Total posts: 168
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Luke’s story of Jesus in the temple at the age of 12 is the only incident in the gospels about the life of Jesus between infancy and the beginning of his ministry. Luke has several intentions for this passage in the gospel of Luke and the book of Acts that are suggestive for preaching. By noting that Mary and Joseph went every year to Jerusalem for the Passover, Luke 2:41-52 implies that Jesus grew up in a faithful Jewish household. The emphasis on Jesus in the temple and his interaction with the teachers of Israel plays a similar important role in the gospel of Luke and the book of Acts. Jesus was immersed in Judaism since his youth. He speaks as an insider with a thorough knowledge.
These facts are important because by the time Luke wrote (80-90 CE) tensions had developed between Luke’s congregation, whose distinguishing features were believing that the ministry of Jesus began the final and full manifestation of the realm of God and welcoming gentiles into the community without complete conversion to Judaism, and other Jewish groups that did not share that belief. As the ministry of Jesus unfolds, Jesus has considerable conflict with Jewish authorities over how to interpret God’s presence and purposes in the eschatological moment. The same thing is true of the church in Acts. By recollecting that Jesus was raised in a faithful Jewish atmosphere, and recalling that Jesus speaks as a Jewish insider, Luke assures listeners that the viewpoints of Jesus and the church are authentically Jewish. Jesus and the church do not reject Judaism. They interpret Jewish convictions in light of the eschatological turning of the ages.
It is easy to be appalled that Mary and Joseph lost track of Jesus. Luke, of course, is not pointing to bad parenting, but is setting the stage for Jesus to state clearly his own understanding that he has a special relationship with God. Jesus’ true Father is God (not Joseph), and Jesus is to be about God’s interests, i.e. must serve God’s purposes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
I’d appreciate it if you didn’t misquote me. The full quote is: “Regardless, most of the questions you've raised aren’t really important with regards to the overarching atonement narrative.” I did not say it wasn’t important, period. I said it wasn’t important for the atonement narrative.
Will you address anything else from #20?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Indeed we do not know "all" the details nor circumstances. But the bible makes it clear that it was "a whole day" before they noticed he was missing.
Firstly, we need to consider the cultural norms of the period. In ancient Jewish society, communal responsibility played a significant role in child-rearing, especially during events like the Passover pilgrimage. It was typical for large family groups to travel together, and it would not have been unusual for parents to assume their children were safe with relatives or neighbors. To apply modern standards to this context misrepresents the reality of their world.
Next, the passage in Luke 2:43-44, which states, "After the festival was over, while his parents were returning home, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem, but they were unaware of it," suggests not neglect but a reflection of this cultural trust. It wasn’t until they could not find Him after a day’s journey that concern set in, sparking their immediate return to Jerusalem. It is not conjecture but reasonable context to consider that, like any parents, they could have been reassured by assumptions or common practices.
This doesn't answer they question as to why they were "astonished", does it? Had they forgotten that this child was "divine"?
Regarding their astonishment at finding Jesus in the Temple (Luke 2:46-47), this was less about ignorance and more about the surprising display of His knowledge at such a young age. While Mary was aware of her child's divine nature, experiencing this in a new, tangible way — Jesus discussing profound theological matters with esteemed scholars — underscores the complexity of fully comprehending His mission. Just as humans can be told of extraordinary capacities yet remain awestruck when witnessed, this reaction was consistent with her human nature, even as the mother of the Messiah. The claim that Mary was distinct and chosen does not negate her humanity.
He (Jesus) was holy, immaculately conceived, special and a child that was to be a king that by the promise of his father god himself would inherit the throne of king David ? Which among other promises made to his mother by god never came to fruition.
According to scripture, this promise is rooted in the covenant God made with David in 2 Samuel 7:12-16, where God promises that David’s lineage will endure forever and that his throne will be established eternally. This is interpreted in Christian theology as pointing to the coming of the Messiah. Jesus’ role as King is manifested not through a conventional earthly kingdom but through His spiritual reign over believers. The New Testament emphasizes that His kingdom is "not of this world" (John 18:36), indicating that His reign transcends earthly politics and focuses on a divine, eternal rule. In this interpretation, Jesus does fulfill the promise to inherit David's throne by establishing a new covenant that surpasses a temporal dynasty and extends into an everlasting spiritual realm.
