texts: Did God kill the first borns in Exodus, according to Jehovah's Witnesses?

texts:
Two Jehovah's Witnesses were here yesterday, and we talked for a while about religion. We mentioned briefly God's killing of all the first born in Egypt in Exodus 12:29, whereupon one of the Witnesses said that it wasn't God who killed them. Not having a Bible close by, I just said I must misremember, and we started talking about something else.

Now, upon rereading Exodus 12:29 I think it's pretty clear that "the Lord" killed the first born. Is there some alternative interpretation of this, that this Lord is entirely separate from God? I'm confused, because the Witnesses otherwise seemed to have great knowledge of the Bible. What am I missing?

Who do Jehovah Witnesses believe killed the first-borns in Exodus 12?


texts: What manuscripts did people use to create the NIV and KJV? Are the manuscripts used to fashion the NIV older than those used for the KJV?

texts:
What manuscripts did people use to create the New International Version (NIV) of the Bible and the King James Version (KJV)? Are the manuscripts used to fashion the NIV older than those used for the KJV? Are they the same manuscripts?

To elaborate more on my question; I basically am interested in knowing what manuscripts or ancient documents were used when authors were putting together the NIV Bible, and when are those documents dated to?

To follow on my elaboration above, the same question goes for the KJV Bible.

I'm thinking that the question of reliability of version(s) is irrelevant if one was fashioned by older documents than the other. Though I still find major problems with reading things like "thou houth shalteth" in the year 2016.

Thanks for your time.


texts: How would believers in Jesus' deity paraphrase 1 Clement 59:4, "Let all the Gentiles know that Thou art the God alone, and Jesus Christ is Thy Son"?

texts:
1 Clement is the only extant uncontested writing of Pope Clement I. It is generally dated to the 1st Century. Along with the Didache and Old Roman Creed, it is an early Christian 'dog that didn't bark' in that there is no mention of Jesus being God.
1 Clement not only does not mention that Jesus is God, it clearly and consistently distinguishes between God and Jesus. Perhaps the strongest instance of this is 1 Clement 59:4.

"Let all the Gentiles know that Thou art the God alone, and Jesus
Christ is Thy Son."

This sounds quite similar to John 17:3, which is

"Now this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God,
and Jesus Christ, whom You have sent."

which in turn is often referred to by Biblical Unitarians as evidence that John was not making an argument that Jesus is God.
How would Trinitarians (or others who hold that Jesus is God) paraphrase 1 Clement 59:4 such as to make sense with Trinitarian (or other positions that hold Jesus is God) thought? How would 'thou', 'God', 'thy', and so on be spelled out in Trinitarian terms so as to make the sentence make sense?


texts: How is Matthew 18: 8-9 explained in the context of non works-based salvation?

texts:
if your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life maimed or crippled than to have two hands or two feet and be thrown into eternal fire.
And if your eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell.
Matthew 18:8-9

Jesus is either referring to saved or unsaved people. But either one, for unsaved it seems like they must cast away their sin to be saved, and for saved people it seems like they must not sin in order to remain saved. How is this explained in the context of non works-based salvation?


texts:
Now-At this time-the Son of Man is glorified-is having been glorified- in the glory of His Father in the past-and John 17v5 glorify me with the thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was. v32  If God was glorified[aorist] The Father will also glorify [future] Him in Himself...at once. The moment Jesus returns to Heaven He will be back in Him, in the Father, which is glory for Jesus. [Not the moment He is on the cross].

Before creation- glory with the Father.

At the cross-separation from the Father.[why ..forsaken me?]

After the cross Heb12v2 who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross.

It is glorious for the Father to have an obedient Son.

It is glorious for the church to have a perfect Saviour.

It is glorious for Jesus to fulfil the Law.

"in Him/in Himself" occurs three times in v31 and 32. These verses are about the Father Son relationship and here the past relationship of glory with the Father guarantees to Jesus the future glory despite what man will do to Him on the cross.

Does the evangelical Protestant tradition objectively say what Jesus considers to be the greatest source of His glory ?


texts: What guidelines should be followed using spiritual gifts?

texts: What guidelines should be followed if using spiritual gifts in a church setting today?


texts: What is the Catholic stance on Embryo Screening?

texts:
Embryo Screening is the process of fertilizing multiple eggs, checking their DNA makeup, and then screening out the eggs that do not meet the requirements.  These requirements can be anything from potential health issues (genetic diseases) to gender preference.

Obviously, the Bible doesn't have much to say about this directly.  Still, I'm curious what the Catholic stance is for or against this and what Bible verses support this stance.


texts:
Where in the Catechism can one read about sins of omission?
I couldn't find this term in it when I searched for it.


texts:
Famous computer scientist Donald Knuth is also the author of 3:16 Bible Texts Illuminated (A-R Editions, 1990). This is a tour of the Bible using the methodology of "stratified random sampling", where Knuth examines chapter 3, verse 16, of each Bible book (for which such a verse exists). Each one is illustrated with typographical art, and three pages of commentary. For example, the following image is for 1 Timothy 3:16 - note the hidden cross shape. (The history of this picture is also discussed in Things a Computer Scientist Rarely Talks About; the cross shape came about as a happy accident!)

Knuth's aim with this sample was to present a more-or-less representative picture of the Bible; the choice of 3:16 was to make sure that for at least one verse (John 3:16), he'd have something to say. It turns out that many of the 3:16s are surprisingly interesting, and there are some common themes that run throughout the whole book. He speculates about other variations on the same theme - for example, taking every 4:4, or picking a wholly random assortment of verses without regard to chapter and book boundaries.

Has anybody else produced a work of exegesis based on a similar "sampling" idea - not looking at every single verse, nor at a selection with a common theme, but at an almost arbitrary choice of verses? Now that Knuth has done this experiment once - in my view, successfully - is there any insight to be gained in doing something similar again?


texts: What "fundamentalist" beliefs are most commonly rejected by "moderate" Christians?

texts:
On this site there is plenty of information about what the "official" doctrines of various denominations are, but I doubt that the majority of Christians follow all of these to the letter.

Have there been any studies done to identify beliefs taught by a denomination, but which are widely ignored or not given much weight by its members?

An example would be self-identifying Catholics who use contraception.

To avoid the "no true scotsman" fallacy, consider a member of a denomination to be anyone who identifies themselves as such.

I'm mostly interested in protestant views, but interesting examples from other groups are also welcome.


texts: Huxley? Agnoticism and Christianity. Both at the same time?

texts:
Are they call agnostic theist? I believe it's wrong to say I'm certain of things. But I want to believe in God? Knowledge and belief is two different things right?

Or did I not understand Huxley's definition of agnosticism correctly?

Also, what do Christians think of agnosticism?


texts: Is there any historical evedence of more apostles being called that were not mentioned in the Bible?

texts:
In the Bible it mentions the apostles meeting together in prayer to determine who the lord would have them choose to fill the apostolic vacancy left by Judas.

    Acts 1:23 And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias.

  24 And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of
  all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen,

  25 That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which
  Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.

  26 And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias;

From this account we see that the lord intended the apostleship to continue however history shows that it did not. How long did the practice of replacing the fallen or deceased apostles continue after this account and why did it stop happening?


texts: Is there scholarly concensus on the historicity of Foxe's Book of Martyrs?

texts:
Foxe's Book of Martyrs purports to recount the lives and deaths of many who are regarded as the heroes of the Christian faith, and is revered as a classic within the genre of Christian literature. The author, however, cites few of his sources.

Is there a general agreement among recognized contemporary Christian researchers as to the reliability of the accounts given in Foxe's Book of Martyrs?


texts: If you guys don't know, she's the queen that quizzed Solomon to discover his wisdom in 1 Kings 10. Was Sheba located somewhere in Africa? (I heard some theories that Sheba was Arabia but I'm skeptical of this).


texts: Why did the reformers include the book of Hebrews in the canon?

texts:
Related: Why was Hebrews included in the canon?

It's widely known that Hebrews has been in the canon of most of Christendom for a long time, originally on the basis of Pauline authorship (see the linked answer above for more).  Despite some divergence of opinion (cf. Martin Luther), most of the reformers considered it canonical as well.  Here, I'd like to understand their reasons – that is:

Why did significant reformers (e.g., John Calvin, John Knox, Ulrich Zwingli) generally include Hebrews in the canon?

Did they still believe that Paul wrote the book, and thus include it on the basis of apostolic authorship?
Or did they accept it based on other factors, like the testimony of the early church, perhaps because Pauline authorship had already begun to be doubted?


texts: I have been trying to search this on the web and it seems I keep getting conflicting information. Apparently, modern scholars believe the Gospel of Luke was written in the second century AD. If this is true then why do we include it in our Bibles? Why do people read it if it was written much later? And then, I read some info about it being written in the 60s AD. I tried to search this on StackExchange but no luck. Could you help me out?


texts: Who are the origin of Hebrew people and the land ? Genesis 40:15

texts:
I found the word Hebrew appear in Genesis 40:15

  New International Version I was forcibly carried off from the
  land of the Hebrews, and even here I have done nothing to deserve
  being put in a dungeon.

I'm unable to understand the sentence of the verse above.... because to me it can mean :
A. Joseph is not a Hebrew but he live in the land of the Hebrews before
B. Joseph is a Hebrew and he is indirectly telling to whom he talking with that he is a Hebrew.

  New Living Translation For I was kidnapped from my homeland, the
  land of the Hebrews, and now I’m here in prison, but I did nothing
  to deserve it.

This verse is clearer to me, it's B.
But still I'm lost as I can't find in the Bible how is the origin of Hebrews people and the Hebrew Land even after I go back to the story from Abraham.

Abraham is from Ur-Kasdim, and from this wiki it said it's in the land of Mesopotamia. And wiki also said that this is Abraham's native land. So my own conclusion : Abraham is not a Hebrew, and I think he is Sumerian.

