texts:
There is a great set of answers that covers some of my question regarding the interpretation of this passage over on the Biblical Hermeneutics site, but it didn't answer all of my questions.

Today I heard an old pastor speak about when he saw one of those gates for himself in Jerusalem. If I understand it right, the gate he saw was even labeled with "The eye of the needle" or something similar (though his interpretation was not the classic, because he was sure of that there was no way a camel could get through the gate he saw).

What gate (which obviously exists today) is this pastor speaking about?
Is there really any part of the Jerusalem walls left since Jesus time? Weren't all of the walls destroyed after the siege of Jerusalem 70 A.D?

Update 1

Even since before asking this question, I never doubted that Jesus was speaking about a real "eye of the needle", and not a gate. Even though I marked one answer (which was really clarifying) as accepted, it would be really interesting to nail this myth and go down to the details. According to the New Bible Dictionary, third Edition, p. 562, there is one remaining ancient wall "at the present-day Damascus Gate". What does "ancient" mean in this context? Could it have survived since the days of Jesus? In that case, how big is this part? Are there other ancient walls that could be from the days of Jesus? And are there any "gates" in these ancient walls that have been suggested as the "needle eye gate"?


texts: Is John the Baptist the same John who wrote the Book of John in the New Testament?

texts: I am confused about whether or not it was St. John the Baptist who wrote the Book of John in the New Testament.  I thought this was a different John who was one of the apostles.


texts: Can the faithful receive Holy Communion on repenting after committing a grave sin?

texts:
At Matthew 26: 26-28, we read:

  While they were eating, Jesus took a loaf of bread, and after blessing it he broke it, gave it to the disciples, and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.”   Then he took a cup, and after giving thanks he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you;   for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

That would imply that a member of the Church who is in a state of sin, but repents and receives the Body and Blood of Christ in Holy Communion should receive forgiveness for his/her  sins in the same way he/she gets absolution from sins in Confession. But, the Catholic Church has always been insisting that one should be in a state of Grace in order to receive Holy Communion in a worthy manner.

My question is: What has been the Catholic Church's answer to query on the above lines, raised by the faithful over the past few years?


texts: Does the blessing of Genesis 12:3 extend to Palestine or is it only for Israel (and the church as the spiritual Israel)?

texts: I was reading 12:3 and I started to wonder whether or not that blessing was for Palestinians too, as descendants of Abraham. Thank you.


texts: What are the Journal of Discourses viewed as?

texts:
So after reading the comments here. I got curious. I see non-mormons citing the Journal of discourses all the time, but have never heard a mormon cite them.

Wikipedia tells me where they come from and what they are, but why do modern mormons not use them and not consider them scripture?


texts: What is the scriptural basis that the Devil or Satan understood God's salvation plan?

texts:
Extending from this question and the accepted answer, what is the scriptural basis that the Devil or Satan understood God's salvation Plan?

Please see OP's answer to What is the scriptural basis that the Devil or Satan did NOT understand God's salvation plan?


texts: Did John Calvin say "The worst of plagues is human reason"?

texts:
I have searched high and low for the source of this quote, attributed to John Calvin, but to no avail.  This link provides approximately 425 quotes, but I could not find "The worst of plagues is human reason".  https://www.azquotes.com/author/2355-John_Calvin
My difficulty is that it seems to me the quote is more likely to have come from Martin Luther.  For example, Luther said the following on this subject:

Reason is the Devil's greatest whore; by nature and manner of being she is a noxious whore; she is a prostitute, the Devil's appointed whore; whore eaten by scab and leprosy who ought to be trodden under foot and destroyed, she and her wisdom ... Throw dung in her face to make her ugly. She is and she ought to be drowned in baptism... She would deserve, the wretch, to be banished to the filthiest place in the house, to the closets.  Source: Martin Luther, Erlangen Edition v. 16, pp. 142-148

There is on earth among all dangers no more dangerous thing than a richly endowed and adroit reason... Reason must be deluded, blinded, and destroyed.  Source: Martin Luther, quoted by Walter Kaufmann, The Faith of a Heretic, (Garden City, NY, Doubleday, 1963), p. 75

If John Calvin did say "The worst of plagues is human reason" then I need to know where those seven words came from in order to put them into their proper context and respond to the person who has asked me to explain what Calvin meant.
I fear I may be on a wild goose chase here, and time is running out before my response is due.  Any help from the community would be greatly appreciated.  Thank you.


texts:
This question is a spin-off from On which date was Christ born?

There are differing views on the birth year of Christ, which also affect the dating of the resurrection (as we know Jesus's age on death). Which years are possible, and what are the arguments?


texts: Does Jesus contradict Himself in these verses?

texts:
Just to state, I don't necessarily believe Jesus contradicted Himself. But these parts of Scripture sound like a contradiction, and I would like to hear any thoughts on how this can be reconciled.
I thought of this question after reading this post and these verses:

He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. It is written: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors’; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment.”
The disciples said, “See, Lord, here are two swords.”
“That is enough,” he replied.

Luke 22:36-38
But then when they come to seize Jesus, after Judas betrays Him with a kiss, this happens:

51 And behold, one of those who were with Jesus reached out his hand and drew his sword and, striking the body servant of the high priest, cut off his ear.
52 Then Jesus said to him, Put your sword back into its place, for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.

Matt. 26:51-52
As per the answers in the linked post, Jesus had them get swords so the prophecies could be fulfilled: That He would be counted amongst the transgressors, and His arrest would be certain. But then why would Jesus reprove Peter of using his sword the way he did in the latter verses, when that is what He wanted to happen? Perhaps "contradiction" wasn't the best choice of wording, feel free to edit if you can word it better for me :)


texts: What was the main reason for excluding 35 latest names from the list of recognized saints by ROC?

texts:
What was the main reason for excluding 35 latest names from the list of recognized saints by the Synodal Commission of Russian Orthodox Church on Canonization?

Source: РПЦ отзывает партию святых, оказавшихся бракованными (YouTube video).

EDIT:
The author of the video claims that the reason was that some KGB archives have been made available to the public, and a lot of bad, yet true stories are revealed about those priests who have been canonized. As the author says, some of them, if not all, were cooperating with KGB and reported. ROC excluded them suddenly, with no explanations


texts: How do Catholics explain the fact that Jesus is male yet he has no human biological father?

texts:
Science states that the mother contributes an X chromosome, while the father contributes either an X or a Y chromosome. If the father contributes a Y chromosome, the fetus will develop into a male (excluding anomalies); if the father contributes an X chromosome, the fetus will develop into a female (excluding anomalies).

According to Wikipedia’s entry on “XY sex-determination system,” it states,

  In humans and many other species of animals, the father determines the sex of the child. In the XY sex-determination sys[tem, the father contr]ibutes either an X chromosome or a Y chromosome, resulting in female (XX) or male (XY) offspring, respectively.

Since the Lord Jesus Christ had no human biological father, how is the determination of his male gender explained by Catholic apologists?

Edit: If you watch this YouTube video, @2:57, you will see that Tim Staples (from Catholic Answers) offers some speculation on the subject, but does not go any further. I am curious if there are some Catholic apologists who have actually discussed the matter in depth.


texts: What is the meaning of Holy Spirit in Mark 3:28-29?

texts:
Mark 3:28-29
28 : Truly I tell you, people can be forgiven all their sins and every
slander they utter,
29 : but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit
will never be forgiven; they are guilty of an eternal sin.

As here mentioned, what does the Holy spirit is referred to as:

is that refers to the Holy Spirit or the man who get Holy Spirit (general)?

If that refers to the Holy Spirit, how we can sin against Holy Spirit or blaspheme them?


texts: In John 17:19, what is Jesus referring to specifically regarding His sanctification, and how does this then apply to us being sanctified?

texts:
John 17:19 (NASB)

  19 For their sakes I sanctify Myself, that they themselves also may be
  sanctified in truth.

Is this sanctifying of Jesus in reference to his crucifixion, his resurrection, his ascension, or something else entirely?

Is our, in turn being sanctified, according to this specific passage, referring to our justification, the indwelling of the Spirit for our growth and maturity, our glorification on the last day, or something else entirely?

You can use this translation or another if you think it will better help to explain the meaning of these words within this verse.


texts: What is the New Testament "process" for doing a church plant?

texts:
Given that new churches are to be started (eg the ministry of the Apostle Paul in partial fulfillment of the Great Commission), what is the New Testament model or process for how this should be done?

Does it vary culturally?

Can (or 'how can') one know when it is time to plant another church in the same town\region, and when to encourage people to come to an established local body?

Most specifically, I'm looking for models\processes surrounding "independent" or "non-denominational" churches - ie not Roman Catholic, Episcopalian, PCA, etc who all have formal processes for starting new churches.


texts: Is Roman Catholic reconciliation with the Orthodox likely (or possible)?

texts: I have consistently heard rumors that the Orthodox and the Roman Catholics will be reconciling at some point (at least to the point of Catholics being able to receive Orthodox sacraments). Sometimes the rumors are that it will happen during a reigning patriarch, but other voices among the Orthodox have suggested that such a gesture is an impossibility*. So, which is it? Is reconciliation possible (and close), or will things continue as they have for nearly a millennium?


texts: Positional and Relational Forgiveness, what is the Biblical Basis?

texts:
My question spawns from an explanation of 1 John 1:9 provided by the very popular protestant resource GotQuesitons.org.

It seems to me that the answer given has holes in it, which I would like, filled.  I assume, I hope not incorrectly, that the article is based on a “once saved, always saved” (OSAS) position and the answer to my question should be from those who adhere to that position.

The web site gives the fallowing definitions in this article:

  “Positional” forgiveness, or judicial forgiveness, is that which is obtained by every believer in Christ.

This positional forgiveness is achieved when “Jesus has been accepted as your personal Lord and savior”  Correct me if I am wrong and I will adjust my understanding.

  “relational,” or “familial,” forgiveness—like that of a father and a son. For example, if a son does something wrong to his father—falling short of his expectations or rules—the son has hindered his fellowship with his father. He remains the son of his father, but the relationship suffers. Their fellowship will be hindered until the son admits to his father that he has done wrong. It works the same way with God; our fellowship with Him is hindered until we confess our sin. When we confess our sin to God, the fellowship is restored. This is relational forgiveness.

Relational Forgiveness, seems to:

Have no consequences towards salvation which is already achieved by personal forgiveness.
Fellowship seems to be a empty of any meaning regarding salvation.

The possibility of entering into fellowship and out of it seems shadowy without consequence and meaningless.

When reading these explanations, they seem on the surface to address the issue but when you look deeper, for a scholarly biblical understanding, that being scripture citations explaining the position,  little explanation is provided.

What is the Biblical basis for the two concepts of forgiveness? Specifically the understanding that being separated from fellowship with God, does not in any way interfere with a person's final dispensation.


texts: "Ask and it will be given to you" vs. "Not my will, but yours be done."

texts:
So, please clarify something for me. I'm trying to get a better understanding of presenting my requests to God, but also recognizing that it is not my will, but His will be done. Here are three verses that I am trying to connect (I have italicized the most key parts):

Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will,
but yours be done. (Luke 22:42 NIV)
Do not be anxious about anything, but in every situation, by prayer
and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God. (Philippians 4:6)
Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the
door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives; the one
who seeks finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened.
(Matthew 7:7-8 NIV)

So, whenever I pray, I will present my requests to God, and then I will finish it off with: "yet not my will, but Your will be done always and only." But the Scripture says to "ask and it will be given to you." But, are there times when it won't be given to me, because if God doesen't want something to work out, it won't be given to me. It all around just confuses me, and I have ignored it for a long time. But, I was thinking about all of this earlier today and decided to finally get some clarification.
Please don't criticize my faith. That is definitely not why I came to this forum. I am a devout Christian and care about what God wants above anything else. I just need some clarification so I can advance with my prayers. =)


texts: Who were the eyewitnesses mentioned by name who were still living to the audience of the book/letter in question?

texts: My wife and I are wracking our Brains, and we cannot remember where the reference is or who the reference is about, but there is somewhere in the New Testament that mentions people who were eyewitnesses of Jesus and that they were still among the believers at the time of the writing.  Does anyone know where this is located?


texts: When Jesus was nailed to the cross, did the nails go through his hands or through his wrists?

texts:
I have heard some people say that the nails went into Jesus's hands and I have also read that in a crucifixion, the nails went into the wrist.

What really happened on the cross?


texts: Is a confession valid if I only voice the sins I'm comfortable sharing and confess the rest in my heart to God?

texts:
So my wife is Catholic and my daughter has been baptized in the Catholic faith and my new born son is soon to be baptized as well. I was baptized myself but I've fallen away from my Baptist roots for certain reasons and I've come to enjoy the structure of the Catholic faith.

My question is this, I spent a good amount of time in the military and overseas, I've done somethings that I don't like to talk about or want to even voice.  It makes me sick just thinking about them.  I really don't think I can voice these when it comes time for my first confessions and has kept me from join RCIA sooner for fear of the Priests response.  Would the confession be valid if I only voiced what I'm comfortable sharing and confess the rest in my heart to God?

I'm really anxious about this, but truly desire to become closer to God once again.


texts: What should be a Christian's attitude when his prayers are not answered?

texts: Not all prayers are answered by God. When one is facing some heavy burden God does not move away, what should our attitude be? The Bible often talks about waiting for God patient. How do we apply these Bible verses?


texts: What is an overview of Jesus' ministry during Holy Week?

texts:
Starting with his arrival in Jerusalem, what is an overview of events in the final week before his resurrection as they occurred on specific days of Holy Week?

Note: I'm looking for an answer that cites sources in Catholic and Orthodox traditions and compares them if necessary, and most importantly presents the events in the context of the Jewish Passover festival calendar.


texts:
I know that people are baptized now in either:

The name of Jesus (Acts 2:38)
The name of Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost (Matthew 28:19)

But according to scripture, in whose name was Jesus baptized? Thus indirectly, in whose name did John the Baptist baptize?


texts: According to Calvinists, how could Adam and Eve fall? How could Satan fall?

texts:
Under Calvinism, men under grace are guaranteed to choose God and be saved.

If God's holy influence is so convincing, that it is impossible for free thinking creations to choose against it, why did something go wrong in the first place?


texts: How do Calvinists interpret "Your word is a lamp to my feet And a light to my path" and "He shall direct your paths"?

texts:
Do Calvinists interpret the following verses to support predestination?
-   “Your word is a lamp to my feet And a light to my path” (Psa 119:105)
-   “In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct your paths” (Pro 3:6)

If so, is their view only that God predestined our salvation or also that he predestined everything (e.g., which colleges we would attend, which spouses we would marry, which jobs we would take, etc.)?

Is it significantly different to how Arminians interpret the above verses?


texts: Is it allowed to deviate from the Catholic Liturgical Calendar during a pilgrimage?

texts:
Later this year I am helping to lead a Marian pilgrimage. The days we are away are all non-Marian feasts or obligatory memorias. (Following the general Catholic Liturgical  Calendar.)

Is it permissible according to Catholic rules to celebrate votive Marian masses during the pilgrimage in place of the masses of the day?


texts: How has God destroyed the wisdom of the wise?

texts:
In 1 Corinthians 1:19, Paul writes:

1 Corinthians 1:19-20
For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?

How has God destroyed the wisdom of the wise and made foolish the wisdom of the world?
Ironically, much of the world seems to think that science has done the same to God.


texts: In the book of John, is the Holy Spirit not in Jesus until the dove descends on Him?

texts: When Jesus was baptized by John, and the Holy Spirit descended on Him like a dove, was the Holy Spirit not with Him up until then?


texts: According to Jewish Law, is Jesus entitled to the throne of David?

texts:
Can it be shown from Jewish law/tradition that the legal right to the royal lineage may be passed through adoption, as in the case of Joseph (descendant of David) and Jesus?
It's my understanding that, if Mary is descended from David, it is irrelevant to Jesus because the royal lineage is not passed through the mother but through the father only.
I'm having a hard time understanding the conflicting genealogies of the Messiah.
Thank you in advance for your time,
God bless


texts: Self-Examination in Reformed Practical Theology

texts: I have the sense that the doctrine of self-examination figures large in the writings of the Puritans (and perhaps other old-school Reformed theologians); however, I do not know nearly as much about it as I would like, as I am only at the very beginning of my study of the old Reformed theologians. What did the old Reformed theologians, particularly the Puritans, teach about the Christian practice of examining oneself—how it is to be done, its importance, what its purpose and result is, and where it arises from the Scriptures? What works by the Reformers and the Puritans might I turn to to study this teaching further? I would also be pleased if any answers wanted to include some addition information about what other Christian traditions have said about it.


texts: Did the church fathers or OT talk about the visible and invisible church?

texts:
In the Reformation, the doctrine of the distinction between the visible and invisible church was important in the Reformers' claim not to have started a rogue church. I am wondering...

Given that it was common for the Reformers to use the Patristics, did they reference any of the early church fathers on this question? More generally, did the early church fathers speak on it?
How did they relate this doctrine to the concept of the remnant in the Old Testament?

(I'm looking for actual quotes from church fathers, Reformers, confessional documents, etc.)


texts: How do proponents of the Prosperity Gospel interpret Matthew 19:24?

texts:
Matthew 19:24 (New International Version)

  Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a
  needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.

Generally I think Christians interpret this to avoid materialism and place physical, earthly concerns below concerns about what God expects from us.

I was curious as to how people who preach the Prosperity Gospel interpret this passage. I did some googling, and I found several articles using it as a way to discredit the Prosperity Gospel. But, I didn't find a Prosperity Gospel interpretation of it.

How to people who preach Prosperity Gospel interpret this scripture?


texts: What is the source of hatred often perceived by Christians in western society?

texts:
Not everyone hates Christians, but it seems that most Christians have felt hated at some time by someone because of their faith.

Is there a specific reason behind the hatred I've seen towards Christians as a group? Is the reason different among former Christians than with those who never held the faith?


texts: Is there any extra-Biblical 'evidence' of Herod's murder of babies?

texts: When Herod heard of the news from the kings form east that there was a new king (Jesus) born, he ordered the killing of all boys younger than the age of two. So that would have been a great slaughter. So is there any historical 'evidence' for that event?


texts: A comment to this answer prompted this question. Was Adam created, naming the animals, and married in one day, or did these events take place in a larger time span?


texts: When did the split in crufix/empty-cross sybolism occur and why did it happen?

texts: Today, we have Catholic and Orthodox churches (and a few others) using the crucifix, whereas most Protestant denominations use an empty cross in their symbolism. Did this difference in symbolism arise around the time Martin Luther "created" the Protestant church, or did it happen at a different time? Also, what caused the change of symbol?


texts:
I have heard an interview where a Jesuit exorcist said that Lucifer and Satan were different beings. I'd always thought that they were the same.

Are both Lucifer and Satan mentioned by name in the Bible?
What is the support for considering them the same being? What is the support for considering them separate beings?


texts: Any dangers for the usage of sacramentals that are not-yet-blessed-by-a-priest?

texts:
I just bought a new Rosary, and I haven't asked our priest in the locality to bless it.

Is there any danger when I pray the Rosary (or use of any "not-yet-blessed" sacramental for this matter) using this one?

Thanks for answering! =)


texts:
Possible Duplicate:
  What does the Bible say about "bad" words?

