2,813 reputation
52163
bio website
location Taiwan
age
visits member for 3 years, 11 months
seen 4 mins ago

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.


May
25
comment What is the scriptural basis for a monarchical episcopate?
I don't understand. Peter applies these words to Judas Iscariot. Does this mean that Judas was a bishop?!
May
20
comment Do the Orthodox pray to John the Baptist?
Can you, please, provide some sources.
May
20
comment Do the Orthodox pray to John the Baptist?
@curiousdannii - I don't have any quotes or references. I just saw them pray to many different saints, yet have never seen them pray to John the Baptist. This was all that prompted my question.
May
19
comment Which Apocrypha are part of the Catholic and the Orthodox traditions and which are not? Why?
But... isn't it like all the early Church Fathers, when speaking about the story of presentation of Mary draw that story from the Protevangelium?
May
19
comment Which Apocrypha are part of the Catholic and the Orthodox traditions and which are not? Why?
@MattGutting - "The belief is buttressed by its presence in the Protevangelium, but that doesn't mean they accept the book as a whole as part of their tradition" - In other words, they have some other sources besides the Protevangelium that tells them about that story, right?
May
19
comment Which Apocrypha are part of the Catholic and the Orthodox traditions and which are not? Why?
@MattGutting - "It sounds as if you're asking how these churches decided to choose books for their canon" - No. Apocrypha are by definition not part of canon. I am asking about how they decide which Apocrypha they still keep as a part of their tradition, and which Apocrypha they don't consider to be a part of their tradition.
May
19
comment Which Apocrypha are part of the Catholic and the Orthodox traditions and which are not? Why?
You might want to expand on your answer - I just edited my question. My original intention in it was not to ask about what an Apocrypha is, but rather about what Apocrypha are the part of the Catholic or the Orthodox traditions and which ones are not.
May
19
comment Which Apocrypha are part of the Catholic and the Orthodox traditions and which are not? Why?
Ah, I got it now. Thanks for the clarification.
May
18
comment Which Apocrypha are part of the Catholic and the Orthodox traditions and which are not? Why?
So where in my words have you seen my "historic relativism"? And what did you mean by saying "I raise you one Council of Nicaea"? Did you mean to say "I refer you to the Council of Nicaea"?
May
18
comment Which Apocrypha are part of the Catholic and the Orthodox traditions and which are not? Why?
I see your historic relativism and raise you one Council of Nicaea - What do you mean?!
May
17
comment Which Apocrypha are part of the Catholic and the Orthodox traditions and which are not? Why?
"Each church decided which books were going into their bible, and if they didn't, the book is not holy to them by definition" - Well, this is at least not true about the Orthodox Church. They consider many books outside of the canon to be the part of their Holy Tradition and believe whatever is written in them and don't question the validity of the events described in them.
May
16
comment Which Apocrypha are part of the Catholic and the Orthodox traditions and which are not? Why?
@Steve - "If the works are not considered part of their canon, then they are by definition not Apocrypha" - I am quite confused by this statement. Do you mean to say that the cannon is consisted only of Apocrypha?! "Perhaps you are asking whether there are any more holy or inspired works than those in the Catholic Bible?" - I am asking about if there are any Apocrypha (like "Acts of Andrew", "Gospel of Mary", etc.) that are not considered by Catholics and the Orthodox to be part of their canons and yet are considered by them to be the part of their holy tradition.
May
16
comment Which Apocrypha are part of the Catholic and the Orthodox traditions and which are not? Why?
@kutschkem - "By apocrypha, do you mean those that are in the bible?" - No. I mean those that are NOT in the Bible.
May
13
comment In the parable of the ten minas, why does the king kill his enemies?
@Andrew - I could've, but I forgot where exactly I came across that interpretation.
Apr
27
comment Matthew 18:10 “Children's angels always behold the face of the Father” - what does this mean?
@AndreasBlass - "The verse doesn't say that adults don't also have guardian angels who behold the face of God" - However, the verse doesn't say 'their angels do ALSO always behold the face of my Father' either. True, the verse does not deny the fact of existence of an individual guardian angel for each adult, but neither does it explicitly state that it talks exactly about the individual guardian angels. It may be a special group of angels that are somehow responsible for some additional protection for humans while they are still in the early days of their life course.
Apr
27
comment Matthew 18:10 “Children's angels always behold the face of the Father” - what does this mean?
@Andrew - By 'this place' I meant 'this place in the Scriptures', that is, Matthew 18:10. Perhaps, the word 'verse' would be better here. I will edit my question.
Apr
10
comment Books of NT written after the assumption of Mary
My question was "... after assumption of Mary", not "... after the earliest reference to the assumption of Mary".
Apr
8
comment Was this teaching (of soul existing before a birth) condemned by the Church?
@BrianHitchcock - So what about the souls of the martyred ones that John saw under the alter in Rev 6:9? Do you mean to say that they are the spirits that had already been somehow re-united with their bodies by that time? John says specifically that he saw souls.
Apr
7
comment Was this teaching (of soul existing before a birth) condemned by the Church?
(2) In other words, the existence of a function and the manifestation of that function are two different things – if function hasn’t been manifested it doesn’t mean that the function does not exist. However, what St. Thomas says is basically this: because the soul is not united with the body (= is not yet manifested) it doesn’t exist. I don’t see his logic here.
Apr
7
comment Was this teaching (of soul existing before a birth) condemned by the Church?
(1) “But I think he's talking about Adam's creation, not ours. Adam was created fully functional” – Yes. That’s exactly what I mean. Adam was created fully functional, which means that the function of being fruitful and multiplying was in him as soon as he was created. However, it doesn’t mean that he started being fruitful and multiplying right at the moment of his creation – at least not before God said “be fruitful and multiply”.