Posted on 11/21/2012 2:34:48 PM PST by Lera
Not a word was heard from the Vatican all the years Sderot babies were in mortal danger. They began noticing the violence last week.
Cardinal Gianfranco Ravasi, President of the Vatican Council for Culture, commenting on the war between Israel and Hamas, delivered a severe attack on the Jewish people: “I think of the ‘massacre of the innocents’. Children are dying in Gaza, their mothers’ shouts is a perennial cry, a universal cry”.
The Catholic Church high official equated Israel’s operation in Gaza against terror groups with the New Testament story of Herod’s slaughter of Jewish babies in his effort to kill Jesus.
(Excerpt) Read more at israelnationalnews.com ...
That is in contrast to the Christian God, who because He is love, commands to love one another, not just those who look, sound, and act like us. If you do not love the children of the Gaza as dearly as you love yourself you stand in opposition to his commandments.
The Torah very plainly orders the utter annihilation of eight distinct nations. Now . . . chrstianity has always claimed a superior knowledge of G-d than Judaism, but what we see here is a justification of liberal theology and "Biblical criticism" in the name of the chrstian "progressive revelation": ie, "The ancient Israelites thought that G-d ordered them to annihilate eight nations because they didn't know any better, the fulness of revelation had not yet come, and that's the kind of world they lived in back then. Nowadays we know that G-d never ordered such a thing, but the Israelites thought He did and wrote it into their semi-savage Bible. The authors of the Bible were primitive and didn't understand the true nature of G-d any more than they understood the true origins of the universe."
There. Did I describe your worldview accurately?
This is blasphemy against G-d and against the Torah. But this blasphemy has been latent in chrstianity all along and was inevitable. Once one rejects the commandments and ceremonials of the Torah (and replaces them with alien ones), it is only a matter of time before one replaces the "primitive" worldview of the Torah and its narratives with a more up-to-date "scientific" one.
Catholics (and all classical chrstians) do not worship the Biblical G-d. They reject the Biblical G-d for the same reason atheist liberals reject G-d altogether: because He's allegedly a "big meanie." This standing in judgment on A-mighty G-d (which one would hope most people wouldn't have the guts to do) is inevitable once one replaces G-d as the source of morality with "natural law."
Our dear friend ZC should realize we believe in an unchanging God of Love who would be changed from perfection if He had hatred in Him
If you reject HaShem as G-d, kindly do not call me your "dear friend." The reference to a "bloodthirsty" G-d was clearly based on the two thousand year old chrstian slander on the "old testament G-d" as being a bloodthirsty tyrant as opposed to the allegedly "superior" chrstian "gxd" who would never order the annihilation of entire nations--but who has no trouble in torturing uncounted billions of souls in fire for all eternity. Yes, your "gxd" is just a big huggable teddy bear, isn't he?
Unfortunately, since you have no knowledge of the Holy Tongue (the language from which the universe was created), you don't understand either "love" or "hatred." In Hebrew the expressions "love" and "hate" are used to merely describe G-d's choice of one person/group/position to another. The well-known quote from Mal'akhi "Jacob have I loved, `Esav have I hated" merely means that G-d chose Jacob rather than `Esav. Of course, if you think the ancient Israelites were stone-age savages and the Holy Torah nothing but primitive ravings you will only laugh at this.
It is truly heartbreaking to see members of the allegedly "unchanged and unchanging" church invoking liberal Protestant higher criticism in order to justify the replacement of Judaism by chrstianity. As anti-Semitic as they are, I don't think the sedevacantists would have the gall to do what you Catholic FReepers have done--although they'd probably have their hearts warmed by your new-found fundamentalism with regard to Yushqa' actually being born on 12/25 ("because that's what the Roman census records say!").
Kindly refrain from slandering HaShem as "bloodthirsty."
Don't even try to shame Catholics because one of them likes Darwin. He's a saint to them.
“”The Old Testament God is the New Testament.””
Of course it’s the same God, but where we differ is Catholicism understands the New Testament revealed in Christ which means many things in the OT are seen as “types”(typology)
Example ...A type (typos in Greek), or “archetype,” often called a “shadow,” “parable,” “allegory,” or “figure” in Scripture, is a person, thing, or action that precedes and prefigures a greater person, thing, or action. That which is prefigured is referred to as an “antitype.” The concept is summarized in Scripture itself:
http://www.fisheaters.com/typology.html
A good article
http://www.uvm.edu/~wstephan/dante/typessay.htm
“”The God of Abraham who destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah and commanded the slaughter of the Canaanites is the God of Christianity as well.””
Their sin destroyed them,God just allowed it to happen because of their free will not to repent and have hardened hearts
Perhaps Saint Thomas Aquinas can help you understand about an unchanging God
But some might be of opinion that God does not love one object more than another; for a higher and a lower degree of intensity of affection is characteristic of a changeable nature, and cannot be attributed to God, from whom all change is utterly removed. Besides, wherever else there is mention of any divine activity, there is no question of more and less: thus one thing is not known by God more than another. In answer to this difficulty we must observe that whereas other activities of the soul are concerned with one object only, love alone seems to tend to two. For love wishes something to somebody: hence the things that we desire, we are properly said to ‘desire,’ not to ‘love,’ but in them we rather love ourselves for whom we desire them. Every divine act then is of one and the same intensity; but love may be said to admit of ‘greater and less’ in two ways, either in point of the good that we will to another, in which way we are said to love him more to whom we wish greater good; or again in point of the intensity of the act, in which way we are said to love him more to whom we wish, not indeed a greater good, but an equal good more fervently and effectually. In the former way then there is nothing to object to in the saying that God loves one more than another, inasmuch as He wishes him a greater good: but, understood of the second way, the saying is not tenable.
Hence it appears that of our affections there is none that can properly be in God except joy and love, though even these are in Him not by way of passion, as they are in us. That there is in God joy or delight is confirmed by the authority of Holy Scripture. I was delighted day by day playing before him, says the Divine Wisdom, which is God (Prov. viii, 30). The Philosopher also says that God ever rejoices with one simple delight.* The Scripture also speaks of love in God: With everlasting love I have loved thee (Jer. xxxi, 3); For the Father himself loveth you (John xvi, 27).
But even other affections (affectiones), which are specifically inconsistent with divine perfection, are predicated in Holy Writ of God, not properly but metaphorically, on account of likeness of effects. Thus sometimes the will in following out the order of wisdom tends to the same effect to which one might be inclined by a passion, which would argue a certain imperfection: for the judge punishes from a sense of justice, as an angry man under the promptings of anger. So sometimes God is said to be ‘angry,’ inasmuch as in the order of His wisdom He means to punish some one: When his anger shall blaze out suddenly (Ps. ii, 13). He is said to be ‘compassionate,’ inasmuch as in His benevolence He takes away the miseries of men, as we do the same from a sentiment of pity: The Lord is merciful and compassionate, patient and abounding in mercy (Ps. cli, 8). Sometimes also He is said to be ‘repentant,’ inasmuch as in the eternal and immutable order of His providence, He builds up what He had previously destroyed, or destroys what He had previously made, as we do when moved by repentance: It repenteth me that I have made man (Gen. vi, 6, 7). God is also said to be ‘sad,’ inasmuch as things happen contrary to what He loves and approves, as sadness is in us at what happens against our will: And the Lord saw, and it seemed evil in his eyes, because judgement is not: God saw that there is no man, and he was displeased, because there was none to meet him (Isa. lix, 15, 16).
All Orthodox Jews (and Noachides) are by definition "anti-chrstian" because they believe chrstianity is a false religion. Short of converting them all to chrstianity, you can't demand that they stop thinking this. Should all chrstians stop "crawling into bed" with Orthodox Jews on matters of common concern?
You know . . . you're going to cross the line into out-and-out anti-Semitism one day if you don't watch yourself. Please take a friendly word of caution and take some time off to count to ten or something.
Why do I sense bitterness from you?
A God of perfection would not be perfection with hate..
Since I’m back in my Aquinas studies these days perhaps this might help you..
That God hates nothing- ST Thomas Aquinas
AS love is to good, so is hatred to evil; we wish good to them whom we love, and evil to them whom we hate. If then the will of God cannot be inclined to evil, as has been shown , it is impossible for Him to hate anything.
2. The will of God tends to things other than Himself inasmuch as, by willing and loving His own being and goodness, He wishes it to be diffused as far as is possible by communication of His likeness. This then is what God wills in beings other than Himself, that there be in them the likeness of His goodness. Therefore God wills the good of everything, and hates nothing.
