texts: All my days are ordained before I was born?

texts:
Psalm 139:16 (KJV) Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being
  unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in
  continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.

My understanding of this verse: God has written down the process of how our bodies will be formed. Thus, referring to embryology.

  Psalm 139:16 (NIV) Your eyes saw my unformed body; all the days
  ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to
  be.

My understanding of this verse: God has written down how many days I should live on this earth. Thus referring to predestination. This translation is very hard to digest for me.

How should we interpret this verse?  I myself cannot accept the NIV way of translation because that would put God responsible for everything in my life, whether good or bad, and that even my destiny of going to Hell or Heaven is predestined. Some writers like Rick Warren  prefer this NIV way of translation.

What is the view of Mainstream Christian Denominations on this verse?


texts: Eucharist for Catholic Candidates after Easter Vigil?

texts: I realize that the Eucharist is taken for the first time at Easter Vigil, but is it continued for candidates of RCIA through Confirmation, or is it a received for the second time at confirmation?


texts: Should a Christian wear clothing of mixed fibers?

texts:
Possible Duplicate:
  To what extent does the Law of Moses still apply?
  How should a christian evaluate whether a particular action a sin or not?

I hear Leviticus 19:19 brought up from time to time, mainly because it's one in a laundry list of sins. It states:

  Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woolen come upon thee.

If a sin is a sin is a sin, where does wearing mixed fibers fall in the grand scheme? Is this something that all Christians should honor?


texts: What different acts do Catholic priests require of people who go to confession?

texts:
I understand that when people go to confessional in the Catholic Church, the priest will often prescribe certain things for them to do for penance in order for their sins to be forgiven.

I have heard people in passing mention doing "Hail Mary's", and I'm pretty sure they weren't talking about long desperation passes at the end of a football game.  I've also heard mention of "Our Father's".  I assume these refer to a prayer to Mary and recitation of the Lord's Prayer.

So, are these the most common thing a priest will prescribe?  Are there any others?  Fasting?  Is there a set pattern prescribed by the Catholic Church?


texts: What do the Catholics say about Isaiah 29:13?

texts:
Isaiah 29:13 NLT reads:

  ... And their worship of me
      is nothing but man-made rules learned by rote.

I come from a Catholic background. And we are taught the Rosary and many such prayers by rote learning. Does this not contradict the above verse?


texts: How do Jehovah's Witnesses explain Mark 1:1–3?

texts:
Mark 1:1–3 from the NWT reads:

  The beginning of the good news about Jesus Christ, the Son of God:   Just as it is written in Isaiah the prophet: “(Look! I am sending my messenger ahead of you,* who will prepare your way.) A voice of one crying out in the wilderness: ‘Prepare the way of Jehovah! Make his roads straight.’”

Contextually, this is talking of Jesus, and saying that John the Baptist "will prepare your way," and then it quotes the prophecy from Isaiah that says "Prepare the way of Jehovah!"

How does Jehovah's Witness doctrine explain this? It seems that their own scriptures are suggesting that Jesus is Jehovah.


texts:
What is the biblical basis for praying to Jesus, as opposed to praying to God in the name of Jesus?

My question is based on John 14:13–14:

  “And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Son may bring glory to the Father. You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it.”

I have used the New International Version here. The English Standard Version is similar. The King James Version likewise says to ask in Jesus' name. The New Living Translation is more emphatic:

  "Yes, ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it!"

The New World Translation likewise says:

  "whatever it is that you ask in my name, I will do this... If you ask anything in my name, I will do it."

The Kingdom Interlinear Translation word for word translation from Greek into English says:

  "If every anything you should ask me in the name of me, this I shall do."

Are there any other Bible verses like that, or verses unlike that (praying to Jesus). Or are there any examples in the New Testament where Jesus' disciples prayed to Jesus?


texts: According to Catholicism, is it sinful to physically harm abortion doctors to prevent them from performing abortions?

texts:
Question: Is it sinful to physically attack a doctor who performs abortions and break his fingers so that he can not perform an abortion? If yes, why? If no, why? Does it depend on the circumstances?

Arguments against:

It would seem that one should not attack a doctor because he is not doing something unlawful.
It would seem that one should not attack a doctor because one does not have the authority to exert violence.

However, these arguments seem not to be good. To explain why I will give an analogy.

Imagine a situation where some guy wants to dismember a 3-year-old child. You see him going toward the child, and you know for certain what he plans to do. You are able to stop him via violence (and no-one except that guy will be harmed in the process). However, your stopping him will be illegal. It still seems that you should stop the guy. This analogy seems to explain why neither authority nor what is (il)legal matter, and therefore it shows why arguments against are not good arguments. Also, it is often said that: "Necessity does not know the law." And that "Unjust laws are not really laws."

If it were not sinful to attack a doctor who performs abortions someone would already be doing it. But we did not see such a case.

Arguments for:

Using the same analogy as above, it seems not only that it is not sinful to attack a doctor, but that we have a duty to attack a doctor, just as we would have a duty to stop someone (if we are able to) who wants to dismember a 3-year-old child.

Maybe the arguments above depend on whether we see a doctor who directly goes to the hospital to perform an abortion, but not to a doctor who does not directly go to perform an abortion.

I am interested in responses from a Catholic viewpoint (preferably a natural law response).


texts:
Do all Christians believe in predestination? If not, for those who don't, how do they explain Romans 9:14 - 9:24?

14 What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be! 15 For He says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” 16 So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I raised you up, to demonstrate My power in you, and that My name might be proclaimed throughout the whole earth.” 18 So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires.
19 You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?” 20 On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it? 21 Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? 22 What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? 23 And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory, 24 even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles.

The passage says some are "vessels of wrath prepared for destruction," and others are "vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory..." Also when it says "He hardens whom he desires," the implication is that when a person's heart becomes hardened, it is hardened by God in which case they did not do so of their free will. Both of these support the idea of predestination (the former more than the latter) and I want to know how a Christian who doesn't believe in predestination (or one who somehow harmonizes predestination and free will) would interpret this passage, particularly the things I mentioned.


texts:
Is there anything in the Roman Catholic doctrine of papal supremacy that would prohibit the Pope from relinquishing his authority as head of the Church, and instead be "First among Equals?"

One of the fundamental differences separating the Roman Catholic Church from our fellow Christians in the Orthodox Church is the issue of papal supremacy. Rome believes that the Pope is the leader of the entire church, while the Orthodox believe that the Bishop of Rome is first among equals.

Given the pressure of secularism (both from outside and inside the Church), I believe that it is high time for us Christians who believe in the ancient faith to be united.

My questions is this: Given the Roman Catholic doctrine of papal supremacy, would it be possible, for the sake of Christian unity, for the Pope to relinquish that supremacy and become first among equals? Could he decide that it would be better for the universal church if he acted as "Prime Minister" of the faith, instead of "King of the faith?"


texts: Can humans aquire 'infinite' joy when they are finite beings?

texts: I read CS Lewis say that the Beatification is an "infinite good" and, hence, "infinitely outweighs the negations" (the stuff we shall leave behind here). He also argued, in Letters to Malcolm, that we shall not experience time as an infinite present because we are finite creatures and, therefore, can only experience what suits our humanity. Being that we are finite, does that mean when he (or other writers) talk of 'infinite joy' they mean it metaphorically rather than literally? In Weight of Glory, Lewis also refers to it as 'transfinite'.


texts: Is the quote "there is no saint without a past and no sinner without a future" attributed to St. Augustine?

texts:
This quote is often attributed to St. Augustine, but I have not been able to find anything that cites where in his works he writes this, nor have I found any historical account where he says this in a public setting such as a sermon. I would really appreciate if someone could find why this is attributed to Augustine, so that I know if it's falsely attributed to him or not.

"there is no saint without a past and no sinner without a future"

P.S. I found the answer myself. This quote is not attributed to St. Augustine or Pope Francise as it is spread on internet. It is attributed to Oscar Wilde. Oscar Wilde's quote was used by many authors and among them as Persian author Mirza Ahmad Shorab whose work contain this quote. Oscar Wilde was born much before Mirza.


texts: What is "New Creation" according to Catholicism?

texts:
2 Corinthians 5:17 (ESV)

  Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old
  has passed away; behold, the new has come.

I don't know if this subject has importance in Catholicism. Therefore, I want to know what Catholicism has to offer regarding this topic.

How has Catholicism explained what is "New Creation"?


texts: Is there a medical dispensation formally allowed from Lenten fasting in Catholicism?

texts:
Today, 10 February 2016, begins the observation of Lent in the Catholic Church, and indeed in much of Western Christianity. Catholic rules for the observation of Lent include the requirement for adults to fast (that is, to reduce one's eating) on certain days:

Abstinence from meat, or from some other food as determined by the Episcopal Conference, is to be observed on all Fridays, unless a solemnity should fall on a Friday. Abstinence and fasting are to be observed on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday.
To the law of abstinence those are bound who have completed their 14th year of age. To the law of fast those of the faithful are bound who have completed their 21st year and up until the beginning of their 60th year.

(Apostolic Constitution Paenitemini, Paul VI, 1966; norm IV)

The law of abstinence binds those who have completed their fourteenth year. The law of fasting binds those who have attained their majority, until the beginning of their sixtieth year.
The conference of bishops can determine more precisely the observance of fast and abstinence as well as substitute other forms of penance, especially works of charity and exercises of piety, in whole or in part, for abstinence and fast.

(Code of Canon Law, canons 1252–1253)

Amended: "... the age of fasting is from the completion of the twenty-first year to the beginning of the sixtieth" (Paenitemini, norm IV) is amended to read "‘... the age of fasting is from the completion of the eighteenth year to the beginning of the sixtieth' in accord with canon 97."