Regardless, most of the questions you've raised aren't really important with regards to the overarching atonement narrative. As always, it's important to explore questions like these, but I wouldn't worry about it too much if I were you. Let me know if I forgot to address any of your other questions or objections.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
I simply prefer to discuss my theories, opinions and beliefs concerning the scriptures on this open forum where they can be challenged by all comers including Chaplains, Pastors and Priests and to be able to ask questions of my own and hopefully receive good, reliable coherent answers and or replies.
I respect that. It seems like you're more committed to truth-finding rather than potential numerical gratification.
Can you not think of anything yourself concerning the bible that you may want to discuss or worth asking about and questioning?
I have many questions regarding the faith. I definitely do not know everything regarding the Bible. However, I have my own social circle with whom I ask questions and dialogue with. Most questions I research directly myself; a good example of this would be when claims arise during debates, or when I'm directly posed a question in private messages or on forums. This is a big part of why I like to debate — it forces me to improve my theological aptitude. In debating, I research complicated topics I might not have explored otherwise.
Mary must have been the most ignorant negligent mother to have ever walked the Earth given the circumstances surrounding her conception and the birth of gods "ONLY" son.It was a whole day before she realised that her heavenly charge- son of a god no less!- was missing. And another three to find the little lingerer.And what is as puzzling is as to why it was that they were "astonished" by how he spoke and answered questions! Why was they!?
You're referencing Luke 2:41-52 here. I wouldn’t label Mary or Joseph as "ignorant" or "negligent" without a deeper understanding of the context, especially given the customs of their time. In those days, traveling to Jerusalem for Passover meant moving in large family caravans, where it was common for children to be with extended family or friends. Mary and Joseph likely assumed, quite reasonably, that Jesus was safe within the group (Luke 2:44). Once they realized He wasn’t, they immediately went back to search for him (Luke 2:45). Could they have checked more carefully? Perhaps, but it's important to consider that we don’t know all the circumstances. They may have been under stress, overworked, or even reassured by someone that Jesus was with the group. I'm not excusing their oversight, I'm simply offering a compassionate perspective. Without knowing these details, I don't think it’s fair to judge their actions as negligent. If anything, I think this passage showcases that the parents of Jesus were not perfect, but had shortcomings like you and I.
As for their astonishment upon finding Jesus teaching in the Temple, I think this points not to ignorance, but rather to the depth of Jesus’ divine nature, which was challenging for any human to fully grasp. Mary, despite knowing she bore the Son of God, was still a human mother, processing the mystery of His nature gradually. Witnessing Jesus engage in profound discourse with religious scholars was beyond any previous expectations she might have had. It’s similar to being told someone can perform miracles, and then witnessing it firsthand — no matter the foreknowledge, the reality can still astonish.
Excuse the rather long comment!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
At the moment, I'm looking into debating. I've noticed you have a considerable amount of posts but no debates. I'm quite curious why you don't participate in debates. Is there a specific reason?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
In Latin, "Lucifer" translates to "light-bearer" or "morning star," and in early Christian contexts, it sometimes even referred to Christ in his role as the "light of the world." The Church often uses the word lux (Latin for "light") to symbolize divine wisdom, purity, and truth, especially in association with God or Christ as the "light of the world." Consequently, luce is Italian for "light." The title of "light" is not unique to Lucifer, as Jesus is also known as the "light of the world." The reference to "Luce" may symbolically represent Christ or saints who "bring light" to guide humanity. Although I haven't researched it thoroughly, there are clearly various reasons for the Catholic choice to name "Luce" as "light." I personally don't see this as a red flag.
Hopefully this context cleared some speculation.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
@ADreamOfLiberty
To those that wanted to answer the questions, I can see that you have opinions on the topics. Would either of you be willing to engage in a debate?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
Thank you for the feedback! Regarding your first question, I haven’t delved deeply into the Pope scandal myself, but I recommend watching this video for more information. As for your second question, I’m not entirely sure I understand. Could you please clarify?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
That's an interesting take. Would you say there are a lot of Muslim debaters on this website? I don't check the debate feed often, but when I do I can't say I recollect much Muslim content.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
To clarify, I wasn’t seeking responses to the debate questions themselves. The topics I shared are debate subjects I’m considering for future events. I’m looking for opinions on whether people find these topics interesting and suitable for debate — not answers to the questions.
Created:
Posted in:
I have a few topic ideas I'd like to explore in a new debate and would love to hear your thoughts, as you'll likely be the ones reading it. I wouldn't want people to read a boring debate, so feel free to share your thoughts. Please feel free to comment below if you'd like to participate in any of these topics or if you have any suggestions for new ones.
