Jesus, being divine, is portrayed in the Gospels as knowing the hearts and thoughts of men (John 2:25, Matthew 9:4). In the Garden of Gethsemane, Peter draws a sword (or knife) and cuts off the ear of the high priest's servant (John 18:10), only to be rebuked by Jesus and told to put it away (Matthew 26:52). Given that Jesus had divine foreknowledge and perfect awareness of His surroundings, why did He allow Peter to carry or hide the knife in the first place? Was Jesus allowing this act to happen as part of a prophetic fulfillment or a deeper lesson on violence and obedience? Or does this highlight something about the tension between human zeal and divine purpose? How do Christian theologians and commentators interpret this moment in light of Jesus’ omniscience?

I'm interested in whether there was an early Church Father who ***explicitly*** drew the connection that Trinitarians commonly draw today: the connection between Jesus' "**I am**" statement, found in **John 8:58** and God Almighty calling Himself the "**I am**" in **Exodus 3:14**. I would be interested in any Trinitarian answer that holds on to the Chalcedonian creeds. **When did the Church start drawing this connection?** I couldn't find such an explicit reference to such a connection being made by any of the 1st to 3rd-century Church Fathers in my research and am wondering if I'm missing something.

> A short section of 1 Enoch (1 En 1:9) is quoted in the New Testament > (Letter of Jude 1:14-15), and is there attributed to "Enoch the > Seventh from Adam" (1 En 60:8). It is argued that all the writers of > the New Testament were familiar with it and were influenced by it in > thought and diction. — Wikipedia So why is the Book of Enoch not regarded as canonical by major Christian denominations?

Below are several excerpts from Christian websites that discuss the idea of "paying the price" in a spiritual context: > God is a God of process. The major problem with this generation is that men are not ready to **pay the price** to have spiritual power and experiences. But the truth is, if it is genuine, there will be **a price attached to it**. Jesus told the disciples in Luke 24:49 to tarry in Jerusalem until they were endued with power from on high. So, where did you get the version of your divine power without divine process? **Anything valuable always has a price tag**. If you see anything that is valuable, that is cheap, it is either somebody paid for it, or it is stolen. **Authentic power has a price tag**. > > There is a **price you will have to pay** to walk in the authentic power of God. If you see a man that works in supposed power and you don’t see a price in his life, it’s false power he’s working with. The man that God will work with must **pay the price** for spiritual experiences. Specific callings and specific anointing call for specific **prices that we must constantly be paying**. May the Lord find you dependable to carry His power these last days. > > https://spiritmeat.net/2024/06/22/22-june-2024-the-price-for-spiritual-power-and-spiritual-experiences-pay-it-mark-314/ > Every day we need to be watchful by **paying the price to buy the Spirit as the golden oil** so that we may supply the churches with the Spirit for the testimony of Jesus and be rewarded by the Lord to participate in the marriage dinner of the Lamb. > > Our urgent need today is to gain more of the Spirit; we need to live a life of **buying** an extra portion of the Spirit to saturate our entire being. > > Day by day we need to live such a life, a life of **paying the price** to gain the Spirit not only in our spirit but also in our soul, being saturated with the Spirit in our vessel. If we have a day when we don’t **pay the price** to gain the saturating Spirit, that is a wasted day; we do not want to have any wasted days! > > For us to gain more of the Spirit in our soul we need to **pay a price**; we need to **pay the price** of giving up the world, dealing with the self, loving the Lord above all things, and counting all things loss for Christ. > > Day by day we need to **pay the price** of losing our soul life and denying the things that we want to do so that we may pray more, even persevere in prayer and watch unto prayer, so that we may gain more of the Spirit. > > If we don’t **pay the price to buy the oil today**, we will have to pay it after we are resurrected; sooner or later, we will have to **pay the price** – so why not today, why not in this age? > > https://agodman.com/paying-price-buy-spirit-oil-vessel-word-prayer/ > The wise virgins told the foolish virgins to go buy their own oil. When the Bible speaks of the oil, it refers to the Holy Spirit. You may ask, “But, how is it possible to buy the Holy Spirit?” > > Jesus is referring to a person having to **pay the price**, which means denying their will, obeying the Word of God, being faithful, sacrificing and keeping constant watch. > > All those who truly want the presence of God should be aware that **there is a price to pay**. The wise virgins, certainly, **paid the price** (sacrificed) with the time they waited for the bridegroom. Surely, they prepared themselves by investing in their spiritual lives through prayer, fasts, consecration and surrender, not allowing the light of the Spirit to burn out. > > On the other hand, there are those who aren’t willing to **pay that price**. They live according to their fleshly desires, refuse to stop living in sin, are in the church but far from God, have the lamp, which is faith, but don’t have the oil, which is the Holy Spirit. > > https://www.universal.org/en/bispo-macedo/pay-the-price/ Is the idea of "paying the price" for greater spiritual power, anointing, or a deeper experience of God a common teaching across all Christian denominations, or is it emphasized primarily within certain groups? For example, is it widely taught that Christians must *pay a price* to receive more of the Spirit, more anointing, or greater spiritual authority? What is the biblical basis for this teaching?

