In this section you can write a comment with any question you may have about Christianity, and we, within our capabilities, will give you an answer.
If you are a Catholic but need clarification, if you are a Protestant and you think you must correct a Catholic error, if you are an agnostic who has not give up in your search for the truth, or if you are simply a Christian but have questions or want to dig deeper, do not be afraid and ask.
When Thomas saw Jesus and still doubted, Jesus did not just reproach him for his lack of faith; he took his hand and asked him to put his finger into his wound. This is how faith problems are resolved, addressing them directly instead of trying to ignore it for fear of losing faith… or discovering it.
Leave your question below (it will be published after review):
Please maintain a respectful tone; offensive comments or those in all caps will be ignored. We appreciate it if you indicate your religion or denomination to help us better focus our response.
previous users’ questions
-
In Timothy 2:5 it says that the only mediator between God the Father and humanity is his son Jesus Christ, but doesn’t the fact that we pray for someone make us mediators?
LikeLike
-
Great question! Let’s take a closer look at 1 Timothy 2:5 and what it means in the broader context of Scripture and Christian tradition.
- What Does 1 Timothy 2:5 Actually Say?
The verse states:
“For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” (1 Tim 2:5, RSV-CE)
This passage affirms that Jesus Christ is the one and only Mediator of Redemption—He alone reconciles humanity with God through His death and resurrection. No one else can take His place in that role. -
Does This Mean We Can’t Mediate in Any Sense?
No, because the Bible itself shows that Christians do play a role in interceding for one another. There is a difference between Christ’s unique mediation and our participation in intercessory prayer.
Consider these biblical examples:
– 1 Timothy 2:1 (just a few verses before!): “First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people.”
– James 5:16: “The prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effects.”
– Romans 15:30: Paul asks others to pray for him: “I appeal to you, brethren, by our Lord Jesus Christ and by the love of the Spirit, to strive together with me in your prayers to God on my behalf.”
Clearly, the Bible commands Christians to intercede for one another. If intercessory prayer were a violation of Christ’s sole mediatorship, then Scripture would not encourage it!- Understanding Mediation in Two Ways
There are two types of mediation to distinguish:
– Mediation of Redemption → Only Jesus can bridge the infinite gap between sinful humanity and a holy God.
– Mediation of Intercession → Christians, united to Christ, can pray for and assist each other.
When we pray for others, we participate in Christ’s mediation—we do not replace Him. It’s similar to how we share in His mission:
– Jesus is the Good Shepherd, yet He calls Peter to “feed my sheep” (John 21:15-17).
– Jesus is the Great High Priest, yet we are called a “royal priesthood” (1 Peter 2:9).
– Jesus is the one Mediator, yet He calls us to intercede for others (1 Tim 2:1).- What About the Saints and Mary?
Some object to Catholic prayers to saints, claiming it contradicts 1 Timothy 2:5. But asking for the intercession of Mary or the saints is no different than asking a friend to pray for you—except the saints are already in the presence of God (Rev 5:8). Their intercession does not replace Christ’s mediation but flows from it.
Conclusion
1 Timothy 2:5 means that only Jesus reconciles us with the Father, but it does not mean we cannot intercede for each other. Scripture explicitly commands us to do so! When we pray for others, we are not rivaling Christ’s mediation but participating in His work as members of His Body.LikeLike
- What Does 1 Timothy 2:5 Actually Say?
-
-
According to Genesis 3:16, childbirth pains are a punishment to women for original sin, but female animals also feel pain when giving birth. Did they also sin?
LikeLike
-
Some argue that the pain of childbirth is not a divine punishment but simply the result of evolution and human anatomy. Others point out that some animals also experience pain when giving birth, supposedly refuting Genesis 3:16. But is this really the case?
- Do animals suffer pain when giving birth?
It is true that some animals may experience some degree of pain during birth, but not to the same extent as women. In most wild animals, a normal birth is not a traumatic experience.
📌 Key differences between human and animal birth:
✅ In nature, most births are quick and uncomplicated. An animal that remains defenseless for hours in a difficult labor would be easy prey. Natural selection has favored efficient births.
✅ Most animals have a birth canal well adapted to the size of their offspring. In contrast, human babies have large heads, and the birth canal is narrow due to bipedal evolution.
✅ Domesticated animals may suffer more during birth, but this is due to human selective breeding, which has created breeds with anatomical problems. This does not happen in nature.📌 Conclusion: A normal birth in wild animals does not involve significant suffering. Pain may occur in cases of complications, but this is an anomaly, not the norm. In contrast, for women, pain is a constant reality.
- Is human childbirth pain just a biological accident?
It is true that there is a biological explanation for the difficulty of human birth:
✔️ Bipedalism → The pelvis became narrower, making birth more difficult.
✔️ Babies with large heads → Human brains are more developed.
✔️ Prolonged and painful labor → Often requires assistance.
But this only explains the “how,” not the “why.”
If God exists and created the universe, then natural laws are not a product of chance. If evolution was the mechanism He used, it is still part of His plan. In other words, if human childbirth is difficult and painful, God allowed it to be so.
- How should we understand Genesis 3:16?
When the Bible says:
📖 “I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing; with pain you will give birth to children.” (Genesis 3:16)
It does not mean that God suddenly changed human biology after original sin. It means that God allowed women to experience suffering in childbirth as a reminder of humanity’s fallen condition.
📌 This aligns perfectly with reality:
✔️ Biology explains the mechanism, but not the meaning.
✔️ Childbirth pain is real and uniquely severe in women, just as the Bible states.
✔️ If pain were merely an evolutionary accident, why does it specifically affect human reproduction, which is crucial for survival?Genesis teaches not just that “birth will be painful,” but that human suffering in general is a consequence of sin. The pain of childbirth is a particular manifestation of this reality.
- Conclusion
Denying Genesis’ teaching because “childbirth pain is biological” is like denying original sin because “death is natural.”
If God does not exist, then the suffering of childbirth is just a cruel accident of evolution. But if God exists, then it serves as a reminder of our fallen condition and our need for redemption.
Genesis 3:16 is not a scientific explanation of childbirth pain but a theological explanation of human suffering. Biology describes how it happens, but the Bible tells us why it happens.
📌 Human childbirth is exceptionally painful, and there is no comparable case in nature. This is precisely what Scripture teaches, and reality confirms it.
LikeLike
- Do animals suffer pain when giving birth?
-
-
Did Jesus’ divine nature die on the cross?
LikeLike
-
This is a profound theological question that requires a nuanced answer. The correct response is not simply “yes” or “no” but rather a careful explanation of what truly happened.
- Jesus: One Divine Person with Two Natures
Since the Council of Chalcedon (451 AD), the Church has taught that Jesus is one Divine Person with two natures: one divine and one human. This doctrine is known as the Hypostatic Union.
This means that:
Jesus is not a human person. He is a Divine Person (the Word) who assumed a real human nature. Everything experienced in both His divine and human natures is experienced by one single subject: the Divine Person of the Son. This is why we rightly say that Mary is the Mother of God—not because she gave birth to the divine nature, but because she gave birth to the Divine Person of Christ, who possesses both natures.Following the same logic, we can say that God died on the cross. But how should we understand this correctly?
- Can God Die?
God, in His divine essence, is immortal. He cannot cease to exist or be destroyed. However, in the Incarnation, God assumed a human nature that was capable of suffering and dying.
Death is the separation of the soul from the body. When Jesus died on the cross:
His human soul separated from His human body. His divinity remained united to both His soul and His body.This is essential: His divinity was never separated from His soul or His body, even in death. Therefore, we can rightly say that God died and was buried, because the Person who died was divine, even though death occurred in His humanity.
- The Parallel with Mary, Mother of God
This same reality explains why Mary is rightly called Mother of God (Theotokos).
She did not give birth to Christ’s divine nature, because divinity has no beginning. But she did give birth to the Divine Person of Christ, who assumed a human nature.Similarly, God died on the cross because the Person who died was God, even though His divinity itself is immortal.
To say that only the “human nature” of Jesus died would be a Nestorian error, as if there were two separate persons in Christ—one divine that suffered nothing and one human that died. But Jesus is one Divine Person, and that one Person truly died.
- What Does It Mean to Say That “God Experienced Death”?
Although God knows all things, there is a difference between knowing something conceptually and experiencing it firsthand.
In the Incarnation, God did not simply “know” what hunger, suffering, and death were—He personally experienced them in His own humanity.
Thus, when we say that God died on the cross, we mean that:
God, in the Person of the Son, experienced human death in His own flesh. This does not mean His divinity ceased to exist, but rather that God took upon Himself the real experience of death in His humanity.- Why Is It Important to Affirm That “God Died”?
Denying that God died on the cross would lead to errors similar to denying that Mary is the Mother of God. In both cases, it would separate Christ into two different subjects, which contradicts the doctrine of the Hypostatic Union.
The infinite value of the Redemption comes precisely from the fact that God Himself offered His life for us. His sacrifice has redemptive value not just because He suffered intensely, but because the One who suffered and died was God made man.
Conclusion
Yes, we can say that God died on the cross. No, His divine nature did not "die" in the sense of ceasing to exist. Jesus truly died in His humanity, but the One who died was the Divine Person of the Son. His divinity remained united to both His body and soul, even in death. The death of Christ is a profound mystery that reveals God's infinite love, as He chose to personally experience human suffering and death for our redemption.LikeLike
-
-
Job 5:1 Call now, and who will answer you? And to which of the saints will you turn?
What saints does this passage refer to?
LikeLike
-
- Context of the Passage
This verse is spoken by Eliphaz, one of Job’s friends, as he rebukes Job. Eliphaz argues that suffering is a result of sin and suggests that Job’s afflictions are a consequence of his own wrongdoing. In this context, he challenges Job to call upon “the saints” (or “holy ones”) to see if any would intercede for him. -
Meaning of “the Saints” (קְדוֹשִׁים – qedoshim)
The Hebrew word qedoshim (קדושים) means “holy ones” and can have several possible interpretations:
A. Angels
In the Old Testament, the term “holy ones” is often used to refer to angels. For example:
“A court was convened, and the books were opened.” (Daniel 7:10)
“The heavens praise your wonders, O Lord, your faithfulness in the assembly of the holy ones.” (Psalm 89:5)
“Who among the gods is like the Lord? Who is like you—majestic in holiness, awesome in glory, working wonders?” (Exodus 15:11)
These references suggest that the “holy ones” could be celestial beings in the divine court.B. Old Testament Saints (Righteous Men)
Another possible interpretation is that it refers to the great patriarchs or righteous men of old, such as Abraham, Noah, or Job himself (whom God later calls “my servant Job” in Job 42:8).
In this sense, Eliphaz could be sarcastically asking Job which of the past righteous figures would support his case against God.- Theological Implications
In Catholic theology, this verse can be understood as an Old Testament foreshadowing of intercession. While Eliphaz is wrong in assuming Job’s guilt, the concept of righteous figures interceding before God is present in both the Old and New Testaments (e.g., Abraham interceding for Sodom in Genesis 18).
The Church later expands this idea, recognizing the Communion of Saints, where holy men and women can intercede before God.
Conclusion
Job 5:1 likely refers to angelic beings or righteous men of the past. While Eliphaz’s argument is flawed, the verse inadvertently points toward a biblical foundation for intercession, which finds its fulfillment in the role of the saints in Christian theology.LikeLike
- Context of the Passage
-
-
Before Jesus, were there others who claimed to be the Messiah?
LikeLike
-
Yes, before Jesus, there were several individuals who either claimed to be the Messiah or were perceived as such by different Jewish groups. The idea of a coming Messiah was deeply embedded in Jewish expectations, especially during times of political turmoil and oppression, such as the period under Roman rule. However, none of these figures truly fulfilled the Messianic prophecies, and none could prove their divine mission through supernatural signs. Jesus stands apart from all of them—not only because He fulfilled the prophecies and proved His divine nature through miracles, but also because His movement did not die with Him. Instead, it grew stronger after His death and remains the most influential force in history, even after 2000 years.
Messianic Figures Before Jesus
Here are some key figures who were seen as Messianic or claimed to be the Messiah before Jesus:Judas Maccabeus (c. 167–160 BC) – Although he did not claim to be the Messiah, many Jews saw him as a deliverer when he led the Maccabean Revolt against the Seleucid Empire. His military victories and the rededication of the Temple gave rise to Messianic hopes.
Simon of Perea (4 BC) – A former slave of Herod the Great, Simon led a rebellion against the Romans and was declared king by his followers. Some may have viewed him as a Messianic figure, but his movement was quickly crushed.
Athronges (c. 4 BC) – A shepherd who led a revolt after Herod the Great’s death, claiming royal status. His followers saw him as a potential deliverer, but his rebellion was short-lived.
Theudas (c. 44 AD, though his claims may have had earlier roots) – He proclaimed himself as a prophet and possibly a Messiah, leading followers to the Jordan River with the promise of parting its waters like Moses. The Romans executed him, and his movement collapsed.
“The Egyptian Prophet” (50s AD) – Mentioned in Acts 21:38 and by the historian Josephus, he led thousands into the wilderness, claiming he would miraculously bring down the walls of Jerusalem. The Romans crushed his movement, but he escaped.
All these figures either led political revolts, made empty prophetic claims, or attempted to gain royal status. None of them succeeded, and their movements died with them.
Why Jesus Is Not Just Another “Messiah”
Unlike these failed Messianic figures, Jesus not only fulfilled the Messianic prophecies but also proved His divine mission through His miracles. While others attempted to establish their authority through political means, Jesus demonstrated His authority through supernatural works that no human power could imitate:Healing the sick – The blind saw, the lame walked, and lepers were cleansed (Matthew 11:4-5).
Power over nature – He calmed storms, multiplied loaves and fish, and walked on water (Mark 4:39, Matthew 14:25).
Casting out demons – Showing dominion over spiritual forces (Mark 1:34, Luke 8:26-33).
Raising the dead – Bringing people like Lazarus and Jairus’ daughter back to life (John 11:43-44, Mark 5:41-42).
His own Resurrection – The ultimate proof, as no other “Messiah” in history has risen from the dead and been witnessed alive by hundreds (1 Corinthians 15:3-8).
These miracles were public and undeniable, so much so that even His enemies could not dispute them (John 11:47-48). More importantly, Jesus did not merely claim to be the Messiah—He proved it through His works, fulfilling the Scriptures and demonstrating divine power. No other so-called Messiah in history has done this.The Greatest Proof: The Church’s Endurance
Another undeniable proof of Jesus’ true Messiahship is that His movement did not die with Him—in fact, it became stronger after His death. This is in stark contrast to every other so-called Messiah in history:When Simon of Perea, Theudas, or Athronges were killed, their followers scattered, and their movements disappeared.
Even great Jewish movements like the Maccabean Revolt eventually faded, absorbed by history.
But Jesus’ death did not mark the end of His movement—it marked its beginning. His Resurrection transformed His disciples from fearful men in hiding to bold proclaimers of the Gospel, willing to die for their faith. The Roman Empire, the most powerful force of the time, could not suppress it. Instead, Christianity grew, outlasted Rome, shaped civilizations, and still remains the largest and most influential religion in the world today.For 2000 years, despite persecutions, wars, heresies, and cultural changes, Christianity has endured. No mere human leader could have ensured such survival. This is proof that Jesus is not just another false Messiah—He is the true, eternal Christ, whose Kingdom will never end (Daniel 7:13-14, Matthew 16:18).
