R
rcwitness
Guest
c,mon… you know you can’t ask a question to general protestants and expect one answer.
- Status
M
MichaelP3
Guest
Not at all. We would need to agree with the idea of mortal sin and what it entails.
M
MichaelP3
Guest
40 And they found under the coats of the slain some of the donaries of the idols of Jamnia, which the law forbiddeth to the Jews: so that all plainly saw, that for this cause they were slain.
I think the part in Macc makes it pretty clear the writer sees it as a very severe form of “having an idol”.
I never said it’s sinful to pray for the dead. I never even said it “couldn’t be productive”. I guess many things are possible that we don’t know. I am just questioning that part as proof to anything and it contradicts Catholic teaching. If it wasn’t for the mortal sin (Which we don’t believe in and thus I do not say they are in hell) teaching that part would be sufficient I guess.
Regards
W
wmscott
Guest
So that you understand Mortal Sin here is a link to some information that may further your understanding of it, not saying you have to believe it but understand what a Catholic is talking about when they refer to Mortal Sin. Beginning Catholic
Additionally the Catechism of the Catholic Church 1846 - 1876 teaches this CCC
Both links are short reads but very informative.
B
Brendan
Guest
It would not be, as neither Christ nor the apostles ever quoted from Ezra, Nehemiah or Ruth, but those Books are still accepted.
that is the primary reason. The Catholic and Orthodox Churches have traditionally relied on the Septuagint. That was the Greek language Old Testament in use at the time of Christ. It is the strongest indication of what books were considered to be Sacred Scripture by the Jews at that time ( or at least most of them, as the Sadducees only considered the Pentateuch to be Inspired by God). The books in the Septuagint are the ones in the Catholic O.T.
After the fall of Jerusalem, the Phariseetical schools of Scripture became dominant. They revised the Canon of Sacred Scripture to exclude everything that was not written originally in Hebrew. That was the creation of the Masoretic text. One key factor is that it occurred AFTER Christ.
W
wmscott
Guest
Just addressing the above bold and underlined I have added this for your reading pleasure.
P
Peter_J
Guest
Alright.
From a Catholic pov I believe we’d say that we don’t know whether they went to hell or not.
T
Techno2000
Guest
Everybody went to Hell (Sheol) back in those Days… you just didnt want to go to the bottom floor.
M
MichaelP3
Guest
As all Christian denominations would (and if not, should).
M
MichaelP3
Guest
I’m not really sure what you mean. I glanced over the link and didn’t see anything new. And I can assure you I have thoroughly studied the Catechism (obviously the first thing I would turn to), my copy looks like a school textbook with all my notes.
So I’m not sure if my understanding is the problem. Although I generally see on these threads people assume if you don’t agree or find something sketchy you obviously don’t understand it (fully).
P
Peter_J
Guest
I salute you for it
although tbh it seems a bit “above and beyond the call of duty” for you to do that.
C
campeador
Guest
It is certain that Judas Maccabeus had hope that they did not.
W
wmscott
Guest
All I was doing was providing information, nothing more. If you have already been through it that is fine. I was not implying anything.
po18guy
Well-known member
Phillip Melanchthon’s apologia harmonizing James with the Pauline letters would be my guess. Since no one other than ML or a handful of others ever questioned James, who else would Melanchthon have written it for?
I see that you are taking the circuitous route to becoming Catholic. Now, only a half-step to the Anglican Rite and you are home. Circumspection over. Celebration begins.
Even Luther in his initial commentary (1524) says he praises James, despite its rejection by “the ancients.” He translated an included it in his initial translation. I’ve seen no evidence that he wanted to force others to exclude it.
Already Catholic, just not “Roman”.
Jon
C
campeador
Guest
Thanks Jon.
Seems scripture does prove the Jewish custom of praying for the dead.
How I wish all Christians would support the Church Suffering!
I
IgnatianPhilo
Guest
It seems to me that since the Septuagint or Greek compilations of the Old Testament included more books than the Hebrew canon related to us by Josephus. Also that the early Church primarily relied on the Greek Septuagint in terms of reading the Old Testament and in terms of it’s canon is the reason why ‘Catholic’ bibles are bigger than ‘protestant’ bibles.
When looking at the use of various biblical books throughout the history of the Church, it doesn’t seem like there’s universal agreement on the limit of what constitutes the bible. It’s a debate that only arose out of the reformation and gained importance when the reformers preferred the Hebrew text of the Old Testament to the Greek. I think we all agree that anything written after the Apostolic age is not scriptural but that leaves wide room for disagreements concerning the Old Testament.
When looking at the use of various biblical books throughout the history of the Church, it doesn’t seem like there’s universal agreement on the limit of what constitutes the bible. It’s a debate that only arose out of the reformation and gained importance when the reformers preferred the Hebrew text of the Old Testament to the Greek. I think we all agree that anything written after the Apostolic age is not scriptural but that leaves wide room for disagreements concerning the Old Testament.
M
MichaelP3
Guest
It tends to happen when you have an entire Conservative Catholic (The nice non-judging kind) family in law. My father in law, a very smart guy, I had to answer some interesting questions. In this instance one would tend not to want to sound “uninformative”.I salute you for it
M
MichaelP3
Guest
- Status