Protestants:If you don't pray to Saints, do you pray to Angels?

[Pax]

:bowdown: I don’t wanna be rude but GOD told us in his ten command ments HE said I AM THE LORD YOUR GOD and there is no other god so I think if GOD want us to pray for angels then there will something in writing and GOD will never allow this because HE IS THE ALMIGHTY GOD AND HE MUST BE worship alone through his SON JESUS.

We do not worship the angels and saints. This point has already been addressed earlier in the thread.

Please read the thread to see the explanations and scriptural support for what we actually believe and do in regards to prayer.

To pray does not mean “to worship.” Prayer to God often contains worship. Prayer to the angels and saints is for intercession and may contain elements of honor, but never contains any elements of worship which are reserved to God alone.

I hope this helps.

 

[Pax]

Mgrfin,

…
…
I do know that this as well as other books (they have a name as a whole and I can not remember) are not even accepted as Scripture by Judaism. Since it came from Jews and they reject it, than I am more inclined to agree with them at this point in my walk (Pilgrimmage). I admit that I am ignorant on this subject and need to look into it more. I will take Gods Word over Tradition to the grave and my ultimate hope, beyond. If my interpretations agree with other people who try to understand and read the Bible then maybe we are onto something and it is nothing new at all. I sometimes wonder if the Catholic Church is not happy that bibles are so easily accessed today.

The 7 books missing in non-Catholic bibles are called the Deuterocanonical Books. Protestants refer to them as Apocrapha. The history of all of this is really quite interesting and I am happy to say that the Catholic Church is actually thrilled that bibles are readily available. The history of the reproduction of the bible texts is quite revealing in terms of the Church and her attitudes toward scripture. I’ll give you a quick summary that you can easily verify with historical data.

THE 1st PRINTED BIBLE was the Gutenberg Bible printed in 1452 (i.e.the Latin Vulgate Catholic-bible with all 73 books). Over 200 copies printed in the 1st edition.
There were124 editions in the first 50 years, and all were sponsered by the catholic church. By the time Luther’s German New Testament appeared in 1522 there were 14 complete printed editions of the Catholic Bible in German. Parallel with this in time were 11 Italian translations, 10 French, 2 Bohemian, 1 Flemish, and 1 Russian.

1st complete Catholic ‘‘modern’’ english translation was the Douay Rheims NT 1582, OT 1610.

The English Language as we know it today did not emerge as a definite language until the 15th century.

King James version was first published in 1610. The seven dueterocanonical books were included at the back of the 1610 edition and there was a penalty of one year in prison if a KJV bible was printed without these books.

Reformation began in 1517

Wyclif’s was a pre-Ref.
Old English translation written around 1380.

Aelfric, Catholic Archbishop of Canterbury from 994 to1005, translated 1st seven books and the Book of Job into old English.
Between 721 and 901, various writers (i.e. Bede, Eadfrith, Alcuin, and King Alfred are believed to have translated parts or all of the bible into ‘‘Old English.’’

The name Vulgate means ‘‘disseminated’’ or people’s bible. The Latin Vulgate was translated by the Catholic monk, Jerome around the year 384. The Catholic canon of scripture was settled at the Councils of Rome, Carthage and also Hippo in A.D. 393. This is the identicle canon as that of the Council of Trent, 1546.

Luther rejected the 7 deuterocanonical books of the bible and also eliminated Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelaton from the NT, but later Protestants reinserted them. Today the Catholic and Protestant NT books are identicle. Until 1873 the authorized version of the King James had the 7 books they call the apocrapha. Some new editions are restoring these books.

 

[vocatio]

King James version was first published in 1610. The seven dueterocanonical books were included at the back of the 1610 edition and there was a penalty of one year in prison if a KJV bible was printed without these books.

I have received word from a friend that saw it with his own eyes. He saw a first print of the KJV that had the “Apocrypha” integreated in the original orders, just like the “Catholic” Bible.

Further, * the Jews at the time the New Testatment was actually written did accept what is referred to as the Deuterocanonical texts. Martin Luther tried to take them out. I also learned that after the KJV exclued the Apocrypha from the back of the bible but the references were left for many years later. They finally removed those references. The entire claim is just rediculous if you honestly look at it. Even the “Protestant accepted” New Testament referrs to at least some of these texts. I’ve heard this spill so many times. It took me 17 years to finally realize on my own that the Church is the authority, not the bible. It’s scripural. So is “praying” to Angels. I listened to Patrick Madrid today on the Catholic Answers radio, apparently he has a good book out on this topic. It’s about time that many of the Protestants start learning real Catholic teachings and why the Church has always believed it. My mother-in-law’s answer to my wife’s question about where were the Christians right after the first apostles passed on the faith. She replied “on the banks of river, under trees”. Even Christ said that the Church would be protected to the ends of time. Assuming that Catholic subdued the early Christians is exactly opposite what the scriptures claim. You’re facts are messed up. I figured much of this out on my own. That’s why I was trying to convert to Orthodoxy. I did this because I read the early church fathers and realized that I had been duped by well meaining [but misguided] Proselytizing Evangelist.

God bless.

Hoping to start a formal graduate theology program within the next year or two.*

 

[Pax]

Now for the Jewish Canon of Scriptures. Please be advised that Jesus and the apostles quoted primarily from the Greek Septuagint OT scriptures. This version of the Jewish scriptures included the seven Deuterocanonical Books found in the Catholic Bible.

At the time of Jesus the Jewish Canon was not settled. The Sadducees only accepted the Pentateuch which is the first five books of the OT. Unlike the Pharisees, the Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection, the immortality of the soul, or in angels. The Jewish canon was still under review at the Jewish counsel of Jamnia in 90 AD, but wasn’t actually settled until 200 AD.

The early Christians/Catholics rejected any Jewish decisions concerning the Christian canon because:

1. The Jewish leadershiop rejected all of the NT scriptures.
2. Their efforts to settle their own canon was in reaction to Christianity which they rejected. Their rejection of Christianity had an influence on their decisions concerning their own OT canon.

The Sadducees lack of belief in the resurrection is interesting on another canonical level. If you check your KJV or other Protestant bible you will not find the word resurrection anywhere in the pages of the OT. If you check a Catholic bible you will find the resurrection mentioned in 2 Maccabees 7:14. This biblical narrative tells of a pagan king that tried to force a family of brothers and their mother to defile themselves with forbidden food. They were tortured and then executed one by one. When the fourth brother was near death he cried out, “Ours is the better choice, to meet death at men’s hands, yet relying on God’s promise that we shall be raised up by him; whereas for you there can be no resurrection to new life.” Verse 20 says this about the mother: “But the mother was especially admirable and worthy of honourable remembrance, for she watched the death of seven sons in the course of a single day, and bravely endured it because of her hopes in the Lord.”

The Book of Hebrews in the NT makes a pointed reference to this event from 2 Maccabees 7. Scholars both Catholic and Protestant recognize that Hebrews 11:35 is a direct reference to Maccabees 7. The passage in Hebrews says, “Women received their dead by resurrection. Some were tortured, refusing to accept release, that they might rise again to a better life.”

Much more can be said on the topic of the OT Canon. A good Catholic link can be found at: catholic-legate.com/articles/dcbooks.html

 

[Ginger2]

every bible only christian believes they are being guided by GOD, and yet they all contradict each other, I Wish the protestants would atleast stop saying they are being guided by the Holy Spirit that way it will no longer be insulting towards our Lord…

I find this comment particularly amusing as I was on another forum awhile back.

The Catholics began accusing four Protestants, including me, of all being the same person because we believed the same things “It’s like they’re clones.” Said one guy.

I made a request for the moderator to verify that I was not perpetrating this falsehood.

When I was cleared not one even apologized for any of the nasty and sarcastic comment they had said to me.

So, you can see why the above quote, “they all contradict each other”, amuses me.

BTW, On the other forum, the four of us turned out to be from different denominations.

 

[Ginger2]

It took me 17 years to finally realize on my own that the Church is the authority, not the bible. It’s scripural.

That strikes me funny! The Church is the absolute authority, and the way you prove it is the Bible

BTW, Catholics consider Bible and Tradition equal. You have just put Tradittion above Scripture. :tsktsk:

 

[MariaG]

That strikes me funny! The Church is the absolute authority, and the way you prove it is the Bible

BTW, Catholics consider Bible and Tradition equal. You have just put Tradittion above Scripture. :tsktsk:

Well laugh away because this I frequently and not without irony say that I was led to the Catholic through scripture alone and the leading of the Holy Spirit.

Why should it surprise you or make you laugh so hard that Catholic Christians actually claim to be spirit led through scripture alone for the truth they have found in the Catholic CHurch? Or only Protestants allowed to be led by the Holy Spirit through scripture alone?

The only difference is Catholic Christians actually CONFIRM what they believe they have been led to since scripture warns us that we can be misled. And where does scripture itself tell us to look? The Church.

God bless,
Maria

 

[Ginger2]

MariaG,

I think you have misunderstood.

I am forever being told by Catholics that you can’t trust Scriptures to lead you to truth, because no individual can interpret Scriptures apart from the RC. ONly the RC can accurately interpret Scriptures. Why? Because the Holy Spirit is not given to anyone but the Apostles and the direct descendants of Peter. (ie the Pope)

But you keep testifying that is not true. The Holy Spirit can and does speak to individuals seeking the truth.

I agree with you MariaG!

 

[Pax]

I find this comment particularly amusing as I was on another forum awhile back.

The Catholics began accusing four Protestants, including me, of all being the same person because we believed the same things “It’s like they’re clones.” Said one guy.

I made a request for the moderator to verify that I was not perpetrating this falsehood.

When I was cleared not one even apologized for any of the nasty and sarcastic comment they had said to me.

So, you can see why the above quote, “they all contradict each other”, amuses me.

BTW, On the other forum, the four of us turned out to be from different denominations.

Ginger,

Since no one apologized to you for whatever lack of charity existed, I would like to do so now on their behalf. Please be advised that follow ups on forums can really be hit and miss. I sincerely apologize on behalf of those that may have offended you. I do so even if they themselves are not already sorry. May you go in peace and may we heal one another through our Christian love.

God Bless.

 

[Pax]

MariaG,

I think you have misunderstood.

I am forever being told by Catholics that you can’t trust Scriptures to lead you to truth, because no individual can interpret Scriptures apart from the RC. ONly the RC can accurately interpret Scriptures. Why? Because the Holy Spirit is not given to anyone but the Apostles and the direct descendants of Peter. (ie the Pope)

But you keep testifying that is not true. The Holy Spirit can and does speak to individuals seeking the truth.

I agree with you MariaG!

I think the problem is more nuanced than you suggest. There is no doubt that the Holy Spirit can and does use scripture to lead us to truth. Likewise, the Holy Spirit might use a person, a poem, a sunset, or many other things to bring someone to truth. Obviously, scripture has a greater hierarchical position in this than a poem or a sunset. Needless to say, there are those that have read the scriptures in their entirety and they remain unphased and unchanged. There are also those that have never been brought to the realization that God even exists even though the wonders of nature have provided that insight to others.

When a Catholic is critical of the non-Catholic generalization of Sola Scriptura it is not without merit. The Church is described by scripture as “the pillar and foundation of the truth.” Scripture does not even make that same claim for itself. Likewise, Peter warns against personal interpretation of scripture[see 2 Peter 1:20-21].

The empirical evidence and the scriptural testimony against sola scriptura should give anyone pause. Unfortunately, most non-Catholic, bible-only Christians will not budge at all even when confronted with these facts. This is what sets up the friction and conflicts over the function and character of the Church and Scripture. The fact is that there is no conflict and they are not mutually exclusive. Non-Catholics do not see it that way.

Most non-Catholics look to John 16:13 for their justification of sola scriptura. The verse says: “When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.” The problem is that Jesus is speaking specifically to the apostles and is not speaking to every individual. He is speaking of the Holy Spirit coming to them at Pentecost. The context makes this clear as we can see in the following:

“I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you. All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you. ‘A little while, and you will see me no more; again a little while, and you will see me.’”

This leading into all truth is an apostolic/church charism that isn’t given to each of us individually. This is why Peter makes his warning against individual interpretation of scripture. The scriptures give us the truth. The Holy Spirit gives us the truth. The Church gives us the truth. We deceive ourselves if we leave out any one of them, because we then place ourselves above an authority that is higher than ourselves in the hierarchy of protecting and promulgating the truth.

I hope this helps.

 

[JOUBERAR]

We do not worship the angels and saints. This point has already been addressed earlier in the thread.

Please read the thread to see the explanations and scriptural support for what we actually believe and do in regards to prayer.

To pray does not mean “to worship.” Prayer to God often contains worship. Prayer to the angels and saints is for intercession and may contain elements of honor, but never contains any elements of worship which are reserved to God alone.

I hope this helps.

:bowdown: GOD never told us to pray to angels, saints or ancestor spirits we will recieve only the elements of honor from GOD and CHRIST.

 

[Pax]

Have you read this thread?

 

[mgrfin]

That strikes me funny! The Church is the absolute authority, and the way you prove it is the Bible

BTW, Catholics consider Bible and Tradition equal. You have just put Tradittion above Scripture. :tsktsk:

As usual, Ginger, you misstate our Theology. Scripture and Tradition are not on equal footing. Tradition trumphs Scripture all the time.

There is nothing funny about it. In order to talk to Protestant we have to play by 'Luther rules", that is quote Scripture whenever possible. Why, you would accept the teaching Magisterium of the Church. You would take ‘as Gospel’ the canons of the Council of Trent?

Peace

PS I think you should start your own thread so people can commiserate with you on your ‘poor treatment’ by the Catholics on the site.

 

[Ginger2]

Pax,

The problem goes both ways. Catholics seem to think “Scripture alone” means that is all there is and nothing more is needed. A Catholic in another thread said exactly that.

Scripture is the inerrant Word of God. It is perfect and complete. It is one way that God communicates to His people. It contains everything we need to know about God.

But Scripture does not contain all information for all time. It doesn’t mean there is no other way for God to speak to us and give us guidance.

Also, your interpretation of “the Church” is confined to the RC. Protestants understand “the Church” to mean all people who belong to God. (ie Luke 9:49 Then John said in reply, “Master, we saw someone casting out demons in your name and we tried to prevent him because he does not follow in our company.” 50 Jesus said to him, “Do not prevent him, for whoever is not against you is for you.”)

Concerning 2 Peter 1:20 Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, 21 for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God.

Excuse me, but this does not say that the RC is the only place to find truth. It says that the prophets did not speak according to their own teachings, but “moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God.”

 

[Pax]

Excuse me Ginger, but I never claimed that the Church is the only source of truth. Please reread my post. Likewise, Peter is talking about personal interpretation and he condemns it. The quote from Peter is clear.

 

[Pax]

I realize that Protestants view the “church” differently from Catholics. That is one of the very reasons they are Protestants. The Catholic view of the “church” is IMHO the correct one and is a more accurate view based on scripture which we both agree to be inerrant. Please note that scripture is inerrant but those that go about free of guidance and seem unfettered in their interpretations are not.

 

[Ginger2]

I thought I made clear that it is other Catholics who claim the RC is the only source of truth. Including comments in this thread.

Peter is where we disagree. I believe he is saying that the Scriptures were not the personal interpretation of many men about who God is, but rather, that God revealed Himself to the men who wrote the Scriptures.

 

[Pax]

Pax,

The problem goes both ways. Catholics seem to think “Scripture alone” means that is all there is and nothing more is needed. A Catholic in another thread said exactly that.
…
…

Unfortunately, most non-Catholic Bible Christians tell us Catholics that very thing. I have had only a handful of non-Catholic Christians give a more sophisticated and nuanced view of sola scriptura. I believe that even the nuanced view is insufficient.

 

[Pax]

I thought I made clear that it is other Catholics who claim the RC is the only source of truth. Including comments in this thread.

Peter is where we disagree. I believe he is saying that the Scriptures were not the personal interpretation of many men about who God is, but rather, that God revealed Himself to the men who wrote the Scriptures.

Are you saying that other Catholics including those on this thread actually believe that the Catholic Church is the only source of truth and that the bible is not a source of truth? I don’t think so.

 

[Ginger2]

One other thing is that Scriptures clearly tell us that some will twist the Scriptures to their own liking. There is nothing you or anyone else can do about that, short of prayer, because it is our freewill.

Also, Jesus even admitted he often spoke in parables so the unbelieving would not understand.