Umm… where do you see God as saying that He’ll do another ‘Sodom & Gomorrah’ number in the context of the New Covenant? Where do you see that this type of punishment is applicable in these, the end times (which were inaugurated with the birth of the Church)? Just curious…
*Whatever town or village you enter, look for a worthy person in it, and stay there until you leave.Umm… where do you see God as saying that He’ll do another ‘Sodom & Gomorrah’ number in the context of the New Covenant? Where do you see that this type of punishment is applicable in these, the end times (which were inaugurated with the birth of the Church)? Just curious…
An observation: How can anyone who has read the New Testament not be worried about the consequences of misunderstanding that Jesus came to perfect the Law, not to abolish it or merely reiterate it?
So, let me make sure I understand what you’re saying, since when people talk about modern-day “Sodom and Gomorrah” judgments, they’re generally talking about God punishing groups of people in the context of the ‘here-and-now’: are you suggesting that God will rain down fire on the earth as a punishment upon people in this life? Or are you suggesting that Jesus’ statement, which you quoted above, is speaking about the eschaton?
With all due respect I am not obliged to believe in your private personal interpretations of Scripture, on the contrary I will follow Catholic doctrine regarding the matter.An observation: How can anyone who has read the New Testament not be worried about the consequences of misunderstanding that Jesus came to perfect the Law, not to abolish it or merely reiterate it?
To honestly answer your question, though, these consequences will be felt upon individuals, at their particular judgment, not on nations or cities or towns.
All good soldiers defer to the Church regarding this matter. Father William Saunders writes:
Fair enough. Yet, I see that you’re unable to answer my question. Let me help you: in the Scripture citation you provided, Jesus says, “on that day.” He’s talking about the day of judgment: not any arbitrary day in the history of mankind, but on the day of judgment itself, when all humans will be judged. You see, towns and cities do not suffer judgment; people do. On the day of judgment, if the entire populace of a town rejected Jesus, then they will suffer punishment for that action. That’s not a “personal interpretation;” that’s the teaching of the Church.
Let’s be perfectly clear: I’m not telling you that you cannot believe this notion that you’re espousing. Rather, I’m telling you that this isn’t the interpretation that the Church demands of its faithful. Therefore, what you shouldn’t be doing is telling us that your interpretation is the only one that the Church proposes.
Humor me, please: how does the description of the second coming answer my question to you? It was a simple question, really: are you talking about a Sodom-and-Gomorrah style destruction of a region in the course of history (which is what people generally mean when they warn of God’s retribution, and so, lacking any further commentary from you, I’ll assume that this is what you mean), or are you talking about general judgment at the second coming of Christ?
I will defer to the Church on these matters. Please read the commentary I quoted. Not our will but God’s.
With all due respect, you are giving your personal opinion. But the Catechism of the Catholic Church doesn’t say that the Church favors the “preterist” view in Scripture interpretation. Instead, the Church seems to teach equally about four senses of Scripture interpretation, one of which is anagogical or viewing events in terms of their eternal significance. Here’s what it says about it:The thing is – and i think this addresses your ‘fundamentalist’ questions precisely – the Catholic approach to Revelation is generally preterist rather than futurist. That being the case, the very attempt to identify the ‘whore of babylon’ or to map the second coming on a timeline of current events… well, it sounds a lot more fundamentalist than it does Catholic. And so, that’s my guess at why you’re getting those charges leveled at you…
In revelation it does. Trying to interpret revelation literally and/or apply the subjects to current individuals/countries is absurd.
Do you believe that the Second Coming will literally happen? If so, why wouldn’t the events leading up to it apply to the real world? The only rule the Catholic Church has for interpreting Scripture is that we can’t interpret it to go against any of the Church’s official magisterial doctrines. There is no Church prohibition against interpreting Scripture prophecies to apply to nations and events in the real world.
Yes, because Paul speaks about it, and Jesus as well. I don’t depend upon Revelation for all of my end-time doctrine. In fact, if you’d read some good scholarship on the matter (The Lamb’s Supper, ignatius study bible), you’d see that Revelation actually has a lot to do with the Mass.
How long has so-called “abortion rights” been in existence? How long have countries defined marriage in their laws to include sodomy? How long has the world had to live under fear of nuclear war which can destroy the whole earth? I never denied that Revelation can be interpreted to apply to the Mass. But that’s not the only way it can be interpreted.
How long have women and children been taken as slaves after a war and used for sex legally, their husbands killed and tortured? How long has sodomy and sex with other men, women, and children, even when married, been accepted? How long has exterminating the population of a conquered town or city been acceptable? How long have plagues and incurable diseases ravaged the land and killed 2/3 of the population? How long have children been sacrificed to Moloch through burning?
Although history doesn’t necessarily repeat itself(as in you don’t have the same people making the same choices throughout history) it does rhyme.
I’m fine with this. There’s nothing wrong here. But the op is trying to actually apply Revelation and it’s subjects to current nations and people. This is impossible.Although history doesn’t necessarily repeat itself(as in you don’t have the same people making the same choices throughout history) it does rhyme.
There’s really no reason not to think that the cataclysms that Revelation spoke of in John’s time, which eventually came upon Jerusalem at the hands of Rome as well as upon pagan Rome itself, could not eventually fall upon, say, the likes of any other city. Cities and cultures have imploded all throughout history under their own weight and the natural consequences of their manifold sins.
I’ve never considered these cataclysms as judgments upon individuals by God in those cities or cultures but rather God’s judgment on sin which these cultures have identified themselves with and institutionalized. It’s not God that sends the cataclysms but rather it is the manifold sins of that culture which create or invite the cataclysms they suffer and which cause their implosions.
FYI: I proudly identify myself as a Catholic fundamentalist
Livingwordunity, I’m on your side all the way. Many Catholics these days feel like they have to fit into some common nich to be able to feel authentically orthodox. It’s baloney. The Catechism tells us that many if the faithful will be tricked -and that’s because as Catholics, there are an infinite number of ways in which we are free to form our own opinion on things.
many of the Saints were ridiculed in their day.Catholics are free to form opinions on things as they choose, as long as those things do not contradict Catholic doctrine/teachings made formal. Miracles, however should be approved by the Papacy as authentic before we put any faith into them as being supernatural… But our conscience does indeed play a part in our personal faith.