4. What is found naturally in all active causes, must be found especially in the Prime Agent. But all agents in their own way love the effects which they themselves produce, as parents their children, poets their own poems, craftsmen their works. Much more therefore is God removed from hating anything, seeing that He is cause of all.*
Hence it is said: Thou lovest all things that are, and hatest nothing of the things that Thou hast made (Wisd. xi, 25).
Some things however God is said, to hate figuratively (similitudinarie), and that in two ways. The first way is this, that God, in loving things and willing their good to be, wills their evil not to be: hence He is said to have hatred of evils, for the things we wish not to be we are said to hate. So it is said: Think no evil in your hearts every one of you against his friend, and love no lying oath: for all these are things that I hate, saith the Lord (Zach. viii, 17). But none of these things are effects of creation: they are not as subsistent things, to which hatred or love properly attaches. The other way is by God’s wishing some greater good, which cannot be without the privation of a lesser good; and thus He is said to hate, whereas it is more properly love. Thus inasmuch as He wills the good of justice, or of the order of the universe, which cannot be without the punishment or perishing of some, He is said to hate those beings whose punishment or perishing He wills, according to the text, Esau I have hated (Malach. i, 3); and, Thou hatest all who work Iniquity, thou wilt destroy all who utter falsehood: the man of blood and deceit the Lord shall abominate (Ps. v, 7).*
Example ...A type (typos in Greek), or “archetype,” often called a “shadow,” “parable,” “allegory,” or “figure” in Scripture, is a person, thing, or action that precedes and prefigures a greater person, thing, or action. That which is prefigured is referred to as an “antitype.”
Of course, the Catholic claim that the Hebrew Bible is a "type" of the "new testament" is no more self-evidently true (or more valid) than similar claims made by islam or mormonism. This makes Catholic criticisms of islam, Protestantism, and mormonism hypocritical, since taken to their logical conclusion they refute Catholicism as well.
I again invite all Fundamentalist Protestants on this forum to get out of chrstianity of any kind and embrace the True G-d by becoming observant Noachides. There is no "correct" form of chrstianity. It is all an imposition, an adulteration, and a brazen contradiction of G-d. To the extent that you continue to hold on to J*sus (however Judaized) you are implicated in this blasphemy.
Please consider it. Let the statements of Catholic (and other classical chrstian) FReepers open your eyes as to the true nature of chrstianity. The laws of G-d are light and life, and there is nothing to fear in acknowledging them.
It seems that you have become rabidly anti Christian,ZC
I prefer to pray for you rather than correspond with you anymore.
I pray the Holy Spirit fills you with love.
You may have the last word.
“I’ll keep posting every other godless thing I can find that he has said to the media”.
This seems to me to be very akin to the “target and demonize” ROE of the political left.
There is not one of us who can deny that, in our personal life, we have said something either incorrect, imprudent, or which can be misinterpreted, which had consequences and for which we are sorry.
Politicians do this, as the last election cycle has shown.
And people who are representatives of churches can also fall prey to this misfortune of words that can, whether justly or unjustly, be held against them.
That is why, in all such situations, the spiritual virtue of prudence has practical value, and which is much needed here on this unfortunate thread.
I can see only one beneficiary here: Old Screwtape, he who sows discord and division among the believers.
............................................
“The wise of heart is called a man of discernment, and pleasant speech increases persuasiveness.” Proverbs: 16:21
“The mind of the wise makes his speech judicious and adds persuasiveness to his lips.” Proverbs 16:23
“He who restrains his words has knowledge, and he who has a cool spirit is a man of understanding” Proverbs 17:27
Intellectualizing Sodom and Gomorrah as their sin destroying them does not mesh with the words of the Biblical account, stfassisi. The plain meaning is that they were destroyed rapidly and deliberately by God and God alone, to the point that the few righteous were instructed to flee and not look back.
We see this at work in Nineveh, which was spared essentially because of the innocent animals there. We see it in prophecy, with the Abomination Of Desolation, flee, do not tarry, do not go into your house to gather your belongings, go immediately.
Sin was the cause but not the effect. They were destroyed by God.
The unchanging Love of God works in two ways,dear RC
It punishes the wicked and it brings joy to the blessed, but that love of God is not a rage of hate or God would be changed and lack perfection.
“For our God is a consuming fire” (Hebrews 12:29)
Who “dwells in unapproachable light.” (I Timothy 6:16)
St. Isaac of Syria captures this well....
.. those who find themselves in hell will be chastised by the scourge of love. How cruel and bitter this torment of love will be! For those who understand that they have sinned against love, undergo no greater suffering than those produced by the most fearful tortures. The sorrow which takes hold of the heart, which has sinned against love, is more piercing than any other pain. It is not right to say that the sinners in hell are deprived of the love of God… But love acts in two ways, as suffering of the reproved, and as joy in the blessed! (St. Isaac of Syria, Mystic Treatises)
That is a completely unfounded allegation. I hate no one. I have lived and worked in Israel and know and love it's people. While the vast majority of the Israelis I have known are wonderful people, but that does not mean that, like Free Republic, it doesn't have its share of vile individuals. Not liking certain Jews is not antisemitic and rejecting the beliefs of the militant fringe of Judaism does not make me anti-God in any way.
However, Hillel Fendel is perfect example of the vile Israeli Jew. He is a racist, hateful person and is not representitive of all or even most Jews. He is an equal opportunity hater and thinks all Christians are antisemitism. As his writings confirm he is no stranger to outright lies.
No this is not about sowing discord , this is about exposing another lefty liberal academic but the biggest problem with this lefty is that people are already talking about making him the next pope.
See post 228 please. This lefty liberal cardinal believes in evolution and likes Darwin, is into environmentalism , and likes to quote God is dead Nietzsche , and has stated he has plans on getting involved in both Chicago and Washington. (yeah that is all this country needs is another foreign liberal pushing more liberal policies upon us)
Check out his twitter feed too . People are equating Gaza to his quote and he is not saying anything to discourage the two being tied together.
My reference to the opening line of an article doesn't mean that's the only point I recall. It means I chose not to make this personal and instead pointed to one of your recommended sources. The article's notion that protestants are catholic isn't something anyone I know IRL buys into. It's just a softer way to venture into anticatholic territory. And yes, I do consider that article anticatholic because it makes false statements about the Church. And curiously, the author doesn't seem to be against infallibility or the papacy. It's just the infallibility and papacy of Rome he rejects. He seems quite comfortable ascribing to himself the infallibility and ability to define doctrine that he would deny to the Pope.
Maybe a start of that, "let's everybody get along" meme should be we should be honest and accept constructive criticism when it is given and to know the difference
Point taken if you're referring to me personally. If, however, you're referring Protestant comments about Catholics and the Catholic Church, then surely you're aware that use of emotionally laden terms or thinly veiled insults hardly come across as "constructive" or well intentioned, even if they are honestly held beliefs of the commenter. I'm speaking in general, not of you specifically. And I speak of both Catholics and non. There's a way to state something objectively, and a way to do it with venom. Threads like this seem to be invitations for venom. And like you and I have said before, if something lacks the fruit of the Holy Spirit, it's difficult to believe it was Spirit-inspired.
I'm stuffed too :) Peace be with you.
“Check out his twitter feed, too.”
I’m not going to check out anything.
We are given life only one minute at a time and that is the way our Good Lord wishes us to live it. I know that my Redeemer lives and that I live for something far better than spending any more time on this thread or checking into somebodys twitter feed.
I’ll let this unfortunate thread run its dismal course, leaving its resolution in the hands of our Savior.
“May God send his truth and his love”. Psalm 57
I’m out now.
I don't justify or support anyone who harms a child no matter what their religious proclamation is, so I have no idea what point you're trying make . I also don't understand your reasoning behind showing disgusting video's on something everyone is aware of.
Perhaps you might post something that shows how Christian love of others changes hearts,rather than posting graphic disgusting video's that only serve to whip up more anger on something we already know.
Dear Lera, you really ought to do the right thing and ask to have this thread removed since it was misleading about Ravasi and was based upon liberal journalism and lies
IOW, you'll attempt to change the subject.
It's really simple. I'm going to post Ravasi's actual words. The discourse on which your article is based. I'm inviting you to compare Meiotti's words with Ravasi's actual words.
Is there a problem with that?
Things edited and translated by the Vatican to cover for him don't count much.
Ah, I see. You won't discuss the transcript because the Vatican doctored it. Have I got that right?
Figures.
BTW, since you're so concerned about integrity in publishing, you might like to consider this little tidbit. The author of this piece, Giulio Meiotti, is apparently a serial plagiarist. How 'bout that then!
Did you know that? You're happy to quote him as a journalist of record?
Thank you for your wise and helpful comments.
"You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect." - Matthew 5:43-48
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.