???? Why bring Kucinich's better half into this?
Posted on 02/14/2008 1:42:48 PM PST by NYer
The red heifer is my favorite ;-)
The above line is where he wanders off a bit. Does he honestly believe that many, if not most, of the people he talks about, haven't learned the faith?
You’re right.
People worry themselves sick over the Mark of the Beast, the Rapture, or whatever, yet never stop to consider the fact that the real End Of The World — death — comes for someone every day. These folks should spend less time worrying about being Left Behind and more worrying about what would happen in they were to die today. After all, not one of us is guaranteed even a single moment more in this world; each us us could find ourselves in our own personal “end times” scenario at any second.
God will win in the end. We Christians know this. Therefore, let’s quit wasting time on the End Of The World worries and spend that time considering our own personal Last Days.
???? Why bring Kucinich's better half into this?
I saw a show about that on the History Channel.
The choq of the "red heifer" (parah 'adummah in Hebrew) is given in the nineteenth chapter of the Book of Numbers (which will be read in synagogues throughout the world on the morning of the upcoming 3/29). It is the most mysterious mitzvah in the entire Torah. In fact, though Solomon's wisdom enabled him to adduce the reasons for all the other mitzvot, this one utterly escaped him. Only Moses attained understanding out of pure revelation from G-d.
There are two types of mitzvot: mishpatim ("judgments"), which can be explained rationally, and chuqqot ("statutes") which rest on no human understanding but can be accepted only as the word of G-d. The "red heifer" is the most famous of these latter.
In reality, however, at some point beyond mere human understanding, the two blend into one. For even those commandments which human reason cannot justify is nevertheless purposeful and justified in the Mind of G-d, and the most rational of commandments (such as "thou shalt not kill") in fact rest ultimately on the authority of our A-mighty Creator and not on its apparent rationality to our frail minds.
G-d's commandments bind us because they are from Him, whether or not we understand the understanding.
I suggest using it to learn what “The gates of hell shall not prevail” means. I also suggest learning what “He who listens to you listens to me,” “indefectibility”, and “infallibility” mean.
You don’t know how many times I have said this, almost verbatim, to my SSPX friend, often several times in one day.
"Blessed is the one who reads the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, because the time is near." Revelation 1:3.
Sling mud, and do not give one word of refutation to the Protestant position...great tactic. This article assumes the Roman Catholic interpretation is the correct one, and therefore, by definition all others are wrong...without one word of definition or defense. Interesting.
Did you maybe miss out on the fact that the article really wasn’t even about Protestants or Protestantism, or are you just spoiling for a fight?
Mark 13:32
“about that day or that hour no one except the Father knows, neither the angels in heaven nor the Son,”
and referring to the evangelical position as "kooky" are not exactly terms of mature debate..
It's not "the" (one and only acceptable) evangelical position, it's "an" evangelical position, out of several.
What would those "several" positions be?
Basic stuff, as I'm sure you're aware.
My own response to all this apocalyptic fooferah from both Protestants and Catholics is “Same pathologies, different dress.” --original posting
Which I find interesting.
That's because his article is really about Catholics who chase after visions and "prophecies," and is not directed to Protestants at all.
Sometimes Catholics write things directed at other Catholics that take it for granted that Protestants are wrong.
Sometimes Protestants write things directed at other Protestants that take it for granted that Catholics are wrong, too. Often, in fact.
That said, I really like the way Mark Shea writes.
I have never heard of the red heifer thing however. ??
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.