I'll list the topics in order from "most common/least interesting" to "least common/most interesting," based on how familiar I think people might be with them. By "most common," I mean topics that are often debated and may feel overdone, like an overplayed song. I'd prefer to avoid familiar topics if everyone already knows them well.
TOPICS.
- Are the dual natures of Jesus contradictory or self-refuting?
- Do the Marian Dogmas have theological basis?
- Does Purgatory have theological basis?
- Is the Trinity logical?
- Do any of the Seven Sacraments have theological basis?
- For the purpose of the debate, we would be selecting one Sacrament
- Is the Bible a reliable source?
- Is the Trinity in the Bible?
- Does the Bible claim Jesus is God?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Casey_Risk
I'll have to pass. I'm very busy, especially balancing our current debate and other preoccupations. Sorry to miss this one.
Created:
Posted in:
I've come up with a few more debate topics. Here are the additions:
1. St. Mary, the Mother of God. (Something related to the doctrines about her)
2. Explaining evil in the world
3. Is the Trinity logically coherent?
4. The duality seen within the natures of Jesus are not contrary or self-refuting.
5. Anything relating to the Seven Sacraments.
I'd love suggestions and criticism. I also invite any challengers who may want to engage in a debate to send me a PM.
Created:
Posted in:
There is a few debate topics I might be interested in participating in. The list is as follows:
- Does the Bible claim Jesus is God?
- Is the Bible a reliable source?
- Establishing the trinity
- Is the idea of purgatory mentioned in the Bible?
I'm curious to know what the people on this website want to see for a debate. Drop down some suggestions that I can consider.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Moozer325
It's all subjective. You decide what the objective is. Whether you want to ensure as many people live or whether you want to ensure the safety of your own life is up to you.
Created:
Posted in:
I have not come up with the following problem myself, it is a mere copy-paste. The problem is though-provoking and I am curious to know your opinions.
You are on a boat that is sinking. You do not know if there are other life rafts, but the life raft you are on can only hold 9 people apart from you. From the following list, who do you put on the raft and throw off.
- A doctor, GP, who has an addiction to drugs and is very nervous
- A black Protestant Minister
- A prostitute, but is an excellent nurse, she has already saved a drowning child and put him on another lifeboat
- A criminal. Charged with murder and can navigate the boat.
- A mentally disturbed man, who carries important government secrets in his head
- A law-abiding salesman. He sells automatic washing machines and is also a member of the Rotary Club
- A crippled boy, paralyzed since birth. He cannot use his hands and is dependent on others.
- A housewife with two children at home
- A Jewish restaurant owner, married with 3 children at home
- A teacher considered one of the best in England
- A Catholic Nun, supervisor of a girl's school
- An unemployed man, formally a professor o literature. He has a great sense of humor and is a decorated soldier for his contribution in the last war and was in a concentration camp for 3 years.
- An Irish man studying to be a pharmacist
- An Irish woman, studying to be a nursery teacher
- An American, he is also a Neo-Nazi and thus hates the Jew. However, he has a large box of food which he will throw into the sea unless he goes into the lifeboat
Good luck.
Created:
Posted in:
I'll have to skip this one as I'm going camping and won't be on the site much. Tag me on the next one.
Created:
What are you living for and what is the evidence that what you're living for is true?
Created:
Posted in:
I'm gonna sit this one out. I'm quite busy unfortunately.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
Oh, that's my bad. I didn't read the previous messages. I was assuming I was using my ability to confirm whether I am scum or not.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Casey_Risk
Vote Barney.
I voted Barney on a non-deciding vote. From what I understand I should get lynched instead.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
ChatGPT says the following:
You are the 2000 Election! In this intense race, incumbent Democratic Vice President Al Gore faced off against Republican George W. Bush, the son of former President George H. W. Bush. Although Gore secured the popular vote, the outcome of the election hinged on the results from Florida, where Bush held a razor-thin lead of just a few hundred votes. The controversy surrounding the recount led to the landmark Supreme Court case Bush v. Gore, ultimately resulting in Bush winning both Florida and the presidency. Because this election was decided by the slimmest of margins, especially in Florida, you are the Hammerer! You can only cast your vote if it is the decisive (hammering) vote. If you attempt to vote without it being the final vote, the day will automatically end with your lynching instead. Your victory condition aligns with the Town.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
The electoral vote all came down to Florida. Florida was the deciding vote. So I am the Hammerer. I can only vote if it is the deciding one.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
I am the election of 2000 (Democratic vice president Al Gore V.S. Republican George W. Bush). I am the Hammerer, if I cast a vote which isn't the deciding one, I get lynched instead.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Moozer325
What do you mean by "you weren't technically supposed to say that?" I didn't see anything mentioning being unable to say that in the rules.
