Mother Teresa Struggled With Her Faith
 

Jesus has a very special love for you. As for me, the silence and the emptiness is so great that I look and do not see, listen and do not hear.
— Mother Teresa to the Rev. Michael Van Der Peet, September 1979

Does anyone find this surprising? She's Mother Teresa, yeah, but she's only human, and humans inherently have existential doubts and all of the associated emotions that this entails. I found myself pondering this as I considered the oblivion and extinction of self that death most likely represents. This line of thought would inevitably lead one to conclude that it really doesnt matter how we comport ourselves in life. Would, that is, if one truly held no hope. What a profoundly sad situation this atheism thing must be! Since it makes little sense to live a life devoid of meaning, you've gotta wonder if any true living atheists exist, presumably since anyone who could truthfully say such a thing about themselves would've already committed suicide.

Yes, all we really have is hope. Without it, we have nothing! Less than nothing.

Jesus Christ even struggled with his faith "My God, why have you abandoned me?"

Everyone struggles with their faith. Saints throughout history have written about their struggles. Everyone struggles. It is good to read about recent potential saints and their struggles. We relate better to them because we followed their lives.

Excellent point, Matt. Of course, one would'nt expect Him to have any doubts, since presumably He knows for certain. That He struggled with the question does nothing to bolster hope.

This is one of the biggest mistakes made by people because they are not willing to read for themselves. Christ when addressing "God" would say Father not God !!!!! Our Father, who art in heaven, Hallowed be thy Name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, On earth as it is in heaven. ... :pray::pray:this would also indicate that heaven is coming to earth and no one is going to be raptured out. The word rapture only occurs once in the Bible and is a mistranslation. Take some time to look it up !
Christ NEVER struggled with his faith NEVER !! He was teaching even up to his last words from the old testament. To say that Christ had doubt would be to bring him down as a mere mortal man and He is much, much more than that !!! Sorry here Matty this is not so much aimed at you as is people in general that will not pick up their Bible and read. Instead they let the stuffed shirt in the pulpit tell them what to think and were to send their money.

Christ was quoting the 22nd Psalm

To the chief Musician upon Aijeleth Shahar, A Psalm of David.

1 My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? why art thou so far from helping me, and from the words of my roaring?

2 O my God, I cry in the daytime, but thou hearest not; and in the night season, and am not silent.

3 But thou art holy, O thou that inhabitest the praises of Israel.

4 Our fathers trusted in thee: they trusted, and thou didst deliver them.

5 They cried unto thee, and were delivered: they trusted in thee, and were not confounded.

6 But I am a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised of the people.

7 All they that see me laugh me to scorn: they shoot out the lip, they shake the head, saying,

8 He trusted on the LORD that he would deliver him: let him deliver him, seeing he delighted in him.


http://www.carm.org/kjv/Psalms/Psalm_22.htm

A life without struggle is a life with nothing to gain. No hopes, dreams, goals, amibitions, or anything that one could want or need in life. A man who has obtained everything in life, must then struggle to keep it. Even He has hopes and therefore, logically has struggles and hardships.

As Tom Hanks once said (referring particularly to baseball), "The Hard is what makes it great."

Very true Isaac! Most people only know what they are taught by preachers in churches. I study the Bible on my own but still need much guidance from other sources as to help me with understanding the translations. The Sheperd's Chapel hosted by Arnold Murray is a fantastic tv program and resource. I was so surprised when I first began really listening and understanding! He's the first person that helped me make sense of the Bible.
http://www.shepherdschapel.com/:)

Christianity is a reality not a religion. The Bible is written to the individual soul not the preacher. There are many great teachers of the Word but now days far and few between. The best thing is to pick up your Bible and read it and have a Concordance to help you study. I would say to any of you that attend church to listen to your preacher and just count how many verses he reads in the service. If he is teaching you will know it because he will read the Bible if not he is a bag of hot air. They skew the truth and fleece the flock. I have two verses for you that care to read.

Amos 8

11 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord GOD, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the LORD:

12 And they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the LORD, and shall not find it.

You know why ? People have put their Bible away and rely on a blow hard to tell them what to believe. You want to unplug from the mainframe (matrix of sorts) then start thinking for yourself the spirit will fill you and true joy will be in your heart each and every day even when bad times hit you are strong.
Pokie good post and I am not here to judge any of you I have just put a lot of time in reading and understanding. PC Bible is a great study tool that you can buy for your computer. Six Bibles and many dictionaries and concordances.
I have had my rant but it comes deep from my heart.

:clapbig:

I loved that movie, "A league of their own". Tom Hanks is my favorite actor. I even watched him on the tv show "Bosom Buddies".

Attachment 1400
:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Jesus words "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

Jesus did not experience reprobation as if he himself had sinned. But in the redeeming love that always united him to the Father, he assumed us in the state of our waywardness of sin, to the point that he could say in our name from the cross: "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" Having thus established him in solidarity with us sinners, God "did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all", so that we might be "reconciled to God by the death of his Son".

Jesus was fully God and fully human. His humanity was displayed with these words as was his completion of the new covenant by quoting the words from the New Testament. Jesus wasn't just quoting for the sake of quoting. He was fully God AND fully human. Though He did not sin, He was tempted just as we are tempted.

Did you know that the documents in the Old Testament, and the New Testament were not actually written in English? The books of the New Testament were written by early Christians (aka Catholics). The current list of books of the Old and New Testaments was created in 393 A.D. at the Council of Hippo. This is the list used for the last 1700 years by Roman Catholics.

