Matthew 24:34

[Nihil Obstat]

3 hours ago, veritasluxmea said:

 I don't mean to imply Elisha did it out of anger or revenge, although the commentary isn't infallible teaching. I agree it's possible he thought he was doing the right thing. What his motives were doesn't matter as much as what he did 

Many Church teachings are not raised to the level of infallibility. The Challoner commentary in all likelihood rises to the level of ordinary Magisterium. And much of it corresponds with sacred Tradition. It is a solid commentary and worthy of deference.

Edited December 29, 2015 by Nihil Obstat

[Guest]

22 hours ago, MarysLittleFlower said:

I'm sorry I don't understand why  this is posted here? 

Why not? It relates to the subject. Catholic Answers is one of my favorite sites because of post like the one I quoted. They allow this stuff to be talked about IN DETAIL and don't censor everything. So if it was up to you MLF only stuff that supports your view could be posted? No thanks. For the record I think Phatmass does a great job at letting things get discussed. I just read a recent thread (2015) on Catholic Answers about Hitler and it had tons of pics with Him posing with Clergy and things of that nature. I'm glad the thread was allowed and it was very eye opening. The Catholics in the thread did a good job defending the Church and it was a roller coaster of emotions for me with each post in the debate to say the least. Although I don't think the thread or all the pictures should of been deleted because it makes people uncomfortable or might challenge someones faith. When you claim that your Religion is the ultimate truth and anyone who doesn't submit to it is going to hell for all of eternity then expect people (believers and unbelievers alike) to discuss things when they don't appear to make sense or there's what seems to be glaring contradictions. The answer isn't just ignore it and don't talk about it. The only person that benefits is the person who is 100 % convinced their belief is the truth. A lot of times this persons only response to objections is "oh well this is how it it is accept it or burn in hell forever for eternity." Overblown religious fundamentalism "I'm right there's no possibility I could be wrong you're going to hell if you don't accept I'm right" is a disease. Whoever it's coming from and whatever religion they're representing. An update on me through prayer and talking with God this particular issue is resolved for me. I still have the questions/doubts but more then that I have faith/trust and love for a Higher Power that I know is here with me. That Higher Power is Jesus and I feel His presence daily and I'm thankful for it. I'm glad He's a big enough God to let me express doubt and not disown me for it. I'm thankful He gave me a brain to think with and isn't angered when I use it.

Edited December 30, 2015 by Guest

[Guest]

On 12/28/2015 2:39:25, Seven77 said:

These things can be answered...  and there are very good answers out there--- all you have to do is use Google, being sure to fiddler out skeptical websites and visiting reliable ones, especially if they are Catholic. I'm pretty sure some of them have already been answered here on PM too. 

 Just to take one example, the incident about Elisha and the bears has a very good explanation here...  I looked it up earlier:

( his book sounds like its definitely worth checking out)

My understanding has always been that the bear incident was used as a cautionary tale-- don't mock God because there will be consequences. And, just because bears came out and mauled those "kids"  doesn't mean that God caused it to happen-- he merely allowed it to happen and it was attributed to him. Also, it can't be stressed enough, a lot of events  (historical and not so historical-- remember that the Old Testament is a collection of theological--thus inspired--books that span multiple genres) that occurred during Old Testament times took place for the sake of teaching “infants,"  and the New Testament  (historical) events  are intended to mature those infants, which means that personal moral responsibility is increased.

 St. Augustine once said that he wouldn't put stock in the Bible unless he was moved by the authority of the Catholic Church to do so. It's important to read it in the way it was intended to be read and interpreted and carried out.

(A long time ago, I was also seriously under the impression that the Bible is full of contradictions and cannot be trusted but thankfully God exposed me to reliable teachers like Scott Hahn, etc. And now thanks to God for people like Bishop Barron)

Great post. Really enjoyed the video. Good stuff. The book is probably great. Also Bishop Barron is awe some. It's to bad the best Catholics of all time like Voris bash him constantly and say he's a heretic.

Edited December 30, 2015 by Guest

[KnightofChrist]

1 hour ago, Josh said:

Why not? It relates to the subject. Catholic Answers is one of my favorite sites because of post like the one I quoted. They allow this stuff to be talked about IN DETAIL and don't censor everything. So if it was up to you MLF only stuff that supports your view could be posted? No thanks. For the record I think Phatmass does a great job at letting things get discussed.

I don't think MLF wanted to censor your post, but wondered what it had to do with Matthew 24:34. Also had she wanted it censored why on earth would she then precede to respond to it? 

