Hostage to fear

[Randy Carson]

Nothing. It was a pastoral letter...not a biography.

Exactly.  Because those things weren't important.  Physical laws (reality) suspended... reasons to believe?  Not miracles apparently.

As I just noted in my previous post, it was a pastoral letter to people who had ALREADY heard the miracle stories.

Finally, I'm intrigued by the idea that Matthew was a tax collector who probably had some skills with pen and ink. It may well have been the case that Jesus, like many of the religious teachers of his day, had students taking notes during his various sermons. Matthew would have been able to do this, and this may be one reason why he was chosen to be one of the Twelve.

Because all those notes survived.  Right.  They certainly wouldn't have been retained as relics of the tradition and kept as holy.     It's not like God preserves his word or anything.

That's a non sequitur. If Matthew or any of the other disciples took notes that were not inspired texts, then why would God preserve them?

Only later, when the full story could be told, did the Holy Spirit inspire the books which were later canonized.

If God did not think to preserve the "relics" of the original manuscripts, why do you think you gain any mileage by pointing out that He failed to preserve the disciples "class notes" - if they EVER existed?

See, there's a lot of empty bluster in your posts...

But you must have a reason for asking all these questions...

You mean like the resurrection? Yep. Took that literally.
You mean like "this is my body...this is my blood" at the last Supper (and in John 6)? Yep. Took that literally.
You mean like priests have the authority to hear confessions and forgive sins? Yep. Took that literally.

And that part about stoning your own children?

You've read the NT and Paul's Letter to the Romans. Are we still under Law? And if not, why not?

Sheol is the place of the dead. This is where Jesus went to liberate those who were waiting for their salvation. The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains it this way:

632 The frequent New Testament affirmations that Jesus was "raised from the dead" presuppose that the crucified one sojourned in the realm of the dead prior to his resurrection.478 This was the first meaning given in the apostolic preaching to Christ's descent into hell: that Jesus, like all men, experienced death and in his soul joined the others in the realm of the dead. But he descended there as Savior, proclaiming the Good News to the spirits imprisoned there.479

633 Scripture calls the abode of the dead, to which the dead Christ went down, "hell" - Sheol in Hebrew or Hades in Greek - because those who are there are deprived of the vision of God.480 Such is the case for all the dead, whether evil or righteous, while they await the Redeemer: which does not mean that their lot is identical, as Jesus shows through the parable of the poor man Lazarus who was received into "Abraham's bosom":481 "It is precisely these holy souls, who awaited their Savior in Abraham's bosom, whom Christ the Lord delivered when he descended into hell."482 Jesus did not descend into hell to deliver the damned, nor to destroy the hell of damnation, but to free the just who had gone before him.483

634 "The gospel was preached even to the dead."484 The descent into hell brings the Gospel message of salvation to complete fulfillment. This is the last phase of Jesus' messianic mission, a phase which is condensed in time but vast in its real significance: the spread of Christ's redemptive work to all men of all times and all places, for all who are saved have been made sharers in the redemption.

635 Christ went down into the depths of death so that "the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live."485 Jesus, "the Author of life", by dying destroyed "him who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and [delivered] all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong bondage."486 Henceforth the risen Christ holds "the keys of Death and Hades", so that "at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth."487

My favorite part of your post.  I ask you for your understanding... you copy/paste catechism.

I understand what I posted. Do you?

And if I actually answered your question by posting a spot-on passage from the Catechism which eloquently answered you, why do you mock that response and then simply move on to your next talking point?

Why? Because you knew that I nailed the answer and there was no more sport to be found in pursuing that point.

Dude, give me a break. Sure, God COULD have just put us all in some condominium somewhere in the future with lots of air conditioning and an all you can eat buffet. But then we'd all be robots with no free will. What would be the point?

Sorry, the rest of this is nonsense.

So... no need to respond to them, I suppose.

If there were, I would have responded. See how this works?

Sorry... your arguments are nonsense.

Then you should have no problem dismantling them. I'm waiting and your new-found friends can't wait to see what the "new guy" will say next. Please.

You can't address the underlying issues of theodicy.  You've been prompted, but not even come close in your attempts.

Theodicy.  Address that.  Without copy/pasting.

I did address it, and what I posted was something I put together for another poster from my own study of the matter.

What do you expect? Original material? Then you'll have to come up with an original question, because what you're posting has been answered long ago.

Your arguments are flawed.  How do you know that today's ISIS suicide bombers don't *know* their deity is commanding them to their actions?   You simply don't know.  This is called argument from authority.  

Moving the goal posts, eh? Smart given the blunder of your first attempt.

Neither one of us believes that terrorists are hearing from God. Is this actually worth debating?

I did. A long time ago. Did you? I'll do it for you:

II. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRADITION AND SACRED SCRIPTURE

---

One common source. . .

80 "Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, then, are bound closely together, and communicate one with the other. For both of them, flowing out from the same divine well-spring, come together in some fashion to form one thing, and move towards the same goal."40 Each of them makes present and fruitful in the Church the mystery of Christ, who promised to remain with his own "always, to the close of the age".41

. . . two distinct modes of transmission

81 "Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy Spirit."42

"And [Holy] Tradition transmits in its entirety the Word of God which has been entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit. It transmits it to the successors of the apostles so that, enlightened by the Spirit of truth, they may faithfully preserve, expound and spread it abroad by their preaching."43

82 As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted, "does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence."44

---

Dude the most you can do is copy/paste from catechism?

No. But it may be the BEST I can do. You, former Catholic, may have some distant recollection of the idea that the Church is infallible. So, a solid answer from an infallible Church is better than a fallible answer from me.

Again... get back to theodicy.  Especially how extra ecclesiam nulla salus relates to the catechism you love to quote when the Roman Catholic Church declares God's blood atonement was made for *all men*.

It's available to all, yes. But it is not automatic...we must ACCEPT the gift.

THAT is where your faith's problem is.  Theodicy.

Heh, no, dude...that's where YOUR faith problem is. That's what's caused you to auger yourself into the turf trying to wrap your mind around it. But that's not my problem. The real question is: what is your solution or answer to the problem? Rejecting God because you can't see anything else?

Who's mind is too small here? Yours or Gods?

Convince me on that, and you'll be helping.  Until then... you're just parroting.

Are you open to being convinced? Or do you just want me to throw out some more clay pigeons for you???