I know that swearing and using obscenity is wrong, but I'm curious what exactly are the Scriptures that support this.  Is there any Scripture that clearly states that using obscenity is wrong? or is swearing/blaspheming/obscenity wrong because it violates key values and doctrines of Christianity?


texts:
Are there any rules for painting (or praying) Orthodox Christian icons that disallow depictions of violence or conflict?

For example: Would an icon depicting a murder be a problem?


texts: Where did the concept of separate races originate?

texts:
I want to preface what I say with a statement saying this is not in any way related to any kind of Prejudice! I only want to ask how we got from the family of Noah to having so many so called races.

According to my Bible; which is the King James version, this is how the world was populated.

Genesis 11:1 and 2

  And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech. And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a  plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there.

Everyone seems to have been one happy family, but then pride crept in and:

  Genesis 11:4  And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.

God didn't like that:

Genesis 11:6 through 9

  And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.  Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech. So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city. Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.

Now as far as I have been able to determine God only mixed up their languages so they could no longer understand each other, but I find nothing that says he turned them into different races to be able to visually tell the difference between them.

So where did people become different races?


texts: Why are some miracles hard to explain and some are not?

texts:
Here is a related question but they are not the same
Do miracles violate the laws of physics?

Looking at most miracles in the bible, they can be explained based on what we already understand (physics, chemistry, etc) and sometimes they were even explained in the bible. Like in the case of God parting the red sea, the east/west wind had to be strong to drive the water apart and made the children of God passed. There are others like that.

But there are 2 miracles that are difficult for me to explain.

The Shunamite widow pouring out oil from nowhere (2 Kings 4) - Here is an analyses have read but not satisfied: http://www.jba.gr/Articles/nkjv_jbajuly97.htm
Jesus feeding 4000/5000 from food that did not exist

I know God is omnipotent and can do all things, but in the case of the Red Sea, we learned how He did it.

My question is, when Jesus had 5 loaves of bread and 2 fish, how does breaking them increase them till they could feed 5000 people (I know it's a miracle)

I am even more concerned about the Shunamite woman. Having a jar of oil, and pouring into several jars and could have continue if there were more to fill. How did the oil keep pouring when there was a finite amount inside (diluted with water - I don't think so)


texts:
About a week a go I heard about something called obstinate sin. What is obstinate sin? Is it the same as not listening to God?

According to Catholicism what is meant by living in a state of obstinate sin?


texts: What were Martin Luther's opinions on the Crusades?

texts: Martin Luther, leader of the Protestant Reformation, was critical of many practices of the Catholic Church. The Crusades were fairly recent in his day. What were his opinions on them? Did he see them as righteous expressions of faith, or did he see them as a further sign of the church's corruption?


texts: Does the Holy Spirit indwell the Christian, and if so, how?

texts:
It is written that the Holy Spirit indwells the Christian, as the apostle Paul wrote (1 Cor. 3:16 cp. 1 Cor. 6:19),

  Don't you know that you are the temple of God and the Spirit of God dwells in you?

I was browsing the internet, and to my surprise, I found quite a few sites that said that the Holy Spirit does not actually dwell in the Christian.

For example,

  The word "dwell" does not necessitate a literal indwelling of the Person.

According to 1) Roman Catholicism, 2) Protestantism, and 3) Evangelical Christianity, does the Holy Spirit actually dwell in the Christian, and if so, how does this occur (including, where does he dwell)?


texts:
Genesis 7 and 8 describes the flood of Noah, and says in part:

  The waters rose and increased greatly on the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. They rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered. The waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than fifteen cubits. Every living thing that moved on land perished—birds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. Genesis 7:18-21 NIV

"Common sense" seems to suggest this must have been a local flood (otherwise, where did all that water go?) but the text seems to indicate that it covered the entire earth.

Which was it, and why?


texts: What is the "Catholic Church" acording to Anglicanism?

texts:
I recently attended a service of the Church of England. There, the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed was said. This creed contains the words

  I believe one Catholic and Apostolic Church.

I wonder what is the sense in which Anglican theology uses the word "Catholic". Naturally, it does not refer to the Catholic Church (as in the Latin Catholic Church and other churches which are in communion with the Pope). But does it include it? Or is the word Catholic simply taken to mean "universal", as in the original Nicene creed, and so it does not have a particular interpretation?

It is quite hard to find online material on this, because as soon as you search "anglican catholic" and related searches, million of sites appear on the issue of anglican-catholicism. Maybe someone acquainted with the topic can help out.


texts:
There is a famous, often (ab)used phrase, "judge not, lest you be judged" , which implies (to me at least) that people on the whole, and Christians in particular, should defer from judging other people. The only person/power/entity (whatever you call it) that can pass judgement is God.

This is a belief upheld by most monotheistic religions that I know of. I attended a Catholic school, and remember that one of my teachers was a former deacon.  When he was asked to be a jury member in a big court case, he said he had to decline as he took a vow, which prevented him from passing judgement, especially in matters that concerned life and death.

I wonder, though, how this affects Christians that did not take the same vows. I mean: "the judge not" bit seems applicable to everyone who adheres to the Christian faith, does it not?

Does being a judge or member of a jury have a whiff of sin about it, as a result?

So my questions are:

Can Christians be judges?
If so, can they ever sentence someone to death?
If not, can they judge in any matter, or are they allowed to settle domestic disputes or rule in material matters?
Is sentencing or being on a jury a sin?


texts:
Did the early church record other events of handing people over to Satan?

So when you are assembled and I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present, hand this man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord. (1 Corinthians 5:4–5, NIV)
Among them are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan to be taught not to blaspheme. (1 Timothy 1:20, NIV)


texts: How should other churches respond to a  pastor and congregation who live contrary to the Gospel?

texts:
The news recently had a case of a pastor and two deacons who beat up the pastor's nephew and the nephew's boyfriend on church property in order to prevent the homosexual couple from entering. This pastor may or may not preach love (we're not told) but his actions demonstrate that hatred is what is in his heart. According my understanding of Matthew 18:16-20,  church members should now approach this minister, and the deacons, and probably ask them to leave. If the church doesn't do that, then it would imply the members agree with this pastor.

Besides the several NT verses from Jesus about loving others, here is one from the same OT book often quoted to attack homosexuality:

  Leviticus 19:18: Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.

It would appear that this pastor may be case study for this principle:

  Matthew 7:15: “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves.”

It would seem that churches like this are damaging the body of Christ, as this minister will attract people that want to feel righteous about hatred toward others. Like a poison, it continues to spread to the world-wide church. Unfortunately this is not an isolated phenomena, but in many countries we can find examples where ministers are preaching and practicing such hatred, and so the members act on this, in the name of Christ.

Given the damaging/contrary witness this provides for the Gospel of love we claim to represent and...
Given the no-action tacit approval this church has shown towards the actions of it's leaders and...
Since we are all brothers and sisters in Christ and thus one Church under God...

Should all the members of this church be treated as we would treat tax collectors or lepers (ostracized)? Can/should church discipline be extended to an entire church by the larger body of Christ?


texts: In 1 Corinthians 7:8, Apostle Paul mentioned that he was unmarried. Is there any knowledge that he might have been widowed, therefore unmarried at that time?


texts: Why did Mary ask Jesus to make wine at the Wedding at Cana

texts:
The Wedding at Cana is the only instance AFAIK where Mary asks Jesus to perform a miracle.

Is there any indication or insight as to why she did so ? Was the family very close to her/them ?

Or was it simply the time for Jesus to perform a public miracle and it came about in this manner?


texts: How is the George Lamsa translation of the Bible (from Aramaic) viewed by Evangelical scholars?

texts:
According to Why does Iglesia ni Cristo use the Lamsa Bible?, at least one Christian church thinks Acts 20:28 in the Lamsa translation supports thier non-trinitarian viewpoint. Many translations use "church of God" and suggest God's blood purchased our salvation, whereas the Lamsa translation says [emphasis mine]:

  Acts 20:28 Take heed therefore to yourselves and to all the flock, over which the Holy Spirit has appointed you overseers, to feed the church of Christ which he has purchased with his blood.

What do evangelical leaders and scholars think about the Lamsa translation? Does it appear to contradict their doctrines?


texts: When did the term "New Testament" first come into usage?

texts:
While reading William Bridge's, "The Wounded Conscience Cured," (1642) I came across Bridge's usage of the term "New Testament" :

  "And in the New Testament, Romans 13.1..."

  -William Bridge, "The  Wounded Conscience Cured," (5)

While obviously not the earliest usage of the term "New Testament," this did get me wondering about how early on the term first came into usage.

David Trobisch, a prominient scholar on the formation of the Christian Bible, records in his book what he deems to be the earliest usage of the term in an anonymous late second-century treatise against the heresy of Montanism :

  "At approximately the same time, (late second century) the
  previously mentioned anonymous  treatise against the Montanist
  movement seems to use the term New Testament in reference to a written
  source. The author explains that  he was initially very reluctant to
  write at all. He did not want to  create 'the impression that he was
  adding anything to the word of the  gospel of the New Testament;
  since no one, who decided to live  according to the gospel, can add to
  it or take away from it.'"

  -David Trobisch, "The First Edition of the New Testament", (44)

With regards to answers, "New Testament" does not have to be used in reference to a modern day canon; however, "New Testament" should inherently be used to describe some sort of canon from antiquity.

Therefore,

I am curious if there are any other earlier usages of the term "New Testament" or is David Trobisch's example truly the earliest, extant usage of the term?

Just to clarify, I am not inquiring of the earliest English usage of the term, but earliest in any language, so a usage resembling (but not exclusive to): Novum Testamentum, Καινή Διαθήκη, ܕܝܲܐܬܝܼܩܝܼ ܚܵܕܬܵܐ.


texts: When did the LDS church begin teaching the Word of Wisdom?

texts: At what date did the LDS church begin teaching the Word of Wisdom? What circumstances led to the introduction of the Word of Wisdom and what publications cover that period of time in LDS church history?  How did the members of that time period receive the teaching?


texts: How universal are the "color" masses in the Catholic Church?

texts:
In my diocese we have certain "color" masses:

Red for legal profession
Blue for Police and First Responders
White for health care professionals.

I also saw something about a Green mass for farmers, but I don't think that's official yet. Black mass would have a pretty bad connotation.  We do have a polka mass, it's not a polka-dot mass - that would be strange, although not a lot stranger than a polka mass.

But, my question is, are these "Color" masses celebrated in the entire Church or are they an American novelty (and if so why are the celebrated in the USA)?


texts: Does God create some people Heterosexual and others Homosexual?

texts:
It is quite common for people who identify themselves as homosexual to say that God created them this way. Some way even go so far as to say it was a misfortune that they were born into:

  "Unfortunately for me, God made me gay."

This line of reasoning usually continues with
- "so I can't do anything about it"
- "it's not my fault, it's God's fault that I sin"

Others claim that since they were created that way it must not be a sin.

What does Christianity hold about the way people were created? Does having something in our natures make it not a sin?


texts: Is Seventh Day Adventistism considered an orthodox denomination?

texts:
Because of their Sabbath day standards, and unique lifestyle, my question is:
Is 7th Day Adventistism considered an orthodox Christian faith?


texts: How did Martin Luther justify the separation from the Catholic Church?

texts:
Even though Luther found great abuses in the  Church of his time, there is the clear idea in the Bible that the Church is one, Jesus even prays that his followers be in unity. ("I pray that they will all be one [...] " John 17:21)

So how did Luther justify separating from Rome?


texts: Help identifying a large FAQ about women pastors made by John Piper and someone else

texts: I don't know if was a book, article, or interview, but recently I read a document which contained 30-50 question and answer items related to women as pastors. I know it was by John Piper and potentially co-written by another author or pastor.


texts: Are there any studies on why some doubters quit faith and others double-down on it?

texts:
Every person comes to moments when they question what they believe.  For me, I was born into a fundamentalist Christian home, came to doubt that worldview, and after lots of soul searching and learning, became a non-believer.  Other people I know go through doubt and come out to be even stronger Christians.  Similar evolutions happen for people in other faiths or people who have no faith joining a religion, etc.

Have any studies been done on what kinds of circumstances, personalities, etc. are involved when people change from one faith to another or between faith and non-faith?


texts: Why do LDS members (Mormons) maintain a long-term supply of food?

texts:
I understand that LDS members are encouraged to build and maintain a long-term supply of food and other essentials.  From where did this teaching originate and what is the reasoning behind this practice?  What is the prevalent "target" that one is encouraged to achieve?

Does this have anything to do with LDS end-times theology?


texts: Is there a point when "be fruitful and multiply" should no longer apply?

texts:
Possible Duplicate:
  Is the commandment to multiply, and replenish the earth in effect today?

Well mainly I'm talking about the multiply bit...there are 7 billion people on the planet, is there any Christian reasoning that states that at some point you should take in existing-orphans instead of making more people?


texts: What does "people of good will" mean in Encyclicals?

texts:
Many encyclicals are directed not only to Catholics but to all "people of good will". Just a few examples:

Laudato si:

  Why should this document, addressed to all people of good will, include a chapter dealing with ...

Pacem in Terram:

  [...] and to the Clergy and Faithful of the entire Catholic World, and to all Men of Good Will.

Populorum Progressio:

  To the Bishops, Priests, Religious, and Faithful of the Whole Catholic World, and to All Men of Good Will.

Is there an official understanding by the Catholic church of what people of good will mean?

I searched through the Cathecism, but the two references to good-will that exists are not related to the above. I also searched the Catholic Encyclopedia, without success.


texts: What do Catholic traditions say was the real name of St. Thomas?

texts:
The Gospels do not mention the real name of St Thomas, unlike in the case of other apostles. The name Thomas (Koine Greek: Θωμᾶς) given for the apostle in the Gospels is derived from the Aramaic or Syriac: ܬܐܘܡܐ Toma, equivalently from Hebrew Teom, meaning "twin". The equivalent term for twin in Greek, which is also used in the New Testament, is Δίδυμος Didymus. {Courtesy: Wikipedia}
So, if Didymus and Thomas were in fact nick-names, what was the real name of St Thomas the Apostle?
What do Catholic traditions have to say on this?


texts: Do Latter Day Saints / Mormons consider themselves to be henotheists?

texts:
Up until now, I saw Christianity as a whole to be monotheistic (there is only one god that created the world, is all-powerful and intervenes in the world).

Whilst looking at monotheism and henotheism (belief in a single god while not denying the existence or possible existence of other deities and any other deities are viewed to be of a unitary, equivalent divine essence), Wikipedia's article on henotheism states that

  Some scholars have written that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) can be characterized as henotheistic, but others have rejected this stance.

  Eugene England, a professor at Brigham Young University, asserted that LDS Presidents Brigham Young and Joseph Fielding Smith along with LDS scholar B. H. Roberts used the LDS interpretation of 1 Corinthians 8:5–6 as "a brief explanation of how it is possible to be both a Christian polytheist (technically a henotheist) and a monotheist".

1 Corinthians 8:5-6 reads (NIV)

  5 For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”), 6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

What does the LDS church say about it?  Are Latter Day Saints monotheistic or henotheistic?


texts: Was David aware that his words were prophetic according to any doctrines, traditions, or exegesis?

texts:
Often times Christians cite some of the writings of David as prophetically applicable towards Jesus.

Therefore, I'm curious if there are any doctrines, traditions or textual evidence that suggest that David was or wasn't aware of the prophetic applicability of his writings.

For example:

  "Kiss his son, or he will be angry and your way will lead to your destruction, for his wrath can flare up in a moment. Blessed are all who take refuge in him." - Psalms 2:12

Did David just think he was talking about himself as the anointed son of the Lord or did he recognize a double meaning to come?

The answer to this question could give insight into David's motivations as well as reveal implications for analyzing the writings of other potential or confirmed prophets.


texts: Does Catholicism consider body building to be a sin?

texts: I am an amateur body builder. I have heard that the Roman Catholic church categorizes this as a 'sin'. Is this in line with church beliefs?


texts: Is there any evidence that Paul was a descendant of Jonathan?

texts:
Paul being a descendant of Jonathan would have some appeal from a devotional perspective since Jesus' more direct saving of Paul could be viewed as fulfilling the covenant of friendship between David and Jonathan and their descendants (1 Samuel 20:42).

From Philippians 3:5 we know that he was from the tribe of Benjamin (like Jonathan) and Paul's other name, Saul, might be more common among descendants of King Saul than among Benjaminites generally. On the other hand, with the purging of the house of Saul (2 Samuel 9:3 indicates that Mephibosheth might be the bottleneck as a sole survivor) there might have been few if any descendants of Jonathan in the first century A.D.

Is there any other evidence supporting or falsifying this possibility or is this merely a wild speculation where even tradition is silent?

Optional bonus question: Has this speculation been written about earlier in Church history? (Allegory and other somewhat fanciful conceits seem to have been more popular earlier in Church history, so I would not be surprised if someone had considered this possibility given its devotional attractiveness.)


texts: Why did the Presbyterian Church of Korea split in 1959?

texts:
The number of Presbyterian denominations in Korea is breathtaking: Wikipedia lists dozens of them.  From what I can tell, most of these denominations originate in the Presbyterian Church of Korea, which was founded in 1884.  In 1959, however, the denomination apparently split in half, some members forming the TongHap and others the HapDong.  These are now two of the largest Presbyterian denominations in the world, each with about 3 million members.

Wikipedia provides some very high-level information about the debate (conservative vs. liberal, disagreement over ecumenism).  But I'd like to have a deeper understanding of the underlying issues behind the divide.  Were common "Western" debates a factor, like biblical inerrancy and female leadership?  Do outside observers see personality conflict to be a major cause of the divide, as many do with respect to some Presbyterian denominations in the US?

What is an overview of the causes of the 1959 split of this denomination?


texts:
I don't want to set off any red flags here.  I am not pursuing a suicidal lifestyle, nor do I have the desire to end my life. That being said:

Perhaps the greatest thing a person can hope for is to enter the
Kingdom of Heaven.
We are told that if a person truly accepts God as their Saviour,
they promised an eternity in heaven.

With this in mind, why not just accept Christ and then off yourself? We all want to go to heaven, don't we? Why prolong the wait and "misery" of living in a sinful world and just proceed to enter the pearly gates?  Strictly speaking in a logical sense this is the best thing a person could do for themselves.

I know in other faiths suicide nullifies a person's access to their promised land, but does the Bible say anything about this?


texts: Are there any Catholic medieval directives (rubrics) about what to do/pray/think during Eucharist Adoration?

texts: Are there any medieval (from the 5th to the 15th century) directives (some kind of manual or rubrics) about what to do/pray/think during Eucharist Adoration?


texts:
In order to ask this, let me set a stage. This is just a scenario that will be recast in a second.

As Christians we believe that God is good. We trumpet his justice, rightness, holiness, and so on and so forth. We say that he is the true standard of what goodness and justice are. When we make judgement calls we claim to use his character as the standard of right and wrong.

And yet ... we ascribe to him something so wicked that it should make us shiver to think of it! If an earthly judge --charged by the state to uphold the laws of the state in a fair manner and himself known to be a good and upright judge-- were to knowingly acquit a guilty party we would rage against him. If a criminal proven to have committed every crime in the book from common theft to rape and murder of children, not just once but over and over and over every day of their lives, were to stand before a bench and say "your honor, guilty as charged" -- and the judge were to say "Why thank you, since you know you're guilty you are free to go and here is some money for dinner," how would we react?

Say that your child was one of those that were abused and killed by this criminal. Would you not cry out and scream about the injustice of it all and then write to the papers and get interviewed and do everything in your power to have the evil judge himself brought to justice?

Do you get the picture? We somehow inherently know that what was done was un-just. We also say that our standard of justice is God himself. And yet as Christians, instead of protesting this scenario when the scenario is cast with God as the judge, we celebrate it!

Let us recast the story.

According to our own doctrines we claim that all men are indeed guilty (Romans 3:10). We also claim to that God is a perfectly just judge. When we go on to say that he has indeed acquitted some wicked men (us) we don't even blink, as if there was no problem with this scenario. Yet according to our own inherent sense of justice, this should make him an evil judge worse than the criminals he acquits.

So here is the question: How is it that God can be truly just and yet justify wicked men?

God is in the dock. Is he defensible?


texts: How can things considered bad when done by humans become good when God does them?

texts:
The following is one of the central questions concerning moral values in Christianity.

I am referring to an answer Caleb gave earlier on here. There he says, and I believe this is the standard stance Christianity holds:

  God is good, 100% pure good. He is, in fact, the only standard of what
  good is; we measure whether something is good or not by comparing it
  to the character and decrees of God.

In the comments he writes (bold style added by me):

  because he IS the standard (rather than being measured against it)
  there are certain things that are good for God but sin for men.

My question is: How can this be the case?

Even if God sees the big picture and has knowledge of all the ramifications of all potential actions the point where you can call something good ends when real suffering by sentient human beings over extended periods of time is involved.

Just as one example see the following citation about things to come when Jesus will return to us from Revelation 9:1-5:

  Revelation 9:5 (NIV)
  They were not allowed to kill them but only to torture them for five
  months. And the agony they suffered was like that of the sting of a
  scorpion when it strikes.

By all moral standards I have ever heard of this deed alone (extensive torturing of people) would be considered an outrageous atrocity, so the direct opposite of good. How can something like this be considered good when done by God?


texts: Why didn’t the blind man at Bethsaida get healed the first time?

texts:
According to Mark 8:22

  22 Then He came to Bethsaida; and they brought a blind man to Him, and begged Him to touch him.
  23 So He took the blind man by the hand
      and led him out of the town. And when He had spit on his eyes and put
     His hands on him, He asked him if he saw anything.

  24 And he looked up and said, “I see men like trees, walking.”

  25 Then He put His hands on his eyes again and made him look up. And he was restored and saw everyone clearly. 26 Then He sent him away
  to his house, saying, “Neither go into the town, nor tell anyone in
  the town.”

Here we see Jesus asking the blind man if he had been healed. Jesus again lays His hands on the blind man and he gets healed. Why did Jesus have to ask the blind man if he had been healed? Why wasn't the blind man restored completely the first time?


texts:
I'm trying to understand the difference between these two terms.  Are they the same, or are they different? (see definitions below) The Easton Bible dictionary appears to define "dispensation" as an "age" of sorts, whereas the IVP pocket dictionary appears to conflate "dispensationalism"  with some eschatological beliefs. Are they two separate things, would it be true that you could use the word "dispensation" and not have people assume your talking about "dispensationalism"

So are they different words, is my summarised understanding above correct?

Dispensation (Easton)

  (Gr. oikonomia, “management,” “economy”).
  The method or scheme according to which God carries out his purposes towards men is called a dispensation. There are usually reckoned three dispensations, the Patriarchal, the Mosaic or Jewish, and the Christian. (See COVENANT, Administration of.) These were so many stages in God’s unfolding of his purpose of grace toward men. The word is not found with this meaning in Scripture.

dispensationalism (IVP pocket dictionary)

  A system of theology popularized mainly in twentieth-century North America, especially through the influence of the Scofield Reference Bible. The dispensationalism delineated by Scofield suggested that God works with humans in distinct ways (dispensations) through history; that God has a [Theological Terms, p. 40] distinct plan for Israel over against the church; that the Bible, especially predictive prophecy, needs to be interpreted literally; that the church will be secretly raptured from earth seven years prior to Christ’s second coming; and that Christ will rule with Israel during a literal thousand-year earthly reign. Contemporary, or progressive, dispensationalism remains thoroughly premillennial but rejects the ontological distinction between Israel and the church as two peoples of God, seeing them instead as two salvation-historical embodiments of a single people. (Pocket dictionary)


texts:
A pastor in my church once told me that "human effort does not oppose God's grace", I.E. to say, as long as you do your best (which is impossible to attain, but you try any way), God will indeed do the rest.

Are there any biblical references that support/reject this view?


texts:
From Gloria.tv:

  During Sarah's "renewal" Paul VI laicised ten thousands of priests and
  furiously persecuted the Priestly Society of Saint Pius X who was able
  to gather the sheep shattered during the conciliar folly over
  which Paul VI was presiding.

What does this mean?
What was conciliar folly?


texts: Does the Seal of Confession include saying whether or not a person confessed to them?

texts:
The Seal of Confession is the duty of Catholic priests to not disclose anything they hear from someone who comes to them for confession. Does this include disclosing whether or not someone has seen them for confession? For instance, could they say:

  Yes, I have seen Joe Schmoe in confession yesterday afternoon, but I cannot reveal anything that was discussed.

Or would that be something that they wouldn't be allowed to say?

Another way of putting this is: at what point does the Seal of Confession start? When they walk in the door or when they say something?


texts: In Raymundi Martini's Pugio Fidei, there is a section entitled, De Consistorio. While it seems he is using it in reference to Judaism, it also appears there is an equivalent in Catholicism. So, what is a Constitorio (Consistory) in Catholicism?


texts: Why have Christians often had in their possession the Book of John as opposed to other books of the Bible?

texts:
A few examples:

I have been offered The Book of John in booklet form from time to time by Christians preaching on the main street in Auckland.

In the TV series Vikings the Viking leader and hero Ragnar Lothbrok raids the Lindisfarne Monastery in the year 793 and asks a Christian monk named Athelstan what is the book he has in his possession. Athelstan replies "The Book of St John", and when questioned why he says "Because without it there is only darkness".

Is the Book of John significant for one reason or another?


texts: Lutherans, Methodists, and Calvinists believe that justification is an event (as opposed to the Roman Catholic church and the Orthodox church who believe it is a process). If justification is an event, when does it happen? Is it at the moment of conversion, at baptism, or at some other time?


texts: What does the perpetual virginity of Mary add to our salvation?

texts:
I tried this question earlier and it was closed due to so many other similar questions but, having looked through I didn't find an answer.

What, if any, is the salvific benefit of the perpetual virginity of Mary?  In other words, having been born of a virgin according to prophesy and all other parts of the life, death, burial, resurrection, ascension, and coming again of Christ remaining the same, is our salvation in Christ lessened in some way if Mary has moral and lawful intercourse with her husband?


texts: Can blood disinfect a house from plague according to Leviticus?

texts:
We know blood is a good media of germs, bacteria, as well as toxin. But Leviticus, Ch. No.14, Verse No.49 to 53 - tells a way for disinfecting a house from plague of leprosy.

It states ‘Take two birds, kill one bird, take wood, scale it - and the other living bird, dip it in water and under running water - later on sprinkle the house 7 times with it.
Does it work and how?


texts: What was the purpose to animal sacrifices?

texts: I've never completely understood the purpose as to why God required that the Israelite's should kill an animal in order for God to forgive them.


texts: Am wondering if "letters of investiture" (if that is the right term), from popes to early European missionaries, are available anywhere in print, or on the web? Am particularly interested in Ansgar.


texts: Are there any Indian Christian traditions (Liturgical or scriptural) where God is referred to as "Brahman"?

texts:
The title sums up the question.

The reason I ask is that historically Catholics have placed a heavy emphasis on inculturation when evangelising new cultures. Rather than introducing western words for God into a new culture, they often study the existing religion of a culture and try to work out what word is used for the "supreme being". As such, in China, the word λογος is translated as 道 and God receives names such as 神 and 天主, all of these Chinese words designed to refer to some conception of a supreme being. Similarly in Arabic bible translations the word Allah is used to refer to God, in an effort to draw on existing connotations that Muslims associate with the name.

So I was wondering if there is any tradition in any strand of Indian Christianity (Protestant, Catholic, or otherwise) where they refer to God as Brahman, because that is the name of the supreme, ultimate reality in Hinduism.


texts: What does being lukewarm mean in contrast with being hot or cold for the church of Laodicea?

texts:
From Rev. 3:14-22(ESV)

  14 “And to the angel of the church in Laodicea write: ‘The words of
  the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of God's
  creation.

  15 “‘I know your works: you are neither cold nor hot. Would that you
  were either cold or hot! 16 So, because you are lukewarm, and neither
  hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth. 17 For you say, I am
  rich, I have prospered, and I need nothing, not realizing that you are
  wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked. 18 I counsel you to buy
  from me gold refined by fire, so that you may be rich, and white
  garments so that you may clothe yourself and the shame of your
  nakedness may not be seen, and salve to anoint your eyes, so that you
  may see. 19 Those whom I love, I reprove and discipline, so be zealous
  and repent. 20 Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears
  my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him,
  and he with me. 21 The one who conquers, I will grant him to sit with
  me on my throne, as I also conquered and sat down with my Father on
  his throne. 22 He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to
  the churches.’”