Conclusion
Unlike all others before Him, Jesus not only fulfilled the Messianic prophecies but also proved it with undeniable miracles, His Resurrection, and the unstoppable endurance of His Church. Every other so-called Messiah faded into obscurity, but Jesus remains the center of history. His life, death, and Resurrection changed the world forever—and His reign has no end.LikeLike
-
-
Why did God kill Ananias and Sapphira for lying?
LikeLike
-
The punishment of Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5:1-11 was exceptional in the history of the Church and is not repeated in the same way in later times. The reason for this severity is that this episode occurred at the very birth of the Church, when God was establishing the foundations of the Christian community.
God, in His pedagogy, often acts with particular strictness at the beginning of something sacred to establish a clear and non-negotiable principle. This is why we find similar episodes in the Old Testament:
- Nadab and Abihu (Leviticus 10:1-2), who offered strange fire on the altar and were immediately struck dead, because at the beginning of the Levitical priesthood, God needed to make it clear that worshiping Him was not to be taken lightly.
- Uzzah (2 Samuel 6:6-7), who touched the Ark of the Covenant when he was not supposed to and died instantly. God had to establish that His holiness is absolute.
Similarly, with Ananias and Sapphira, God wanted to set a precedent for the entire future Church, showing the seriousness of hypocrisy and deceit within the Christian community. If, from the very beginning, the Church had allowed lying and double standards in spiritual matters, it would have been a corrupted foundation from which the Christian community could not have remained pure.
That is why God acted with extreme severity in this particular case: because the Church was taking its first steps, and it was crucial to establish from the outset that God does not tolerate hypocrisy or deceit within His holy community.
Why Is Lying and Hypocrisy Considered Sinning Against the Holy Spirit?
When we usually talk about the “sin against the Holy Spirit,” we think of what Jesus mentions in Mark 3:28-30 and Matthew 12:31-32, where He warns that this sin will not be forgiven. Theologians have identified this sin as an attitude of total rejection of God’s work in the soul, which commonly takes forms such as:
- Despair of salvation (believing that our sins are too great for God to forgive).
- Presumption of divine mercy (believing we can be saved without repentance).
- Denial of the known Christian truth (rejecting what we know to be true out of stubbornness).
- Envy of another’s grace.
- Final impenitence (dying without repentance).
- Obstinacy in sin.
Now, what does this have to do with Ananias and Sapphira? In Acts 5:3, Peter says:
“Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and to keep back part of the proceeds of the land?”
Peter does not simply say that he lied to the apostles, but to the Holy Spirit Himself. This is crucial because:
- They attempted to deceive God Himself, pretending to be generous when, in reality, they were manipulating the community for recognition.
- This shows an attitude of conscious disregard for the work of the Holy Spirit in the Church.
- They did not just lie with words; their entire spiritual life was a lie, as they sought to appear holy and generous while acting deceitfully.
- They did not repent, but persisted in their deception until the end.
What made their sin so grave was not merely the act of lying, but the fact that they knowingly opposed the work of the Holy Spirit in the early Church, which can be seen as a form of obstinacy and hardness of heart—similar to the sin against the Holy Spirit that Jesus describes.
Therefore, their sin is not exactly the same as the “unforgivable sin” of Matthew 12, but it shares its essence: a conscious and deliberate opposition to the truth and the work of God.
Conclusion
God acted with severity because the Church was in its foundational stage, and it was essential to establish that lying and hypocrisy have no place in the Christian community.
Their sin was against the Holy Spirit because it was not just an ordinary lie—it was an attempt to deceive God and manipulate the Christian community, which reflects a hardened heart and contempt for the truth.This episode is a reminder for all Christians that God does not tolerate falsehood within His Church and that spiritual hypocrisy is a very serious sin, especially when it involves using religion to deceive others.
LikeLike
-
-
Why did God kill Ananias and Sapphira for lying?
