Priest of Medjugorje Visons of Mary Defrocked

Bob, (bolding mine)

Regarding your use of the term "Mariology", I tend to prefer the term "Maryolatry". It tends to keep the idolatrous nature of the practice "front and center" as they say.

 

So, what you are basically saying is Moses is alive. This is based on a book that all extant versions do not include Jude's statement yet can be determined it most likely. So you are indicating that Moses had recieved the resurrection of the body based on Jewish tradition as stipulated by a book of the Psuedopigraphia? Is this correct? Remember 1 Enoch, the book of Jubilees of which the assumption of moses is a part is all based on Jewish tradition and was writen about 200 years BC. How is this any different from a Catholic holding to Christian Tradition that Mary was assumed or in dormition who also received the ressurection and thus they are able to pray to her as Christ spoke with Elijah and Moses. Note we have no idea the content of their conversation. And aren't all Christians under the promise of the resurrection thus the dead in Christ are more aptly alive rather than dead? A Catholic or Orthodox do no more than ask these "alive" saints to pray for them. It seems to me you are using the same argument yet I find this tact very interesting:

You are refering to Authenticity of selected books. Obviously, this hints at canon and acceptance yet you ignore the history in the compilation of acceptance. Note: In Jesus day there was no solidified "canon" of scripture. The Qumran find indicates that there were books that were specially selected by that Essene community but there was no select "canon" of books. Most Jews through out the world at that time save the palastinian Jews used the Greek Translations of books known as LXX. Paul and the other apostles most definately selected these works in their referrence of writen letters to the different churches. We find that early christians used all sorts of writings that are now not canon such as the Sheperd. The Jews actually don't even make a convention of selected approved books until at possibly Jamia or more likely even later. I suspect around the same time period when Christians themselves were selecting approved works. Note 300 AD we have the Jerusalem Tamud and 500 AD the more accepted Babylonian Talmud. 500 AD we have the Massoretic convention and translation. Christianity was already well established! Christian Canon was first selected at the Council of Laodicea, then Rome, then Hippo, then finally the Council of Carthage. Note Each of these councils which established canon for christian use and would not come into queston until 1100 years later are inclusive of the books mentioned such as maccabees, Ben Sirach, and the rest. So where does the authority ultimately lie? In a Jewish convention well after the founding of Christianity as a response to Christian converts? Or the Churches themselves which were inclusive of books that were accepted for 1100 years by all Christiandom? The Catholic would say History, convention, favors them with regard to books chosen from which they respond. So you are reliant on a books that is at best speculative of Moses resurection. Jude only quotes that Moses' body was argued over and does not mention the ressurrection of Moses to validate Jesus discussion with Moses. This is based on Jewish Traditon. Christian tradition mentions the assumption or dormition of Mary by which following the same logic is ameniable to your argument to favor Jesus discussion with Moses. Hmmmm.

 

The same is true of John as he writes the book of Revelation - all Bible scholars still point to areas of Isaiah being quoted by John.

The principle is solid - I believe it is even beyond dispute.

Agreed. That is the case with all Bible writers.

It remains to be seen if any Bible writer affirms a revealed account (such as the dispute with the Devil which could only have been given by divine revelation to the author of the book - the Assumption of Moses) while claiming that the source was not of of God.

That point is certainly disputed in many circles.

in Christ,

Bob

 

It is based on the book of Jude - as the inspired author quotes from the book "The Assumption of Moses" referring to a detail divinely revealed to the author regarding a dispute with the devil over the body of Moses. (Body of Moses about to be resurrected as it is reported).

All scholars agree that we have only a portion of the book surviving to this day. But both tradition and the title of the book help us know what the book was teaching.

So yes - Moses "alive" in Matt 17 -- instead of "consulting the dead" and instead of "a seance" - as is so often argued by our Catholic friends.

It appears you feel that Jude never should have quoted such a book as having a divine revelation that was trustworhty and factual.

I normally would agree that we should not do such a thing - but since Jude has confirmed the divine revelation in that regard - we are safe to follow his lead.

1. The book of Moses is not "part of" the book of Jubilees.

2. Enoch "the seventh-from Adam" is quoted in the book of Jude.

If you can equivocate between an inspired Apostle such as Jude -- and "Catholic tradition invented a few centuries ago" then you are more imaginative than I my friend.

You enter the RCC slippery slope as they say "lets not call the DEAD in Christ the DEAD in Christ as Paul does -- so that when we commune with them it can not be called communion with the DEAD".

If you can equivocate between talking to your neighbor and asking a request that they pray for you -- and PRAYING TO your neighbor -- then you are far more imaginative than I my friend.

in Christ,

Bob

 

Pray tell how is this so? Wait am I praying to you or speaking with you?

Its funny how you combine an eschatological statement about a specific occurance with a general belief of Saints being alive in Christ (1 thes). So do you fall into the catagory that believes when someone dies they are "a sleep" and know nothing until the resurrection or are they participatory in Heaven? And if Paticipatory in Heaven are they not yet speaking and praying to Our Heavenly Father? The Martyrs in Revelation are said to be complaining to God though they are dead about judgement. So you are combining two consepts thinking there is correllation there is none. Paul is just specifying that at that time the currently living Christians as opposed to those who have physically died will witness those latter ones rise first. This has nothing to do with the Orthodox or Catholics who pray to living saints nor with Jesus speaking with Moses who died or holding a seanse. I wonder have you read the assumption of Moses? or the Book of Jubilees (also known as the little genesis?). And I know who enoch is but he didn't write the book of 1 Enoch though the writer writes as though he is Enoch. It was a stylystic writing of 200 BC (BCE).

By the way I can show you that the "Catholic/Orthodox tradition" was not invented a few centuries ago. But there are quotes of writers dating back to the 300's that show this Marian veneration. Certainly 1700 years is a bit more than a few centuries ago.

 

1. The Catholic Church herself explicitly forbids praying to the living. You can not equivocate between normal everyday conversation with the living - and praying to the dead.

2. But you are making a good point that the Catholic argument is very much based on the false idea that the "Dead in Christ" should not be viewed as "the Dead in Christ" no matter how often Paul does it. Once we take that small departure from scripture - a whole host of seance options and prayers-to-the-dead become available to us.

in Christ,

Bob

 

I refer to the "DEAD in Christ" of 1Thess 4. What are you referring to in regard to the dead - from 1Thess??

John 11 "Our friend LAZARUS SLEEPS I go that I may WAKE HIM".

1Thess 4 "Regarding those who have FALLEN ASLEEP"

If you are accusing me of believing the case about the "DEAD in Christ" that Paul states in 1Thess 4, and 2Cor 5... then ... "guilty".

The martyrs of Revelation are said to be huddled under the altar complaining - not a literal case.

The blood of Abel in Heb 11 is said to be yelling from the dirt. Not a literal case.


But Paul's statement in 1Thess 4 is neither apocalyptic nor symbolic. The same goes for his teaching in 1Cor 15 regarding the saints who "sleep" and are awakened at the resurrection. The same goes for Christ's statement in John 11 about one who sleeps and Christ goes that He may "wake HIM".

clearly with that dormant condition in death - it is no wonder in Isaiah 8 that God condemns those who "consult the dead on behalf of the living".

It is no wonder then that God condemned the spiritists to death in the OT.

It is no wonder then that it was the servants of Satan who claimed to be able to contact the dead "on behalf of the living".

BTW - Enoch is called "Seventh from Adam" in the book of Jude - where Enoch is quoted.

(I am always amused by that BCE - Before Common Era - reference as I first saw it used by some JW and then Mormon Missionaries).

in Christ,

Bob

 

I thought I'd share the actual catholic argument and as you see from this post the certain verses were similiar to your support of Jesus speaking with Moses. So their claim is not entirely reliant on tradition. However, despite my affinity to arguing I am not comfortable with Christians praying to the saints. Especially, when you see the uneducated use of this in Spain and Latin America which does seem similar to the "roman house gods". Interesting to note in Bill Mahers Religulous he shows that a survey of which person do Catholic Itialians pray to when in trouble; 6th on the list was Jesus. However, educated catholics (like my father) will say this is do to lack of understanding of their own faith. Maybe so, but then the accusation is what is being taught? Can be levied. However, I prefer honest debate when it comes to accusatory statements about faiths.

These are the verses the RCC uses to support its stance on prayers to the saints from a catholic site:

 

The Council of Nicea in 787AD discusses how God and the saints are addressed differently. We implore God to grant us blessings and deliver us from evil, we implore the saints to intercede for us to God who grants the petitions. Therefore we pray to God: "Have mercy on us", and to the saints, "Pray for us."

It is strictly incumbent on all to beware lest they transfer to any creature the rights which belong strictly to the Deity. We do not adore any creature nor honor the saints as though to adore them, but we call upon them as brothers and as friends of God and therefore we seek assistance from these our brethren.

Do we have any relationship with the departed saints? Do they have anything to do with our prayers? Is this NECROMANCY (Communicating with the dead): NO! Necromancy is lack of faith, and is pagan.

