Angels look like girls? replied by Arandur @ Wed, 24 Feb 2010 04:51:56 -0000

Arandur — Wed, 24 Feb 2010 04:51:56 -0000

Wait, so Moroni and other humans-turned-angel didn’t make it to the Celestial Kingdom?

What story specifically? Sodom and Gomorrah? I don’t think the City’s fate was due to them going after angels, whether the angels looked pretty or not. They were messengers to Lot, and the scenario was indicative of the immorality of the city, both sexually and its violation of hospitality/foreigners.

Angels look like girls? replied by Arandur @ Sun, 14 Feb 2010 21:09:19 -0000

Arandur — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 21:09:19 -0000

Koo! :)

Angels look like girls? replied by Arandur @ Mon, 08 Feb 2010 18:35:44 -0000

Arandur — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 18:35:44 -0000

That’s the first I’ve heard of the “angels have feminine features” thing. Angels are another order of being, spiritual intelligences, that may manifest themselves in a human form if it serves their mission. While I believe that angels may well have gender (C.S. Lewis explores this topic), they need not have sex (sexual features by which to reproduce physically). In Jewish tradition, most if not all angels were thought of as distinctly male. What would imply that they have “feminine features?”

With homosexuality and other sexual sin being a major factor for the condemnation of Sodom and Gomorrah, I don’t where one would see an implication about the angels’ appearance.

Tao Te Ching replied by Arandur @ Fri, 09 Oct 2009 02:52:11 -0000

Arandur — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 02:52:11 -0000

Anyone still around?

May I call upon you again, my gnostic friend, Satolkin?

My brother has begun drafting a book comparing the Tao Te Ching and parallel verses and concepts in the Bible. He’d like my critique and input. I’d like to extend that to you and see your perspective and familiarity (if any) with it. I figured you would be among the most likely of my friends to be familiar with the Tao Te Ching.

I’ve only just begun an introductory examination of it, so I can’t say much yet.

LDSGal, Koo, anyone else still around? As I’m sure you know, this site is pretty dead. I need some email addy’s!

So who's going away for the Summer? replied by Arandur @ Thu, 13 Aug 2009 14:08:57 -0000

Arandur — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 14:08:57 -0000

East Aurora, actually (the new part with the golf courses, not the ghetto). But yeah. I dislike the very short fall and spring seasons. I could even handle those if I lived up in the mountains. Though winters might be a bit burdensome. But ultimately we need to be closer to immediate family. 9-14 hour road trips don’t make things easy. And when we have kids, it will be much easier to have family to help out than to go it alone, relying on friends, daycare, and babysitters. Family is meant to be imposed upon, and for free :)

Regarding pictures of temples, that would be cool. LDSGal mentioned that she thought LDS Temple pictures could be readily found, but I haven’t had much luck, because I’m under the same understanding as you: they don’t let people in after the open houses. I’m not sure they let you take pictures during the open houses.

The town hall last night was sort of to get our feet wet. We had made signs, but the plan was only to show them if we weren’t going to be able to get inside (I don’t think they let signs inside, for good reason). Mike Coffman is a Republican against the health care bill, and since this was a town hall specifically on health care, I didn’t have as much disagreement with him. Though you can bet we were making some serious noise every time (and it was often!) that people were berating him/Congress for even considering something so blatently un-Constitutional, or rebuking the government for meddling in our lives over matters of life and death.

Coffman had originally planned one meeting, but realized it was going to be so crowded he planned two the day before. Last night there were so many people he stayed to hold 4 meetings to make sure everyone got in. His approach was basically to present some information (from some third party hospital group), present a few thoughts of his own, and then go back and forth between audience comments supporting and opposing the health care bill, 1 for 1. I’d say about 10-20% of the crowd was in favor of the bill, and many of those with reservations. Coffman didn’t answer many questions—he stated mainly that he wanted to hear what we had to say.

That’s fair enough, I think. Town halls are mainly to get feedback from constituents. They should not be just “informational meetings” like Obama has explicitly stated he’s doing. We don’t want these worst-of-used-car-salesmen just getting up there and selling us their B.S. by the boatload. We know what the bill says. You come down here and let us tell you just where you can shove it.

