Skip to comments.Last Judgement #28 [Invitation to the New Church]
Posted on 05/22/2011 10:02:42 AM PDT by DaveMSmith
Last Judgment 28
V. THE LAST JUDGMENT IS TO BE WHERE ALL ARE TOGETHER, AND SO IN THE SPIRITUAL WORLD, NOT ON EARTH
The general belief about the Last Judgment is that the Lord accompanied by angels will appear in glory in the clouds of heaven, and He will then raise up from their graves all who have ever lived from the beginning of creation, clothe their souls with a body, and, when they have been summoned to meet, judge them, sending those who have lived good lives to everlasting life or heaven, and those who lived wicked lives to everlasting death or hell.
The churches have taken this belief from the literal sense of the Word, and there was no possibility of removing it so long as it remained unknown that everything mentioned in the Word has a spiritual sense; and this sense is the real Word, the literal sense serving as its basis or foundation. Without this kind of literal sense the Word could not have been Divine, and have served both heaven and the world as a means of instruction on how to live and what to believe, and as a means of conjunction. So if anyone knows the spiritual things corresponding to natural things in the Word, he can know that the Lord's coming in the clouds of heaven does not mean His appearance there, but His appearance in the Word. The Lord is the Word, because He is Divine truth. The clouds of heaven in which He is to come are the literal sense of the Word, and the glory is its spiritual sense. The angels are heaven, from which He appears, and they are also the Lord as regards Divine truths.# This makes plain the meaning of these words, namely, that when the church comes to an end the Lord will open up the spiritual sense of the Word, and thus reveal Divine truth such as it is in itself. This will be a sign that the Last Judgment is at hand.
That there is a spiritual sense within each thing and expression in the Word, and what it is may be seen in the Arcana Coelestia. This book expounds in full detail the contents of Genesis and Exodus in accordance with their spiritual sense. Some selected passages dealing with the Word and its spiritual sense may be found in the small work About the White Horse described in Revelation.
# The Lord is the Word, because He is Divine truth in heaven (AC 2533, 2813, 2859, 2894, 3397, 3712). The Lord is the Word because the Word comes from Him and is about Him (AC 2859). It is about nothing but the Lord, especially in its inmost sense about the glorification of His Humanity, so that the Lord Himself is contained in it (AC 1873, 9357). The Lord's coming is His presence in the Word and the revelation of this (AC 3900, 4060). A cloud in the Word means the letter of the Word, or its literal meaning (AC 4060, 4391, 5922, 6343, 6752, 8106, 8781, 9430, 10551, 10574). Glory in the Word means Divine truth such as it is in heaven and in the spiritual sense (AC 4809, 5922, 8267, 8427, 9429, 10574). Angels in the Word mean Divine truths coming from the Lord, since angels are the means by which they are received, and they do not utter them of themselves but from the Lord (AC 1925, 2821, 3039, 4085, 4295, 4402, 6280, 8192, 8301). The trumpets and horns then blown by angels mean Divine truths in heaven and revealed from heaven (AC 8815, 8823, 8915).
Okay, you're OBAMA.
I've listened to hundreds of sermons from Protestant pastors, and somehow I've failed to hear what you just claimed.
I might suggest turning on your television during televangelist hour. Perhaps you will not fail.
Really? Is the RM also unlettered in the languages of Christain theology and likewise prone to jump into the middle of online conversations, thus missing the nature and content of the conversation?
James 2:10-11 10For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it. 11For he who said, "Do not commit adultery," also said, "Do not murder." If you do not commit adultery but do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law.
From Catholic's favorite book of the NT.
If you're a law breaker, you incur the penalty of death. If righteousness came by the law, Christ died for nothing.
We can't earn salvation by good works because the only way to have the penalty of death remitted is through forgiveness, which is a gift, not earned.
Harley, Harley, Harley, I recognize and appreciate the effort you are putting into this, but I think your problem is that you are reading Catholic sources (note: New Advent is not an official Catholic source) not with a critical and objective eye, but in an effort to find evidence of guilt. Trent did not outlaw indulgences. Catholic doctrine, per Indulgentarium Doctrina 1, defines and indulges as; "An indulgence is a remission before God of the temporal punishment due to sins whose guilt has already been forgiven, which the faithful Christian who is duly disposed gains under certain defined conditions through the Churchs help when, as a minister of redemption, she dispenses and applies with authority the treasury of the satisfactions won by Christ and the saints".
The scandal you are referring to was the corruption of the practice of alms giving. There has never been any selling of indulgences.
Yes, really. According to the RM, if you post in any language other than English, unless it's a common phrase, you must post the translation.
It's a result of certain of your compatriots posting exorcism "prayers" against non-Catholics in Latin. If you don't like the RM's directives, you can thank them.
Is the RM also unlettered in the languages of Christain theology and likewise prone to jump into the middle of online conversations, thus missing the nature and content of the conversation?
How would I know? You'd have to ask him (her?). And besides, it's irrelevant as not everyone who reads FR knows Latin and the faux surprise and astonishment that there are actually people out there who are not fluent in Latin is condescending at the very least, haughty and arrogant at the worst.
Daniel, ....Your post of Swendenborg much resembles the path today's cults and false religious leaders follow. Thereafter those who they recruit do likewise. There is a systematic step by step progression away from Christ and the way of Salvation God provides.
I say this because I recently had conversation with one who basically said the same thing Swedenborg said. Stunning similarity!
This person also is supposedly "seeking the truth" though they have known the way of salvation thru Christ...they now doubt the truths of the scripture prefering to use only those which guarantee their salvation...but cannot accept God would allow people to go to hell for not accepting Christ.
Which just shows that demonic influences appear to use the same tactics even today. That man still falls for just as Eve did. Amazing to think mans intellect has not advanced as he proclaims it has....at least in the areas of the real battles for mens souls.
You're just saying that because Greek is the first language of the Church. I cannot take umbrage at that because Latin is the second tier, true. But I can beat you at skeet shooting, so there.
Metmom, try hard to understand this. The Latin prayer I posted was a translation of an ENGLISH one two posts earlier.
"And besides, it's irrelevant as not everyone who reads FR knows Latin and the faux surprise and astonishment that there are actually people out there who are not fluent in Latin is condescending at the very least, haughty and arrogant at the worst."
There is nothing faux about it. It has surprised me for years now. I keep hoping that anyone here who is serious about Christian theology would actually take the time to develop a working knowledge of Latin and Greek at least, and hopefully Slavonic. It would improve the quality of the discussion immeasurably.
Grace is a gift that is freely given. God desires that all be saved, yet all are not saved. Faith without works and works without faith are both dead. Works alone will not get me into heaven, but and absence of works will probably keep me out.
Little is known of St. Dismas, the good thief, except for the narrative of the crucifixion. His works are a matter of speculation.
We need an interpreter of English too. Exactly what constitutes a "common phrase"? Common to whom?
There are Latin and Greek phrases that are very common among the Roman and Orthodox Catholics that are objected to on this forum. I think it is just a tool to annoy and impede Catholic content and theology.
It never ceases to amaze me that the very people who can manage to find the single derogatory or anti-Catholic nugget in an obscure or banned website are suddenly incapable of locating and using the many online translation tools or sources.
2) Are you infallibly certain that your interpretation of the Bible is infallible?
More than i can be certain that Rome is the infallible interpreter, and as much as i can [be] certain its interpretations are infallible, insomuch as Scripture clearly declares such. And anyone who even affirms that there is a God could be declaring infallible truth.
To reiterate what was also said ,
I believe i can infallibly and inerrantly declare, based upon what is clearly stated in the Scriptures, that God is, and has communicated His word to certain souls mentioned in the Bible. And so may you and Rome.
On the other end, I do not hold i can declare anything close to certainty as knowing the year of the Lord's return. And i certainly do not infallibly declare that i am and will be infallible and inerrantly whenever i speak on faith and morals to all within my house, or the like.
Thus it should have been evident to you that the answer was a conditional yes, for as i carefully stated, the real issue is the basis for determining infallibility, that of Scriptural warrant and corroboration, versus conformity to a content and scope-based criteria, which renders whatever it declares to be infallible, not the degree of scriptural substantiation, which might not even be an infallible interpretation of said Scripture.
Now are you certain that your understandings of infallible definitions are infallible, as well as your judgment as to how many declarations (judging the parts that are), certainty of which you need to know in order to submit to them?
Can you even be certain, with the certainty of faith, that you have received a true sacrament through Rome's clergy?
And if you have certainty that the Pope has only spoken ex cathedra twice, do you claim greater ability than Roman Catholic apologists and clergy who disagree with you?
Doctrine of Life 1 and Coelestia 8393
Are these another gospel?
Well, thanks for sticking up for this unlettered and uncultured ignoramus who doesn't even understand Latin and I thought I was the only one. Do you mean there are others?
