Catholic_Apologist

Joined 20 years ago

• started 0 topics
• posted 4 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Catholic_Apologist

• 
  42

  How do you explain bible prophecies?

  by ithinkisee in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  20 years ago

  you know the ones ... how alexander the great was supposedly predicted in advance .... how daniel interpreted dreams and foretold bablyons destruction ..... how cyrus was named years in advance .... how jesus fulfilled so many hebrew scriptures prophecies ...... how do you explain this?

  conspiracy by the early church?

  conspiracy by the 70 scholars of the lxx?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 

  20 years ago
• 

  Catholic_Apologist 20 years ago

  Hey everybody!

  I think prophecy in the Bible isn't so much a matter of foresight (athough there is a certain element of this), as it is a matter of insight.

  That said, I do agree to some extent with some of the more skeptical posts about certain people retroactively applying historical events to Scripture in order to show fulfillment of prophecy. Especially with the book of Revelation, since most modern readers don't relate to and understand the distinctive form of Jewish apocalyptic literature.

  However, I do think that the Bible does have some valid examples of foresight that can be convincingly demonstrated.

  One particularly interesting field I've been looking into is typology (the study of how Old Testament texts may foreshadow New Testament events). An example is the story of the sacrifice of Isaac, found in Genesis 22.

  Some similarities between Isaac and Jesus: 1. both are called only, beloved sons. 2. Both ride on an ass on their way to the place of sacrifice. 3. Both have a discussion with their father about the coming trial. 4. Both carry the wood of the sacrifice on their own shoulders up a mountain. 5. Abraham tells his servants that "we will worship and then return to you" (Gen. 22:5) which indicates that he believes his son will somehow rise from the dead. 6. Abraham tells his son that "God will provide Himself the sheep for the holocaust" (Gen 22:8), which to Christians foreshadows Jesus, the lamb of God. Christians believe that God Himself is the sheep for the holocaust. 7. Both Isaac and Jesus were bound and lead off to their place of execution. 8. Abraham sacrificed a ram in place of his son (Gen 22:13). His statement that God would provide a lamb for the holocaust is fulfilled in Jesus. Furthermore, Christians believe that Jesus is offered in place of sinful humanity. 9. The ram's head is surrounded by thorns, much as Jesus was crowned with thorns. 10. Abraham names the place "On the mountain the Lord Himself will see to it. Early Church Fathers testify that this place is the same as Golgotha. 11. Abraham was willing to sacrifice his only son for God. God did not accept this sacrifice, but instead, in His infinite love, offers His Son as a sacrifice for Abraham, Isaac, and all of us

  The story of the sacrifice of Isaac comes into sharper focus when it is understood as speaking prophetically about Jesus. Now, I can understand how a sceptic might say that the similarities are applied retroactively. However, this is just one example of typology in the Bible. When taken together, the many examples of foreshadowings of Jesus in the Old Testament present, in my mind, converging and convincing evidence that God slowly revealed His plan for humanity through the Old Testament Scriptures.

  In St. Luke's story of the disciples on the road to Emmaus, Jesus goes back through the books of Moses and interprets for the disciples everything that refered to the Christ (Lk. 24:27). The disciples hearts were burning within them as Jesus opened the Scriptures for them. Modern disciples experience much the same thing when their eyes are opened to the beauty of God's plan for His people.

  Take care everybody, and God bless you all!

  Brian (a.k.a. Catholic Apologist)

  Link
• 
  168

  Has there been any "New Light" on the Blood Issue?

  by Mastodon in

  1. watchtower
  2. medical

  20 years ago

  someone asked me if i knew anything about that.

  oblviuosly i don't, so i'm reaching to all of you in this enlightened crowd to shed some light on this for me.

  thanks!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 

  20 years ago
• 

  Catholic_Apologist 20 years ago

  Hi everybody,

  The issue of blood transfusions is one where I have profound disagreements with the Jehovah's Witness teaching, although I can say that I respect the desire of Jehovah's Witnesses to please God even when it causes them suffering to do so.

  In the New Testament, Jesus embraces an ethic centered on promoting and protecting human life; whenever He is confronted with questions about the laws of Moses, He always responds in a way that puts human life at the forefront. For example, when He is challenged for healing on the Sabbath, He replies, "Is it lawful to do good on Sabbath days, or to do evil? To save life, or to destroy?" (Mk. 3:4). For Jesus, the fundamental question was how an action either protected human life, or neglected to do so. When the Pharisees put adherence to law above care for people, Jesus always took them to task.

  Today, God has given doctors the means to save lives through using modern medical techniques, including blood transfusions. Jesus asks us the same question today, "Is it lawful to do good or to do evil, to save life, or to destroy?" I believe that God does not want us to adopt a legalistic morality similar to that of the Pharisees, but rather He wants us to use the intellect that He has given us in order to help people to live longer and happier lives.

  Of course, there are just limitations to the ways that we can legitimately utilize science to promote human interests. Ethical objections to embryonic stem cell research come to mind. However, since blood transfusions allow the donor to live and the recipient to live, I see no moral objection to this practice.

  I realize that Jehovah's Witnesses have deeply held views on this subject, but I respectfully disagree.

  God bless you all!

  Brian (a.k.a. Catholic Apologist)

  Link
• 
  70

  And the Word was with God

  by Narkissos in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  20 years ago

  no this is not meant to be another trinity thread.

  rather another shamelessly speculative / philosophical one.

  one good thing with the latter: they are usually much shorter.. so we often discuss how the logos was or wasn't "god/god/divine" etc.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 

  20 years ago
• 

  Catholic_Apologist 20 years ago

  Hi everybody,

  Thank you all for your very thought-provoking and sometimes erudite posts.

  The Trinity is a very theological and complex topic, and I am not qualified to go into Greek to English translations, subtle distinctions, and ancient formulations of doctrine. However, I do have some questions that this discussion thread has brought to mind:

  1. Did God become a Father only when He created, or is He a Father from all eternity?

  2. Before God created, was He alone? If God is love, does that mean that before He created, He loved only Himself?

  3. When God uses the term "us" in Genesis, is He speaking to Himself, or to the angels? If He is speaking to the latter, does that mean that man is made in the image and likeness of the angels?

  4. When the average, non-scholarly person, reads the Bible, how does he or she know which translation to trust, when many people who are very well-educated and have studied the ancient Greek manuscripts disagree on fundamentals points of interpretation.

  5. Does traditional Jehovah's Witness theology on this point have more in common with Islam than with traditional Christianity?

  6. If the Trinity is a correct doctrine, what does God's revelation of Himself as a Family of Persons teach us about the human condition?

  7. If the Trinity is an incorrect doctrine, then why did Jehovah God suffer it to be widely accepted by followers of Jesus for so long? Why didn't Jehovah God allow Arianism to become the orthodox form of Christianity?

  I'm sure the questions I've posed betray my own point of view. Still, I'm interested in what others think about the topic.

  God bless everybody!

  Brian (a.k.a. Catholic Apologist)

  Link
• 
  105

  How do you defend your god's inaction?

  by AlmostAtheist in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  20 years ago

  this is a question for those that believe in a god or gods, particularly those described as "all knowing" or "almighty".. how do you defend to yourself that your god has not in any modern situation saved his people from anything?.

  people of all faiths are regularly killed by various natural elements.

  of course, if you knew such a thing was going to befall a person and you could do something to protect them, you would.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 

  20 years ago
• 

  Catholic_Apologist 20 years ago

  Hi everybody,

  I was browsing through this forum, and decided to join so that I could respond to this interesting topic of discussion.

  The problem of suffering has been a question that human beings have always struggled with.

  The objection can be put this way: if innocent people suffer, then God cannot be infinitely good, just, loving, and powerful.

  In my view, only the Christian faith fully engages the question of suffering, because in that faith, God Himself experienced suffering by becoming human, suffering, and dying. The Christian faith offers a hopeful answer because the cross was not the end, but a new beginning.

  By virtue of Jesus' cross and resurrection, God teaches people many important lessons. Among these lessons: Human life has a dignity that transcends the temporal states of suffering and pleasure. God identifies Himself not with the strong and powerful, but with the weak and powerless. God can bring goodness out of all things, even suffering. God loves beyond all limits. Human happiness consists not in avoiding suffering, but in the attainment of virtue.

  Suffering can happen for many reasons. Sometimes it is a result of human sin, as in when a person acts to bring suffering to others, or when a person fails to act to spare somebody else from suffering. Also, sometimes suffering just happens, such as when children are born with serious birth defects, or when people get sick and die for no discernable reason. Although some religions, such as Buddhism, believe and teach that people can escape from suffering, Christianity teaches that suffering is inevitable in this life. Christianity also teaches that God gives us the grace to make it through the suffering, and that He will reward us if we hold fast to virtue in the midst of suffering.

  Throughout His life, Jesus was tempted to use easy and attractive forms of power to solve the problem of suffering. However, God's plan for us is not for Him to do miracle after miracle to provide for our needs, but rather for us to be His presence in the world. All people are called to minister to the needs of others, so that God might act through us. For me, Mother Teresa was an example of a good response to suffering. She embraced people in the midst of their suffering. While she could not always take away the suffering of others, she could love them and be with them through their suffering. In loving people, especially those in the utter poverty of suffering, she loved Jesus.

  The word "mystery" can mean "a puzzle to be solved", but it can also mean "a reality imbued with the hidden presence of God." Suffering is a mystery in this second sense. The infinitely good, just, loving, and powerful God reveals Himself to us in a special way when we are most vulnerable.

  Hopefully my post gives some reasons why people like myself continue to believe in God, even when He does not act in the way that we might if we were in His position. Thank God that He is God and I am not, because He has far better at His job than I could ever be.

  May He bless you as He uses you to bless others!

  Brian (a.k.a. Catholic Apologist).

  Link