T
TOmNossor
Guest
Hope_Philomena:
Last edited:
- Status
R
Reuben_J
Guest
Think of it this way - anyone can be saved at it is today. God plan of salvation is by using a chosen people for Him to bring about His saving action and revelation in time of history. This culminated in the Good News of Jesus redemptive death on the cross which is for the whole world to know and for those who knew to bring it to those who have not.
It’s not necessary for it to happen in every culture as it does not guarantee believing, even from among the chosen people itself.
It’s not necessary for it to happen in every culture as it does not guarantee believing, even from among the chosen people itself.
A
AlNg
Guest
How do you explain the fact that God gets angry at times:
He displays his wrath every day Psalm7:11.
God was angry with Solomon 1Kings 11:9.
and
Romans 1:18
Deuteronomy 29:20
and
Jesus got angry Mark 3:4.
R
Reuben_J
Guest
God deals with the bad and good or sin and righteousness accordingly. Humans may call them anger or being pleased, depending on what it may be.
R
Reuben_J
Guest
Not, if you have been with the Church 1800 years. Nothing new actually. What are new are what people do in recent times forgetting what the Church has done from the beginning.
J
jas84173
Guest
If Mary was born without sin how could she have been redeemed by Christ with the rest of humanity? She’s basically a god with the Immaculate Conception and that’s just fact.
R
Reuben_J
Guest
That’s not what Immaculate Conception is.
J
jas84173
Guest
Watch it people flag this I have come to notice.
Yes it was the biggest mistake in the history of the Church and its legality is questionable when you read the Council of Trents conditions on the Liturgy. It was not supposed to be reversed. The Missal could be updated which it was a few times but the complete overhaul of the Mass and then people being so hostile to the form of mass celebrated for 400 years for this new Anglican style service is the most sad thing.
Yes it was the biggest mistake in the history of the Church and its legality is questionable when you read the Council of Trents conditions on the Liturgy. It was not supposed to be reversed. The Missal could be updated which it was a few times but the complete overhaul of the Mass and then people being so hostile to the form of mass celebrated for 400 years for this new Anglican style service is the most sad thing.
J
jas84173
Guest
Oh Mary conceived without sin pray for us who have recourse to you?
D
Don_Ruggero
Guest
The Missal of Divine Worship is a great masterpiece.
R
Reuben_J
Guest
Yes, she was conceived without sin and like all of us, was redeemed by Jesus. Her immaculate conception does not contradict that.
A
AlNg
Guest
Is it true that St. Thomas Aquinas (the Angelic Doctor) and the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Oriental Orthodox Church do not accept the Immaculate Conception? If the Catholic Church taught the Immaculate Conception all along and it was not anything new, why don’t other apostolic churches and why doesn’t St. Thomas Aquinas accept it?
D
Don_Ruggero
Guest
Saint Thomas Aquinas predates the dogmatic definition. In his time, there was a disputed question concerning the reconciliation of this point to other critical values, which was his great concern. The Franciscans provide the resolution by means of prevenient grace which, in fact, preserves the values at the center of the concerns of Thomas.
The East uses an entirely different paradigm in speaking of the Theotokos. She is the Panagia which conceptually is above and beyond the Occidental definition of the Immaculate Conception since the latter is, essentially, a negative formulation in its dogmatic definition.
D
DetectiveNiko
Guest
This explains it pretty well
P
PJM
Guest
That my friend is a good and a fair question;
Mt 10: 1-8 "[1] And he called to him his twelve disciples and gave them authority over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal every disease and every infirmity.
[2] The names of the twelve apostles are these: first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zeb’edee, and John his brother;
[3] Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus;
[4] Simon the Cananaean, and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him.
**[5] These twelve Jesus sent out, charging them, “Go nowhere among the Gentiles, and enter no town of the Samaritans, **
[6] but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
[7] And preach as you go, saying, `The kingdom of heaven is at hand.’
[8] Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse lepers, cast out demons. You received without paying, give without pay”
The answer is that the “Jews” were given first opportunity and MANY of them choose to reject the long promised Messiah
Micah, chapter 5: 1* But you, Bethlehem-Ephrathaha least among the clans of Judah, From you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel; Whose origin is from of old, from ancient times. Isaiah also prophesied Christ birth; and Jesus and most of the Apostles were Jews.
