Hail Mary

[Angels_Unaware]

I deny the idea that a person is to communicate with a dead saint via prayer. That is not in Scripture.

Then you disagree with the early Church who did not interpret Hebrews 12:1 as you do. You arrogantly and pridefully reject the testimony of those who were taught directly by the Apostles. Plain and simple.

JA4, you have no interest whatsoever in understanding Jesus Christ as He has been revealed by the One, Holy, and Apostolic Church. Notice the difference between the thought processes of Catholics and Fundamentalists. Catholics/Orthodox are not afraid of putting orthodoxy to the test by reasonable, honest debate. Look through this thread. Notice how many catholics and orthodox people told you frankly there are Marian abuses and they do not deny it, but that those abuses by individuals do not destroy the Catholic Church. It is because the Orthodox Catholic Church is immune (by the Grace of Jesus Christ, who promised that Hell would not prevail against the Church) to your errors. Truth and reason are inherent to the Catholic Church, and our faith is reasonable!

The Catholic Church is not an anti-intellectual cult that makes irrational, logically indefensible claims, (such as Sola Scriptura) as Fundamental Protestantism does, and then fear-mongers its members into believing that if they don’t believe exactly what it tells them they are going to hell. The Catholic Church does not need to do that, because Truth does not need anti-intellectual mind control to bring people to Itself. The Holy Spirit is patiently waiting for your to open your eyes to the truth of Jesus Christ as is revealed in the fullness of His Church.

Whoever told you that Catholicism is equivalent to Mormonism LIED TO YOU.

 

[Lampo]

How do you know where they are at? How do you know with any certainty that they are LIVING in Christ?

The reality is our God is a God of the living and not of the dead as Mark 12:26-27 tells us.

“[26] And as concerning the dead that they rise again, have you not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spoke to him, saying: I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? [27] He is not the God of the dead, but of the living.”

It is clear therefore that those are with God are living and are not dead. As further proof we recall that Moses and Elijah conversed with Jesus at his transfiguration in Mark 9:4,

“And Peter answering, said to Jesus: Rabbi, it is good for us to be here: and let us make three tabernacles, one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias (Elijah).”

Clearly Moses and Elijah were alive as the Gospel story tells us. Not in our bodily form, but in one approaching that of Jesus transfiguration. The Bible also tells us that death cannot separate us from Christ (Rom. 8:35-39), but those in heaven belong to his body, that Communion of Saints in heaven. In Rev 7:15 we read of they that stand before God worshipping him day and night.

“Therefore they are before the throne of God, and they serve him day and night in his temple: and he, that sitteth on the throne, shall dwell over them.”

They do not sound dead to me to be able to serve him night and day! In the story of the Rich man and Lazarus we have the rich man having a conversation with Abraham begging him to intercede for his brothers back on earth.

We breathe air yet we can’t see it but we believe it exists. What is stopping people in heaven for not hearing us?

 

[justasking4]

Angels Unaware;4357192]
Originally Posted by justasking4
I deny the idea that a person is to communicate with a dead saint via prayer. That is not in Scripture.

Angels Unaware;
Then you disagree with the early Church who did not interpret Hebrews 12:1 as you do. You arrogantly and pridefully reject the testimony of those who were taught directly by the Apostles. Plain and simple.

Where and when did the Catholic church offically interpret Hebrews 12:1 to say what you claim? All i ask is to see this document when such a thing is stated.

JA4, you have no interest whatsoever in understanding Jesus Christ as He has been revealed by the One, Holy, and Apostolic Church. Notice the difference between the thought processes of Catholics and Fundamentalists. Catholics/Orthodox are not afraid of putting orthodoxy to the test by reasonable, honest debate. Look through this thread. Notice how many catholics and orthodox people told you frankly there are Marian abuses and they do not deny it, but that those abuses by individuals do not destroy the Catholic Church.

Huh? What abuses are you talking about?

It is because the Orthodox Catholic Church is immune (by the Grace of Jesus Christ, who promised that Hell would not prevail against the Church) to your errors. Truth and reason are inherent to the Catholic Church, and our faith is reasonable!

Immune from what? Error?