We’re going to picket the Democrat town halls. We don’t have much hope of getting in. They don’t seem to be nearly as well run as Coffman’s. That’s unusual for a Republican, frankly. His venue was much too small, though; there were much larger ones that would have easily been available in his district.

Anyway, the 15-20 liberal picketers had ditched their SEIU and ACORN shirts and (most) of their pre-printed signs, but still had fairly standard-format hand-written signs and were following the direction of a cheerleader who was leading them in chants. Of course, if anyone tried to engage them in a discussion or point out any facts, they just focused on that person and shouted them down, shouting louder and harder and getting a bit in their faces.

It was quite funny, actually, the hypocrisy. The conservative picketers and those in line were pretty quiet, and very willing on the whole to engage in a point-by-point discussion, many with excerpts of the bill and relevant offending sections on hand. The liberals had none of that that I saw—and I tried to engage them. Their favorite chant was “FACTS NOT FEAR!” Which is just hilarious considering their side is the one that is consistently using scare tactics and high pressure to try to force this through without anyone reading what the facts of the proposal actually are.

I even heard one liberal whining to his friends after he got out of the first meeting (we had to wait for the 3rd, even though we arrived almost half an hour early) actually claim that “they’re better at getting their lunatics out in force than we are.” A more ridiculously false statement I don’t know I’ve ever heard.

So I’ll be going to Ed Perlmutter and Jared Polis’s meetings if possible and picketing them, along with friends. They aren’t scheduling them in convenient central locations after business hours (Coffman’s was 6:30 but actually started at 5:45 and the fourth meeting was starting at 9:00pm). Most of theirs are during business hours or at 5:30 (you can’t get anywhere in Denver by 5:30, due to rush hour traffic), which means most good Americans can’t attend. Typical. Seem like very small venues, too. I don’t have much hope of getting in to give them a piece of my mind, but maybe some of my posters will piss some of Obama’s goons off enough that the media cameras will cover it. I’ll let you know if I get on the news :)

So who's going away for the Summer? replied by Arandur @ Wed, 12 Aug 2009 14:27:57 -0000

Arandur — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 14:27:57 -0000

Haven’t gotten to tour one. Haven’t been able to find good interior photos, either. Nor of a Masonic Temple. Any sources that would give a preview (pictures, explanations of symbolism, etc.)?

I’m partial to my Catholic cathedrals and basilicas :)

KC because the wife’s family is from there and it’s only 4 hours away from my family in St. Louis. We haven’t been able to get anyone from our families to move out to CO. It would be a good place to raise a family, except that being close to an extended family that gets along well and is supportive is really here home is. Plus I miss the green and better, longer Spring and Fall of MO. If I could live up in the mountains of CO it would be different, but being on the eastern edge of Denver metro isn’t as satisfying.

Well, I’m going to a town hall tonight (on my own initiative!). I’m sure you all can guess my general position on health care and cap and trade >:(

Why do the pro-”choice” people want to eliminate choice, want to force me to pay for other people to kill their babies, even after saying I should just stay out of it and not have an abortion if I don’t want one? What happened to it being a “choice” at all for a mother, if it’s now just considered a part of “health care?”

And abortion is just the most offensive part of it, part of what I think is a plan to shut down Catholic hospitals and take them over for the government-run system. Then there’s the cost; the brokenness of Medicare, Medicaid, and the VA; the failure of other universal systems; the impact to research and development; the simple economic stupidity of it; the limitation of choices; the coverage of illegals; the possibility of going down the euthanasia slope; the likelihood of waiting lines; and this nonsense about it being a “right,” having a “right” to someone else’s services.

So who's going away for the Summer? replied by Arandur @ Mon, 20 Jul 2009 14:14:18 -0000

Arandur — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 14:14:18 -0000

Sorry guys. I’ve been trying to find a job back in KC so that my wife and I can move back and start a family. Not the best time, I know, but we feel like we’ve already waited a few years and are just itching to get back.

DAILY THREAD (APRIL 2009 AND BEYOND, IN PERPETUITY AS IT WERE...) replied by Arandur @ Tue, 02 Jun 2009 17:12:38 -0000

Arandur — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 17:12:38 -0000

LdsGal202 wrote:
>Well a point important to bring up is that Adam & Eve did not SIN. They transgressed. They were innocent and had no knowledge of good or evil :)))

Romans 5:12-Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.

And others like it. Adam and Eve sinned. Disobedience to one of God’s commandments is a sin. To say that disobedience to a commandment is not a sign is to destroy the meaning of sin and make a moral free for all.

DAILY THREAD (APRIL 2009 AND BEYOND, IN PERPETUITY AS IT WERE...) replied by Arandur @ Thu, 28 May 2009 14:54:15 -0000

Arandur — Thu, 28 May 2009 14:54:15 -0000

It’s hard to find them. Some topics I’m discussing in other forums (that we haven’t discussed in a while) are evolution, Adam and Eve and Original Sin/the necessity or lack thereof of their sin, Sotomayor, the relative importance of abortion compared to other political issues.

Anything interesting among those? Any other ideas?

Predestination and Preordination. replied by Arandur @ Sun, 10 May 2009 02:18:07 -0000

Arandur — Sun, 10 May 2009 02:18:07 -0000

I was expanding your definition of predestination, Gal, because I felt what you were using was too narrow. Your definition fits with a narrow Calvinist interpretation, but not a wider Scriptural one. For if Predestination meant (Scripturally) what you say it means, it could not be used in Scripture because such a limited definition is false. And yet, Scripture does use the term, much more frequently than “preordination,” IIRC. So either your definition must accommodate Scripture, you must call its Scriptural use false, or your definition is not correct.

At this point its semantics, because I think we agree on is the same thing. You just want to call it strictly “preordination” and entirely exclude “predestination,” and I call the two much more closely related.

This is probably much more in depth than what you’re interested in reading, but I’ll provide it anyway: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12378a.htm

Zarathrustra and the Avestan scriptures replied by Arandur @ Fri, 08 May 2009 04:58:12 -0000

Arandur — Fri, 08 May 2009 04:58:12 -0000

By the way, where does the concept of “demiurges” come in? I had thought it was Zoroastrian in origin when our old Marcionite friend Swiss Celt was talking about them.

Zarathrustra and the Avestan scriptures replied by Arandur @ Fri, 08 May 2009 04:55:23 -0000

Arandur — Fri, 08 May 2009 04:55:23 -0000

You’re using a looser definition of Dualism than the traditional Catholic definition :).

From what I understand, Zarathushtra initiated a rather abrupt change to previous Aryan cultural nature spirit/deity worship. In fact, there is apparently a place among the various heavenly beings for those Aryan spirits. Which makes sense both from a religion-as-man-made-philosophy approach as well as a religion-as-man-trying-to-understand-real-divine-beings-and-dimensions approach. Very clumsy, I know, sorry. Tired. I make the distinction because sometimes its hard for me to understand where you’re coming from, Satolkin. Sometimes you seem to lean pretty heavily towards the former approach; I lean heavily towards the latter. In other words, I believe many of the various “gods” worshipped by many cultures through history could well be real spiritual beings, just not ones worthy of worship in the same way that the One True God is. Zarathushtra’s Ahura Mazda (with His three aspects and six Spentas), as distinct from other angelic and daevic beings, makes a lot of sense to me. What his Aryan ancestors previously worshipped were either angelic beings, daevas, or man-made idols. Or it was their best, muddled understanding at the time of aspects of the One True God, sort of like native American Great Spirit worship.

One the Zoroastrians-as-spiritual-ancestors and brothers thing, I also find it pretty interesting that the some among Islam consider them “People of the Book,” as well, even though the spread of Islam culturally destroyed Zoroastrianism.

Zarathrustra and the Avestan scriptures replied by Arandur @ Thu, 07 May 2009 04:00:59 -0000

Arandur — Thu, 07 May 2009 04:00:59 -0000

I’ve seen some discussions of Zoroastrianism identifying it originally as a true monotheistic faith originally, then being adopted in various cultures as a dualistic tradition, then back in same ways. Are you in the Dualist crowd, Satolkin, and why?

One of the reasons that I think Zoroastrianism was the mainline religion of the one true God before Abraham is that the Bible seems to acknowledge it as such through Cyrus the Great (along with many other Persian emperors, avowed Mazda worshippers), Melchizedek, and the Magi that journeyed to pay Jesus homage (almost certainly Zoroastrian priests).

Zarathrustra and the Avestan scriptures replied by Arandur @ Fri, 01 May 2009 18:52:56 -0000

Arandur — Fri, 01 May 2009 18:52:56 -0000

What do you mean by “Initiatic” and “graded?”

You also mention other religions and savior beliefs, as well as other similar beliefs. Could you mention some? I’ve seen small elements from various other mythologies and ancient religions that are shared in common with the Judeo-Christian tradition (and all of its similar systems and offshoots). But I’ve never seen any anywhere near as close as Zoroastrianism. Who else had similar savior beliefs, monotheistic/Trinitarian beliefs, or other major similarities in belief? I expect many have other heavenly beings, and some may have a Truth/Lies, Order/Disorder, Law and Love central focus, though I can’t really recall any of the latter right now either.

Zarathrustra and the Avestan scriptures replied by Arandur @ Thu, 30 Apr 2009 19:03:47 -0000

Arandur — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 19:03:47 -0000

I say “proto-Trinitarian” in that I view it as an early understanding of the nature of God that is better understood now.

Do you know much about how Zoroastrians practiced their religion?

Zarathrustra and the Avestan scriptures replied by Arandur @ Thu, 30 Apr 2009 05:20:38 -0000

Arandur — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 05:20:38 -0000

Oh, and Gal, if you’re interested, check out this link for starters: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoroastrianism

Zarathrustra and the Avestan scriptures replied by Arandur @ Thu, 30 Apr 2009 05:19:59 -0000

Arandur — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 05:19:59 -0000

Ahriman, yeah, though it seems like there is a variety of opinion about him running through historical Zoroastrianism. The earlier beliefs seem to hold Ahriman up as a corruption and corruptor of the ideal, even leading the angelic figures astray, but without true dualistic equality of power or even necessity of existence.

If you’re referring to the Roman cult of Mithras, that seems to have been a smallish military cult that was contemporary and subsequent to Jesus. I’m not sure that contributed much other than festivals and holy days to be co-opted by the Christian Church, but the Mithra concept does still seem to be proto-Trinitarian in the person of the Son. There was also a belief in a Saoshyant messiah figure to “renovate” the world, according to recent internet sources I’ve explored.

Satolkin, you probably see this as all evolution of concepts and understanding of the divine.

I see it as pre-Abrahamic revelation of the same unchanging God. As more revelation is received and people accept and consider more, human understanding increases, but the truths behind the beliefs remain the same. Zarathustra was given some knowledge of God and angelic orders and even of Christ that would come to be understood more through the ages and through God’s special revelation in His Chosen People and in the Incarnation of His Son.

I’ve often wondered about just what belief in God was like before He chose Abram. We have lots of figures who knew something before him, from Adam to Cain to Enoch and Noah. But then we also have Melchizedek, a priest-king operating with authority and leading faithful even during Abraham’s time, and even using the bread and the wine as a prefiguring of Christ’s paschal sacrifice.

Satolkin, can you direct me to good sources on Zoroastrianism? Are there other similar ancient belief systems that you’re aware of?

Predestination and Preordination. replied by Arandur @ Thu, 30 Apr 2009 05:02:10 -0000

Arandur — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 05:02:10 -0000

Gal, I’m not sure what it is that we’re disagreeing on, other than that you said I’ve got it all wrong, that you’re saying the Catholic Church teaches your limited definition of predestination and not something more akin to what I was explaining, and then the patriarchal blessing stuff.

The definition you’re using for predestination is one that some Calvinists believe, and perhaps a few others. It’s not something Catholics believe.

Zarathrustra and the Avestan scriptures replied by Arandur @ Mon, 27 Apr 2009 19:01:45 -0000

Arandur — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 19:01:45 -0000

Maybe this will get Satolkin back!

I am revisiting an interesting in Zoroastrianism. I see many parallels with Judeo-Christianity, in particular as it influence Hebrew understandings of God, though it may not seem like it on the surface. Anyone know much about it?

Seems to me Ahura Mazda is clearly the uncreated God worshipped by the Hebrews, as well, though the Hebrews would have disliked the distraction with other Yazatas, and the other asuras and daevas would appear variously as angels or demons insofar as they were improperly objects of worship. Ahura Mazda and his other aspects of Mithra and Burz appear proto-Trinitarian.

I like the concepts of the divine sparks, the Amesha Spenta, as ideals; they seem proto-Hebraic, taken too far in later works as deific objects of worship.