The New Testament was written by the Apostles, the first to spread the teachings of Christ. Following the same teachings and traditions of Christ through the Apostles, the Catholic Church, instituted by Christ, assembled the Bible, interpreted, and translated it into the vernacular.

I find it very incredible that a Christian tradition can adopt a book of religious teaching from one Church, remove it from the context of 1200 years of study and interpretation, then tell said Church they do not know their own holy book.

This is to say that apart from the teaching and interpretation of God through the Roman Catholic Church, understanding of Biblical teachings is incomplete. You're right that we shouldn't simply take everything the "stuffed shirt" says as Gospel. The teachings of Christ through the Catholic Church are not simply "this is what you believe, end of story". The gifts of logic and reason are applied, throughout the history of the Catholic Church, to fully understand Christ's teachings, and appreciate the mysteries of God.

However, it is utter arrogance to think that each person can interpret the Bible for themselves and thus each person will have the truth. That way of thinking is nothing more than theological relativism, a practice which leads to nothing but confusion and contradiction.

To many, the origin of the Bible can be summed-up as follows: "A mere translation of a translation of an interpretation of an oral tradition" - and therefore, a book with no credibility or connection to the original texts. Actually, the foregoing statement is a common misunderstanding of both Christians and non-christians alike. Translations such as the King James Version are derived from existing copies of ancient manuscripts such as the Hebrew Masoretic Text (Old Testament) and the Greek Textus Receptus (New Testament), and are not translations of texts translated from other interpretations. The primary differences between today's Bible translations are merely related to how translators interpret a word or sentence from the original language of the text source (Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek).

In addition, these texts agree with the Septuagint version of the Old Testament, which was translated from Hebrew to Greek some time during the 3rd century BC.

Matty I respect your post but I do not agree with your statement. The original Hebrew and Greek text have acrostics built into them that lock in the truth. I am that I am dictated the Bible with human hands as scribes. The entire Bible is divinely inspired. This comes down to what IT is we believe as individuals. I respect your interpretation I just do not agree. I think we are both seeking truth and I know that is light years ahead of many church goers that warm the bench. I wish you the best in your quest.

Isaac,

You trivialize the origin of the Bible. The Catholic Church didn't just assemble the documents and send it on its way. Biblical scholars and theologians worked, and continue to work, for 2000 years to find, not just the interpretation of each individual word, but the meaning of the message as a whole.

You are correct that the King James Bible is derived from the ancient scripts. However, when the Bible was translated by Roman Catholics long before the Protestant Reformation, there was no disunity in the Church. The King James version was commissioned to continue the disunity and thus was translated reflecting the non-Catholic beliefs (sola scriptura).

King James was the head of the Church of England, which was created by Henry VIII (self declared head of the Church of England) for the sake of getting divorced. How was the Church instituted? For what reason? These things matter. The Church of England was instituted by a king who wanted Church-sanctioned sin. Those who stood up to him were executed (St. Thomas More). King James continued in the tradition of Henry VIII by supporting the right to head of the Church of England.

Define divinely inspired. Your two sentences are confusing.

"I am that I am dictated the Bible with human hands as scribes. The entire Bible is 'divinely inspired'".

The phrase "dictated the Bible with human hands as scribes" and "divinely inspired" seem to contradict. The first seeming to infer that God "possessed" (for lack of a better word) the scribes and took over their hands to put it down on paper. The second phrase infers that the Bible is "inspired" by God.
Something to remember is that the Bible was not jotted down be every person involved. Adam and Eve did not keep journals. The Bible was passed on verbally for generations, until it was finally recorded on paper (scrolls, whathaveyou). Did the verbal tradition whittle away every single detail of the story? Undeniably. It is part of our nature. When finally transcribed, was the story exactly the same as the actual event. Doubtful. If God told the scribes exactly what to write leaving no interpretation of the story to the writers, and human nature had changed the verbal tradition, the written version and the verbal versions would be vastly different. So which one is true?

I do not trivialize the Bible in any form or fashion. I see you well indoctrinated in Catholicism :D I would like to know you thoughts on the ten lost tribes ??
This question of who wrote the Bible could go on for a long time and I feel very sure we would not agree. Matty I have some close friends that are Catholic and I do not wish to insult anyone that is Catholic. I am not Catholic but I am a Christ-man (Christian). The need for a religion is a man made need and a set of controls put in place by man. You think you need a Priest or Pope to tell you what the Bible says I do not. I can read if for myself and the idea of waiting to be read to is just what the "church" would want so they can play mind control. You know it really amazes me how many people go for that flock mentality. I am sure you are nice guy and a devout Catholic and I respect your person and your religion. The answers are coming soon and I will repeat I am NO MANS judge but I do not think you need a fancy building and another man to be a studied Christian.

Well, As much as I wanted to respond- Isaac pretty much said it here! The Catholics certainly have an agenda, mainly to justify themselves, in my opinion. The ritualistic chants and proceedures- To much Tradition of MAN can distort the word of GOD. But hey, if that helps you, it's better than nothing -I wonder.I also do not believe a church should decide what information I should recieve, and I wonder how much "information" is hidden away in the depths of the Vatican- because we are not "on THEIR level"or wouldn't fully understand . I believe ALL men are equal in GOD's eyes, and I'm sure JUDGEMENT will be swift at the pulpit for the "mis-informers"! Yes, That includes all religions. This is MY opinion, of course, I wasn't trying to jump on Catholics-I just think the group mentality is dangerous:pray: