Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit!
You're currently viewing Catholic CyberForum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our online cyberparish, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.
Join our community!
Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of abuse, personal attacks, blasphemy, racism, threats, harrassment, and crude or sexually-explicit language.
If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Did Jesus Die For Many Or For All?
Topic Started: Sunday, 29. October 2006, 14:17 (530 Views)
Gerard

Anne-Marie
Wednesday, 20. April 2011, 13:07
Derekap
Wednesday, 20. April 2011, 10:57
I still insist that God the Father sent His Only Son to redeem ALL (everyone without exception)
My assumption/sympathy has always been with your view, Derek.
Trouble is: The dogma/teaching of the Church, as approved in the 'master' Latin version by a council of the Church supported by popes historically has always stated quite clearly 'for many' - whether you and I like it or not.
Even the approved Latin of the Novus Ordo version is clear about that... but for whatever reason, those producing the English translation chose to write 'for all'.

Now all that raises the thorny problem of whether councils of the Church and/or popes have any power or right to determine what our Church teaches and what we should believe.
And if we start challenging that:
1. Are we Catholic?
2. Does the Church have the right or power to impose anything belief on us? Or is it all a 'con'???

Interpretation or understanding of issues may vary, but a straight, specific historical teaching of the Church at the highest unified (popes AND council) level is a tad awkward if we don't like it....
The whole Faith comes unstuck if we choose to reject the Church's teaching as 'wrong'.
IS IT? :bl:
The Church has always taught that Jesus died for all. His sacrifice is sufficient to save every single person. Any teaching contrary to that is, in fact, heresy.

There is no guarantee that all will accept this salvation.

It is possible to understand many as "all".

Gerry
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gerard

P.S.

I have yet to meet anyone under 70 who thinks the new translation is a good idea.

Gerry
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
KatyA

Gerard
Wednesday, 20. April 2011, 17:56
P.S.

I have yet to meet anyone under 70 who thinks the new translation is a good idea.

Gerry
Here I am
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gerard

Have not met anyone off line who thinks anything other than that this new translation is disasterous.

Gerry
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Anne-Marie

Gerard
Wednesday, 20. April 2011, 17:56
I have yet to meet anyone under 70 who thinks the new translation is a good idea.
Gerry
KatyA
 
Here I am

Gerard
 
Have not met anyone off line who thinks anything other than that this new translation is disasterous.
Gerry

You thought you were safe with that second attempt at a sweeping statement, didn't you, Gerry?
Well, you're not - because I can name several in my own parish.

So you'll just have to limit your claim even further with a third attempt to maintain your unsustainable claim, Gerry....
Anne-Marie
FIAT VOLUNTAS DEI
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gerard

Why? I have never met anyone in your parish Anne Marie?

Gerry
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Anne-Marie

Gerard
Wednesday, 20. April 2011, 19:13
I have never met anyone in your parish Anne Marie
It can be arranged!
:rofl:
Anne-Marie
FIAT VOLUNTAS DEI
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
Gerard
Wednesday, 20. April 2011, 17:30
Quote:
 
1 John 2:2

He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.
Therefore, a mistake was made when the original text of the Church was written and approved! Is there any reason why we should accept that "for many" instead of "for all" is an infallible teaching?
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gerard

Rose,

We are talking about a prayer - not a doctrinal statement.

Insofar as this is directly from the Bible it is a problem of translation and interpretation - about which much has been written (I thought I remembered much discussion on this very point on this forum). Now it turns out that this text from scripture actually has been dogmatically defined. Christ's death was sufficient for all. Any teaching that would reduce the power of Christ's sacrifice would be a heretical teaching. Though, of course, it is possible that not all would benefit - though it is available to all.

In as much as the English might appear to say that he did not die for all - this is a problem of translation.

But I said above - many could be all.

Gerry
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Derekap
Member Avatar

Gerry wrote:

"But I said above - many could be all"

Agreed, but 'all' is all
Edited by Derekap, Wednesday, 20. April 2011, 20:42.
Derekap
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
OsullivanB

polloi = many and that's what it says in the gospel accounts of the last supper. No point in blaming the translators.
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Anne-Marie

OsullivanB
Wednesday, 20. April 2011, 21:04
polloi = many and that's what it says in the gospel accounts of the last supper. No point in blaming the translators.
Thank you once again, OSB - that is what I have kept trying to tell people....

That is what scripture says and that is what the definitive Latin text of the Mass has always said (even in Novus Ordo format) - It was only the English translation of the Novus Ordo Latin that changed it to 'for all'.
The N.O English translation was wrong, remains wrong, and is finally being corrected.
'Many' is not 'all'.
Anne-Marie
FIAT VOLUNTAS DEI
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gerard

Are there any nuances to the word ? I dont know Greek, but I see a lot of discussion saying that the word does not have quite the same meaning as we see in the English "many".

And if the translation really is as clear as you say OsB then it most certainly is a case of interpretation. And other verses in Scripture and Dogma says Christ died for all.

Gerry
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Gerard

CCC 1260

"Since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery." Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved. It may be supposed that such persons would have desired Baptism explicitly if they had known its necessity.
"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Derekap
Member Avatar

OsB wrote:

"polloi = many and that's what it says in the gospel accounts of the last supper. No point in blaming the translators"

'polloi' may mean many, but 'all' is surely still the correct pronoun in English?

This is just how slavishly literal in translation results in incorrect and inappropriate English
Edited by Derekap, Wednesday, 20. April 2011, 21:25.
Derekap
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · General Catholic Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply