testing.licitamos.cl/prezzo-azithromycin-250mg-recensioni.php Evidently Paul entertained long before his vision those notions of the Son of God which he afterward expressed; but the identification of his Gnostic Christ with the crucified Jesus of the church he had formerly antagonized was possibly the result of a mental paroxysm experienced in the form of visions.
The Galilean ministry begins when Jesus returns to Galilee from the Judaean Desert after rebuffing the temptation of Satan. Once one's spirit evolves to the point where it sees most clearly, the idea of evil vanishes and the truth is revealed. Caution and subterfuge in these circumstances was essential if difficulties of these kinds were to be avoided. Houlden, J. Stephen My email address is webmaster at newadvent.
Whether the Hellenists in Jerusalem, at the head of whom stood Stephen, Philip, and others named in Acts vii. He was Paul's older companion, apparently of a more imposing stature Acts xiv. The two traveled together as collectors of charity for the poor of the Jerusalem church ib. Finally, on account of dissensions, probably of a far more serious nature than stated either in Acts xv. That both Paul and Barnabas held views different from those of the other apostles may be learned from I Cor. Paul's relation to Apollos also was apparently that of a younger colaborer to an older and more learned one I Cor.
According to Acts xiii. New Testament , Paul began working along the traditional Jewish line of proselytizing in the various synagogues where the proselytes of the gate and the Jews met; and only because he failed to win the Jews to his views, encountering strong opposition and persecution from them, did he turn to the Gentile world after he had agreed at a convention with the apostles at Jerusalem to admit the Gentiles into the Church only as proselytes of the gate, that is, after their acceptance of the Noachian laws Acts xv.
This presentation of Paul's work is, however, incompatible with the attitude toward the Jews and the Law taken by him in the Epistles. Nor can any historical value be attached to the statement in Gal. In reality Paul had little more than the name of apostle in common with the actual disciples of Jesus. His field of work was chiefly, if not exclusively, among the Gentiles; he looked for a virgin soil wherein to sow the seeds of the gospel; and he succeeded in establishing throughout Greece, Macedonia, and Asia Minor churches in which there were "neither Jews nor Gentiles," but Christians who addressed each other as "brethren" or "saints.
As to the chronology, much reliance can not be placed either on Gal. From II Cor. He labored hard day and night as a tent-maker for a livelihood Acts xviii.
He says II Cor. Acts xvi. In Damascus he was imprisoned by King Aretas at the instigation, not of the Jews, as is stated by modern historians, but of the Jerusalem authorities; and he escaped through being let down in a basket from a window II Cor. Acts xxvii. He was besides this constantly troubled with his disease, which often made him "groan" for deliverance I Thess. Corinth and Ephesus, the two great centers of commerce, with their strangely mixed and turbulent as well as immoral population, offered to Paul a large field for his missionary work; and, because the Jews there were few and had little influence, he had free scope and ample opportunity to build up a church according to his plans.
He was greatly aided therein by the Roman protection which he enjoyed Acts xviii. Yet as long as the church at Jerusalem was in his way he found little comfort and satisfaction in his achievements, though he proudly recounted the successes which marked his journeys throughout the lands. It was to Rome that his efforts gravitated. Not Athens, whose wisdom he decried as "folly" I Cor. Consciously or unconsciously, he worked for a church with its world-center in Rome instead of in Jerusalem.
A prisoner in the years Phil. For futher biographical details, which form the subject of much dispute among Christians, but are of no special interest for Jewish readers, see the article "Paul" in Hauck,"Real-Encyc. Bible," and similar works. In order to understand fully the organization and scope of the Church as mapped out by Paul in his Epistles, a comparison thereof with the organization and the work of the Synagogue, including the Essene community, seems quite proper.
Each Jewish community when organized as a congregation possessed in, or together with, its synagogue an institution 1 for common worship, 2 for the instruction of young and old in the Torah, and 3 for systematic charity and benevolence. This threefold work was as a rule placed in charge of men of high social standing, prominent both in learning and in piety.
The degree of knowledge and of scrupulousness in the observance of the Torah determined the rank of the members of the Synagogue. Among the members of the Essene brotherhood every-day life with its common meals came under special rules of sanctity, as did their prayers and their charities as well as their visits to the sick, the Holy Spirit being especially invoked by them as a divine factor, preparing them also for the Messianic kingdom of which they lived in expectation see Essenes.
