Hot answers tagged

5

The First Epistle to the Corinthians opens with an expanded address (1 Corinthians 1:1-7), identifying its writer as the apostle Paul who, with Sosthenes, was writing to the church community in Corinth. After a warm opening address, Paul urges the Corinthians to agree in what they say, and to be united in the same mind and in the same purpose. The reason for ...


4

One of my favorite go-to books on this kind of topic is St. Augustine's De Consensu Evangelistarum, which includes a chapter on the calling of the apostles. The full chapter is worth a read, but here is my breakdown of it as it applies to this specific question. Statement of the Difficulty 37 The question may indeed be raised as to how John gives us ...


4

The church of Corinth had a problem: it was split up into quarrelling factions. The people were more focused on the differences between them, such as which apostles they identified with, than the unity they should have had as fellow members of the body of Christ. Many people "followed Paul", but evidently few had been personally baptised by him. Paul is ...


2

It seems more likely that Paul was referring to James the Just (Christ's familial "brother" or possibly a "brother" in name only), but we have no definitive way of knowing this. Some considerations: There is no agreement on whether or not Christ had a familial brother named James. Below is an excerpt from a commentary, "The Brothers and Sisters of ...


2

Now concerning virgins παρθενων I have no commandment of the Lord: yet I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful. I suppose therefore that this is good for the present ενεστωσαν distress αναγκην, I say, that it is good for a man so to be. -- 1 Corinthians 7:25-26 Concerning this passage: It should be noted that ...


2

He was just using it as an expression to make it known that whatever he was about to say needs to be taken as seriously as possible. Jesus has always told the truth but I cannot say if everything he said was taken seriously by the people he was speaking to. So it could have been used more in the context of "listen carefully to what I am about to tell you ...


1

Here's what the Catholic Haydock Commentary says about those verses: Ver. 31. Covenant. That made with the captives was not such. Their covenant is grown old, and at an end, as St. Paul shews, Hebrews viii. 8. They were not indeed divided, as they had been, Ezechiel xxxvii. 16. Ver. 32. Dominion. As a husband, (Hebrew; Calmet) or "Lord." (Haydock) ...


1

Jesus was actually saying the complete opposite--well, almost--of what you suggest. Now he was not saying that the old is somehow inferior to the new. Rather, he was saying that the old and the new are not compatible. Let me explain. First, new wine is incompatible with old wineskins. Since "new wine" when it is placed in a wineskin is not finished ...


1

Luke 5:33 is a reference to the past, in which we are told that Jewish tradition required frequent fasting: Luke 5:33: And they said unto him, Why do the disciples of John fast often, and make prayers, and likewise the disciples of the Pharisees; but thine eat and drink? Then verses 34-35 takes us to the new, and to what is to come: Luke 5:34-35: ...


1

If you look at the pattern in Matthew 5:20-44, Jesus is not telling us not to resist evil. Quite the opposite. Jesus responds in one of two ways to the old laws. He uses a direct command to in effect disobey the old law as in "Swear not at all" 5:33-34, and "Love your enemies.." 5:43-44. But,as in the case of 5:38-39, he first adds a "that" which I read not ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible