hmbld

And you don't think her confusion played into how satan was able to deceive her? I'm not seeing any confusion. Eve stated she knew God said not to eat of it.

Genesis 3:4 You will not certainly die,” the serpent said to the woman. 5 “For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” The deception was the woman believed there was something to be gained by going against God's word. Not that she did not know what God said.

It was a conscious decision. Adam also was not confused. They both knew not to eat. Deceived, lied to, etc. does not negate our personal wrong doing when we know it goes against God's word. Bad decisions are made, then the finger pointing begins! Again, the text states Eve knew not to eat it.

Then why did Eve say God said not to touch the fruit or they would die? That of course solidifies the point made, she knew it was wrong even if she got details incorrect.

Genesis 3:2 The woman said to the serpent, “We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die." Eve knew not to eat it.

Eve deliberately decided not to submit to God. No she was not confused, she stated God said not to eat of it.

Bottom line, satan was able to get to Eve and confuse her because she didn't understand what God forbade, and so his lies sounded like truth. Satan certainly mixed the truth with a lie, but Eve was fully aware God forbade eating the fruit, so i don't believe it is as simple as Eve was confused, it looks like she deliberately decided to disobey God, possibly believing as Genesis 6:3 states: "When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it" "desirable for gaining wisdom"

Awesome! Spread the hope you have found! Nehemiah 8:10 Nehemiah said, “Go and enjoy choice food and sweet drinks, and send some to those who have nothing prepared. This day is holy to our Lord. Do not grieve, for the joy of the Lord is your strength.”

I couldashoudawouda googled the correct terms but I didn't see the point. If anybody has time on their hands they should read scripture not something the pope releases.

my limited understanding of the pope is even to Catholics he is not infallible in anything except his official whatchamacallits, some official something or other is infallible. Which is why later popes have to play word games to get around infallible statements by earlier popes. A little revealing there.

http://www.westernjournalism.com/a-new-gospel-from-a-modern-pope-preaching-a-counterfeit-approach-to-true-salvation/

I'd like to know what was June 1963?

So without formal catholic training on how to interpret properly, i should assume everything I hear the pope say, actually means something he did not say. So, I won't insist your wrong, but I find it odd you think everyone misunderstands what either you clearly say, or the catholic church actually teaches. Even when documented proof is given, you insist it is a misunderstanding. It means the wisest course of action is to learn what Catholics mean by the words they use and exercise the wisdom of restraint until you do. All you have given documented proof of is your misunderstanding of the Pope's words in light of the Catholic faith. I see. So then why does the pope speak to the world then if only a catholic can understand his meaning? Does this "misunderstanding" manner of defense of unbiblical prayers to relics or canonized saints actually work? Was he speaking to the world? I thought he was praying and speaking to God? What you consider unbibllical, the very Early Church believed and taught as truth and in keeping with the scriptures. Ok. I'm not sure what my attitude has been, argumentative, condescending maybe, I apologize. I find all this to be a distraction and nothing good.

As a dear friend said to me: "Him visiting Congress was like him sitting with the tax collectors. Then he went to dinner with the homeless." What did the phraisees say about Jesus when He sat with the tax collectors? Jesus did not endorse a gay priest or put one in power. Jesus did not canonize a man who was known to have abused indians. Jesus did not endorse the teachings of a man who combined buddhism with Christianity. Jesus did not endorse global warming actions. Jesus did not call unbelievers His brothers. All of these things the pope did. Luke 8:19 And His mother and His brothers came to Him. And they could not come near Him because of the crowd. 20 And it was told to Him by some , who said, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside desiring to see You. 21 And He answered and said to them, My mother and My brothers are those who hear the Word of God and do it. Agreed. Jesus also did not live in an extravagant temple or wear meaningless expensive dress up robes.

So without formal catholic training on how to interpret properly, i should assume everything I hear the pope say, actually means something he did not say. So, I won't insist your wrong, but I find it odd you think everyone misunderstands what either you clearly say, or the catholic church actually teaches. Even when documented proof is given, you insist it is a misunderstanding. It means the wisest course of action is to learn what Catholics mean by the words they use and exercise the wisdom of restraint until you do. All you have given documented proof of is your misunderstanding of the Pope's words in light of the Catholic faith. I see. So then why does the pope speak to the world then if only a catholic can understand his meaning? Does this "misunderstanding" manner of defense of unbiblical prayers to relics or canonized saints actually work?

So without formal catholic training on how to interpret properly, i should assume everything I hear the pope say, actually means something he did not say. So, I won't insist your wrong, but I find it odd you think everyone misunderstands what either you clearly say, or the catholic church actually teaches. Even when documented proof is given, you insist it is a misunderstanding.

and if the Holy Spirit tells me to kill radical jihadists.... what then. Ahh, I figured you would talk to me again! My answer is only a question, what if the Holy Spirit leads you another direction, are you prepared? I only ask because many times the words used make it sound like certain people have their minds made up already, and that is what I object to, along with the criticism of those who disagree.

There are many more reading here than those who post, seemingly in ways to silence you. Please ignore the mean comments and continue posting. I am often surprised when so many find violence is THE answer, and i do not agree. It may be necessary at times, but not the answer. The answer is following the lead of the Holy Spirit. I appreciate your talking about importance of repentance, God bless,

"... Not that these things are unimportant, of course. But we have been entrusted with a great responsibility, and this is why god's people rightly expect accountability from us but the true worth of our apostolate is measured by the value it has in god's eyes, to see and evaluate things from god's perspective, calls for constant conversion in the first days and years of our vocation and, need I say, it demands great humility. "The cross shows us a different way of measuring success. Ours is to plant the seeds. God sees to the fruits of our labors. And if at times our efforts and works seem to fail and not produce fruit, we need to remember that we are followers of Jesus Christ and his life, humanly speaking, ended in failure, the failure of the cross...." In only human terms, crucifixion can be seen as the abrupt termination of Christ's earthly ministry. I'm sure the Sanhedrin thought that Jesus had failed -- until they had to forbid their fellow Jews from saying his name in public (Acts 4:17)!!! I agree the pope was trying to say we can't measure in human terms, but stopped a little short. Needed a little more, as Jesus defeated death and lives! Look what he emphasizes in his speech & who he thanks-- unsurprising, he reveals his heart. I did even though I dislike what I read of what he speaks, he did say in human terms, not actually that the cross was a failure. I have heard others say basically the same thing, that the cross can look like the end to some, though we know it was not the end, it was planned and deliberate.

"... Not that these things are unimportant, of course. But we have been entrusted with a great responsibility, and this is why god's people rightly expect accountability from us but the true worth of our apostolate is measured by the value it has in god's eyes, to see and evaluate things from god's perspective, calls for constant conversion in the first days and years of our vocation and, need I say, it demands great humility. "The cross shows us a different way of measuring success. Ours is to plant the seeds. God sees to the fruits of our labors. And if at times our efforts and works seem to fail and not produce fruit, we need to remember that we are followers of Jesus Christ and his life, humanly speaking, ended in failure, the failure of the cross...." In only human terms, crucifixion can be seen as the abrupt termination of Christ's earthly ministry. I'm sure the Sanhedrin thought that Jesus had failed -- until they had to forbid their fellow Jews from saying his name in public (Acts 4:17)!!! I agree the pope was trying to say we can't measure in human terms, but stopped a little short. Needed a little more, as Jesus defeated death and lives!

From Vatican radio website: This was the final prayer of Pope Francis: "Today is [the feast of] Santa Rita, Patron Saint of impossible things – but this seems impossible: let us ask of her this grace, this grace that all, all, all people would do good and that we would encounter one another in this work, which is a work of creation, like the creation of the Father. A work of the family, because we are all children of God, all of us, all of us! And God loves us, all of us! May Santa Rita grant us this grace, which seems almost impossible. Amen.” Now, you can play word games, we all know that when a person's mortal body dies, they are considered "dead". Pointing out that the soul lives on is true. But just playing with wording. I know I don't understand how a leader can pray to a patron saint to "grant us this grace". Please show an instance in the bible where we are directed to pray to someone who has died. Or how someone could study the bible and call "all children of God, all of us, all of us!", when the bible clearly states only born again believers are His children, but that is already an entirely different thread.

Ok, so why should anyone care who the pope investigates? Why call certain people saints? Why hold anyone up to be an example to follow when clearly all we need is Jesus to follow? I've been thinking all afternoon about your previous response to me, and the verses you quoted in no way can be inferred that we should canonize anyone, or the pope for that matter. Romans 13:7 Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor. Please explain why we should spend so much time honoring the dead, praying to the dead, or praying to relics of the dead, and again, i believe the verses you used are being taken out of context. You really see nothing wrong with attributing miracles to praying to relics of the dead?

Far too easy to see the problem here.

From Wikipedia: In the Roman Catholic Church (both the Latin Catholic Church and Eastern Catholic Churches), the act of canonization is reserved to the Holy See and occurs at the conclusion of a long process requiring extensive proof that the person proposed for canonization lived and died in such an exemplary and holy way that he or she is worthy to be recognized as a saint. The Church's official recognition of sanctity implies that the persons are now in heavenly glory, that they may be publicly invoked and mentioned officially in the liturgy of the Church Appears to be an act which has no biblical basis or worth?

This has been on my mind lately, its from Oswald Chambers Utmost For My Highest: In our natural life our ambitions change as we grow, but in the Christian life the goal is given at the very beginning, and the beginning and the end are exactly the same, namely, our Lord Himself. We start with Christ and we end with Him— “…till we all come…to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ…” (Ephesians 4:13), not simply to our own idea of what the Christian life should be. The goal of the missionary is to do God’s will, not to be useful or to win the lost. A missionary is useful and he does win the lost, but that is not his goal. His goal is to do the will of his Lord.