I also like the Asha/Druj conflict, crystallized in Hebrew as Law and in Christianity as Love.

Come back, my gnostic friends, and educate me!

Predestination and Preordination. replied by Arandur @ Mon, 27 Apr 2009 14:58:45 -0000

Arandur — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 14:58:45 -0000

I’ve never troubled myself too much with either, and haven’t made much distinction between the two.

I think the way you phrased your definition of predestination is focused too much on the object of it (the “you”). Predestination has very little to do with a person, but almost everything to do with God and His perspective. Predestination is primarily an acknowledgment of God’s prescience and His will. On the one hand, He has a plan and will see that plan achieved, but on the other He works with and respects our free will, meaning that He does not force us to participate in His plan. He just knows enough about cause and effect, about what we will do, that He can work His will regardless of participation on an individual level. An author can make the story of his book turn out ultimately how he wants, while remaining “true” to its characters. Or, a better analogy, if you knew how people would act and respond to your message and orders, and how other people would react to their actions, wouldn’t you be able to bring about your will? That’s what politics and military strategy are all about, except that we are poor predictors of human actions.

Preordination also is really more focused on God than on man. God wants something done, He’ll see it done, one way or another. He offers us the choice to participate. Again, this is better understood on a broad historical level. Since God respects our free will, He also respects the consequences of it. If we neglect to help a desperate person or save a dying man, their plight may be no better, despite God wishing that it be so. His love and mercy will more than make up for those peoples’ plight in the next life. But if God needs that dying man to be saved to bring about some other great part of His will (like needing the example of the Good Samaritan), He will make sure the right people find him and help him.

So both are right, in their proper context.

State of Our Union replied by Arandur @ Mon, 27 Apr 2009 14:40:13 -0000

Arandur — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 14:40:13 -0000

I’m 27. I’ve known about the duplicity of government officials for as long as I’ve cared about government. I know that’s the way it’s always been. What makes it more troublesome now is that the power grab is so much greater now, and so extremely extra-Constitutional that if they get away with it the Constitution will no longer be any sort of check on government power anymore.

The government can regulate interstate commerce and thus ought to put limits on lending to prevent predatory lending. There is a place for government regulation to protect the public from fraud—and requiring bonus contracts on publicly-traded companies to be restricted to profit-making is a form of protecting the public from fraud.

However, government takeover of whole sectors of the economy is a complete abandonment of the Constitution and the founding principles of our country. We might as well use the Constitution for toilet paper. And show me anywhere in the world where government take over of the economy has been, long term, good for the country and the individual, and how that could work for the U.S.

I’m all for Town Halls (for Hope) and Tea Parties, because this country needs a revolution and a return to the principles that made us great. I don’t want any sort of armed revolution, so I’m trying to find and be supportive of those attempts that are peaceful.

DAILY THREAD (APRIL 2009 AND BEYOND, IN PERPETUITY AS IT WERE...) replied by Arandur @ Mon, 20 Apr 2009 22:29:26 -0000

Arandur — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 22:29:26 -0000

Sorry to hear that, Koo. I hope she gets better if she can, or that the passing is as easy as possible if not. Best wishes to you and yours.

State of Our Union replied by Arandur @ Sat, 28 Mar 2009 05:19:05 -0000

Arandur — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 05:19:05 -0000

What are people’s opinions of the current and proposed actions of our government?

I am very worried. I see the government and various officials asking for more and more power and less and less accountability, while systematically working to take over the financial industry, the energy industry, the health care industry, perhaps even the auto industry.

They seek to remove private voting rights in favor of political union machines; exert more and more control over education in this country; propose silencing or preventing dissent; attempt to set wages and control prices; attempt to pass ex-post-facto tax law; attempt to limit or even remove our right to bear arms, disarming the populace; discussing the possibility of a world currency and abandoning the dollar internationally; and setting up such huge liabilities and public debt that the possibility of ever climbing out of our hole becomes more and more bleak.

Is anyone else seeing this? Is this even the United States anymore? Is this not what happened in countries like Germany, Italy, and Russia when they fell to their various forms of socialism?

Are we heading towards, as our only recourse for redress of these wrongs and infringements upon our Constitution, what the Founders recognized as a periodically-necessary Revolution?

