Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Italian scientist reproduces Shroud of Turin
Yahoo ^ | 5 Oct 2009 | Philip Pullella

Posted on 10/05/2009 11:22:44 AM PDT by Gamecock

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 521-540541-560561-580581-592 next last
To: Swordmaker
Yes, words matter. And Roman Catholics quibble about the meaning of "explicitly" when their own catechism clearly and EXPLICITLY says "the sign of Jonah" references Christ's resurrection, a fact three Roman Catholics denied EXPLICITLY. From the RCC catechism...

994 - But there is more. Jesus links faith in the resurrection to his own person: "I am the Resurrection and the life."544 It is Jesus himself who on the last day will raise up those who have believed in him, who have eaten his body and drunk his blood.545 Already now in this present life he gives a sign and pledge of this by restoring some of the dead to life,546 announcing thereby his own Resurrection, though it was to be of another order. He speaks of this unique event as the "sign of Jonah,"547 the sign of the temple: he announces that he will be put to death but rise thereafter on the third day.548

Mere demonstrations of how a parable can be interpreted in another way than what you think.

lol. Apparently the RCC catechism doesn't think this parable can be interpreted any other way but according to the clear and explicit metaphor Christ chose to employ.

541 posted on 10/08/2009 12:32:08 AM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 539 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg
Nice point Doc.

It seems Roman Catholics are free to interpret their catechism anyway they see fit.

542 posted on 10/08/2009 12:38:21 AM PDT by Gamecock ("...Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles" and both to Americans.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 541 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg
Apparently the RCC catechism doesn't think this parable can be interpreted any other way but according to the clear and explicit metaphor Christ chose to employ.

The Catholic Catechism IS the Roman Catholic Church's interpretation of the meaning... that does not mean there are not more and perhaps more accurate interpretations made from a position of later scholarship.

543 posted on 10/08/2009 1:07:24 AM PDT by Swordmaker (Remember, the proper pronunciation of IE is "AAAAIIIIIEEEEEEE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 541 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg; Petronski
As Petronski pointed out, the picture you posted has both the Blessed Virgin holding the Baby Jesus AND our Lord on His Cross, certainly nobody believes that the mother and Child were crucified.

If anything what is depicted is both the beginning and end of Christ's Life on Earth. If you cannot see that His mother was an integral part of his life then I feel sorry for you, if you believe that His love for His mother somehow detracts from His love for you then I feel sorry for you and if you believe that scouring the internet for the most hateful things you can find about His mother, then I feel really sorry for you.

I've given you the benefit of the doubt for a long time, but I can only conclude that your purpose on these threads is to somehow convince yourself of you “election” by exhibiting hatred of Catholicism. I cannot even imagine how terrifying it must be for a person to believe that their salvation is so conditioned on proselytizing that they fabricate falsehoods. God loves you and wants you with Him, He DOES NOT need you to prove that you are somehow better than the rest of His children. I will continue to pray for you, but it is doubtful that I will respond to any of your posts in the foreseeable future.

544 posted on 10/08/2009 4:50:05 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 538 | View Replies]

To: blue-duncan

I am well aware that Jesus Christ was chastising the man in John 4:48, I am ALSO aware that Jesus then performed His second miracle and cured the man’s son.


545 posted on 10/08/2009 4:56:44 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 517 | View Replies]

To: Petronski

LOL. riiiiighhhhttt.


546 posted on 10/08/2009 5:16:00 AM PDT by Marysecretary (GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 529 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg

There are three figures in that photo: Mother of God, the Christ Child and Christ Crucified.

If you think using the back of that stone crucifix as a support for another statue means it depicts that other statue on the Cross with Jesus at the Crucifixion, then you necessarily must claim (absurdly) that “Catholics believe Mary and the Christ Child are on the cross with Christ helping Christ to redeem His sheep.”

Imagine that: another great Perry Mason moment from you, another EPIC FAIL.


547 posted on 10/08/2009 6:10:20 AM PDT by Petronski (In Germany they came first for the Communists, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 538 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg
Yes, words matter.

An amazing admission from you. It's progress.

And Catholics quibble about the meaning of "explicitly"...

What you call a "quibble" is a rigorous effort to explain to you what the word means.

...when the Catechism of the Catholic Church clearly and EXPLICITLY says "the sign of Jonah" references Christ's resurrection...

That was not the issue. The issue was whether the Catechism of the Catholic Church supports your claim that Christ explicitly said the only sign we need is His resurrection, which it does not.

...a fact three Catholics denied EXPLICITLY.

Bzzzzt. Wrong again. Either you are playing a shell game with your contentions or you cannot follow simple logic. I suspect the former.

548 posted on 10/08/2009 6:17:04 AM PDT by Petronski (In Germany they came first for the Communists, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 541 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock
Nice point Doc.

LOL

549 posted on 10/08/2009 6:17:36 AM PDT by Petronski (In Germany they came first for the Communists, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 542 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg
Out of respect; those of us who acknowledge Jesus as the Messiah would do this.


550 posted on 10/08/2009 6:31:46 AM PDT by Storm Cloud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 516 | View Replies]

To: Petronski
Keep in mind that the picture comes from an anti-Catholic website. But they do have some really interesting stuff on their website:

THE CALVINISM DEBATE Part 1 of 2

3. CALVINISM’S DOCTRINES ARE CONTRARY TO THE PLAIN TEACHING OF GOD’S WORD.

THE BIBLE VS. THE CALVINIST DOCTRINE THAT FAITH IS A WORK

Calvinism says that grace means man cannot do anything, cannot even believe, because otherwise grace would not be grace and the sinner would have something to boast of.

4. CALVINISM INTERPRETS SCRIPTURE BY THEOLOGY RATHER THAN BY CONTEXT.

Its doctrines are not supported by the plain language of Scripture but are read into the Scripture. In Bible interpretation, the principle rule is to interpret according to the plain language of the text and according to the context.

5. CALVINISM MISSTATES WHAT NON-CALVINISTS BELIEVE.

There are many strawman arguments that the Calvinist erects and defeats, but by defeating them he has only defeated a figment of his own imagination.

551 posted on 10/08/2009 6:34:48 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 547 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

The blind leading the blind.

Sad.


552 posted on 10/08/2009 6:41:03 AM PDT by Petronski (In Germany they came first for the Communists, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 551 | View Replies]

To: Storm Cloud

Religious reasons aside, the Shroud of Turin is capitalized because it is a proper noun, it is no different than capitalizing the Arch of Titus in Rome or the Brooklyn Bridge.


553 posted on 10/08/2009 6:47:51 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 550 | View Replies]

To: Petronski
But it was rather telling to see that it's not just Catholics who recognize the outrageous strawman tactics employed by Calvinists.
554 posted on 10/08/2009 6:51:02 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 552 | View Replies]

To: Petronski
The problem is that you keep redefining "its."

Actually it should be "it's" (with an apostrophe), but regardless it should be quite easy to provide a link for something that Christ said EXPLICITLY.

If the ONLY sign we need is the Resurrection, WHY do the Gospels also focus on other events? Why did Saint Paul write so many epistles?

555 posted on 10/08/2009 7:03:40 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 523 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

The suggestion that the Resurrection is the ONLY sign we need is supported neither by Scripture NOR the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

The reason neither support this suggestion is that the suggestion is false.


556 posted on 10/08/2009 8:12:51 AM PDT by Petronski (In Germany they came first for the Communists, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 555 | View Replies]

To: Petronski

It’s just another strawman argument.

If its ONLY the Resurrection, then why do the Calvinists have “TULIP”? For that matter, where is “TULIP” in the Bible because if it’s not manmade I don’t know what is.


557 posted on 10/08/2009 8:36:21 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 556 | View Replies]

To: Storm Cloud
Out of respect; those of us who acknowledge Jesus as the Messiah would do this (capitalize "shroud.")

Good grief. Are we to worship a piece of hemp or flax? Are we to show "respect" through punctuation? Are we to kiss the leather of a sandal or even the blanket that swaddled the Christ child?

God forbid such idolatry.

"Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him." -- Psalms 2:12


"Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen." -- Romans 1:21-25


"Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,

(Touch not; taste not; handle not; 2

Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men?" -- Colossians 2:20-22

Get it? The reality of our sanctified life is spiritual, not physical "after the commandments and doctrines of men."

Christ told us the only "sign" we need is His resurrection. To look for more, especially in the physical world, shows a lack of trust in Him and His word.

558 posted on 10/08/2009 4:22:16 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 550 | View Replies]

To: Petronski
The issue was whether the Catechism of the Catholic Church supports your claim that Christ explicitly said the only sign we need is His resurrection, which it does not.

lol. I actually enjoy this. Such is the glory of God. Here's your own catechism explicitly rebuking you...

994 - But there is more. Jesus links faith in the resurrection to his own person: "I am the Resurrection and the life."544 It is Jesus himself who on the last day will raise up those who have believed in him, who have eaten his body and drunk his blood.545 Already now in this present life he gives a sign and pledge of this by restoring some of the dead to life,546 announcing thereby his own Resurrection, though it was to be of another order. He speaks of this unique event as the "sign of Jonah,"547 the sign of the temple: he announces that he will be put to death but rise thereafter on the third day.548

Please note your catechism says Jesus "speaks of this unique event ('His own resurrection') as the 'sign of Jonah.'"

Christ's own words which He "speaks" clearly without confusion tell us His resurrection is as the sign of Jonah.

On this one it would seem like a person doesn't even need "eyes to see." His words are that "explicit."

559 posted on 10/08/2009 4:39:01 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 548 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg
Here's your own catechism explicitly rebuking you...

I don't have a catechism. You are quoting the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

That aside, you need a dictionary.

What's missing is "only." The exclusivity is not there, if you have eyes to see and a heart to limit yourself only to what Christ (and the Catechism of His Church) says, rather than what you want.

I guarantee, taking you to school on logic is thoroughly enjoyable to me.

560 posted on 10/08/2009 4:53:27 PM PDT by Petronski (In Germany they came first for the Communists, And I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 559 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 521-540541-560561-580581-592 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson