Wow...

Wow...

 

Do you want a crack at it, or should I? Or should we wait to see if any of the Catholics on here take issue with him?

Do you want a crack at it, or should I? Or should we wait to see if any of the Catholics on here take issue with him?

I defer to you Sir... :thumb:

For the most part I agree with you. Please note however, that we Catholics are not sacrificing him over and over again, but instead are re-presenting the same single Sacrifice as he commanded us to do.

 

 

 

Clearly it would be ridiculous to elevate the Church above the Lord. Lets make sure we see things as they are. The Lord founded the Church. The Church gave us the Bible. The Lord left his authority to his Church, not to a book that had not even been written at the time of Jesus's death.

 

As for only Christians making it to Heaven, what kind of a God would create a person only to condemn him to hell without any chance at salvation?

 

 

There was a Protestant Revolution because Martin Luther in an effort to correct various abuses determined that he, and not the vicar of Christ, the holder of the keys, knew better. Going directly against Scripture, he privately interpreted the Bible, he changed the wording of Scripture, and he disregarded 1500 years of teaching that had come from the Apostles.

 

 

 

 

In the 1st Letter of Peter, all of us, i.e. fishermen, carpenters, and highly educated people are warned not to privately interpret Scripture. Remember that Scripture itself confirms that the Church is the bulwark of our faith- not the Bible.

 

With all respect, until you understand this point, this discussion is probably fruitless.

 

I hope when you say "the church" you are talking about all who has been saved by the blood of Jesus Christ. All saved christians are the church. When we speak of being Babtist, Catholic, Methadist ect... they are not churches we belong to, they are types of religion you belong to, there is only one church and everyone who has salvation belongs to it. God said where ever there is two or more christians gathered together he will be among them. Remember, God tells us that the only weapon we have agains Satan is the truth and the truth is the word of God and we call that the Bible.

That thought came from Jesus Christ not Catholic doctrine. Unless you are saying that all things that Jesus said and the church of Acts are Catholic doctrine.

I am saying Catholic Doctrine came from Jesus and his followers down the line and alot of times when people try to use Christian theology to prove a point in a religious debate they are fighting with themselves. We have all been studying from the same text for thousands of years and we don't all agree on the details, that doesn't mean we don't have the same basic tenants. Most the time people get caught up on the minutia trying to point out why one side is wrong and their side is right. And half the time they don't understand the principles that they are trying to argue against. I once was told on this site by a non Catholic that we weren't living as Christians because we Catholics weren't allowed to eat meat except for fish. I had to explain to the poster that was not the case and that there is only like 8 days out of the year we refrain from eating meat but he swore that his church taught him that we don't eat meat. Anyway my point is that we all pretty much agree on most things, and that the things that are different are largely misunderstandings over the minutia. Catholics are Christians and we all share basic tenants of faith and we should focus on that instead of worrying about the details. Let Baptist be Baptist and let Catholics be Catholics. There is no need to preach to the converted.

In the 1st Letter of Peter, all of us, i.e. fishermen, carpenters, and highly educated people are warned not to privately interpret Scripture.

 

CF, if you don't mind, tell us where in First Peter are you seeing this warning?

 

I've always read 1 Pet 3:15 as an admonition for us to study the scriptures and be ready to provide a scriptural basis for the faith we have in Christ as our resurrected Savior. I've never read Peter's words as a warning for us not to study.

 

Thanks.

CF, if you don't mind, tell us where in First Peter are you seeing this warning?

 

I've always read 1 Pet 3:15 as an admonition for us to study the scriptures and be ready to provide a scriptural basis for the faith we have in Christ as our resurrected Savior. I've never read Peter's words as a warning for us not to study.

 

Thanks.

Maybe he meant 2 Peter 1:20- Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

Wow...

 

Do you want a crack at it, or should I? Or should we wait to see if any of the Catholics on here take issue with him?

:laugh: One would think that our mod's would at least show some respect to someone giving their beliefs.

 

Paging rockmom, paging rockmom, I need help....

 

I'll try, but to be honest, I'm caught here with two conflicting emotions:

 

1) I seriously would love to be able to explain to people why we believe what we believe. And feel I have provided oodles and oodles of information, and that it's being met by many with selective reasoning. I was fortunate to attend religious instruction for 12 years of my life, and this included studying other religions. Nowhere in my studies did we focus on tearing down another religious beliefs. What we did was a compare and contrast of our Belief vs. other beliefs. Never did we try to dissect and tear down the leadership organization of another religion. I can remember dating a Southern Baptist boy, going to his church services with his family, and being singled out by the preacher and condemned to hell, complete with finger point, and spittle flying...because I was a Catholic. My grandfather forbade my grandmother from practicing Catholicism. I have NEVER attended a Catholic mass in 41 years that called out any single religion/or individual and condemned it/them.

 

2) The sneaking suspicion that I can't shake, that many here are asking me to defend my faith in a fashion that is designed to mock my responses, and to some how show me the "error of my ways. I'm continually trying to squash that suspicion, as I truely want to believe that there is a genuine interest in understanding Catholicism, and not simply a desire to attack it.

 

I'll try to dig in and address some of the recent questions later, but I need a little time to do some work!

Maybe he meant 2 Peter 1:20- Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

 

Of course, that must be it. However, studying 2 Peter, that verse shouldn't be taken out of context or used as a warning for believers not to study the Word.

 

Peter here is forewarning of false teachers. The church was still in its infancy and he knew they would be subject to many false teachers and they needed to be ready to recognize them.

 

The scripture he is talking about is the Old Testament Prophesies and the Greek word ginomai, being used and translated here as interpretation, more commonly deals with "origin". Thus not of private origin. Peter is saying that Scripture has been revealed by God to holy men who recorded it. The OT came from God, not from the prophets own individual invention.

 

To get the meaning here, you really have to read verses 19-21 together.

 

¹⁹We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: ²⁰Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. ²¹For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. - KJV

 

The implied question is "How can you recognize a real prophetic Word?" The reply given is, "No prophecy of Scripture ever arises from human ingenuity, for never did a single Old Testament prophecy come at the impulse of a man; what those men spoke was the Word of God because they were being influenced by the Holy Spirit"

 

Peter was giving them the means to detect false prophets, and he goes on in Chapter 2 to be more direct on the subject.

To address some of the questions regarding why Catholics pray to saints, and the reverence of Mary by Catholics:

 

After much reading, and some discussion with a priest:

 

 

Some very basic questions need to be asked:

 

Do you believe that the prayers of the living on your behalf can impact the outcome of an intercession?

Do you ask for prayers from your friends, family or faith community when there are times of crisis, etc?

If the prayers of the living can intercede to God on our behalf, why not those that have gone before us and we believe to be in Heaven with God already?

Would not their prayers of intercession also be considered as valuable, if not more, of those of theliving?

Saints are not "worshiped", they are HONORED. The same with Mary, but she is revered even futher for her selection by God to be the Mother of His Son.

 

To me, it's a very simple, logical conclusion drawn from the belief in Salvation and the belief that we have souls, and there is a Heaven. If we have souls, it stands to reason that the soul's ability to intercede is actually enhanced by the fact that it has ascended into Heaven and is in the presence of God already.

Some very basic questions need to be asked:

 

Do you believe that the prayers of the living on your behalf can impact the outcome of an intercession?Not if I am dead. Prayers of the living while I am alive, yes

Do you ask for prayers from your friends, family or faith community when there are times of crisis, etc? yes

If the prayers of the living can intercede to God on our behalf, why not those that have gone before us and we believe to be in Heaven with God already? I would like to see the Scriptural basis (not a Papal decree) of this thought that we should pray to them and that they would even hear us. In regards to prayer, I think of Jesus model prayer and it was directed to God. While others can pray for us, we can go straight to God in our prayers because of Jesus. I am not sure that anymore weight is given to a prayer from me asking and a prayer of 100 asking for the same thing for me. I think God would view my request as important as if it was a single request.

Would not their prayers of intercession also be considered as valuable, if not more, of those of theliving?I don't think they would necessarily would be of more value as God loves all and wishes all to come to Him. But I also think God is sadden because He knows that some will CHOSE NOT to come to him.

Saints are not "worshiped", they are HONORED. The same with Mary, but she is revered even futher for her selection by God to be the Mother of His Son.I found it difficult to separate worship and honored when you are praying to them. I believe God and Jesus are the only two that we should be praying to. And to confuse the matter, since they are one, the ONLY entity we should be praying to.

Some very basic questions need to be asked:

 

Do you believe that the prayers of the living on your behalf can impact the outcome of an intercession?Not if I am dead. Prayers of the living while I am alive, yes

Do you ask for prayers from your friends, family or faith community when there are times of crisis, etc? yes

If the prayers of the living can intercede to God on our behalf, why not those that have gone before us and we believe to be in Heaven with God already? I would like to see the Scriptural basis (not a Papal decree) of this thought that we should pray to them and that they would even hear us.

Would not their prayers of intercession also be considered as valuable, if not more, of those of theliving?I don't think they would necessarily would be of more value as God loves all and wishes all to come to Him. But I also think God is sadden because He knows that some will CHOSE NOT to come to him.

Saints are not "worshiped", they are HONORED. The same with Mary, but she is revered even futher for her selection by God to be the Mother of His Son.I found it difficult to separate worship and honored when you are praying to them. I believe God and Jesus are the only two that we should be praying to. And to confuse the matter, since they are one, the ONLY entity we should be praying to.

 

As you are more versed in Scriptural text than I, what Scriptural basis is there for the prayers of the living? What is the difference between asking someone to pray for you, and sending a prayer to ask a saint to pray for you?

As you are more versed in Scriptural text than I, what Scriptural basis is there for the prayers of the living? What is the difference between asking someone to pray for you, and sending a prayer to ask a saint to pray for you?

I would have to study that and cannot give you a quick answer. The first Scripture that does jump to my mind is the one in Revelations that says those in Heaven spend eternity glorifying God through praise. I don't ever recall reading that those in Heaven spend time hearing prayers to them and then going to God and ask for those things.

 

Also, I pointed out in my answers, I do not know that there is anything Scriptural to indicate that a prayer of my entire congregation carries more weight with God than the prayer of one member of the congregation concerning a single issue. I would think that God gives as much weight to my single voice as he does to a 1,000 voices. If not, than that would mean he cares more about the workings at Southeast and their thousands than the small country church of 10-20.

 

But that is just me trying to level the playing field between urban and rural.

If we believe in eternal life, it would seem logical that we would be on equally firm ground to ask for the prayers of those who have moved on to the "next level" as we would be to ask for the prayers of those who remain on this level with us.