As my little sister insightfully observed, federal politicians are the new oligarchy, the aristocracy that rules as it wishes with little care for the general populace, abandoning their promises and weaving a web of lies to pacify their subjects while they wield their power and money much like the privileged Party officials in communo-fascist countries.

Ash Wednesday?! replied by Arandur @ Tue, 24 Mar 2009 16:05:06 -0000

Arandur — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 16:05:06 -0000

Not sure I understand the question.

Ash Wednesday is a day of penitence, fast and abstinence, at the beginning of the penitential season of Lent. There is a whole bunch of symbolism involved in all Lenten practices.

Wednesday was chosen just so that the 40 days of Lent preceding Easter would be a more accurate count of 40 days (excluding Sundays, which, as celebrations of Christ’s Resurrection, are days of feasting, not of penitential fasting). Only now we say that Lent ends with the celebration of the Last Supper on Holy Thursday, the beginning of the Holy Triduum (Holy Thursday, Good Friday, Holy Saturday), so the number is more approximate once again, and not exact.

The ashes are used in the long Biblical tradition of using ashes to signify a ritual of repentance. Note that they are not worn throughout Lent (as Jesus recommended that periods of fasting should not be a self-righteous display), but only as part of ritual and sign on this day. The ashes are produced from the palms of the previous year’s Palm Sunday (rather than the ashes of burnt sacrifices because after Christ we have no burnt sacrifices). The ashes are blessed ritually (with holy water and incense), and they are applied to each parishioner’s forehead in the sign of the Cross most often with the admonishment “Remember, man, that you are dust, and to dust you shall return.” Another form is “Repent/Turn away from sin and believe in the Gospel.” I prefer the former, as it recalls our humble origin and Genesis 3:19.

Ash Wednesday is also a day of fast and abstinence. Abstinence from meat, as was practiced often Biblically (such as in Daniel 10: 1-3), is a multifaceted sacrifice. It is a sign of deliberate poverty, a rejection of the desires of the flesh, a sign of humility, and a rejection of death. Fish is often exempted in remembrance of Jesus’ multiplication of the loaves and fishes and the role of some of the Apostles as fishermen.

Fasting was often taken up communally as described in the Bible. Lent specifically recalls Jesus’ 40 days of fasting in the desert, as in Matthew 4 (v2, particularly).

Here are some links for further investigation, if you wish:
All About Lent: http://www.cin.org/users/james/files/lent.htm
Lent is Old English for Spring:
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2001/0104fea1.asp
Ash Wednesday:
http://oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Ash_Wed…
Lent:
http://oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Lent

Jesus went to hell replied by Arandur @ Tue, 03 Mar 2009 04:59:52 -0000

Arandur — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 04:59:52 -0000

Second reading from Mass yesterday:

“Reading II
1 Pt 3:18-22

Beloved:
Christ suffered for sins once,
the righteous for the sake of the unrighteous,
that he might lead you to God.
Put to death in the flesh,
he was brought to life in the Spirit.
In it he also went to preach to the spirits in prison,
who had once been disobedient
while God patiently waited in the days of Noah
during the building of the ark,
in which a few persons, eight in all,
were saved through water.
This prefigured baptism, which saves you now.
It is not a removal of dirt from the body
but an appeal to God for a clear conscience,
through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,
who has gone into heaven
and is at the right hand of God,
with angels, authorities, and powers subject to him.”

Peter seems to think Jesus went personally. Also, the Apostles’ Creed:

“The Apostles’ Creed

I believe in God, the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth; and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord; Who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried. He descended into hell; the third day He arose again from the dead. He ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of God, the Father Almighty; from thence He shall come to judge the living and the dead. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church, the communion of Saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body and life everlasting. Amen.”

I’m inclined to accept these, particularly in the absence of anything at all suggesting otherwise. It makes sense to me. Before Jesus came, many souls that had not rejected God still had not been saved; in whatever place of the afterlife (Sheol, a spiritual prison) they waited, Jesus came to them and released them (as he releases us) from the bondage of sin through his Atonement. He freed them to everlasting life. By doing this personally, he showed that he personally has conquered sin and death and has power over it, as well as the fact that he Saved all of humanity that had ever lived, was living, and would ever live.

Recent Posts by Arandur | GOD STILL LOVES US