Message from @Deleted User

Discord ID: 457677326008713217


2018-06-16 22:38:31 UTC  

that is the traditional interpretation

2018-06-16 22:38:58 UTC  

unless you are specifically looking for a proof of the Nazarene you will not find it in Isaiah

2018-06-16 22:39:28 UTC  

Brother, my respect for God's chosen ends here

2018-06-16 22:39:31 UTC  

Well, there have been a good few who have postulated that it did not refer to Jacob and Israel.

2018-06-16 22:39:51 UTC  

And they were not just on the Christian side of the fence.

2018-06-16 22:40:10 UTC  

such as?

2018-06-16 22:40:19 UTC  

@NullJager are you Catholic?

2018-06-16 22:40:35 UTC  

no, otherwise he would not posit that the Trinity is aspects of G-d @Alex D_rizzle

2018-06-16 22:40:38 UTC  

That is not Catholic teaching

2018-06-16 22:40:40 UTC  

No at the moment I'm non-denom.

2018-06-16 22:40:44 UTC  

it is not professed in the athanasian creed

2018-06-16 22:41:00 UTC  

Christened CoE.

2018-06-16 22:41:40 UTC  

The Roman Catholic church does teach the Trinity

2018-06-16 22:41:51 UTC  

correct, but not in the sense that NullJager professes

2018-06-16 22:42:16 UTC  

the idea of the persons of the trinity being aspects was condemned

2018-06-16 22:42:18 UTC  

@Deleted User in the name of the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit

2018-06-16 22:42:31 UTC  

And I'm just using the words that came to mind at the time.

2018-06-16 22:43:35 UTC  

They are taught as three consubstantial persons.

2018-06-16 22:46:01 UTC  

Yes that is the term exactly

2018-06-16 22:46:14 UTC  

Reinforced and taught by the Roman Catholic Church

2018-06-16 22:46:17 UTC  

that is what is professed in the athanasian creed correct

2018-06-16 22:46:59 UTC  

And are you in disagreenance with this?

2018-06-16 22:47:17 UTC  

i'm not a christian so like

2018-06-16 22:47:22 UTC  

Fair

2018-06-16 22:48:29 UTC  

The Catholic church also held as dogma until the 1970s that your people were personally responsible for the crucifixion of Christ

2018-06-16 22:49:02 UTC  

what are you talking about it still does

2018-06-16 22:49:05 UTC  

it's true

2018-06-16 22:49:11 UTC  

It was removed

2018-06-16 22:49:17 UTC  

In 1971 I believe

2018-06-16 22:49:25 UTC  

no, just because new documents came out doesn't mean old ones are invalidated

2018-06-16 22:49:29 UTC  

the main thing was Nostra Aetate 4

2018-06-16 22:49:37 UTC  

that doesn't rule out anything

2018-06-16 22:49:48 UTC  

It does excuse the Jewish people

2018-06-16 22:49:54 UTC  

At least partially

2018-06-16 22:49:57 UTC  

it just states that Catholics, despite the rocky history, are to respect Jews and that there is a spiritual link between the new and old covenant

2018-06-16 22:50:01 UTC  

not necessarily

2018-06-16 22:50:14 UTC  

let me re-read nostra aetate 4 one sec

2018-06-16 22:50:58 UTC  

also vatican ii happened in the early 60s, by the 70s Pope Paul VI was doing liturgical changes

2018-06-16 22:51:17 UTC  

Didn't the rewrite finally happen in the 1971

2018-06-16 22:51:37 UTC  

well what do you mean by rewrite? the novus ordo?

2018-06-16 22:51:56 UTC  

or the translations? or the documents?