Another part of a video series from Wordonfire.org. Bishop Barron will be commenting on subjects from modern day culture. For more visit www.wordonfire.org/
These videos are short enough that I can't tell for sure, so I'll just ask. When you (or any other minister I've heard, really) get into the story of Abraham being told to sacrifice Isaac, Isaac himself always seems to get sidelined in favor of Abraham's feelings. Is this simply because the focus of the particular message for the study is Abraham's response, because Abraham's plight speaks to you more loudly, or do so many people really not notice that Isaac is every bit as conscious and obedient a participant as Abraham? Especially since Isaac is typifying Christ's own obedience to his Father's will when it was his time to be sacrificed. I read Isaac's words in this story and I think of Christ praying in the garden. Abraham is asked to step into the shoes of God the Father, but Christ is also God and a conscious participant in his sacrifice for the sake of the world.
I HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING WORD ON FIRE TWO OR THREE TIMES A DAY FOR THE LAST SIX WEEKS. Truly the Lord is leading me in paths of righteous as I feel Amazing Grace. Thanks so much for your ministry and the way so many lives are touched.
They must be sad, they feel all that we feel cause live with Jesús Christ, God of the living! And they like our prayers and wait all good from God! 😇😇😇 They teach us the patience with their own experience. God bless all!
Fr. Barron, thanks for all the great Catholic content I've recently come across. I was hoping for two tangentially significant details to come across at the start of this video though. A. An Ishmael name-drop just because he serves as a link from the God of Abraham to the modern Islamic tradition and I believe establishing theological/scriptural common ground between the 3 monotheisms is more important than ever. B. The crown of thorns as an image that reminds us of the sacrificial ram with his horns caught in the thicket, provided by God in place of Isaac. That specific source of the sacrificial lamb/ram is so overshadowed by the Paschal but it can bring us lay Catholics back to Genesis so beautifully and from a different angle. Great video, thanks so much for all the work and word on fire. Keep fighting the good fight.
@JGGREY No, that isn't obvious at all; in fact, it's supremely irrational. A radically contingent universe cannot be explained through endless recourse to contingent causes. There has to be, ultimately, a non-contingent ground. That's what I mean by "God." And you're right in saying that this God is infinitely mysterious and transcendent, which is precisely why he doesn't communicate in the ordinary way.
Prayer will allow you to hear God, but your prayer must be sincere. Remember prayer is a dialog with God. Reading the Saints helps with this. Try Saint John of the Cross: Dark Night of the Soul. It is not an easy read but the mysteries and the transcendence are there. Remember too, God speaks to us as individuals, the individual he called into being, that is you, try to know that being. To know God, is like an eternal state of becoming, Always Moving into the transcendence and mysteries. Peace!
The execution of Jesus doesn't affect God's decision; rather, it displays his decision. John 3:16: "For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him shall have Eternal life." Jesus doesn't change God's decision; he is the act and the example of the decision.
Over the last 5 centuries we see man failing to trust and believe God. Take the Holy Eurcharist which is only one example, The Protestants think it is NOT the actual " Real Presence" the body and blood of Jesus. Well back in Jesus's own time, 1st century Jewish disciples who were amazed by the many 'works'-Miracles performed right in front of them by Our Lord walked away from him when Jesus told them they MUST Eat His Flesh and Drink His Blood. In fact they were told this 4 times in quick succession, and with each repetition more of His disciples abandoned Jesus saying, " This teaching is hard, who can accept this ?" Jesus then asked His own apostles, if they too would abandon Him. In the Last Supper at the Passover seder the bread was broken By Jesus who said " Take you all and eat of this, for This IS My Body, which will be given up for you " and then when supper had ended Jesus took the Cup, and said, " Take you all and drink of this for This IS My Blood, the Blood of the New and Eternal Covenant, which will be shed for you and for all men for the forgiveness of sins, DO THIS (notice Jesus never said 'do a lame imitation of what I am doing', as protestants profess now) Jesus said, " in memory of Me ". Only within the last 5 centuries has this been reduced by heretics/protestants to a pretend body and blood of Christ, except of course the one true church founded by Jesus, The Catholics. Today's Roman Catholics are The People of The Eurcharist, and they amount to the highest state of Judaism, the Post Messianic Judaism, Catholics are the Jewish tradition based on the coming of the Messiah of God, brought to us all by the Chosen People, the Jews through the house of David and born of the virgin in the town of David, Bethlehem as foretold by the prophet. And they don't believe, Jesus's own people, just as happened by God's ways being too far beyond the understanding of most men. Jesus thus became the stone that was rejected, and that became The Cornerstone as prophesied, and now denied by His own people. Abram trusted completely in the goodness of God, and that was why he was made the father of all nations, Abraham from whom The Messiah of God would be a Blessing To All Nations. He did turn and walk away from God, He did not turn God's truth into a heresy of man Abraham was no protestant.