LikeLike
-
One of the most shocking stories in the New Testament is that of Ananias and Sapphira, who suddenly died after lying about the sale of a property (Acts 5:1-11). At first glance, this punishment may seem disproportionate, but by analyzing the context and underlying lessons, we can better understand God’s justice and holiness.
- THE CONTEXT: A HOLY AND GROWING CHURCH
The early Christian community was marked by a strong spirit of unity and generosity. Acts 4:32-37 describes how believers shared their possessions, and some, like Barnabas, sold their properties and gave all the proceeds to the apostles for the common good.
However, Ananias and Sapphira conspired to appear more generous than they truly were. They sold a piece of land but kept part of the money for themselves while claiming to have given the full amount. Their sin was not in keeping some of the money, but in their intentional deception to gain recognition.
- A SIN AGAINST THE HOLY SPIRIT
Peter confronted Ananias with these words:
“Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and keep back part of the proceeds of the land? While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not at your disposal? How is it that you have contrived this deed in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God.” (Acts 5:3-4)
This act was severe because it was not just an ordinary lie; it was an attempt to deceive God Himself, who was visibly at work in the Church. When Sapphira was questioned by Peter, she upheld the lie and faced the same fate.
- GOD’S HOLINESS AND THE PURITY OF THE CHURCH
God is holy and does not tolerate sin, especially when establishing His Church. The deaths of Ananias and Sapphira served as a warning to the community, helping them understand the seriousness of corruption and deceit. As a result, “great fear came upon the whole Church and upon all who heard of these things” (Acts 5:11).
This event mirrors similar occurrences in the Old Testament, such as Nadab and Abihu (Leviticus 10:1-2) and Achan (Joshua 7), who also died for disobedience during crucial moments in God’s plan.
- GOD HAS NOT CHANGED: MERCY AND JUSTICE
Some might think that this punishment contradicts the image of a loving God. However, God does not change (Malachi 3:6). He is merciful, but He is also just. The severity of Ananias and Sapphira’s punishment emphasizes that God does not tolerate hypocrisy and deception within His Church.
Today, although God does not act in the same way, He still calls us to sincerity and authentic faith. St. Paul warns that those who receive the Eucharist unworthily can become sick or even die (1 Corinthians 11:29-30), showing that sin still carries spiritual and sometimes physical consequences.
CONCLUSION
Ananias and Sapphira did not die simply because of a lie, but because they tried to deceive God and corrupt the early Church with their hypocrisy. Their story teaches us that God takes the holiness of His people seriously and that sin should never be taken lightly. As Christians, we are called to live with integrity, fearing God with a sincere and reverent heart.LikeLike
- THE CONTEXT: A HOLY AND GROWING CHURCH
-
-
What do the words maranatha and hosanna mean?
LikeLike
-
Maranatha (Μαραναθα / מָרָנָא תָא)
Meaning: “Come, Lord!” or “Our Lord has come!”
Biblical Reference: “If anyone has no love for the Lord, let him be accursed. Our Lord, come!” (1 Corinthians 16:22, RSV-CE)
Theological Significance: A plea for Christ’s return, expressing the early Christian eschatological hope.Hosanna (Ὡσαννά / הוֹשַׁע־נָא)
Meaning: “Save us, we pray!” or “Save now!”
Biblical Reference: “Hosanna to the Son of David! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord! Hosanna in the highest!” (Matthew 21:9, RSV-CE)
Theological Significance: Originally a cry for salvation, later became a proclamation of Jesus as Messiah and King.Both words express hope and worship—Maranatha longs for Christ’s return, while Hosanna acknowledges His kingship and saving power.
LikeLike
-
-
If God is spirit, why is He described in masculine terms in the Bible? Does He have a gender in the human sense?
LikeLike
-
God, in His divine essence, does not have a biological sex because He is pure spirit (John 4:24). Gender, as we understand it, is a characteristic of material beings, while God transcends physical form. However, in the Bible, God consistently reveals Himself using masculine terms, and this is not an arbitrary choice, but a theologically significant reality.
God is a Personal Being, Not an Abstract Force
God is not a cosmic energy or an impersonal principle, but a personal being—a “someone” rather than a “something.” He has intellect, will, and the capacity for relationships. This is why humans, made in His image and likeness (Genesis 1:27), are capable of reason, love, and moral responsibility. Being in God’s image does not mean He has a human form, but that we share in His spiritual nature.Why Is God Described in Masculine Terms?
Since human beings are either male or female, we naturally think of a personal God in terms that reflect our own experience. The choice to reveal God in masculine language is not random but is deeply rooted in His relationship with creation and with humanity.- Fatherhood and Authority – Throughout Scripture, God presents Himself as “Father” because fatherhood conveys the idea of origin, authority, and providence. He is the Creator who brings all things into existence and sustains them.
-
God as the Bridegroom of His People – In biblical imagery, God is often portrayed as the husband of His people (Hosea 2:19-20, Ephesians 5:25-27). This reflects His role as the initiator of a covenant relationship, where He gives, and His people receive.
-
Jesus Christ, God Incarnate, Became Man – God’s ultimate revelation is in Jesus Christ, who took on human nature as a man. This was not a random decision but a deliberate part of God’s salvific plan.
God’s Masculinity in Revelation Is Not Accidental
While God is not biologically male, His revelation in masculine terms is not a mere cultural adaptation—it communicates something true about His nature and His relationship with us. If we are to relate to a personal God, we need to conceive of Him in terms that make sense to us. Given how masculinity is associated with authority, initiative, and protection, it makes theological sense that God would reveal Himself in this way.God is not male in a physical sense, but in terms of His role in creation, redemption, and relationship with humanity, the masculine imagery best conveys who He is.
LikeLike
-
-
Is divorce permitted in cases of adultery according to Matthew 19:9?
LikeLike
-
Matthew 19:9 states:
“And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.” (Matthew 19:9, RSV-CE)- Catholic Interpretation
The Catholic Church has traditionally understood this passage within the broader teaching of Jesus on marriage. Christ reaffirms that marriage is indissoluble, as it was in the beginning with Adam and Eve (Matthew 19:4-6). When the Pharisees ask why Moses allowed divorce, Jesus responds that it was due to the hardness of human hearts, but that it was not so from the beginning (Matthew 19:8).
The phrase “except for sexual immorality” (porneia in Greek) has been interpreted in different ways:
– The Patristic Interpretation: The Church Fathers generally understood porneia not as adultery but as unlawful unions, such as incestuous relationships or invalid marriages under Jewish law. In these cases, the union was never valid, so it could be dissolved. This aligns with the Church’s practice of annulments today.
– Magisterial Teaching: The Catholic Church teaches that sacramental marriage is indissoluble, even in cases of adultery. A betrayed spouse may separate (i.e., live apart), but remarriage is not permitted as long as the other spouse is alive. This interpretation aligns with other Gospel passages, such as Mark 10:11-12 and Luke 16:18, where Jesus unequivocally states that anyone who divorces and remarries commits adultery.- Does Matthew 19:9 Allow Divorce?
Not in the way modern society understands divorce. Jesus upholds the permanence of marriage and only refers to porneia, which does not mean a valid marriage but rather illicit unions. The Catholic Church allows separation in grave cases but does not permit remarriage while the spouse is still alive.
In conclusion, Matthew 19:9 does not contradict Catholic teaching on the indissolubility of marriage. Adultery can be a reason for separation, but not for remarriage.
LikeLike
- Catholic Interpretation
-
-
We in heaven will not be men or women?
LikeLike
-
- Will We Still Be Male and Female in Heaven?
Yes, we will. Our identity as male or female is intrinsic to who we are, and since we will be resurrected with glorified bodies, that identity will not disappear.
When Jesus says in Matthew 22:30 that in heaven people will “neither marry nor be given in marriage,” He is not saying that gender ceases to exist. Rather, He is explaining that marriage as an institution—which exists for procreation and companionship in this life—will no longer be necessary.
- No More Marriage, But Not a Loss of Love
The fact that marriage does not continue in heaven does not mean that the unique bond between spouses is erased or that all relationships become uniform. Instead:
Deep bonds will remain – If two people truly loved each other as husband and wife on earth, their love will not disappear. In fact, it will be purified, strengthened, and perfected.
Love will be greater, not less – Without earthly limitations (jealousy, sin, imperfection), spouses will be able to love each other even more deeply than before, but now within the larger communion of saints in God.
The relationship will be transformed, not lost – Spouses will no longer relate as husband and wife in an exclusive, earthly sense, but their love will remain as a unique and personal bond, now fully immersed in divine love.- What About Those Who Experience Gender Dysphoria?
For those who suffer from gender dysphoria—who feel discomfort or distress regarding their biological sex—the resurrection will bring complete healing and harmony.
Biological sex is part of God’s design, and in heaven, our resurrected bodies will reflect the truth of who we were created to be.
If someone struggled with their gender identity on earth, they will no longer feel that inner conflict in heaven. Their glorified body will match their true, God-given identity, and they will experience perfect peace, joy, and acceptance of themselves.
Whether someone underwent surgery or not, their resurrected body will be restored according to God’s original design, but without any suffering, confusion, or distress.- Conclusion
In heaven, we will still be male and female, as our resurrected bodies will retain our personal identity. Marriage will no longer exist, but that does not mean the loss of personal love—rather, it will be elevated to its purest and most perfect form in God’s presence. For those who suffered gender dysphoria, heaven will bring total reconciliation with their true selves, and they will experience the joy of fully accepting and loving who they were created to be.
LikeLike
-
-
Some time ago I read an article on the Internet about an atheist scientist (I don’t remember his name) who claimed that believing in the existence of God is a “mental illness.” What is your opinion on this statement?
LikeLike
-
The claim that belief in God is a “mental illness” is not only incorrect but also philosophically and scientifically flawed. Here’s why:
Misuse of Medical Terminology
Mental illness is a condition characterized by cognitive, emotional, or behavioral dysfunction that negatively impacts a person’s daily life. Belief in God, on the other hand, has been shown to provide psychological benefits, such as greater resilience, purpose, and community support. Classifying religious belief as a pathology is a misuse of medical language, much like calling optimism or patriotism a mental disorder.The Fallacy of Pathologizing Belief
Claiming that faith is a mental illness would imply that billions of people, including some of the greatest thinkers in history—Aquinas, Pascal, Newton, and even modern scientists like Francis Collins—suffer from a disorder. This is an absurd conclusion. The fact that belief in God has been a common and persistent aspect of human civilization suggests it is a natural part of human cognition, not a dysfunction.Faith and Reason Are Not Opposed
Many assume that faith and reason are mutually exclusive, but this is false. Faith seeks understanding, and many religious traditions encourage philosophical reasoning. St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, for example, integrated faith and rational thought. Atheism, too, is a belief system—it assumes, without definitive proof, that God does not exist.A Question of Worldview, Not Illness
To say that belief in God is a mental illness is to confuse differing worldviews with pathology. If one person sees purpose in the universe while another sees only randomness, it is a philosophical disagreement, not a psychiatric issue. It would be like claiming that those who appreciate art suffer from a disorder because they see beauty where others see mere colors and shapes.Studies Show Religion Benefits Mental Health
Psychological research consistently demonstrates that religious belief is associated with lower levels of depression, anxiety, and stress. Prayer and religious community involvement often contribute to improved mental health outcomes. If belief were a pathology, it would not correlate with well-being, but rather with dysfunction.Conclusion
Calling belief in God a mental illness is not a scientific assertion but an ideological attack. True science seeks to understand human nature, not to diminish entire belief systems. Faith is not irrational; rather, it is one of the ways in which human beings engage with reality, alongside reason, science, and philosophy.LikeLike
-
Apologia 2.1 in English 
Leave a reply to lebanon Cancel reply