(Complementary norm to Canon 1253; U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops)
Thus, although the general rule of fasting binds everyone who has "attained their majority", the local episcopal conferences can modify this rule, and the U.S. bishops have determined that "their majority" means from age 18.
I have heard, however, that this requirement is dispensed (waived) for those for whom it would be a medical hardship. But I can't find a reference to such a dispensation either in canon law or in anything published by the USCCB.
Is such a medical dispensation formally allowed for by the Church?


texts:
The Jehovah's Witnesses state that Jesus was not nailed on a cross, but on a torture stake. The New World Translation of the Bible is phrased accordingly. For example:

Matthew 10:38 (NWT)
And whoever does not accept his torture stake and follow after me is not worthy of me.

(All the other translations (that I know of) translate cross instead.)
What is significant about the difference between a torture stake and a cross, and on which one was Jesus crucified?

An illustration of what might be a torture stake:

Crux Simplex by Justus Lipsius (1547-1606). Wikimedia Commons.


texts: Under what circumstances does God act on His anger?

texts:
While there is some debate over whether God is angry or loving (or both), it is clear that God sometimes acts on His anger with wrath and vengeance, and other times He does not. Do we know the criterion by which He makes these calls? Can we even pretend to know?

Because if we can't, then we have no way of knowing whether He is a God of love or anger. For example, maybe He's letting people He's angry with live so as to teach us a lesson, or to test our faith in Him. So it would be for the greater good, and thus an act of love. But maybe He's letting those people He's angry with—and other sinners—live as punishment to us, such that we have to endure them. Simply put, if we cannot speak to why He smites some and not others, if we don't have any idea of the criterion He uses, it's impossible to know if He is completely loving or completely hating, or somewhere in between.


texts: I have always heard of guardian angels and have probably even prayed to them, but never really knew anything about them.  What is the purpose of guardian angels and where does the belief in them come from?


texts: How are certain verses that describe God as always being there in times of need such as Psalm 46:1 or Psalm 145:14 compatible with verses such as Psalm 10:1 and Psalm 22:1-2 that describe God hiding himself and forsaking David.


texts: How do adherents to inerrancy reconcile the fact that some part of the bible were added later?

texts:
The story about Jesus forgiving an adulterous women is not in the original copy, but that's the version we most commonly have. So how does that make the Bible inerrant, given that many important parts were added or removed?

Further reading


texts: Do orthodox Christians fast on Monday to exceed the righteousness of the pharisees and scribes?

texts:
This question regards Matthew 5:20:

  "For I say to you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven."

and the orthodox interpretation of it. I found this site that basically says that the fasting on Monday is done by monks, but also observed by pious orthodox believer that ye may exceed the righteousness  of scribes and Pharisees.

Is that why orthodox fast on Monday?

I don't mean to be rude, but I find much of orthodox theology concerning Theosis to be pelagian, as trying to earn heaven by merit, and while I know that the Orthodox Church does not teach that one can enter heaven by it's own power. It still feels like some strive from the bottom of their being to be more pious and righteousness that others, as it were a race, where Christ stands passive and the end of the ladder, while sinners try desperately to climb the ladder, always climbing never reaching the end. Always admiring the  saints, never daring to feel worthy. And even know never daring to feel worthy, still, always fearing and questing, am I good enough, will I be received.

Being told that the saints themselves where not sure if they are saved, then, much more shall the laity fear their fate.


texts: Why do Catholics teach that Catholics go to hell if they die in a state of mortal sin, but teach some Protestants may go to Purgatory/Heaven?

texts: I have heard, according to Roman Catholic professors and dogma, that if we die with a mortal sin on our soul we will go to hell. However, didn't Pope Benedict XVI say that Protestants can achieve heaven? Most Protestants will never receive Reconciliation, so doesn't this imply that those who have mortal sin can still achieve heaven?


texts: Why do adherents to Hypostatic Union believe that God the Son (Jesus) must be fully Human?

texts: Orthodox teaches that Jesus assumed the full human nature. Why is it necessary that he is fully human?


texts: What were the advantages of a monarchy system that Israel wanted?

texts: From Israel's perspective, what were the advantages of being a monarchy "just like other nations" (1 Samuel 8:5)? What negative effects during the reigns of Saul, David, and Solomon did Israel experience by being a monarchy?


texts:
I noticed that Catholics dip their fingers in Holy Water kept mostly at the entrance to the Church and apply it on their forehead.

What is Holy Water?

Is there any specific liquid/water for it?

What are the uses of Holy Water?


texts: Did the Church Fathers advocate celibacy?

texts: What is an overview of the Church Fathers' views on celibacy? Did they see celibacy as a higher or more spiritual calling than marriage? Did they see marriage as incompatible with a spiritual life? Was there general consensus or was opinion split?


texts: Where did the custom of dancing with flags during worship originate?

texts:
I'm trying to get some background about the custom of dancing with flags during worship. I come from eastern Europe and I have seen many "trends" that came from the west (especially from charismatics). When did the churches start to dance with flags, and why?

Here is a concrete example.


texts: How can Christians know if they are truly saved and that Jesus won't tell them "..Depart from me, I never knew you," on judgement day?

texts: In the Bible, it says God knows everything about us- intimately. So, if He KNOWS us, how could He NOT know us and tell us to depart from Him? I'm so confused. I thought I was saved, been to church, pray, speak to Jesus and pray to Him CONSTANTLY. But lately I've been feeling abandoned by Him and it has caused me to completely lose faith in Him. Feels like He couldn't be farther from me and like He doesn't love me. I have been so hard on myself and really spent a lot of time in introspection trying to figure out what I could be doing wrong. I'm not perfect, but I've left so much of my sinful ways behind. I also wonder if I truly am saved. Do Christians absolutely HAVE to be baptized? Maybe that's my problem- maybe I need to get baptized(?) I just don't understand why I'm feeling this way.


texts:
According to Pentecostal doctrines, can a widower marry a divorced person without committing a mortal sin?  Does it make a difference if that person was the victim of marital infidelity?

If there are significant differences between Pentecostal denominations, please give an overview of their different stances.


texts: "Hell's Best Kept Secret" from a Calvinist Perspective

texts:
The Hell's Best Secret teaching is very popular, and is making an impact on Churches and Christians, crossing denominational borders, and having  an influence on Christian movies, television, and radio.

But, just because it's popular, and having an impact, does not mean that it's necessarily true, or even doctrinally supportable.  There are plenty of detractors, and those that simply don't agree with the premise, the teaching, or Ray Comfort himself.

I suspect that the teaching is not supportable from the perspective of Calvinism, because inherent in the teaching is the assumption that sinners have a choice in whether to come to Christ.  Otherwise, what would be the point in talking about an "incorrect motive" for drawing sinners to Christ?

However, not being a Calvinist myself, I'm not sure.  Sometimes my understanding is slightly (or way) off.  I'm curious as to whether or not my assumption is correct, and if so, if someone can provide a review of the teaching from a Calvinist perspective.  I'd be curious to see a high-level reaction along with an analysis of how the teaching agrees with, or conflicts with, each of the five points of Calvinism.

Note, this is not a "refute this" question.  I'm not going for "Is the teaching true?".  Likewise, I'm not looking for other criticisms, such as whether or not this teaches Lordship Salvation, or other critiques, unless if is relevant to the application of Calvinism.  Those would be separate questions.  I'm specifically looking for the application of a specific doctrinal view to a specific teaching.

To be honest, I'm more hoping to increase my understanding of Calvinism and applying it, than the truth or error of this teaching.


texts: What parts of Protestantism accept that there are some on earth who 'smite the earth with plagues' till the end of time (Revelation 11:6)?

texts:
And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth. These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth. And if any man will hurt them, fire proceedeth out of their mouth, and devoureth their enemies: and if any man will hurt them, he must in this manner be killed. These have power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their prophecy: and have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to smite the earth with all plagues, as often as they will.
[Revelation 11:3-5, KJV]

This passage makes reference to Moses turning the waters of Egypt to blood, to Elijah deliberately praying for an extensive three and a half year long drought in the Mediterranean region and to Elijah also calling down fire from heaven to consume troops of soldiers sent by a king to apprehend him.
What parts of Protestantism accept that such men still walk the earth, perhaps not in every generation, but from century to century and that these 'have power ... to smite the earth with plagues' ?
And what parts of Protestantism accept that such men will continue to be seen to the end of time, since their duration is 1,260 days which is three and an half years ( or 'weeks' in the prophetic aspect) and since that length of time prophetically indicates the duration of the Church Age from the ascension of Christ until his triumphant return ?


texts: Was Eden different from the rest of the world?

texts:
Gen 2:8

  The LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden, and there He put the man whom He had formed.

This could sound like Eden was a special place, planted after Adam's creation, and different from the rest of the world. Specifically, in Eden there was apparently no death of any kind - but was this true for the rest of the world?

I am assuming all plants, animals, insects, fish, and micro-life had already been created prior to Eden. So many life forms are designed to consume living prey or the decay of dead life forms (plant and animal). I would also assume that God created them this way. But that would mean death had to exist outside the Garden of Eden, or all those species would die. OR there were special circumstances that allowed those metabolisms to exist on other diets. And any naturally short-lived species would just not die.

I know many people have made their views and conjectures known. But are there any scriptures that support either side of this question?


texts: On the validity of the anticipated absolution in absence of the related confession

texts:
According to Catholic Church, what are the cases in which the absolution can be anticipated and the confession left for a time in which it will be possible to make it?

Also, in cases of anticipated absolution, supposing that for some reason the confession cannot take place, will that absolution be valid and effective to go to Heaven?


texts: Can obstinacy in sin be forgiven in Catholic teaching?

texts:
I've read that obstinacy in sin is unforgivable. Is it one of the sins against Holy Spirit and therefore cannot be forgiven? However, what if a sinner decides to stop being obstinate and repents?

Can God forgive it then, or is it still unforgivable, no matter how much the sinner repents?


texts: What is the biblical basis to claim that masturbation is a sin?

texts:
There's definitely two sides to this coin, some people say that masturbation is not a sin that leads to death, others say that it's a sin because Jesus commands us to deny the desires of our flesh.

So my question to you, is multi-faceted: What biblical basis for claiming that masturbation is a sin; and what is the biblical basis to claim it leads to death?


texts: Salvation for Protestants who knowingly reject Catholicism?

texts:
Is there salvation for Protestants who have researched, prayed, and ultimately rejected Catholic teachings?

Explanation: I am a Protestant aligning most closely with Baptists. I am engaged to a lovely Christian lady who was raised Catholic. In an attempt to unite us better, we have been researching and praying about what we have been taught and what we believe.

In my research and prayers, I have determined that I agree with some doctrines of the Catholic church but do not believe it to be the "True Church" it claims to be.

From the perspective of Catholic doctrine,  is salvation still available to me, or is it closed because I have knowingly rejected Catholicism? Please provide citations and references as you can.

EDIT: Let's enter this discussion post-Vatican 2. So, Catholics say that Protestants can be saved and are in partial communion with the Catholic Church. But does that concern only protestants who are ignorant of Catholic teachings or also those who understand those teachings and have rejected them?

2nd Edit:  "Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it. (CCC 846)"  After reading this from catholic.com, my question can be best summarized like this: Can one be saved who has heard that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ and understands the justifications of that argument but rejects that claim, embracing instead Jesus Christ without the Catholic Church?


texts: What is the traditional view of Divine Command Theory in accordance to the Reformed tradition?

texts:
Wikipedia gives the following definition:

  Divine command theory is a meta-ethical theory which proposes that an
  action's status as morally good is equivalent to whether it is
  commanded by God. The theory asserts that what is moral is determined
  by what God commands, and that to be moral is to follow his commands.

But as I have been taught from a young age, God defines morality through his character or his nature and ask us to adhere to this morality as closely as we can. So if God cannot steal then we should not steal as it is in the nature of his character.

But this theory gives me the impression that Christian morality is not formed in any matter in accordance to his character but rather is just a bunch of arbitrarily contrived rules.

So I'm wondering what is the more conventional view in accordance to a general Reformist tradition?


texts: What translation does the Catholic Breviary of England use for Psalms?

texts: I've heard that in England the Roman Catholic Liturgy of the Hours uses a different translation for the readings from the U. S. (Specifically, the British use Jerusalem Bible in their liturgies (including Mass) and the U. S. uses the N. A. B.) I have not been able to confirm, however, whether they use the Grail Psalms for their Liturgy of the Hours. Do they use a different Psalter?


texts: What is the biblical basis for a Flat Earth?

texts:
From time to time I've come across Christians who claim that the Bible teaches a flat earth (e.g. see this book and the reviews). There are also Christians who have reacted against these (e.g. 1, 2).
In pursuit of impartiality and to give Flat Earth Christians the benefit of the doubt, I ask: What passages of the Bible are commonly cited to make a case for the belief in a Flat Earth?


texts: If the Bible contains all of the word of God and there can be no more, then why do we need the Nicene Creed?

texts:
There seems to be a huge contradiction in traditional Christianity that claims that there can be no more scripture or divine doctrine and yet the only way to determine whether a denomination is "Christian" (e.g., Jehovah's Witnesses or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) is to refer to an extra-Biblical doctrine (i.e., the Nicene Creed) as if it were scripture.

(If you don't think the Nicene Creed is treated as scripture, then how do you define scripture?)


texts: Is celebrating Christmas required of Catholics?

texts: I understand that Catholics are obligated to attend mass and take communion on Christmas — are they obligated to celebrate Christmas in the traditional tree-in-the-house, gift-giving sense?


texts: Do Protestants appreciate the significance of Mary's genealogy?

texts:
Then stood up Phinehas and executed judgment ... and that was counted to him for righteousness unto all generations for evermore. [Psalm 106:30,31 KJV.]
Phinehas hath turned my wrath away ... wherefore .. I give unto him a covenant of peace and he shall have it and his seed after him, the covenant of an everlasting priesthood. [Numbers 25:11-13, KJV ]

The covenant here expressed regards righteousness and is promised to the seed of Phinehas (not as of many seeds - see Galatians 3:16 - but of one) everlastingly.
Now, Elizabeth was of the daughters of Aaron. And Mary, the mother of Jesus, was Elizabeth's close relative (Luke 1:5 and 36) not by marriage but by blood (Luke 1:35-40).
Therefore Mary was of the tribe of Levi by birth. Only by marriage was she of the tribe of Judah, not by birth or blood. Nor could any man descended (naturally, by any means) from Jeconiah onwards ascend the throne for :

Thus saith the LORD, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah. [Jeremiah 22:30, KJV.]

The curse on Jeconiah was impossible to overcome, by any natural means or by any devious manipulation of the royal rights. It was finished. Humanity was prevented from ascending the throne, for ever.
But then a 'woman compassed a man' and a man married that woman. And that changed everything. Yet that humanity formed within Mary did have a connection ... to Phinehas and to a promise of an everlasting Priesthood.
The significance of this seems to have escaped Protestants, as far as I can tell, despite the fact that it is immensely important regarding the matter of justification by faith, the accounting of the righteousness of God to the faith of them that believe in Jesus Christ.
My supposition is that Protestants, rejecting the worship of Mary, have nevertheless neglected to consider her contribution and have overlooked the importance of her genealogy 1 in regard to the promises made to Phinehas and inherited by Jesus, through Mary. (Just as promises were made to David, the king, and were inherited by Jesus, through - adoption by - Joseph.)
Is this so, that this has been neglected ?
Or is it the case that some Protestants have noticed the significance of these two highly important passages in Psalm 106 and Numbers 25 and have recognized the significance of what is inherited through Phinehas and Mary, as we see so much inherited through David and Joseph ?
And, if so, where is this recognition documented ?

1 Just for background interest I add the following :
With considerable similarity to the tripled repeat of fourteen generations - the royal line - from Abraham to Christ through Judah (see Matthew 1:1-15) it can be shown that there is a tripled repeat of twelve generations (the significant number of covenant) from Aaron to Christ through Phinehas and Mary.
[The genealogy in Luke is sometimes claimed to be Mary's genealogy but it is clearly not so by its content. Luke's list is not the royal line (the throne often not passing by direct heritage) but is the natural line of begetting.]
Data in Ezra, Nehemiah and Chronicles gives the following :
Twelve generations from Aaron to the days of David:
Aaron, Eleazar, Phinehas, Abishua, Bukki, Uzzi, Zerahiah, Meraioth, Amariah, Ahitub, Zadok, Ahimaaz
Twelve generations from David to the Babylonian captivity:
Ahimaaz, Azariah, Johanna, Azariah, Amariah, Ahitub, Zadok, Shallum, Hilkiah, Azariah, Seraiah, Ezra
Twelve generations from Captivity until Christ:
Ezra, Jeshua, Joiakim, Eliashib, Joiada, Jonathan, Jaddua, [G8 G9 G10] Mary, Jesus called Christ.
G8 is either Levi or Eleazar
G9 is either Melchi or Matthan
G10 is Joachim
G8, G9 and G10 are not recorded in scripture but recorded in Doctrina Jacobi and by Tiberias and by John of Damascus.
Any further information on this genealogy would be welcome either publicly or privately.


texts: Does "all Israel shall be saved" mean that all Jews, even those who die in their sins, will be saved?

texts: I am confused by the statement that Paul makes in Romans 11:26, where he explains that all Israel shall be saved. My church believes that if you die in your sins, there is no further hope for you. Jewish or not.


texts:
This answer presents the following statement:

  God is in control and I believe that His will has always been done. So to say that He's never failed.

So, are some people are destined to go to hell?

I probably have this kind of thinking from some stories in the bible about God harden some people's heart so everything will go as He planned. i.e : Pharaoh and the religious leaders of Israel during Jesus time.


texts: According to Catholicism, is the existence of God self-evident? What do Catholic theologians say regarding God’s existence being self-evident?


texts: What is the origin and purpose of a new bishop being questioned by a layperson?

texts:
At the enthronement of Justin Welby as Archbishop of Canterbury on 21 March 2013, the following exchange took place as part of the ceremony. Evangeline Kanagasooriam is a  layperson from the diocese, and a pupil at a school with a very long association with the cathedral. (The text is from the order of service, p14, and it can be enjoyed on video as well.)

When the Archbishop arrives at the West Door he strikes it three times with his pastoral staff. The doors are opened and a fanfare is sounded.
Evangeline Kanagasooriam: We greet you in the name of Christ. Who are you and why do you request entry?
The Archbishop: I am Justin, a servant of Jesus Christ, and I come as one seeking the grace of God, to travel with you in his service together.
Evangeline: Why have you been sent to us?
The Archbishop: I am sent as Archbishop to serve you, to proclaim the love of Christ and with you to worship and love him with heart and soul, mind and strength.
Evangeline: How do you come among us and with what confidence?
The Archbishop: I come knowing nothing except Jesus Christ and him crucified, and in weakness and fear and in much trembling.
Evangeline: Let us then humble ourselves before God and together seek his mercy and strength.

I believe that this is new for the occasion. The order of service for Rowan Williams in 2003 does not contain it, but it does have the triple knocking followed by a welcome by the Dean (which also occurred slightly later in the Welby ceremony).
Is there a precedent for this question-and-answer text in Anglican or earlier practice? (I don't mean just the scriptural allusions, but the use of a question-and-answer format when welcoming a new bishop.) What is the rationale for having the interview with a member of the laity?


texts: Has the Bible ever been translated into Egyptian Hieroglyphics?

texts:
I'm very curious to see what the Bible looks like in Ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics. There's an "ancient languages" department at one of the Universities in my city and one of the languages they offer is Egyptian hieroglyphics. When I'm learning a new language I like to refer back to a translation of the Bible into that language so that I can see how a text that I'm familiar with is translated in the language that I'm trying to learn.

I've done a bit of Googling and nothing has turned up. I'm sort of surprised that a hieroglyphics translation hasn't been done, even if just as an academic exercise. I'm not even expecting a full translation. Perhaps just one of the Gospels, or the Psalms, or the Pentateuch. I understand that there wouldn't be much demand for such a translation, but nevertheless I'm surprised it hasn't happened. Perhaps we don't understand hieroglyphics well enough?


texts: According to Catholicism, why did Jesus address inanimate objects?

texts:
In Mark 4:35–39 (RSVCE), we read:

  On that day, when evening had come, he said to them, “Let us go across to the other side.”  And leaving the crowd, they took him with them, just as he was, in the boat. And other boats were with him.  And a great storm of wind arose, and the waves beat into the boat, so that the boat was already filling.  But he was in the stern, asleep on the cushion; and they woke him and said to him, “Teacher, do you not care if we perish?”  And he awoke and rebuked the wind, and said to the sea, “Peace! Be still!” And the wind ceased, and there was a great calm.

One wonders why Jesus spoke to inanimate objects like the wind and the sea. Did Mark want to tell his readers that natural forces also have the power of perception and cognition? What does the Catholic Church teach on this topic?


texts: Is there a consensus among early Christians on Romans 9?

texts: How did the early church interpret St. Paul in Romans 9? Is there a consensus in early Christianity regarding the relation between predestination and free will?


texts: Do the notes in the NABRE accurately reflect the Catholic Church's understanding of biblical inerrancy?

texts:
The NABRE is largely a product of the Catholic Church, and it is approved by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. It's even available online at the USCCB website. So I was surprised to find that many of the notes in the translation propose that the bible contains errors - not just transcription or translation errors, but legitimate errors in the original.

Let me focus on a particularly flagrant example, in Matthew 21. Here is the text that the notes discuss:

  (Matthew 21:1-7, NABRE) When they drew near Jerusalem and came to Bethphage on the Mount of Olives, Jesus sent two disciples, saying to them, "Go into the village opposite you, and immediately you will find an ass tethered, and a colt with her. Untie them and bring them here to me. And if anyone should say anything to you, reply, 'The master has need of them.' Then he will send them at once." This happened so that what had been spoken through the prophet might be fulfilled:

    "Say to daughter Zion,
    'Behold, your king comes to you,
    meek and riding on an ass,
    and on a colt, the foal of a beast of burden.'"

  The disciples went and did as Jesus had ordered them. They brought the ass and the colt and laid their cloaks over them, and he sat upon them.

And now the notes in question:

  (Note on verse 2) An ass tethered, and a colt with her: instead of the one animal of Mk 11:2, Matthew has two, as demanded by his understanding of Zec 9:9.

  (Note on verses 4-5) The prophet: this fulfillment citation is actually composed of two distinct Old Testament texts, Is 62:11 (Say to daughter Zion) and Zec 9:9. The ass and the colt are the same animal in the prophecy, mentioned twice in different ways, the common Hebrew literary device of poetic parallelism. That Matthew takes them as two is one of the reasons why some scholars think that he was a Gentile rather than a Jewish Christian who would presumably not make that mistake (see Introduction).

  (Note on verse 7) Upon them: upon the two animals; an awkward picture resulting from Matthew’s misunderstanding of the prophecy.

The editors seem to believe that Matthew has invented the details of the story of Jesus' entrance into Jerusalem, and furthermore that the chosen details reflect a misunderstanding of Zechariah 9:9.

Does the Catholic Church's understanding of biblical inerrancy really allow for the possibility that these notes are correct?


texts: Do curses have any impact or effect on Christians?

texts:
Christians believe that Jesus saved us by His blood. Since God is the only true God and through Jesus we have victory over Satan, it is claimed that we do not have to fear on curses.

But I hear many others says and even written books saying curses have effect on our lives and we need to deal with it. Is that correct in the New Testament era?

I am looking for answers based on biblical references.


texts: Is it mandatory for a Roman Catholic girl to convert to Syrian Orthodox if the boy is of the Syrian Orthodox church, in the case of marriage?

texts: If a woman is Roman Catholic, and a man is from Kerala, from the Malankara Orthodox Syrian church, and they wish to marry, does the woman need to convert to Syrian Orthodoxy?  According to the Syrian Orthodox church, can she marry him while remaining a Roman Catholic and planning to raise their children as Catholics?


texts: Are chapter and verse divisions international?

texts: If someone quotes e.g. Leviticus 6:7, will this be the correct position no matter the language or translation?


texts: How long did Jesus know Judas before Judas betrayed him?


texts: In general, in the Protestant branch, who can baptize a new believer?

texts:
I know quite well that the plethora of Protestant denominations means that there are almost no universal traditions. However, there are a number of particular traditions or beliefs that are held by the majority of Protestant denominations. In this sense, then, I'm wondering if there is a general consensus - and what the consensus is - as to who can baptize a new believer. An even better answer would be one that broadly categorizes the denominations that have a particular restriction on who can baptize and the denominations that don't have such a restriction. (Brownie points for an answer with a Wesleyan viewpoint.)

Related: According to the Roman Catholic church, who can baptize?


texts: Why is there no first Sunday in Ordinary Time?

texts: After the Baptism of the Lord, there’s the second Sunday of Ordinary Time. What happened to the first Sunday of Ordinary Time?


texts:
We know that Angels were created before Man. Trinity is uncreated and eternal i.e: sempiternal.

Could Angels and Demons be killed or die or lose their life according to Orthodox Christianity i.e: Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant?

I mean by death complete loss of both consciousness and memory. I mean by a life being both conscious and has a memory. This memory may be even one minute.


texts: Why did Peter, James and John (all three) appear to Joseph Smith?

texts:
Why did Peter, James and John, (all three) appear to Joseph
Smith?


texts: What distinguishes Christian meditation from the Catholic tradition from non-Christian meditation?

texts:
There are many different kinds of meditation or prayer, Christian and non-Christian. However, I am confused regarding actual difference because these varieties, both Christian and non-Christian, seem largely to be arbitrarily constructed.

This question asks specifically about the rosary vs a mantra while I am interested in all methods generally. This one asks about sharing Bible references on the correct way to meditate but I think falls short as I do not believe the Bible is a meditation textbook. I also think none of the answers address my question as they seem to straw-man eastern meditation as harmful, demonic, or dulling.

That said, what are the qualitative differences between, for example, practicing the exercise outlined in The Cloud of Unknowing and counting your breaths? The author of The Cloud of Unknowing suggests repeating short, single-syllable words such as 'God' or 'sin' for the purpose of removing all thoughts and imaginings in order to be as receptive to God's grace as possible.

On the other hand, counting your breath seems to me to be an excellent way to remove all thoughts and images and, for the Christian, increase personal receptivity to the Lord's grace. Worth noting is that I am considering long-lived meditative traditions from mature non-Christian spiritual systems which have been providing benefit for at least a thousand years. I will not argue that the majority of new age spirituality is, at best, useless.

Is there a clear, defining line between meditations that are acceptable for Christians and those that aren't? If so, what is it? If I don't yet have the opportunity to learn from a Catholic priest, should I learn eastern meditation from a righteous man who believes it will lead Christians toward God? As far as I can tell, the answer is yes because it is the intention, correctness of practice, and unending goodness of our Lord that determines results.

However, I would much rather admit my own fault than attempt to outsmart two-thousand years of great saints. Answers should reference official statements from authority figures in the Catholic church. Thank you very much!


texts: Lutheranism, Has God ordained all things?

texts:
According to the Westminster Confession of Faith God has, in some way, ordained everything that comes to pass.

I. God from all eternity did by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby neither is God the author of sin; nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures, nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.
II. Although God knows whatsoever may or can come to pass, upon all supposed conditions; yet hath he not decreed any thing because he foresaw it as future, as that which would come to pass, upon such conditions.

Regarding these two points from Chapter III, what would Lutherans confirm, and what would they reject? What is the defense of these confirmations or rejections? Do any Lutheran doctrines stand in an analogous position to these two WCF points?


texts: How can a Christian effectively explain the seeming contradiction between Gen 1:31 and Gen 6:6?

texts:
Gen 1:31 (KJV)

  And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

Gen 6:6 (KJV)

  And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart

The heart of the accusation seems to stem from the literal interpretation of the language. The first passage suggests that God is satisfied in his works while the second suggest that God is dissatisfied with his works. How should each of the scriptural passages be interpreted in light of each other and within their own context?

The specific translation used here isn't necessarily the translation that must be used.

I know that this question could be applicable to the Bible Heuristics site, and if the nature of answers suggests that to be the best approach I will move it there.


texts: When does the bread and wine become Body and Blood?

texts:
Exactly when during the Mass does transubstantiation occur? I am aware that it occurs during the Eucharistic Prayer, but at exactly what moment? Would this change if a priest were to consecrate outside of the Eucharistic Prayer? Why does the Church teach that it occurs at that moment?

It would be helpful to have a direct quote from a document published by the Church that makes a direct statement on when the exact moment is (for example, does it occur before or after a certain word or phrase is said?), both for the bread and for the wine. If both older and more recent sources could be provided, that would be especially helpful. If there are different views within Catholicism, please include those and explain where they apply.


texts: When is "Thanks Be to God" said in the mass?

texts: When do we say "Thanks be to God" in the mass, is it in the Liturgy of the Word? Also when do we say "Praise to You Lord Jesus Christ" in the mass, is it after the Gospel?


texts: What is the biblical argument against Papal Succession?

texts:
Possible Duplicate:
  What are the biblical arguments against the papacy and papal succession?