I really feel that a more strictly biblical reading of the Akhadah from a Hebrew or Abrahamic perspective really gets at the heart of this story. Over and over the prophets of Israel talk about how the nations whom God removed Abraham from (Ur of the Chaldees) and the nations drove out of the "promised land" engaged in scapegoating and human sacrifice. This "God" who called Abram out and away and then asks him to sacrifice his son would NOT have seemed unusual to Abram. It seems to me that
You're not bugging me; I'm actually enjoying the conversation. The physical act of crucifixion is indeed important, as noted in the prophecies of Isaiah. It is from his stripes, from the shedding of his blood, that we are healed. What I am stressing when I mention the pain is that his suffering was on many levels. God granted us free will to choose and decide aside from his will. We choose to go up or down, left or right, because we can't be "lukewarm". (contd)
It depends on how you view omnipotence. It's hard to explain, but I'll try to put it this way: I like to write stories, and I'm currently working on a book inspired by Christian lore. Now, in this book, I write up atheist characters as well as characters of different religions whose views oppose what I believe. Now, what this has taught me about free will and omnipotence is this: I may know how the story ends, but as long as I seperate my will from my characters, they are free to do (contd)
So is the world and the point that Fr. Barron always makes. The algorithms and systems of the world, so to speak, were already in place, so there's no need for God to be the reason why it thunders (like the idols of the world for example). This is where the difference between seeing God's nature in his creation and attributing God to nature differs. Someone seeing the nature of God in their life as a parent is different from God is Shaddai, Lord of Paternity.
What people tend to forget is that God came to Earth "in the flesh". "How does an all . . . god suffer spiritually?" Because he placed himself under the limitations of a human body. It was only through a pure, human body that the sins of man could be atoned for. Sin causes us pain on multiple levels every day, for the Son to take on the sin of the World in one moment, the spiritual burden is unimaginable. Jesus cried out, "My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?" (contd)
There is an early good tradition of Christians that express contempt for soft-minded people invoking God's interventions rather than searching for natural explanations. 14th century natural philosopher Oresme, a bishop, admonished that, in discussing marvels of nature, "there is no reason to recourse to the heavens, the last refuge of the weak, [...] or to our glorious God as if He would produce these effects directly, more so than those effects whose causes we believe are well known to us."
You had some good insights, I really enjoyed it, but I couldn't help but notice you didn't speak about the substitution and the foreshadowing of Christ being our substitute.
(contd) that I had to learn what I did, and through what I learned I discovered about God. I couldn't put free will into words until I had that revelation. Didn't come from my phsychology, cause my view of free will at the time was different than is now, after said revelation. Lastly, I did address God's omnipotence, and I did so directly in both statements I made prior to this response; however, if you're going to stoop into insults, there's no point in continuing.
Did I ever claim that God came to me personally and spoke? No, I didn't, so why use a comparison that has nothing to do with me? Frankly, I can't speak for anyone who has or will have such a revelation because mine was nothing like that.
Life is a test. We are given free will and time in order for us each to choose our own timeless destiny. That what we call God must exist and is the first mover of all things in this universe, was logically proven by Aristotle in his book Metaphysics; and St. Thomas Aquinas credits him for this in his writings. The miracles that continually occur are further proofs. The Catholic Church teaches the truth about these things. Pray for guidance while you can. We will all know it for sure in the end.
Thomas Aquinas was (like so many others) a brilliant man with a huge blind spot in his reasoning. He, like so many other believers, began his thinking with a presupposition that the Christian god is real, and the Bible was his inerrant word. He started from the position that if he saw any conflict or fault in the Bible, the fault was in him, not the book. As soon as one does that, the path to wisdom and learning is closed.
@kevinchin76 "Greater love than this no man has than he lay down his life for his friends." What is 'laying down one's life' but sacrifice? And what is sacrifice but the highest expression of love? Love is expressive. If it isn't actively expressed, it isn't love. God is love. Jesus proved that by laying down His life for His sheep. We do well to follow Him - by dying, to self, for others. For it is precisely in this dying - this sacrifice of self - that we gain eternal happiness!
Father, it came to my mind, while reflecting on this passage, that God might have been using mans preconceived notions how we expected gods to behave, to reveal himself. Back then, people wouldn't have been surprised if their god asked them for a human sacrifice. Perhaps God wanted to prove that he was infinitely different than the other gods, by reconciling the perceived conflict between Abraham's love for God and love for Isaac, showing that He truly is Love.
I feel you maybe greatly unlearned and that makes things difficult. Indeed, Fr. Barron has said the new Atheists are, "profoundly unintelligent". I revere Jews and Jewish traditions. For about 15 years I read Jewish literature almost exclusively. I know a little Hebrew and as I type I am looking at a copy of The Encyclopedia of Judaism that I purchased last week. What I am suggesting to you is that if the learned way, the way of letters is not helping you see The Lord, then seek another way.
the point does include "obedience". After waiting finally for 100 years the call to sacrifice his son would have been a disappointment in light of the covenant promise to make of Abraham a great nation. So to sacrifice his ONLY son would have been a challenge to Abraham's obedience wondering how God was going to fulfill it if the child dies and yet it would NOT have been foreign the human sacrifice. HOWEVER, God stays Abraham's hand and shows him, I am NOT like that. I DON'T want that.
In that one instance that he took on the sins of the world, that sin would have separated the Son from the Father, until the the three days of death where the temple was cleansed and could rise again to dwell with the Lord. And no, I'm not saying that the physical pain isn't important. Isaiah 53: 5: "But he was wounded for our transgressions, crushed for our iniquities; upon was the punishment that made us whole, and by his stripes we are healed." (contd)
@bmparatrooper You also might want to watch his videos on 'Misreading Genesis' and his videos dealing w faith and science in general (like when he comments on Christopher Hitchens' Book).
Whereareas Abe was allowed to stop the sacrifice of his son, God did not hold back and went all the way to sacrifice HIS son for us. Pax Christi Tecum.
The way of the heart and the way of the mind are not mutually exclusive. Balance makes the person whole. Be patient and listen for the Lords call. You will hear him. Look for the work that includes Faith and Reason. Try Saint Thomas Aquinas or Saint Augustine and "be patient with all that is unsettled in your heart. Do not seek the answers now because you would not be able to live them, but the point is to live everything and perhaps in some day you will live into the answer". Rainer M. Rilke.
Fr. Barron, could you make a commentary on existentialism, both the atheistic type of Sartre and Nietzsche and Christian existentialism of Kierkegaard?
(Addition: Well, if you compare Christians finding God's nature in creation, then you have to take into account that this is not coincidence, unlike other people, because the Bible says that you can find his nature in creation. If you don't want to acknowledge that, you shouldn't make the comparison.)
regarding your demand for God's proof he exists, it has been proven already; as for your loyalty, thats up to your free will....to choose good or evil.
(contd) God blessed me with a gift of writing, and it's through that writing that God has revealed his nature to me. This isn't a 'special pleading'; in fact, anyone in any profession is gifted with the ability to see God's nature through their gift. It's just a matter of looking for it. You say that I put my characteristics on God; however, I didn't see God this way until I started writing. It was when I came across the stumbling block of characters that were unlike me (contd_
@Gazdo01 Another problem with accounting for TOTAL spp. today is that it also factors in the plant kingdom, and the archaebacteria prokaryotes etc..I'm pretty sure the ark was just dealing with eukaryotic species don't you think? So minus the plant and bacteria kingdoms which add to the 8.8 mil spp today you'd have significantly less spp. to account for when left with the eukaryotes..add to that the speciation that has taken place which also accounts for total #spp.today-prob not pre-flood
Whatever they please. I may know how the story ends, but because I separate my will, I purposefully limit my power of the story and allow the characters to develop according to the personalities I've given them.Now, if you put this into God's perspective (and it hurts my head to try lol), you'll understand that free will is not us having a special gift, it's God restricting his will over us to allow us to make our own decisions.
(contd) for saying I'm blessed with a gift. Funny thing is that if you're favorite musician said the same, you probably wouldn't call them the same (and for the record, I never bragged about how great I was at writing; I simply said that I have a gift). So, since you're going to result to personal attacks and placing your words and ideals into my mouth/explanations as my own, there's no point in continuing this conversation. Great talking to you though. God bless.
I am puzzled why God makes it so hard for us to believe. Some people believe that God will intervene in the most trivial circumstances in life when we live in a world of terrible suffering. I once asked a Jew if he still believed in God notwithstanding what happened to his people in the holocaust. His reply was that he still believed in God because God does not interfere in details of human existence. Maybe this is the case. Even with miracles there is still always a doubt
Again, that's the point of revelation. It's not meant for you; it's meant for the person who receives it, and it isn't necessarily the same for each person. For me, I was in the midst of writing up characters and the world for a book, and it came to me like an epiphany.
On another subject Pastor Barren, are you going to do one on the Hunger Games? I hope so. My 11 year old daughter wants to read them, I'd love to have your insight. Thanks.
The child and the father can forgive the trespass, yes, but they can't remove the sin that condemns said rapist to Hell. It is the role of the Son to offer salvation for and from the sin. No one else can perform that feat.
@Gazdo01 The Ark was: 450'Lx75'Wx45'H as estimated in Gen.6:4-7--it was 6 times as long as it was wide which is ideal ratio for a ship that needed to sustain seas as high as modern mountain peaks today-which incidentally a still uncovered ship-like wreck remains on Mt. Arat today bc the Turkish government will not allow further expeditions to this mountain region for further investigation. 8.8 million spp.today- but probably isn't an accurate estimate of back then in the antediluvian age.
What I'm saying is not that the physical suffering isn't important, but Christ's suffering so transcendent of anything that we could imagine that to compare another person's physical pain to the pain of Christ on every level (the body, the mind, the spirit) is an empty comparison.
Ben Franklin also went to church. His writings make it reasonably clear that it was an "image thing". To be a successful politician or businessman (even today) it helps to show your face in a church, whether you believe or not. However, it is also possible that Lincoln was searching for something or converted - so what? God failed to reveal himself in any way to me, no matter how much I prayed, and his book is abominable, so I certainly can't accept that as evidence of a "loving god".
That might be the case, but it still does not make our existence that easy. We have to take everything on trust which is not that easy. Maybe the old saying "pray to God but keep your powder dry" applies. We have to get through the problems of this life by ourself. We are not necessarily going to get any obvious help from God
the nations in the promised land performing these horrific, terrifying acts as well as the multiplicity of so-called gods that these people worship who supposedly are telling them to do these things. I'm not trying to remove the scandal from the gospel. I believe it is consistent with God sacrificing His own Son to redeem us. The recapitulating atonement of substitution still becomes mercy and forgiveness as well as justice to human nature.
@psalmsurfer1 "to defend Christian doctrine " Catholicism doesn't depend on the litteral interpretation of Genesis. Our doctrine doesn't depend on Noah's Ark. I have no problem accepting it for what it REALLY is: a story, which should be read allegorically.
Sorry, if I'm nitpicking, but I do like to clarify my posts before I engage another so there isn't any confusion. For point "A", you actually used at least two exclamations, and I didn't make it to be a big deal; I wanted to mention that it doesn't help the discussion. Now I'll goo to the point "B"
Our finite mind cannot grasp the Infinity of our Creator, this is a mystery . We have to accept our limitations and " mediocrity " versus the Omnipotence of God , the Almighty.
@Sarusource: Couldn't respond the regular way due to malfunction, but seeing my deleted comment was nothing special. I've deleted quite a comments during this discussion and reposted them because I mistyped words, had grammar errors, or misworded phrases that I wanted to correct. Yes, I make typing errors, and they sometimes get by me so I have to correct them. And, I'm not projecting my charatersitics onto God, that's just how you choose to see it.
That does not excuse his sin against society however, as God has given every nation the right, and obligation, to judge their criminals. For the father and daughter, Jesus has paid for their sins as well (the sin of wrath and anger, which is said by Jesus no better than murder). The suffering itself is alleviated through forgiveness which is a personal endeavor that one must journey themselves, as the only way to kill suffering is to forgive your transgressor in heart.
The ram god in this story is found throughout the bible. In the Book of Revelation, he is called “the Amen.” He is also our Saint Peter who is the foundation stone of Christianity. In earlier mythos, he was a bull. Amon may have been originally one of the eight deities of the Hermopolite creation myth; his cult reached Thebes, where he became the patron of the pharaohs by the reign of Mentuhotep I (2008-1957 bce). At that date he was already identified with the sun god Re of Heliopolis and, as Amon-Re, was received as a national god. Represented in human form, sometimes with a ram’s head, or as a ram, Amon-Re was worshipped as part of the Theban triad, which included a goddess, Mut, and a youthful god, Khons. His temple at Karnak was among the largest and wealthiest in the land from the New Kingdom (1539-c. 1075 bce) onward. Local forms of Amon were also worshipped at the Temple of Luxor on the east bank of Thebes and at Madīnat Habu (Medinet Habu) on the west bank. Amon’s name meant the Hidden One, and his image was painted blue to denote invisibility. This attribute of invisibility led to a popular belief during the New Kingdom in the knowledge and impartiality of Amon, making him a god for those who felt oppressed. Amon’s influence was, in addition, closely linked to the political well-being of Egypt. During the Hyksos domination (c. 1630-c. 1523 bce), the princes of Thebes sustained his worship. Following the Theban victory over the Hyksos and the creation of an empire, Amon’s stature and the wealth of his temples grew. In the late 18th dynasty Akhenaton (Amenhotep IV) directed his religious reform against the traditional cult of Amon, but he was unable to convert people from their belief in Amon and the other gods, and, under Tutankhamen, Ay, and Horemheb (1332-1292 bce), Amon was gradually restored as the god of the empire and patron of the pharaoh. In the New Kingdom, religious speculation among Amon’s priests led to the concept of Amon as part of a triad (with Ptah and Re) or as a single god of whom all the other gods, even Ptah and Re, were manifestations. Under the sacerdotal state ruled by the priests of Amon at Thebes (c. 1075-c. 950 bce), Amon evolved into a universal god who intervened through oracles in many affairs of state. www.britannica.com/topic/Amon
The "insanity" I was quoting was the BIBLE. Romans chapter 13, verse 1. Have you never read the Bible? I have - several times, and I am glad I did - it was the primary reason I became an atheist. One phrase it did get right - "the truth shall set you free". I read the Bible, saw the truth, and got out of Christianity. It took a while longer to abandon the idea of god, but, if I had never read the whole Bible, I might have been able to convince myself to stay a Christian - I don't know.
But, like I said, that's from what I've learned as a writer. If you're not a writer, you may not be able to understand that metaphor in the sense that I can. I could try to simplify it further if that is the case?
Hi Father, I have question which is unrelated to this video but its your job to spread the good word right? .... What do have to say about the exclusivity of Christianity in that one must accept Jesus (who died for the sins of humanity) in order to be granted salvation? I haven't found this issue addressed in any of your videos. What about the Hindus who never had the chance to read the Bible (or Muslims, or Amazons etc..)? If anyone else has an answer feel free to respond.
(Addition: It also disregards the fact that the Bible says very clearly and unambiguously that we can see the nature of God in creation, so I don't see what point you have).
I am curious about what your definition of sincerity is? The problem is that God does not talk back. Did it not come out after the death of Mother Theresa 's that throughout her life she never thought she had had an answer to prayer. Why does God make it so hard? The more I go on youtube and listen to likes of Father Barron and others the more I think they understand nothing.
@SpeaksToDragons The Old Testament is not one book, that is your problem. You need to look at how each of them are written originally. That is why it was suggested so long ago that Adam and Eve wasn't necessarily literal. The OT is more like a library filled with historical account, allegories, poetry etc.
Read the whole story. Read about Jesus in the garden of Gethsemane. It is in all four Gospels, Matthew 26:36-56, Mark 14:32-52, Luke 22:40-53 and John 18:1-11. If you are not used to reading the bible read it like poetry or a song. The parts that you don't understand ponder, don't reject. To understand takes long pondering. And really, if you ask Jesus or the Holy Spirit to help you understand, well, ask and you shall receive. You must ask sincerely of course. You will get your answers. Peace.
I can't find your continuation but, A) One exclamation mark you make a big deal? B) If you see "god" in creation, this is a binary proposition - either a god had a hand or he didn't - placing god as one of many factors is a complete cop out. If there is a god such as the Friar would have accepted, all factors are attributable to it. If god is some being with only minor power and ability to influence a creation that was not of his making, your argument might make sense.
if we actually heard the voice of god then we could talk about obeying it or not since there are only "people" who say they are speaking to us the will of god , my answer is: first you earn my trust and i might do what you say, otherwise just mind your own buisness
@Gazdo01 Speaking of logic and reason---read Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho if you care to understand the intellectuals vs. Christians worldview on why people were following Christ and not "many gods or no gods" at the time of the early church. It is an essay in logic and reason vs. theism.
It is likely that you failed to see God because you didn't want to or that you don't know how to pray any more than you know how to read the Bible. It can be very difficult! especially if you consider yourself a wise and learned person. That blinds one to God. You must be very humble and honest. The Lord speaks very, very softly. Mostly he speaks within you. That is where you must look. Not out at the world, but in your soul. There you will see who the lord called when he called you into being.
@Gazdo01 Does the fall explain why we are tainted with sin? But if the fall didn't happen how can be tainted? The difference between Fables of LaFontaine and the OT is besides age and level of importance, Christians did believe and still do the Fall wasn't allegorical but historical. Jonah/fish starting backwards from Jesus is about 800 years. Jonah was to Nineveh to prophesy their destruction. It's this just an reinterpretation of events in considerations what Hebrews actually believed?
This might be a little off track but, why does God send a messenger to stop Abraham from sacrificing his son? Why didn't God speak to Abraham as He did initially when He asked him to sacrifice Isaac?
@darkgrb How do you explain mass extinctions? How does the Christian god work with evolution? How do you explain all fossils especially for primates? Are these the Christians God's mistakes? What is a God? Couldn't God just snap God's finger and make everything appear at once? Why would God have to work with anything other than God's own imagination?
standards of evidence are objective in the historical process. they are not mine, they are not yours. they are what they are. faith is in fact a virtue. it allows us to step beyond ourselves...which is clearly your problem. faith is not opposed to reason. they are two different wings of the same bird...truth.
Great, I understand. If you were a parent and you had a child with someone but the child had some terminal illness such as Cancer you will have to be open to the idea that your child might die as if being taken away from you. It's hard to understand why we get a child only to have Death(God) take him away from us so young. But young children do get cancer and the question is whether we will accept what is asked of us to do which is to say Goodbye to our terminally ill child.
Great - Catholic - my old stomping grounds. Haven't been to a mass (except weddings) in 30 years. Luckily for me, I was fortunate to have been an altar boy and escape unscathed. Of course Father Kirkpatrick was a great guy, but looking back, I'm pretty sure his replacement, Father Pohl, would be roasting somewhere for baby buggering if hell existed. Trust me, I am mature (more than I like to admit) and humble enough to understand that no one has the answers the church claims to have.
Mercy and love then becomes the message along with obedience. That human sacrifice stuff is not OF me. I am the God of mercy and love. In this way Abraham's obedience seems reasonable in light of the historical situation of ritual scapegoating and human sacrifice and still a challenge with regards to the covenant to make of him a great nation and confounds his reason & allows God to demonstrate that the Gentile practices were NOT of Him. Mercy and obedience.