Later on Abraham is in Canaan land, which I assume the natives there are Canaanites.
Next, I think Isaac was born in Canaan Land. Later, I think Jacob was also born in Canaan Land.
After that I'm lost as it's not clear to me where the 12 children were born and their native. Maybe because I didn't read the story thoroughly.

  A man who had escaped came and reported this to Abram the Hebrew.

I found that Abraham is referred as a Hebrew in Genesis 14:13.
But how did he get it ? I mean when I put the story-teller position is in around at the actual time of the event, then where is the land of the Hebrews at the time of Genesis 14:13 happen ? Who are the other Hebrews besides Abraham at that time ?


texts: According to Mormons, what is the benefit received from paying tithes and following the temple ceremonies?

texts:
This is related to this other question regarding the Mormon view of the passage in Matthew 7:13-14. In this passage Jesus had said that majority of humankind would follow the road that "leadeth to destruction".

According to Mormons, "destruction" here means not attaining the blessings of the Celestial Kingdom (i.e. the highest level of the 3 heavens); instead, most of humankind will reach either the Telestial or Terrestial Kingdoms.

The question is, if most of humankind will reach some level of blessings (just not the highest level) by doing largely nothing for it, then what is the benefit of faithfully paying tithes and following the temple ceremonies?


texts: According to traditional Catholicism, what is the spiritual solution for the divorcee who hasn't had their marriage annulled?

texts: There has been quite a bit of controversy over what is becoming known as 'modern Catholicism' (post-Vatican II) and 'traditional Catholicism' (pre-Vatin II). 'Modern Catholicism' thought generally holds that divorcees who have not had their marriages annulled and are in another marriage can still receive Communion, so long as they repent. 'Traditional Catholicism' thought, to my understanding, generally holds that divorcees who have not had their marriages annulled and are in another marriage cannot receive Communion since they are still in a state of sin so long as they are neglecting their previous marriage that is not annulled. Assuming the traditional Catholic view to be true, what would be the solution to this problem for the remarried divorcee? Would the traditionalist Catholic suggest that the divorcee divorce the person that they are currently married to (in which case I'm assuming that marriage would be annulled)? And if so, would the person then be obligated to return to the marriage they left (which seems very improbable and unrealistic)? If it is a continual sin to be with another person while your previous marriage is still considered valid, in what way should the more complicated situations of divorce without annulment be evaded?


texts: What is the Bible's take on the existence of dinosaurs?

texts: It seems contradictory that our school system teaches about prehistoric Dinosaurs, that roamed the earth far before humans arrived, and yet at the same time (in Catholic schools) the children are taught that God created the world equipped with human beings in seven days. Are there any official statements by the Church on this subject?


texts: Did Jesus or 'an expert in the law' first share the greatest commandments?

texts:
In Luke 10.25-29 you have a teacher of the law asking Jesus how to inherit eternal life and then that same teacher of the law answering the question with the two greatest commandments

But then in Matthew 22.34-40 you have a pharisee (and an expert in the law) asking Jesus what the greatest commandment is and Jesus then answering with the greatest commandments.

So 1) are these two different situations or the same situation described differently? and 2) who first shared the greatest commandments, Jesus, the expert in the law or someone else?


texts: Are 'treasures' all Earthly goods or wealth?

texts: When it is often repeated in the Bible that we must cast aside our treasures to gain an everlasting treasure in Heaven, does this mean ALL worldly possessions or just money? Do modern desirables (ipods, Playstations, cars, gadgets, incredibly detailed statues, watches etc.etc.etc.) count? I assume they do, just checking...


texts: What effect did the 1897 decree regarding the Johannine Comma have on Catholic scholarship?

texts:
The Comma Johanneum, found in some versions of 1 John 5:7–8, such as the KJV, is a disputed text that has been used since at least the Middle Ages to defend trinitarian doctrine.  Scholars now widely consider it to be a later addition to the text, but this was a subject of significant debate in previous centuries.  The Catholic church took notice in 1897, and apparently applied some sort of restriction on allowable positions within the church:

  The Catholic theologian [...] cannot pass over the disciplinary decision of the Holy Office (13 January, 1897), whereby it is decreed that the authenticity of the Comma Johanninum may not with safety (tuto) be denied or called into doubt. This disciplinary decision was approved by Leo XIII two days later. Though his approval was not in forma specifica [...] all further discussion of the text in question must be carried on with due deference to this decree. (Catholic Encyclopedia, Epistles of St. John)

According to Wikipedia, this state seems to have ended in 1927, when Pope Pius XI decreed that the Comma was open to dispute.  I'm trying to better understand the practical implications of the 1897 decree during the 1897–1927 period.  In that vein I'll pose the following (hopefully indicative) questions:

Around the time of 1897, what did the phrase "with safety" mean?  For example, did it imply the possibility of excommunication or loss of salvation?  Or perhaps simply that rejection of the Comma was a sin?
Did the 1897 decree provide specific guidance regarding what kind of "calling into doubt" was not permitted?

Presumably direct statements would be included, like saying "The Comma is not authentic," but what about publishing research that could be interpreted as suggesting inauthenticity?

Are any Catholic theologians known to have been punished for violating the 1897 decree during this period?

Wikipedia includes a note that the 1927 decree clarified that the original decree was not meant to stop "moderate and temperate" investigation by scholars who promise to accept the Church's authority.  Be that as it may, I'm not convinced that that's how the 1897 decree would have been understood prior to the 1927 decree, so I'm focusing on how it was originally (perhaps mistakenly) interpreted and applied.


texts: Are the gospel authors who we believe them to be?

texts: What I'm wondering is whether the actual authors of the book of John, Luke, Matthew, and Mark are who we believe them to be. I go to a Catholic high school, and in our version of the Bible it says, in the author section for each gospel, something like "traditionally the apostle John", so does that mean it could have been someone else, and we just say that the author was John the Apostle when it wasn't?


texts: How does "Evangelii Gaudium” pose a new perspective on capitalism?

texts:
In response to Rush Limbaugh's criticism of Pope Francis' Evangelii Gaudium (text), Christopher Hale said that "to call the Holy Father a proponent [of] 'pure Marxism' is both mean-spirited and naive. Francis’s critique of unrestrained capitalism is in line with the Church’s social teaching."

"Pure Marxism" aside, can anyone explain, in light of Evangelii Gaudium, what, if any, is the different perspective on capitalism that distinguishes Pope Francis from Ratzinger?


texts: Why would witnesses of the crucifixion think Jesus was calling for Elijah?

texts:
In Mark 15:35, witnesses of the crucifixion thought Jesus was calling for Elijah after He says "Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?" (My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?).

Why would this statement evoke thoughts of Elijah in the people watching?


texts: What is the significance of water from Jesus' side?

texts:
John 19:34 "one of the soldiers pierced Jesus' side with a spear,
  bringing a sudden flow of blood and water."

I know this is supposed to be something great as in the next verse the apostle tries to ensure us just how true this is -

  John 19:34 The man who saw it has given testimony, and his testimony is true. He
  knows that he tells the truth, and he testifies so that you also may
  believe.

What is so significant about this? Is it symbolic of something?


texts: Are there Protestants in Italy today and what became of the Protestants reformers from the peninsula during the reformation?  The reason I ask is that I've never heard of any particular persecution either way in the old nations surrounding the Rome, all the fighting and carrying on seemed to happen in German nations or England, but the absence of hearing about something doesn't mean nothing happened, it just means worse things happened in other places so I'd just like to know what became of the Protestants in what is now Italy and how they're carrying on today.


texts: On the which council did Joseph of Arimathea sit?

texts:
Mark 15:43
Joseph of Arimathea, a prominent member of the Council, who was himself waiting for the kingdom of God, went boldly to Pilate and asked for Jesus' body.

Of which council was Joseph of Arimathea a member?


texts: If God wants everyone to repent, why God didn't do such miracles in Tyre and Sidon?

texts:
Matthew 11:21

  “Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! If the miracles done in
  you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago
  in sackcloth and ashes.

If so and God wants everyone to repent, why God didn't do such miracles in Tyre and Sidon?


texts: When did the gathered church stop singing choruses?

texts:
I read a few years ago, that the early church (1st - 2nd century) would start their gatherings by singing choruses and that this went on for a while, before the rest of the liturgy. Unfortunately, my source is in storage, so I can not give a reference. If anyone can, please provide it.

But my question is really: When did this custom stop? It must have been sometime between the late 2nd century and 5th century. Assuming it was wide spread, I suppose it gradually faded away. Does anyone know of any records of this?

Please note that I ask this question from a church history POV. Post Gregorian worship is not the topic of this question.


texts: Was any transgender person ever ordained as a Catholic priest?

texts:
We find this entry in the Wikipedia:

"Theodora of Alexandria was a saint and Desert Mother who was married to a prefect of Egypt. In order to perform penance for a sin she committed, she disguised herself as a man and joined a monastery in Thebaid. Her true identity as a woman was discovered only after her death."

Of late,   there have been heartening news of  transgender citizens gaining due acceptance  in different walks of life. Though  the Catholic Church has always been against ordaining women as priests, it is not known if such taboo exists in the case of transgender faithful. My question therefore,  is: was any transgender person ever  ordained as a Catholic priest ?


texts: What is the physical evidence for a local flood?

texts:
Some Christians believe Noah's flood was a local event rather than a global flood.

What physical or geological evidence has been given by such Christians to support their position?


texts: Do Christadelphians believe Jesus is God?

texts:
Do Christadelphians believe that Jesus is completely God and has been God since before the creation of the world?