Mt 28:19-20 “[19][YOU] Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
[20] teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age.”
They had [and still have [1 Tim 2:3-4] their chance as GOD commits Himself to OFFER EVERY human Soul sufficient grace that EVERY human soul they CAN/could. should Know HIM. But then and now; God’s OFFER can be rejected.
God Bless you
Patrick
Mt 10: 1-8 "[1] And he called to him his twelve disciples and gave them authority over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal every disease and every infirmity.
[2] The names of the twelve apostles are these: first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zeb’edee, and John his brother;
[3] Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus;
[4] Simon the Cananaean, and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him.
**[5] These twelve Jesus sent out, charging them, “Go nowhere among the Gentiles, and enter no town of the Samaritans, **
[6] but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
[7] And preach as you go, saying, `The kingdom of heaven is at hand.’
[8] Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse lepers, cast out demons. You received without paying, give without pay”
The answer is that the “Jews” were given first opportunity and MANY of them choose to reject the long promised Messiah
Micah, chapter 5: 1* But you, Bethlehem-Ephrathaha least among the clans of Judah, From you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel; Whose origin is from of old, from ancient times. Isaiah also prophesied Christ birth; and Jesus and most of the Apostles were Jews.
Mt 28:19-20 “[19][YOU] Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
[20] teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age.”
They had [and still have [1 Tim 2:3-4] their chance as GOD commits Himself to OFFER EVERY human Soul sufficient grace that EVERY human soul they CAN/could. should Know HIM. But then and now; God’s OFFER can be rejected.
God Bless you
Patrick
T
TOmNossor
Guest
You ask how can God be impassible in light of the scriptures that clearly teach that God is passible?Hope_Philomena:
How do you explain the fact that God gets angry at times:
He displays his wrath every day Psalm7:11.
God was angry with Solomon 1Kings 11:9.
and
Romans 1:18
Deuteronomy 29:20
and
Jesus got angry Mark 3:4.
Father Thomas Weinandy and Eastern Orthodox scholar Paul Gavrilyuk are quite clear that any Christian that wishes to embrace the Nicene Creed and/or call themselves the successor of Athanasius or Augustine or … simply must know that God is impassible. This is historic Christianity. This is Eastern Orthodoxy and Catholicism. So if Father Thomas Weinandy knows Catholicism (and I believe he does), then Catholics need to align scriptures that teach a passible God with the FACT that God is impassible.
The way this is done has ancient Christian roots. Scholars use classifications and two ancient classifications relevant to this discussion are the Alexandrian School and the Antiochian School. Very early in both of these schools one of the broad strokes scholars paint them with concerns the allegorical or the literal interpretation of scripture. The Alexandrian School’s allegorical interpretation has won the hearts and minds of Christian thinkers from Origin to Athanasius to Augustine. Those scriptures you site are not to be read literally. When they prescribe emotion to God, they mean that God’s actions can be understood by humans through these emotional references, but that God who is impassible is not really experiencing emotions.
The Alexandrian school through Clement of Alexandria taught that philosophy was “a schoolmaster to bring the Hellenic mind, as the law the Hebrews, to Christ.” Or more famously “philosophy is the handmaiden of theology.” I am a fan of the precision of philosophy, but historic Christianity imbibed of Greek thought excessively.
I personally think too much was allegoricalized and I reject God’s impassibility as being non-scriptural and ultimately ugly. That being said, having read Weinandy and Gavrilyuk I think I see the lure AND I must acknowledge that humans tend to bring God down to themselves too much so this could explain SOME of how the Bible clearly teaches a passible God (it was written for and by passible humans).
Charity, TOm
G
godisgood77
Guest
I find it interesting and confusing that the Church over time has developed practices and traditions that have no basis in scripture, revelation or early tradition…but the creed and the mass remain true
F
fredystairs
Guest
Since Jesus is fully man as well as being fully God, he could have emotions.
A
AlNg
Guest
Right. Anytime you disagree with Scripture, it is easy to say that those passages should not be taken literally. Of course, when you do agree, then you say that it should be taken literally.
- Status