I pray and strive to understand the word of God in English.
"More than i can be certain that Rome is the infallible interpreter..."
How? What makes your interpretations more accurate than 90%+ of Protestantism and 100% of Catholicism?
"And if you have certainty that the Pope has only spoken ex cathedra twice, do you claim greater ability than Roman Catholic apologists and clergy who disagree with you?"
Infallibility only applies to issues of faith and morals, not Church history so the Catholic apologists and clergy you are referring are inherently fallible> I cannot speak for them, I can only cite actual Church history.
A pope has only spoken "ex cathedra" two times. It was first formally invoked in 1854 by Pope Pius IX with the declaration of the Immaculate Conception. The second time was by Pope Pius XII when he affirmed the Assumption of Mary into Heaven in 1950.
Yes, Swendenborg claimed a unique supreme interpretive ability, but like Camping, his hyper spiritualization can be used to prove anything, and like Joseph Smith (who met with both Elijah and Elias, Greek for the former) he had more supernatural spiritual encounters with notable persons of the Bible than anyone in the Bible.
Hey! You wrote it in English and I understand it!
There's hope for the great unwashed yet.
The irony is that Scripture wasn’t written in Latin, it was written in Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic.
Any Latin Bibles are merely translations of the original, just like English Bibles are, so Latin is nothing special as far as Christianity is concerned.
So someone knows Latin fluently? whoo hoo...... Latin is a dead language.
Color me not impressed.
I'll try to follow all of the rules, even the dumb ones. ;-)
Still with the trick questions? If the answer is, yes, you will ridicule and deny it. If he says, no, you will say, then we don't have to listen to you. The Pharisees tried the same kind of things with Jesus.
Imagine that! Saving that special privileged dispensation of EX-CATHEDRA infallibility for two dogmas and they are both UNSCRIPTURAL!!!
It isn't a trick question at all, it merely points out the vacuousness of the foundations of the reformation. Ultimately, you have to admit that everyone else's interpretations are no better or worse than YOPIS, including that of every Catholic.
That is the beauty of it and why it is also the language of law and science. Because Latin is dead it no longer changes and evolves. Unlike English, Greek, and even now Hebrew, its meanings are fixed permanently in time. Whoo hoo.
Are you speaking infallibly?
I see it as just a way to make anyone's understanding of Scripture purely existential. When you reduce it to that, one is no more "correct" than another. In fact, it must assume there is no correct way. Knowing where you are probably trying to drive this point to is in accepting that there MUST be only one "infallible" interpreter and it is the one you have insisted is the only divinely entitled one - your Magesterium. I think you have overplayed your hand.
I can truthfully say that both of those dogmas are unscriptural, yes.
The latter construct is purely a Calvinist one that is rejected by Lutherans, Pentecostals, Anglicans, Methodists and many Baptists etc. as being one that rejects the idea of a loving Christian God and creates a calvingod who pre-damns people to hell and pre-programs them to only commit evil
hence this is a calvingod who makes a robot (who has no free will), pre-programs them to do evil (note: the robot without free will does no evil, it is the programmer who has in a way done it), pre-chooses some to go to hell and then at the end laughs and sends this robot to everlasting torment.
| 11Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?
12Therefore, thou son of man, say unto the children of thy people, The righteousness of the righteous shall not deliver him in the day of his transgression: as for the wickedness of the wicked, he shall not fall thereby in the day that he turneth from his wickedness; neither shall the righteous be able to live for his righteousness in the day that he sinneth.
13When I shall say to the righteous, that he shall surely live; if he trust to his own righteousness, and commit iniquity, all his righteousnesses shall not be remembered; but for his iniquity that he hath committed, he shall die for it.
14Again, when I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; if he turn from his sin, and do that which is lawful and right;
15If the wicked restore the pledge, give again that he had robbed, walk in the statutes of life, without committing iniquity; he shall surely live, he shall not die.
16None of his sins that he hath committed shall be mentioned unto him: he hath done that which is lawful and right; he shall surely live.
He 'borrowed' from a LOT of places,
but they ALL got it from ME to begin with!
Remember; institutions can be tempted as well!
You will not certainly die, the serpent said to the
woman committee. For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.
Then what this priest seems to be saying is in like mind with what you and Kosta is saying. Here is what the priest states again...
I am under no authority to "submit" myself to the teaching of any priest except when he, as the representative of the bishop, teaches the dogma or canonical discipline of The Church.
If I understand your position, I'm not sure that I see any difference in a Protestant church and a Catholic/Orthodox church on the matter of authority. If I were a member of a Baptist church, when I join the church there are certain things that I submit to in joining the Baptists. Depending on which Baptist group I belong to determines what are the "core" beliefs. A Southern Baptist is significantly different than a Freewill Baptist. If I went into either of these Baptist churches telling them I don't believe in the rapture, some might raise their eyebrows but that would be the extent of it. However, I can assure you that if I asked to have a statue of Mary wheeled in so that I could venerate and say my "Hail Mary's" before it, both the Southern Baptists and the Freewill Baptists would toss me out the door.
In the first case no one cares (for the most part) because there is no written doctrine on the rapture (some do include this in their doctrinal statements). On the other hand, wheeling a statue of Mary into the church would violate certain core beliefs held by all Protestants. The only way this would be allow is if all Protestants bend their position to have statues of the Virgin Mary prominently displayed in the lobby.
With regards to the filique, based upon your comments, someone will have to bend their position on the Nicene Creed, either the Orthodox or Rome. That means that someone will have to be willing to modify a core piece of doctrine. This isn't unlike allowing homosexuals to serve as priests/pastors in churches today. The church can only bend so far before it breaks.
16 But, exerting all my powers to acall upon God to deliver me out of the power of this enemy which had seized upon me, and at the very moment when I was ready to sink into bdespair and abandon myself to destructionnot to an imaginary ruin, but to the power of some actual being from the unseen world, who had such marvelous power as I had never before felt in any beingjust at this moment of great alarm, I saw a pillar of clight exactly over my head, above the brightness of the dsun, which descended gradually until it fell upon me.
17 It no sooner appeared than I found myself adelivered from the enemy which held me bound. When the light rested upon me I bsaw two cPersonages, whose brightness and dglory defy all description, estanding above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the otherThis is My fBeloved gSon. Hear Him!
(Compare line 15 to alien abduction experiences...)
...there would be a series lack of humor and sarcasm in this thread.
I thought your said PASTORs!
The adults were talking and the kids have pestered them!
Why are all the kitchen help in the Great Room, haranging the invited guests?
All that money wasted on my Aramaic lessons!
But not his name.
Then how did he BECOME a saint?
If it weren’t for all the darned ‘exceptions’ the Bible would be a very good rule book!
All your languages are belong to us!
The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world Gods invisible qualitieshis eternal power and divine naturehave been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
Of course! (more refined than 'duh!'; doncha think!)
Just looky here:
27 So he started out, and on his way he met an Ethiopian eunuch, an important official in charge of all the treasury of the Kandake (which means queen of the Ethiopians). This man had gone to Jerusalem to worship, 28 and on his way home was sitting in his chariot reading the Book of Isaiah the prophet. 29 The Spirit told Philip, Go to that chariot and stay near it.
30 Then Philip ran up to the chariot and heard the man reading Isaiah the prophet. Do you understand what you are reading? Philip asked.
31 How can I, he said, unless someone explains it to me? So he invited Philip to come up and sit with him.
32 This is the passage of Scripture the eunuch was reading:
He was led like a sheep to the slaughter,
and as a lamb before its shearer is silent,
so he did not open his mouth.
33 In his humiliation he was deprived of justice.
Who can speak of his descendants?
For his life was taken from the earth.
34 The eunuch asked Philip, Tell me, please, who is the prophet talking about, himself or someone else? 35 Then Philip began with that very passage of Scripture and told him the good news about Jesus.
36 As they traveled along the road, they came to some water and the eunuch said, Look, here is water. What can stand in the way of my being baptized?  [c] 38 And he gave orders to stop the chariot. Then both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water and Philip baptized him. 39 When they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord suddenly took Philip away, and the eunuch did not see him again, but went on his way rejoicing.
(Some manuscripts include here Philip said, If you believe with all your heart, you may. The eunuch answered, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.)
But... what if he is trusting in CHRIST's righteousness?
It's never a waste to learn another language, especially one associated with The Faith. With your knowledge of Aramaic you'll be right at home at a Maronite Liturgy or for that matter, at any liturgy which uses West Syriac which are mostly those of the Non-Chalcedonian Oriental Orthodox, though I sincerely doubt you'll like what you hear. :) Aramaic, btw, like Slavonic, Arabic, Coptic and Ge'ez accurately translates the Greek the NT was written in. Western Latin and Anglo Saxon based languages generally do not.