Created:
Posted in:
I refresh the page to see that Whiteflame was innocent... Are you sure that wasn't a typo?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@whiteflame
@AustinL0926
It was a pleasure to play Mafia with you guys, it was an enjoyable game. I'm glad we were able to uncover who the scum were.
Whiteflame, your psychological prowess deserves praise. You played a masterful game. It's clear that you're a formidable player, and I look forward to future games you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@whiteflame
@AustinL0926
Whiteflame, your skill with words is undeniable. However, your efforts to clear suspicion seem excessive for someone who is truly innocent. If you weren't scum, visiting me would have resulted in your death. Let's be real here — you deliberately avoided visiting me because I'm the only other player, aside from you, who isn't fully confirmed as town. This strongly suggests to me that you're the scum. If I'm right, visiting me would have resulted in my death, removing the only other person under suspicion. The remaining players would have immediately turned their focus on you, the last potential scum. You have kept me in the game for the sole benefit of your interests.
I've been reserved throughout most of this game because I am new. That being said, I am the PGO. While there's no definitive way to prove this, it comes down to whether Austin trusts a seasoned player with conveniently aligned arguments or a guy who's tried to remain honest, despite the attacks made against him.
Vote Whiteflame.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
From what I understand, you lied to see what my reaction was, which was pretty smart. I didn't visit whiteflame but you convinced me.
Unvote.
Vote Whiteflame.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
The way you said that now makes me think that you're the remaining scum. You say that you watched me visit whiteflame, but knowing that I didn't makes me very suspicious as to why you'd lie.
Vote Wylted.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
What made you assume I visited whiteflame last night?
Created:
Posted in:
Yes, there is a good reason. The reason is: I didn't visit whiteflame last night. I have barely been active on the forum so I don't know what's happening recently.
By the way, I can never tag you in the mentions. It always says "Wylted is not active."
Created:
-->
@Mall
"Relational identity" refers to the understanding of a person's identity based on their relationships with others. In the context of the Trinity, it’s used to describe how each person of the Godhead (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) exists in a unique relational dynamic while sharing the same divine essence.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
The Father has sex with the mother to conceive the Son who is also the Father.....so technically the Son, who is also the father, had sex with his mother
The idea of the Son being born of the Virgin Mary does not imply a physical relationship between the Father and Mary. The conception of Jesus was a miraculous act of the Holy Spirit, not a physical union. The Bible teaches that Mary conceived Jesus by the power of the Holy Spirit, not through any human or divine sexual act (Luke 1:35). Any suggestion of incest or an Oedipal relationship is entirely unfounded and misunderstands the spiritual nature of the event.
You mentioned the Father is prior to the Son. The Father and the Son are distinct persons within the Godhead, not in a temporal or hierarchical sense, but in terms of their relational roles. The Son is eternally begotten of the Father, not created, which means He shares the same divine nature but is not subordinate in essence.
Created:
-->
@Sidewalker
Is it that Jesus, who was fully a man, attained a state in which he could also be said to be fully God? Was he telling us if we follow his way that we could achieve what he achieved? Is that the lesson to be learned?
You had raised a crucial question regarding the nature of Jesus. According to Christian doctrine, Jesus possesses two distinct natures: He is fully human and fully divine. These two natures coexist without contradiction.
Jesus’ divinity is not something He attained through His human nature; rather, He is eternally God who took on human flesh (John 1:14). The Gospels do not suggest that we can attain divinity by following Jesus. Instead, they teach that "everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life" (John 3:16). Jesus’ life and teachings show us the path to reconciliation with God, but they do not imply that we will become gods ourselves.
I hope this clears confusion. If you have any more questions, feel free to respond to this comment or send me PM.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
You've influenced me to create a debate on this very topic. If you'd like to participate, I'll include the link here. If you do choose to engage in the debate, I hope you will take it seriously and give it your all.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
You do realise in your quote above that Jesus -in your own words - that you have clearly pointed out that Jesus is speaking to someone else.
Yes, that was what I was pointing out. Jesus is not speaking to Himself but to the Father.
Exactly my point. Such is the ridiculousness of the trinity.
I'm guessing you don't believe in the Trinity?
Created:
-->
@Stephen
I have heard this passage many times and have read it myself. The questions, "Doesn't Jesus pray to himself? How can He be God?" are derived from a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of God.
I provided the definition for the Trinity in a previous comment. Let me reiterate:
The Trinity is One. We do not confess three Gods, but one God in three persons, the "consubstantial Trinity". The divine persons do not share the one divinity among themselves but each of them is God whole and entire: "The Father is that which the Son is, the Son that which the Father is, the Father and the Son that which the Holy Spirit is, i.e. by nature one God" [CCC 253].
Now, regarding Matthew 26:36-46, where Jesus prays in the Garden of Gethsemane, Jesus is not praying to Himself but to the Father. The key verse, Matthew 26:39, shows Jesus expressing His anguish and asking the Father to spare Him from the suffering He is about to endure. This is not a case of Jesus talking to Himself but of the Son communicating with the Father.
Understanding the Trinity helps clarify this: Jesus, as the Son, is distinct from the Father, though they are one in essence. There are various types of prayers, demonstrated by many individuals throughout the Bible. Prayer can involve communion, communication, intimate fellowship, requests, and worship. Why should it surprise you that Jesus, who is not the Father but His divine Son, prayed to the Father? Jesus spoke to the Father, engaged in intimate fellowship with Him, and had communion with Him. This is exactly what we should expect, given that Jesus, while distinct from the Father, is inseparable from Him as His beloved Son, continually engaged in a loving and intimate relationship with the Father. This communication reflects the relational dynamic within the Godhead, where the Son, though fully God, is distinct from the Father.
Jesus' prayer is ultimately a prayer of submission: “Not my will, but yours be done.” Jesus’ willingness to accept the Father’s will, even in the face of immense suffering, demonstrates His perfect obedience and trust in the Father’s plan for salvation. Jesus' prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane is not an instance of Him praying to Himself but rather an expression of His relationship with the Father.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@whiteflame
I can see how that would have been frustrating. I think you might be on the scum team because you thought that it was happening again. You said you were frustrated last time because you were on the scum team, but you're annoyed this time as well. It leads me to believe you're once again on the scum team.
A lot of people have also been accusing you. Change my mind. Make me believe you're with the town.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@whiteflame
I didn't say that was a copy-paste. That's just what I was told. I guess it's up to you if you want to believe I copy-pasted it or gave you the gist of the actual message.
Created:
Posted in:
For some reason I could not mention you because it said "Wylted is not active."
My name is "Catholic Apologetics" (not apologist). Apologetic translates to "defense of the faith." It is derived from the Greek word, "Apologia," which means "defense" as a lawyer gives at a trial. So Catholic Apologetics means "the defense of the Catholic faith."
As for who I think are scums, I haven't really given it much thought. I'll just vote for who the majority of people vote for.
Created:
-->
@Mall
The Trinity is One. We do not confess three Gods, but one God in three persons, the "consubstantial Trinity". The divine persons do not share the one divinity among themselves but each of them is God whole and entire: "The Father is that which the Son is, the Son that which the Father is, the Father and the Son that which the Holy Spirit is, i.e. by nature one God" [CCC 253].
With this definition of the Trinity, I can answer what "Persons" refers to. A "Person" refers to a distinct, relational identity within the one divine essence of God. The term "Person" in Trinitarian theology doesn't mean the same thing as "person" in everyday language, where we think of individual human beings. Instead, it refers to the three distinct identities—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—who are each fully and equally God, yet are not three gods, but one God.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
This is what I was told: "You are the Class Bully. You are the biggest kid in the class and thus can use your force to get the other kids to do what you want. As a result of this, all the other kids are afraid of you, and won't go near you. Thus, you are a Paranoid Gun Owner, minus the mafia. If anybody tries to visit you throughout the night, they will be killed, unless they are the Mafia. You win with the Town."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@AustinL0926
Austin said he will most likely be cleared if he survives the night. I say we keep an eye on him and see if he gets cleared.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Casey_Risk
How about you go first. The way you're assuming leadership, paired with the subtle remark you made earlier makes you all the more suspicious. If you could go first it would help clear all suspicion on you. You wouldn't mind stepping up if you were with the Town. In fact, it would help clear you of all doubt. After you go, Pie can follow.
Created: