"Mother of God"

[First Baseman]

The Pharisees didn't want to be His friends. They closed themselves off. And He said that to Peter, not Satan.

That's right, they closed themselves off. Those of the synagogue of Satan have closed themselves off, too, if they will not hear Jesus.

Do you think Jesus was addressing Satan or Peter? Obviously He was addressing Satan.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

That's right, they closed themselves off. Those of the synagogue of Satan have closed themselves off, too, if they will not hear Jesus.

And not all non-Christians have closed themselves off to Christ.

Do you think Jesus was addressing Satan or Peter? Obviously He was addressing Satan.

He was talking to Peter:

"23 He turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are an obstacle to me. You are thinking not as God does, but as human beings do.” (Matthew 16:23)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+16:23

 

[First Baseman]

And not all non-Christians have closed themselves off to Christ.

He was talking to Peter:

"23 He turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are an obstacle to me. You are thinking not as God does, but as human beings do.” (Matthew 16:23)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+16:23

I never said that all non-Christians have closed themselves off to Christ. You only assume this is so. All those who will not hear the Gospel willingly close themselves off to Christ.

Jesus was addressing Satan. Satan is and always will be an obstacle to Him until he is judged and cast into the lake of fire. Peter was never an obstacle to Christ, only Satan had influenced him to say what he had said at that moment.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I never said that all non-Christians have closed themselves off to Christ. You only assume this is so.

It is true. It is a fact. I'm sure I'm not the only one; and, of course, I can speak for myself.

I know I'm not part of this convo; but, it interest me only because I've never seen this point of view in other Catholics and Catholic doctrine before.

 

[First Baseman]

It is true. It is a fact. I'm sure I'm not the only one; and, of course, I can speak for myself.

I know I'm not part of this convo; but, it interest me only because I've never seen this point of view in other Catholics and Catholic doctrine before.

What are you saying is true?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

What are you saying is true?

Actually this is a contradiction "I never said that all non-Christians have closed themselves off to Christ. You only assume this is so. All those who will not hear the Gospel willingly close themselves off to Christ." now that I'm reading it.

Those who are not willing to hear the gospel are willingly closing themselves off to Christ. Unless non-christians are not Christians by force, would you say they, being non-christians, are closing themselves off to Christ?

It's not a bad thing to be closed to Christ and not everyone is. Unless non-christians are not closed to Christ in another way? Do you believe that? (I do. But not all Christians do.)



My main confusion is that you don't want to associate with satanist. I find that odd, especially as a Catholic. I can't say it's a fundamental doctrine in protestant Churches, but I'm more familiar with that mindset in some of those denominations. In Catholicism, I never had that. If that be the case, no one would be allowed in the Church and there'd be no reason for confession because the priest don't want to associate with those who wish to confess.

So, I'm confused.

Is it your personal preference not to associate with Satanist?

 

[First Baseman]

Actually this is a contradiction "I never said that all non-Christians have closed themselves off to Christ. You only assume this is so. All those who will not hear the Gospel willingly close themselves off to Christ." now that I'm reading it.

Those who are not willing to hear the gospel are willingly closing themselves off to Christ. Unless non-christians are not Christians by force, would you say they, being non-christians, are closing themselves off to Christ?

It's not a bad thing to be closed to Christ and not everyone is. Unless non-christians are not closed to Christ in another way? Do you believe that? (I do. But not all Christians do.)



My main confusion is that you don't want to associate with satanist. I find that odd, especially as a Catholic. I can't say it's a fundamental doctrine in protestant Churches, but I'm more familiar with that mindset in some of those denominations. In Catholicism, I never had that. If that be the case, no one would be allowed in the Church and there'd be no reason for confession because the priest don't want to associate with those who wish to confess.

So, I'm confused.

Is it your personal preference not to associate with Satanist?

Few non-Christians are professed Satanists. What I had said is that no professed Satanist is my friend. I hope that no Satanist advocates every doctrine of Satan but many of them do.

Satan is diametrically opposed to Jesus Christ. It is Satan's will that all be damned. Satan is a murderer and a liar. Satan brought evil into this world. No, I do not have fellowship with such people as would worship or admire Satan.

All are welcome in Church. In Church we worship God and all who wish to do so are welcome. However, those who wish to come to Church to teach a false doctrine will find themselves cast out of the Church as such things are not tolerated.

Of course if a person comes to Church to confess they will not be turned away. If they need help of any kind they should not be turned away. But if they come to do evil and disrupt the order of worship they will be cast out if they will not leave willingly.

Of course no Satanic doctrine will be tolerated.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Few non-Christians are professed Satanists. What I had said is that no professed Satanist is my friend. I hope that no Satanist advocates every doctrine of Satan but many of them do.

Satan is diametrically opposed to Jesus Christ. It is Satan's will that all be damned. Satan is a murderer and a liar. Satan brought evil into this world. No, I do not have fellowship with such people as would worship or admire Satan.

All are welcome in Church. In Church we worship God and all who wish to do so are welcome. However, those who wish to come to Church to teach a false doctrine will find themselves cast out of the Church as such things are not tolerated.

Of course if a person comes to Church to confess they will not be turned away. If they need help of any kind they should not be turned away. But if they come to do evil and disrupt the order of worship they will be cast out if they will not leave willingly.

Of course no Satanic doctrine will be tolerated.

Of course it would be wrong for a Satanist to spread his or her doctrine (false or not) within the Church. That's just rude. I got the impression that you would not associate with a Satanist because of what he or she believed in pretending, for a minute, that you knew this person was a Satanist. I wouldn't expect any Catholic to have fellowship (be in communion/Mass) with anyone not just a Satanist who does not have believe in Christ.

The way you express it makes it seem you are targeting not having fellowship because of the individual himself rather than his belief system.

Think of this, though. During the Easter Vigil, the Church has communion with everyone. They do not allow non-Catholics to take the Eucharist; and, they tell non-Christians to give their prayers and thoughts to be in communion with Christians who are not Catholic but are acknowledged and welcomed as children of Christ, and further welcome Catholics to have physical communion via the Eucharist.

The only way I can see a Catholic denying fellowship with a non-catholic is denying that non-catholic the Eucharists. That is understandable. Common fellowship with those of like mind as in the Vigil is perfectly fine. That I find is beautiful.

Would that be fellowship for you?

How would you see the part of the Easter Vigil that welcomes non-Christians in communion with Christians and Catholics?

 

[First Baseman]

Of course it would be wrong for a Satanist to spread his or her doctrine (false or not) within the Church. That's just rude. I got the impression that you would not associate with a Satanist because of what he or she believed in pretending, for a minute, that you knew this person was a Satanist. I wouldn't expect any Catholic to have fellowship (be in communion/Mass) with anyone not just a Satanist who does not have believe in Christ.

The way you express it makes it seem you are targeting not having fellowship because of the individual himself rather than his belief system.

Think of this, though. During the Easter Vigil, the Church has communion with everyone. They do not allow non-Catholics to take the Eucharist; and, they tell non-Christians to give their prayers and thoughts to be in communion with Christians who are not Catholic but are acknowledged and welcomed as children of Christ, and further welcome Catholics to have physical communion via the Eucharist.

The only way I can see a Catholic denying fellowship with a non-catholic is denying that non-catholic the Eucharists. That is understandable. Common fellowship with those of like mind as in the Vigil is perfectly fine. That I find is beautiful.

Would that be fellowship for you?

How would you see the part of the Easter Vigil that welcomes non-Christians in communion with Christians and Catholics?

1. Yes, if I'm understanding you correctly.

2. I have no problem with it.

To me a friend is someone I can trust and depend on and who can trust and depend on me. That will never include a Satanist. We care about them and we pray for those who hate us for whatever reason. Christ commands us to love them and enables us to do so. However, we are also commanded to be holy. Satan is most unholy so we have no fellowship with him or those who adore him.

Satanism and Christianity are opposite one another. I have been freed from Satan, why would I want fellowship with him any longer?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Hmm. I'll respect that. But I will probe more.