Basically, Jesus Christ wanted the church to be either hot or cold, but never lukewarm. So my question is what does hot, cold, and lukewarm represent for this verse?


texts: Are Lutherans comfortable with worshipping a consecrated host or do they consider it to be idolatry?

texts:
Lutherans believe in a real, physical presence of Christ in the Eucharist, similar to Catholics. However they also believe that the bread and wine remain as bread and wine even after consecration. Does this belief that the bread is still bread (despite also being God) prevent Lutherans from engaging in eucharistic adoration/worship out of fear of idolatry?

If not, can you please provide some examples of situations in which Lutherans engage in such adoration? Does it happen during the liturgy? Does it happen outside the liturgy?


texts: When did knowledge of Christ's sacrifice become necessary for salvation?

texts:
First, this question makes two assumptions:

For a person to be saved today, they must hear the gospel of Jesus Christ, and accept the gift of His death on the cross as penance for their sin.
Before the death of Christ, the requirement for salvation was faith in God's future redemptive work (See How were people saved before ~33AD? ).  This is what saved Abraham, the thief on the cross, and anyone else who was saved up to this point.

These two premises are commonly held by many Christians, including many very close friends of mine.

So my question is, given this understanding of saving faith, when, precisely, did the requirement cease to be "faith in future redemptive work" and instead become "faith in past redemptive work?"

The easy answer would of course be "The instant Christ died," but that has unfortunate implications for anyone who died 5 minutes after Christ did but did not know of Christ's death because the obituary had not yet been published.


texts: Does yearning to know more about God for a stronger relationship leave us hanging in confusion?

texts:
Many times we try to ask questions not to challenge the Christian faith but rather to know more and perhaps draw closer to God.

How can one get the confidence in trying to explain to and convert a learned and highly educated unbeliever who always has strong reasons from philosophy, logic, psychology etc to support his rigid stand?

The bible actually seem to halt us in seeking to know more from God.

  who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? (Romans 9:20, KJV).

Romans 14:5 also says:

  Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.

And then we have this:

  For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. [...] so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. (Isaiah 55:8–9).

These and many more make me feel incapable of winning souls for Christ and often leaves me hanging and tongue-tied myself. How do we manage this as Christians?


texts: Was Tetzel robbed by a man who had preemptively bought an indulgence?

texts:
Wikipedia recounts a story told by Martin Luther about Johann Tetzel. It goes a little something like this:

Tetzel was in Leipzig selling indulgences. After collecting a large sum of money, Tetzel was preparing to leave town for Rome. A nobleman approached him and asked if he could purchase an indulgence for a future sin. Tetzel sold him one. Outside of town, the nobleman beat and robbed Tetzel. He then told Tetzel this was the sin for which he bought the indulgence.

Although Wikipedia does not offer a source, it seems to come from Luther's Sämmtliche schriften, vol 15.

Did this incident occur? If not, did Luther invent it or learn it from somewhere else?


texts: Where is the text of Pope Pius IX, "To the Easterners"?

texts:
I have seen Wikipedia discussion of Pope Pius IX's 1848 Epistle to the Easterners, and while the discussion mentions a now removed link to catholicencyclicals.net which apparently was a resource on the encyclical but did not include its text, I haven't been able to obtain the Latin wording of the encyclical's title, nor pin down the text.

What is a URL to the full text of the encyclical, preferably on vatican.va?

Thanks,


texts: What were the early Christians officially persecuted for?

texts:
I wonder what the early Christians were officially persecuted for by the high priests?

In the book of Acts we see that Saul, before his conversion, received some letters from the high priest that were giving him an official power to persecute early Christians (Acts 9:2). I wonder what was the official reason for that.

I mean, the Bible does let us know that the high-priests didn't want the new teaching to spread (Acts 4:17), that they were quite jealous witnessing the miracles performed by Peter and John (Acts 5:16,17), and even the fact that they were simply afraid of Jesus' blood being brought upon them (Acts 5:28). However, I don't think they would officially state something like "Christians must be persecuted because we feel jealous regarding their growing number". There must have been some "official" and "scientific" reason put forth, perhaps based on the books of law (Old Testament), in order to persecute the early Christians. So, what was that reason?


texts:
Starting with the early church, a large portion of Christian tradition has held the Augustinian hypothesis which believes that Matthew's Gospel was the first to be written, then Mark's, then Luke's, and subsequently John's, with each writer having some knowledge of the others' writing.

Since the 19th century however, many biblical scholars have rejected Augustinian hypothesis (namely that Matthews Gospel was the first to be written) in favor of Markan priority. On top of this, they assert that Matthew and Luke's Gospels have used Mark's as a source from which both draw virtually identical narrations (see The Synoptic Gospels). Under this hypothesis, those portions of Matthew and Luke that are in agreement but do not appear in Mark are believed to have been borrowed from an alternate source commonly referred to as "Q"

"Q" as a tangible fragment or codex has never been discovered within the field of archaeology and paleography however. Many biblical scholars defend "Q's" lack of tangible existence due to many portions of scripture being lost or edited.

However, one group certainly must have recorded an alleged Gospel as important as "Q" would have been, and that group is the Early Church Fathers.

So, do any Early Church Fathers record of another Gospel similar in content to those portions of Matthew and Luke that do not appear in Mark?


texts:
How do Catholics defend the apparent errors found in the deuterocanonical books?

Errors in the Apocrypha


texts: How do the Catholic and Protestant understandings of "Regula Fidei" differ?

texts: In the Hermeneutics course I am taking, a definition of "Regula Fidei" was posed that seemed different from the way my Catholic acquaintances use the term. How is the term Rule of Faith  used differently by Catholics than by Protestants? Specifically how is the practical application different even if the concept is similar in definition?


texts: Is there a rule, on how many Patron Saints a Catholic can have?

texts:
I think I heard on some Catholic forum that we are attributed a patron saint at the moment of our baptism (and/or our Confirmation), and that we are obligated to keep a special devotion to that saint. But that if one desires to work with other saints, one must do so as if it was some kind of temporary collaboration and not elevate those saints to the level of the patron saint attributed to us.

  Essentially I suppose, the question is, can we or can we not have
  multiple saints as our personal patrons? And if we can, how many and
  why?

To answer the question it would be ideal if you quoted Catholic authorities, like cathechisms or even private revelations recognized by the Church.


texts: What's the biblical basis that Joseph adopted Jesus?

texts:
It is common in Christian discussion to describe Joseph as Jesus' earthly father or his adoptive father.

What does the Bible say about the adoption of Jesus by Joseph, Mary's husband? Is there biblical basis for calling Joseph the adoptive father of Jesus?


texts: Eating of which non-fish animals does not go against the dietery law of the Roman Catholic Church?

texts: During lent a Roman Catholic may not consume meat other than that of a fish. However, there are some non-fish animals that have been considered okay to consume during that time, like beaver for example. What other non-fish animals are okay for a Roman Catholic to eat during lent?


texts: How widely accepted is platonism in Christianity?

texts:
How widely is it thought everything in 'this World' reflects a greater reality where those things are perfect (in God)? That we might reach this perfection via beatification? And how widely might we take that claim; can a love of fiction reflect this higher reality? Can films? Can objects?

And if this reality (to be) is greater, to what degree would it be sensible to assume it (they) might be perfected? Are words, to quote Jonathan Edwards,like joy but "low shadows" of how great and perfectly satisfying the joy of the World to come is?

To use an example, I have often hoped (via reading CS Lewis's platonism inspired writings) that my love for Norse Myth, Tolien,'Dr Who' (a tv series) and my nerdy interest in collecting figures based on that program's chacters and monsters, might in fact be instigations of something. I feel, via such, as CS Lewis felt via fairytales, a desire for something 'ineffible'- sehnsucht. Wordsworth felt a similar desire through nature...but how many christians believe that these feelings are 'for something' that they reflect when, I have also heard it argued (by highly professional and 'high up' theologins and Christian teachers) that the only similarity between objects and enjoyments here and the World to come, is that both are enjoyable.
Merry Christmas, by the way, and to all a Happy New Year!


texts: What is an overview of the perspectives on how a miracle is actually done?

texts: Reading through Exodus and seeing that some of the miracles God told Moses to perform, pharaoh's magicians also performed them; I began to have these line of thoughts, that the acts of  miracles may be based on supernatural laws to be discovered similar to how God set in natural laws that were there to be discovered (knowing God is consistent)?  Revelation says the antichrist is going to perform the miracle of calling fire from heaven, which looks similar to what Elijah did in the old testament. I think Elijah did it at will and had the know how,  but he must have done it within God's parameters for the use of such knowledge which God originally made for them to be used. I believe satan cannot produce anything, he only copies from God, he didn't create any power or authority (for signs or magic) by himself, Scripture says he comes to steal and destroy (he stole the power from man when man fell, but already knew the know how for some signs and wonders before he fell from heaven). Knowing his previous position before he fell, I tend to believe he gained a limited knowledge of how signs and wonders are performed (he knew the potentials man had better than Adam did before the fall,  which Jesus has restored to Christians today), he knows some spiritual laws that man is still understanding and he reveals them to his own in a bid to counter God, that is,  for evil and to make man his slave. I have imagined that God may have made such laws discoverable and operatable by anyone who discovers, but did not intend that sin will come in through lucifer who I believe has now harnessed these for evil because they were freely available to him before the fall, in quite a similar way the tree of life was freely available to Adam and Eve and all mankind before man fell.  I am drifting  to believe that Magic should be a classification of sign and wonders (miracles)  worked by the devil (not by powerful demons the way many Christians see it today because the devil cannot create any power for himself, rather by legitimate power he lost when he fell and stole after he fell) to use for his glory and against God, but can never equal, supercede  or reverse that done by God who is the Creator, as the magicians could only produce some of the miracles but could not reverse it. I know the Holy Spirit has a place in the working of miracles promted by God. But Elijah's case of calling fire to devour the army that were sent to arrest him seems like he was working it at his own will and it took an angel to prevent him from devouring the last group of army with fire. Elijah and Elisha, Moses, Jesus performed other miracles that some of us may refer to as magic if they reoccur today. I know my comments are complicated and most probably not well organized, I wish I can make it better. But I will appreciate if any wrong line of thought here can be corrected. I will be glad to receive your comments and clarification.


texts:
How is the contradiction explained between 2 Chronicles 28:3 and Genesis 22:2 in the protestant tradition?

Genesis 22:2 NIV

  Then God said, “Take your son, your only son, whom you
  love—Isaac—and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a
  burnt offering on a mountain I will show you.”

2 Chronicles 28:3 NIV

  He burned sacrifices in the Valley of Ben Hinnom and sacrificed his
  children in the fire, engaging in the detestable practices of the
  nations the LORD had driven out before the Israelites.


texts: Was any of Flavius Josephus' work relevant to the Council of Nicea?

texts: I noticed that Eusebius transcribes the entirety of Josephus' Testimonium Flavianum in 324 AD, and that the First Council of Nicea occurs in 325 AD. Does any of Josephus' work feature throughout the contemporary arguments or literature?


texts: What key differences should I be sure to cover when explaining how I study the Bible as a Catholic to my Episcopalian friend?

texts: A friend of mine was recently given a full Bible and asked if I could read through the book of Tobit with her.  When we discussed the details of doing this, it turned out one of the things she is hoping to learn is how to read the Bible the way I do as representative of the way the Church teaches people to read the Bible.  While flattering, this is also kinda a big responsibility and I want to make sure I do the best I can.  We're probably going to spend a lot of time discussing the differences in our approaches to Bible-reading, but I was hoping for an overview as sort of a place to start. Her church is St. Alban's, if that helps.


texts: Do any Christians sects have a Standing/Prostration Prayer like the Jewish 'Amidah' and Muslim 'Salat'?

texts: I was wondering if any Christians have a prayer that includes movement like bowing towards a certain place and praying like what Muslims and Jews do.


texts: What is the origin of the Orthodox belief that Sts. Joseph and Mary were betrothed but not married?

texts:
The Orthodox refer to St Joseph as Joseph the Betrothed. They assert that he and the Virgin Mary were betrothed, but never married. This differs from the Catholic and Protestant belief that they were married. What is the origin and history of this belief?

In teachings about Joseph where the Orthodox and Catholic differ, the Orthodox seem to align with the Protoevangelium of James. However, I don't see a perpetual betrothal mentioned there. There are places where Joseph denies marrying Mary 'in stealth', but this occurs during her pregnancy with Jesus. I don't think those can necessarily be used to show that they weren't married later.

Related/Inspired by How old was St. Joseph when he married the Blessed Virgin Mary?.


texts: Eastern Orthodoxy, The Trinity & Theology of the Body

texts:
I have read most of Pope John Paul II's Theology of the Body and studied some of the ideas behind it and have felt it was something that was doctrinally accessible to non-Catholic branches of Christianity. The only conflict I possibly see is the Eastern Orthodox understanding of the Trinity and the idea that human sex images the Trinity, where (from the Eastern view) the Holy Spirit proceeds from just the Father, not the Father & Son together.

Do Orthodox Christians take issue with the idea that the human sexual act images the Trinity due to it implying the relationship of the Trinity being that one Person proceeds from the Other Two?

Does the Orthodox Church give much credence to Theology of the Body?


texts: Did the mention of Simon Magnus contribute to Acts of Peter not being part of the New Testament?

texts: The Acts of Peter is a Apocryphal book about the Apostle Peter after he moves to Rome. It seems to talk about Simon Magnus a good deal. I am interested as to whether that is one of the reasons it was discarded as to possibly be part of the New Testament. Were early church fathers afraid that people might rally behind Simon Magnus as someone to worship if they read the Acts of Peter?


texts:
Leviticus 18:18:

  Do not take your wife’s sister as a rival wife and have sexual relations with her while your wife is living.

I always wondered why it says it like this. Instead of, "do not marry your wife's sister while she is alive," it says not to take her as a "rival wife" specifically.

What does that mean?


texts: What are the meanings of the mote and beam in the parable?

texts:
In the new testament, Christ gives the parable of the mote and beam:

  1 Judge not, that ye be not judged. 2 For with what judgment ye judge,
  ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be
  measured to you again. 3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in
  thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own
  eye?  4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote
  out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? 5 Thou
  hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then
  shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

  —Matthew 7:1-5 KJV (Matthew 7:1-5 other versions)

What is the mote's meaning in relation to the beam?  Are we to interpret their meanings by the size alone, or is there a deeper lost in translation meaning?


texts: If a monk dies after been married to a woman, who inherits his legacy?

texts:
If a monk, after he made his eternal vows, quits his monastery and marries a woman by law and his 'marriage' with the monastery is not annulled by the pope, to which is his legacy (capital) going when he dies? To the monastery or to his wife?

Of course this is be answered by the rules of the RCC.

Would the answer be the same for a pastor/priest who had received his ordination?


texts: What is courting according to the Catholic interpretation of the Natural Law?

texts:
The Natural Moral Law is a good way for Christians to understand quite a bit about the nature and purpose of what they're doing and who they are and quite a few of the papal teachings in the last hundred years have been around the nature and purpose of marriage and the relations between the sexes (Castii Canubii, Arcanum divinae sapientiae, Humane Vitae, etc.) , but to my knowledge very few have ventured to give advice about how to get there.

What can the Natural Moral Law, which instructs us that marriage is a bond centered around unity and procreation, tell us about how we should conduct ourselves while courting?  What should one's expectations be of a suitor and suttee?


texts: Understanding Zechariah's prophecy in Luke 1 as a Protestant, Evangelical Dispensationalist believer

texts:
In Luke 1:68–69, Zechariah says under the influence of the Holy Spirit:

  “Blessed be the Lord God of Israel,
      for he has visited and redeemed his people
   and has raised up a horn of salvation for us
      in the house of his servant David,"

ESV uses past perfect tense: "has visited and redeemed" as well as "has raised up."

From the context of the rest of his prophetic prayer of praise, some might infer that Zechariah refers here only to God saving physically, by His presence or intervention in the past.

God was silent for about 400 years before sending Gabriel to Zechariah and then Mary.

Did Zechariah grasp the spiritual implication of the salvation that was at hand from reading "the prophets from of old" (70) through whom God had spoken?

He speaks of promises in regard to  being "saved from our enemies and from the hand of all who hate us;" (71)

But this had a spiritual purpose:

  "that we...might serve him without fear,
  in holiness and righteousness before him all our days." (74–75)

He also says that his son, John,

  will go before the Lord to prepare his ways,
   to give knowledge of salvation to his people
          in the forgiveness of their sins,
   because of the tender mercy of our God,
          whereby the sunrise shall visit us from on high
   to give light to those who sit in darkness and in the shadow of death,
          to guide our feet into the way of peace.”

Zechariah had nine months to study what Gabriel had said and what was recorded by the prophets of old.

1) What did he understand about spiritual salvation and the Lord's visitation through the child to be born to Mary?  (He likely heard her account of Gabriel's visit to her during the three months that she stayed with them.)

2) What specific prophesies in the Old Testament, and fulfillments during Jesus' first advent, can be connected with Zechariah's prophecy?


texts: Is this quote actually in the Gospel of Mark?

texts:
In a chapter heading to Tom Cheethams The World Inside Out: Henry Corbin & Islamic Myticism the following is quoted:

He who believes a lot
Experiences a lot
-- Peasant woman from the Gospel of Mark

I'm not overly familiar with the this Gospel but it sounds rather too colloquial to be Biblical language. Is it actually a reference and who is this peasant woman? If not, how do I make sense of this?
(Its pointed out in a footnote that this was quote was taken from Hans Peter Deurer Dreamtime: concerning the boundary between wilderness and civilisation).


texts: In Catholicism, what does "mystical" mean?

texts:
In the Loreto Litanies, Mary is referred to as Mystical Rose and the Church teaches as doctrine that the Church is the the Mystical Body of Christ1.

In Catholicism, what does mystical mean?

1. Cf. Pius XII > Encyclicals > Mystici Corporis Christi.


texts: What is a good beginner reading-level Bible book for adults?

texts:
I have a friend who is foreign born and her English is good but she needs to improve her reading and writing skills. It is jeopardizing her job situation because she can't read/write emails very well. I want to suggest some books for her to read that will help her improve her skills. However, she is very religious, and would only be interested in reading Bible-related books.

She reads from the King James Bible every day for ~30 mins, but it is in old english, and I am not sure that she understands what she is reading. But she reads it religiously. Is there a more modern Bible-related book that I can suggest for her? Something that would help her understand modern grammar and sentence structure would be best, especially for improving her written communication in daily life.

Any help would be great!


texts:
There are several places where the Bible says that stealing is a sin.

  Exodus 20,15 (KJV)
  Thou shalt not steal.

But is downloading software content like games, music, or films illegally (i.e. you don't pay for it while you should) a sin too?
Does it count as stealing?
Can we tell exactly that this or that counts as stealing or does it depend on the situation?

I know that physically nothing is stolen, and the creator do not lose anything, but in the creators purse there will be less money. People would be using the result of his work and he wouldn't get rewarded, while maybe this is his main source of income. Also the downloader enjoys something that he hasn't paid for.
Do we really count something as stealing if the harmed person/company loses something? Doesn't the loss of income count as a loss?

On the other side, it is easy to tell that this is a sin, but then look to the people of earth. Almost everybody using some kind of illegal content (even faithful Christians). Lots of people say that they can't afford it, while the software is essential to them.


texts: Exodus 20, "And God spoke all these words:"

texts: Exodus 20 leads off with "And God spoke all these words."  However, many of the words in Exodus 20 are clearly not "in the first person."  For example, verse 8 is not "God's words" but [Moses's] editorialized explanation for it. Otherwise, God would be referring to Himself in the third person.  Exodus 34:21, though, clearly is a "first person" commandment, God said, "Six days you shall labor, but on the seventh day you shall rest; even in plowing and harvesting seasons, you must rest."  That passage, however, is in the midst of a number of other "laws" that seem to be extra-10-Commandments. Can someone please help me understand: God says "all" the laws in Exodus 34. Those would seem to be the "definitive" 10+ commandments. However, we use the text of Exodus 20 as "THE" 10 Commandments, even though portions of those text are clearly not recorded verbatim as God spoke them.  How is Exodus 34 not "definitive"?


texts: Biblical basis for two aspects of the Gap Theory

texts:
According to the Gap Theory there was a large gap in time between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2. Two aspects of the theory are:

Rather than Genesis 1:1 being a summary for what follows, it is a distinct event in time, followed by another distinct event in time in Genesis 1:2ff.
Satan is thought to have sinned and fallen during the gap, which God judged through a cataclysmic flood (often called Lucifer's flood) that left the world in the empty and void state we read in Genesis 1:2.

What other verses in the Bible support these two propositions?


texts: Constantine  was the emperor of the Roman Empire who legalized Christianity and called the Counsel of Nicaea, among other thing. Which church traditions regard Constantine the Great as a Saint?


texts: What is consumerism and what does the Pope see wrong with it?

texts:
In the most recent encyclical Laudato si', Pope Francis condemns consumerism. What does he mean by the word consumerism? And what does he see wrong with it?

  To blame population growth instead of extreme and selective consumerism on the part of some, is one way of refusing to face the issues

When someone consumes something, it means that the consumer enjoys and benefits from it. Why is it wrong?


texts: Who is the "Seed of the Serpent" spoken of in Genesis 3?

texts:
In Genesis 3, God curses the serpent Satan in the following words:

  The Lord God said to the serpent, “Because you have done this, cursed
  are you more than all cattle, and more than every beast of the field;
  pn your belly you will go, and dust you will eat all the days of your
  life; And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between
  your seed and her Seed; He shall bruise you on the head, and you
  shall bruise him on the heel.”  Genesis 3:14-15 NASB

Most Christians understand the Seed of the woman to be referring to Jesus, who was uniquely born of woman.  However, it seems unclear who the seed of the serpent is.

To whom exactly is this referring?  I'm not sure a particular tradition matters here, but I'm most interested in a perspective that at the very least views the Scriptures as the divine Word of God (a biblical literalist), but again, I'm not sure other perspectives would really impact an understanding of this too much.


texts: What does it mean that "the two natures of Christ cannot be separated"?

texts:
The Ausberg confession states of Christ in the Chief Articles of Faith,

  Therefore, he has two natures, one divine and the other human. They are united in one person and cannot be separated.

What does it mean by separation of the natures? To add context, how does this shed light on Jesus' lament, "My God, my God! Why have you forsaken me?" or conversely, how is it informed by the lament?


texts: Does the fact that Joseph was a *tekton* require that Jesus was as well?

texts:
I am not a scholar, but it always bothers me when preachers assume Jesus was a carpenter. And I've read the answers that project that his work was most likely in stone.

But, as I understand it, at the time of bar mitzvah, if the required memorization was not perfect then the boys were taught the trades of their fathers, like fishermen, craftsman, etc. And that if the lessons were perfect, the young man went on to higher learning. I don't know, it could be that the family business was also fit into the schedule, because families need to make a living, but I am curious if anyone knows what the culture was at that time?


texts: Why shouldn't the UK have women bishops?

texts:
Just last week in the UK, the Church of England voted on the concept of having women bishops (who would then be eligible for appointment to the House of Lords, but that's not relevant.)

They voted no.

On the morning TV show, "The Big Questions", last Sunday, one of the pundits in favour of that decision stated that the church had "scriptural authority" to back the decision up.  This went unchallenged, and so was not expanded upon.

What is the scriptural authority behind this decision?


texts: In Catholicism, what distinguishes a priestly blessing from a lay blessing?

texts:
Lay Catholics are encouraged to bless their children [and homes?] using particular formulas or patterns. As I understand it, these ought to differ in "manner" and formula from blessings performed by a priest.

What are the differences in formula and manner? Is there a difference in effect or efficacy?


texts: What groups advocate and establish "unlicensed" churches in the US?

texts:
In the United States, most churches file papers of incorporation and formally apply for 501(C)3 status. A few choose not to, a notable example being the Indianapolis Baptist Temple Church in Iowa whose building was seized by IRS in 2001 for a related issue. They had no Employer Identification Number, as they refused any form of government registration. Please ignore the details of the tax case as it's not related to the question.

There are many groups historically which tried to avoid being entangled with the government in any way. What groups today advocate refusal to file these basic documents?


texts:
I am having difficulty reconciling a tension that I see in the teachings of Jesus.

In Matthew 11:28--30 Jesus tells us

  28 “Come to me, all you that are weary and are carrying heavy burdens, and I will give you rest. 29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me; for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. 30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.”

(all verses herein have been taken from NRSV).  However, in Luke 9:23 Jesus also tells us

  23 Then he said to them all, “If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me.

Similarly, in Luke 14:25--33 Jesus tells us the cost of discipleship

  25 Now large crowds were traveling with him; and he turned and said to them, 26 “Whoever comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and even life itself, cannot be my disciple. 27 Whoever does not carry the cross and follow me cannot be my disciple. 28 For which of you, intending to build a tower, does not first sit down and estimate the cost, to see whether he has enough to complete it? 29 Otherwise, when he has laid a foundation and is not able to finish, all who see it will begin to ridicule him, 30 saying, ‘This fellow began to build and was not able to finish.’ 31 Or what king, going out to wage war against another king, will not sit down first and consider whether he is able with ten thousand to oppose the one who comes against him with twenty thousand? 32 If he cannot, then, while the other is still far away, he sends a delegation and asks for the terms of peace. 33 So therefore, none of you can become my disciple if you do not give up all your possessions.

So on one hand, Jesus' yoke is easy and his burden his light.  On the other hand, we are also given the serious and austere command to take up our cross--which is very heavy.  In Romans 8:17, even Paul seems to suggest that we need to share in Christ's sufferings

  17 Now if we are children, then we are heirs—heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ, if indeed we share in his sufferings in order that we may also share in his glory.

In Mere Christianity, Lewis suggests that this tension is reconciled by devoting every aspect of our life to God, but this interpretation doesn't seem obvious to me.  It seems like there should be an easier, more apparent way of reconciling these passages.  If the Bible is God's word (as I believe it is), then why isn't easier to understand?

I have searched this forum, and have been unable to find any answers that directly address the tension to which I am referring.

I would be very grateful to anyone who can shed some light on this matter.


texts: In what manner did Peter, James and John appear to Joseph Smith?

texts:
According to LDS teaching on this page, a few weeks after John the Baptist conferred on Joseph Smith the Aaronic Priesthood, Peter, James, and John appeared to Joseph Smith to confer on him the Melchizedek Priesthood.

According to other LDS teaching, cited in this question, the Apostle John is still alive today, but Peter and James were both martyred.

So, my question is regarding how Peter, James and John appeared to Joseph Smith.  Since John was still living, did he physically appear to Joseph Smith?  I presume that Peter and James appeared to him spiritually, but not physically.

Does the LDS church clarify the manner in which John, in particular, and by contrast James and Peter appeared to Joseph Smith?


texts: What is the significance of one-third in Revelation?

texts:
Why is everything 1/3 in Revelation?
It comes up with the four angels, and the dragon:

8:7 The first [angel's trumpet] sounded, ... and a third of the earth was burned up, and a third of the trees were burned up, and all the green grass was burned up. 8 The second angel sounded, ... and a third of the sea became blood, 9 and a third of the creatures which were in the sea and had life, died; and a third of the ships were destroyed. 10 The third angel sounded, and a great star fell from heaven, burning like a torch, and it fell on a third of the rivers and on the springs of waters. 11 The name of the star is called Wormwood; and a third of the waters became wormwood, and many men died from the waters, because they were made bitter. 12 The fourth angel sounded, and a third of the sun and a third of the moon and a third of the stars were struck, so that a third of them would be darkened and the day would not shine for a third of it, and the night in the same way.
9:15 And the four angels, who had been prepared for the hour and day and month and year, were released, so that they would kill a third of mankind. 18 A third of mankind was killed by these three plagues, by the fire and the smoke and the brimstone which proceeded out of their mouths.
12:4 And [the dragon's] tail swept away a third of the stars of heaven and threw them to the earth.


texts: What conventions did the Jews use to express time in Jesus' day?

texts:
I was reading Acts and I came across Acts 2:15 which reads "These men are not drunk, as you suppose. It's only nine in the morning!"(NIV, 1984).

But I realized that in the Apostolic times,  they did not use the a.m. and p.m. way of time telling. So, after a brief search, I found that in early translations, it is "For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day" (KJB, Cambridge ed.)

I know we live by grace and anything we do which is not of faith is a sin. I like using the old way of time telling. But when I communicate, I try to be helpful in order not to confuse people and use the am, pm time. I think this old timing is the standard in countries like Ethiopia and some Greek, Indian and Russian churches.


texts: Did St. Paul know the doctrine of the Trinity?

texts:
Did St. Paul know anything about the doctrine of the Trinity (3 Persons in 1 God) but ran out of ink to fully explain it?

Or would the Trinitarian doctrine of the Athanasian Creed, for example, have been news to him if he lived in the 4th century?