'The Nativity Story' Movie Problematic for Catholics, "Unsuitable" for Young Children

Where in heaven’s name did you get this idea? Christ and the Apostles used the Septuagint which contains the Apocrypha For lurkers, FTD subscribes to a 19th century extremist Lutheran Old Testament scholar who denies Septuagint. FTD claims that LXX was retro-written by Greek Christians to make it "fit" the New Testament. In other words, FTD says that Septuagint is, to put it simply, a fraud. You may want to take that in to consideration when discussing this with this individual.

And do you have any manuscript proof that an B.C. LXX actually existed.

All you do have is some BC fragments of the Torah, which were likely Targums, not part of any complete LXX

Christ and the Apostles never quoted from any LXX or the Apocrypha.

What you are perpetuating is the myth of the B.C. LXX.

Maybe it depends on our ears, and our ability to hear. No accounting for taste, someone smart said.

“True Christians had the Old Testament that the Lord used, the Jewish Canon,...” Where in heaven’s name did you get this idea? Christ and the Apostles used the Septuagint which contains the Apocrypha. The so called “Jewish Canon” wasn’t put together until the Council of Jamnia in the late 1st century AD.

Christ never quoted from any LXX or Apocyrpha.

The Council of Jamnia did not put any Canon together.

It only recognized what already existed as being the Jewish Canon.

Christ idenified the Canon in the Gospels, which was composed of the Books of Moses, the Prophets and the Writings, 22 Books, our present 39.

The Jews have always had the Torah and the Prophets. The books in dispute at the Council were minor books. When Christ said “It is written” he was definitely referring to Torah and the Prophets.

Actually, in Lk.11:51, Christ states that the generation would be guilty of the 'blood of Abel to that of Zacharias'.

In the Jewish Canon, the last book was 2Chronicles, which is where Zacharias was killed (2Chro.24:20-21), thus, giving the entire Jewish Canon approval.

Even during the Apostolic Era we have examples of a priestly class subverting Christianity for their own empowerment. 3John:9"I wrote to the church but Diotrphes who loves to have preeminence among them, does not receive us."

Amen.

Unto the church of Ephesus write....I know thy work and thy labour and thy patience and how thou canst not bear them that are evil: which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars (Rev.2:2)

This is so "RC". Why is it surprising?

It's not, since it is false.

Dr. F. F. Bruce correctly points out that, strictly speaking, the LXX deals only with the Law and not the whole Old Testament. Bruce writes, “ The Jews might have gone on at a later time to authorize a standard text of the rest of the Septuagint, but . . . lost interest in the Septuagint altogether. With but few exceptions, every manuscript of the Septuagint which has come down to our day was copied and preserved in Christian, not Jewish, circles.” (The Books and the Parchments, p.150). This is important to note because the manuscripts which consist of our LXX today date to the third century AD. Although there are fragments which pre-date Christianity and some of the Hebrew DSS agree with the LXX, the majority of manuscripts we have of the LXX date well into the Christian era. And, not all of these agree.
http://www.purewords.org/kjb1611/html/lesson08.htm

For us all, my Prayer is that we will 'Grow in Grace, and in the Knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.' (2Pet.3:18)

Amen, KM. Thanks so much for your kind words. God Bless you. :)

AG: "To paraphrase, if we declare Christ, He will declare us – if we deny Him, he will deny us."

Kosta: "And here I thought faith was a free (unconditional) gift of God as they say. Seems like there are some heavy ropes attached to this."

God is in full control. This is not the conveyance of an arms-length offer, such as "if you cut my grass, I will give you $25." Rather, it is a statement of immutable fact, such as "if you drop a hammer, it will fall". God's will decides whether we ever declare Christ, for we are fully dependent on Him for the grace to do so.

Ignatius used the word 'Catholic' in the sense of the church being 'universal', which is what the mystical church is

Do you know that because your half-educated pastor told you, or you've been there and talked to St. Ingatius?

Chapter 8. Let nothing be done without the bishop.
See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid.
To the Smyrnaeans

Was the "bishop" also a mystical one?

The early churches had nothing that could identify them with the Roman Catholic Church today, including a 'Priest class'.

Once more, you have the fantasies, I have the quote above.

[.. Unto the church of Ephesus write....I know thy work and thy labour and thy patience and how thou canst not bear them that are evil: which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars (Rev.2:2) ..]

Exactly.. (( EVIL ))... WoW.. Was true then AND Now..
However the Church "at" Philadelphia had the best part..

Yes, great point ftd, thanks!

Of course Adam was created perfect and the comparsion is made in Romans 5

Wrong. That would make Adam divine. Only God is perfect.

Christ had two natures and two wills, thus His human will just as able to fall as was the first Adam

Nope. That would make Him imperfect. There was no possibility for Christ to sin. His two wills are in perfect harmony.

The Trinity is made up of three persons who share the same divine essence

Which is godliness or deity. There is no "His" (Christ's) deity; it's the same essence of the Father and the Holy Ghost.

Well of course not, you have your own personal theological system going, that ~~rejects~~ interpret what the Bible says and what your own Church teaches

That makes me a "Protestant" I suppose. They are just my opinions. I defer to the Church in the final analysis; a Protestant remains his own "pontiff."

the manuscripts which consist of our LXX today date to the third century AD

The oldest complete bibles (with some books later discarded, i.e. Epistle of Barnabas, etc.) date to the 4th century. The oldest fragments (more like "shreds" containing a dozen verses) of various Gospels are copies of copies, the oldest one being John 1 dated c. 125 AD.

According to this logic (I agree with Bruce) copies of ciopies, removed hundreds ofyears from originals (if there were complete originals) is not enough to retro-engineer any piece of OT/NT without having the original.

Doing so, necessarily makes the Bible a human product. Also, the fact that some of the Hebrew language DSS agree with pre-Christian fragments of LXX shows that there was no single Jewish canon.

But we have already discussed this ad nauseum.

God's will decides whether we ever declare Christ, for we are fully dependent on Him for the grace to do so

Then we are helpless and hopeless. But, in Christ, everyone is invited. God knocks on everyone's heart and doesn't bar anyone from coming to Him. The decision is ours, by His permission.

Thank God, He offers His love to all. He favors no one.

Maybe it depends on our ears, and our ability to hear

Maybe it depends what we (don't) know.

No accounting for taste, someone smart said

It's an old Latin excpression de gustibus non est disputandum (of taste, there is no disputing). I am not disputuing your taste (or intention).

I hope y’all don’t mind – but I’ve been out-of-town for several days and a lot has transpired on this thread since then, so I’m consolidating my replies into a single post.

annalex 13566: A baptism is valid whenever water is used, there is a willing parent and/or sponsor, nd it is done in the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit by one intending to initiate the baptized as a Christian. It can even be done, in emergency, by a non-Christian! … Therefore the vast majority of the baptized Christians are Catholic with the capital C. In fact, we do not make the distinction between Catholic and catholic, because certainly St. Athanasius did not have the distinction in mind when he wrote the Creed.

Very good to know, dear annalex! And I gather that extends to those who have been baptized with the Holy Spirit even though they have not yet been baptized in water as in Acts 11:1-18

annalex 13566: The next question is, what that newfangled Catholic does with himself. With Catholic sponsors he will hopefully continue a life of a practicing Catholic of Roman or some other rite… If, however, he is raised in a Protestant background, he will separate from the Church not only nominally but also materially: he will not go to confession, or take the Eucharist. At this point he is a separated Christian.

I regret that you feel this way though I do understand there are Christians on both sides who consider the other separated or in peril. From my perspective as one who eschews all the doctrines and traditions of men, I expect to see all of you on “the other side.”

annalex 13567: I am called to love Calvin; I am not called to like him.

Indeed. We are also called to love our neighbor precisely as we love ourselves. (Matt 22) And we will be measured by the same measure we use on others (Matt 7) or we will be forgiven if we forgive and will obtain mercy if we are merciful. (Luke 6:37)

Quix 13568: Do you have any . . . concise exhortations to help make that easier, quicker . . . more complete, more efficacious. There are some of us who have a hard time effecting that . . . transaction sufficiently well, to our . . . confident satisfaction???

Not really, dear brother in Christ! All I can recommend is after laying something at the Cross, if it is picked up again – repent for having done so (i.e. not trusting Him with it) and lay it down again.

kosta50 13574: Pascal said that we cannot know how God is. Which is why we can only discern what God is not, rather than what He is -- that is -- by apophatic thinking. God cannot be reached by cataphatic logic, scholasticism, quantum physics or Aristotelian philosophy. God can be reached only through prayer.

I certainly agree that we cannot “find” God through reason (1 Cor 1) - though He is a rewarder of those who believe He is and diligently seek Him (Hebrews 11:6) and the fervent prayers of a righteous man avail much. (James 5:16)

Nevertheless, we personally and intimately know God to whatever extent He allows for us, individually – when we surrender to His will through the indwelling Spirit. (I Cor 2, Romans 8, John) There is no substitute.

kosta50 13574: In Judaism, the Son of God did not mean that someone is divine.Jesus was not condemned because He said or implied that He was the Son of God but because he said he could forgive sins.

Actually, there is no record of a Jewish trial per se in the Jewish Encyclopedia – but references instead to a fear of the Romans, that He was inciting an uprising and/or alleged apostasy leading to His death sentence. John’s Gospel witnesses to the fear of Rome in Chapter 11, verses 45-57 – and to the alleged apostasy in Chapter 5, verse 18.

kosta50 13574: Quoting scriptures does little for me. I look at them in the world when they were written.

How very sad that the Scriptures have not yet come alive in you but remain ancient manuscripts for you to approach by sensory perception and reason alone.

kosta50 13574: Correct. The if-then relationship shows that it is not unconditional and therefore not "free." I have objected to the "free gift' oxymoron already on these threads. God's offer is an "if-then" proposition; not a free gift.

Er, the free part is that there is nothing mere man can do to be “good enough” for God. If even one of us could have made it by our own efforts, then Christ died for nothing. (Gal 2:20-21)

I assert that the “if/then”s are God’s perfect justice. We spend our entire mortal lives building the scales whereby we will be measured in the Great White Throne judgment.

I further assert that our deeds do not determine who makes it into the new heaven and earth and who does not. Rather, if one’s name is in the Book of Life of the Lamb, he’ll get in – even if every thing he did in this life was counted for loss. In that event, he’ll enter the new heaven and earth empty handed. Conversely, even if he piled up mountains of good deeds, he won’t get in if his name is not written in the Book of Life. (Rev 20) Thus, for the Christian – the one whose name is in the Book of Life – the good deeds which survive inspection will be treasure in the new heaven and new earth:

Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.

If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire. – I Cr 3:13-15

You continued:

kosta50 13574: Why is it that anything that you disagree with becomes "superimposing Aristotle's Law of identity," but when you agree with something then it is the indwelling "Spirit" talking? If you really wat to be a stickler to anthropomoprhization of God, then everything that has every been written about God is anthropomorphism because our words are inherently anthropomorphic, and our toughs are anthropomorphic when it comes to anything we don't or can't know.

Of a truth, dear kosta50, most everything you have to say concerning God anthropomorphizes Him because (a) in your stated view above the words of God are not preserved but rather the Scriptures are a mere collection of fallible ancient manuscripts, and (b) you have not yet testified to experiencing and leaning on the indwelling Spirit of God.

With neither of these, one’s understanding cannot include Spiritual revelation at all – rather whatever understanding exists can only be based on mortal sensory perception and reasoning – either your own or that of others which you have accepted in good faith. Thus your statements concerning God are anthropomorphisms.

betty boop 13735 Forgive me if I continue to think that human beings are critically important (in a way I admit is inscrutible to me) to God's plan for Creation. Were that not so, God would not have made humans "stewards" of all Creation; and when man fell, the Creation would not have fallen with him. FWIW.

kosta50: 13736 We must not start with the narcissistic conclusion, and then try to find evidence to support it. The fact that God created us, and the rest of the world, is all important, even perhaps critical. We cannot isolate ourselves from the rest of that Creation and say we are critical and everything else is not.

kosta50 13576: Why new heaven? I though heaven is pristine.

The new heaven and new earth is God’s will. Everything in Scripture moves towards that end. Alpha and Omega. First Cause and Final Cause.

This heaven and earth has elements which shall be purged before the new heaven and earth begins, i.e. evil, death, devils, etc. (Rev)

My leaning in the Spirit agrees with the Jewish understanding – that the reason there was a beginning at all is that God the Father wanted to reveal Himself. And further, that He revealed Himself in four ways: through His only begotten Son Jesus by whom and for whom everything that was made was made (Col 1) – through the Holy Spirit – through Scripture – and through Creation (both physical and spiritual.)

The objective of it all, as hosepipe is wont to say, is the establishment of a family with which He will dwell (the new heaven and new earth, Rev 21)

This heaven and earth serves the purpose of revealing God, especially by contrast – that He is Good and not evil, that He is Light and not darkness, that He is Love, that he loves Justice and so on.

kosta50 13576: And, since we are here quoting what Jesus and others "said." Ancient writers quoted others as they believed what a particular person would have said, and not what he or she actually said. Take such quotes with a grain of salt.

Since the indwelling Spirit brings words recorded in Scripture alive within me through the indwelling Spirit – He is the One I’ll be listening to, not any mortal.

kosta50 13576: A-G, the ground was prepared by the Jews rejecting Christ. Had Caiaphas realized that he was staring God in the eyes as he condemned Christ, Alexander and his Greek influence would have been meaningless. Had the Jews not asked for Barabbas, had the Jews not thrown Christ's followers out of the synagogues, just as Christ predicts in the Gospel, had the 12 tribes of Israel not rejected His teachings, Christianity would have never needed to seek Gentiles. It was not the reason He came and it was not what he instructed the Apostles to do… The Essenes had issues with the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem who were, as you know, Sadducees, thoroughly opposed to resurrection, messianic apocalypticismn of the Essenes and angeology of the Pharisees, and who subscribed only to Torah (Five Books of Moses) as the Jewish canon.

I described the prophesy of Daniel concerning Alexander the Greek and the normalizing of the Greek language and word concepts – which prepared the ground for the spread of the Gospel and evidenced that it was part of the plan by raising the passage in John 12:20-23. You raised other things above which had to be “just so” for the Gospel to spread. All of which are true, but you seem to present God as an absentee landlord letting the history of the world unfold by happenstance. I very strongly disagree with that view and assert instead that He is very much in control of “all that there is” – from our point of view, from beginning to end it appears to be in constant flux, which is partly true (free will.) But that is not the whole picture because His point of view is not merely eternity past or future (time without boundaries) --- but timelessness:

Remember the former things of old: for I [am] God, and [there is] none else; [I am] God, and [there is] none like me, Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times [the things] that are not [yet] done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure: - Isa 46:9-10

You continued:

kosta50 13576: Dead Sea Scrolls proved no such thing [faithfulness and true antiquity of Scripture]. If anything they show us that the Scripture was not unified or that there was a set "Jewish canon." Rather, Judaism was a sectarian society, laced with different beliefs and scriptural canon.

Laying aside the myriad interpretations of sacred words – the doctrines and traditions of men which I eschew – the carbon-dating of fragments found at Qumran establish that the manuscripts are ancient, many having been copied around 200 B.C. Moreover, when compared to the previously held “oldest” manuscripts the copies were indeed found to be faithful in various languages, i.e. Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. Not perfect, faithful.

I do not need the carbon dating because the Holy Spirit Himself authenticates his own words to me, personally, by bringing them alive within. But the scholarly findings are important to many. And now they have them.

me: The Holy Spirit is not a "sign" - He is a Person, He is God

kosta50 13578: Yes, He is, but His presence is a sign.

It is not possible to separate the presence of the Holy Spirit from the Holy Spirit Himself.

Dr. Eckleburg, thank you so much for the passage from Acts 13:42-49! I’d like to add another point – that Paul and Barnabas splitting up actually caused the Gospel to be spread further and faster than if they had stayed together. This is why I never get upset over the splits that occur in the assemblies. One may emphasize an area of Truth the other does not – but the net result is that Gospel spreads further all the while, e.g. the Orthodox split from Catholism, the Reformation, “local rule” churches, house churches, non-denominationals and so on.

kosta50: 13580 Within that model, they are waves, not particles and waves, although they "behave" as both. The "particle" aspect of it is the vector, which is an imaginary path of an imaginary point on an imaginary wave of energy.

Indeed. I think of the particle as a “placemarker” in the wave.

hosepipe 13581 The opposite is true in my experience.. I have known few Roman Catholics that were not nominal christians.. not all but most. . Most all roman catholics I've known trust and believed in the church, Not God(father, son, holy spirit) except incidentally.. The church to them is translated to mean the clergy.. extreme Mariolotry being the norm.. Not all of them but most all.. Stories(about the catholic experience) from some of them to me verified this condition is prevalent.. not absolute but prevalant..

