meta user
network profile
| bio | website | |
|---|---|---|
| location | Taiwan | |
| age | ||
| visits | member for | 1 year, 9 months |
| seen | 3 hours ago | |
| stats | profile views | 171 |
I often chose best answers not because they are the best, but because I have to choose a best answer. Please, don't take offense to it.
|
Apr 13 |
revised |
Is it true that John Paul II restored the practice of selling indulgences in 2000? deleted 30 characters in body; edited title |
|
Apr 13 |
revised |
Is it true that John Paul II restored the practice of selling indulgences in 2000? added 2 characters in body |
|
Apr 13 |
revised |
Is it true that John Paul II restored the practice of selling indulgences in 2000? added 82 characters in body |
|
Apr 10 |
awarded | Popular Question |
|
Apr 7 |
comment |
Why the Eucharist is never mentioned in the book of Hebrews? @Caleb (5) - The only answer that sounds plausible to me and very logical is that Eucharist is not really as important as, for example, believing in Christ and in His work on the cross. Hence, I chose the third answer by the.midget as the best one. Should any other answer arrive that looks more logical and more convincing to me, I will choose that one then, but so far it hasn’t happened. |
|
Apr 7 |
comment |
Why the Eucharist is never mentioned in the book of Hebrews? @Caleb (4) - Also, the book of Hebrews is famous for explaining proto-types and symbols, not for speaking in types and symbols. In fact, I can’t find one place in this book where the author would speak in types and figures and not in plain language. Therefore, the belief that the Eucharist is “implied” by the words of author in chapter 7 on Melchizedek, where the author in fact explains the type of Melchizedek, sounds also very unconvincing to me (cwallenpoole’s answer). |
|
Apr 7 |
comment |
Why the Eucharist is never mentioned in the book of Hebrews? @Caleb (3) - It is obvious that the book wasn’t written spontaneously at one setting. On the other hand, unlike, say, the book of Acts, it does have as its aim to touch upon crucial matters of Christian faith – at the end of each section covering one crucial matter there is a strong warning not to fall away from believing in that matter. Therefore, the position that holds Eucharist as one of such important matters and at the same time considers that it was not mentioned in Hebrews just “because the book’s topic is the High Priesthood of Christ” (Alypius’ answer) sounds very unconvincing to me. |
|
Apr 7 |
comment |
Why the Eucharist is never mentioned in the book of Hebrews? @Caleb (2) - If Eucharist was the life or death matter, than it surely should’ve been mentioned among other crucial matters pertaining to the Christian faith in the book of Hebrews. On one hand, the book of Hebrews is quite comprehensive and very consistent. It is clear that the author had a certain structure on his mind that he followed while writing his book. It is also clear that the author didn’t have any time constraints while he was writing it. |
|
Apr 7 |
comment |
Why the Eucharist is never mentioned in the book of Hebrews? @Caleb (1) “If you want something about the book of Hebrews, an answer that just attacks Catholicism shouldn't be valid” - I don’t view the answer as the one that “just attacks Catholicism”. In fact, while reading it, I couldn’t care less about where that teaching (transubstantiation) came from – Catholicism, Orthodoxy, Protestantism or elsewhere. And, after all, the question itself was not about that teaching or its origin. |
|
Mar 19 |
comment |
A set of traits common for all protestant believers @AffableGeek - Can you elaborate a bit? |
|
Mar 17 |
awarded | Notable Question |
|
Mar 7 |
comment |
Why did Jesus never address God by the name “Jehovah”? "For more information about the name and who today is carrying on Jesus's work of sanctifying the name" - Thank you for this invitation, however, I want to get the answer to this question of mine from Christians first. |
|
Mar 5 |
comment |
Does the Bible have any proof that Jesus Christ is the Only-begotten Son of God? So, how does that change the point I made in my previous comment? No doubt, David said that. However, David didn't say "you have begotten ONLY me". Bible is very precise in this matter. The ONLY-begotten-ness is ascribed in the Bible only to Jesus. Yes, David was used in the Bible as a prototype of Jesus, however, David's sonship is way lower then the sonship of Jesus, which is indicated in such passages as Matthew 22:41-46 and Acts 2: 25-34. Jesus' sonship is quite unique, only He possesses that kind of sonship, hence, in the Bible He is referred to as the only-begotten Son of God. |
|
Mar 5 |
comment |
Does the Bible have any proof that Jesus Christ is the Only-begotten Son of God? Did you miss the fact that Jesus is referred to in the Bible as the ONLY-begotten Son? It's true that Adam is called a son of God, and the book of Job, for example, speaks of sons of God, as well as that psalm that you are quoting, however, Bible also calls Jesus the Only-begotten Son of God, a title that has not been given in the Bible to Adam or anyone else. So, if you accept the whole Bible, and not just some of its parts, you must acknowledge that the sonship of Jesus is quite different from that of Adam or others. It is in terms of this unique sonship that Jesus is the Only-begotten One. |
|
Feb 20 |
accepted | Relationships between God the Father, Mary and the two natures of Jesus Christ |
|
Feb 20 |
comment |
Relationships between God the Father, Mary and the two natures of Jesus Christ WOW!!! Thank you. I agree with Alypius, the source provided in this answer really makes it all! |
|
Feb 15 |
revised |
Is this true that before the Quinisext Council it was not allowed to draw Jesus on icons in the form of a man? edited body |
|
Feb 15 |
revised |
Is this true that before the Quinisext Council it was not allowed to draw Jesus on icons in the form of a man? edited body; edited title |
|
Feb 15 |
asked | Is this true that before the Quinisext Council it was not allowed to draw Jesus on icons in the form of a man? |
|
Feb 13 |
comment |
Universalism in the Orthodox Church? I couldn't have missed a question asked by me :) |
