htm#I
Luke 21:27
And then they shall see the Son of man coming in a cloud, with great power and majesty.
Mathew 25:31
And when the Son of man shall come in his majesty, and all the angels with him, then shall he sit upon the seat of his majesty.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Ah. I see. I stand corrected, then. :tiphat:Good.
The Catechism in the section explaining the Creed where it says “He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead.” refers to the passage in a footnote.
**671 **Though already present in his Church, Christ’s reign is nevertheless yet to be fulfilled “with power and great glory” by the King’s return to earth.556
556 Lk 21:27; cf. Mt 25:31.
vatican.va/archive/catechism/p1s2c2a7.htm#I
Luke 21:27
And then they shall see the Son of man coming in a cloud, with great power and majesty.
Mathew 25:31
And when the Son of man shall come in his majesty, and all the angels with him, then shall he sit upon the seat of his majesty.
M
miguel
Guest
The Catechism is a treasure trove of footnotes like that with quick references to Scripture, the Fathers, Conciliar documents, etc. I always start there. You can’t go wrong. JPII called it a “sure norm”.- Status