To me a friend is someone I can trust and depend on and who can trust and depend on me. That will never include a Satanist. We care about them and we pray for those who hate us for whatever reason.

Why would you think a Satanist is someone you wouldn't trust? A satanist is not Satan. Why would you think a Satanist (the person not Satan) would hate you? Is this what you truly believe?

Satanism and Christianity are opposite one another. I have been freed from Satan, why would I want fellowship with him any longer?

If the Church can have fellowship/communion in thought and moment of silence with non-christians (satanist included) during the Easter Vigil and at every Mass, why can't you? (Sorry, don't mean to phrase it like that).

I have a co-worker that doesn't want to have fellowship with me. She says that since I don't believe in god, that wouldn't be right. Then I think of what I experienced at the Church and how the Church welcomes all people in fellowship. The difference is they don't allow non-christians (satanist included) and non-Catholics to take physical communion (full fellowship) in Christ.

If the Church didn't have communion with satanist, why would they have communion with other non-christians?

 

[First Baseman]

Hmm. I'll respect that. But I will probe more.

Why would you think a Satanist is someone you wouldn't trust? A satanist is not Satan. Why would you think a Satanist (the person not Satan) would hate you? Is this what you truly believe?


Satanists worship Satan and Satan is a murderer and a liar. So a Satanist thinks both murder and lies can be justified. If he doesn't think that then he admires Satan for some other evil reason.

Satan hates us. Satan will use his followers to deceive and manipulate us. Satan will do anything to turn us from our faith. I abhor talking about this. Please don't ask me anymore questions about it.




If the Church can have fellowship/communion in thought and moment of silence with non-christians (satanist included) during the Easter Vigil and at every Mass, why can't you? (Sorry, don't mean to phrase it like that).


I have never attended such a mass so I really have no idea what you're talking about. We have never had a moment of silence for communion with non-Christians, Easter mass included. We do pray for non-Christians but I wouldn't call that communion.


I have a co-worker that doesn't want to have fellowship with me. She says that since I don't believe in god, that wouldn't be right. Then I think of what I experienced at the Church and how the Church welcomes all people in fellowship. The difference is they don't allow non-christians (satanist included) and non-Catholics to take physical communion (full fellowship) in Christ.


She is obeying St. Paul's commandment given in 2 Corinthians 6:14 through 18. Christians are right to avoid fellowship with non-Christians because we can so easily be swayed from Jesus and the Apostles' doctrine. She is not commanded not to love you or care about you or pray for you, but to not get too involved with you.

Only those called by God to take the gospel to Unbelievers should do so.


If the Church didn't have communion with satanist, why would they have communion with other non-christians?

Define what you mean when you use the word "communion," I don't think we define it the same way.

 

[Brickjectivity]

@First Baseman its confusing when you don't use the quote function.

 

[First Baseman]

@First Baseman its confusing when you don't use the quote function.

Sorry, I'm on a tablet with no keyboard. I did it that way so that I could be sure and answer each question asked.

 

[metis]

Try these, particularly Isaiah 53:


Messiiah would be rejected by his own people.Psalm 69:8
Isaiah 53:3John 1:11
John 7:515Messiah would be a prophet.Deuteronomy 18:15Acts 3:20-2216Messiah would be preceded by Elijah.Malachi 4:5-6Matthew 11:13-1417Messiah would be declared the Son of God.Psalm 2:7Matthew 3:16-1718Messiah would be called a Nazarene.Isaiah 11:1Matthew 2:2319Messiah would bring light to Galilee.Isaiah 9:1-2Matthew 4:13-1620Messiah would speak in parables.Psalm 78:2-4
Isaiah 6:9-10Matthew 13:10-15, 34-3521Messiah would be sent to heal the brokenhearted.Isaiah 61:1-2Luke 4:18-1922Messiah would be a priest after the order ofMelchizedek.Psalm 110:4Hebrews 5:5-623Messiah would be called King.Psalm 2:6
Zechariah 9:9Matthew 27:37
Mark 11:7-1124Messiah would be praised by little children.Psalm 8:2Matthew 21:1625Messiah would be betrayed.Psalm 41:9
Zechariah 11:12-13Luke 22:47-48
Matthew 26:14-1626Messiah's price money would be used to buy a potter's field.Zechariah 11:12-13Matthew 27:9-1027Messiah would be falsely accused.Psalm 35:11Mark 14:57-5828Messiah would be silent before his accusers.Isaiah 53:7Mark 15:4-529Messiah would be spat upon and struck.Isaiah 50:6Matthew 26:6730Messiah would be hated without cause.Psalm 35:19
Psalm 69:4John 15:24-2531Messiah would be crucified with criminals.Isaiah 53:12Matthew 27:38
Mark 15:27-2832Messiah would be given vinegar to drink.Psalm 69:21Matthew 27:34
John 19:28-3033Messiah's hands and feet would be pierced.Psalm 22:16
Zechariah 12:10John 20:25-2734Messiah would be mocked and ridiculed.Psalm 22:7-8Luke 23:3535Soldiers would gamble for Messiah's garments.Psalm 22:18Luke 23:34
Matthew 27:35-3636Messiah's bones would not be broken.Exodus 12:46
Psalm 34:20John 19:33-3637Messiah would be forsaken by God.Psalm 22:1Matthew 27:4638Messiah would pray for his enemies.Psalm 109:4Luke 23:3439Soldiers would pierce Messiah's side.Zechariah 12:10John 19:3440Messiah would be buried with the rich.Isaiah 53:9Matthew 27:57-6041Messiah would resurrect from the dead.Psalm 16:10
Psalm 49:15Matthew 28:2-7
Acts 2:22-3242Messiah would ascend to heaven.Psalm 24:7-10Mark 16:19
Luke 24:5143Messiah would be seated at God's right hand.Psalm 68:18
Psalm 110:1Mark 16:19
Matthew 22:4444Messiah would be a sacrifice for sin.Isaiah 53:5-12Romans 5:6-8


There are quite a few, actually. But particularly in Isaiah 53.

Deutero-Isaiah cannot refer to Jesus because the time period, the events covered, and the general theme do not fit. This is a long shot, but if you have "Jerome's Bible Commentary" which is Catholic, says what I just posed, but they conclude that it "prefigures Jesus". IOW, it sets up a comparative paradigm.

Isaiah covers the Babylonian exile that took place five centuries before Jesus, plus the general theme runs like this:
1.Israel did not follow the Law (613 of them) close enough...
2.Israel is punished by being taken over by the Babylonians, with a great many being exiled there...
3.a "remnant" returns to eretz Israel...
4.God insists that Israel must follow the Law much more carefully from then on.

Now, that clearly cannot be a reference to the church simply on one basis alone, namely that the church gradually walked away from the Law, and that process clearly shows up in Acts.

If you want to deal with Isaiah 53+, let me link you to this site: http://jewsforjudaism.org/?s=Isaiah+

BTW, let me just add that I really don't much get into the "messiah" issue because it simply doesn't apply to where I'm coming from.

 

[metis]

Were the Pharisees Jesus' friends?

Actually many were, plus Jesus operated out of a liberal Pharisee tradition. The disconnect with him and "the Pharisees" appears to be with the main branch of the Pharisee movement, which added extra observances to follow beyond the Law. And Paul identifies himself as being a Pharisee when arrested by the Romans.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Did you forget to use the quote function? I just caught this.

Satanists worship Satan and Satan is a murderer and a liar. So a Satanist thinks both murder and lies can be justified. If he doesn't think that then he admires Satan for some other evil reason.

I think what you are mixing up is treating Satanist as if they are Satan. What is wrong with associating with Satanist the people? I know why you don't want to associate with their beliefs. However, Satanist are not Satan.

Satan hates us. Satan will use his followers to deceive and manipulate us. Satan will do anything to turn us from our faith. I abhor talking about this. Please don't ask me anymore questions about it.

I will say non-christian instead of Satanist. Why would you not associate with a non-christian since their beliefs are not supported by Church doctrine?

It seems you are reflecting what you disagree about X beliefs on the people who believe them. Hence, why you dislike associating with them. Priest associate with a lot of people and are friends with a lot of people of various beliefs that the Church dislikes.

However, I don't see that as something you do. Why? What about non-christian beliefs make you not associate with the X people who inherit them?

I have never attended such a mass so I really have no idea what you're talking about. We have never had a moment of silence for communion with non-Christians, Easter mass included. We do pray for non-Christians but I wouldn't call that communion.

During the Easter Vigil, there is a part of Mass that the priest says that even though non-christians are accepted as brothers in Christ (or something similar), we still don't permit them to take the Eucharist. They say to non-christians to communion with everyone in thought if not in prayer. I will find it. It's written in the bulletin as a customary way of communing with everyone regardless their religion or

She is obeying St. Paul's commandment given in 2 Corinthians 6:14 through 18. Christians are right to avoid fellowship with non-Christians because we can so easily be swayed from Jesus and the Apostles' doctrine. She is not commanded not to love you or care about you or pray for you, but to not get too involved with you.

Only those called by God to take the gospel to Unbelievers should do so.

If she and my other friend can be swayed by my being in prayer with them, then their belief isn't as strong as I would have thought.

On that note...

Define what you mean when you use the word "communion," I don't think we define it the same way.

Catholics define it taking part in the Eucharist at Mass. During some holidays and circumstances like funerals and weddings, they'd have communion with everyone. However, it isn't by the Eucharist but as brotherhood in Christ regardless of a person's faith. The one you're talking about is that of the Eucharist. The Church doesn't always commune with Catholics only. If that be the case, they would lock the doors to non-catholics. Non-catholics and non-christians commune too if need be.

There is RF member with a wife, I think, who is Catholic. He attends Mass with her. He is in communion with the Church even though he doesn't take the Eucharist. In general, that is communion. Commune with humanity. That's the universal Church.

 

[metis]

There is RF member with a wife, I think, who is Catholic. He attends Mass with her. He is in communion with the Church even though he doesn't take the Eucharist. In general, that is communion. Commune with humanity. That's the universal Church.

Yep, and I gotta feeling I may know who that is.

At our church, the priests not only fully welcome me, but I have helped them out on several occasions. OK, maybe these priests are just poor judges of character.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Yep, and I gotta feeling I may know who that is.

At our church, the priests not only fully welcome me, but I have helped them out on several occasions. OK, maybe these priests are just poor judges of character.

Rats. You found me out. Yeah. Maybe so. I found priests to be very accepting and welcoming too. I pay respects to Jesus for the sacraments and my christian grandmothers during sometimes. If anything, they smother me wih rosaries, prayers, hugs, and smiles. I can be a satanist or an alien. Im blessed to have those experiences. I wish other people had the too.

 

[First Baseman]

Deutero-Isaiah cannot refer to Jesus because the time period, the events covered, and the general theme do not fit. This is a long shot, but if you have "Jerome's Bible Commentary" which is Catholic, says what I just posed, but they conclude that it "prefigures Jesus". IOW, it sets up a comparative paradigm.

Isaiah covers the Babylonian exile that took place five centuries before Jesus, plus the general theme runs like this:
1.Israel did not follow the Law (613 of them) close enough...
2.Israel is punished by being taken over by the Babylonians, with a great many being exiled there...
3.a "remnant" returns to eretz Israel...
4.God insists that Israel must follow the Law much more carefully from then on.

Now, that clearly cannot be a reference to the church simply on one basis alone, namely that the church gradually walked away from the Law, and that process clearly shows up in Acts.

If you want to deal with Isaiah 53+, let me link you to this site: http://jewsforjudaism.org/?s=Isaiah+

BTW, let me just add that I really don't much get into the "messiah" issue because it simply doesn't apply to where I'm coming from.

Sounds like a total cop-out to me.

 

[Desert Snake]

Doesn't bother me.