Quoran Questions - Mainly Middle Ages and Catholicism

Q

Why is there huge amounts of people that are still be-fooled by the papacy?
https://www.quora.com/Why-is-there-huge-amounts-of-people-that-are-still-be-fooled-by-the-papacy/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl

C on Q

I could understand in the medieval ages how the papacy manipulated Christians into thinking that the pope is the key to heaven just so they can monopolize on religion & politics at the time, but today is a different age yet a lot of people cannot think for themselves?

ARq

Answer requested by Anonymous

Own answer

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Studied religions as curious parallels and contrasts to Xtian faith since 9, 10?

Written just now

"I could understand in the medieval ages how the papacy manipulated Christians into thinking that the pope is the key to heaven just so they can monopolize on religion & politics at the time,"

Why? I could for one not understand how papacy could have done that without at least fairly good Biblical support.

Especially as they were NOT monopolising politics.

"but today is a different age yet a lot of people cannot think for themselves?"

You seem to have little talent for thinking for yourself if that is how you contrast Middle Ages with today.

• thinking for oneself has not become easier by mass education, since it is a compulsory one;
• thinking for oneself does not mean thinking what you would want someone thinking for himself to think.

Q

Was the spread of Islam a reaction to Christianity?
https://www.quora.com/Was-the-spread-of-Islam-a-reaction-to-Christianity/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl

ARq

Answer requested by Victor Asanache

Own answer

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Studied religions as curious parallels and contrasts to Xtian faith since 9, 10?

Written 11m ago

In what exact way?

I would say that on Arabic Peninsula, it was a reaction against Jewish vs Christian feuds, as imported from Ethiopia into Yemen the century or centuries before Muhammed.

But in a more general way, I don’t know. Why would it be?

Q

There is any evidence that "shuriken" style weapons were used in Europe during ancient/middle ages?
https://www.quora.com/There-is-any-evidence-that-shuriken-style-weapons-were-used-in-Europe-during-ancient-middle-ages/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl

C on Q

The first shuriken were improvised from pieces of broken weapons and armor found in battlefield. As it is simply a sharp piece of metal or a spike, it is quite simple to make. There is any evidence of its use in ancient/medieval western world?

ARq

Answer requested by Adler Mow

Own answer

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Middle Ages fan + Latin student in Lund (where Medieval Latin rules).

Written 15m ago

I spontaneously came to think of Der Bundschuh.

It was some league which had lost its banner, and the banner keeper or sn else made an improvised banner of one of his shoes. They won the battle and the shoe was accepted as their new banner.

However, that is not a shuriken style weapon, it is if anything a shuriken style banner.

As for weapons, I don’t know.

Adler Mow

Not mean to be harsh, but are you being sarcastic or “shuriken” has meanings others than the weapon?

Hans-Georg Lundahl

I was giving it an extended meaning for the context.

I was also adding “if anything” precisely because I don’t know if such a meaning exists.

Adler Mow

Ahhh… well :-)

Q

What are the most realistic movies ever made depicting the Middle Ages?
https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-most-realistic-movies-ever-made-depicting-the-Middle-Ages/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl

ARq

Answer requested by Christian Dechery

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Been going to movies most of my childhood and teens.

Written 24m ago

It is actually easier to come up with unrealistic ones.

Even The Name of the Rose is less realistic as a movie than as a book.

I read the book, did not bother about the movie.

Q

How did society and the church see people who disputed creationism before an understanding of evolution?
https://www.quora.com/How-did-society-and-the-church-see-people-who-disputed-creationism-before-an-understanding-of-evolution/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Studied religions as curious parallels and contrasts to Xtian faith since 9, 10?

Written 27m ago

I consider the terms of the question misleading.

Evolution belief is not an “understanding of evolution”.

It is not an understanding of genetics, mutations, epigenetics and natural / by breeder / selection.

And creationism is not a complete fixity of species either.

I will give an example : Isaac de la Peyrere was a Jew who converted to Catholicism.

France has a way of honouring Evolutionists even if they are not orthodox Darwinists or Neo-Darwinsists. Therefore, it is not surprising that streets are named for him.

So, I had to look him up.

He wrote a book stating that there were human people before Adam and which seemed to indicate for instance Black Africans or Red Indians were really not Adamites but pre-Adamites.

His book was condemned, as it should.

So, this story shows that in condemning Evolutionism, I am taking my stand with the Church of back then, with the Church of the Centuries and indeed Millennia (close to two of them by now, just counting the Catholic Church without the predecessor Jewish Church as existing between Aaron and Kaiaphas, or its predecessor the Patriarchal Church).

Q

How many languages are spoken on planet earth?
https://www.quora.com/How-many-languages-are-spoken-on-planet-earth/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl

ARq

Answer requested by Stephen Kahn

Hans-Georg Lundahl

I speak two langs, Latin and Germanic. In a few dialects.

Written just now

Earth is not a planet, so actually none.

Or is there a bar called “Planet Earth” somewhere?

Now, on Earth as non-moving centre of the Universe, I think there are about 6000 languages.

Most of them spoken by very few people.

Q

Which is the true Christianity: Protestantism or Catholicism?
https://www.quora.com/Which-is-the-true-Christianity-Protestantism-or-Catholicism/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl

C on Q

I don’t want to start a debate. I have not had the relationship with God that I seek and am told I can have, so I asked which is true christianity and want to see for myself which will bring me closer to God.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Studied religions as curious parallels and contrasts to Xtian faith since 9, 10?

Written Mon

I think James Hough and another friend of mine already answered, namely Catholicism.

Next question is : what is the true Catholicism, Orthodoxy or Roman Catholicism?

I’d say, and I think they said, Roman Catholicism.

NEXT question is, what is true Roman Catholicism, who is the true Pope?

Can you trust “Francis” or “Benedict” or both, or should you look around between Pope Michael, Palmarians, Alexander IX, Feminist Colinists in Canada …? I say the second and have submitted to Pope Michael.

“another friend of mine” - Alex Pismenny. A good guy, but I keep forgetting his name.

James Hough

Catholic who teaches Catechism, RCIA, and Prayer classes.

Updated Feb 17

Upvoted by Christopher Delich,

Ioannes Petras, and Alex Pismenny

Catholicism is the only religion which was established by God, in person, and guaranteed by Him. It is the only one that He sent the Holy Spirit to guide, the only one He promised to be with it until the end of time. Catholic Christianity is His Body in a very real sense, and His Bride, and He does not have multiple bodies, and he is not a polygamist.

Protestantism is a collection of various religions which were made up by disaffected Catholics who LEFT Christ’s Church to found their own “churches”. They may call themselves Christianity, they may rewrite the Bible to agree with their teachings, and they rewrite Christianity itself to be palatable to their followers, but the only Church that Christ established and guaranteed, the only Church that has been here for 2,000 years, and the only Church which will be here at the end, REMAINS the Catholic Church, and no amount or redefining terms or rewriting history or the Bible is going to change the fact that there were no other Christians for hundreds of years, and there will no other Christians in heaven.

On that last statement, please note that since the Catholic Church IS the Body of Christ (see Acts (9)) anyone who is saved is saved through the Catholic Church even if they are not a visible member of the Church. Thus a baptized non-Catholic Christian, IF they are saved, are saved through the Catholic Church. And even a non-baptized person who is genuinely searching for God, and trying to lead the best life possible in their circumstances would still be saved through the Church.

Does this mean that people do not need to become Catholic, or that Catholics do not need to evangelize? By no means. Everyone who is saved dies in a state of grace - with no unforgiven mortal (serious) sin on their soul. The only normal way for sin to be forgiven is through the sacrament of penance.

Can God save someone outside the Church who has never heard of Christ? Can God save someone who was raised with an animus towards the Catholic Church which makes their conversion all but impossible. Sure, He can. Does He? We don’t know. The only thing that we know for sure is that He established His Church - the Catholic Church - for men’s salvation. Everything outside the visible Catholic Church is mere speculation on our part.

Johan Nijhof

Feb 15

Interesting view, I always heard Catholicism was established by a power hungry emperor, Constantine, who presided the council in 325, and used much violence (inter alia melted lead poured into the throats of unwilling bishops) to form his church into a suitable instrument for his power politics. He himself was no Christian by the way, he was only baptized when he died. If you think there has been 2000 years of Christianity, you calculate badly. 2000 years ago Christ was just an adolescent, and had not even entered his ministry. Let`s see if your church will pass this milestone yet.

James Hough

3 upvotes

Feb 15

Hi Mr. Nijhof,

The fact that you never heard of commonly accepted history just proves that you were educated in a Protestant influenced education system.

It’s not my view, it has been the infallible teaching of the Catholic Church since the beginning. Everyone who has taken a Church history course knows when Constantine was baptized, and knows exactly how “Christian” he was. Which has exactly nothing to do with a church which was already nearing its third century mark at that point - after having surviving atrocious treatment by the Roman Empire.

The ridiculous theory that Catholicism was established by Constantine is just a red herring, one among many, concocted by Protestants to try and give themselves validly by attacking Christ’s Church. Won’t work, Christ had guaranteed His Church and kept it around for 1,500 years at that point, anything they come up with is just ridiculous at that point.

2,000 is just a round number referring to two millennia of Christianity, I’m not using a calculator.

pax,

James

Petronela

Feb 15

If I were you, I just choose to reply they who really curious only.

Let him go on denying. It's hard to change the denials perception.

:D

James Hough

2 upvotes

Feb 15

You’re probably right, but then you never know. As soon as I start treating everybody like a denier, the next one turns out to be someone who genuinely never heard the truth!

pax,

James

Petronela

1 upvote

Feb 16

Hahahahahahahaa! You patience should be awarded!

Great job sir!

Alberto Cano.

Feb 17

Your statement is rather hard. Would Pope Francis agree with you on no other Christian faiths followers being allowed into heaven in the final days?

James Hough

Feb 17

Hi Mr. Cano,

Please re-read the answer, I tried to make it more specific. See if that helps, and get back to me, okay?

pax,

James

Alberto Cano.

Feb 18

Yes is much clearer now. Thanks for adding that information. I grew up in a chatolic-protestant home so you can imagine how much fun that was. Personally I love chatolic liturgy and Im very fond of this new Pope. I have some argentinian friends that actually knew him personally and they tell me this man has an exceptional kind heart. On the other side my local chatolic church lacks a sense of a community that I did found among protestant and my pastor is like a father to me, always there when we need him. Well thanks for your reply and may God continue to use you in his plans.

John Rallison

Feb 16

First, you have left out the entire Eastern/Orthodox church in terms of churches having a 2,000 year history.

Second, ou disowning all other Christians reminds me of Paul telling the believers that the eye cannot say to the hand, “I have no need of you.”

The Reformation was finally touched off (it had been brewing for a while) when the Roman Catholic church, in an effort led by a Dominican Friar named John Tetzel, was selling forgiveness of sins and release from purgatory to fund the refurbishment of St. Peter’s Basilica. Martin Luther tried to ask questions and point out theological problems with this process (read his 95 Theses) but the response of the Roman Catholic church was to put a price on his head. Martin Luther did not want to start a new church. He wanted to call the Roman Catholic church back to her Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, who would never have sold forgiveness. He didn’t even sell healing. “Freely you have received, freely give.” I would be willing to have a discussion in much greater detail if you are interested. I am being intentionally brief because if Quora has a fault, it’s that some of the answers posted are very long.

James Hough

Feb 16

No need, I did my thesis in college on this and I know the facts in greater depth than you are presenting, and that was 40 years ago, I have a much greater knowledge and understanding of it now than I did back then. And I have no wish to refight the wars of religion.

John Rallison

Feb 17

There isn’t room in Quora to present the facts in depth. And most people wouldn’t be interested. You seem very comfortable in your positions, so I wish you the best. Pax, John

Inserted comment:

[There certainly IS room on or in quora to present the facts in depth.]

James Hough

Feb 17

Hi Mr. Rallison,

As I have gotten older, what is important has become much more important to me; and I strive each and every day to know and do the Will of God in my life. I find it extremely sad that so many people over so many centuries have tried to come up with their own versions of Christianity.

Although we are all called to be evangelists in our own particular field, and none of us can walk away from that, nevertheless, I find myself overwhelmed with just caring for and educating the converts right in front of me. I do find it interesting and necessary to answer questions when I can spare a few minutes, but I must always draw the line if it threatens to tear away time from those whom God has given to me to take care of.

I don’t know if any of us can ever be described as “comfortable” while we are away from the Lord; this life was never ever meant to be comfortable, it is a time of decision, and time of fighting for Him and His Kingdom. Anytime I start to feel comfortable, I know that I am sliding the other way, away from my God and what is asked of me.

Does that make sense?

Oremus pro invicem,

James

ARq

Answer requested by Trish Meyer :

Alex Pismenny

Catholic Christian.

Written Feb 17

There is little I can add to James Hough’s answer.

On the other hand, it appears that many answers here are written as a shopping guide: “this part is good, that part is bad, pick one”. That is not a serious approach. Religion is not a club, not an object of art and not a lifestyle choice. The purpose of religion is simple: to teach you how to have eternal life after you die.

Anyone interested in salvation should avoid facile answers stemming from the falsehood that one is saved by faith alone and is instructed in salvation by scripture alone. These were gross simplifications of faith, and these both simplifications are contradicted by the Holy Scripture itself:

…wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

Was not Abraham our father justified by works, offering up Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou, that faith did co-operate with his works; and by works faith was made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled, saying: Abraham believed God, and it was reputed to him to justice, and he was called the friend of God. Do you see that by works a man is justified; and not by faith only? And in like manner also Rahab the harlot, was not she justified by works, receiving the messengers, and sending them out another way?

For even as the body without the spirit is dead; so also faith without works is dead. (James 2:20–24)

Faith is necessary for salvation, but so do good works. In fact, faith, as this passage teaches, cannot be separated, let alone seen in opposition to good works. We are saved by both; and indeed even though the scripture praises faith a good deal, nowhere does it say that we are saved by faith ALONE as Protestantism teaches.

Neither is the scripture alone is the Rule of Faith. If it were, then it would have said it somewhere. It doesn’t. The Holy Scripture is praised many times, but nowhere does it formulate that unfortunate Protestant dogma. And indeed:

...if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother.

And if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand. And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican. Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven. (Matthew 18:15–18)

Here you go: the Church and not the Scripture is the Rule of Faith; it is the Church that resolves disputes among Christians.

And who rules the Church?

Invisibly, Christ does; He said that the “gates of hell” shall not prevail against “His” Church. Not “your” church, “His” church. (Matthew 16:18).

But visibly, the Church is hierarchical:

Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. (Acts 20:28)

ordain priests in every city, as I also appointed thee (Titus 1:5)

Think about it.

James Boll

2 upvotes

So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter. 2 Thessalonians 2:15

Q

Catholics: how do you know that Protestantism and other forms of Christianity are not correct where they differ from Catholicism?
https://www.quora.com/Catholics-how-do-you-know-that-Protestantism-and-other-forms-of-Christianity-are-not-correct-where-they-differ-from-Catholicism/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Studied religions as curious parallels and contrasts to Xtian faith since 9, 10?

Written just now

Because they don’t have the Catholic Tradition behind their positions.

And that means they don’t have the Apostolic Sucession behind it either.

And THAT means they are not the Church described in Matthew 28:18–20.

This refers to Protestantism.

With Eastern Orthodox, it can be a bit delicate as in the time when schism broke out both sides accused each other for inventing novelties and claimed to be only applying what had always been taught.

Finally, Eastern Orthodox don’t have as good a case as they think, but they have a better one than Protestantism.

Q

Why were the early middle ages called "dark ages"?
https://www.quora.com/Why-were-the-early-middle-ages-called-dark-ages/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl

C on Q

There were negative consequences for europe due to the collapse of the romam empire, but were those centuries so bad to be called the dark ages?(besides the justinian plague)

ARq

Answer requested by Rodrigo Carlos dos Santos :

Hans-Georg Lundahl

History buff since childhood. CSL & Eco added to Medieval lore. + Classics.

Written Mon

Obviously you can’t call them the Dark Ages just due to Justinian Plague.

That would be like calling XXth C. the Dark Ages just due to 1918 flu pandemic. Or just due to AIDS. Or just due to Ebola. …

There are two options:

• a series of disasters for government and frontiers, mainly;
• a lack of [written] sources compared to earlier and later.

Either of these would be mostly finished by the time of Charlemagne.

Q

What is the stance of the Catechism of the Catholic Church on gambling?
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-stance-of-the-Catechism-of-the-Catholic-Church-on-gambling/answer/Hans-Georg-Lundahl

ARq

Answer requested by Amanda Marie :

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Studied religions as curious parallels and contrasts to Xtian faith since 9, 10?

Written Mon

If you mean a Catechism which is truly of the Catholic Church, I think any would give this answer:

• if the stakes are so low that stealing would be a venial sin, taking what you win on gambling is a venial sin;
• if they are so high that stealoing would be a mortal sin, taking what you win on gambling is a mortal sin.

Note that by gambling you mean not a production or service with risk taking in the part of repayment, but an agreement to hoard money or other things, including future purchases of coke bottles (would not be mortal!) in a lump, and decide that whoever wins on sth truly related just to chance, normally, like the roll of dice or the playing of cards (which means : including where the chance element is most basic, even if there is a tactics element to it too), gets the lump.

If you mean the non-Catholic work termed “Catechism of the Catholic Church”, I think it would say the same, even if I have not checked : it is non-Catholic on other items, such as possibility to prove existence of God or perhaps also literal inerrancy.