The Catholic Church is not an anti-intellectual cult that makes irrational, logically indefensible claims, (such as Sola Scriptura) as Fundamental Protestantism does, and then fear-mongers its members into believing that if they don’t believe exactly what it tells them they are going to hell. The Catholic Church does not need to do that, because Truth does not need anti-intellectual mind control to bring people to Itself. The Holy Spirit is patiently waiting for your to open your eyes to the truth of Jesus Christ as is revealed in the fullness of His Church.

Whoever told you that Catholicism is equivalent to Mormonism LIED TO YOU.

Huh??? Where did i ever claim such a thing as this?

 

[justasking4]

The reality is our God is a God of the living and not of the dead as Mark 12:26-27 tells us.

“[26] And as concerning the dead that they rise again, have you not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spoke to him, saying: I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? [27] He is not the God of the dead, but of the living.”

It is clear therefore that those are with God are living and are not dead. As further proof we recall that Moses and Elijah conversed with Jesus at his transfiguration in Mark 9:4,

“And Peter answering, said to Jesus: Rabbi, it is good for us to be here: and let us make three tabernacles, one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias (Elijah).”

Clearly Moses and Elijah were alive as the Gospel story tells us. Not in our bodily form, but in one approaching that of Jesus transfiguration. The Bible also tells us that death cannot separate us from Christ (Rom. 8:35-39), but those in heaven belong to his body, that Communion of Saints in heaven. In Rev 7:15 we read of they that stand before God worshipping him day and night.

“Therefore they are before the throne of God, and they serve him day and night in his temple: and he, that sitteth on the throne, shall dwell over them.”

They do not sound dead to me to be able to serve him night and day! In the story of the Rich man and Lazarus we have the rich man having a conversation with Abraham begging him to intercede for his brothers back on earth.

We breathe air yet we can’t see it but we believe it exists. What is stopping people in heaven for not hearing us?

It may not be possible. Just because someone is alive somewhere does not mean that they can hear you when you call their name. It may sound reasonable to pray to some saint whom you believe to be in heaven does not mean that they can hear you. The Scriptures certainly do not teach this.

 

[Lampo]

Where and when did the Catholic church offically interpret Hebrews 12:1 to say what you claim? All i ask is to see this document when such a thing is stated.

You were told yesterday that the Church has not infallibly defined this passage. Why did you ask it again?

This is quanophore’s response to you about this exact question TODAY: "Scripture is interpreted in the light of the Apostolic Teaching. It is the teaching that is official for the entire Church.

The Teaching of the Church is that saints are in communion with one another, not separated by death,a nd that the whole Body of Christ is joined together, and each action on the part of one affects the whole."

Also, you skipped over this question: Do you try to lead Catholics away from the Catholic Church?

 

[Lampo]

It may not be possible. Just because someone is alive somewhere does not mean that they can hear you when you call their name. It may sound reasonable to pray to some saint whom you believe to be in heaven does not mean that they can hear you. The Scriptures certainly do not teach this.

Did you miss this?:As further proof we recall that Moses and Elijah CONVERSED with Jesus at his transfiguration in Mark 9:4

 

[justasking4]

Lampo;4357480]
Originally Posted by justasking4
Where and when did the Catholic church offically interpret Hebrews 12:1 to say what you claim? All i ask is to see this document when such a thing is stated.

Lampo
You were told yesterday that the Church has not infallibly defined this passage. Why did you ask it again?

i must have missed the answer. If the church has not infallibly defined the passage then what we have are opinions of what people think it means?

This is quanophore’s response to you about this exact question TODAY: "Scripture is interpreted in the light of the Apostolic Teaching. It is the teaching that is official for the entire Church.

Not sure what this means–“Scripture is interpreted in the light of the Apostolic Teaching”. How can this be if the apostles in their writings never explain that there is some kind of communication going on between the living here and the living there?

The Teaching of the Church is that saints are in communion with one another, not separated by death,a nd that the whole Body of Christ is joined together, and each action on the part of one affects the whole."

I’m familar with this but its not grounded in Scripture.

Also, you skipped over this question: Do you try to lead Catholics away from the Catholic Church?

Off topic:shrug:

 

[Lampo]

i must have missed the answer.

Well now you know.

Off topic:shrug:

It wouldn’t take that much time. It’s a yes or no answer.

 

[Lampo]

Off topic:shrug:

A lot of this thread is off topic. When was the last time the OP’s first post was addressed?

 

[Lampo]

Not sure what this means–“Scripture is interpreted in the light of the Apostolic Teaching”. How can this be if the apostles in their writings never explain that there is some kind of communication going on between the living here and the living there?

The same way the Canon of Scripture was decided. Do the apostles in their writings ever explain what books should be included in the Bible?

 

[Angels_Unaware]

i must have missed the answer. If the church has not infallibly defined the passage then what we have are opinions of what people think it means?

You are totally ignorant of what “infallibly define” means, so of course, you missed the whole point- on purpose- since you have no interest in truly understanding. (That happens when cults brainwash their members. They can’t even consider new ideas).

The pope does not “infallibly define” scripture, the pope “infallibly defines” dogmas.
JA4:

Not sure what this means–“Scripture is interpreted in the light of the Apostolic Teaching”. How can this be if the apostles in their writings never explain that there is some kind of communication going on between the living here and the living there?

Thank you for letting us know that you do not even comprehend the meaning of Apostolic Teaching.How are you going to convince us all to leave Rome and come join your Bible-only church if you are this ignorant of what you are arguing against?

Your statement above is circular reasoning. The apostles DID EXPLAIN the communion of the saints. THEY JUST DID NOT WRITE IT DOWN. THAT IS SACRED TRADITION.

Lampo:

The same way the Canon of Scripture was decided. Do the apostles in their writings ever explain what books should be included in the Bible?

YES. If you can comprehend the fact that Canon is NOT written, and the significance of that, and comprehend that there are mutual understandings that are NOT written, then you understand Sacred Tradition.

 

[Lampo]

YES. If you can comprehend the fact that Canon is NOT written, and the significance of that, and comprehend that there are mutual understandings that are NOT written, then you understand Sacred Tradition.

Was that directed to me? I understand quite well what Sacred Tradition is. I was trying to prove a point to JA4.

 

[Angels_Unaware]

Was that directed to me? I understand quite well what Sacred Tradition is. I was trying to prove a point to JA4.

I was re-posting your point because it was so excellent.

 

[Lampo]

I was re-posting your point because it was so excellent.

Oh, I see now. Thanks. I was reading it wrong. I do wish JA4 would answer whether she tries to lead Catholics away from the Church though.

 

[Angels_Unaware]

Oh, I see now. Thanks. I was reading it wrong. I do wish JA4 would answer whether she tries to lead Catholics away from the Church though.

Yes. What is interesting to me is here is a person who thinks that we are superstitious pagans who are “unsaved” and don’t understand grace or faith or having a relationship with Jesus. She thinks all of this, but has absolutely no first-hand knowledge on which to base it. She just “knows” her understanding is right and ours is wrong because someone has taught her that, and then drilled into her head, over and over again. Essentially, she is brainwashed. She cannot enter into a constructive debate with us because she doesn’t even truly understand Catholic theology. Her perspective is, “I am right, and I’ll figure out the details later”.

Well, wouldn’t a person who is right and has all truth be confident in examining that truth? But she isn’t. She never truly enters into a constructive, honest examination of Protestant versus Catholic ideas.

She is also deceitful and manipulative; speaking to everyone with an agenda, and not hearing anything that they say. And she thinks that God converts people by deceit and manipulation?

I have no problem telling anyone my agenda. My agenda is to explain to you why the Catholic Church represents the Church of the 1st century Christians, and why we hold to its teachings.

I wonder how many people have directed her to testimony of Scott Hahn? I am sure may have if she has been here for 2 years.

Yes, JA4- Scott Hahn is a brilliant theologian. He was vehemently anti-Catholic until his honest pursuit of truth led him into the Catholic Church.

There are many stories like that of Protestants being led into the fullness of truth in the Catholic Church, and their shock when they realized that they had deeply wrong understandings of what the Catholic Church actually taught.

 

[Lampo]

Nicely stated AU.

 

[Angels_Unaware]

Actually, JA4 has inspired me to create a new thread called “Protestant Errors”, which is what this discussion has really turned into where we can discuss what is wrong with some basic Protestant ideas. I am going to take some time to think about it first, though.

Sola Scriptura, for example, is illogical. Not illogical in the sense that an atheist would accuse the trinity of being illogical- as in, it is a mystery we have to have faith in- but illogical in that Sola Scriptura represents circular reasoning. As an analogy, the dictionary cannot interpret itself. Certainly the dictionary can interpret itself up to a point, but there will be a point in which it will fail to define meaning without the real world. The dictionary must ultimately have a reference in the real world to connect with and give meaning to its terms- it cannot contain all meaning. That is only one reason who Sola Scriptura is illogical! Another example of circular reasoning inherent in Sola Scriptura is the canon. How can Scripture be defined by a canon of men unless men have authority to interpret Scripture?

There are so many more arguments, but essentially they all flow from the same Protestant error.

One religious error is to worship the creature rather than the Creator. Another religious error is to worship a God who is separate from man and not allow God to bridge the separation. Fundamentalist religions make that error. They do not allow the truly Christian perspective to emerge, which is that God saves us because He works in us. He* bridges* the gap between man and God in the incarnation, and man and God cooperate. The Protestant error is to be so terrified of the New Age error that led Adam to try to be like God that they de-emphasize the role of human will in cooperating with the Holy Spirit.

The Holy Spirit works through the Church to bring the Word of God to us through Scripture and Sacred Tradition.

The Holy Spirit works* through *the Church in all ways. JA4 missed the post where I asked her if it were Jesus who fed the hungry in India or Mother Teresa. Which one did it? The answer is that Jesus fed the hungry through Mother Teresa. Just as saints give Jesus their body on earth to be worked through, the saints in heaven intercede (give their spirit) for Jesus to work through when they pray for us in heaven.

 

[justasking4]

Lampo;4357658]
Originally Posted by justasking4

Not sure what this means–“Scripture is interpreted in the light of the Apostolic Teaching”. How can this be if the apostles in their writings never explain that there is some kind of communication going on between the living here and the living there?

Lampo
The same way the Canon of Scripture was decided.

Are you then claiming that this was decided by a council? If so, which one?

Do the apostles in their writings ever explain what books should be included in the Bible?

In a way yes.

 

[justasking4]

Originally Posted by justasking4
It may not be possible. Just because someone is alive somewhere does not mean that they can hear you when you call their name. It may sound reasonable to pray to some saint whom you believe to be in heaven does not mean that they can hear you. The Scriptures certainly do not teach this.

Lampo
Did you miss this?:As further proof we recall that Moses and Elijah CONVERSED with Jesus at his transfiguration in Mark 9:4

I’m aware of this. Where in Mark 9:1-8was Jesus praying to them? Are there any other passages in the NT where this passage is used as a passage for praying to someone other than God?

 

[justasking4]

Angels Unaware;4357885]
Originally Posted by justasking4
i must have missed the answer. If the church has not infallibly defined the passage then what we have are opinions of what people think it means?

Angels Unaware
You are totally ignorant of what “infallibly define” means, so of course, you missed the whole point- on purpose- since you have no interest in truly understanding. (That happens when cults brainwash their members. They can’t even consider new ideas).

The pope does not “infallibly define” scripture, the pope “infallibly defines” dogmas.

Who in the church does infallibly defines and interprets Scripture since the pope does not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by JA4
Not sure what this means–“Scripture is interpreted in the light of the Apostolic Teaching”. How can this be if the apostles in their writings never explain that there is some kind of communication going on between the living here and the living there?

Angels Unaware
Thank you for letting us know that you do not even comprehend the meaning of Apostolic Teaching.How are you going to convince us all to leave Rome and come join your Bible-only church if you are this ignorant of what you are arguing against?

Huh? Where have i said i was trying to convince everyone to leave Rome???

Your statement above is circular reasoning. The apostles DID EXPLAIN the communion of the saints. THEY JUST DID NOT WRITE IT DOWN. THAT IS SACRED TRADITION.

Where is this SACRED TRADITION to be found? Is it in some document in the Vatican somewhere?

Originally Posted by Lampo
The same way the Canon of Scripture was decided. Do the apostles in their writings ever explain what books should be included in the Bible?

Angels Unaware
YES. If you can comprehend the fact that Canon is NOT written, and the significance of that, and comprehend that there are mutual understandings that are NOT written, then you understand Sacred Tradition.

Did Jesus and His apostles know exactly what books were inspired-inerrant for the OT canon?