| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 5/24 |
| 2004/1/23-24 [Reference/Religion] UID:11914 Activity:high |
1/23 I'm not trolling, I'm really curious:
What is the reason given by Christians that human life or a soul or
whatever happens at conception, and not later, such as late brain
development or birth? It's sure not in the bible...
\_ Jeremiah 1:5. "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,
before you were born I set you apart"
\_ That kind of implies you have a soul before you're even concieved.
\_ That's why the Church says condoms are bad?
\_ too complicated to explain here on the motd. But that's
not the reason.
\_ That's why onanism is a sin.
\_ Is it a sin if, instead of tossing your sperm on the ground
to die in cold, dry misery, you give it a nice, warm home
in someone's stomach?
\_ But sperm die on their own anyway. And the sin of Onan was
that he was denying his brother an 'heir' out of spite.
\_ That's how I see it too, but many have interpreted it
as the act of wasting your seed outside a vagina.
\_ And Mormons believe that the soul preexists our physical
existence. When I've talked with traditional Christians about
interpretation of that passage, they respond by saying that it
just means that since God knows everything, including the
future, he could know a future-existing person before he was
born. -emarkp
\_ So you exist before you're concieved, and if a baby is
concieved, it's God's will. And if they're not concieved
that's also God's will, but if they're concieved but then
aborted, it *wasn't* God's will? That reminds me of how
parents will say stuff like "My son is so smart" and then
turn around and say "Look what your son did!"
\_ Hey, I'm just reporting what people have told me. -emarkp
\_ From God's perspective, God knows what happens.
But from our human perspective, we still have
free will. It's still our choice. God doesn't
force us to choose good or evil. It's free will.
\_ Pre-ordained free-will. Cool paradox.
\_ Yeah, free will is so pesky..
\_ Depending on your philosophical axioms, free will may or
\_ Depending on your philisophical axioms, free will may or
may not be contravened by foreknowledge. -emarkp
\_ Let's send a rover to the planet Kolob!
\_ Kolob is a star, not a planet. Get better sources.
-emarkp
\_ Sorry, planet near the star Kolob.
\_ We don't know if there are any planets near the
star Kolob. -emarkp
\_ I'll stop reading Bruce McConkie then.
\_ Well, keep in mind he presents his opinion as
his opinion. However, on rereading, you can
read Kolob to be a planet or a star. My bad.
star Kolob. -emarkp
\_ I'll stop reading Bruce McConkie then.
-emarkp
\_ what's your definition of a traditional Christian?
\_ Typically I mean non-Restorationist Christians.
Catholics and Protestants mostly. I haven't had much
interaction with Orthodox faiths. Granted, I don't have
-emarkp
a full survey of those faiths, but have discussed this
point with members of many of them. -emarkp
point with members of many of them. -emarkp
\_ http://tinyurl.com/2tb77
\_ Either way, if it has a soul, souls can't die. So no problem. "Go
directly to heaven. Do not pass go, do not collect $200."
\_ but they haven't been baptized yet, so maybe they won't
go to heaven.
\_ that God, he's a vengeful one. he'll throw you out on a
technicality.
\_ not necessarily. we can't say for sure what he'll do.
but why risk the salvation of souls?
\_ I thought only a hundred odd thousand souls were
getting into heaven. And they've already been chosen,
since god is all-present and fore-knowing. And that
\_ something I heard from some jehovah's witnesses.
I'm paraphrasing... and he's pretty ironic, so
who knows what he actually believes.
go to heaven.
\_ that God, he's a vengeful one. he'll throw you out on a
technicality.
\_ not necessarily. we can't say for sure what he'll do.
but why risk the salvation of souls?
Prince is one of them.
Damn. I'm going to be stuck burning in hell and he's
going to be up in heaven rocking out all the ladies.
\_ Why do you think that Christianity
(a minority religion on this planet)
is the right bet?
\_ did it come from one of his songs or is that
one of his "beliefs"?
\_ something I heard from some jehovah's witnesses.
I'm paraphrasing... and he's pretty ironic, so
who knows what he actually believes.
\_ Yeah, for all we know you're damned unless you die
\_ Yeah, for all we know you're damned unless you die
wearing a green top hat. I always wear one.
wearing a green top hat. I always wear one.
\_ believe what you want, but we'll all know the
\_ http://www.op.org/steinkerchner/fenwick/cccbaptism.html
\_ believe what you want, but we'll all know the
answers when we die, and we'll have all eternity
to contemplate what we could have done differently
\_ If they're Catholic, they get to wait in Limbo.
\_ wait for what?
answers when we die, and we'll have all eternity
to contemplate what we could have done differently
\_ only if there is an eternal afterlife.
\_ are you a gambling man/woman?
Do you want to bet on your eternity?
\_ Why do you think that Christianity
(a minority religion on this planet)
is the right bet?
\_ if "not taking the chance" is the core
of your faith and beliefs then it
seems unlikely that you're going
anyplace other than Hell. I suspect
"pragmatic faith" is not the route
to Heaven.
\_ If they're Catholic, they get to wait in Limbo.
\_ wait for what?
\_ until their souls are cleansed and they can then go
to Heaven.
\_ http://www.op.org/steinkerchner/fenwick/cccbaptism.html
\_ just wait. nothing in particular.
\_ wait for all eternity then.
\_ Pretty much:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09256a.htm
\_ Faith and logic/reason. |
| 5/24 |
|
| tinyurl.com/2tb77 -> groups.msn.com/catholicandprolife/thebibleandtheunbornchild.msnw The image of God Mankind is unique in all of creation in being made in Gods image. Genesis 1:26-27 and 5:1-2 This is true of the entire human species and of every member of it without exception, and including unborn children. The sanctity that Gods image bestows on each human being is affirmed by the prohibition on taking human life in Genesis 9:6 . This prohibition became codified as the sixth commandment Exodus 20:13. This is the fundamental pro-life position: that every human life is sacred. Unborn children in the bible Because they too are made in Gods image, unborn children are regarded in the Bible as having the same dignity as other human beings. Their formation and growth are said to be in the hands of God Job 10:8-11 and it is possible for them to have a personal relationship with their Creator Psalm 139:13-16 . Jeremiah and Paul both received their calling from God before birth Jeremiah 1:5 and Galatians 1:15 , as did the servant in Isaiah Isaiah 49:1-5. Samson was bound by vows as an unborn child Judges 13:7 and John the Baptist was filled by the Holy Spirit Luke 1:15 and displayed spiritual discernment Luke 1:41-44 literally from the womb. As Christians, we are to bear one anothers burdens Galatians 6:2 and may look forward to the lifting of all our disabilities Isaiah 35:5-6. Love in action The parable of the good Samaritan Luke 10:29-37 bids us extend the limit of the neighbours we love beyond where it presently stops. Jesus announced his ministry as good news for the suffering Luke 4:18-19 and his followers must do the same. There can be no pretending that what is happening to unborn children is in some way for the good Isaiah 5:20, or pleading ignorance as an excuse for inaction Proverbs 24:11-12. Two difficult passages Ecclesiastes 11:5 The Hebrew word is the same for spirit and wind . If spirit is intended, the passage may be saying that the way of the spirit and the growth of the bones are both mysteries, or that the relationship between spirit and bones is a mystery. Exodus 21:22-25 This passage deals with an accidental occurrence, not procured abortion. Even if the mother is unharmed, the accidental killing of the baby incurs a fine. Because it is not a life for a life, this does not imply that the baby is not considered human, any more than the slave incidents in verses 20 and 21 imply that the slave is not human. This is more likely because the word used nearly always describes a live birth, and the term used for the child delivered is always used of someone having a recognisable human form. In this case, any harm to either child or mother must be met by an equal punishment including a life for a life, and there is a fine even if neither suffers any harm at all. In the case of a deliberate abortion, presumably the normal provisions for murder would apply. Sometimes reference is made to the Septuagint version of this passage. This imposes a fine if the baby is imperfectly formed, but life for life if it is perfectly formed. The Septuagint is an ancient Greek translation of the Old Testament and this passage in it appears to reflect more the influence of Greek medical theory than faithfulness to the original Hebrew text. Proverbs 24:11-12 GODS TRUTH ABOUT ABORTION In the Bible, Exodus 20:13, God gave mankind the Commandment, YOU SHALL NOT KILL. This means that we are not kill the unborn child, the baby that is already born, the young child, the teenager, the middle- aged and the elderly. In the Bible, life is considered to be sacred from the moment of conception up through a persons physical death and beyond into eternal life in Heaven. In Luke 1:44, the word brephos is used to denote the unborn baby, As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy. In Luke 2:12, 16, this same Greek word is used to denote the baby Jesus after His birth. In Luke 18:15 the Greek word brephos is used to denote an infant or small child. In all these passages we see that the Bible makes no distinction between born and unborn children. The unborn child is looked at as being just as human and special as the child that is already born. Scripture tells us that God creates the baby, forms the baby in the mothers womb and tenderly watches over the baby while the baby is maturing. |
| www.op.org/steinkerchner/fenwick/cccbaptism.html Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus tenderness toward children which caused him to say: Let the children come to me, do not hinder them,63 allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Churchs call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism. |
| www.newadvent.org/cathen/09256a.htm Whatever name may be used in apocryphal Jewish literature to designate the abode of the departed just, the implication generally is that their condition is one of happiness, that it is temporary, and that it is to be replaced by a condition of final and permanent bliss when the Messianic Kingdom is established. In the New Testament, Christ refers by various names and figures to the place or state which Catholic tradition has agreed to call the limbus patrum. Peter still more explicitly teaches that being put to death indeed, in the flesh, but enlivened in the spirit, Christ went and preached to those souls that were in prison, which had been some time incredulous, when they waited for the patience of God in the days of Noah I Pet 3:18-20. It is principally on the strength of these Scriptural texts, harmonized with the general doctrine of the Fall and Redemption of mankind, that Catholic tradition has defended the existence of the limbus patrum as a temporary state or place of happiness distinct from Purgatory . Actual possession of the beatific vision was postponed, even for those already purified from sin, until the Redemption should have been historically completed by Christs visible ascendancy into Heaven. And this, substantially, is all that Catholic tradition teaches regarding the limbus patrum. LIMBUS INFANTIUM The New Testament contains no definite statement of a positive kind regarding the lot of those who die in original sin without being burdened with grievous personal guilt. But, by insisting on the absolute necessity of being born again of water and the Holy Ghost John 3:5 for entry into the kingdom of Heaven see Baptism, subtitle Necessity of Baptism , Christ clearly enough implies that men are born into this world in a state of sin, and St. The question therefore arises as to what, in the absence of a clear positive revelation on the subject, we ought in conformity with Catholic principles to believe regarding the eternal lot of such persons. Now it may confidently be said that, as the result of centuries of speculation on the subject, we ought to believe that these souls enjoy and will eternally enjoy a state of perfect natural happiness; The best way of justifying the above statement is to give a brief sketch of the history of Catholic opinion on the subject. We shall try to do so by selecting the particular and pertinent facts from the general history of Catholic speculation regarding the Fall and original sin, but it is only right to observe that a fairly full knowledge of this general history is required for a proper appreciation of these facts. Pre-Augustinian Tradition There is no evidence to prove that any Greek or Latin Father before St. Augustine ever taught that original sin of itself involved any severer penalty after death than exclusion from the beatific vision, and this, by the Greek Fathers at least, was always regarded as being strictly supernatural. Explicit references to the subject are rare, but for the Greek Fathers generally the statement of St. Gregory of Nazianzus may be taken as representative: It will happen, I believe . Thus in De libero arbitrio III, written several years before the Pelagian controversy, discussing the fate of unbaptized infants after death, he writes: It is superfluous to inquire about the merits of one who has not any merits. For one need not hesitate to hold that life may be neutral as between good conduct and sin, and that as between reward and punishment there may be a neutral sentence of the judge. Augustine and the African Fathers believed that unbaptized infants share in the common positive misery of the damned, and the very most that St. Augustine concedes is that their punishment is the mildest of all, so mild indeed that one may not say that for them non-existence would be preferable to existence in such a state De peccat. II, xxxiii, 5, and it acquired a certain degree of official authority from the letter of Innocent III to the Archbishop of Arles, which soon found its way into the Corpus Juris. Pope Innocents teaching is to the effect that those dying with only original sin on their souls will suffer no other pain, whether from material fire or from the worm of conscience, except the pain of being deprived forever of the vision of God Corp. Thomas view the limbus infantium is not a mere negative state of immunity from suffering and sorrow, but a state of positive happiness in which the soul is united to God by a knowledge and love of him proportionate to natures capacity. Thomas was received in the schools, almost without opposition, down to the Reformation period. The very few theologians who, with Gregory of Rimini , stood out for the severe Augustinian view, were commonly designated by the opprobrious name of tortores infantium . Some writers, like Savonarola De triumbpho crucis , III, 9 and Catharinus De statu parvulorum sine bapt. Peter speaks II Peter 3:13 will be their happy dwelling place for eternity. At the Reformation, Protestants generally, but more especially the Calvinists , in reviving Augustinian teaching, added to its original harshness, and the Jansenists followed on the same lines. This reacted in two ways on Catholic opinion, first by compelling attention to the true historical situation, which the Scholastics had understood very imperfectly, and second by stimulating an all-round opposition to Augustinian severity regarding the effects of original sin; Augustine or vainly try to reconcile the two, while the other remained faithful to the Greek Fathers and St. The latter party, after a fairly prolonged struggle, has certainly the balance of success on its side. As students of history, they felt bound to admit that, in excluding unbaptized children from any place or state even of natural happiness and condemning them to the fire of Hell , St. Augustine, the Council of Carthage, and later African Fathers, like Fulgentius De fide ad Petrum , 27, intended to teach no mere private opinion, but a doctrine of Catholic Faith; Moreover, there was the teaching of the Council of Florence, that the souls of those dying in actual mortal sin or in original sin alone go down at once mox into Hell , to be punished, however, with widely different penalties. It is clear that Bellarmine found the situation embarrassing, being unwilling, as he was, to admit that St. Augustine and other Fathers considered to be de fide , and what the Council of Florence seemed to have taught definitively. Hence he names Catharinus and some others as revivers of the Pelagian error, as though their teaching differed in substance from the general teaching of the School, and tries in a milder way to refute what he concedes to be the view of St. Petavius, on the other hand, did not try to explain away the obvious meaning of St. Augustine and his followers, but, in conformity with that teaching, condemned unbaptized children to the sensible pains of Hell , maintaining also that this was a doctrine of the Council of Florence. Neither of these theologians, however, succeeded in winning a large following or in turning the current of Catholic opinion from the channel into which St. Only professed Augustinians like Noris and Berti, or out-and-out Jansenists like the Bishop of Pistoia, whose famous diocesan synod furnished eighty-five propositions for condemnation by Pius VI 1794, supported the harsh teaching of Petavius. The twenty-sixth of these propositions repudiated as a Pelagian fable the existence of the place usually called the childrens limbo in which the souls of those dying in original sin are punished by the pain of loss without any pain of fire; This condemnation was practically the death-knell of extreme Augustinianism, while the mitigate Augustinianism of Bellarmine and Bossuet had already been rejected by the bulk of Catholic theologians. Suarez, for example, ignoring Bellarmines protest, continued to teach what Catharinus had taught - that unbaptized children will not only enjoy perfect natural happiness, but that they will rise with immortal bodies at the last day and have the renovated earth for their happy abode De vit. It is true, on the other hand, that some Catholic th... |