Hebrews 12:1 “Since we therefore have such a great cloud of witnesses surrounding us…’

Rev. 6:9 5th angel: Under the altar are the souls of the martyrs crying out “How long O Lord before you avenge our blood on those on the earth?” God replies, rest until their fellow servants and brethren are killed also.

Rev. 5:8 …the four living creatures and the 24 elders fell down before the Lamb, each on having a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, WHICH ARE THE PRAYERS OF THE SAINTS. (Who are the “Elders”? Not angels. They are martyrs: golden crowns and white robes/purity)

Rev. 8:3 “I saw another angel who came and stood before the altar holding a golden censer and much incense was given to him that he might add it to the prayers of the saints upon the golden altar that was before the throne. And the smoke of the incense with the prayers of the saints went up before God out of the angel’s hand. And the angel took the censer and he filled it with the fire from the altar and threw it to the earth and there followed peals of thunder, and sounds and flashes of lightning and an earthquake."

Rev. 7:13 “One of the elders said to me “who are these in the white robes and from where do they come?” And I said, “Lord, you know.” And he said to me, “These are the ones who have come out of the great tribulation….”

Hebrews 12:22-23 “You HAVE COME to Mount Zion, and to the city of the Living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to the myriads of angels, to the general assembly, and the Church of the first born who are enrolled in heaven, and to God the judge of all, and the spirits of righteous men made perfect.

James 5:16: “The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man accomplishes much.”

The above are the Bible facts and truths:
1) Christ overcame death.

2) The "dead in Christ" are not dead.

3) Moses and Elijah were speaking with Christ. (as been shown in this thread)

4) We have a "Great cloud of witnesses" watching us.

5) The souls of the martyrs are under the altar of God praying for those being persecuted.

6) We, when we come into the Church, come to the heavenly Jerusalem to the spirits of “righteous men made perfect”.

7) he prayer of a righteous man availeth much.

8) The elders around the throne are offering up the prayers of the saints to God, the angels offer up the prayers too. (Where did they get those prayers to offer up to God?)

9) We are commanded as Christians to pray for one another and to ask each other for prayers as an expression of love. Does love for the brethren cease in heaven?

10) People who are Christians in this life are PROBABLY Christians in the next one.

11) The Church is the Body of Christ, made up of the “living” and the “asleep” in Christ.

12) A "prayer" is merely a request. Prayer to the saints is ASKING the saints to INTERCEDE for us, NOT mediate the new covenant.

13) “Eternal life” begins in THIS life in Christ, it continues in the “next life” in Christ also.

So in summary: The BIG question is: Does the Bible REALLY need to explicitly say "It is OK to ask the departed saints to intercede for us?" 2 and 2 is 4 isn't it? What is missing in the equation?

ALL the parts are there IN THE BIBLE. The only thing missing in the "sola scriptura" arena is an explicit command. We should also note here that there is no explicit command to NOT pray to the saints in the Bible, either. The preponderance of Scriptural and historical evidence points to the fact that the Church has ALWAYS believed and practiced prayer to the departed saints and thus it did not NEED an explicit command.

There are a lot of doctrines that are believed and taught that are “logical conclusions” of biblical principles. It seems the challenge to the "average" Protestant to look at his own method of Biblical interpretation and his use of "logic" and precision of thinking and defining terms and drawing rational conclusions based on cross referencing and connecting different passages together… wouldn't he be virtually constrained to “pray to the saints” based on all the Biblical teachings above?

The saints and angels in heaven are praying, they hold our prayers up to God, place them on His altar, and our fellow Christians who have prayed for us on earth are now perfected in heaven, are witnessing our struggles on earth, and we are all alive in Christ in the Church as one body, members of one another… How can we NOT believe the saints can and do intercede for us before the throne of God?

We cannot permit doctrine to be determined by “rome-o-phobia”, it MUST be based in Scripture.

In XC
-

 

Zenus...

The counterfiet "Mary" that the Catholics and Orthodox worship as a goddess certainly is.


Regarding the true Mary, no...of course she isnt an agent of the devil. She was a humble Jewish girl who was chosen by God to bring Christ into the world physically.

 

Oh but there is. The following is from a sermon given by Albert Mohler at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary on Nov. 11, 2008.

 

The context for Heb 12 is in the "you are my witnesses" point of fact. As the witnesses are all described in Heb 11 as witnessing to the truth of God in spire of sword and dungeon. The cloud of witnesses then speaks to the lives of those witnesses just detailed in Heb 11 - that stood up to error with much endurance.

Then Heb 12 says that given the endurance of that group and even more - given the endurance of Christ himself -- we too should "not grow weary and lose heart".

It is an argument to endure as that group of witnesses for Christ endured.

in Christ,

Bob

 

And now idolized in mariolotry as "Queen of Heaven" where God is "King of Heaven" and idolized as "all powerful" like Christ, "sinless" like Christ, Co-redemptrix along with Christ.

That idolization is done by the very Popes themselves.

in Christ,

Bob

 

How odd that communicating with the dead -- when done by Catholics is "right" but when done by non-catholics is wrong!

By contrast in Isaiah 8:19-20 we are told "NOT to consult the Dead on BEHALF of the Living".

If you wish to use the term "DEAD in Christ" as Paul does in 1Thess4 -- then find... "We are not to consult the DEAD in Christ on behalf of the living".

Thus the point made in the quote above - is a "distinction without a difference".

in Christ,

Bob

 

Catholics claim that when they consult the DEAD in Christ on behalf of the living - it is right -- but when non-Catholics do it -- it violates the Bible injunction not to "Consult the dead on behalf of the living".

Yet in the text below - they seem to admit that it is a "distinction without a difference".


Catholics of the 20th century publish the connection to paganism for the world to see and understand. (Catholic Digest is the 2nd largest Catholic publication on the planet – though it is not written by the Vatican itself)

Pagan prayer methods.


Quote:
Catholic Digest 12/1994 pg 129

Fr Ken Ryan:
“The Rosary is, unsurprisingly, Not mentioned in the Bible. Legend and history place its beginning in the 13th century long After the Bible was completed. As a Pagan practice, praying on counting beads goes back centuries before Christ…

Buddhists use prayer wheels and prayer beads for the same purpose… Counting prayer beads is common practice in religious cultures”.

Quote:
Cath Digest 9/1993 pg 129
Question:
“My husband has been transferred to Japan and we have been here in Hiroshima for about two months. On a site seeing tour the Japanese guide brought me to a Buddhist shrine. There were statues of Buddha everywhere. The guide told me they represented different aspects of life and that the people offer food to the Buddhas and ask for Favors. It made me think of Our Catholic praying to the saints and wonder whether they have anything like the Ten Commandments to guide them.

There were fountains at the gate where pious visitors washed their hands before entering the shrine grounds. Could this be the same as our holy water?”

Fr Ken Ryan answers:
“Very probably the physical washing signifies some kind of spiritual cleansing, AS it does with Us! Some Muslims say prayers on rosarylike beads Just as We do, so there is no copyright enforced on prayerful customs among the great world religions. The Pagan Romans prayed, each family to its own household gods, JUST as we do to our patron saints. In Old Testament times the gentile had local gods for their town or country, and our Christian Saints eventually supplanted Them!

The Hebrews, of Course, had the mission of Wiping Out such heathen worship with the worship of the one true God, and while they have always had great respect for spiritual heroes, they Never set up any of their own race as substitutes for the local pagan gods!!
They had no need to make distinctions between praying TO the saints for their intercession with god and total adoration of God as the source of everything, as we must!

 

I agree with your point there -- it makes the issue very clear.:type:

in Christ,

Bob

 

You're still having issues understanding what Isaiah 8:19-20 is speaking of. Necromancy is communicating with the dead to make an attempt to gain information...kinda like a Medium or Psychic...ever heard of John Edwards? He has a program where he acts as a Medium to communicate with the dead relatives in this audience. He communicates with the dead and relays the information to the relatives. This Bob, is what Isaiah 8:19-20 is talking about!

Interestingly is that John Edwards IS Catholic, yet the RCC has spoken out against what he is doing.

The Church Triumphant in heaven is not insensitive to the needs and sufferings of the Church Militant on earth. The two churches remain connected through the bond of love which is expressed through prayer. The communion of saints is a communion of never-ending prayer.

Thus, besides our Church Family on earth, we belong to a larger family of God, which includes those who have gone before us. We are united with those in heaven. We call this the Communion of Saints, that is, the union of all who share in the life of Christ, whether on earth or in the other world.

In God and in His Church there is no division between the living and the departed, but all are one in the love of the Father. Whether we are alive or whether we are dead, as members of the Church we still belong to the same family, and still have a duty to bear one another's burdens. Therefore just as Orthodox Christians here on earth pray for one another and ask for one another's prayers, so they pray for the faithful departed and ask the faithful departed to pray for them. Death cannot sever the bond of mutual love which links the members of the Church together.

A much different concept described here than what is described in Isaiah 8:19-20.

In XC
-

 

Then obviously you don't ask others to pray for you huh? Sad, no prayer list at your Church?

In XC
-