Sadly, too many mob movies – like the Sopranos and now the Black Donnellys – feed that perception, i.e. that no one knows for sure they’ll make it and anything can be forgiven in this life or worked out in purgatory so “what me worry.”

I take that as a Hollywood distortion of Catholic doctrine. It certainly would not apply to the Catholics in my family and my other dear Catholic brothers and sisters in Christ.

kosta50 13584: Come on, Dr. E, if you were a Church elder in those days, you'd be scrambling to justify what was never the initial mission of Christ, for He leaves no doubt that He was "sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." [Mat 15:24] and He prohibited His disciples from going to the Gentiles [cf Mat 10:5-6]

The rejection by Israel was part of God’s plan. As was the acceptance by the Gentiles after the rejection by Israel. And all promises will be kept. (Romans 11)

Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes? – Matt 21:42

And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, [and] one shepherd. – John 10:16

And from the Song of Moses:

They have moved me to jealousy with [that which is] not God; they have provoked me to anger with their vanities: and I will move them to jealousy with [those which are] not a people; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation. – Deu 32:21

I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but [rather] through their fall salvation [is come] unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy. – Romans 11:11

Christ spoke in parables to hide Truth in plain sight which was all part of the plan – to gather His sheep from two folds, Jews and Gentiles. Only those with “ears to hear” can spiritually hear Him:

And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables? He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath. Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.

And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: For this people's heart is waxed gross, and [their] ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with [their] eyes, and hear with [their] ears, and should understand with [their] heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them. But blessed [are] your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear. – Matt 13:10-16

But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: - John 10:26-27

In another sidebar:

jo kus: In the spiritual realm, it is not necessary to occupy space, because spiritual beings have no mass. They cannot occupy space, as a result.

forest keeper: But aren't you "crossing realms"? :) I have no problem in thinking that spiritual beings do not have mass in our realm, but as for their own realm, who can know? I think of Jesus and His resurrected body. We are told that we are also going to have resurrected bodies. These will take up space, somewhere. It doesn't have to be in our realm.

To whatever extent God may have used dimensions to accomplish His will and effect both a spiritual realm and a physical realm, it must be noted that angels appearing among us cannot be distinguished by sensory perception from ordinary mortals:

Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares. – Hebrews 13:2

Jesus also appeared after the Resurrection in places and forms as He willed – sometimes being known, sometimes not, sometimes in the open, sometimes in closed rooms, etc.

Thus I make no presumptions about the resurrection body concerning space, time (dimensions) – or mass:

So also [is] the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power: It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam [was made] a quickening spirit. – I Cor 15:42-45

forest keeper at 13597:

You certainly impress me as someone who is very serious about her belief in scripture, and as one who does not look at it through any of the standard "lenses". So I would like to ask you: can you think of any spiritual belief that you hold true, as opposed to a musing, which is not "reasonably" supported, in your mind, by scripture? If your answer is "No", then congratulations are in order. You are a member of the Sola Scriptura "club"! :)

The indwelling Spirit almost always confirms His leadings by bringing Scriptures alive within me. But there are times when He leads me without direct Scriptural reference. These include warning me away from certain people or places or things – or conversely, compelling me to certain people or places or things. Also, He allows some things spoken to me – or written, in the case of this forum – to “ring true.” For instance, when a little blue haired lady at church was commenting on a sermon about Peter’s failure to walk out to Jesus on the water, she said “sinking wasn’t his job.” That rang true.

Finally, there are some questions He answers with images or impressions. For instance, when I was asking about the significance of Calvary, He gave me an image or impression of a great Light proceeding upwards from the Cross, spanning over all of space and time – and innumerable tiny bubbles, rising up from the darkness, disappearing into the Light. The impression is that we are those tiny bubbles, drawn out of the darkness into His Light.

Dr Eckleburg: The reply then goes on to cite the Westminster Confession's declaration of what constitutes the Lord's Supper which I think is 100% Scriptural and sound. For emphasis, please read the remarks of Calvin's brave student, John Knox, which further explain how the Roman mass errs in presuming to continually offer a sacrifice to God that has already been performed, accomplished and accepted by God, once for all the sins of His flock.

Truly, I expect that Catholics do not see themselves as crucifying Christ anew every time they celebrate the Eucharist. Rather, I would expect my Catholic relatives to underscore the crucifixion at every turn, i.e. “preaching Christ, and Him crucified.” (I Cor 2:2) This would be apparent by the stages of the cross in the sanctuaries, jewelry, Christ remaining on the Cross – and of course, the doctrine of Transubstantiation.

The other half of my family would respond “He lives!” and emphasize this with empty crosses (empty tombs) – and a symbolic Lord’s Supper “in remembrance of me”. (Luke 22:19)

With the caveat that I eschew all the doctrines and traditions of men, the leaning I have in the Spirit is that John 6 must be Spiritually discerned. Indeed, Christ told them as much – and many turned back from following Him not being able to receive the command that we eat His flesh and drink His blood.

The Spiritual leaning I have is that He is quite serious, we must consume Him really in Spirit and in Truth. We are to take Him in, He is our Life – much like Adam fed on the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil – we are to feed on Him, personally and continually. Not likenesses of Him, symbols of Him or material things – but Jesus Himself. Here are the confirmations I have received in Scripture:

But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. – Matthew 4:4

Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me. This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever. These things said he in the synagogue, as he taught in Capernaum.

Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard [this], said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you? [What] and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, [they] are spirit, and [they] are life. - John 6:53-63

Betty boop at 13626:

Actually it was Einstein who said, “If two descriptions are mutually exclusive, at least one of them must be wrong.” But not all problems are reducible to “either/or, true/false, Yes/No” criteria. Many problems we encounter actually involve questions of “both.” To apply the Law of the Excluded Middle in such cases forces a reduction of reality to what fits the model, which obscures (or obviates) an important sector of the reality we are trying to understand.

For instance, it makes no sense (to me at least) to bring the Third Law to bear on what constitutes human nature. Human beings have been understood since classical times as constituted by (1) body and (2) soul, or spirit (or psyche or nous -- different terms referring to the "spiritual" aspect). That is, they are constituted by a complementarity: This is not an “either/or situation”; this is a case of both. Just as with the complementarity of particles and waves in quantum theory. You can study the body part, and you can study the soul part. But you can’t eliminate one of them and get a “complete description” of the human being.

That is an excellent example, dearest sister in Christ! Truly the Dawkins’ of the world who only recognize the physical have built a room around themselves with no windows or doors, because they have precluded everything else on principle. And likewise, one who insists that God must abide by the Third Law (either/or) or indeed any mortal mental construct has conceptualized a “small god” who must be capable of residing within his own mind. How is this not an idol?

betty boop at 13630 With faith comes spiritual discernment, in God's good time. Place your trust in the Lord in this.

Very, very, very important wisdom! Spiritual discernment comes with time and in measures according to our willingness towards Him and most especially, God’s will for us.

I am reminded of Abraham and Sarah and Moses who developed gradually, perhaps even slowly and yet became spiritually strong and used of Him in their old age. And yet there was David who developed quickly and was used of God from his youth. The bottom line is that we are on God’s schedule not our own – so we must be patient.

kosta50 13633: What we do affects us and not God. We cannot affect, derail or sabotage His sovereignty. But we can choose not to follow Him, not because He programmed us, but because He gave us that freedom by His permission and will. And He will take that freedom into account when He judges us according to our deeds.

Indeed. That is the leaning I have in the Spirit as well. Our “free will” is by His permission and we bear the responsibility for our own behavior – for good or ill, building the measures by which we will be measured (Matt 7). His justice is perfect.

kosta50 13637: After all, the system (based on the geocentric model), still "works," so it "must" be real. Ptolemy's work contains scientific method that we use to this day to "prove" various working models as "real."

Truly, evolution theory is a classic type of this phenomenon. For under that paradigm, for every observed thing in present biological life there must be a rational explanation over vast amounts of time since supernatural intervention is disallowed under “methodological naturalism.” And yet there does not exist a fossil for every creature that ever lived and so it must remain a “just so” story.

betty boop 13684 But this "closure" business: I am pretty sure there is none to be had! First of all, there is no "certainty" in a contingent world. Secondly, and of vastly greater importance, is the seeming fact that religion and theology address precisely those questions that must ever remain "open": That is, the relations that obtain between God and man, world and society, which comprehend the eternal questions that man has asked since the dawn of humanity. Science and unaided reason are no helps in this domain.

So very true. Science cannot deal with God because He cannot be observed with microscope or telescope. And reason – or philosophy – has to cope with the limitation of the mortal mind. As Justin Martyr discovered, understanding requires both faith and reason – knowledge is incomplete without Spiritual revelation.

betty boop 13684 Just because we can't see the whole ball of wax entire, doesn't mean we can't know anything about the whole ball of wax (which is actually a work in progress, so to speak). And I imagine that what and how we think is amazingly consequential to the unfoldment of divine reality.... It would take a book to explain that. But then, my very dear friend Alamo-Girl and I are working on one, working title: "God and the Observer problem." God willing, we'll finish it some day. :^)

Amen.

betty boop: 13688: Oh. I can see how/why such issues should complicate theology.... Still, I am unable to discern any conflict between the Platonic insights and those of the dispensation inaugurated by the Crucifixion.

I suspect many who dismiss Plato believe that all Greek philosophy of the period was pagan per se and thus were unwilling to filter the insights from the myths. Interestingly, Martyr saw a number of Judeo/Christian themes in Plato’s writings.

hosepipe 13659Love is exactely and expressly sacrifice.. Whatever you love you will sacrifice for.. Whatever you do not love you will not sacrifice for.. Sacrifice(love) is in degrees. Love is not a feeling its a deed..

My brother once drove a similar point home with me by asking me what was most important to me and I replied, God, family, country, friends, etc. as was my intention. Then he pulled out a piece of paper and started breaking down my time and actions and I discovered that what I intended and reality were not the same. He summed it up this way, “your actions speak so loudly I can’t hear a word you’re saying.”

kosta50 13775: Then we are helpless and hopeless. But, in Christ, everyone is invited. God knocks on everyone's heart and doesn't bar anyone from coming to Him. The decision is ours, by His permission. Thank God, He offers His love to all. He favors no one.

To the contrary, equality seems right to man but it is not God’s way. We are clay in the Potter's hands.

Abraham was chosen. So was Moses. Esau was hated. Pharaoh was used. Israel has been given a promise which applies only to Israel:

Thus saith the LORD, which giveth the sun for a light by day, [and] the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; The LORD of hosts [is] his name: If those ordinances depart from before me, saith the LORD, [then] the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for ever. Thus saith the LORD; If heaven above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth searched out beneath, I will also cast off all the seed of Israel for all that they have done, saith the LORD. – Jer 31:35-37

And although the words of God go out to all – not everyone has “ears to hear.”

Why do ye not understand my speech? [even] because ye cannot hear my word. – John 8:43

The ones to whom Christ is speaking were physically hearing Him, but they could not spiritually hear Him. It is a gift:

And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father. – John 6:65

If we could do it on our own, He would rescue us:

For this people's heart is waxed gross, and [their] ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with [their] eyes, and hear with [their] ears, and should understand with [their] heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them. – Matt 13:15

Quix 13568: Do you have any . . . concise exhortations to help make that easier, quicker . . . more complete, more efficacious. There are some of us who have a hard time effecting that . . . transaction sufficiently well, to our . . . confident satisfaction???

Not really, dear brother in Christ! All I can recommend is after laying something at the Cross, if it is picked up again – repent for having done so (i.e. not trusting Him with it) and lay it down again.

THANKS TONS AND WELCOME BACK! It has been . . . itneresting.

RE the above . . . . I suppose leaving it at the Cross means not thinking about it; not even praying about it any more etc. etc.

Say it’s a habit of scratching mosquito bites . . . which is usually unconcsious . . . after scratching or in mid scratch—realizing—oh, AGAIN! Repenting noting “I receive your forgiveness, Lord”; and then blocking out again?

Sorry, the nuts and bolts mechanics sometimes get me down.

I do think this is a growing edge for this RECOVERING OBCOM

I'm soooo sorry. When I was making the addressee list (and bold facing) in post 13777 - I missed your handle.

Perhaps we are so very much alike I cannot discern your handle apart from my own? At any rate, I apologize.

For those who die without the benefit of sacramental baptism, we are asked to pray and rely on the sovereign mercy of Christ. All, baptized or not, are judged by their works.