Are children's prayers more efficacious? It would seem so, because they are purer and more innocent. Matt 18:10 : >See that you despise not one of these little ones: for I say to you, that their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father who is in heaven. What did Fathers, Doctors of the Church, or other saintly Catholic theologians have to say about the efficacy of children's prayers?

Regardless of the historicity of the account, the people who wrote it down, edited it, listened to the story, and edited again, must have realized some people would be confused by the characters simply giving up after they had overcome much more physically demanding hurdles. The authors and the audience must have had this literary sensitivity. This raises the question: _Why was this not adressed? Why was this not commented on? Why did the author of the story of the Tower of Babel did not consider, or did not address, or glossed over the possibility of some of his characters trying to learn the other's language to continue the enterprise?_

According to Trinitarian theology as held by the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, God is 3 persons/hypostasis in 1 essence/nature/substance and one attribute of God is his immutability ([*c.f.* *Summa Theologica* Ia Q9 A1](https://www.newadvent.org/summa/1009.htm)) yet it is also the case that Christ is both true God and true man. This latter doctrine is called the hypostatic union referring to the two natures (divine and human) present in one person (hypostasis). How are these doctrines both held as true?

The Catholic Church is one of several denominations that teach the Real Presence, but they don't all have the same understanding of this doctrine. What is the Catholic understanding?

We see in Acts 11:24-26 (NRSVCE): "For he was a good man, full of the Holy Spirit and of faith. And a great many people were brought to the Lord. Then Barnabas went to Tarsus to look for Saul, and when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch. So it was that for an entire year they met with the church and taught a great many people, and it was in Antioch that the disciples were first called “Christians.” I wish to know how the name Christians used for followers of Jesus stuck . Antioch was a part of ancient Greece, and the word Christian had its origin in Greek word Christos meaning the Saviour, known as Messiah in Hebrew. That St. Luke wrote the Gospel and Acts of the Apostles in Greek, may also have contributed to the firming up of the name Christian. But then, we see Jesus being addressed as The Nazarene all through the Gospels and the Acts. It is therefore, strange that His disciples were not called Nazarenes by the Jews who were more comfortable with Hebrew language than with Greek. My question therefore is: Were the early Christians called by some other name in languages other than Greek? If they were, why did those names become defunct? PS: In southern India, Christians in the good old days called themselves as Nasrani, a name derived from the Syrian word for Nazarene.

Growing up I was told [Rev. Almeida](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jo%C3%A3o_Ferreira_de_Almeida#Bible_translation) translated the whole Bible directly from Hebrew and Greek and cross-checked with translations in Latin, Spanish, Italian, French, and Dutch. I now know that this is a myth. I have recently read that he did not finish the translation of the Old Testament, did not finish editing the New Testament, did not know Hebrew, possibly did not know Greek either, mostly translated from Spanish and Dutch, his work was extensively revised by a Dutch group, then extensively revised by a British group, did not impress either commission with the quality of his work, and to this day there are missing verses, verses out of order, and frequent unusual grammar. Since this translation is the most numerous and widely read work in the Portuguese language, I believe it is a serious matter. The best source I found on this was a 2007 paper in Portuguese by Herculano Alves: [*A Bíblia de João Ferreira Annes d’Almeida*](https://revistas.ulusofona.pt/index.php/cienciareligioes/article/view/4095) . Herculano's paper is impressive, but it does not cover one aspect: **what percentage of the New Testament with handwritten corrections by Rev. Almeida can be attributed to mostly a word for word translation of the [Reina Valera](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reina_Valera) and the [*Statenvertaling*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statenvertaling)** ? (or whatever versions he used?) Has this question been already researched? If so, by whom and where?

Jesus is the Messiah. From my understanding of scripture, the Messiah was promised to the Jews. If the Jews had accepted him as such - (a hypothetical) - was the Messiah prophesied to die for the sins of ONLY the Jews? If Jesus was sent only to the Jews -(AND HE ALWAYS DOES THE WILL OF THE FATHER) - when was the mission changed by the father (to turn it into a global mission of dying the the sins of all humanity)? Or did Jesus change it by himself?

In Revelation 12:7-9 a war breaks out in heaven. Michael and his angels fight against the dragon, who fights back with his angels, but the dragon, named the Devil or Satan, is defeated. The dragon is then thrown out and all his angels with him. Why, according the Catholic Church, did God not throw the dragon out of Heaven Himself?

How does the Catholic, Baptist and Pentecostal denominations justify the practice of following teachers given this in scripture? > "But the anointing which you have received from Him abides in you, and > you do not need that anyone teach you; but as the same anointing > teaches you concerning all things, and is true, and is not a lie, and > just as it has taught you, you will abide in Him.", 1 Jn 2:27 and, this > "No longer will each one teach his neighbor or his brother, saying, > ‘Know the Lord,’ because they will all know Me, from the least of them > to the greatest.", Heb 8:11 Obviously, they are appointed in the Church: > "And God has placed in the church first of all apostles, second > prophets, **third teachers**, then miracles, then gifts of healing, of > helping, of guidance, and of different kinds of tongues.", 1 Cor 12:28 Then, apparently "you" should be teachers at some point, > "by this time you ought to be teachers", Heb 5:12 Then, there's 1 Jn 2:27 and Heb 8:11 . If you back up to Heb 8:10, this is largely acknowledged as the New Covenant where the Holy Spirit is given to dwell within believers transforming their nature to keep God's ways: > "This is the covenant I will establish with the people of Israel after > that time, declares the Lord. I will put my laws in their minds and > write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my > people.", Heb 8:10 That appears to be the anointing in v11. And, that anointing says you have no need of a teacher. So, why do the denominations justify their followers remaining under teachers, most their entire lives in the church? Here's a New Testament example of how to conduct "When you come together": 1 Cor 14:26-39, and some points: > "**everyone has** a psalm or **a teaching**, **a revelation**, a tongue, **or an interpretation**.", v26 > "Two or three prophets should speak the others should weigh carefully > what is said. **And if a revelation comes** to someone who is seated, the > first speaker should stop", v29-30 >**For you can all prophesy** in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged", v31 > "If anyone considers himself a prophet or spiritual person, let him > acknowledge that **what I am writing you is the Lord’s command**.", v37 The above is quite different from conventional church services.

this previous question asks for evidence that points to Deuteronomy being written during the reign of King Josiah. A lot of modern scholarship today suggests that Deuteronomy was a much later work, produced in a much later time period. So what evidence is there that points to Deuteronomy being written before this time? I am willing to accept that Deuteronomy may have some redactions and changes, but lots of liberal scholarship points to it being a much later text, with no relevance to Moses or the first four books of the bible at all. Any general answers that highlight evidence for an early date for Deuteronomy / before the reign of King Josiah are welcome. This question may also naturally lead to the question of authorship, so if that isn’t too broad, feel free to include that in your answers as well if you deem it appropriate.

