Why doesn't God destroy the devil now?

[Q_Bee]

**Hog wash!

**I look at Revelations and it’s end and I question why a new earth and a new heaven. Does the Salvation history start all over again? ****

---

---

---

The “Book of Revelation” [singlular; no “s” ending] is just what it’s named, which is taken from a biblical literary form - a revelation. It takes its form from ‘apocalyptic writing’, which we can compare to the function of a prophet, who is not a fortune-teller. The prophet’s role is not to see into the future but to speak for God in the contemporary situation. The prophet’s message often concerns the future because s/he warns the people of future ramifications of their present behavior: Infidelity to the covenant brings suffering while fidelity to the covenant brings joy. But the prophet’s primary intent is to speak to his contemporaries about their present condition.

Conventions of Apocalyptic Writing:
In corporation of material presented as if the ideas came through dreams, visions, or auditory transmissions

Sealed Revelation:
Since the ‘revelation’ has been sealed in a book and will only be opened at the end of time, that time is the time when the original audience was reading it. In other words, all of time is continuously in ‘the end of time’.

The above notes are paraphrasing from the book “And God Said What?: An Introduction to Biblical Literary Forms” by Margaret Nutting Ralph, secretary of educational ministries for the Roman Catholic Diocese of Lexington, Kentucky, director of the master’s degree programs for Roman Catholics at Lexington Theological Seminary.

Q<

 

[Q_Bee]

In answer to your question, each moment we live begins a new heaven and a new earth if we live in cooperation with and as co-creators in an ongoing creation. Remember, God rested; creation didn’t stop at a completion point. In Christ, all things are made new. We are in Christ, and Christ is in the Father and the Father is in him.

When Jesus was questioned concerning healing on the Sabbath he said, “My Father is at work until now, so I am at work” (John 5:17).

Q<

 

[CatsAndDogs]

Quote:
Originally Posted by CatsAndDogs View Post

In any case, atheists is FUN to play with! Much better than Leggos, or photoshopping disparaging jpegs of “Bambie and The Hair-Club-For-Men Guy”.

Love your sense of humor and willingness to not take yourself too seriously!

PLEASE! No one should take ME (especially!), or anyone, in a venue like this (internet forum) particularly seriously! EVER!

I play in Photoshop and other venues, but try not to get caught up in too many issues, have an aversion to parroted Vatican documents, memorized quips, or papal quotes made to look like Jesus’ words in red-letted edition… remembering the ‘good ole days’ when canned quotes from the Baltimore Catechism dominated the scene.

I only discovered I was Catholic a year and a half ago, so I’m not overly stuck in the inertia that I see in so many “cradle Catholics”, which is not to be disparaging of “those people”, but only a rather obvious observation.

As I am constantly saying, and actually DO mean when I say it, I’m not interested in converting anyone and don’t engage in ANY attempts to do so! I merely comment on what other people say, from my own (possibly bizarre) point of view, and keep the “ball bouncing” into my conversation partner’s court as long as possible.

It’s a welcome relief to read something from people who actually think out their own thoughts, discern, engage in lectio divina, etc.

Personally, I don’t like “verse quoters” very much if they don’t interpret (with referenced assistance from the Magisterium) their quotations, and respond to my comments on their interpretations.

But, that may just be me. I don’t know.

I tend to be very “compassionately crotchety”.

 

[CatsAndDogs]

Hog wash! God destroys as well creates. In the end God will throw Satan into the Lake of Fire which is the Second Death. Death of the Soul. God destroyed all the dinosaurs. I doubt man had a part in that at all.

God doesn’t “annihilate” satan when He drops him in the lake of fire. Satan continues to exist AS SATAN, and suffers for it for ETERNITY.

God simply “dissolved” the matter of the dinosaurs so that it could be “re-formed” into other things. God did NOT “annihilate” the matter of the dinosaurs.

God NEVER destroys! He simply puts eternal things where they are supposed to go when it is their time for eternal deposition, and recycles non-eternal things (aka non-personal [person connected] matter) within the creation until it’s “new heavens and new earth” time.