The Roman Catholic Church teaches the doctrine of Papal Succession, that is, that starting from Peter, there has been a line of "Popes" to lead the church.  This question addresses the argument for papal succession.

Neither the Orthodox Church nor Protestant churches in general affirm this doctrine.  What, then, is the biblical argument against papal succession?


texts: For Eastern Orthodox churches, what are the main references concerning Biblical Interpretation methodology?

texts: The Catholic Church has several encyclicals giving guidelines for Biblical Interpretation, such as Divino Afflante Spiritu or Providentissimus Deus.  Are there any Eastern Orthodox equivalents to these encyclicals? I imagine they use the writings of the Church Fathers such as Augustine's De doctrina christiana, but I was wondering if there is any later reference work that they use to define their interpretation methodology. (Any other references concerning Eastern Orthodox Biblical interpretation methodology would be appreciated, including Slavonic / Russian or Greek works).


texts: Has a papyrus been found that was written by a disciple of Jesus?

texts: My list of papyri discoveries is a little dated. Has any new papyrus been found from the 1st. cent. that one of the immediate disciples of Jesus wrote? It would be in Aramaic, I expect. There was a mention of a Gospel by Matthew, made by one of the Church Fathers that was in Aramaic. but it has not been found.


texts: In Trinitarian theology who created the world?

texts:
Did the father create the world by himself by fiat ("Let there be and there was...")?

Or,

Did the father order the son to create the world and the son did the work (where "Let there be..." was a command)?

Or,

Did the father create the world by his own hands?

Or,

Did the father say "Let there be..." and then he and the son undertook the project together by division of labor?

Or,

Did the son create the world by fiat?

And was the Holy Ghost involved in any of these scenarios?


texts: What is the case that 1 Corinthians 15:7 refers to James the Just, relative of Jesus, rather than James, one of the Twelve?

texts:
The following verses refer to "James," and most commentators identify him as the same James who is referred to as the "brother" of Jesus (though the exact meaning of that word is unclear). How do we know that it refers to him, rather than the son of Zebedee or of Alphaeus, two of the Twelve Apostles?

1 Corinthians 15:3-8

  For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures,
  that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures,
  and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve.

  Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep.
  Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles.

  Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me.


texts: Did George Muller have a Biblical basis for not accepting illegitimate orphans?

texts:
I admired George Muller's works in caring for orphans and his faith in God to provide for his need. However, I find it troubling that he didn't accept illegitimate orphans.

  George Muller was a Prussian who came to Britain in 1829 in order to
  train for Christian missionary service. Some years later, inspired by
  the example of August Francke's orphanage in Halle (founded in 1696),
  George Muller began a similar work in Bristol. Muller's Homes - a
  complex of five gigantic barracks at Ashley Down, Bristol - provided
  accommodation for over sixteen hundred orphans mainly aged from seven
  to twelve years, who received an elementary education and were trained
  for trade or domestic service. The outstanding characteristic of
  Muller's work was that it depended entirely on faith in God: George
  Muller had no personal resources, yet he never asked for money; his
  Institution never went into debt; all his assistants were committed
  Christian believers and, on leaving, children were apprenticed to
  Christian employers or placed in service in Christian homes. His
  orphanages never attempted to be children's hospitals or
  reformatories; incorrigible delinquents were reluctantly expelled,
  and, curiously enough, George Muller did not accept illegitimate
  children. But the scale of Muller's work created a public awareness of
  the problem of orphan children, and aroused Christians to their
  responsibilities. George Muller was one of the early founders of the
  (open) Christian Brethren.

  link
  Emphasis mine

What is his Biblical reason for not accepting illegitimate children?

Update

While searching, I found this article and learned that it was not easy to adopt illegitimate child during their times:

  I know it’s hard to believe, but foundlings [illegitimate children]
  generally died in the streets because there was no home for them, and
  adoption, as it is known today in the western world, has generally been illegal throughout most of history.

-

  British almshouses (poorhouses) were more difficult to get into than
  either of the other institutions [Charles Spurgeon's and Muller's orphanages]
  mentioned in the first paragraph.
  Spurgeon and Muller both lamented the cruel system of gathering
  signatures, securing votes, and the complex paper work necessary to
  place a child into an almshouse. Most almshouses were notoriously
  horrible places. 90% of the foundlings who went into almshouses died
  before reaching 10 years old. It took Thomas Coram, a wealthy retired
  shipbuilder who was shocked to see dead babies in the streets of
  London, years to get legal permission to open the first home for
  foundlings. Afterwords his legal charter was repeatedly debated, and
  at one point rescinded, because saving foundlings was considered a
  corrupting influence on society.

Could it be that George Muller tried to avoid running afoul with the law or is it that, sadly, he shared with the his society the social stigma on illegitimate children?


texts:
We see Jesus saying at  Luke 16:8 (NRSVCE)

".. And his master commended the dishonest manager because he had acted shrewdly; for the children of this age are more shrewd in dealing with their own generation than are the children of light."

We also see Jesus instructing his disciples  at Matthew 10:16 (NIV)

" I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves."

I wish to know what exactly Jesus meant by `shrewdness '. Was it practical wisdom,  futuristic sight or some other desirable quality   ? What does the Catholic Church say about the said teachings of the Lord ?


texts: Why do some Christians oppose Tarot cards?

texts: The title should explain it all.  Many (perhaps most) Christians view Tarot cards as evil, or at least something to be avoided.  Why?


texts: According to Catholic doctrine, if a rich man does not share his wealth with the poor, is he being injust?

texts:
According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church,

1807 Justice is the moral virtue that consists in the constant and firm will to give their due to God and neighbor... Justice toward men disposes one to respect the rights of each and to establish in human relationships the harmony that promotes equity with regard to persons and to the common good. The just man, often mentioned in the Sacred Scriptures, is distinguished by habitual right thinking and the uprightness of his conduct toward his neighbor. "You shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great, but in righteousness shall you judge your neighbor." "Masters, treat your slaves justly and fairly, knowing that you also have a Master in heaven."

According to Catholic Social Thought, one of the key principles of social moral theology is the so-called "universal destination of goods", for which the Catechism of the Catholic Church states:

2403 The right to private property, acquired or received in a just way, does not do away with the original gift of the earth to the whole of mankind. The universal destination of goods remains primordial, even if the promotion of the common good requires respect for the right to private property and its exercise...
2405 Goods of production – material or immaterial – such as land, factories, practical or artistic skills, oblige their possessors to employ them in ways that will benefit the greatest number. Those who hold goods for use and consumption should use them with moderation, reserving the better part for guests, for the sick and the poor.

Finally, according to St. Thomas Aquinas,

since injustice always consists in an injury inflicted on another person, it is evident that to do an injustice is a mortal sin according to its genus.

All these seems to mean that the rich (and more broadly, all those who "have more than they need") are obliged to share it with the poor, otherwise at the risk of committing a mortal sin. Is this a sound doctrinal conclusion from the matter at hand, according to Catholic doctrine?
Partially related question for reformed theology here.


texts: What is the biblical basis for the belief by Seventh-day Adventists that evangelized Gentiles should keep the Sabbath?

texts: Which passages of Scripture are canonically or typically cited by Seventh-day Adventists in defense of the belief that evangelized Gentiles are to keep the Sabbath (sunset Friday to sunset Saturday) the same as the Jews in the Old Covenant? How do they normally interpret those passages in order to come to that conclusion?


texts: What did Christian authors of the 7th - 15th centuries say about the Muslim claim of Gospels being direct revelations from God?

texts:
According to the Quran, God revealed the Gospels (which it calls Injeel) to Jesus, just like He revealed the Quran to Muhammad, and Torah to Moses, but the New Testament doesn't have any books that can be called God's revelation in the first person to humans. Gospels are biographies that are believed to be written by people inspired by God.

My question is did early Christian authors point out this issue? Any references would be very helpful.


texts:
Are humans fallen angels who are being given the chance to earn their place in heaven again?
I was reading somewhere that this is true. The source gave no scripture references, however. Please give all answers from a biblical standpoint. I do not care of what denomination you are. Just show me in the word. Is there any scripture that backs up the claim that humans wew once angels? Thank You.


texts: According to the Catholic Church, why did Jesus co-relate end of the world and passing of the generation of His time?

texts:
At Matthew 24:34 Jesus, while referring to the signs of the end of the world says: "Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened."

Does the Catholic Church have an official view on this passage?  Should the phrase "this generation will not pass" be taken literally, or does the church view it as an idiomatic construction to denote the imminent nature of an event predicted?


texts: Why does the KJV say "people perish" in Pr. 29:18?

texts: Can anyone tell me why the KJV translates the Hebrew words yipara am as “people perish” in Pr. 29:18? (The Hebrew word am means people and yipara means unrestrained.) Other translations render yipara am as “the people run wild,” and “the people cast off restraint.” YLT says, “Without a Vision is a people made naked.” Brenton says, “There shall be no interpreter to a sinful nation: but he that observes the law is blessed.” The Lexham English Septuagint says, “A seer will never come to a lawless people, but those who keep the law are most blessed.” The JPS Tanakh: The Holy Scriptures according to the Masoretic Text (1917) translates yipara am as “the people cast off restraint.” What am I missing here?


texts: Are there Christians who believe Jesus was an ideology and not a person?

texts:
Is there a denomination or Christian religion that believes that Jesus Christ was just an idea or way of thinking and that the apostles must have personalized him for the people to understand it easier? If so, what is their biblical basis for rejecting the historical personhood of Jesus? I'm not asking on the historicity of Christ.