Paul, the Hellenist, however, knowingly or unknowingly, seems to have taken the heathen cult associations as his pattern while introducing new features into the Church see Anrich, "Das Antike Mysterienwesen in Seinem Einfluss auf das Christenthum," ; Wobbermin, "Religionsgeschichtliche Studien zur Frage der Beeinflussung des Urchristenthums Durch das Antike Mysterienwesen," , p. Still more is the partaking of the bread and the wine of the communion meal, the so-called "Lord's Supper," rendered the means of a mystic union with Christ, "a participation in his blood and body," exactly as was the Mithraic meal a real participation in the blood and body of Mithra see Cumont, l.
To Paul, the Holy Spirit itself is not an ethical but a magic power that works sanctification and salvation. It is a mystic substance permeating the Church as a dynamic force, rendering all the members saints, and pouring forth its graces in the various gifts, such as those of prophesying, speaking in tongues, and interpreting voices, and others displayed in teaching and in the administration of charity and similar Church functions Rom. The Church forms "the body of Christ" not in a figurative sense, but through the same mystic actuality as that by which the participants of heathen cults become, through their mysteries or sacraments, parts of their deities.
Such is the expressed view of Paul when he contrasts the "table of Christ" with the "table of the demons" I Cor. While Paul borrows from the Jewish propaganda literature, especially the Sibyllines, the idea of the divine wrath striking especially those that commit the capital sins of idolatry and incest fornication and acts of violence or fraudulence Rom. Salvation alone, that is, redemption from a world of perdition and sin, the attainment of a life of incorruption, is the object; yet this is the privilege only of those chosen and predestined "to be conformed to the image of His [God's] son" Rom.
It is accordingly not personal merit nor the greater moral effort that secures salvation, but some arbitrary act of divine grace which justifies one class of men and condemns the other ib. It is not righteousness, nor even faith—in the Jewish sense of perfect trust in the all-loving and all-forgiving God and Father—which leads to salvation, but faith in the atoning power of Christ's death, which in some mystic or judicial manner justifies the undeserving Rom.
Heathen as is the conception of a church securing a mystic union with the Deity by means of sacramental rites, equally pagan is Paul's conception of the crucifixion of Jesus. It is to him a cosmic act by which God becomes reconciled to Himself. God sent "his own son in the likeness of sinful flesh" in order to have His wrath appeased by his death. To a Jewish mind trained by rabbinical acumen this is not pure monotheistic, but mythological, thinking.
Paul's "Son of God" is, far more than the Logos of Philo, an infringement of the absolute unity of God. While the predicate "God" applied to him in Titus ii. He is, or is expected to be, called upon as"the Lord" I Cor.
Only the pagan idea of the "man-God" or "the second God," the world's artificer, and "son of God" in Plato, in the Hermes-Tot literature as shown by Reizenstein, l. Only from Alexandrian Gnosticism, or, as Reizenstein l. Paul's attitude toward the Law was by no means hostile from the beginning or on principle, as the interpolated Epistle to the Romans and the spurious one to the Galatians represent it.
Neither is it the legalistic nomistic character of Pharisaic Judaism which he militates against, as Jesus in the Gospels is represented as doing; nor was he prompted by the desire to discriminate between the ceremonial and the moral laws in order to accentuate the spiritual side of religion. All such interpretations fail to account for Paul's denunciation of all law, moral as well as ceremonial, as an intrinsic evil Hausrath, "Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte," 2d ed. According to his arguments Rom. He has no faith in the moral power of man: "I know that in me that is, in my flesh dwelleth no good thing" ib.
What he is aiming at is that state in which the sinfulness of the flesh is entirely overcome by the spirit of Christ who is "the end of the Law" ib. For Paul, to be a member of the Church meant to be above the Law, and to serve in the newness of the spirit under a higher law ib. For in Christ, that is, by the acceptance of the belief that with him the world of resurrection has begun, man has become "a new creature: the old things are passed away.
For Paul, the world is doomed: it is flesh beset by sin and altogether of the evil one; hence home, family life, worldly wisdom, all earthly enjoyment are of no account, as they belong to a world which passes away I Cor. Having at first only the heathen in view, Paul claims the members of the Church for Christ; hence their bodies must be consecrated to him and not given to fornication ib.
In fact, they ought to live in celibacy; and only on account of Satan's temptation to lust are they allowed to marry ib. As regards eating and drinking, especially of offerings to idols, which were prohibited to the proselyte of the gate by the early Christians as well as by the Jews comp. Acts xv. Only those that are "weak in faith" do care; and their scruples should be heeded by the others. The Gnostic principle enunciated by Porphyrius "De Abstinentia," i.
Encyc , v. As he stated in I Cor. To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some. The original attitude of Paul to the Law was accordingly not that of opposition as represented in Romans and especially in Galatians, but that of a claimed transcendency. He desired "the strong ones" to do without the Law as "schoolmaster" Gal.
The Law made men servants: Christ rendered them "sons of God. Only in admitting the heathen into his church did he follow the traditional Jewish practise of emphasizing at the initiation of proselytes "the law of God," consisting in "Love thy neighbor as thyself," taken from Lev. Also in the mode of preparing the proselyte—by specifying to him the mandatory and prohibitive commandments in the form of a catalogue of virtues or duties and a catalogue of sins, making him promise to practise the former, and, in the form of a "widdui" confession of sins , to avoid the latter—Paul and his school followed, in common with all the other apostles, the traditional custom, as may be learned from I Thess.
Rendel Harris, "The Teaching of the Apostles," , pp. A comparison of the "Didascalia"with Paul's various admonitions in the Epistles likewise shows how much he was indebted to Essene teachings See Jew. Didascalia , where it is shown in a number of instances that the priority rests with the Jewish "Didascalia" and not, as is generally believed, with Paul. Also "turning from darkness to light" I Thess. It is rather difficult to reconcile these moral injunctions with the Pauline notion that, since law begets sin, there should be no law ruling the members of the Church.
This term, taken from Grecian mysteries see Light-foot, "Epistles to the Colossians," ad loc. For Paul, then, the Christian's aim was to be mature and ready for the day when all would be "caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air" and be with Him forever I Thess. To be with Christ, "in whom dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead," is to become so "complete" as to be above the rule of heavenly bodies, above the "tradition of men," above statutes regarding circumcision, meat and drink, holy days, new moon, and Sabbath, all of which are but "a shadow of the things to come"; it is to be dead to the world and all things of the earth, to mortify the members of the flesh, to "put off the old man" with his deeds and passions, and put on the new man who is ever renewed for the highest knowledge of God gnosis , so that there is "neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free, but Christ is all and in all" Col.
I Cor. Far then from making antagonism to the Law the starting-point of his apostolic activity, as under the influence of the Epistle to the Romans is assumed by almost all Christian theologians, except the so-called Dutch school of critics see Cheyne and Black, "Encyc.
There is no bitter hostility or antagonism to the Law noticeable in I Thessalonians ii. His antinomian theology is chiefly set forth in the Epistle to the Romans, many parts of which, however, are the product of the second-century Church with its fierce hatred of the Jew, e. The underlying motive of Paul—the tearing down of the partition-wall between Jew and Gentile—is best expressed in Eph. Instead, indeed, of removing the germ of death brought into the world by Adam, the Law was given only to increase sin and to make all the greater the need of divine mercy which was to come through Christ, the new Adam ib.
By further twisting the Biblical words taken from Gen. And so he declares faith in Jesus' atoning death to be the means of justification and salvation, and not the Law, which demands servitude, whereas the spirit of Christ makes men children of God Rom. The Pauline Jew-hatred was ever more intensified see ib. Another sophistic argument against the Law, furnished in Gal. Josephus, "Ant. Weiss's note ad loc. The Pauline school writing under Paul's name, but scarcely Paul himself, worked out the theory, based upon Jer.
Similarly the interpolator of II Cor. Scotus Eriugena ; in particular, many rationalistic Protestants of the last centuries defended this belief , e. Among Catholics , Hirscher and Schell have recently expressed the opinion that those who do not die in the state of grace can still be converted after death if they are not too wicked and impenitent.
The Holy Bible is quite explicit in teaching the eternity of the pains of hell. The torments of the damned shall last forever and ever Revelation ; ; They are everlasting just as are the joys of heaven Matthew Of Judas Christ says: "it were better for him, if that man had not been born" Matthew But this would not have been true if Judas was ever to be released from hell and admitted to eternal happiness. Again, God says of the damned: "Their worm shall not die, and their fire shall not be quenched" Isaiah ; Mark , 45, The fire of hell is repeatedly called eternal and unquenchable.
The wrath of God abideth on the damned John ; they are vessels of Divine wrath Romans ; they shall not possess the Kingdom of God 1 Corinthians ; Galatians , etc. The objections adduced from Scripture against this doctrine are so meaningless that they are not worth while discussing in detail. The teaching of the fathers is not less clear and decisive cf. We merely call to mind the testimony of the martyrs who often declared that they were glad to suffer pain of brief duration in order to escape eternal torments; e.
Atzberger, "Geschichte", II, sqq. It is true that Origen fell into error on this point; but precisely for this error he was condemned by the Church Canones adv. Origenem ex Justiniani libro adv. In vain attempts were made to undermine the authority of these canons cf. Besides even in Origen we find the orthodox teaching on the eternity of the pains of hell; for in his words the faithful Christian was again and again victorious over the doubting philosopher. Gregory of Nyssa seems to have favoured the errors of Origen ; many, however, believe that his statements can be shown to be in harmony with Catholic doctrine.
But the suspicions that have been cast on some passages of Gregory of Nazianzus and Jerome are decidedly without justification cf. Pesch, "Theologische Zeitfragen", 2nd series, sqq. The Church professes her faith in the eternity of the pains of hell in clear terms in the Athanasian Creed Denz. Hence, beyond the possibility of doubt , the Church expressly teaches the eternity of the pains of hell as a truth of faith which no one can deny or call in question without manifest heresy.
But what is the attitude of mere reason towards this doctrine? Just as God must appoint some fixed term for the time of trial, after which the just will enter into the secure possession of a happiness that can never again be lost in all eternity , so it is likewise appropriate that after the expiration of that term the wicked will be cut off from all hope of conversion and happiness.
For the malice of men cannot compel God to prolong the appointed time of probation and to grant them again and again, without end, the power of deciding their lot for eternity. Any obligation to act in this manner would be unworthy of God , because it would make Him dependent on the caprice of human malice, would rob His threats in great part of their efficacy, and would offer the amplest scope and the strongest incentive to human presumption.
God has actually appointed the end of this present life, or the moment of death, as the term of man's probation. For in that moment there takes place in our life an essential and momentous change; from the state of union with the body the soul passes into a life apart. No other sharply defined instant of our life is of like importance. Hence we must conclude that death is the end of our probation; for it is meet that our trial should terminate at a moment of our existence so prominent and significant as to be easily perceived by every man.
Accordingly, it is the belief of all people that eternal retribution is dealt out immediately after death. This conviction of mankind is an additional proof of our thesis. Finally, the preservation of moral and social order would not be sufficiently provided for, if men knew that the time of trial were to be continued after death.
Many believe that reason cannot give any conclusive proof for the eternity of the pains of hell, but that it can merely show that this doctrine does not involve any contradiction. Since the Church has made no decision on this point, each one is entirely free to embrace this opinion. As is apparent, the author of this article does not hold it. We admit that God might have extended the time of trial beyond death; however, had He done so, He would have permitted man to know about it, and would have made corresponding provision for the maintenance of moral order in this life.
We may further admit that it is not intrinsically impossible for God to annihilate the sinner after some definite amount of punishment; but this would be less in conformity with the nature of man's immortal soul ; and, secondly, we know of no fact that might give us any right to suppose God will act in such a manner.
The objection is made that there is no proportion between the brief moment of sin and an eternal punishment. But why not? We certainly admit a proportion between a momentary good deed and its eternal reward, not, it is true , a proportion of duration, but a proportion between the law and its appropriate sanction. Again, sin is an offence against the infinite authority of God , and the sinner is in some way aware of this, though but imperfectly.
Accordingly there is in sin an approximation to infinite malice which deserves an eternal punishment. Finally, it must be remembered that, although the act of sinning is brief, the guilt of sin remains forever; for in the next life the sinner never turns away from his sin by a sincere conversion. It is further objected that the sole object of punishment must be to reform the evil-doer.