**Newly created Catholic Mass for the Care of Creation?** Apparently Pope Leo XIV inaugurated a new mass for the care of creation. This [source](https://www.catholicbishops.ie/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Mass-for-Creation-Time..pdf) says the the Feast of Creation is September 1st (or for any other day in Creation Time, September 1st - October 4th). Concerning this new mass or feast, what is the reasoning behind this new mass and feast? What is it’s liturgical rank as a feast? And why these dates for the Feast of Creation? Any insights about this new mass would be greatly appreciated.

The final words of the Book of Haggai are: > The word of the Lord came a second time to Haggai on the twenty-fourth > day of the month, “Speak to Zerub′babel, governor of Judah, saying, I > am about to shake the heavens and the earth, and to overthrow the > throne of kingdoms; I am about to destroy the strength of the kingdoms > of the nations, and overthrow the chariots and their riders; and the > horses and their riders shall go down, every one by the sword of his > fellow. On that day, says the Lord of hosts, I will take you, O > Zerub′babel my servant, the son of She-al′ti-el, says the Lord, and > make you like a signet ring; for I have chosen you, says the Lord of > hosts.” The reference to being chosen as God's "signet ring" at least evokes a sense that the prophet predicted a restoration of royal authority approved by God (see Jeremiah 22:24). Zerubbabel was a descendant of King David and the grandson of one of Judah's last kings. Given his lineage and the powerful words of promise above, is Haggai expressing a messianic hope in Zerubbabel? (Note: I mean this in the sense of the Jewish messiah, who restores the throne of David, not the Christian sense, in which the messiah dies for the sins of mankind.) Related questions: whether or not this is a messianic prophecy, why does it seem it was not fulfilled. Were there events in Zerubbabel's time that fulfilled the prophecy? In what sense did he become God's "signet ring?"

If there is a god then he probably wouldn't let us have 100% proof that he is real, so that we can have faith in him instead of just having physical proof. so we cant know for sure that he is or isn't real. But if there isn't a god, then eventually we should be able to find 100% proof that he isn't real, and that people are just bending reality to fit their religion. but we don't have that proof yet. So, how can I know if he exists or not?

According to Wikipedia, Isidore of Seville (not to be confused with Isidore the Laborer ) is the patron saint of the Internet and computer programmers. Unfortunately, the current revision doesn't describe how a 7th Century man became the patron of a 20th Century invention and its related profession. It does mention the existence of the Order of Saint Isidore of Seville , founded January 1, 2000, but it's unclear on if they pushed for this patronage or if it was others. How did Isidore of Seville gain the distinction of being the patron saint of the Internet and computer programmers?

What is the Catholic Church's view of Anne Catherine Emmerich - can her visions and prophecies be trusted? Is she a true prophet by the biblical standard? *(This question has been prompted by the comments to the answer to [What did the serpent look like?](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/7632/what-did-the-serpent-look-like/31040#31040)*)

[Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Jericho#Historicity) explains three archaeological studies of the Jericho site, and concludes that the city was abandoned at the time the supposed Biblical battle took place. How do Christians reconcile the Biblical account with this science?

Trinitarians assert that Jesus was fully God and fully human. That the two "persons" were separate and not intermixed (one could die, get hungry, feel physical pain and the other wouldn't). Which of these two was sent by "the father"? Which of these two received authority as spoken in Matthew 28:18-19?

In the Old Testament, we can see several places that portray God as the most gracious and the most merciful. However, when God accompanied the Israelites to their promised land, he said that he would destroy the seven nations of that area (Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Hivites, and Jebusites) so that the Israelites could take their place. Why does God love the Israelites so much that he can also show his mercy and love to all the other nations and people he created? Are only Israelites entitled to his love, and not modern-day Christians who follow the teachings of Jesus Christ? If not, then why did Jesus say he came to fulfill the laws of Moses? (In Matthew 5:17, Jesus says, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.") Are other people not worthy of God's love?

I looked at the [*Wikipedia* page on the St. Thomas Christians](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Thomas_Christians) , the oldest school of Indian Christians who follow the teachings of St. Thomas the Apostle, who had travelled to India to preach. However, I couldn’t find what their beliefs *were* from that page. Were they Trinitarian or Unitarian? Are there any academic references (books, papers) that discuss their religious beliefs on the nature of God, Jesus, etc?

While having a conversation with a member of the Latter day saints. I did some independent research regarding their official account of the origin of their Faith. I did not see any similar question, if there is one I do apologize. Forgive the long build up to my question, it helps the question be properly understood. It is down below in large friendly letters. :) I found this in "Joseph Smith's History" on a very well designed website, that would display explanations for certain words and even links to specific Bible verses involved. During my reading of the first hand account of events, I intentionally did not bother with any historical details nor look up things to bias my original opinion of the text. ---------- The account does not seem to show that Joseph did anything to confirm that his vision was from God and not from the evil one. I come from an eastern orthodox perspective and it seems that Joseph neglected (perhaps due to his age) 2 out of the 3 things we are supposed to do when confronted by visions of supernatural nature. 1. Challenging the messenger, demons can perfectly imitate even divine figures and loved ones. Even various Orthodox saints were deceived by visions where demons impersonated Christ, saints, or similar. We are supposed to challenge them, who sent them, etc. (Example St. Issac of the caves was tricked into worshiping a demon that another one called Christ) 2. Test the message itself, it should align with scripture if it is from God. (Remember this for the question at the end) 3. Seek guidance from a spiritual leader. --------------- These are the issues (minor and major) that I see from reading it. 1. It seems odd that the vision starts with "overpowering darkness" preventing him from speaking. But that doesn't really pose an issue, especially if Joseph did become freed by calling out to God. 2. In the vision, one being points to the other and says "this is my son", who's son? Lucifer and God both will say that they have a son. The orthodox church accounts of visions have many instances where one demon calls another "Christ" to deceive the recipient. 3. The angel Moroni, according to Joseph misquotes scripture by changing verses entirely. This should have been a clear sign that it was false. The "angel" versions are significantly different. 4. Joseph told pastors of his vision, but the pastors he told flatly refused to acknowledge that visions could even occur. (Making it regrettably impossible for him to seek spiritual guidance) -------------------- My main question is this focused on my 3rd objection above. #### "According to the account Joseph as a young man knew the scriptures, despite this he allowed an angel that he knew **changed a text from the Bible** to guide him. How do members of the church of latter day saints reconcile for this direct sin performed by the angel Moroni? >36 After telling me these things, he commenced quoting the prophecies of the Old Testament. He first quoted part of the third chapter of Malachi; and he quoted also the fourth or last chapter of the same prophecy, **though with a little variation from the way it reads in our Bibles**. Instead of quoting the first verse as it reads in our books, he quoted it thus: > > 37 For behold, the day cometh that shall burn as an oven, and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly shall **burn** as stubble; for **they that come shall** burn them, saith the Lord of Hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch. Compare with: "For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch." (Malachi 4:1 or Malachi 3:19) ----------- > 38 And again, he quoted the fifth verse thus: Behold, I will **reveal unto you the Priesthood, by the hand of** Elijah the prophet, before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord. Compare with: "Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord:" (Malachi 4:5 or Malachi 3:24) ----------------- Changing verses is a sin, and the angel Moroni did it, and Joseph noticed and recorded it officially. > “Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.” (Deut. 4:2.) I understand the LDS response to this already, if the first vision and angel are valid from God, then there is no issue. But the angel sinned according to the account, by changing the scriptures... > We have renounced secret and shameful ways; we do not use deception, **nor do we distort the word of God.** On the contrary, by setting forth the truth plainly we commend ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God. (2 Corinthians 4:2). > “**Your word**, LORD, **is eternal; it stands firm in the heavens**” (Psalm 119:89). > “The grass withers and the flowers fall, but **the word of our God endures forever**” (Isaiah 40:8). > “Heaven and earth will pass away, but **my words will never pass away**” (Matthew 24:35)

For the first 74 years of the KJV (including most notably the 1611 version) the KJV included the apocryphal books. So if the 1611 version is inspired why don't the Protestant KJV-1611-Only crowd consider them canonical?

If the Catholic Church acquired ChatGPT, could the chatbot hear confessions? Or does Catholic Doctrine established that a human priest must hear all confessions?

I might be making much ado about nothing and/or being nit-picky. However, was it an accepted custom amongst the Ancient Israelites to name their children Ishmael? I'm asking because in 2 Kings 25:25-27 and the Book of Jeremiah, it mentions a person named Ishmael the son of Nethaniah, the son of Elishama, of the royal family. > 25 But it came about > in the seventh month, that Ishmael the son of Nethaniah, the son of > Elishama, of the royal [a]family, came [b]with ten men and struck > Gedaliah down so that he died along with the Jews and the Chaldeans > who were with him at Mizpah. - 2 Kings 25:25-27 (New American Standard Bible 1995) > 8 So they came to > Gedaliah at Mizpah, along with Ishmael the son of Nethaniah, and > Johanan and Jonathan the sons of Kareah, and Seraiah the son of > Tanhumeth, and the sons of Ephai the Netophathite, and Jezaniah the > son of the Maacathite, both they and their men. - Jeremiah 40:8 (New American Standard Bible 1995) However, is it strange for Ancient Israelite to name one of their children, Ishmael, which is a name usually associated with a quasi rival as Ishmael was an opponent of Isaac (one of the paternal ancestors of the Ancient Israelites)?

I've heard a lot of religious chatter concerning what exact "sea" was parted by God to allow Moses and the Israelites to cross out of Egypt. Seems productions by the History Channel and other such sources have made statements about it but they also talked about the Mayan end of the world ideas. I know my bible says "Red Sea" but I've heard that could be a mistranslation. I was just wondering if there was any solid evidence to support either location? Such as archaeological findings or other sources. > "18 So God led the people around by way of the wilderness of the Red > Sea." -Exodus 13:18

Within the theology of the The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, a Great Apostacy is held to. The Great Apostacy is primarily identified by the loss, or removal, of priesthood keys and authority from the earth. I can't find any specifics from a church source on when this occurred. Does anyone know of any detailed explanation on when the apostacy occurred? I'd like to give an idea as to why that is the case, and encourage members to poke holes in it if possible. In our theology, the Apostles hold all the keys of the priesthood, which constitute the right to preside over and direct the Church within a jurisdiction. Sometimes the Apostles delegate those keys. For example, "Bishops hold the priesthood keys to lead the work of the Church in the ward" (local congregation) (source ). "A bishop is called by inspiration of the Lord and ordained by a stake president under the direction of the First Presidency of the Church and the Quorum of the Twelve."(source ) *In the absence of keys held by apostles, there can be no ordination of bishops. A bishop does not hold the keys to authorize the ordination of successor bishop (**this seems to be the key claim**).* As it relates to the Great Apostacy, once the Apostles are all gone, the keys to direct bishop ordination are gone. A bishop could be ordained and alive at the time the last Apostle is taken, and he could ordain others to offices in the Aaronic priesthood, but once he dies the keys he was delegated are gone. So it may be true that holders of the priesthood are alive at the time the last apostle was taken, but within the next 100 years or so, no living key holder will be left and soon following no authoritative ordination will be possible. This seems to be the reason we can't pin a date down, we don't know when the last priesthood holder died. Thoughts?

A week ago I was reading Matthew, and at Mt 2:15 and 2:17 he write about Old Testament prophecies. Searching for it, maybe in Jeremiah, I read something like *'**we must be cautious reading the Holy Scriptures because prophets can make mistakes**'*. I found it a beautiful message, but at the time, when I was searching for the prophecy referenced by Matthew, I don't pay too much attention to it, and today I'm not able to find it again. Can someone point me the location of some versicle that could be that?