If not, when does Jesus become God (or take on God like attributes)? What is their justification for this?


texts: When was “pistis christou” first understood as a statement about Christ’s faith?

texts:
There is an ongoing debate among translators and commentators of Paul’s letters about how to understand the phrase Πίστις Χριστοῦ (pistis christou)1 -- “[the] faith[fulness] of Christ" vs. “faith in Christ”. For instance, Gal 2:16:

  εἰδότες ὅτι οὐ δικαιοῦται ἄνθρωπος ἐξ ἔργων νόμου ἐὰν μὴ διὰ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ

  knowing that a man is not justified by works of [the] law but by pisteos iesou christou

The only published translation I’m aware of that chooses the “subjective” reading2 is the NET, which has notes that summarize the decision. Like most bibliographies I’ve found on the topic theirs starts in the late 20th C., with Richard B. Hays’s 1983 publication of The Faith of Jesus Christ (link is second edition) figuring prominently. See also this timeline.

I’m wondering if this interpretation had ever occurred to anyone before the 1970s. Starting from the Greek fathers, many scholars of prior generations likely had keen instincts about Greek, and I’m curious whether they “felt” the ambiguity reflected in our modern debate.

When was the subjective interpretation first suggested?
Did the Greek fathers write anything that would reveal their understanding of this phrase as either subjective or objective?

Notes:

1. The (comprehensive as far as I know) list of pertinent Pauline references, including those with Iesou and/or christou: Rom 3:22, 3:26; Gal 2:16 (x2), 2:20 ("son of God"), 3:22 , 3:26; Phil 3:9.

2. So-called because Christ is the subject who exhibits faith: “the faith[fulness] of Christ”. The alternative, traditional rendering (“objective genitive”) has Christ as the object of faith: “faith in Christ”. “Faith" vs. “faithfulness" is a question that arises secondarily if the subjective genitive is adopted and obviously has a major impact on interpretation as well. These issues have been discussed extensively.


texts: For what human reason was Christ crucified?

texts:
I know that from God the Father's perspective, Christ had to die for the sins of the elect.

However, from a secular perspective, why was Christ crucified?

I know that the Jews were unhappy with Christ claiming to be God -- but secularly, that only makes him insane, not worthy of the death penalty.

There was the time that he over turned a bunch of tables in the temple; but that too seems like a misdemeanor / felony, not death by crucifixion.

Given that he was crucified with "King of the Jews" was the reason that he was guilty of "trying to overthrow Rome" ?


texts: What did Brigham Young teach regarding Blood Atonement, and is that doctrine still held today in the LDS/Mormon Church?

texts:
Brigham Young taught the doctrine of Blood Atonement that indicated the blood of Christ was insufficient to provide forgiveness for some sins.  What are the specifics regarding the doctrine of Blood Atonement that Brigham Young taught?  Where is this teaching found?  What sins could be atoned for by the cross of Christ and which could not?

Is this doctrine still believed today?


texts: Where did the phrases "God the Son" and "God the Holy Spirit" came from?

texts:
We find the term "God the father" in the new testament. But we don't find "God the Son" nor "God the Holy Spirit."
There is no part which talks about the Son and the Holy Spirit in the old testament.

Can we say it is because Jesus wasn't born that the Son wasn't referred in the old testament?  If so, then what about the Holy Spirit?


texts: In heaven, will we desire to receive more intimacy, affection, and care from all others compared to our earthy life (catholic)?

texts:
In heaven, will we desire to receive more intimacy, affection, and care from all others  than what we experience in this life on earth (please answer according to Catholic teaching)?

There are two views on this.
The first view tells that we will desire to receive less intimacy, affection, and care from others compared to what we experience in this life on earth, because in heaven, God will be our only focus (so we won't care much about our relationships with all others in heaven, or going even further, in heaven, there will be no such desire in us - the desire to be loved by other members of heaven - because we are already perfectly satisfied in God).

The second view (my view), however, suggests that we will desire to receive more intimacy, affection, and care from all others than what we experience in our earthy life. And here is the logic to this view: In heaven, we will be in the perfect and complete union with God, and we will love God perfectly. Also, the Catholic church's teaching on the communion of saints emphasize that it is God's will that we all be in a perfect and complete union in heaven not only with God himself, but also with all others in heaven  - And because loving God requires desiring precisely what God desires for us, in heaven, we will desire a perfect and complete union with all others in heaven; and if we are to desire this, surely we will desire to receive more intimacy, affection, and care from all others, more than what we want from others in our earthy life.

I am not sure which view is correct. Can anyone help me with this?


texts: Claims by Jehovah's witnesses from doctrine?

texts:
I have heard these three claims at different times from Jehovah's witnesses said in the presence of other JWs. Are they based in JW doctrine?

Jehova created dinosaurs for the purpose of clearing forests for humans to plant crops and removed them when that task was done.
The "abomination that maketh desolate" (KJV) or "disgusting thing that is causing desolation" (NW) mentioned in Dan 11:31 is a prophecy identified with the United Nations in New York, with particular condemnation of the display in the UN of the "swords into plowshares" quotation from Isaiah 2:4.
The "breath of life" that Jehovah put into the nostrils of Adam in Gen 2:7 is what we call oxygen. It is essential for living things and impossible for humans to make; scuba divers and astronauts cannot survive without bringing oxygen with them.


texts: How would Mormon christology be classified?

texts: Is Mormon christology Trinitarian in the sense of seeing Jesus as having always existed? Or is it Arian as seeing him as the first being created by God and used as the agent in creation of everything else? Is it adoptionist in viewing Jesus as being born a mere man and exalted or "deified" at some later point?  Or is it a type of Sabelianism (i.e. Jesus being a man but with the Father dwelling in him)?  Does it accept him as the Platonic logos?


texts: Why is the ten commandments sometimes called the decalogue?

texts: I have heard the ten commandments written in Exodus and Deuteronomy sometimes called the Decalogue. What does this word mean and why are they sometimes called that?


texts: What justification would make divorce worse than adultery?

texts:
While I'm not talking salvation here (I understand grace) there is a sense in which some sins are more offensive to God then others.  Scripture is replete with examples of God's hatred for adultery (read pretty much any prophet!) and divorce (Malachi, Matthew, etc...).

Recently, I had a discussion with another pastor who was counseling a person who had created what I believe to be a false dichotomy - the counselee believed himself to be incapable fidelity to his wife, and so felt there were only two options - divorce or adultery.  (The counselee's justification was 1 Cor 7:9 "But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion"). The thing that was interesting to me was that it was suggested that adultery was better than divorce.  The counselor suggested that if the counselee was incapable of being true to his wife, that it was better to have an affair than to terminate the marriage.

Now, leaving aside any personal specifics (this is not a pastoral advice question!), I'm wondering what is the logic of holding the sanctity of marriage over fidelity within it?  In other words, what is the biblical or extra-biblical justification for suggesting that adultery would be preferable to divorce.

I'm looking for either an exegesis of Scripture or Pontifical statement that would be the basis for making such a counsel. Appeals to the sources of tradition for any denomination are accepted - I'm just trying to understand what the justification is for stating that divorce is worse than adultery.

Barring that, the inverse - if someone would make the case that adultery is worse than divorce, I'd be interested in that exegesis as well.


texts: How easy was it to get a Bible (Old Testament or both Testaments) in the Eastern Roman Empire during the early reign of Justinian?

texts:
My question spawns from a book I am thinking about writing.  It is the story of how a young man (teenager) living in a tribe of nomads trading along the Silk Road.  He becomes a Christian and ransoms a girl out of slavery causing him to be estranged from his tribe and finding a new home in the Christian world.

This starts during the late reign of Emperor Justin and the early reign of Emperor Justinian in the Eastern Roman Empire, because I want his conversion to Christianity (as this is total fiction) to go in the order of: being curious, getting a Bible, realizing its true, going back to east Rome and asking a Christian how he must be saved.

The ease of this happening depends totally on how accessible copies of the Bible were to traders and common folk in east Rome during this time.

This is a writing question but I believe that this is a question about Christianity and so is proper here. As a Christian I am not doing this to advertise this book I will write (that I also might not publish), but trying to get a better understanding of this period as well.

How accessible were Bibles in the Eastern Roman Empire in the early reign of Emperor Justinian?


texts: How is the new anti-conversion law going to affect Christians in India?

texts:
There is news that Modi government likely to bring bill to prevent religious conversion in next Parliament session
There is currently this plea from persecution relief and a petition to be signed
How have such laws affected Christians in the world in the past?
And how would they affect Christians in India?
Have such laws caused any type of unity and revival of fellowship among denominations who would not otherwise fellowship with each other in the past in world history?


texts: Do any of the Church Fathers draw a connection between Eve and the Holy Spirit?

texts:
In Wild at Heart, author John Eldredge takes some effort to describe the language used in Genesis 2:18 to refer to Eve. While some translations and commentors translate the hebrew "עֵ֖זֶר כְּנֶגְדּֽוֹ׃" (ezer kenegdo) "suitable helper" or "help mate", Eldredge comments on the weight of that description while discussing the sanctity and gravity of the marriage union,

  It means something far more than just "helper"; it means "lifesaver." The phrase is only used elsewhere of God, when you need him to come through for you desperately. "There is no one like the God of Jesherun, who rides on the heavens to help you" (Deut. 33:26). Eve is a life giver; she is Adam's ally.

While meditating on this, I was reminded of what Jesus said to the disciples before his crucifixion:

  I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever; (John 14:16, NASB)

Do any of the Church fathers compare Eve and the Paraclete?


texts: What is the opposite of Total Depravity?

texts:
One of the core beliefs of all Calvinists (and many Christians in general) is that of Total Depravity.  Fundamentally, it suggests that mankind is inherently fallen, corrupt, and incapable of doing good of his own accord. There is a good question on the site here, and I will admit, I find it to be a very compelling biblical case.

The question is - what do you call the opposite of total depravity? In other words, if man is capable of being sufficiently good to save himself, (at least in theory if not practice) but just regularly chooses not to, what do you call that doctrine?  And, what, if any biblical support would there be for it?


texts: Why do human beings have enmity towards snakes? (Catholic perspective)

texts:
Following is an excerpt from an article appearing in LiveScience:

  Fear of snakes is one of the most common phobias, yet many people have never seen a snake in person. New research suggests humans have evolved an innate tendency to sense snakes — and spiders, too — and to learn to fear them.
  Psychologists found that both adults and children could detect images of snakes among a variety of non-threatening objects more quickly than they could pinpoint frogs, flowers or caterpillars. The researchers think this ability helped humans survive in the wild.

My question is: Is the fear of and enmity towards snakes inherent in human beings  an after-effect of the curse which fell on the serpent in Eden? Do the teachings of Catholic Church discuss this issue?


texts: What LDS scriptures support the doctrine that Jesus is Jehovah of the Old Testament?

texts: What passages of the LDS edition of the KJV and other authoritative writings and recorded teachings of the LDS support the teaching that Jesus is Jehovah of the Old Testament?


texts:
My country is full of beggars asking for money, sometimes it's kinda family controlled business, the parents ask their children to beg for money and then steal the money from them, some beggars are really poor, others are just scammers.

But you don't have anyway of telling, the vast majority of people either yell at them or ignore them or tell them to go away or act as if they never saw them.

I don't imagine that one could pay each and every beggar he sees on a daily basis, and the people in my country aren't rich and there are too many beggars out there.

From a roman catholic point of view, how should common people treat beggars? Is ignoring them a sin? What does the church and saints have to say about that?


texts: Was everyone who worked on the tabernacle given the Spirit?

texts:
Them hath he filled with wisdom of heart, to work all manner of work, of the engraver, and of the cunning workman, and of the embroiderer, in blue, and in purple, in scarlet, and in fine linen, and of the weaver, even of them that do any work, and of those that devise cunning work.  (Exodus 35:35 KJV)

Does this verse mean that every person that worked on the tabernacle was given the Spirit, or just Bezaleel and Aholiab?

Also, does this imply that they walked like Christians today, or did the Spirit solely provide wisdom for building?


texts: Where, if anywhere, is it explicitly stated that the Church may borrow and adapt heathen feasts?

texts:
I think I remember having read some official document of the Catholic Church (maybe even of Vatican II) explicitly stating that the Church, while establishing the Faith in a heathen area or culture, does not always need to fight the existing heathen rituals and feasts; rather, in certain cases, it may borrow and adapt these feasts, leaving many rituals but making them compatible with the Christian theology.

Now it is not my intention to discuss this particular holiday, but just to make clear what I mean: I’ve heard people claiming that in this very fashion the Christian feast of Christmas was established, drawing its origins from the heathen feast of the Sun. (I’ve also seen people debunking this theory, though).

Do I remember correctly that such a statement has been made in official documents of the Church? If so, where can it be found?


texts: Christ is true God and true Man... from when?

texts:
According to the catholic doctrine, Jesus is "true God and true human." That nature of Him was taken in order to redeem the humanity of sin.

My question is:

  Since he is God since all times, did he become true human in the incarnation or he was already man before it?

If He has became human there, and now He is human also nowadays due to His simple and eternal attributes, excent (indifferent, alien, unaffected, etc) of time and space:

Wouldn't He has to been human since all times since He lives in eternity?


texts: Do Calvinists believe that Heavenly Rewards are predestined?

texts:
Assume

doctrine of predestination
Calvinism

Context

10 Talents (Matthew 25):

  For the kingdom of heaven is as a man travelling into a far country, who called his own servants, and delivered unto them his goods. And unto one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one; to every man according to his several ability; and straightway took his journey. Then he that had received the five talents went and traded with the same, and made them other five talents. And likewise he that had received two, he also gained other two. But he that had received one went and digged in the earth, and hid his lord's money.
  After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them. And so he that had received five talents came and brought other five talents, saying, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me five talents: behold, I have gained beside them five talents more.
  His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.
  He also that had received two talents came and said, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me two talents: behold, I have gained two other talents beside them.
  His lord said unto him, "Well done, good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord."
  Then he which had received the one talent came and said, "Lord, I knew thee that thou art an hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown, and gathering where thou hast not strawed: And I was afraid, and went and hid thy talent in the earth: lo, there thou hast that is thine."
  His lord answered and said unto him, "Thou wicked and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not strawed: Thou oughtest therefore to have put my money to the exchangers, and then at my coming I should have received mine own with usury." "Take therefore the talent from him, and give it unto him which hath ten talents."
  For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath. And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

1 Corinthians 3

  According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

Question:

Given that salvation is predestined. Are heavenly rewards / crowns that one wins also pre-destined, or is that free will: i.e. God gives you a free ticket into heaven; but the rewards received in heaven is up to you.


texts:
I think many people assume that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because of their sexual immortality, and this may at least be part of the reason. However, I recently read Ezekiel and in Ezekiel 16:49-50

  49 Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. 50 They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen.

It seems that Ezekiel is turning the traditional interpretation on its head, although there is certainly room for argument in the phrase "did detestable things before me".

Is there any kind of doctrinal consensus or majority view on why exactly Sodom and Gomorrah was destroyed?


texts: According to the Catholic Church, was Mary's Magnificat a spontaneous utterance?

texts: At Luke 1: 46-55 we see Blessed Virgin Mary singing  a song of praise, now known as the Magnificat, while greeting her cousin Elizabeth. I wish to know if the song of Mary was a spontaneous utterance, or was it an  integration of  prayers from the old Jewish scripts and the Psalms ? What do the teachings of Catholic Church say on the source(s) of the Magnificat ?


texts: What is the protestant apologetic for James' explicit statement that we are justified by works?

texts:
James 2:24, RSVC2E: You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

Many times I've heard Protestants claim that James isn't really saying what he appears to be saying here. They will say something along the lines of "James isn't saying that we are justified by works, he is saying that works are the sign and fruit of faith. If you have faith, you will naturally do works"

I have no problem with saying that works are the fruit of faith and that if you have faith you will naturally do works, however that is not what this verse is saying. This verse very explicitly says that we are justified by works. That is, our works affect our justification in some way. My understanding of Catholic teaching is that we are supposed to just take the verse at face value and say that we can increase and decrease our justification via our good and bad works. In this view "Justification" is not a binary attribute which you either have or don't have, but instead a quantitative property which everyone has and which can increase or decrease as time goes by, such that someone can have more justification than someone else (and be rewarded in heaven appropriately).

What is the protestant explanation for this verse, without ignoring it or handwaving it away? Obviously works do justify us according to James 2:24, so in what sense?


texts: Is a word [letter] and [scripture] in 2 Peter 3:16 the same meaning?

texts:
2 Peter 3:16

  He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in
  them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard
  to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do
  the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.

I mean, when Peter said "his letters" ---> Did Peter mean [his Scriptures] ?

As I'm from a non-English speaking country, this is quite confusing for me. Because in our language words, a Scripture is a Bible - while a letter is not a Bible. And of course, in this modern time - no one will say "I'm writing a Bible" :).

Illustration :
Suppose Peter is writing for his fellow Christians.
Someone phone him "Hi Peter, what are you doing ?".
Peter answer "I'm writing a scripture".

What will be in the caller's mind ?
A. Peter is writing a Bible
B. Peter is writing a letter (not a Bible)

Thank you.


texts: Were there any converted children or teenagers among Jesus disciples or in the first century church?

texts: Since children and teenagers (minors) conversions are not recorded in the entire New Testament, I always wondered if they were qualified candidates for Christianity.


texts: Papal Infallibility and teaching heresy?

texts:
I had a question that I hoped the Catholics on the board could help me out with.  My understanding of the doctrine of Papal Infallibility is that speaking in his official capacity as the "Vicar of Christ" and the Spiritual leader of the Christian Church, the Pope is considered infallible by the Catholic Church.

This is a purely hypothetical example, because in the real world, I imagine a cardinal or bishop would be anathemized (sp) before he could ascend to the level of Pope, but what would happen if the Pope taught a heresy such as Modalism or Docetism, speaking in his capacity as the church, from the chair of Peter?  Would Catholics be compelled to agree with the same heresies former councils had violently condemned in the past?  If the heresy was damnable enough, would it be possible to revoke the doctrine or reformulate it, just as it was initially put in place and formulated by the Church?  Or would the tradition of the Church, which it has maintained since Apostolic times, overrule the Pope's proclamation?


texts: How do Catholics speak with their Guardian angels?

texts: According to Catholic teachings, how are Catholics to speak with their guardian angels?  With their voice?  In their minds?  Does the Church provide any guidance or description?


texts: What passages support that God once walked the earth as a man?

texts:
I thought that God once walked on the earth as we do now, but I can't find that in the bible, offhand.

I thought that Joseph Smith taught that he walked with us and was once a man.  What bible verses did he use to show this?

Where does that teaching come from?


texts: 5 meaningful contacts with Christians before considering the claims of the gospel

texts:
I've been reading a book on Church growth (Growing A Healthy Church by Dan Spader and Gary Mayes) with a chapter on evangelism that says something which I've heard in churches before:

"Typically an unbeliever needs to have more than five meaningful contacts with a number of Christians before he or she will begin to trust the message of the gospel

Growing a Healthy Church
This seems to be a linchpin point supporting relationship-style evangelism but the book doesn't cite any sources and I don't seem to be able to find any myself. Can someone else locate the source of this claim whether it be a study or merely an idea proposed by someone else?


texts: How can we be with Christ when we die, if Christ has a glorified body and we won't until the resurrection?

texts:
It is taught that when we die we who believe in Christ will be with him right away, but how can we be right away with Christ if he has a glorified physical body that we are supposed to receive only in the resurrection?

This question is aimed at those Protestants who reject both purgatory and soul sleep, while believing in an intermediate state.


texts: According to Catholicism, why did Jesus not name the rich man in the story of Lazarus and the rich man?

texts:
In the story of the rich man and the poor man (Luke 16:19–31), Jesus did not name the rich man. The name Lazarus that Jesus gave to the poor man is said to have originated from a Greek word meaning 'God will help' or 'assistance of God'.

My question is: According to Catholicism, why did Jesus not name the rich man?  Was it in order to convey a message that His affinity was more towards the humble underdogs than towards the proud rich?


texts:
Starting from this question, I'm curious how the LDS church handles the doctrine changes.

I saw a similar question (What is the LDS position on changing doctrine), but what I'm wondering is how this works in practice:

Let's assume a new idea comes. Who validates that the new idea is right or wrong? Is there a vote?
Where are these changes published?
What are some examples of doctrine changes? I expect to see them reflected in the archives of the conferences (or other official archives).


texts: In Roman Catholicism, what is the right way of praying for the salvation of departed souls?

texts: In Roman Catholicism, I understand that as per traditions, while praying for the salvation of departed souls, we usually have to recite “Our Father and Hail Mary”.  Are there any Church guidelines along these lines? There is some confusion as to whether we should conclude this with “Glory to the Father and the Son ....” or not. Either way, what is the significance of concluding it with or without "Glory to...." at the end?


texts: Are the ten commandments considered part of the old testament law?

texts:
Possible Duplicate:
  To what extent does the Law of Moses still apply?

Leviticus contains many laws that modern-day Christians do not follow. From what I've understood, this is because they consider this law to have been fulfilled through the death of Christ. However, they also often tout the ten commandments as a source of morality.

Were the ten commandments not part of the law that was fulfilled? Or is there some other reason why Christians still adhere to them?


texts: What is the scholarly biblical argument against theistic evolution?

texts:
In Catholics and Evolution | New Advent, it seems a case might be made for theistic evolution.

The question is what is the scholarly - as opposed to personal opinion - biblical argument against theistic evolution?

Evolution defined as

  Biological evolution, simply put, is descent with modification. This
  definition encompasses small-scale evolution (changes in gene
  frequency in a population from one generation to the next) and
  large-scale evolution (the descent of different species from a common
  ancestor over many generations). Evolution helps us to understand the
  history of life. - Source.

Theistic evolution oversimplified as being evolution with God involved.

Please see also: Theistic evolution | Conservapedia.


texts: What was the weight of Noah's ark before and after the animals were loaded on to it?

texts: Does anyone know what was the weight of the Ark before and after the animals were loaded on to it?


texts: Has the Catholic Church endorsed the view of Einstein on the Creator?

texts:
One of Albert Einstein's most famous quotes is, "God does not play dice with the universe."

I wish to know if the Catholic Church has ever used the said statement of Einstein in its teachings on creation, sustenance and end of the universe . If it has, has there been a disagreement between the scientist and the Church in relation to the interpretation of the statement ?


texts:
Did Paul (Saul) hear Jesus teach? I base this on his being approximately the same age and being taught by Gamaliel in Jerusalem during the time of Christ's ministry. A Jewish source mentioned that followers of specific Rabbis were sent out to listen to itinerant teachers to strengthen their understanding of Torah by comparing the teachings.
 I can't remember where I read he may have been an early follower but left when Christ's teachings became hard.
 To me this in part would explain his extreme reaction to the earliest Christians and why he was so aggressive in the discipline of the Christians.


texts: Who are the people depicted in Dionisius' famous icon of Christ's descent into hell?

texts:
The renowned Russian Orthodox icon painter Dionisius produced a famous, and exquisitely beautiful, depiction of Christ's descent into hell. However, I'm having trouble identifying most of the figures depicted therein. More specifically:

Who are the people above the barrier which Christ has broken? Are they newly-liberated souls, or were they - in the logic of the painting - saved before Christ's descent? Whose wrists is Christ clasping, and why?
Who are the figures in the bluish haze which surrounds Christ?
Who are the greyish winged figures below the barrier?
Who is the figure at the very bottom of the icon? Why are the two angels grabbing him?
Who are the white-clad figures in the bottom corners of the icon?


texts: What is the oldest recorded filmed Catholic mass?

texts: Where can I view the oldest filmed recording of a mass?


texts: What does the Bible verse saying "don't boil a goat in its mother's milk" mean?

texts: Does it mean don't use the word of God (milk meat and honey) condemning the little ones just learning the word of Christ to the point. The child rejects even hearing about God?


texts: According to the Catholic Church, do guardian angels graduate?

texts:
I received two conflicting reports from two women whose catholicity I highly respect, but whose sources are circumspect, or at the very least circumlocutory.

One says that if and when we get to heaven, our guardian angel gets
promoted up the ranks.
The other says that if and when we get to heaven, our guardian angel
stays with us, and remains our guardian angel in heaven.

I'm not an expert, nor do I know if these things can be known. However, I do know a contradiction when I see one. Which is right? Do our angels graduate, or do they remain with us in Eternity?

Catholic answers only, please - no Sylvia Browne.


texts: Is it generally acceptable to attend a bible study as a non Christian?

texts:
I am a bit curious about seeking out a bible study. There are several reasons for this:

A friend of mine (in another country) says she finds such a study group enjoyable, and it seems to be a good way to meet new people. (I myself just moved to a new country, where Christianity seems to have a larger place in society than I am used to).

It will help me understand Christianity better.

However, I do not really consider myself a Christian. Will I be out of place in such a study group, or even, will people be offended?

I do like to question things, and ask if something is unclear (I have a strong background in science). Is this something that might make people uneasy?


texts: Which kind of relations are considered incestous in Christianity?

texts:
My question, in strict propriety, is specifically what kind of relationships are defined as incestuous in Christianity?

I am guessing that it is forbidden to marry one's parents/children or siblings but what about other relations like first cousins. I would appreciate some sort of a reference to maybe a specific passage in Christian holy scriptures. Is this something specifically commanded by God explicitly, listing forbidden relations? Or is it some sort of an interpretation done later by a scholar which is widely accepted today?

And I am talking about Christianity in general encompassing all of its sects. Do different sects have different rules?


texts: Why do Catholics believe that it is a priest's blessing that transforms the elements into the body and blood of Christ?

texts:
I understand that Catholicism teaches the doctrine of transubstantiation, that is, that the bread and wine of the Eucharist are transformed into the literal body and blood of Christ.  This apparently takes place once a priest pronounces a blessing on the elements.

My question is why does it take a priest to do this, and why must a blessing be given in order to achieve this?  When did the teaching originate regarding the necessity of a priestly blessing?


texts:
The popular story of David and Goliath describes Goliath as very tall ("six cubits and a span"--apparently roughly 9 feet 9 inches, or 297cm).  Most children are just told he was a "giant" in Sunday school.

Where did he come from?  Was he part of a now-extinct race of giants, or was it just some sort of genetic mutation?


texts: Does Catholicism or any church father make a connection between Eve and Mary in Genesis 2:18 and John 14:26?

texts:
Genesis 2:18 New International Version (NIV)

  "The Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.”(Genesis2:18)

  and

  John 14:26 New King James Version (NKJV)

  "But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.

  Footnotes:
  John 14:26 Comforter, Gr. Parakletos

In this particular passages both God the Father and Jesus the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity both mentioned the word "helper".

In Catholicism based on Church Father's Teaching and in the Catholic Article of Faith the New Adam & New Eve is Jesus and the Blessed Virgin Mary.

Would it follows that the role that the First Adam & First Eve in the context of the foreshadowing events in the Old Testament and New Testament, Jesus and Mary would fulfill the new role of Adam & Eve as the Church Fathers teaches.

My question is based on the passages on Genesis2:18 the role of  "helper" is given to Eve to help the First Adam,and in John14:26 the "Helper" to help Jesus the New Adam, would be given to Blessed Virgin Mary the New Eve.

In this context, my question is according to Catholicism, Church Father, Saints and biblical interpretation(hebrew parallelism),;

Is the Blessed Virgin Mary being acknowledge by the Church Fathers and Catholic Church as the New Eve would take the role of the "Helper" in John14:26?


texts:
In Hebrews 1:5-13, it was a first person point of view that God is speaking. In verse 8, you will see this time that God is addressing the Son - which is Jesus himself.

But of the Son he says, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever..."

In Catholicism, Jesus is God the Son and that verse in the bible seems to agree as well.
What are other Christian denominations' points of view on this matter?


texts: When Pilate offered up Jesus or Barabbas for release, was this to the crowd for their justice or for pardon?

texts:
I have limited understanding of this was a tradition each year where Pilate would release a prisoner during the Jewish Passover but did this release mean a pardon?

This was posed in my Sunday school class today and I am seeking any knowledge or understanding on this.

  But they all cried out together, “Away with this man, and release to us Barabbas” (Luke 23:18, ESV)


texts: What is considered "The Word of the Lord" in the Episcopal Liturgy

texts:
We finish the reading of scripture readings in the Episcopal church with the words:
"The Word of the Lord".

What does the Episcopal Church actually consider to be "The Word of the Lord?"


texts: According to Catholicism, what is the difference between forgiveness and release from punishment?

texts:
The first thing to note is that forgiveness of a sin is separate from punishment for the sin. Through sacramental confession we obtain forgiveness, but we aren't let off the hook as far as punishment goes.

That's a quote from Catholic Online's article on indulgences. I've never heard forgiveness spoken about in this way. Even the site's tag wiki for forgiveness specifically includes release from punishment. I know this question is similar, but its answers don't cover a Catholic view. The only well-sourced answer explains a Lutheran stance.

If God's forgiveness does not spare one from punishment, then what is it? Does this mean that the sacrament of confession alone does not spare you from punishment? Where does the Catholic Church get this distinction? Is there a biblical basis? Is it part of sacred tradition? Did a council decide it?

On another note, I learned while researching for this question that anyone who has completed the three prerequisites for an indulgence may gain one by participating on Christianity.SE:

  Christian Doctrine. Partial indulgence to those who take part in teaching or learning Christian doctrine.


texts: Is there any theological reason for not drinking the communion wine?

texts:
So, when serving communion, I notice that there is a significant number of people who will eat the bread, but not drink the wine. (Note, I'm not talking intinction here - rather they eat the bread, then get up before the chalice is offered.)

