Are those of the Talmudic religion

[Era Might]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Apr 16 2006, 05:09 PM']quote another council than Vatican II. its far from Convincing.
[right][snapback]949275[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

That's your problem when you accept the teaching of the Church because it's "convincing" and not because it is the teaching of the Church.

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

[quote name='Era Might' date='Apr 16 2006, 03:12 PM']That's your problem when you accept the teaching of the Church because it's "convincing" and not because it is the teaching of the Church.
[right][snapback]949279[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


how would a council called 40 years prove the church has "The Church has already rejected any proposition that the Jewish people are guilty for the sins of their forefathers,"?

especially when the council defined NO dogma.

[Era Might]

EENS,

I'm not gonna argue with you. I suggest you go pray the litany of humility and spend a few months reading the documents of the Second Vatican Council.

Have a good Easter.

Edited April 16, 2006 by Era Might

[Guest JeffCR07]

Talmudic Judaism as a religion could not possibly be guilty of the crucifixion of Christ. The Talmud is a collection of the Mishna, the Tosefta, and the Gemara: none of which existed at the time of Christ. The Mishna, the earliest of the three, was created during the Tannaitic Period from 135-200 AD.

People have it in their heads that there was one set "Judaism" during the Second Temple Period, and that it was modern Rabbinic Judaism. This is flat out wrong. Judaism existed in the form of multiple sects, no single one of which could be considered "maintstream" by todays standards.

Were the individual Jews who crucified Jesus guilty? Yes. Is every sinner also guilty? Yes. Is Talmudic Judaism guilty? No, and to assert such is not only illogical, but also reflects poorly on the intellectual character of Catholics.

Your Brother In Christ,

Jeff

[qfnol31]

StThomasMore, You haven't given me any proof that I should believe they're guilty of Deicide. You have to give an argument 'cause I'm skeptical about anything told to me following Vatic an II from any side.

Speaking of which...anyone else here ever want to commit geocide?

[dspen2005]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Apr 16 2006, 03:15 PM']how would a council called 40 years prove the church has "The Church has already rejected any proposition that the Jewish people are guilty for the sins of their forefathers,"?

especially when the council defined NO dogma.
[right][snapback]949285[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

have you ever actually READ the VII documents, or are you simply relying upon the 'interpretations' of the documents. it seems to me that this is the case for you... you claim to be a faithful Catholic, but you aren't doing much to prove that point.

[qfnol31]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Apr 16 2006, 03:15 PM']how would a council called 40 years [ago?] prove the church has "The Church has already rejected any proposition that the Jewish people are guilty for the sins of their forefathers,"?

especially when the council defined NO dogma.
[right][snapback]949285[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Just because it didn't define dogma doesn't mean that there wasn't anything infallible. I don't have to define dogma to say the Church has never given an official opinion on Limbus Infantium...It seems the Church can do the same...The Magisterium hopefully knows Her better than we and can better say such things.

Also, just because of tons of abuses following and maybe confusing language, I don't think you could say that it was innaccurate in its assessment. As I just said, the Magisterium probably has a better idea of what was actually taught.

Finally, the Church could not have called blame down upon the Jews in the way it seems to be here because that's not a part of the Church's duty to decide. The Church cannot judge such culpability as it has been decided.

[Snarf]

I just find it interesting that nobody has yet pointed out that "deicide" is an intrinsic impossibility. Remember what Christ told Pilate, "You would have no power over me were it not given you from above"? The human authorities, whether you levy the blame foremost on the Sanhedrin or the Romans, had only the power to undergo a human execution. However, it was at all times Christ's option to save Himself from any fate, yet He chose not to out of love for human kind. Nobody is capable of "killing" God. You can nail Him to a tree and watch Him die, but He will have all the power in the world to undo this at all times.

[Resurrexi]

I can see why snarf has the "I dont rep..." sign under his name

[avemaria40]

We're all guilty. It was everyone's sins that put Our Lord on the Cross.

[Cam42]

[quote name='StThomasMore' date='Apr 16 2006, 01:11 PM']I believe the modern people of the Talmudic/ modern Jewish religion are guilty of Deicide. Do you?
[right][snapback]949030[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

We've been through this before STM. It is inappropriate to speak against the Jewish people in this manner. You need to back up your position, with scholarly proof.

[Theoketos]

I <3 Cam.

[Seven77]

closed due to offensive generalization of the Chosen People as a whole.