« first day (1890 days earlier)      last day (2747 days later) » 

12:59 AM
@Nathaniel I'm really looking forward to seeing your answers. Like I told Lee, I'm going to leave you guys alone for a while. I've asked a million questions and I can't even keep up with them all.
I'm interested in your question about infants going to heaven, but I do think we should talk about this first. This seems like a dangerous idea to me, and I think it's logical conclusion is worst than any of the imaginary hells. If all infants go to heaven, how is it moral to let them live knowing that there is about a 90% chance they're going to hell?
 
1:28 AM
@anonymouswho I don't know that the question answered particularly well, as the doctrine of original sin is about the baby being conceived in a corrupt state which is immediately followed by actual sin, that is, not obeying the law of God perfectly from then on (which anyone with a corrupt nature can not do). There is of course the additional doctrine of the covenant, which teaches that children born to covenant parents who die are saved as part of the covenant (see David's child with Bathsheba).
 
 
1 hour later…
2:31 AM
@anonymouswho Unfortunately I haven't had as much time as I'd like to devote to putting together some answers to these questions; part of the problem is that they are good questions that require research! Feel free to take a break, but don't let a lack of answers deter you from asking more... lots of my questions are unanswered and waiting for the right person to come along.
 
@Birdie Are you saying that an infant does commit sin that makes them guilty enough for hell? If you can answer the question better than Caleb, then by all means, please do. I still can't help but imagine billions of babies being born and instantly thrown into an eternal torture chamber to have their flesh burned forever and ever in agonizing pain; but maybe I'm misunderstanding something.
I wanted to ask you a question if you don't mind. Do you believe the entire Christian church was deceived for about 1400 years?
 
@anonymouswho Incidentally, since this one appears unlikely to be reopened (for reasons that escape me), let me briefly say that yes, trinitarians believe that many bare references to "God" in the NT refer to God the Father, and that Jesus is the Son of the Father, not the Son of the "divine essence."
 
@Nathaniel I'm glad you like some of my questions. You always seem to help me out when everyone else wants to close them, and I really appreciate that. Hey, thanks for answering that. It probably will get closed but I don't mind. I just wrote it as a wink to curiousdannii because he said it was wrong to call the persons of the trinity the bare word "god" =)
 
@anonymouswho Ah, gotcha. There are certainly different levels of precision. I certainly wish sometimes that higher levels of precision were used in the Bible, but God had his reasons...
 
@LeeWoofenden For my questions about Swedenborg, would it be okay with you and everyone else if I quote sections of your site that I have questions about? I'm assuming you're a proper authority on the subject.
 
3:35 AM
0
Q: Father and Son invaders

SpudsDisclaimer: This is NOT meant to incite political debate. I am looking for a historical answer. Presidents George H W Bush and George W Bush both invaded the Middle East. Before these two, what father and son pair each invaded the Middle East while leaders of their land? Maybe during the crusades?

 
@anonymouswho Yes, that's what I am saying. What's different from babies going to hell and not-babies?
@anonymouswho No, what makes you say this?
 
4:44 AM
@anonymouswho Questions here can quote websites for reference, as long as they provide proper attribution--i.e., links back to where the material is quoted from. And yes, I am an ordained Swedenborgian minister.
@anonymouswho Of course, you could ask questions on my website itself, in the comments section of the article(s) where the statement(s) are made. Please see my comments policy for some basic guidelines. There is also a form for submitting questions that either aren't addressed on the site or would require a full article to answer.
 
 
8 hours later…
12:20 PM
@Birdie Yeah, maybe there isn't much difference. As long as I get to live forever, I guess somebody's flesh has to burn to keep me warm in heaven; so the more the better. I asked about deception because you asked Lee if the church has been deceived for the past 1700 years. Are you a reformed christian? Because churches have been significantly different since Luther and Calvin spread their heresies against the Catholic church.
@LeeWoofenden Great thanks! If I think I'm misunderstanding something, I'll comment on the site to make sure I'm not confused, but if I have a real question I'd like to ask it here. Since you hang out here a lot, and this site is geared toward mostly Catholic and Reformed churches, I'd like to contribute to a bit of diversity.
 
12:59 PM
0
Q: Why was Archbishop of Carthage, Cyriacus, arrested?

NSNoobIn Life and Letters in Roman Africa page 117, it is mentioned that Cyriacus, the Archbishop of Carthage was arrested by Arab rulers on complaints by his own Roman Catholic followers. I find it very odd that Christians complained to Muslim Arab rulers about their own Archbishop. He was of course...

 
 
4 hours later…
4:29 PM
@anonymouswho Sounds good. I haven't had as many questions to answer here lately as I did earlier.
 
 
6 hours later…
10:27 PM
0
Q: Why didn't the knights of Western Europe drive the Moors out of Granada in 1212 when they invaded Iberia?

georgestriebyIn 1212, the knights of the Holy Roman Empire, France, and Spain pushed the Moors far down the Iberian Peninsula... but why didn't they go on and drive the Muslims completely off that peninsula? Did they have a reason for leaving southern Spain in the hands of the Almohads, when they could have e...

 
11:01 PM
@anonymouswho Luther and Calvin didn't really teach anything new, the Reformation was about returning (Reforming) the church in its original form, as the Roman Catholic Church, while having fairly sound origins, had gone way off the beaten path. And the official doctrinal positions of the RCC were not the only positions held by Christians before the Reformation, nor was the RCC the only church. So no, I don't think the church has been deceived for 1700 years.
Sorry, 1400*
 

« first day (1890 days earlier)      last day (2747 days later) »