Is there any theology behind this, or is it just a general "ick" factor at potentially drinking out of the same cup?


texts: What is the earliest written surviving liturgy?

texts:
The Divine Liturgy of St John Chrysostom, for example, has been traced to the fourth century, and is purported to be based upon even earlier forms. The Liturgy of St James is even more ancient, and is supposed to be the oldest liturgy still in common use.

I have two related questions:

What is the earliest Christian liturgy that we have the actual (complete or partial) text of?
What is the earliest Christian liturgy, whether anonymous or attributed to a particular author, that is specifically referred to in ancient sources?


texts: If Adam and Eve were perfect, why did they choose to sin?

texts:
Adam and Eve, when they were created in the Garden of Eden, were without sin.  Because of that, they were perfect and flawless.
However, with that theology in mind, I'm running up against a wall: Why, if Adam and Eve were perfect, did they choose to sin?
Were they not perfect?
If we presume that they weren't perfect, then we have to see that God created them with the imperfection.  If God created them as imperfect, would that mean that by creating us this way he caused us to sin?
(Being omniscient, he knew full well that if he created us to sin then we would sin.  Therefore wouldn't his act of creation be the cause of the sin?)  Finally, if he created us to sin, can God be held accountable for this sin?
Were they perfect?
Or, rather, did God create them as perfect and they chose imperfection?  If Adam and Eve chose imperfection, how could they be considered perfect?
My question, in summary
Are there any doctrines that speak to the perfection or imperfection of Adam and Eve (particularly in regards to why they chose to sin)?
If the doctrine claims Adam and Eve were perfect, how do they reconcile this with them choosing imperfection (since that would indicate they were imperfect from creation)?
If the doctrine claims that Adam and Eve were imperfect, how do they reconcile this with the idea that God created imperfect beings?  Furthermore, does that doctrine hold that God is partially responsible for the sins that Adam and Eve committed since he knew that they would commit the sin and chose to create them anyways?


texts: Seeking a graphic or flowchart of the history of the formation of Christian denominations

texts: I'm hoping someone can refer me to a graphic, flowchart or even a list of when various Christian denominations formed. For example, a biggie is the Lutheran church breaking off from the Catholic church.  Or the Anglican church splitting off from the Catholic one.  Will appreciate any help, thank you.


texts:
Where in the Bible does it mention that God mourns with us when we mourn? I have heard this from the philosopher Peter Kreeft, and some others as well. I would like to be pointed to the biblical source of this. Thanks.

(Or is it an extrapolation of Christ's suffering?)


texts: Who do Seventh Day Adventist think the Harlot is in Revelation chaps 17 & 19?

texts:
According to Seventh Day Adventist’s Who/what is the harlot noted in Revelation?
Why do you or your source think that answer is correct?


texts: What is the Calvinist view of God's sovereignty?

texts:
I have many Calvinist friends, and when we discuss matters of theology or doctrine, almost inevitably, the conversation turns to them saying something like "That's because of God's sovereignty," or "That undermines God's sovereignty."

In fact, most (if not all) of the 5 points of 5-point Calvinism hinge on the sovereignty of God as their cornerstone, either directly, or as they build on the other points.

I have my own idea of what God's sovereignty means, but it must be quite different than what Calvinists mean by this phrase, because when they throw that phrase at me to support their views, I usually see my concept of God's sovereignty contradicting their view.

So... what is the Calvinist view of God's sovereignty, and where is it based in scripture?


texts: How does current Church of England polity compare with Richard Hooker's teaching?

texts:
Richard Hooker's Of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity (1593) is a foundational document for the theology and ecclesiology of the Church of England. In it, he defends (among other things) the Anglican understanding of the episcopacy, and the power of the church to set its own form of government, within certain doctrinal limits.

Since Hooker, the polity of the Church of England has changed in some important ways. Following the motto of "episcopally led, synodically governed", there are more synods than there used to be, and they include lay people as well as clergy. For example, the General Synod (since 1969; the Church Assembly from 1919 until then) is a legislative body including  separate houses of bishops, clergy and laity. There is a national executive body called the  Archbishops' Council (since 1999). Comparable structures exist at the diocesan level.

How does the current model of Church of England polity compare with the understanding of Hooker? In particular, what would he think about governance by regular synods with lay participation?


texts: What is the mainline Protestant understanding of "unceasing prayer"?

texts:
The Bible speaks about this concept of unceasing prayer, to give some examples that seem to talk about thus:
1 Thessalonians 5:16-18 (Rejoice always, pray without ceasing, in everything give thanks; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you.),

Other verses: Mark 13:32-37; Matthew 26:40-41;

I've heard Eastern-Orthodox priests as having  literal interpretation of this idea. Saying that we should follow the example of hermits, retreat in the wild and pray unceasingly.

I find that to be a bit extreme and wondered how do Lutherans, Reformed, Anglican and other mainline Protestants interpret these verses?


texts: Why does Satan collect souls that are subservient to him according to mainstream Christian scriptures?

texts:
Pardon my ignorance, I'm by birth a non-christian and just trying to learn...keeping up with the philosophy of this stack-exchange forum.
According to Christian, Gnostic/Book of Q or other Abrahamic scriptures,
is there any description on Why Satan collects souls that are made subservient to him later on? To what purpose does it serve? Is it to fight with the Second coming of Jesus or to fight ultimately with the Father/God? Do they remain subservient to him after they are dead? Is there are reference to the number of souls he needs for that purpose?


texts: What was the nature of the miracle experienced by Zacharias & Elizabeth?

texts:
Although the story about Zacharias & Elizabeth is great, the details are not clear. so that here are my stupid questions.

  But the angel said unto him, Fear not, Zacharias: for thy prayer is heard; and thy wife Elisabeth shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name John. (Luke 1:13, KJV)

When someone is called "barren" due to advanced age, does it mean that she is known to be menopausal?
Does the above telling by the angel suggest due physical efforts from Zacharias? or does it suggest that the pregnancy shall be by the Holy Spirit or something else?

The reason I am asking the above ones is to figure out what part of the story is considered a miracle. After the Annunciation, I imagine Mary talking about the Annunciation with Elizabeth enthusiastically because Elizabeth will understand Mary thanks to her own "impossible" experience. But unfortunately, I am not sure about the impossible part of the above story. Just can't imagine what Elizabeth experienced through.


texts: How are the 12 Anathemas of St. Cyril against Nestorius supposed to be read?

texts:
I'd never seen this before today when I was trying to answer a question on the natures of God, but St. Cyril's 12 Anathemas against Nestorius is pretty interesting, and as a piece of literature, I think it's pretty unique.
This is from the first of the Anathemas:

If anyone will not confess that the Emmanuel is very God, and that therefore the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God (Θεοτόκος), inasmuch as in the flesh she bore the Word of God made flesh [as it is written, "The Word was made flesh"] let him be anathema.
Nestorius: If anyone says that the Emmanuel is true God, and not rather God with us, that is, that he has united himself to a like nature with ours, which he assumed from the Virgin Mary, and dwelt in it; and if anyone calls Mary the mother of God the Word, and not rather mother of him who is Emmanuel; and if he maintains that God the Word has changed himself into the flesh, which he only assumed in order to make his Godhead visible, and to be found in form as a man, let him be anathema.

Is the first part St. Cyril and the second part Nestorius himself? Or is the whole thing St. Cyril and the part that starts with Nestorius: just St. Cyril writing what he believe are the problems with Nestorius's theology?


texts:
Is Jeremiah lying here? I know that Jeremiah had previously discussed not being sent back to Jonathan's house in Jeremiah 37:20, but that is not the conversation that the officials seem to be asking about in Jeremiah 38:24-27.

Jeremiah 38:24-27 (NET):

  Then Zedekiah told Jeremiah, “Do not let anyone know about the
  conversation we have had. If you do, you will die. 25 The officials
  may hear that I have talked with you. They may come to you and say,
  ‘Tell us what you said to the king and what the king said to you. Do
  not hide anything from us. If you do, we will kill you.’ 26 If they do
  this, tell them, ‘I was pleading with the king not to send me back to
  die in the dungeon of Jonathan’s house.’” 27 All the officials did
  indeed come and question Jeremiah. He told them exactly what the king
  had instructed him to say.


texts: Where did the idea that Catholics can have a break from their Lenten discipline on Sunday originate?

texts:
Maybe this is just a Wisconsin thing, if so, I'll delete this question as too localized, but is there a tradition in the universal Church that whatever you give up during Lent, you can do on Sundays?

If so, what is the rationale and has it ever been sanctioned by the Magisterium?


texts:
Open theism, in a nutshell, asserts that the future free choices of agents endowed with free will are unknowable, and therefore that God, though omniscient, is not capable of knowing in advance what we will freely choose in any particular future situation because future free choices are unknowable things, as I just said.
What is the biblical basis for Open Theism?


texts: How can the translators of the New World Translation say that their version is near what was originally written?

texts: The New World Translation of the Bible says much concerning the original Bible writings. As none are known to exist, how can the translators of the New World Bible, JWs, say that anything is anywhere near what was originally  written?


texts: Is there a standard text of the Litany of Loreto accepted for universal use by the Catholic Church?

texts: The Litany of Loreto recited in Southern India contains a prayer "Glory/pride of the  Order of Carmelites, pray for us" just before the last prayer "Queen of peace, pray for us". That prayer is not found in the English version. May be, the prayer was added to the Litany by the Carmelites who perhaps popularized the Rosary in Southern India. My question therefore is: Is there a standard text of the Litany of Loreto accepted for universal use  by the Catholic Church ?


texts:
1 Corinthians 13:13 (NIV)

  13 And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.

Sola-fide states that faith alone brings salvation. In this oft-quoted verse, Paul is clearly saying that love is greater than faith.

How can any attribute be greater than that which is necessary for salvation?


texts: Do Christian groups which think homosexuality is a sin think you can be a practicing homosexual and also a Christian?

texts:
Many Christian groups condemn homosexuality as a sin, pointing to specific passages in the Bible and traditional Christian views on sexuality and marriage.

How do these groups handle the question of whether a person can be both a practicing homosexual and also a Christian?

Are there any additional steps required? Do these groups teach that it would be sinful to continue practicing after one became a Christian?


texts: Does the taxpayer take any part in funding Christian Churches in Britain?

texts:
Are organisations such as the Church of England and the Catholic Church funded at all by the taxpayer?

It was something I thought of the other day but I thought it couldn't possibly be true as it would be so ridiculous, but the thoughts been getting at me and I've really been wanting to make sure.


texts: Why is the sin of the fallen angels unforgivable? (Catholic catechism)

texts:
Referring to the fall of Satan and his angels, according to the Catechism:

  393 It is the irrevocable character of their choice, and not a defect in the infinite divine mercy, that makes the angels' sin unforgivable. "There is no repentance for the angels after their fall, just as there is no repentance for men after death."

Can someone please explain further why the angels who turned away from God cannot be forgiven, unlike man? What does irrevocable character of their choice mean?


texts: Was God "unmerciful" to Ananias & Sapphira in Acts 5:1-10?

texts:
Mercy in the words of the Popes;

“God’s face is the face of a merciful Father who is always patient. Have you thought about God’s patience, the patience he has with each one of us? That is his mercy. … He waits for us; he does not tire of forgiving us if we are able to return to him with a contrite heart. ‘Great is God’s mercy,’ says the Psalm.” — Pope Francis, Angelus, March 17, 2013
“Mercy is in reality the core of the Gospel message; it is the name of God himself, the face with which he reveals himself in the Old Testament and fully in Jesus Christ, the Incarnation of creative and redemptive love.” — Pope Benedict XVI, Divine Mercy Sunday 2008
“And is not mercy love’s ‘second name’ (Dives in Misericordia, 7), understood in its deepest and most tender aspect, in its ability to take upon itself the burden of any need and, especially, in its immense capacity for forgiveness?” — Pope John Paul II, Divine Mercy Sunday 2000

http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/a-trove-of-divine-mercy-messages-from-the-popes
And Jesus teaches in the gospel of Matthew;

"Blessed are the merciful,for they will be shown mercy."(Matthew5:7)

But how come in the story of Ananias and Sapphira, God had immediately struck death upon both of them for speaking lies. And the worst part, Ananias & Sapphira perhaps have no idea that when they speak a lie to Peter they also had directly spoken a lie to the Holy Spirit;

Ananias and Sapphira
5 Now a man named Ananias, together with his wife Sapphira, also sold a piece of property. 2 With his wife’s full knowledge he kept back part of the money for himself, but brought the rest and put it at the apostles’ feet.
3 Then Peter said, “Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? 4 Didn’t it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn’t the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied just to human beings but to God.”
5 When Ananias heard this, he fell down and died. And great fear seized all who heard what had happened. 6 Then some young men came forward, wrapped up his body, and carried him out and buried him.
7 About three hours later his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. 8 Peter asked her, “Tell me, is this the price you and Ananias got for the land?”
“Yes,” she said, “that is the price.”
9 Peter said to her, “How could you conspire to test the Spirit of the Lord? Listen! The feet of the men who buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out also.”
10 At that moment she fell down at his feet and died. Then the young men came in and, finding her dead, carried her out and buried her beside her husband. 11 Great fear seized the whole church and all who heard about these events.

Was God "unmerciful" to Ananias & Sapphira in Acts5:1-10?
The church teaches that speaking a lie is a grave matter that can lead to mortal sin but the Church also teaches that one can avail pardon thru Sacraments of Confession.Why does this narration somehow implied God does not give a second chance for Ananias & Sapphira.
Three significant reflections of the Vatican II Popes on the Infinite Mercy of God to all mankind especially sinners plus Jesus very gospel speaks of God Mercy seems not in harmony with St.Lukes narration in Book of Acts.
The story of Anannias & Sapphira is commonly understood as a harsh judgement by God by never giving them a chance to repent is a complete contradiction to the teaching of Jesus and the reflections of the three Popes on the Divine Mercy.
Looking for answer that support the teaching of Jesus & Popes that Ananias & Sapphira received the Mercy of God.


texts: Why were the people of Exodus so stubborn?

texts:
It appears that the people of Israel during the time of Exodus were so stubborn. They rebelled  many times, grumbled against Moses and God over and over again. In spite of seeing all the miracles that God performed right before their very eyes, they were always questioning God. But the next generation were obedient under the leadership of Joshua.

What could be the reason of their stubbornness? Was it because they were illiterate? Was it because they were raised as slaves which made them hard and obstinate?


texts: What role does the Vatican play in marriage annulments?

texts: I've heard that every annulment must go through the Vatican in some capacity. Does every annulment get reviewed by some tribunal there or is it just a rubber stamp for the tribunal of the diocese from whence it came?


texts: Why Catholic Saints are said to be in heaven but not yet given their resurrected bodies?

texts:
In my understanding, the Saints are part of the Church Triumphant and in the Catholic Church's understanding of the Communion of Saints they help the Faithful on earth (Church Militant) to intercede for us  (Catechism 954-959).
When reading Fr. Armoth's book An Exorcist Explains the Demonic I came across this quote from Chapter 1 "The Victory of Christ over Sin and Death" under "The Consequences of Christ's Victory" (emphasis mine):

...
Here lies the victory over the second condemnation: man is made of soul and body and cannot live with the soul detached form the body.  Body and soul are destined to reunite at the end of time, that is, at the moment of the Last Judgment.  St. Thomas Aquinas -- in my view, the greatest Christian theologian -- affirms that, if in faith we believe in this unity between the soul and the body, even from a rational point of view (using only the power of reason), it is impossible to conceive them separated.  If we think of the saints -- who already enjoy paradise but whose bodies are still not united to their souls, since that will happen only at the end of time -- we can be certain that they already live the beatified state without the body and that they will reach their highest level of blessedness when body and soul are rejoined.  And through the mercy of God, the same can be said of us when we reach paradise.  Only when time is completed, when the soul and the body are rejoined, will there be a true fullness of life.  To say it in simple terms: for the moment, the saints have so much happiness that they can be content with only their souls.  The same can be said inversely for the damned.
...

Does it mean when the Catholic faithful pray to the Saints for their intercession, they are conscious but have not received their resurrected bodies?  If so, why do the Church said (Catechism paragraph 956-957) that the Saints are in heaven?


texts: How does Luke 11:5-13 fit as corollaries to the Lord's teachings on prayer [Luke 11:1-4]?

texts:
I find Luke's account of the Lord's prayer model for His disciples revealing:

God's familial relationship with us as He is introduced to us as OUR FATHER who is to be hallowed...
and secondly
God's providence as we are asked to petition Him about His kingdom, our daily bread, forgiveness and temptation.

How then does the story of the midnight traveler and the father-son illustration in Luke 11:11-13 serve as corollaries expanding on the content of the Lord's prayer?


texts: What do Protestants say was the source for the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary?

texts:
Not counting Martin Luther, who appears to have believed in the doctrine of the Perpetual Virginity of Mary, what do other Protestants think is the source and reason for Catholic adherence to the notion that the Blessed Virgin Mary was a virgin before giving birth, after giving birth and until the end of her earthly life?

My assumption, as a Catholic, is that once the reformation took off, and people were interpreting the Bible for themselves, that they looked at the brothers and sisters of Christ mentioned in Mark and threw out the doctrine.

They probably thought that it leads to

worshiping Mary.
is an extra burden put on them by the Church.
is borne out of ignorance of scripture.
is a made up tradition.

But all these are my assumptions, what are the protestant assumptions about the source and reason for the existence of the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary (the one that they absolutely do not adhere to).

By perpetual virginity, I mean mainly that she remained a virgin during and after giving birth to Jesus.

If the answer is purely biblically based is should at least acknowledge the fact that pre-reformation Christians were capable of reading and interpreting scripture.  I'd like to know what the reformers used as their arguments that most Protestants just take for granted nowadays. Unless, of course, they seriously weren't all that interested in convincing anyone who was not ignorant of scripture.


texts: What is the basis of the teaching that souls in purgatory can intercede for the living?

texts:
Point 6 in the Our Sunday Visitor Article "9 truths about purgatory" is that souls in purgatory can intercede for us:

The souls in purgatory can’t do anything for themselves, but the Church has long believed that they can do something for us: They can pray for us, helping obtain for us the graces we need to follow Christ more perfectly.

Two other questions related to their consciousness while in purgatory, given their status as disembodied souls:

Whether they can hear our petition for them to intercede for us, or whether the initiative to intercede for us can only come from them?
Whether they retain the memory of their loved ones on earth so they can intercede for us?

What is the Catholic teaching on this: from Scripture, Magisterium, and/or respected saints & theologians?


texts: Prior to the burning bush event - what was Moses's knowledge of God?

texts: We know that he went to live with the Egyptians from a young age to the age of more or less 40. He then lived in Midean for another 40. It seems that there was no contact with other Israelites. Or was there a role played by his father in law?


texts: What influence did Greco-Roman philosophy have on the doctrine of "creatio ex nihilo"?

texts:
Background

Frequently, Creationists and Theistic Evolutionists will appeal to and debate/discuss the idea of "Creatio Ex Nihilo" (Latin for "creation from nothing") with some critiquing the concept and claiming that Genesis does not assume creatio ex nihilo.

These critics often assert that the concept arose out of Greco-Roman philosophy. According to Wikipedia,

  Some scholars[which?] have argued that Plethon viewed Plato as positing ex nihilo creation in his Timaeus ...
  [and] ... The School of Chartres understood the creation account in Plato's Timaeus to refer to creatio ex nihilo.

And this appeared to be a topic of interest and discussion amongst the philosophers.

Question

What, exactly were the arguments for the philosophical concept of Creatio Ex Nihilo made by the classical philosophers and what relationship (if any) does this have to Plato's Theory of Forms? How might these arguments have influenced the modern Christian doctrine of Creatio Ex Nihilo, and what relationship do these ancient philsopical arguments have (if any) with it?


texts: Is Jesus using a rhetorical device when he says "turn the other cheek"?

texts:
I would like to know how to best interpret "turning the other cheek".

I think that it is reasonable to assume that Jesus is using a rhetorical tactic, in much the same way as he does when he says you should "hate" your mother and father, "let the dead bury the dead" and so on. Is this the most common interpretation? Is Jesus merely saying that we shouldn't seek revenge, or is he advocating pacifism?


texts: Are there non Catholic/Orthodox churches that use a Crucifix?

texts:
Are there churches outside of the Catholic and Orthodox traditions that use a crucifix as opposed to a cross?

I just watched a movie in which the main character is in a church that has a crucifix on the wall, but the service looked neither Catholic nor Orthodox. I have heard that perhaps Lutheran and Anglicans do this as well, but I don't know how to verify this.


texts: According to the LDS church, when was the priesthood lost?

texts:
I suppose this has no definitive answer, but maybe I am wrong, so:

From an LDS view, when was divine authority in the early church lost? From all I have read and heard so far about the early church, I would expect this to be a rather quick process starting right with the death of the early apostles. Is there any other teaching I am not aware of? Or is this a case of "we don't really know"?


texts: Is There an Exhaustive List of All/Most Common Venial and Mortal Sins?

texts: I would like to know if there is an exhaustive list of all common venial and mortal sins or, at least, most common venial and mortal sins. It could in a certain sense be useful. I know mortal sins are usually said to be tied to the 10 commandments one way or another, but I think it wouldn't be out of touch to have additional explicit lists.


texts: Why is rejection of the Trinity heresy, and not just wrong? (Protestant perspective)

texts:
There are plenty of instances where Christians systematically believe something false and directly contradicting biblical teachings, yet they are not deemed to be so errant as to disqualify them from salvation and from fellowship with the universal Church.

By way of example, predestination unto salvation is a mutually exclusive belief about the nature of God such that some Christians directly deny it and others directly confirm it, yet neither believes the other to be heretical.

Yet it is almost universally held in Trinitarian Christianity, that denial of the Trinity is a renunciation of Christianity and salvation.

Why? Why isn't it simply, wrong? Is it mainly due to the early historical discernment of the early councils, or is there a better, biblical argument for this case?

I'm coming from a Protestant perspective. Certainly, a Catholic perspective could get away with saying, "The Church has denounced it." For a Protestant, what does it take before something is properly known as a heresy?

relevant: What is "heresy"?


texts:
According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, the Devil's Advocate (Advocatus Diaboli) was:

  [a] popular title given to one of the most important officers of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, established in 1587, by Sixtus V, to deal juridically with processes of beatification and canonization.

Yet, toward the end, it says:

  The first formal mention of such an officer is found in the canonization of St. Lawrence Justinian under Leo X (1513-21).

I am struggling to find who was the first person to hold such title. Unfortunately, the above text does not provide a reference to where such first formal mention is to be found. I have searched in texts related to the life of Leo X (here and here) without success. I have not found a compilation of the life of St. Lawrence either (which might mention something about his canonisation).

Moving forward, I decided to look for any mention of such person in the life of Sixtus V (compilations also available in www.archive.org), also without success. According to this book, the first saint canonised by Sixtus V (which might have used the services of an Advocatus Diaboli) was Didacus of Alcala. A book about the life of this saint (available here) does not mention much about it, except:

  and quietly [Didacus] passed to his eternal reward.
  It was November 12, 1463. King Philip II, of Spain, joined the
  people in soliciting the canonization of the servant of God. Rome
  heeded the petition and the usual rigid examination into the life of
  the friar began. [...] Finally, unmistakable proof having been presented that through the
  intercession of Venerable Didacus at least two miracles, that is works
  such as only God can effect, had been wrought, Pope Sixtus V, in
  1588, placed his name in the catalogue of saints.

Not very helpful either.

PS: the Advocatus Diaboli title was later changed to that of Promotor Fidei.


texts: Reward in Heaven? What is it? (Catholic)

texts:
Catholic Church teaches that we will be rewarded differently in heaven based on our merit (i.e. based on the amount of good deeds that we have freely done during our earthy life; for example, see this article from International Catholic University).

My question is, what exactly is this "heavenly reward"? I have heard some saying that the heavenly reward is our heavenly capacity for love (with greater the reward implies having a greater heavenly capacity for love), but I cannot really find a source of this claim.

What exactly will our "heavenly reward" be?

Please answer according to Catholic understandings.


texts:
Cynicism is a school of Greek philosophy. It taught that

  the purpose of life was to live in virtue, in agreement with nature. As reasoning creatures, people could gain happiness by rigorous training and by living in a way which was natural for humans, rejecting all conventional desires for wealth, power, sex, and fame. Instead, they were to lead a simple life free from all possessions. (Wikipedia)

Some scholars have suggested that Jesus shows signs of being influenced by Cynicism, such as Burton L. Mack and John Dominic Crossan of the Jesus Seminar. They say that Jesus was more heavily influenced by Greek ideas than Jewish prophetic traditions. What evidence is there that Jesus was influenced by Cynicism and taught in accordance with it?

Some scholars have also stated that Q, the hypothesised shared source of Matthew and Luke, has strong similarities with Cynicism. What in Q has been identified as Cynic teaching?


texts: What is the difference between Demon and Devil?

texts:
Both terms, demon and devil, are used in various Bible passages.

According to Catholic Encylopedia:

  ... the chief of the demons is called the devil.

Is that true? Because the term devil is used with plural form (devils) in several Bible passages (e.g.: Luke 9: 1, Mark 3: 15 etc.)
Is there any exact difference between demon and devil?
What does Christian demonology say about this?


texts:
I know Jesus is not a liar, but an incident in the New Testament has puzzled me for a long time. Jesus was asked by his disciples if he was going to go to a feast and he said he wasn't, but, later he went:

You go up to the feast. I am not going up to this feast, for my time has not yet fully come. (John 7:8, ESV)
But after his brothers had gone up to the feast, then he also went up, not publicly but in private. (7:10)

Could someone explain this contradiction?


texts:
They were only engaged when Mary was concieved by the Holy Spirit, correct?

They would have had to marry before Jesus' birth, correct? In order for him not to be considered a bastard born out of wedlock?


texts: On the body of Satan and Holy Ghost and angels according to Mormons

texts:
This is kind of a follow-up question to my other question about the kind of bodies people will have in heaven, according to Mormons.

From the answers it seems that nobody in heaven has a spirit body.

The questions I would like to ask:

Do Mormons believe that Satan also has only a physical body?
Is there a doctrinal explanation as to why the person "Holy Ghost"
does not have a body?
According to Mormons, if no one in heaven has a physical body, where
does the concept of spirit beings communicating information between
God and humans originate?


texts: How can we be sure of the authenticity of the bible

texts: How can we be sure the bible we are reading today is what the authors wrote down and its not corrupted? And with the different bibles etc niv, catholic bible, king james bible how do i know which one is the most authentic?


texts: Evidence that Peter alone was made a Bishop by Christ?

texts:
This got my attention. Although I don't currently agree with it, it's an intriguing question which I am open to accept if sufficient evidence is found. Now when I read classical works on the Papacy (or general catholic works on Ecclesiology), I'm starting to see sort of how St. Robert Bellarmine came to that conclusion. Some of the "evidence" I've found so far are Saurez's Defensio Fidei Catholicae (taken as a whole) and Sermons by St's. Gregory the Great and Leo the Great.

For example,

  "When the Passion of the Lord was drawing near, an event
  that was going to shake the constancy of his disciples, he said:
  'Simon, Simon. Behold, Satan has obtained his request to sift
  you (all) like wheat. I, however, have begged for you that your
  faith not fail. Once you have converted, strengthen your brethren,
  lest you (all) enter into temptation.' Each apostle encountered
  the same danger through temptation from fear. All
  equally needed the help of divine protection, since the devil
  wanted to harass them all and to crush them all. Still, the Lord
  took special care of Peter and prayed especially for Peter. It
  was as if the condition of the others would be more secure if
  the mind of their leader were not overcome.
  In Peter, therefore, the fortitude of all is reinforced, for the
  aid of divine grace is ordered in such a way that the firmness
  given to Peter through Christ is conferred upon the apostles
  through Peter."" (Tractatus IV, Pars 3, Sancti Leonis Magni).

Now, I'm not arguing that that quote alone proves the thesis but combined with other arguments in context may give some weight. Does anyone have any evidence for St. Robert Bellarmine's claim? Any arguments against it?


texts: Does Acts 20:33-34 suggest that a church should not have a paid ministry?

texts:
33 I have coveted no man’s silver, or gold, or apparel.

34 Yea, ye yourselves know, that these hands have ministered unto my necessities, and to them that were with me.


texts:
According to the Ethiopian and Eritrean Churches, the Book of Enoch was written by Enoch himself around the year 3300 BC.  I have seen statements like, "outside of Ethiopia, no one has defended this position."  Actually, I have not found any attempt to defend it even in Ethiopia.  Assuming someone has actually made a serious attempt to defend the date & authorship, I would like to read it.  Can anyone outline a defense of church's traditional position, or point me to one?

To be clear, I am not interested in the reasons this date is unlikely (which I already know).


texts: What is the biblical basis for the personhood of the Holy Spirit?

texts: According to Trinitarian theology, the Holy Trinity consists of three persons (τρεῖς ὑποστάσεις), the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, who share the same essence/nature (ὁμοούσιος). What is the biblical basis for the personhood of the Holy Spirit (i.e., that the Holy Spirit is a "person")?