We read in Lk 2:21 , how Jesus was named : > After eight days had passed, it was time to circumcise the child; and he was called Jesus, the name given by the angel before he was conceived in the womb. As for the case of John the Baptist, there was difference of opinion on how he should be named, as we see in Lk 1: 59-63: > On the eighth day they came to circumcise the child, and they were going to name him after his father Zechariah, but his mother spoke up and said, “No! He is to be called John.” They said to her, “There is no one among your relatives who has that name.” Then they made signs to his father, to find out what he would like to name the child. He asked for a writing tablet, and to everyone’s astonishment he wrote, “His name is John.” Now, the formal naming ceremony of a baby does not in any way take away the right of the parents in calling it by the name they like most, just to strike a chord of communication with the new-born child. Such a name could also derive from the names of objects like honey, pearl, amber etc. varying from culture to culture. It is also possible that Joseph and Mary addressed the Infant as Jesus from the very day of his birth, without ever giving him a pet name. (On the contrary, they could have given him a pet name and kept using it even after the formal naming ceremony). My question therefore is: Are there any traditional/apocryphal teachings on by what name Jesus was called until the 8th day after his birth? Inputs from any denomination are welcome.

Looks like there are a few questions here about Jehovah's Witnesses viewing 1914 as a significant year in the history of mankind, but not much about what their reasoning has been for that. The other question that is claimed as duplicate does not address the question. What is the **biblical/historical/mathematical/etc reasoning** that led Jehovah's Witnesses to believe in the significance of 1914?

**From a Catholic perspective**, what's the worst for a person between being Protestant and atheist? I mean, Protestants are still Christians who believe in god and Jesus, but if an atheist becomes protestant they can help them to convert other people (like Catholics) to Protestantism, or give their funds.

Thomas' statement at John 20:28 > "Thomas replied, “My Lord and my God!”" > Ἀπεκρίθη Θωμᾶς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ “Ὁ Κύριός μου καὶ ὁ Θεός μου.” has been the subject of significantly different interpretations. Some, and now this seems the standard view, hold that Thomas is saying Jesus is both Thomas' Lord and God, where 'God' is understood in something like a Trinitarian sense. There are other interpretations , including calling Jesus a 'god', an exclamation of astonishment, or Thomas seeing the Father in Jesus because he now knows Jesus is the agent of the Father. What is the earliest known commentary on John 20:28? How does the commenter (or commenters if they are roughly contemporaneous) understand Thomas' statement?

Why didn't God strike Herod with Leprosy before he could to any harm to the newborns? He could prevent the death of many newborns and Joseph wouldn't have been forced to run to Egypt with Mary and baby Jesus. Matthew 2:16: >When Herod realized that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi. In Matthew 2:18 it says that this needs to happen to fulfill the prophecy of Jeremiah: >A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more. But why?

Did Historical protestant churches like Lutheran, Calvinist, Anglican, etc... and their founders identify themselves as lowercase "catholic"(Universal in sense) in their founding years? or the Catholic - catholic difference came from branch theory later? *Inspired from: https://christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/q/78/58919 , https://christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4248/58919*

Outside the Sacrifice of the Mass and the use of the Roman Ritual, are there any Catholic historical traditions that are have been or are in use amongst the Catholic faithful for the feast of the Holy Innocents (December 28), either within religious communities or the domestic church?

In 325 CE, following the defeat of Arius at the Council of Nicea, Emperor Constantine the Great went on a campaign of book burning to eradicate all memory of Arius and his beliefs : >After the First Council of Nicea (325 CE), Roman emperor Constantine the Great issued an edict against nontrinitarian Arians which included a prescription for systematic book-burning: > >"In addition, if any writing composed by Arius should be found, it should be handed over to the flames, so that not only will the wickedness of his teaching be obliterated, but nothing will be left even to remind anyone of him. And I hereby make a public order, that if someone should be discovered to have hidden a writing composed by Arius, and not to have immediately brought it forward and destroyed it by fire, his penalty shall be death. As soon as he is discovered in this offense, he shall be submitted for capital punishment....." > >According to Elaine Pagels, "In AD 367, Athanasius, the zealous bishop of Alexandria... issued an Easter letter in which he demanded that Egyptian monks destroy all such unacceptable writings, except for those he specifically listed as 'acceptable' even 'canonical'—a list that constitutes the present 'New Testament'". (Pagels cites Athanasius's Paschal letter (letter 39) for 367 CE, which prescribes a canon but does not explicitly order monks to destroy excluded works.[original research?]) Heretical texts do not turn up as palimpsests, scraped clean and overwritten, as do many texts of Classical antiquity. According to author Rebecca Knuth, multitudes of early Christian texts have been as thoroughly "destroyed" as if they had been publicly burnt. The great Alexandrian library was destroyed under mysterious circumstances around that time. So my thought is that it might be impossible to get my hands on Arius' writings. Is it? Or have any of his words survived?

St. Augustine is the most commonly known inventor of the just war theory, which is that war is sometimes justified if the outcome is peace, but did any other early church father other than St. Augustine believe and affirm the doctrine of the just war theory?

What is the Biblical Basis for a Closed Canon?

Acts 15:28 and 29 tells us that basically all of the old law covenant is no longer to be observed except: >Acts 15:28 KJV For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; Are Christians under obligation to avoid any or all of those 4 things today? >Acts 15:29 KJV That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well. Most religions are in agreement that sexual immorality (fornication) should be avoided. Of particular interest is what it meant in ancient times to abstain from blood and what it means now in modern times to abstain from blood. As far as I know only the Jehovahs Witnesses refuse blood transfusing for religious reasons. I would like **an overview of mainstream Christian groups' interpretation of this scripture**, in light of the vastly different conditions we have now with most of us never being involved in the slaughter of the animals we consume, in addition to the many medical therapies that involve blood and fractions thereof. **Edit** Answers should specifically state what various denominations teach regarding abstinence from blood. What must adherents of denomination X do or not do to demonstrate they are abstaining from blood?

I have heard, during my entire Christian life, that "Jesus was both fully God and fully man". What is the biblical basis for this claim, in particular the "fully man" part of this doctrine?

>The Lord will open to you his good treasury the heavens, to give the rain of your land in its season and to bless all the work of your hands; and you shall lend to many nations, but you shall not borrow (Deuteronomy 28:12 RSV). >For the Lord your God will bless you as he has promised, and you will lend to many nations but will borrow from none. You will rule over many nations but none will rule over you. (Deuteronomy 15:6) My question is specifically for the part of both scriptures where it says that the Israelites will lend to many nations but will not borrow. My question is when did Israel have all of this wealth and resources to be able to lend to other nations? I know that major blessings came to Israel during the days of Solomon but I can't find a particular scripture that outlines Solomon or some other king of Israel having nations borrowing money from them or lending to the nations.

On OrthodoxWiki it says that the filioque violates the Canons of the Council of Ephesus, because it's an addition to the Nicene Creed. The Catholic Encyclopedia says "[But] that creed itself would be abolished by this decree if it is taken too literally." But does not elaborate much on this. If the problem is taking the canons "too literally" then how should the canons be read? How do Catholics explain that the *filioque* does not violate Ephesus?

I am looking for a digital copy of any personally handwritten sermon of St. John Vianney. From what I have read, I am under the impression that 80 or so are extant, but I have not been able to locate any. There should be at least one available, as part of it has been placed on the cover of the following book: QUESTION: Does anyone know where I might find a (preferably) digital version of at least one full-length sermon of St. John Vianney? Or, at least a paper version of it? Thank you. REASON FOR THE REQUEST: If I can locate at least one of his full-length handwritten sermons, I could then explore the possibility of producing some gylphs in order to produce a "Curé of Ars" font for typography purposes.

Joshua 7:6 >Then Joshua tore his clothes and fell facedown to the ground before the ark of the Lord, remaining there till evening. The elders of Israel did the same, and sprinkled dust on their heads. Does this break the First Commandment that one is to worship God alone? Why is Joshua permitted to bow down before the Ark?

Can someone point me to the earliest source that contains the melody for *Adoro te devote*? I've checked on the Cantus Index, as well as MMMO database and have not been able to find anything on this hymn. I want to view the document. If you don't know the earliest one, can you point me to an early one? I'm guessing it would be 18th century.

It is clear that Isaiah told about the Jesus, the Messiah, in verses Like Isaiah 9:6. But it seems to me that Isaiah made statements about a false prophet in 9:15: ...the prophets who teach lies are the tail. And it states earlier that He(The Promised Son) will cut the head and the tail(false prophets). One thing I noticed is that Isaiah says that there will be many liar prophets. It says like in the Apocalypse in Isaiah 9:16 that the false prophets will mislead the population . . . >For the leaders of this people cause them to err; and they that are led of them are destroyed. [KJV] . . . but it doesn't make a big deal out of it. I mean in Apocalypse the antichrist is a scary, son of demon that wants all people to lose their salvation and we need to be carful NOT to think that he is the real Messiah. In Isaiah, the false prophets are just some liars that will mislead the population, but Jesus will end their lies before they can do any harm.

Is the will of God always fulfilled? In Mark 14:36 it reads > And he said, Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee; take > away this cup from me: **nevertheless not what I will, but what thou > wilt**. Is there any probability for the will of God not to be fulfilled?

When was Sunday created? I mean, we have Sunday once a week , so every 7 days, who decided that? The same thing for Islam, who decided that the holy day is Friday, that happens to be every 7 days? I looked it up and google says "321 CE Emperor Constantine" I don't know much about religion, so, if Jesus was born in year 0 (Emperor Constantine wasn't alive yet) then, was Sunday somehow related to the lunar calendar?