Apologies for the length of this introduction but I felt it was important to begin with a weight of evidence. There have been a great many changes in the Jehovah's Witness understanding and prophetic predictions regarding the commencement and conclusion of the 'time of trouble', the beginning of Christ's 'second presence' and His coming into the Kingdom with power, the length and composition of 'this generation', and even which people group all these things apply to. I have bolded parts of each of the references below. One of the most dramatic changes is that 1799 marks the beginning of the 'time of the end' and then 1914 is given as the end and not the beginning of the time, and then 1914 is given as the beginning of the time. At this point 1914 is clung to and the definition of 'this generation' begins to change. > "...**1799 definitely marks the beginning of 'the time of the end'**.... 'The time of the end' embraces a period from A.D. 1799, as above indicated, to the time of the complete overthrow of Satan's empire....we have been in 'the time of the end' since 1799" (The Harp of God, 1928 ed., pp. 235-36, 239). > "The time of the Lord's second presence dates from 1874....**From 1874 forward is the latter part of the period of 'the time of the end'.** From 1874 is the time of the Lord's second presence... It was in the year 1874, the date of our Lord's second presence..." (The Harp of God, 1928 ed., pp. 236, 239-40). > "CAN IT BE DELAYED UNTIL 1914?...our readers are writing to know if there may not be a mistake in the 1914 date. They say that they do not see how present conditions can last so long under the strain. We see no reason for changing the figures - nor could we change them if we would. They are, we believe, God's dates not ours. **But bear in mind that the end of 1914 is not the date for the beginning, but for the end of the time of trouble"** (Watch Tower, 15 July 1894, p. 226). > "The Scriptures indicate that a great time of trouble similar to that which came upon the Jewish nation will now come upon all Christendom. **The experience of Israel in the year 70 [destruction of Jerusalem] will be paralleled in the experiences of the year 1915"** (Watch Tower, 15 June 1913, p. 181). > "...**in the year 1918, when God destroys the churches wholesale** and the church members by millions, it shall be that any that escape shall come to the works of Pastor Russell to learn the meaning of the downfall of 'Christianity'" (The Finished Mystery, 1917, p. 485). > "The date 1925 is even more distinctly indicated by the Scriptures because it is fixed by the law God gave to Israel. Viewing the present situation in Europe, one wonders how it will be possible to hold back the explosion much longer; and that **even before 1925 the great crisis will be reached and probably passed"** (Watch Tower, 1 September 1922, p. 262). > "As we have heretofore stated, the great jubilee cycle is due to begin in 1925. At that time the earthly phase of the kingdom shall be recognized... **Therefore we may confidently expect that 1925 will mark the return of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and the faithful prophets of old,** particularly those named by the Apostle in Hebrews chapter eleven, to the condition of human perfection" (Millions Now Living Will Never Die! pp. 89-90). > **"The foretold events having begun A.D. 1914, the generation of mankind that is still alive from that year is the generation meant by Jesus Christ.** Till now we have seen fulfilled the world-shaking features of the 'sign of [Christ's invisible] presence and of the consummation of the system of things.'...The occurrence of these things since 1914 is within the knowledge of millions of this generation.... We, then, are the generation that will not pass away till there is fulfilled that 'great tribulation such as has not occurred since the world's beginning until now, no, nor will occur again'" (Watchtower, 15 April 1961, p. 236; brackets in original, italics added). > "Jesus said 'this generation will by no means pass away until all these things occur.' Which generation is this, and how long is it?... [W]hen it comes to the application in our time, **the 'generation' logically would not apply to babies born during World War I**. It applies to Christ's followers and others who were able to observe that war and the other things that have occurred in fulfillment of Jesus' composite 'sign.' Some of such persons 'will by no means pass away until' all of what Christ prophesied occurs, including the end of the present wicked system" (Watchtower, 1 October 1978, p. 31). > **"If Jesus used 'generation' in that sense and we apply it to 1914, then the babies of that generation are now 70 years old or older.** And others alive in 1914 are in their 80's or 90's, a few even having reached a hundred. There are still many millions of that generation alive. Some of them 'will by no means pass away until all things occur.' - Luke 21:32" (Watchtower, 15 May 1984, p.5). > "To calculate where man is in the stream of time relative to God's seventh day of 7,000 years, we need to determine how long a time has elapsed from the year of Adam and Eve's creation in 4026 B.C.E. From the autumn of that year to the autumn of 1 B.C.E., there would be 4,025 years. From the autumn of 1 B.C.E. to the autumn of 1 C.E. is one year (there was no zero year). From the autumn of 1 C.E. to the autumn of 1967 is a total of 1,966 years. Adding 4,025 and 1 and 1,966, we get 5,992 years from the autumn of 4026 B.C.E. to the autumn of 1967. Thus, eight years remain to account for a full 6,000 years of the seventh day. **Eight years from the autumn of 1967 would bring us to the autumn of 1975, fully 6,000 years into God's seventh day, his rest day.**(Watchtower, 1 May 1968, pp. 271-72). An April 8, 1988 issue of Awake magazine, in an article entitled 'How Long Can a Generation Last?' intimated that 1989 would be the end of the 'last generation' The 1994 Watchtower 2 volume research dictionary, "Insight on the Scriptures" calculated a possible end to the 'last generation' as 1994. (Vol. 1, pp. 917-18). Finally in Watchtower (1 November 1995, p. 19) the definition of 'this generation' was changed from those born in 1914 to "all the peoples of earth who see the sign of Christ's 1914 presence but fail to repent". The historical pattern of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society appears to be one of thresholds proclaimed, reached, exceeded, and changed. Rinse and repeat. What is the Jehovah's Witness explanation of this constantly evolving eschatology surrounding the year 1914?

What did Edwards mean when he penned the subject line of a sermon he preached in 1752: "No such experiences as the devils in hell are the subjects of are any sure sign of grace." I'm trying to unravel the point he was making in this sentence. ------ (Research added by @GratefulDisciple; many thanks to @depperm [who helped us discover](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/a/102722/10672) the Yale WJE Online archive) According to [WJE Vol. 25 Appendix pages](http://edwards.yale.edu/archive?path=aHR0cDovL2Vkd2FyZHMueWFsZS5lZHUvY2dpLWJpbi9uZXdwaGlsby9nZXRvYmplY3QucGw/Yy4yNDozOS53amVv) listing dated and undated sermons: > *James 2:19(b)*. "No such experiences as the devils in hell are the subjects of are any sure sign of grace." Dec. 1746. Repreached Sept. 28, 1752. New York. Published as *True Grace Distinguished from the Experience of Devils* (New York, 1753). The sermon manuscript's facsimile [can be viewed here](https://collections.library.yale.edu/catalog/10695957) (the entry from the collection itself is [here](https://findit-uat.library.yale.edu/catalog/digcoll:3888407)) , which is transcribed in WJE Vol. 25 as [*"True Grace Distinguished From the Experience of Devils"*](http://edwards.yale.edu/archive?path=aHR0cDovL2Vkd2FyZHMueWFsZS5lZHUvY2dpLWJpbi9uZXdwaGlsby9nZXRvYmplY3QucGw/Yy4yNDozMDoxLndqZW8=) . The volume also provides a [sermon background](http://edwards.yale.edu/archive?path=aHR0cDovL2Vkd2FyZHMueWFsZS5lZHUvY2dpLWJpbi9uZXdwaGlsby9nZXRvYmplY3QucGw/Yy4yNDozMC53amVv) .

I'm trying to locate a transcript of Jonathan Edwards's sermon from August 1740 that he delivered to the children of his congregation. I have already located [a facsimile of the handwritten manuscript](https://collections.library.yale.edu/pdfs/10719295.pdf) but it is fairly illegible and I don't want to have to buy the entire volume 22 of Jonathan Edwards' works in which the sermon transcript is located.

I have been reading the Book of Revelation and it sounds as if the current color of the hair of Jesus is **white as wool** but the disciples of Jesus saw it in the resurrected body and it was in the same color he was crucified with. *Revelation 1:14* >"His hair was white as white wool, white as snow" Jesus was born with a regular hair like other Jews but it seems as if the glory of God caused that to change, did the spiritual brightness of God cause this physical change in the color of the hair of the Lord Jesus Christ?

**Triune Godhead** It goes without saying that Christianity is based on the concept of a Triune Godhead, a Trinity, a Tri-unity. But those theological words do not make it any easier for the lay person, or the seeker, to understand the whole idea of a God that is 3-in-1. So, drawing from Catholicism, Orthodoxy, or Protestantism in the history of Christianity, what illustrations have been used to demonstrate such a mysterious concept? Which of them comes closest to accurately describing this Christian God? Or, per chance, is such a concept beyond comprehension, and falling short of illustrations, so that believers must accept it as a mystery, belonging only to the realm where Eternity exists? **Note**: The OP intent is not to dredge up systematic theology dissertations to prove the concept of the Trinity. This doctrine is stipulated and acknowledged. Rather, since Jesus---and Church Fathers---did not hesitate to use illustrations (and parables) to portray important biblical doctrines, the intent here is to also seek out good illustrations about the Trinity so that ***the plough boy in the realm*** can appreciate and exult in it! **The quest here is not "which one is the best", but which illustrations are available that have been effective and productive while presenting the Gospel to the non-theologians?** Again, do not mistake this as a substitution for presenting the Gospel, but just a way of illustrating the Gospel in terms that people outside the seminary can understand. Remember that *the common people heard Him gladly.* And this wasn't because Jesus was an eloquent pedantic theologian! Neither did He compromise the Gospel of the Kingdom...He was just a good illustrator.

Was Jacob Arminius a cessationist and credobaptist? An article I am reading claims that he did not believe in infant baptism or in spiritual gifts today.

We read in Ex 4:10-15 (KJV): > And Moses said unto the Lord, O my Lord, I am not eloquent, neither heretofore, nor since thou hast spoken unto thy servant: but I am slow of speech, and of a slow tongue. And the Lord said unto him, Who hath made man's mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the Lord? Now therefore go, and I will be with thy mouth, and teach thee what thou shalt say.And he said, O my Lord, send, I pray thee, by the hand of him whom thou wilt send. And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Moses, and he said, Is not Aaron the Levite thy brother? I know that he can speak well. And also, behold, he cometh forth to meet thee: and when he seeth thee, he will be glad in his heart. And thou shalt speak unto him, and put words in his mouth: and I will be with thy mouth, and with his mouth, and will teach you what ye shall do. Later we see Aaron always accompanying Moses except on a few occasions like the receipt of the Commandments. God could have easily removed Moses' deficiency on Day One, but ordained that it stays. The fact that Moses was instrumental in the successful redemption of Israel from Egypt proves that his speech deficiency did help him. My question is: What was the value addition made by Moses' speech deficiency to his leadership?

I was talking to a rather hardcore TLM'er last weekend who, when it was mentioned that we're having an all-city Mass next week held in an amphitheater outside of our courthouse (which I thought was cool) that only in emergencies - like a time of war - is it licit to have mass outdoors like that. I was like "we're at war with the culture" and he was like "mhmm", well anyway, the conversation didn't go so well. In any event, the previous weekend, I attended a TLM outdoors at camp and the week before I went to Mass several times in the Lucas Oil Stadium (Holy Ground now, next time Taylor Swift plays, I guess). In any event, there's gotta be some rubric around it. Is this just a "spirit of Vatican II" abuse that I've been frog-boiled into or is this actually something permitted by the US Bishops and is unique to the USA (but strangely ubiquitous) or is this a thing that can never be done under any circumstances?

I'm from Brazil (we speak Portuguese language) and with help of translating tools I've translated the following paragraphs to ask my question. The question is related to Ellen White prophecies. > The time is not far distant when the test will come to **every soul**. The > **observance of the false sabbath** will be **urged upon us**. The contest > will be between the commandments of God and the commandments of men. > Those who have yielded step by step to worldly demands and conformed > to worldly customs will then yield to the powers that be, rather than > subject themselves to derision, insult, threatened imprisonment, and > death. At that time the gold will be separated from the dross. True > godliness will be clearly distinguished from the appearance and tinsel > of it. Many a star that we have admired for its brilliance will then > go out in darkness. Those who have assumed the ornaments of the > sanctuary, but are not clothed with Christ's righteousness, will then > appear in the shame of their own nakedness. (Prophets and Kings, p. 181) > 16, 17 (Daniel 3:1-18; see EGW on 1 John 2:18). History Will Be > Repeated—History will be repeated. False religion will be exalted. The > first day of the week, a common working day, possessing no sanctity > whatever, will be set up as was the image at Babylon. **All nations and > tongues and peoples will be commanded to worship this spurious** > **sabbath**. This is Satan's plan to make of no account the day instituted > by God, and given to the world as a memorial of creation. > > The decree enforcing the worship of this day is to go forth to all the > world. In a limited degree, it has already gone forth. In several > places the civil power is speaking with the voice of a dragon, just as > the heathen king spoke to the Hebrew captives. (EGW SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 7, p. 976.8) Then all nations will be Christian before this decree, because it is not possible for them to impose something that only makes sense to Christian without being Christian. One side note about sabbath violation: it's only a violation if another day is worshiped in place of sabbath. If it's just a day for resting, then it is not a violation (not a worship). Another observation I'm making is: I'm calling Christian people in the broad sense (I'm not making any difference if they follow or not the 10 commandments perfectly). I'm assuming that if people that say that they believe in Jesus, then they are indeed Christian (even if they make mistakes about God's commandments). **"All nations and tongues and peoples will be commanded to worship this spurious sabbath.**" says "**all nations**" and **makes no exceptions**. And this worship of a false sabbath comes from a Christian point of view. If that worship comes from a catholic influence, then it is a Christian, and if it is enforced by the state (nation), it makes the nation Christian. Understand? One thing implies another. So this is the reason I'm trying to explain that all nations must be adopting the Christianity officially. That means democracy all around the world and no more states of muslim and any other religion? - No more North Korean dictators - China will officially adopt Christianity - No more muslim countries (today it is over 50) - etc... Another 2000 years to wait? Don't get me wrong, I believe in most prophecies of EGW, but it seems like will take time to see it happening.

I'm curious about how this was understood by the early church. Initially when I read it in English it seemed to allude to Hebrews 2:5 but then when I looked at it in Greek, "ζωὴν τοῦ μέλλοντος αἰῶνος" seems to allude more to passages like Luke 18:30. Trying to research this portion of the creed proves difficult because most of what's written focuses on the christological statements of it. Hebrews 2:5 KJV > For unto the angels hath he not put in subjection the world to come, whereof we speak. Luke 18:30 KJV > Who shall not receive manifold more in this present time, and in the world to come life everlasting. The English renders both phrases as "world to come" but Luke uses "age" and Hebrews uses "world/inhabited earth" in Greek. I'm looking for early writings on how this was understood.