P
Pixie_Dust
Guest
James 5:16
- Status
J
justasking4
Guest
Just because it is said a man can be righteous it does not mean he has never sinned nor cannot sin…
P
Pixie_Dust
Guest
I was referring to the exhortation to pray for one another, and that the prayers of the righteous “availeth much” (KJV). Who more righteous than those who are in the presence of God, who have been changed from corruptible to incorruptible, from mortal to immortal? We know from John’s vision in Revelation that they are aware of what is happening on earth, and they are praying for us. We also know that there is no sin in heaven, so they are certainly more righteous than any person on earth you might ask to pray for you. The communion of saints is so very clear in Scripture, I’m not sure why it’s so very hard for you to accept.
D
dougfreed
Guest
I would like to discuss this one and don’t need any more points especially posting out of topic lets go here forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=4228816#post4228816
J
justasking4
Guest
The context of James 5:16 is not about someone who supposedly is in heaven but about the righteous in this world. In fact i can’t think of any passage in Scripture that speaks of someone actually praying in heaven.
The context again determines what is going on. In Revelation all we see is not a prayer but a yearning for justice and vindication.
Couple of problems here. One is that we don’t if those who are in heaven can communicate with the living here. The only One Who can do that is the Lord Jesus. Secondly, the Scriptures never exhort us to pray to anyone but God.
I understand it and the way Catholics explain it is clear. However, even though it may be clear it goes to far in asserting that we can communicate with dead saints. That is something the Scriptures never teach.
P
Pixie_Dust
Guest
So all that stuff in Revelation about the “prayers of the saints” being presented to God is not really prayers, just a yearning for justice and vindication. Gotcha.
Nobody’s trying to get those in heaven to communicate with us, we are asking them to pray for us to the Lord our God.
You’ve heard the Lord Jesus communicate with you? Audibly? And here I thought you were a Baptist.
Yes, we pray to God, and we ask others to pray for us and with us to God. Don’t you have prayer request time at your church? When someone asks (prays) that you pray for them, do you tell them that they shouldn’t ask (pray to) you, rather they should just go directly to God and not bother you? “Pray” simply means “ask.” Ever read Shakespeare?They. are. not. dead. Mt 22:31-32 - “But regarding the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God: I AM THE GOD OF ABRAHAM, AND THE GOD OF ISAAC, AND THE GOD OF JACOB’? He is not the God of the dead but of the living.”
G
guanophore
Guest
Well, speak for yourself. It may limit those who have chosen to limit themselves to the portion of God’s revelation in Scripture. But for those of us who have received the fullness of the faith, we are not limited by such artificial criteria.
Such a statement reveals a narrow understanding of “pray”, which really means to supplicate. Actually, it is a conversation, just like Mary had with Gabriel, and Zechariah had with Gabriel. These conversations are possible, and are biblical.
Jesus says that the angels behold the face of God in heaven, and that is why we should not be abusive of others (he was speaking especially about children).
“Take care that you do not despise one of these little ones; for, I tell you, in heaven their angels continually see the face of my Father in heaven.” Matt 18:10-12
If the angels were not able to advocate on our behalf, why would it be relevant?
Both Mary and Zechariah asked questions (supplication/prayer) of Gabriel, and received answers. To assert that people cannot have a conversation with an angel is not even biblical!
I agree. However, the reference to “what is written” is about Paul using his own experience and that of others as an example. When you take it out of context to support SS there is a pandemic of errors.
Well, this is a sad commentary on the work of God. If this is the case, then surely, Christ died in vain. If it was only for a book, and no human soul, that He wished to exemplify Himself, He fell far short, since He founded a Church, instead of a book.
On the contrary, His spirit is at work in them that believe, and in us He is glorified:
Gal 1:24
“And they glorified God because of me.”
We who believe are His living letter:
2 Cor 3:2-3
“You yourselves are our letter, written on our hearts, to be known and read by all; 3 and you show that you are a letter of Christ, prepared by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts.”
If you believe that God is not found in His people, then you are blind indeed to what He intends to do for humanity.
Perhaps your trust has been so wounded by others that you must cling to that which lacks a living soul.
G
guanophore
Guest
John 13:15
15 For I have set you an example, that you also should do as I have done…"
Jesus is our example. He made sure that His disciples witnessed Him having conversation with Moses and Elijah. He could have gone up there alone, as He did on other occasions. However, he chose Peter, James, and John, to witness his transfiguration and converstation with those who have passed beyond the boundaries of this world.
G
guanophore
Guest
Those who are kept in heaven cannot sin, for they have been separated forever from sin. Their prayers, since they are righteous, are very powerful.
C
Church_Militant
Guest
So GOD gave us the Bible to insure that we don’t do certain things. I totally agree with you you need to be careful what you read every religion will twist their writings to suit them that’s why i think the Bible is the true church. Hope this isn’t to far off topic…Really? Let’s follow out that line of reason and see if it holds true for your particular non-Catholic belief system.
Virtually every discussion of the early church…verifiable through historic documents, shows that the church began its existence with a 73 book canon of inspired scripture.
Why then, if as you assert, the Bible does not change, did the founders of your theology and their modern post reformation step children remove 7 books from it and then propagate that it does not change and that you have a complete Bible?
This basically speaks to the core of the problems that that and most all other such sites have.
C
Church_Militant
Guest
discussion of the early church…verifiable through historic documents, shows that the church began its existence with a 73 book canon of inspired scripture.
Why then, if as you assert, the Bible does not change, did the founders of your theology and their modern post reformation step children remove 7 books from it and then propagate that it does not change and that you have a complete Bible?
This basically speaks to the core of the problems that that and most all other such sites have.C’mon Doug…don’t dodge this. You made a statement that I challenge because your own theological position in fact refutes it based on known historical facts.
Before you can go on to make any kind of reputable and substantive case for anything else you need to respond and justify this, because if not then your whole religion sways precariously in the new winds of doctrines of men. :juggle:
R
RobHom
Guest
That limit is placed on God and His realm only by those who embrace “sola scriptura”…which is nothing more than a scheme devised by a mere man.
Splitting hairs. And nowhere in the Bible does it say or even intimate that “sola scriptura” is “inspired” or necessary.
Again, you profess belief in a scheme devised by a mere man as justification for the sum total of your beliefs, simultaneously limiting God.
Only because the Catholic Church established the Canon of the Bible. That they did not include other writings does not officially discount all else as “speculation”.
R
RobHom
Guest
Believe me when I say that I say this with all kindness and charity:
You have been victimized to a great extent by false teachers who specialize in historical revisionism, among other things.
The Old Testament is a history of the Jews and prophecies of the prophets, etc… You might want to take a breather and go to this site and properly acquaint yourself with the Bible starting here with the Old Testament, also known to the Hebrew people as the “Torah”. jewfaq.org/torah.htm
The New Testament was written many years after Christ established the Church and gave Peter the Keys… and the last books of the New Testament were written over a span of several hundred years.
R
RobHom
Guest
It has been discuss quite a bit. Why redirect? Dare I ask if the “learning curve” is getting too steep, or if you are finding that you have been misinformed as to facts?
M
Mason1971
Guest
What are you saying here? I do not want to jump to conclusions but it sorta seems you are saying the books of the New Testament were not written by the people they claim to be written by? Just clarifying to make sure. Because we do not teach that
D
dougfreed
Guest
I understand that books were removed and I also believe that it was a God inspired decision. I do not sway in my stand. Show me where your 7 books you have any different info that isn’t in mine. I think there could be books that you guys took out that could answer some questions.
J
justasking4
Guest
The DC"s were not considered fully inspired until Trent declared them so. These books were called Deutrocanical which was a second canon.
J
justasking4
Guest
One of the things you will find in one of the 7 books that Catholics have is praying for the dead.
J
justasking4
Guest
Actually the NT was finished by the 90’s. It took until the 4th for the church to offically recognize the NT canon of 27 books.
D
dougfreed
Guest
where?
- Status