But what is the subject, is it Matthew 24:34 as it seemed to be originally, to be or is the much more wide, vast, broader, expansive and shotgun effect topic of 'difficult teachings and moments recorded in the Bible?' It really is quite difficult to discuss the latter. Imagine, you're a history teacher and I'm your student and the subject is "conflicts and tense moments in world history." First I ask you about the Cuban Missile Crisis, as you're answering that I then jump to the assassination of Caesar, then the American Indian War, then Tiananmen Square, then the Ararat Rebellion and so on. Do you see how I may make you're brain go boom? Can you see how you've already jumped from Matthew 24:34, to the Flood, Witches, homosexuals, Elisha, discrepancies in the family tree of Jesus, Saint Paul, slavery, head covering, the stupidity of Christianity, the wars of King Saul and King David, the infidelity of King Solomon, infallibility of the Bible, Hitler and the Clergy, religious fundamentalism, Michael Voris and I'm sure there are topics I missed.  

 

Edited December 30, 2015 by KnightofChrist

[MarysLittleFlower]

My issue with the post from CA was that it wasn't like a question that was phrased, but a very emotional response coming from a person who is clearly really struggling. If a lurker is reading people asking questions, that won't necessarily affect their faith because it's fine to ask questions and to seek understanding of the faith. But the emotional doubtful tone of the post could affect more sensitive readers and make then feel doubts even if intellectually they don't struggle with this topic. As Knight said it was also a very general topic and an illustration of someone's doubt vs specific questions. I understand why you posted it Josh - I just saw the persons post being a type of complaint almost - not specific questions, but almost like saying "see how impossible it is to believe this!". I wasn't sure if the poster is seeking to be convinced or to convince others! It was almost an argument. But maybe it just came from some pain and the person is seeking answers, and was just feeling emotional over it all. I'll assume that. Anyway it was more the tone that concerned me not asking questions, which I have no issue with

[Guest]

43 minutes ago, MarysLittleFlower said:

My issue with the post from CA was that it wasn't like a question that was phrased, but a very emotional response coming from a person who is clearly really struggling. 

I didn't take that from "Roy's" post at all. Granted I read the entire thread but even just reading that single post  I don't take agree with your conclusion. I don't see how it's emotional? He's just listing arguments (dare I say convincing arguments?) as to why he views things the way he does. Can you point out what you find emotional about it? I also don't see how you think he's "clearly really struggling" I just see a guy who says he doesn't think the Bible is perfect. Do I agree with him? At this very moment in time I will go with no. Because I can see how everything can come together to show the whole picture through Christ. 5 days ago I would say I do agree with Roy because he has good points and these points aren't far fetched. They're pretty obvious and easy to grasp. I fail to see how your assessment of his emotional reply/supposed struggle is accurate. I don't see it. 

Edited December 30, 2015 by Guest

[MarysLittleFlower]

I think he is struggling because he is having difficulty (for a reason unknown to me) to believe a doctrine of the Church about infallibility of Scripture.

The arguments aren't as convincing as they might seem with researching the Church interpretation in more detail..  For me personally I am not a scholar but I just try to trust God. Without trust a person can lose any understanding they had, I am saying this because it has happened to me and only God's grace keeps me here. I think the Church teaching is entirely reasonable but I don't trust my own mind completely because I've made many mistakes.

I don't know if he was upset while writing this or not, but it just sounded that way to me, maybe it wasn't like that for him though. 

I really believe in seeking understanding together with trust and virtue. Some things are above reason though they are not unreasonable. Other things we can understand through reason and natural law. 

Edited December 30, 2015 by MarysLittleFlower

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, MarysLittleFlower said:

For me personally I am not a scholar but I just try to trust God. Without trust a person can lose any understanding they had, 

Agreed

[KnightofChrist]

St. Chrysostom: Homilies on the Gospel of Saint Matthew

“Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled!”²⁸¹¹ All these things. What things? I pray thee. Those about Jerusalem, those about the wars, about the famines, about the pestilences, about the earthquakes, about the false Christs, about the false prophets, about the sowing of the gospel everywhere, the seditions, the tumults, all the other things, which we said were to occur until His coming. How then, one may ask, did He say, “This generation?” Speaking not of the generation then living, but of that of the believers. For He is wont to distinguish a generation not by times only, 445 but also by the mode of religious service, and practice; as when He saith, “This is the generation of them that seek the Lord.”²⁸¹²

For what He said above, “All these must come to pass,”²⁸¹³and again, “the gospel shall be preached,”²⁸¹⁴this He declares here also, saying, All these things shall surely come to pass, and the generation of the faithful shall remain, cut off by none of the things that have been mentioned. For both Jerusalem shall perish, and the more part of the Jews shall be destroyed, but over this generation shall nothing prevail, not famine, not pestilence, not earthquake, nor the tumults of wars, not false Christs, not false prophets, not deceivers, not traitors, not those that cause to offend, not the false brethren, nor any other such like temptation whatever.