For example:

  Mark 6:45-56 Shortly before dawn he went out to them, walking on the lake. He was about to pass by them, but when they saw him walking on the lake, they thought he was a ghost.

He was about to pass by them? It doesn't make sense. It would make sense if he was going towards them. This is something that could be taken as a metaphor from the Old testament. Title for God, the one who walks on water. Job 9:8, Psalms 76:19, LXX]

Further arguments would be that the whole life of Christ could be summed up into something that the first Christians started to believe. That is was their new way of thinking and that surrounding Jews tried to kill this new way of thinking but in 3 days it rose again.


texts: What is the earliest record of using icons to worship God in the Catholic or Orthodox traditions?

texts: The question is as simple as the title. I am simply wondering, ‘When is the earliest recorded date of this tradition?’


texts: Had Jesus already read the end of the book?

texts: Was Jesus aware of his ultimate destiny while on earth?  Did he already know that he would die, be resurrected, and reign as king in heaven while on earth as a man?  If so, does that not diminish the sacrificial intensity of the act?  How many of us would be much better equipped to handle suffering if we have already read the end of the book?  I am a god-fearing person and not trying to prove or disprove anything. I just really want to know the answer to this question backed up by scripture.


texts: Why did John Newton oppose Handel's Messiah?

texts:
Recently, while listening to a lecture on worship by Kevin Twit, I was surprised to hear John Newton's opinion on Handel's Messiah:

  John Newton, the author of "Amazing Grace," refused to let Handel's Messiah be performed in his church.  Do you know why?  He thought the musical style was too worldly. ["Does Musical Style Matter?" MTW Global Missions Conference 2013]

Of course, Handel's Messiah, which includes the ever popular "Hallelujah Chorus," is a staple for many churches at Christmas and/or Easter.  Why would John Newton object so strongly to Handel's Messiah?  Is Twit's summary correct?  Or were there other reasons for Newton's dislike of the work?


texts: Does the Bible itself give us clues about which parts to interpret literally and which figuratively?

texts:
I know that the question may seem a little bit self-referential but I ask it anyway:

There is often great controversy among Christians what parts of the Bible are to be interpreted literally and what parts are to be interpreted symbolically. The most prominent one that comes to mind is of course creation vs. evolution but there are many issue more throughout the Bible.

My question:
Which parts of the Bible are relevant to give some clues or even guidance what should be interpreted literally and what symbolically?


texts: Does saying "Thank God!" count as using God's name in vain?

texts:
Would it be alright if I was to say "Thank God?" I'm not sure, as I'm quite a new Christian. This is the context:

I am late for the plane. I rush through the check-ins and stuff, and I reach the plane just in time. I say, "Thank God!".

Would that be counted as using God's name in vain? This comes from this question.

What about saying "Thank the Lord!" Would that be taking the Lord's name in vain?


texts: What happened to the apostle John after the Biblical account of his life ends?

texts:
There is a legend that says that John traveled to Ephesus where he took care of Virgin Mary and that he lived there until the end of his life.

Is this legend true? Are there any historical accounts that support the legend? Are there any other theories about the later life of apostle John?


texts: Why is it not that a state divorce is actually an argument AGAINST a church annulment petition rather than a necessary condition for such petition?

texts:
Note: This question may be wrong. I think the right question is in the following link: How do Filipino Catholics get a church annulment when their state marriage is valid, considering the Philippines doesn't have divorce?

Apparently, state divorce is a necessary condition to begin a church annulment process. Why isn't a state divorce actually an argument against rather than a necessary condition for a church annulment petition?
I mean, there are reasons to get an annulment instead of divorce despite divorce being cheaper. So, if your church marriage is invalid, as you want to petition, then why did you get a state divorce instead of a state annulment for your state marriage, which I guess was also invalid?
Of course, answers may include:

Your state marriage is invalid, but the financial reasons for getting a state annulment instead of a state divorce weren't applicable to you. Hence, even though your state marriage is invalid, you chose the cheaper route of getting a state divorce instead of a state annulment.

Your state marriage is valid though your church marriage is still invalid.

Related: Marriage invalid. Would a church annulment require a state annulment or state divorce?
Update:
Would a state separation suffice in the place of a state annulment or state divorce? Case 1: The country has divorce. Case 2: The country is the Philippines.


texts: Can a Catholic ask for protection from a priest in case his/her spouse has filed a no-fault divorce?

texts: In the case of no-fault divorce, if one spouse files for divorce and the other spouse does not want a divorce, then can the other spouse receive protection from the Catholic priest in order to prevent the former spouse from remarriage?


texts: According to the Catholic Church, is a marriage consummated if the couple had premarital sex?

texts:
A valid Catholic marriage can be dissolved if it has not been consummated (if the couple has not had sex after marriage, with some additional rules). This is generally determined to be the case if the couple has not lived together.

Assuming a couple is known to have had sex / lived together at some point before marriage (fornication in Canon Law terms), but not after, would the marriage be considered to have been consummated? Or could it be dissolved on a ratum sed not consummatum basis?


texts: Does specific authorship of a given book of the Bible "matter"?

texts:
Based on a variety of previous questions, it seems that specific authorship of many parts of the Bible are not known for sure.
For example (though I realize there are traditions of who wrote what):

Job
Ruth
Esther
Hebrews

Question(s):
Why is specific authorship considered important (eg the on-going scholarly debates over who wrote the epistle to the Hebrews)?
Is it important?
When is it important?

note - I am not looking for direct answers to canonicity, but for whether specific authorship is important


texts: What is the basis for saying that the Gospel of Thomas was accepted as scripture by early Christians?

texts:
In an answer here, Dick Harfield writes:

  we know that [the Gospel of Thomas] and (probably) Q were treated as scripture by early Christians.

Reading the Wikipedia article on the Gospel of Thomas, I see that there is scholarly disagreement over the dating of the Gospel of Thomas – some say before AD 100, while others say after.  But by the mid- to late-2nd century, the four gospels we recognize today were affirmed by Irenaeus and others, to the exclusion of the Gospel of Thomas.  Actual evidence from the first century seems sparse, and so my question:

Among those arguing for an early date for the Gospel of Thomas, what is the evidence that points to early Christians (i.e., 1st century or early 2nd century) considering it to be "scripture"?


texts: Has any prominent theologian ever explained why Jesus let a thief be in charge of the money?

texts:
From John 12:4-6 we learn that Judas was a thief, but also that he was in charge of the money bag.

I've always thought of this as Jesus way of allowing Judas to master it rather than be mastered by money or possibly to show Judas His love, even at personal cost.

But I cannot also help but wonder whether it is a bit like leaving an alcoholic in charge of the bar. If Judas really had a money problem, should he have been the treasurer?

Has any prominent theologian ever addressed this?


texts: According to Catholic theology, why does God have an only Son?

texts:
Catholics, and to my understanding other Trinitarian Christians, believe and teach what is borne by scripture [cf. Eph 4:4-5] i.e. there One God the Father, One God the Son, and one God the Holy Spirit.

The Father, being the Origin without origin is perhaps easier to grasp.

The Apostles Creed and the Nicene Creed recite I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord and We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father respectively.

A human father by nature can have many sons, many children. It is an article of Faith that God begets by nature - God from God - one and only Son.

The question is, according to Catholic theology, why does God have an only Son1; that is, why is there one and only one "member" (or whatever the appropriate term is) of the Godhead who can properly be called "God the Son"?

1 Anecdote: I remember when testifying to a person on how God gave his only Son to suffer and die ignominiously for our sins, and they answered, why doesn't he have another one ...


texts: 1 Peter 2:7-8 different meaning on other language

texts:
1 Peter 2: (7) Now to you who believe, this stone is precious. But
  to those who do not believe, "The stone the builders rejected has
  become the cornerstone," (8)and, "A stone that causes people to
  stumble and a rock that makes them fall." They stumble because they
  disobey the message--which is also what they were destined for.

Reading the English verse, it leads me to think that it's about Double Predestination.

Where verse 7 becomes like this :
Because I predestined you to be in Heaven
Then you believe
Because you believe
Then the stone is precious to you.

And verse 8 becomes like this :
Because I predestined them to be in hell
Then they don't believe
Because they don't believe
Then the stone becomes a stumbling block to them

But when I read the verse from the Bible on my own language, the verse's sentences have the sense something like this :

If someone obey My Words
Then he/she will believe the stone
Then the stone is precious to him/her
If someone disobey My Words
Then he/she won't believe the stone
Then the stone is a stumbling block to him/her

So, the sentence which is also what they were destined for in the Bible of my language is not like that in English one.

In my language, "they were destined for" in verse 8 has a sense that if the "IF" criteria by an external party (someone who disobey) is fulfilled, then the "THEN" follows ---> they are "destined" to stumble.

While in English language, it seems to me that it shows Double Predestination, starting from the "Because I".

My question:
Is the Bible in my language gives a wrong translation ?

I just searched from the internet, and found a link which telling on what God says :

  Peter also speaks of those to whom Christ is the precious Cornerstone
  of salvation and those who stumble against him to their eternal
  destruction; and of those who are reprobate, he says clearly that
  they were “predestined” to disobey the word and so to perish (1 Pet. 2:6-8).

So, it is the "Because I".


texts: Does the Holy Spirit's procession from the Father and Son infringe on the co-equality of the Trinity?

texts:
The following is intended to correlate to classical scholastic terminology, to whit:

Nature = essence, as in "the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit all have the Trinitarian 'nature' of God."

Person = mode of particular operation, as in "the Son is the second "person" of the Trinity, light from light, true God from true God, begotten not made..."

The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all co-eternal and co-equal.

Question

If the the persons of the Trinity - Father, Son, and Holy Spirit - are co-eternal and co-equal, and the Holy Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son...

Wouldn't the Father and the Son need to proceed from the Spirit as well in order to maintain the triad of equal procession from all three?

It seems as though, since the Holy Spirit doesn't have the faculty of bestowing procession upon the Father and the Son, then that gives the Holy Spirit one less faculty than the rest, which in turn subordinates the Holy Spirit to receive procession only.

Doesn't this infringe on the Spirit's co-equality?

This question derives from my study of the and drawn out debate concerning the validity of the filioque.


texts: What did the commisioning of the preaching of crusades involve?

texts:
I was reading about St. Bernard of Clairvaux, and this appears:

  The pope commissioned Bernard to preach a new Crusade

A similar phrase appear in the respective Wikipedia article.

I get what it means to "preach a Crusade" (call Christians in favour of it and to join if possible). The article in the Catholic Encyclopedia about Crusades states:

  All crusades were announced by preaching.

But, what did the commissioning of such preaching by the Pope involved? What were the responsibilities? Could someone provide a reference for this? Maybe a papal document related to such commissioning?


texts: Can a Sovereign-will authorize personal liberty?

texts:
Every thing I read about “sovereignty” associates it with having “authority” not how authority is exercised.  Some Protestant Denominations seem to claim that because God is sovereign then He is the causal agent of all things.  Must "authority" always employ "power"?

On what basis do these denominations exclude liberty from sovereignty?


texts: What is the Biblical basis for "righteous anger"?

texts:
What would be defined as "righteous anger"?

Ephesians 4:26 (ESV) says:

26 Be angry and do not sin; do not let the sun go down on your anger,

So, is all anger justifiable if you don't sin? Or are there other verses that address this subject? When is anger justified?


texts: Per Ecclesiastes 7:16, Does the Bible want me to sin?

texts:
From Ecclesiastes 7:16,

  Do not be overrighteous,
     neither be overwise—
     why destroy yourself?

So, why does the Bible say, "don't be too righteous"?  Encouraging one to be moderate in their righteousness... Doesn't that seem a bit out of place?


texts: Did the Jews use icons and images to help them worship as Catholics or Orthodox worshippers do?

texts:
I understand that some worshippers use icons to 'lift up their minds from earthly things to the heavenly things'? I am not interested about those using them as stage-props for a play (in comparison), but in those who do it from a religious sense, of helping them in prayer or worship.

Did the Jews ever do this?


texts: Are modern Amish much more dissimilar from society than the original generations of Amish?

texts:
I read that the Amish trace their roots back to the late 1600's.

It seems to me that their culture is vastly different than the mainstream, in part because of mostly (but not entirely) rejecting modern technology.      Also modern fashion, music, etc.

However would I be correct to think that in the late 1600's and early 1700's such differences must've been much less pronounced? I mean, I imagine that the level of technology and the fashions, etc which modern Amish have are approximately the same as what most people in the colonial times had? It's not like they are always lagging their technology 200 or 300 years behind whatever is current, and were thus using 1300's tech in the 1600's, right?

When did they decide to freeze their lifestyle? Was that always a part of being Amish or did it come later?


texts: Is to ignore Satan also to underestimate the potential he has to assault the Christian?

texts:
I've often thought that, once indwelt by the Holy Spirit and saved by the grace of God, Satan has nothing against me.

But, is to ignore Satan also to underestimate the potential he has to assault the Christian? What do the apostles and disciples of Christ say with respect to Satan's ability against the Christian?


texts: Who are the missionaries and godly men who were helped by Keswick Theology for a fuller Christ like life and ministry?

texts:
My curiosity arises from two sources.

J I Packer ( Reformed Theology ) says the Keswick Theology ruined him

Whereas

T Austin Sparks says that the Keswick Theology helped him lead a fuller life

Since reformed theologians are against Keswick Theology, I would like to get a list of missionaries and godly men who were helped by Keswick Theology for a fuller Christ-like life and ministry so that I can study their lives.


texts: What does "give that which is holy to dogs" mean?

texts:
What does this mean?

  You must not give that which is holy to dogs. Do not cast your pearls before swine, or the swine may trample them under foot, and
  then turn on you and tear you to pieces.

  (Matthew 7:6)


texts: Do I have to attend church every Sunday?

texts:
I used to be an avid church-goer, but as of late I haven't had the chance. This is primarily because of my scouting activities, which take place Sunday mornings (the same time the church service takes place).

I know it's been stated in the bible that we as Christians should come together, but I am getting a chance to do that elsewhere, specifically at my youth group.

Would this lack of church attendance be unfaithful in the eyes of God?


texts: When will believers of Christ get punished?

texts:
I just found out about the Judgment seat of Christ.
And from what I'm understanding, this is not the place where God metes out punishment for God's children.
Well, when will that time come?

Can anyone provide information or answers?

I've google everything I possibly can,,  still haven't ran across the answer.. I know It must come after the Judgment seat of Christ.. But when?
Right after?


texts: Why do we explicitly need to ask for help through prayer?

texts: Since God is omniscient not only does he know all of our hardships but he also knows that we want him to help us through said hardships. Why do we explicitly ask for help through prayer?


texts: Could Christ who carried our sins on the cross forgive those same sins?

texts:
Christ who bore our sins on the Cross:

  1 Peter 2:24 (NASB77)
  24  and He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed.

Also forgave sins under the Law:

  Luke 5:24 (NASB77)
  24  "But in order that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins,"-- He said to the paralytic-- "I say to you, rise, and take up your stretcher and go home."

If Christ is the offering for the sins, isn't He forgiving Himself?

Or....

Is it that Christ is the Mediator as high priest to God for the sins under the NT (and God not Christ forgives those sins) but acted as equal to God under the Law but not the sacrafice for those sins?


texts: What doctrine does Family Radio have of the End of the World?

texts:
I originally asked this question on October 21, 2011. I had received a link to an article on the eBibleFellowship page explaining how we'd been living the Day of Judgment since May 21, and today (ie. Oct 21, 2011) was the End of the World!

  We are living in a most unusual time. On May 21, of 2011, mankind entered into the Day of Judgment. This “day” will last for 5 months (153 days) until October 21, 2011. The Bible is teaching us that this period of time is Judgment Day!

The article links to similar teachings of Family Radio (which eBibleFellowship is not affiliated with).

What is the origin of this teaching? Do other Christian groups besides Family Radio and eBibleFellowship teach this? How do they explain the predictions after the date has passed?

Note that in March 2012 Harold Camping of Family Radio admitted they were wrong and the statements they made were sinful.


texts: Location of Jesus' tomb identified by Helena, mother of Constantine?

texts:
I was reading a National Geographic article about the recent restoration work done at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Israel in which the stone slab that covered the supposed resting place of Jesus was removed. According to the article, it went on to say:

  ...it was first identified by Helena, mother of the Roman emperor Constantine, in A.D. 326.

I researched a bit more about Helena's visit to Jerusalem and came upon another article that had this to say about her visit:

  The site was identified in the year 326, when the Emperor Constantine’s mother Helena went on a pilgrimage to the Holy Land in search of relics from the time of Christ. She asked the residents of Jerusalem where the site of Jesus’ tomb was, and they directed her to a spot where a pagan temple now stood. We might be justifiably sceptical that the people in Jerusalem at that time would have known where Jesus’ tomb once was and suspect that out of deference to the Emperor’s mother they pointed to some site.

Read more: #500 Excavating the Tomb of Jesus

Does anyone know the source for this claim? Specifically want to research more on Helena asking residents of Jerusalem where the site of the tomb was.


texts: Which was the first Roman Catholic hymnal to include Martin Luther's "A Mighty Fortress Is Our God"?

texts:
Recently I learned that modern Roman Catholic hymnals include Martin Luther's well-known hymn, A Mighty Fortress Is Our God.  Investigating further on hymnary.org, however, I find that the song is not found in apparently popular Roman Catholic hymnals from 1851 and 1913.

I am speculating that the inclusion of the song only became possible after counter-reformation bad blood between Roman Catholics and Martin Luther waned.  Thus, I'd like to know which was the first popular/official* Roman Catholic hymnal to include the hymn.  Bonus points for an answer that takes into account non-English hymnals, but an English-only answer is fine too.

*Note that I do not know how much oversight the Roman Catholic church exercises over its hymnals.  I'm looking for a hymnal popular or official enough that it indicates at least broad acceptance of the hymn.


texts: How many children did Adam and Eve have?

texts:
I recall someone suggesting to me one time that Adam and Eve had a total or twenty of so children, and that this came from some Jewish writings.  Is there any indication, then, from history regarding how many children they had?
It seems they would have likely had at least seven, as Cain, Abel and Seth are named.  Seth was considered to be in place of Abel, and it is said that after Seth, Adam and Eve had other sons (plural) and daughters (plural).  Thus, Cain (1) + Abel (1) + Seth (1) + other sons (2+) and daughters (2+) would equal at least seven children.

And Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son and called his name Seth, for she said, “God has appointed for me another offspring instead of Abel, for Cain killed him.  Genesis 4:25 ESV
The days of Adam after he fathered Seth were 800 years; and he had other sons and daughters.  Genesis 5:4 ESV

So, again, is there any indication from tradition or historical writings regarding how many sons and daughters Adam and Eve had altogether?


texts: Do miracles violate the laws of physics?

texts:
I asked a Christian today whether he believed that Jesus turning water into wine literally happened, or was just a metaphor. He said it literally happened, and also that other miracles literally happened, such as Jesus dying and coming back to life.

Some miracles described in the bible appear to violate the laws of physics. For example, in turning water into wine, I assume carbon atoms would have to appear where they did not exist before.

Do Christians have an opinion on what happened? Do they believe

The laws of physics were obeyed, and that our understanding of them is merely insufficient to understand what happened.
God does not break the laws of physics, but he changed the laws of physics temporarily such that those laws permitted certain miracles to occur.
God is not only able, but is willing, to break the laws of physics that he created?

The latter two sound like God being inconsistent, and the first one raises the possibility that if humans can understand the science fully, it may (or may not) be possible to replicate what he had done.


texts: How do Catholic theologians reconcile homoousion with the vulgate translation of Hebrews 1:3?

texts:
How do Catholic theologians reconcile homoousion with the Vulgate translation of Hebrews 1:3?

(Vulgata Clementa) qui cum sit splendor glóriæ, et figúra substántiæ ejus, portánsque ómnia verbo virtútis suæ, purgatiónem peccatórum fáciens, sedet ad déxteram majestátis in excélsis
(Douay-Rheims) Who being the brightness of his glory, and the figure of his substance, and upholding all things by the word of his power, making purgation of sins, sitteth on the right hand of the majesty on high.

Isn't being a "figure of" God's substance indicate that he did not actually "share" God's substance?


texts: "Jesus Christ, son of God" or "Jesus Christ is God"?

texts: If Jesus Christ is God, why are there passages stating that Jesus is the son of God?


texts: How do Jehovah's Witnesses understand Galatians 1:11-12?

texts:
The Apostle Paul stated at Galatians 1:11-12 the following:

Galatians 1:11-12: For I would have you know, brethern, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.

Also, Galatians 1:1:

Paul an apostle  (not sent from men, nor through the agency of man, but through Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised Him from the dead.

Then there is one more verse declaring the gospel of Jesus Christ at Mark 1:1:

The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

So Paul is informing us that the origin of the gospel he shared with them/the Galatians went back directly to a revelation of Jesus Christ Himself. It is the book of Acts that records what happened to Paul at Acts 9:3-19.
So the question is how Jehovah's Witnesses, who teach that Jesus Christ was only a human man and not God, reconcile the Apostle Paul saying he did not receive the gospel from any man nor did any man teach him the
gospel?


texts: According to the Catholic Church, did Jesus fulfil the prophesy of Isaiah by being buried in a tomb hewn in rock?

texts:
As per the Gospels of Matthew (27:60), Mark (15:46 ) and Luke (23:53) , the Body of Jesus, after his crucifixion was laid in a tomb 'hewn in the rock'. That all the evangelists except John mention the make of the tomb, suggests that there is some significance to it. I hope that this was written to indicate that Jesus had, in his burial, fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah at 53:9 (RSVCE):

  And they made his grave with the wicked and with a rich man in his death...

Clearly, only a rich man could afford to construct a grave hewn in rock. And, Matthew 27:57 in deed depicts Joseph of Arimathe'a in whose new tomb the body of Jesus was laid,  as  a rich man !

My question is: are there any official teachings from the side of Catholic Church confirming that Jesus was in deed fulfilling the prophesy of Isaiah by being buried in a tomb hewn in the rock ?


texts: Why were the interpreters called "Urim and Thummim"?

texts:
Urim and Thummim are lots in the pouch of the priests (High Priest? I don't remember) in the Old Testament. Not sure what "lot" is in this context but I am imagining some kind of dice. In any case, sometimes the lot were cast and the result seen as manifestation of divine will. Revelation.
The interpreters (on the breastplate which Joseph Smith got together with the plates) were clear stones you would look into and see something. Joseph Smith used them to translate the Book of Mormon, and I suppose there could be some other revelations he had through them.
The connection is both are physical objects used to inquire God and receive revelation, but that's about it. It's not even obvious whether or not the Urim and Thummim were stones (right?). The interpreters are more like the Liahona than the Urim and Thummim in my mind. The Book of Mormon, as far as I am aware, doesn't use the term "Urim and Thummim", nor does any angel that visited Joseph Smith (right?). The interpreters appear in the Book of Mormon from nowhere, as far as I am aware, King Mosiah just happens to have them.
So why did (I assume Joseph Smith) start calling them "Urim and Thummim"? Just to give them a biblical name or is there something more to it? And when did this association start?


texts: The nature and extent of the atonement of Jesus during the crucifixion

texts:
Biblical examples of God's wrath against damned men and angels are graphic:
Revelation 14:10-11: “He also will drink the wine of God’s wrath, poured full strength into the cup of his anger, and he will be tormented with fire and sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever, and they have no rest, day or night, these worshipers of the beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name.”

Considering the evangelical view of the Trinity and the atonement of Christ, what did the atonement of Jesus consist of during His crucifixion?  Jesus bore the intense physical pain without complaint, even praying for the Father to forgive the Roman soldiers while they nailed Him to the cross.  At a climactic point, though, Jesus cried out: "My God! My God! Why have you forsaken Me?"   This one time, Jesus did not refer to God as His Father.

That cry, quoted from Psalm 22, possibly indicates a schism in the Trinity itself:  God the Father separated from God the Son.  Was that seeming separation of God the Father from the Son of His love while the latter bore the sin of the world the atonement - or payment for our sins - or is there a spiritual dimension to it that wasn't visible?  If it was separation from the Father, it seems the Father surely suffered greatly for His beloved Son.  That does not seem to be addressed in the Bible, however.

This post title and substance were edited from 'wrath of God' to 'atonement', due to a post below that noted the wrath of God being directed toward Jesus on the cross is not found in the Bible.


texts: Surveys to find out which Christian denomination I am most like

texts:
Are there any (free) surveys or questionnaires that I can use to determine which Christian denomination I am most like?

I have been a Christian for many years and have preferred to read the Bible and commentaries in order to determine what I believe is right (rather than just following the teachings of one particular denomination).  With this being the case, I have not really followed one Christian denomination over another.


texts: What is the earliest known instance of a petition directed to Mary?

texts:
A recent answer on this site says that "People have always prayed to Mary as a chief intercessor on their behalf."  Such a statement will surely seem excessive to Protestants, who would normally characterize the idea of Mary interceding for the living as a (negative) development that took place centuries after Christ.

I doubt that debate will get resolved here, but it still makes me wonder – what is the earliest known instance of a petition directed to Mary?  I am looking for a clear statement where Mary is the actual target of a petition, not that she is tangentially referenced in association with a petition.  I'm not looking for statements of praise directed at Mary.

Checking quickly in Everett Ferguson's Church History, I found the following, which may prove useful as a starting point for answers:

  Mary was invoked in prayer among Greek speakers in the third or fourth century, but the first Latin hymn involving an address to Mary is from the fifth century. (16.2.C)

Notice however that this quote lacks two things that I'm looking for in answers – it doesn't specify that the prayers were petitions, and it doesn't state the documents in which these prayers were recorded.

We have a similar question, When is the first documented case of Christians praying to the dead saints?  However it does not specifically address the question of prayer to Mary, and though Mary is mentioned several times in one answer, she is only praised, never petitioned, in the prayers quoted there (such as from the Liturgy of St. James).


texts: What were the motivations of the Council of Trent?

texts:
Are there any documents maintained by the Roman Catholic Church that provide the original (ie, by the councils themselves) commentary on the declarations of the Council of Trent?

If not, what more recent writings, sanctioned or verified by the Roman Catholic Church, comment on the declarations of the Council of Trent?


texts: Do the Catholics consider Orthodox Christians heretics?

texts: The Orthodox Christians consider Catholics heretics. But what is the opposite case?


texts: When did the older English spelling of the endings of Isaiah and Elijah stop being used in the Catholic Church?

texts:
I was reading Archbishop Fulton Sheen's Life of Christ and he always refers to Isaiah and Isaias and Elijah as Elias.

I know that's one of the traditional English spellings, but when did it change for Catholics at Mass (at least in Latin translated Missals) and in other liturgical use?

Not on topic here, but well appreciated would be an explanation of how one could come to pronounce -jah as -ias.


texts: Does Ezekiel 28 speak of Satan (as "king of Tyre")?

texts:
Ezekiel 28 speaks of the king of Tyre. I've heard it both taught and refuted that this refers to Satan. I also just recently saw an answer making this assumption.

Does the passage refer to Satan?


texts: Was the account of eating forbidden fruit a metaphor?

texts: What is the established church's (Church of England's) view on the theology of the eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil as being a metaphor for the act of questioning God's judgement and requirement for acquiescent obedience?


texts: Jesus celebrated Jewish Passover; why Christians celebrate Easter, a different feast?

texts: According to the four Canonical gospels Jesus Christ and the apostles kept the Passover (John records three Passovers celebrated by Jesus: John 2:13, John 6:4, John 11:55 ); Why  Christians today celebrate a different feast that appeared c. 150 AD, almost one century and a half later?


texts: History of the age restrictions in the Priesthood in the LDS Church

texts:
In the LDS Church, some offices in the Priesthood have minimum age requirements:

A deacon must be at least 12 years old
A teacher must be at least 14 years old
A priest must be at least 16 years old
An elder must be at least 18 years old

I am wondering, what is the history of these age requirements?


texts: When Saint Rita was born, how old was her mother?

texts: A question about hagiography. It is said that Saint Rita's mother Amata Ferri was old when her daughter was born, and she had been sterile for a very long time. But how old was she, if anyone knows her biography (even an approximation if you have).


texts: Where do we draw the line when questioning/testing God?

texts:
It's pretty clear that we shouldn't put God to the test.

  Luke 4:12 NIV

  Jesus answered, “It is said: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the
  test.’ ”

Or is it?

  Isaiah 7:10-12

  10 Again the LORD spoke to Ahaz, 11 “Ask the LORD your God for a
  sign, whether in the deepest depths or in the highest heights.”

  12 But Ahaz said, “I will not ask; I will not put the LORD to the
  test.”

God clearly wanted Ahaz to ask him for the answer, but Ahaz assumed that this was a test. We know from other faithful people in the Bible that they all went to God and asked God for answers to their questions.

Where should we not test God and when/where is it ok to test Him?