Quote Originally Posted by Dmarie View Post
Greetings & Blessings.

Columcille, you are not being very nice, nor respectful....and a whole paragraph at that. I will refer you to read Jill's latest post.

In regards to the Intermediate State, so far you have not presented any specific Scriptural support or basis for this teaching. You have listed and provided "points" in an effort to try and prove a "concept", an "agnostic reticence." I have addressed and answered all of your points in my posts, and by your own words...
"I don't have to explain away the Intermediate State, I only state that there is one."

Your above statement is clear, and I think that you've explained this as fully as is possible...which is not.

Blessings...Dmarie
It is not meant to be clear. Paradoxes never have such clarity. How, in worldly wisdom is the "meek to inherit the earth" when all worldly wisdom see the actions of agressors dominate and "own" the earth? The paradox is simply not making the same references which are misunderstood by outsiders. This is a very Eastern mindset, to embrace paradoxes and not having to feel the need to break them down into specific catagories. You have in your statement stated that my above comment is clear, but what you seek is a very Westernized expression.

As far as my rudeness is concerned, I feel that my point is relevant. There are literally thousands of writings by patriarches (John Chrysostom, Bartholomew I), popes (PJPII...), saints (Francis of ***isi), doctors of the Church (Bonaventura, Aquinas), Early Church Fathers (like Tertullian, Origen) and Councils (both regional and ecumenical... Florence, Lyons, Nicea, Constantinople). I rarely expect that people have read the documents in its historical perspective... like when some say the term "Theotokos" applying to Mary means to them that she is "The fourth person of the Trinity" rather than seeing how the terms was used against the Arian heresy. It is easy to "misrepresent" singular quotes when there is no relevant context. I used my example of Mormonism's literature as a means of an example that I have not read all their material and I don't expect every Mormon to have encountered all their materials. I generally in discussion try to make my comments relevant to the points being brought up. I don't usually introduce a quote unless the person has already introduced it or is within the Original Post either by being referenced as a bibliographical source or there are clear allusions within the structure of what is said. Typically, if the OP is talking about a specific quote, I pick my "fights" based on my own knowledge of the quote being referenced; if I am fairly ign.orant and I am already engaged in dialogue, I tend to glance a quick overview like I did with your introduction of the Confession which led to a very quick commentary by Bishop Ware regarding it; if I am fairly ig.norant and not in dialogue yet, I tend to choose not to participate and thereby aggravate my ignorance. As Dr. Martin has stated the proverb often, "better a fool remain silent than to speak and remove all doubt."