This is not true. Besides punishments inflicted for correction, there are also punishments for the satisfaction of justice. But justice demands that whoever departs from the right way in his search for happiness shall not find his happiness , but lose it. The eternity of the pains of hell responds to this demand for justice. And, besides, the fear of hell does really deter many from sin ; and thus, in as far as it is threatened by God , eternal punishment also serves for the reform of morals. But if God threatens man with the pains of hell, He must also carry out His threat if man does not heed it by avoiding sin.
For solving other objections it should be noted: God is not only infinitely good, He is infinitely wise, just, and holy. No one is cast into hell unless he has fully and entirely deserved it. The sinner perseveres forever in his evil disposition. We must not consider the eternal punishment of hell as a series of separate of distinct terms of punishment, as if God were forever again and again pronouncing a new sentence and inflicting new penalties, and as if He could never satisfy His desire of vengeance.
Hell is, especially in the eyes of God , one and indivisible in its entirety; it is but one sentence and one penalty. In itself, it is no rejection of Catholic dogma to suppose that God might at times, by way of exception, liberate a soul from hell. Thus some argued from a false interpretation of 1 Peter sq. Others were misled by untrustworthy stories into the belief that the prayers of Gregory the Great rescued the Emperor Trajan from hell.
But now theologians are unanimous in teaching that such exceptions never take place and never have taken place, a teaching which should be accepted. If this be true , how can the Church pray in the Offertory of the Mass for the dead: "Libera animas omnium fidelium defunctorum de poenis inferni et de profundo lacu" etc.?
Many think the Church uses these words to designate purgatory. They can be explained more readily, however, if we take into consideration the peculiar spirit of the Church's liturgy ; sometimes she refers her prayers not to the time at which they are said, but to the time for which they are said.
Thus the offertory in question is referred to the moment when the soul is about to leave the body, although it is actually said some time after that moment; and as if he were actually at the death-beds of the faithful , the priest implores God to preserve their souls from hell.
But whichever explanation be preferred, this much remains certain, that in saying that offertory the Church intends to implore only those graces which the soul is still capable of receiving, namely, the grace of a happy death or the release from purgatory. Impenitence of the damned The damned are confirmed in evil ; every act of their will is evil and inspired by hatred of God. This is the common teaching of theology ; St. Thomas sets it forth in many passages. Nevertheless, some have held the opinion that, although the damned cannot perform any supernatural action, they are still able to perform, now and then, some naturally good deed; thus far the Church has not condemned this opinion.
The author of this article maintains that the common teaching is the true one; for in hell the separation from the sanctifying power of Divine love is complete. Many assert that this inability to do good works is physical, and assign the withholding of all grace as its proximate cause; in doing so, they take the term grace in its widest meaning, i.
The damned, then, can never choose between acting out of love of God and virtue, and acting out of hatred of God. Hatred is the only motive in their power; and they have no other choice than that of showing their hatred of God by one evil action in preference to another. The last and the real cause of their impenitence is the state of sin which they freely chose as their portion on earth and in which they passed, unconverted, into the next life and into that state of permanence status termini by nature due to rational creatures, and to an unchangeable attitude of mind.
Quite in consonance with their final state, God grants them only such cooperation as corresponds to the attitude which they freely chose as their own in this life. Hence the damned can but hate God and work evil , whilst the just in heaven or in purgatory , being inspired solely by love of God , can but do good. Therefore, too, the works of the reprobate, in as far as they are inspired by hatred of God , are not formal, but only material sins , because they are performed without the liberty requisite for moral imputability. Formal sin the reprobate commits then only, when, from among several actions in his power, he deliberately chooses that which contains the greater malice.
By such formal sins the damned do not incur any essential increase of punishment, because in that final state the very possibility and Divine permission of sin are in themselves a punishment; and, moreover, a sanction of the moral law would be quite meaningless. From what has been said it follows that the hatred which the lost soul bears to God is voluntary in its cause only; and the cause is the deliberate sin which it committed on earth and by which it merited reprobation.
It is also obvious that God is not responsible for the reprobate's material sins of hate, because by granting His co-operation in their sinful acts as well as by refusing them every incitement to good, He acts quite in accordance with the nature of their state. Therefore their sins are no more imputable to God than are the blasphemies of a man in the state of total intoxication, although they are not uttered without Divine assistance. The reprobate carries in himself the primary cause of impenitence; it is the guilt of sin which he committed on earth and with which he passed into eternity.
The proximate cause of impenitence in hell is God's refusal of every grace and every impulse for good. It would not be intrinsically impossible for God to move the damned to repentance; yet such a course would be out of keeping with the state of final reprobation.
The opinion that the Divine refusal of all grace and of every incitement to good is the proximate cause of impenitence, is upheld by many theologians , and in particular by Molina.
Scotus and Vasquez hold similar views. Even the Fathers and St. Thomas may be understood in this sense. Thus St. Thomas teaches De verit. Nevertheless many theologians , e. The damned can never divert their attention from their frightful torments, and at the same time they know that all hope is lost to them.
Hence despair and hatred of God , their just Judge, is almost inevitable, and even the slightest good impulse becomes morally impossible. The Church has not decided this question. The present author prefers Molina's opinion. But if the damned are impenitent, how can Scripture Wisdom 5 say they repent of their sin?
They deplore with the utmost intensity the punishment, but not the malice of sin ; to this they cling more tenaciously than ever. Had they an opportunity, they would commit the sin again, not indeed for the sake of its gratification, which they found illusive, but out of sheer hatred of God.
They are ashamed of their folly which led them to seek happiness in sin , but not of the malice of sin itself St. Thomas , Theol. Poena damni The poena damni , or pain of loss, consists in the loss of the beatific vision and in so complete a separation of all the powers of the soul from God that it cannot find in Him even the least peace and rest. It is accompanied by the loss of all supernatural gifts , e. The characters impressed by the sacraments alone remain to the greater confusion of the bearer. The pain of loss is not the mere absence of superior bliss, but it is also a most intense positive pain.
The utter void of the soul made for the enjoyment of infinite truth and infinite goodness causes the reprobate immeasurable anguish. Their consciousness that God , on Whom they entirely depend, is their enemy forever is overwhelming. Their consciousness of having by their own deliberate folly forfeited the highest blessings for transitory and delusive pleasures humiliates and depresses them beyond measure.
The desire for happiness inherent in their very nature, wholly unsatisfied and no longer able to find any compensation for the loss of God in delusive pleasure, renders them utterly miserable. Moreover, they are well aware that God is infinitely happy , and hence their hatred and their impotent desire to injure Him fills them with extreme bitterness. And the same is true with regard to their hatred of all the friends of God who enjoy the bliss of heaven. The pain of loss is the very core of eternal punishment. If the damned beheld God face to face, hell itself, notwithstanding its fire, would be a kind of heaven.
Had they but some union with God even if not precisely the union of the beatific vision , hell would no longer be hell, but a kind of purgatory. And yet the pain of loss is but the natural consequence of that aversion from God which lies in the nature of every mortal sin. Poena sensus The poena sensus , or pain of sense, consists in the torment of fire so frequently mentioned in the Holy Bible. According to the greater number of theologians the term fire denotes a material fire, and so a real fire. We hold to this teaching as absolutely true and correct. However, we must not forget two things: from Catharinus d.
Some few of the Fathers also thought of a metaphorical explanation. Nevertheless, Scripture and tradition speak again and again of the fire of hell, and there is no sufficient reason for taking the term as a mere metaphor. It is urged: How can a material fire torment demons , or human souls before the resurrection of the body?
But, if our soul is so joined to the body as to be keenly sensitive to the pain of fire, why should the omnipotent God be unable to bind even pure spirits to some material substance in such a manner that they suffer a torment more or less similar to the pain of fire which the soul can feel on earth? The reply indicates, as far as possible, how we may form an idea of the pain of fire which the demons suffer. Theologians have elaborated various theories on this subject, which, however, we do not wish to detail here cf. It is quite superfluous to add that the nature of hell-fire is different from that of our ordinary fire; for instance, it continues to burn without the need of a continually renewed supply of fuel.
How are we to form a conception of that fire in detail remains quite undetermined; we merely know that it is corporeal. The demons suffer the torment of fire, even when, by Divine permission, they leave the confines of hell and roam about on earth.