Catholic Tradition /MariaG

[edwinG]

Malachi4U:

Resting? Do you believe in ‘Soul Sleep?’ Where in the Bible does God specify ALL the attributes saints/angels have or have not? Where did you get this information? I know in the OT the Jews tought their souls rested in paridise (the theif beside Jesus went to paradise with Jsus that day, not heaven). Jesus died on the cross and went to paridise to preach to the souls ‘resting’ before He came. He preached to them to ‘save’ them (using a protestant sense of ‘saved’). Jesus ascended into heaven later.

Where did the angels come from if our souls are in a state of suspended animation in heaven (or wherever)? How did St. John see saints giving our prayers to God in heaven (see Revelations)? The Psalms have at least 2 examples of our petitions going through those in heaven (see Psalms).

Heaven is a place of life, not death or suspended animation.

In heaven we are souls and on earth we are souls trapped in a human shell. Do not confuse attributes of a human shell with the attributes God gives a soul.

The “father” of the reformation prayed to Blessed Mary and believed in the intervention of Saints. When did his followers stop this practice? Why? Who?

Seek the answers to questions I pose. The truth is sometimes hard to follow but to follow Jesus is to find the Truth. I found the truth in the writtings of the early Church and in Scripture. I opened my eyes and removed the ‘scales’. Now I can ‘see’ and ‘hear’ what I denied as a protestant.

You are searching for the truth. Never stop. Whether you stay protestant or reconcile yourself back to the Catholic Church is your choice. God loves you and therfore I love you. Just follow the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

Whatever you choice, best of luck, I am sure the Holy Spirit is guiding you, just follow Him.

Daniel 12:13 But you go your way to the end, for you shall rest,and will arise to your inheritance at the end of the days"
And does Jesus define “resting” Matthew26:45 " … are you still sleeping and resting…"
Isaiah. 28:7-12
But they also have erred through wine
and through intoxicating drink are out of the way
The priest and the prophet have erred through intoxicating drink,
They are swallowed up by wine,
They are out of the way through intoxicating drink
They err in vision , they stumble in judgment
For all tables are full of vomit and filth
No place is clean
Whom will he teach knowledge
And whom will he make to understand the message
Those just weaned from milk
Those just drawn from the breast
For precept must be upon precept
precept upon precept
line upon line, line upon line
here a little , there a little
For with stammering lips and another tongue
He will speak to this people
To whom He said, " This is the rest with which
You may cause the weary to rest
And "this is the refreshing "
Yet they would not hear.
And of course Jesus is the rest and He sent the Holy Spirit.
So here God said His word can not be entrusted to priests and prophets but to the Holy Spirt. How do you interpret this?
Can you give me the references in Revelations and Psalms so I can digest them please.
I don’t have any knowledge of Mary as intercessor. Can you give me references for this too please. and who is the father of the reformation?http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon7.gif
Christ be with you
walk in love
edwinG

 

[edwinG]

RBushlow:

Here’s the oath you are looking for:
“Dost thou renounce Satan?” “I do renounce”.
"and all his works? “I do renounce”
“and all his pomps?” “I do renounce”.

Hi Mr R,
Thanks for your post. I think it is a very good one and says a lot.
Think very carefully about an oath. If you take an oath, eg I wont say the word “sldhg rjh;oif” again, this means you wont say this word again or you have broken your oath.
Now look at God’s word. Love me is to obey me.
Loving God is not saying the word, loving is doing.
Renouncing is not saying the word renouncing is doing.
So I say to you . Is every catholic free from sin. sinless.
If not you have broken your oath.
I believe what Chirst said, Do not make an oath. By doing so you are putting your self in danger.
Christ be with youhttp://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon7.gif
walk in love
edwinG

 

[itsjustdave1988]

EdwinG,

Your understanding of Christianity seems to suggest you have no superiors other than Jesus Christ. Doesn’t that make nonesense of Heb 13:17?

“Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account. Let them do this joyfully, and not sadly, for that would be of no advantage to you.” (Heb 13:17)

I don’t see that you have addressed this passage yet. How do you obey Heb 13:17 if you only submit to Jesus Christ and Him only? Your “Just Jesus and Me” ecclesiology does not seem to be the same as the inspired and inerrant author of the Epistle of Hebrews. Do you have any leader here on earth that is responsible for keeping watch over your soul to which you are bound to obey and submit to?

 

[Malachi4U]

edwinG:

…When you say that God and His truth are only in one church and that is the Roman Catholic church , I put this to you. There are two parts to this statement. God in Christ is in only one church. That church is the Roman Catholic church.
Ask me anything to satisfy yourself of my position in Christ.I ask this of you, for your benefit. Satisfy yourself , test me to see if I am a hypocrit, or if I follow some pagan belief. Ask to satisfy yourself in case you feel I may be unbalanced. I give you permission to ask me anything you like.

Perhaps you misunderstood. I said that the Catholic Church was His Church, His body. I did not say all Christians were in the Catholic Church. I know many Christians who are Baptist and Lutheran, etc. I even know a few Catholics whom I doubt I’ll see in heaven. Only Jesus judges us. He even said that those who where with Him could not be against Him. He will save those whom He judges worthy of it whether or not they are Catholic (i.e. His “universal” Church.).

You will have to judge of course if my answers are true. I say in Christ’s holy name that I will answer in all truth or tell you I wont answer a particular question. If you satisfy your self I am a Christian and that Jesus is not only aware of me but approves of my servitude then you will have to decide if 1) you are in the wrong church or 2) Christ approves of more than one church.( Is there an alternative?)

I am not God. Jesus did not die and make me God either. I do not judge whether anyone is or is not Christian (Many in my former Baptist churches did!). I cannot tell who is or who is not a Christian, only God can do that. I can tell you what Jesus taught though. I can also say that you appear to me to be a very good Christian who I “HOPE” to see in heaven. Do not “prove” yourself to me or anyone else. Just let your ‘works’ be proof to Jesus of your Faith. He will judge you, not me, not the Pope or any human. Shine your light so that we may see it. You appear to have a very bright light and the world would be a darker place without it. Never put it under a basket.

Act in Love in everything you do. It is our greatest gift you know. Greater then Faith or Hope.

I will not judge you or anyone else. You have nothing to prove to me.

 

[Malachi4U]

edwinG:

…Study history, I am 58 and I dont have time. The bible takes up nearly all of my study time…

Too late? Are you looking down at the daisies or up at the grass? Scripture is clear that those who are last will be first. It also states that the worker who only put in a part of a days wgaes will be paid the same as a worker who put in a full days wage!

As long as your looking down at the grass it’s never too late!

I might suggest, and it’s just a suggestion, that you change “Bible study” time to “Sacred Scripture study” time. Study whats in Scripture one day, the next day study where Scripture came from, who wrote it, when, why, who connonized it, what did the first Christians believe, was there a Church ‘before’ Scripture was written, what did the early “FATHERS” teach/believe, when and why did sects break off the Catholic/Universal Church, does God want us in or out of organized assemblies, where did the KJV come from, why did protestants stop using the Geneva Bible or the AKJV, who and why and when were entire books deleted out of the KJV, do ‘RE’-formers still believe what Luther taught, etc…?

Bible study is a mind set. By past practice we think Bible study is to study only what is in the Bible. Expand your horizen. Think outside the box. The Bible does not say it is the only Word of God. Study history along with and beside the Bible. God is not in the Bible, He is in you and me. He is alive! Would you go to a mechanic with one tool or a mechanic with a toolbox full of tools? Use ALL the tools God gave us, not just one.

You are not 58 years old, you are 58 years young. Do not have one year of experience repeated 58 times, have 58 years of experience. Memorizing Scripture does not make us wizer or give us better or new experience, living Scripture will give us a Scripturally accurate “HOPE” for salvation and give us new experiences!

 

[Ter]

edwinG:

Hi Maria,
2) Formal submission to the Authority of the Catholic Church.
edwinGhttp://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon7.gif

Hi Edwin, I think you might be slightly misinterpreting ‘submission’. Catholics are required to submit to the “Teaching Authority” of the Church. This means that if your personal opinion/interpretation of an officially declared doctrine of the Chuch is in conflict with the Church’s teaching you are required to accept that the Church’s position is Truth i.e. you must accept that Christ is present “body, blood, soul & divinity” in the Eucharest. If you cannot reason this for yourself you must accept it on faith & pray for enlightenment.

This is the only submission required of Catholics. Please note that this submission relates only to the official teachings of the Church. So, for example a Catholic is not required to believe that the various Marian apparitions have occured. Not even the apparitions that the Church has approved i.e. Fatima, Lourdes. Approval means that they appear valid and Catholics may believe they occured & go to pray there without harming their souls but they are Private Revelations & not a doctrine of the Faith.

Again this is a ‘mature’ [not quite the right word] submission i.e. if a priest tells you that Christ was not Divine he is contradicting the Church’s offical teaching - he is wrong & you should not listen to him.

This submission to the Church’s teaching authority is based on a number of things, particularly that this is the Church Christ founded (the various protestant denominations did not apppear until after 1600) , that He is the Head of the Church and that as Head is will not permit the Church to declare as official doctrine something which is not True. If it did then ‘the gates of hell’ would ‘prevail’ against the Church which He founded on Peter and that cannot happen.

 

[Todd_Easton]

edwinG:

In I Samuel 28: 15-19 Samuel was annoyed because Saul had contacted him " Why have you disturbed me by bringing me up" Samuel then predicted Saul death. Not a good ending for waking up the dead. I agree Samuel knew what was transpiring, he is a prophet, but he definitely said he was disturbed at being brought up. I find this in contradiction to your belief of asking the saints to intercede for us.

You seem to equate rest with sleep but the words rest and sleep do not necessarily mean the same thing. There can be rest without sleep and there can be restless sleep. Here are the first few definitions of the word rest from my dictionary: rest: 1. a) peace, ease, and refreshment, as produced by sleep. b) sleep or repose or a period of this. 2. refreshing ease or inactivity after work or exertion. 3. a period or occasion of inactivity, as during work or on a journey. 4. a) relief from anything distressing or annoying, tiring, etc. b) peace of mind; mental and emotional calm; tranquility.

An obvious example of rest not meaning sleep is found in Genesis 2:3: “So God blessed the seventh day and hallowed it, because on it God rested from all his work which he had done in creation.” When it says, God rested, does that mean God fall into unconsciousness and slept through the entire seventh day? I don’t think so.

If I was Samuel and I was brought up from the peace, ease, refreshment, calm and tranquility of Abraham’s bosom by the divination of King Saul and his witch, I would have been a little annoyed too. However, because rest need not mean sleep as shown above, there is no reason to assume that Samuel was awakened from sleep.

Also, conjuring up the spirits of the dead (divination) is condemned by the Catholic Church and the Bible. Asking the saints in heaven to pray for us is not the same thing as conjuring up the dead. Addressing the spirits and souls of the just in prayer and asking them to do something is praiseworthy. This is exactly what the three young men did from inside the fiery furnace in Daniel 3:86, saying, “Spirits and souls of the just, bless the Lord; praise and exalt him above all forever.” (Daniel 3:86)

Don’t bother to look for Daniel 3:86 in your 16th-century Protestant abridgment of the true Christian Bible. This is another of those Scripture passages, along with Sirach and Maccabees and others, that were removed from the Christian Bible by misguided men trying to reinvent Christianity some 500 years ago. If you want to read those passages you will need a Catholic Bible.

edwinG:

Luke 9:30-36 … They were not making an intercession for someone on earth…

I did not say they were making intercession. I used this passage as an illustration that the dead are not asleep but conscious and active. (Actually, Elijah never died and I apologize for calling him a dead prophet but, the point is, he too is not asleep but conscious and active.)

edwinG:

Luke 16:19-31 This is not intercession. …

This was not a successful intercession but it was indeed an intercession of a dead person for the living. Remember, James 5:16 says, “The prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effects.” The fact that the dead rich man was not a righteous man might have had a little something to do with his requests not being granted.

continued on later post…

 

[Ter]

RE: “I believe what Chirst said, Do not make an oath”
In the rest of that passage Christ deals with what constitutes an oath - ‘do not swear by heaven’ ‘do not swear by earth’ ‘do not swear by God’ ‘if you mean yes say yes… no say no…’ (this is from memory so the words may not be exactly right). Now in the baptismal promises it goes “Do you reject Satin - I do; And all his works - I do”. Notice that at no point does the person say “I swear by…”. This type of commitment is not forbidden by Christ - it is commitment of how we will live as Christians. We may fall & sin but then we can turn to God again, look for forgiveness & renew our promise.

Final note - you might find it easier to accept the idea of submission to the teaching authority of the Church if you could see how the actual teachings remain the same down through the centuries. An easy way to do this is to read some of the lives of the Saints - the various saints despite living hundreds of years apart all have the same faith & the same view on what is essential to live a Christian life - St.s John Bosco, John Vianney, Therese, Teresa of Avila, John of the Cross are very good & there are many others. And it does’t take very long to read them.

Final Final note - submission to the Church versus Christs Church. The Catholic Church can trace its roots directly back through apostolic succession to the Church founded by Christ on Peter. For the first 1600 years it was the only Church. The baptismal promises mentioned above are from that period, in fact the line in question goes “do you believe in One, Holy, Catholic & Apostolic Church - I do”. So at that time there was no possibility of the Catholic Church not being Christ’s Church. After the 1600s some people who disagreed with certain Church teachings split off and founded their own Churches e.g. Luther & Calvin. Because they rejected certain teachings of the Church, which had been in existence for hundreds of years, the Catholic Church teachings that the various Christians denominations have part of the Truth but only the Catholic Church has the ‘fullness of the Truth’.

P.S. At every mass the people say "May the Lord accept the sacrifice at your hands for the praise and glory of His name, for our good and the good of all His Church. Note the “His Church”.

(Sorry this was so long but I just kept thinking of more things)

 

[Todd_Easton]

edwinG:

Rev 4:10 and Rev 5:8 Do you know who the 24 elders are. I do not know but they are not called saints in heaven…

Rev 4:4 says, “Round the throne were twenty-four thrones, and seated on the thrones were twenty-four elders, clad in white garments, with golden crowns upon their heads.”

Who are the elders in the Bible? Men. The Bible, and the New Testament in particular, mentions two groups of elders, Jewish and Christian, but in either case they refer to human beings. Since the Jewish elders condemned Jesus, it is likely that the elders in heaven in Rev 4:4f are Christian elders, former leaders of the early Christian communities now deceased.

In 1 Peter 5:1, the Apostle Peter refers to himself as an elder. The author of 1 John and 2 John also refers to himself as an elder.

In Matt 19:28, Jesus told the Apostles that they would sit on 12 thones.

In Rev 2:10, Jesus told Christians, “Be faithful unto death, and I will give you the crown of life.”

In Rev 3:5, Jesus told Christians, “He who conquers shall be clad thus in white garments, and I will not blot his name out of the book of life; I will confess his name before my Father and before his angels.”

Taking the above Scripture passages into consideration, it seems reasonable to assume that the 24 elders in heaven are deceased Christian elders who were faithful to the end, and some of them are probably deceased Apostles. (Acts 12:2 mentions the early martyrdom of the Apostle James, the brother of John.)

Rev 5:8 says of these deceased Christian elders, “…the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and with golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints.”

Since, elsewhere in the New Testament, Christians on earth are called “the saints” (2 Cor 1:1, Col 1:2, Eph 1:1, Phil 1:1), it is reasonable to assume that the saints refered to in Rev 5:8 are also Christians on earth.

So there you have it, deceased Christians elders (the saints in heaven) offer to God the prayers of the Christians on earth.

From the Scriptures I cited in this and previous posts, I think I have made a case for the following:

1. Though their bodies may be at rest, the spirits of deceased Christians in heaven are conscious, active, aware of what is happening on earth, praying and interceding for the living, offering up to God the prayers of Christians on earth, and through their intercession God performs great deeds.
2. It is a good thing to ask others to pray for us. And, since the prayer of a righteous man is great in its effect and since Christians in heaven are perfectly righteous, it too is a good and praiseworthy thing to ask them to pray for us. Since Mary is the most exalted of Christians in heaven (see Luke 1:28-55, John 2:1-11 and Rev 12:1-17), her prayers are very great in their effect.

Is it necessary to ask the Christians in heaven to pray for you? Yes, if you interested in receiving all the good gifts God wants you to have because some things can only come from the prayer of a righteous man.

 

[Strider]

RBushlow:

Here’s the oath you are looking for:
“Dost thou renounce Satan?” “I do renounce”.
"and all his works? “I do renounce”
“and all his pomps?” “I do renounce”.

Ter alluded to this, but did not expound on it. This is part of the formula for a Catholic baoptism.
The priest asks, “Do you renounce Satan?”
The one being baptized (or the godparent in the event of an infant being pabtized) replies, “I do renounce him.” and so on.
It is not an “oath”, as explained above.
Others have done exemplary jobs of explaining what must be believed by a Catholic (doctrine), and since it all comes from Christ, it is Christ’s teaching, as guarded and preserved by the Church, that must be believed. That’s not so bad, or frightening.
To fully understand, though, you simply must study history as well as the bible.
It’s a lifelong journey for all of us.

 

[edwinG]

itsjustdave1988:

EdwinG,

Your understanding of Christianity seems to suggest you have no superiors other than Jesus Christ. Doesn’t that make nonesense of Heb 13:17?

“Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give account. Let them do this joyfully, and not sadly, for that would be of no advantage to you.” (Heb 13:17)

I don’t see that you have addressed this passage yet. How do you obey Heb 13:17 if you only submit to Jesus Christ and Him only? Your “Just Jesus and Me” ecclesiology does not seem to be the same as the inspired and inerrant author of the Epistle of Hebrews. Do you have any leader here on earth that is responsible for keeping watch over your soul to which you are bound to obey and submit to?

Hi ,
Thanks for your post.
Yes I submit to my priest, Pastor Steve. I am an active member of his congregration. However if he asked me to do something which I regarded as sinful I would have to discuss this with him. If it still bothered my conscience, ( lets say I have a tender conscience) well, as Paul remarks, let us be aware of each other and not be a stumbling block to each others faith.)
I submit to all government authorities.
I submit to my employers
I submit to my wife and honor her
For this reason, I have noted several instances which bother my conscience and for these reasons ( I don’t doubt your christianity) I could not be a member of the Roman Catholic church.
These most basic reasons are 1) your submission to the authority of men. IT is submission to men unless you change the word from catholic church to His church.
2) you take a vow which is contrary to Christ’s command and if you sin you break your vow.
Can we narrow our discussion to these points and see if we have common ground before we move to other areas.
my love is for you
Christ be with you
walk in love. ( let love be the motivating reason for all of your actions and let love find the strength to do more)
edwinG

 

[edwinG]

Hi,

Today is Saturday here in Thailand. Usually I dont have time during the day and Tui, my wife uses the computer at night. So unless circumstances change, I wont be on the net until Monday morning.

Christ be with you

walk in love

edwinG

 

[James224]

Hi EdwinG,

I liked your openess and you come across as being very honest. I appreciate that and thought I would give a reasonably short post. I think you said it in your post that the real problem you have with all these doctrines is the problem of “Authority”. Once you’ve solved that, all these other doctrines will fall into place. Protestants will say that the “Bible Alone” is the authority and Catholics will say it’s “The Bible and Apostolic Tradition”. Nowhere in scripture does it say the bible is the sole authority. Usually they cite 2 Tim 3:15-17 which says, “And because from thy infancy thou hast known the holy scriptures which can instruct thee to salvation by the faith which is in Christ Jesus. 3:16. All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice: 3:17. That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.” Notice: It doesn’t say it’s the sole authority. What scripture were they talking about here? The Old Testament so was the old testament the sole authority? The New testament had not been totally written. Now look at 2 Thess 2:14 where Paul says, " Therefore, brethren, stand fast: and hold the TRADITIONS, which you have learned, whether by WORD or by our epistle." The “Oral” word is the gospel and not just the written word. Also, remember that the first copy of the New Testament wasn’t finished until around 90-100ad so before that, where was the authority? It was in men. The first book of the New testament wasn’t written until around 50ad so from the time Christ died (33ad) until 50ad there was not one word of the New Testment written down. The authority was in men - the apostles and in those whom they ordained. The bible says the following in 1 Tim 3:15, “But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the CHURCH of the living God, the PILLAR AND GROUND OF THE TRUTH.” Christ established ONE church and you see that in Matt 16:18 which says, “And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build MY CHURCH, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” You see it in Ephesians as well. Jesus built the Church on Peter in which the Pope is the direct successor of him. If you want to see that the apostles ordained other men to carry on the succession one example is in I Cor 4:16-17 " Wherefore, I beseech you , be ye followers of me, as I am also of Christ. For this cause have I sent to you Timothy, who is my dearest son and faithful to the Lord; who will put you in mind of my ways, which are in Christ Jesus; as I teach everywhere in every church." Timothy teaches the same as Paul. Timothy passed on the same faith. How? Orally. Timothy’s faith was binding. Timothy was ordained in I Tim 4:14 " Neglect not the grace that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with imposition of the hands of the priesthood." Timothy received the grace for this ministry through Orders – Must receive this sacrament.

I could give you a small book on this subject. Let me know what you want the most and I’ll try to get it for you. How to reconcile Peter’s failings? Mary? Saints?

May God bless,

James224

 

[Ter]

edwinG:

Hi ,
2) you take a vow which is contrary to Christ’s command and if you sin you break your vow.
http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon7.gif

Hi Edwin, I still maintain that a vow/promise is not forbidden swearing by ‘x’ is forbidden (see my earlier post).

Matthew 5.34 “But I say to you, Do not swear at all, either by heaven , for it is the throne of God, or by the earth, for it is his footstool, or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make one hair white or black. Let what you say be simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’.”

I’m very aware of this difference 'cos I always thought it was funny that the president of the USA says “I swear by Almighty God…”, which this passage forbids.

Secondly the wording of promise taken on entry to the Catholic Church is:
“Do you reject Satan & all his works & all his empty promises - I do (some people use renounce)
Do you believe in God, the Father Almighty creator of heaven and earth - I do
Do you believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord, who was born of the Virgin Mary, was crucified, died and was buried, rose from the dead and is now seated on the right hand of the Father - I do
Do you believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body and life everlasting - I do”

Now I assume that you were married in your church i.e. your priest said “Do you take this woman etc.etc.” and you said “I do”. Now if the vow taken on entering the Catholic Church is forbidden by Christ than marriage vows are also forbidden by Christ, which seems unlikely, as are employment contracts, promises to your children etc.

 

[Ter]

edwinG:

Hi ,

1. your submission to the authority of men. IT is submission to men unless you change the word from catholic church to His church.
   edwinG
   http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon7.gif

The problem with changing the wording from catholic church to His church is that if someone disagrees with a specific teaching of the catholic church they can decide that the catholic church is not His church in this aspect that their personal view is correct or the anglican view or the methodist view etc. Then Christ’s Message is different depending on the personal inclination of each one. If something is “too hard a saying” they will pretend it doesn’t exist. Besides which, all churches expect their members to accept their teachings, after all you could hardly be a member of a protestant church if you believed that the Sacrament of Confession was a necessary part of your faith life.

As I mentioned in a different post, the Church teachings are essentially unchanged down through the centuries e.g. the position on the Eucharist is the same today as it was in the first and second centuries. Anyway, it is illogical to think that Christ went to all the trouble of coming to earth to proclaim the Good News, suffer for our redemption, establish the Church, tell the apostles “go ye therefore & make disicples of all nations” and not safeguard his message to ensure it was not changed or distorted. Catholics believe that He established the Church to do just this, ‘to protect the deposit of the Faith’ as we say. It is part of the role of the Church to ensure that Christ’s Message is proclaimed in every generation not the message that society thinks ‘should be’ Christ’s Message.

 

[edwinG]

Todd Easton:

You seem to equate rest with sleep but the words rest and sleep do not necessarily mean the same thing.

I am sorry if I led you to believe that. I quoted from Samuel and it just said that Samuel was ‘Disturbed’ and I did not mean resting or sleeping, only what Scripture said, “disturbed” but at the same time I believe that the saints are resting see Daniel 12:13 " But you, go your way till the end,for you shall rest, and will arise to your inheritance at the end of the days"

Also, conjuring up the spirits of the dead (divination) is condemned by the Catholic Church and the Bible. Asking the saints in heaven to pray for us is not the same thing as conjuring up the dead.

Can you explain to me in scripture the difference between conjuring up the spirits of the dead ( divination) and asking the saints in heaven to pray for us.

This is exactly what the three young men did from inside the fiery furnace in Daniel 3:86, saying, “Spirits and souls of the just, bless the Lord; praise and exalt him above all forever.” (Daniel 3:86)

Pretty funny, as soon as I read your reference, I rushed to the bible and found and read the story of Shadrach and his friends and could not find your reference. Then I continued to read your post, and lo and behold there was the answer. LOL

Don’t bother to look for Daniel 3:86 in your 16th-century Protestant abridgment of the true Christian Bible. This is another of those Scripture passages, along with Sirach and Maccabees and others, that were removed from the Christian Bible by misguided men trying to reinvent Christianity some 500 years ago. If you want to read those passages you will need a Catholic Bible.

I did not say they were making intercession. I used this passage as an illustration that the dead are not asleep but conscious and active. (Actually, Elijah never died and I apologize for calling him a dead prophet but, the point is, he too is not asleep but conscious and active.)

Yes, I agree with you that they are alive and conscious and aware.

This was not a successful intercession but it was indeed an intercession of a dead person for the living. Remember, James 5:16 says, “The prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effects.” The fact that the dead rich man was not a righteous man might have had a little something to do with his requests not being granted.

That it was not successful is to me the revelant teaching.

continued on later post…

Thank you again for you time and energy,
Christ be with youhttp://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon7.gif
walk in love
edwinG

 

[edwinG]

Ter:

Anyway, it is illogical to think that Christ went to all the trouble of coming to earth to proclaim the Good News, suffer for our redemption, establish the Church, tell the apostles “go ye therefore & make disicples of all nations” and not safeguard his message to ensure it was not changed or distorted. .

I agree with you wholeheartedly. And to me this is God’s answer.
Isaiah28:7 But they also have erred through wine,
And through intoxicating drink are out of the way,
The priest and the prophet have erred through intoxicating drink,
They are swallowed up by wine,
They are out of the way through intoxicating drink,
They err in vision, they stumble in judgment
For all tables are full of vomit and filth.
No place is clean.

Whom will He teach knowledge?
And whom will He make to understand the message?

Those just weaned from milk?
Those just drawn from the breasts?

For precept must be upon precept ,
precept upon precept,
Line upon line, line upon line.
Here a little , there a little.

For with stammering lips and another tongue,
He will speak to this people,
To whom He said, " This is the rest with which
You may cause the weary to rest,"
And " This is the refeshing"
Yet they would not hear.

Now if you have not heard people speaking in tongues you may not be aware of the “stammering lips”. 100% this is a spirit talking. Now of course you have to discern if it is the Holy Spirit and that is another thread, however,
Do you agree that this passage said All men "err in vision and stumble in judgment and therefore God in His wisdom entrusts the Holy Spirit to speak to His people .( The people who accept Jesus, the rest , and that the Holy Spirit is the refreshing)

I feel that all people on this list hold basically the one belief, but we are plagued by human loyalties to this team or that team. ( this church or that church).
To me the bible is a book of belief and each of us may validly hold to his belief, bearing in mind that on this he will ultimately be judged.
Christ be with youhttp://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon7.gif
walk in love
edwinG

 

[edwinG]

Ter:

RE: “I believe what Chirst said, Do not make an oath”
In the rest of that passage Christ deals with what constitutes an oath - Now in the baptismal promises it goes “Do you reject Satin - I do; And all his works - I do”. Notice that at no point does the person say “I swear by…”.

Final note - you might find it easier to accept the idea of submission to the teaching authority of the Church if you could see how the actual teachings remain the same down through the centuries. An easy way to do this is to read some of the lives of the Saints - And it does’t take very long to read them.

Final Final note - submission to the Church versus Christs Church. The Catholic Church can trace its roots directly back through apostolic succession to the Church founded by Christ on Peter. For the first 1600 years it was the only Church. After the 1600s some people who disagreed with certain Church teachings split off, but only the Catholic Church has the ‘fullness of the Truth’.

P.S. At every mass the people say "May the Lord accept the sacrifice at your hands for the praise and glory of His name, for our good and the good of all His Church. Note the “His Church”.

(Sorry this was so long but I just kept thinking of more things)

Hi Ter,
Yes , from what you say, I agree that what is called an oath may in fact not be an oath. We must always be most mindful of our words. I dont have the pre/post wordings to the “renouncing " but even Michael only said of Satan, The Lord rebuke thee.
These fine lines really test a person’s faith, like walking over a ravine on a slippery log.
In Answer to the body of your post, re the Catholic church is the one church and was the only church for 1600 years, I would ask you to comment on Isaiah 28 7-12. ( see below on another post) This is not an isolated comment in scripture.
Romans 8:4 " … who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the spirit "
Romans8:14 : For as many as are led by the Spirit of God , these are sons of of God.”
Psalms34:1He will teach the ways that are right and best to those who humbly turn to Him. And when we obey Him, every path He guides us on is fragrant with His loving kindness and His truth.
Psalms 139:6 " This is too glorious, too wonderful to believe. I can never be lost to your spirit.
Isaiah 2:22 Puny man! Frail as his breath! Don’t ever put your trust in him. ( In whom them?)
The list is endless. That is one of the reasons Christ died. The Holy Spirit is Christ our Priest who lives forever, and in us, the temple of God… We can’t see Him as the apostels did , but through the Holy Spirit He speaks to us. He, Christ is still our priest. Why should we deny Him by accepting the earthly churches as the only source of teaching and wisdom. This is a new thread and I will open it today. The role of the church on earth.
Most questions have been answered as some point.
Christ be with you
walk in lovehttp://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon7.gif
edwinG

 

[redeemed1]

Some theologians have wondered whether we could confidently press the New Eve parallel so far as to include an immediate co-operation by Mary, that is, one extending even to Calvary. Were we left merely to the resources of our own deductions, such a doubt would be understandable. However, the Holy Father, whose place it is to interpret authentically for us the meaning of Scripture and Tradition, continues, and tells us as plainly as possible, in the words of his own Encyclical, Mystici Corporis,[9](javascript:OpenNote(202,0,9) that Mary’s co-operation with Christ did not begin with being His Mother, and then break off-rather, she was “always most intimately united with her Son” and she “as the New Eve, offered Him on Golgotha, together with the holocaust of her maternal rights and love…” Surely, no more plain words could be found to say that the comparison of Mary to Eve extends even to Golgotha, where Mary “offered Him” and included in that offering “the holocaust of her maternal rights and love…” But there is more: the Pope says that the reasons for Mary’s Queenship form “a certain kind of analogy”[10](javascript:OpenNote(202,0,10) with the reasons for Christ’s Kingship.

I have to ask…is this truly the official teaching of the church?

 

[mrS4ntA]

redeemed1:

I have to ask…is this truly the official teaching of the church?

What is? that Christ is the King and as His mother, Mary is the Queen Mother? then yes.