Hog wash again! God desires all men to be saved, yet God allows Satan and his Angels to do as they please so that many men will not be saved.

To a point I agree with Bill Maher. God could just stop this silly game and irradicate the sources of temptation, namely and primarily Satan and his angels.

Why the neccessity of all this dramatic climax.

Is this a question? Are you asking for an answer to this?

I look at Revelations and it’s end and I question why a new earth and a new heaven. Does the Salvation history start all over again?

No. Salvation history is finished when the history portion of our show, the pre-Christ coming back part, is over and all revocable choices have been made by each and every person (God, angels, and human-persons).

Once “history ends” the “salvation status” of each “salvable” thing, also know as every “person”, is set for eternity, and the “rewards” of that status are experienced by those persons forever and ever, amen.

Any questions?

 

[Q_Bee]

Has anyone on this forum read the book “The Shack” by William P. Young?

It’s been on the best seller list for a while now and is generating a lot of conversation concerning evil in the world, personal relationship with the Divine, forgiveness, and institutionalism of religion.

I’m interested in hearing what others who’ve read the book thought of it.

Q<

 

[Q_Bee]

PLEASE! No one should take ME (especially!), or anyone, in a venue like this (internet forum) particularly seriously! EVER!

Personally, I don’t like “verse quoters” very much if they don’t interpret (with referenced assistance from the Magisterium) their quotations, and respond to my comments on their interpretations.

But, that may just be me. I don’t know.

I tend to be very “compassionately crotchety”.

Catholics need to be more aware of what their sacred scriptures actually say, beyond the selective quotes taken out of context and edited for lectionary readings, which are more valid than what the Magisterium has to say. I’d rather get my basis of faith from the actual source, not a predigested version that comes out in legaleze from people who feel they are supposed to do my thinking for me.

Q<

 

[Matariel]

Catholics need to be more aware of what their sacred scriptures actually say, beyond the selective quotes taken out of context and edited for lectionary readings, which are more valid than what the Magisterium has to say.

The Holy Scriptures support the Magisterium to a tee. You seem to be under the delusion that they are somehow conflicting (in which case you’d be unorthodox).

I’d rather get my basis of faith from the actual source, not a predigested version that comes out in legaleze from people who feel they are supposed to do my thinking for me.

*]>Q<

Wow. You have a very low view of our spiritual shepherds. If you don’t like the Church, and think she’s sexist, pompous, and overly-magisterial, then why do you continue to be a cafeteria Catholic? Why not just leave? No offense… but, seriously…

 

[Q_Bee]

The Holy Scriptures support the Magisterium to a tee. You seem to be under the delusion that they are somehow conflicting (in which case you’d be unorthodox).

Wow. You have a very low view of our spiritual shepherds. If you don’t like the Church, and think she’s sexist, pompous, and overly-magisterial, then why do you continue to be a cafeteria Catholic? Why not just leave? No offense… but, seriously…

You’ve presented nothingto sustantiate your position, but went on attack again the person rather than the points in question. Maybe you could present something that makes a point for discussion.

Q<

 

[SFTor]

The Trinity has always been in existence. There is also plenty of evidence out there supporting this. This link quotes Church Fathers, Popes, Saints, etc. almost all of whom wrote about the doctrine of the Trinity before the year A.D. 325.

Yes, they are. They can teach. In fact, many catechists are females. Simply because they cannot receive Holy Orders doesn’t mean that they aren’t treated equally. Men can’t become nuns, can they? No, of course not. Why? Because men fulfill certain roles that are for men, just as women fulfill certain roles that are for women. To say that they are the same is a slap to both sexes.

You are most certainly reading into this one. It is taken completely out of context. Tantum ergo is simply describing those holy women who we never hear about (hence the word “quiet”) who lead simple, ordinary lives. The same could be said about men.

Schnitz, this doesn’t fly.

The one about men not being able to become nuns is especially heavy in the hindquarters.They can become monks. If you don’t see that the Catholic Church treats men and women differently I would suggest a visit to the optician.

John Paul II wrote:

“[The Church] holds that it is not admissible to ordain women to the priesthood, for very fundamental reasons. These reasons include: the example recorded in the Sacred Scriptures of Christ choosing his Apostles only from among men; the constant practice of the Church, which has imitated Christ in choosing only men; and her living teaching authority which has consistently held that the exclusion of women from the priesthood is in accordance with God’s plan for his Church.”

So women can give you a heart transplant, be President of your country, and teach your children in school, but they can’t preach to a congregation?

Schnitz, this is not a forum visited by stupid people. It won’t do to advance nonsensical arguments.

As far as the Trinity is concerned, you know as well as I do that there are a couple of vague allusions to it in the NT, at best. What saints said since is something that you may give some credence to. I will not.

Best,

Tor

 

[SFTor]

**Hog wash! God destroys as well creates. In the end God will throw Satan into the Lake of Fire which is the Second Death. Death of the Soul. God destroyed all the dinosaurs. I doubt man had a part in that at all. **

---

Hog wash again! God desires all men to be saved, yet God allows Satan and his Angels to do as they please so that many men will not be saved.

---

**To a point I agree with Bill Maher. God could just stop this silly game and irradicate the sources of temptation, namely and primarily Satan and his angels. **

---

**Why the neccessity of all this dramatic climax. **

---

**I look at Revelations and it’s end and I question why a new earth and a new heaven. Does the Salvation history start all over again? **

---

---

---

The lake of fire? You have got to be kidding.

You doubt that man had a role in destroying the dinosaurs? Now what would make you think such a thing? The fact that they are separated by 65 million years? Or do you believe that Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a Triceratops?

And Joey, isn’t this firmament awfully crowded for a monotheistic religion? How many angels, demons, Beelzebubs, and Malchizedeks are up (or down) there exactly?

Best,

tor

 

[SFTor]

Do you really think that, for example, the books of the New Testament, which were written in the 1st century AD of events that took place then, by men who lived then (under the guidance of the Holy Spirit). . .were 'held to those cultural norms then which no longer exist today?"

Are you arguing that because ‘today’ women are arguably more equal in social position etc. than in those times, that what was written in the New Testament only relates to ‘those times’ in so far as you personally do not find the teachings ‘acceptable’ in regard to women and men?

Do you think that if God exists, and Christ came as He did, that He was not perfectly capable of transcending things like culture and that what was written and taught would not likewise be ‘godly’ and ‘eternal’ and above all true for ALL time, not ‘just’ ‘those times’?

It appears that God was so far ‘beyond’ the scope of early man-- 1st century AD man–medieval man–contemporary man–and FUTURE MAN–that the teachings He gave are relevant and true for ALL MEN/WOMEN whether they lived in the Stone Age, today, or in ‘the year 2525’ and beyond. God doesn’t bend in the wind to accommodate the ‘winds of change’ that can–and do–change back with some regularity. (if you honestly think that ‘all women’ of Biblical times were downtrodden, uneducated, and despised, I suggest you do some research as you have been misinformed).

P.S. I’m a woman myself, and very happy to be a member of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church which acknowledges the beauty and equality of men and women (and always has) even when many other cultural and social groups in history did not.

Except that this highly egalitarian Church will not let you be a priest. Oh no, you must have a penis for that to be open to you. How is that for acknowledging the equality between men and women?

Best,

Tor

 

[Q_Bee]

The lake of fire? You have got to be kidding.

You doubt that man had a role in destroying the dinosaurs? Now what would make you think such a thing? The fact that they are separated by 65 million years? Or do you believe that Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a Triceratops?

And Joey, isn’t this firmament awfully crowded for a monotheistic religion? How many angels, demons, Beelzebubs, and Malchizedeks are up (or down) there exactly?

Best,

tor

Excellent! The Triceratops remark is a hoot! Wouldn’t it be nice to have a few more people who study in this forum and know what they’re talking about?

Q<

 

[SFTor]

Because God/Being in the Universe as we experience it implies its inverse or shadow, Nonbeing. Light implies Shadow. Existence is walking the tightrope between being and nonbeing. To destroy nonbeing would negate being, and the simple reason God does not do this is that God loves his Creation.

That is nothing more than a dualistic perspective of the world. Nonbeing is a construct of the mind. Light implies light, nothing else. Darkness is not non-light, just the absence of light. Everything is still there, it’s just that you can’t see it with your eyes. It’s a limitation of your physical capabilities. If in doubt ask your cat if you have one. Cats can see when we can’t.

We have grown past these shallow constructs. We are. The idea that we could also non-are is as deep as saying that a pig may not wear lipstick. Or non-lipstick.

Or do you believe in non-pigs, too?

Best,

Tor

 

[Q_Bee]

Except that this highly egalitarian Church will not let you be a priest. Oh no, you must have a penis for that to be open to you. How is that for acknowledging the equality between men and women?

Best,

Tor

What’s being taught is that the Holy Spirit can’t possibly call a female to holy orders. I’d say that the hierarchy is placing limits on the Holy Spirit. How’s that for spiritual pride! To not even consider that there might be a vocation is sacrilege. And women who defend such a stance must be suffering Stockholm Syndrome.

Q<

 

[SFTor]

What’s being taught is that the Holy Spirit can’t possibly call a female to holy orders. I’d say that the hierarchy is placing limits on the Holy Spirit. How’s that for spiritual pride! To not even consider that there might be a vocation is sacrilege. And women who defend such a stance must be suffering Stockholm Syndrome.

Q<

Catholic reality is highly malleable as far as i can tell.

God doesn’t want women too close to him. A highly advanced idea by any measure.

Best,

Tor

 

[SFTor]

Excellent! The Triceratops remark is a hoot! Wouldn’t it be nice to have a few more people who study in this forum and know what they’re talking about?

Q<

Hi Q:

I find such a variety of Catholics here. Some are highly advanced, other will blithely quote Revelation, horns, harlots and all without reflecting over it for a second.

I won’t sit still for that.

Best,

Tor

 

[rinnie]

Excellent! The Triceratops remark is a hoot! Wouldn’t it be nice to have a few more people who study in this forum and know what they’re talking about?

Q<

Boy Q bee i just said awhile back that someone was wrong, and you said my comment was highly offensive. Then you turn around and say this, Maybe you should practice what you preach!

 

[Q_Bee]

Hi Q:

I find such a variety of Catholics here. Some are highly advanced, other will blithely quote Revelation, horns, harlots and all without reflecting over it for a second.

I won’t sit still for that.

Best,

Tor

Dear Tor,

It would be spectacular if even half of the population of this list were to read a basic primer on biblical literary genres. When I teach RCIA I often give out copies of “And God Said What?” to people who can’t afford a copy. It’s the best value and quickest way to get past ingorant fundamentalist notions. Ho-hum… maybe the pontificators only read posts on lists, but nothing on which to base a sound scriptural understanding.

Q<

 

[CatsAndDogs]

Catholics need to be more aware of what their sacred scriptures actually say, beyond the selective quotes taken out of context and edited for lectionary readings, which are more valid than what the Magisterium has to say. I’d rather get my basis of faith from the actual source, not a predigested version that comes out in legaleze from people who feel they are supposed to do my thinking for me.

Q<

Unfortunately, we non-Magisterial humans are not qualified to “MORE bordering on MOST” exhaustively interpret scripture.

And since scripture is only a subset of the deposit of faith, it’s rather silly to base all “faith and moral” questions of a subset of the thing which they should be based on. Yes, no? Mais oui?

For a final decision as to what scripture means, one simply must rely on a God-given singular authority. That authority is the Magisterium of the Church.

If someone can show me how they are more, not “as well”, qualified to “most exhaustively” interpret scripture than the Magisterium then I’ll be happy to call them Pope.

 

[Q_Bee]

Boy Q bee i just said awhile back that someone was wrong, and you said my comment was highly offensive. Then you turn around and say this, Maybe you should practice what you preach!

I went all the way back to early July and couldn’t find any post where you “just said that”. Maybe I missed something. Would you be so kind as to direct me to the post in which “just said that”?

Q<