On Hannity, he was talking to Mel Gibson about other stories in the bible.
This is of course the book which, from the Catholic viewpoint, Luther removed from the bible due to praying for the dead, but it also covers the exciting period after the Jewish return from Babylon when the Greek general Anticus Epiphanies took over the rule of Israel.
This really is block buster material and opens up the whole debate of the Catholic bible vs. the Protestant one.
*** “Spending some time with the Bible would clarify what you should believe.” ***
I have been studying the New Testament although not quite intensively. I consider every verse essential and try to shape the whole picture. I do not accept a teaching if it violates even just one verse which is still the words of God. Certainly, I do not skip, omit or reject any verse for an agenda. With my limited knowledge, I did find verses seemingly contradicting to each other. However with the Catholic bible study guide, I found all these questions answered and explained logically. Of course, she was the one who put the books together with the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Example, verse John 21: 25 tells us clearly that not all the events and teachings of Christ are recorded in the Bible. How can you preach something different and still claim to be faithful to the Bible? How can I respect or even join your denomination if that is the way and attitude you preach the Bible?
To defend the practice of “praying for the dead”, may be I have to touch on the subject of Purgatory, which I do not intend to do here otherwise, the discussion would never end. You can do your research on the subject in many Catholic websites if you are curious or interested. I also can not accept the fact that God would allow an erroneous practice to exist and to pass on from His Old Testament Church (Judaism) to His New Testament Church (early Christianity, the present Catholic and Orthodox) for more than 2000 years. I wonder what could be the opinion of a Rabbi. .
False teaching is from the evil and not from God. Matthew 12: 30, “He who is not with me is against me.”
"How can you preach something different and still claim to be faithful to the Bible? How can I respect or even join your denomination if that is the way and attitude you preach the Bible? "
I don't teach ANYTHING contrary to what the Bible states. My "attitude" or tone is that of talking about a mundane day. If you wish to read something inflammatory into that, that is your doing.
"To defend the practice of “praying for the dead”, may be I have to touch on the subject of Purgatory, which I do not intend to do here otherwise, the discussion would never end. You can do your research on the subject in many Catholic websites if you are curious or interested. I also can not accept the fact that God would allow an erroneous practice to exist and to pass on from His Old Testament Church (Judaism) to His New Testament Church (early Christianity, the present Catholic and Orthodox) for more than 2000 years. I wonder what could be the opinion of a Rabbi. ."
There is no need to touch on purgatory since you haven't mastered that praying to the dead is wrong according to the Bible. When you understand that then commenting on purgatory would be next. I'm not interested in Catholic websites or Jewish website for that matter. What I elevate above that is what is written in the Bible.
It's not about what mere fallible mortal does what. It is ALL about what God (Perfection) teaches through the Bible. I haven't noticed that the Jews walked on water in the Old Testament. Have you? So their practices may not be proper with God. The Old Testament simply tells you what they did and how God reacted to it.
Now, back to the issue on praying to the dead:
God is Omnipotent, omnipresent and Omniscient. I usually refer to them as the three O's. The problem is that us mere fallible mortals are not any of the three O's so we are obligated to look to the Bible for guidance and knowledge.
Again that is why I restate what started this discussion. Regardless of which "O" attribute highlighted, it is the Bible that we need to use as our litmus test in what is proper and improper. The issue is praying TO the dead. It's a pointless exercise because according to God the fate of the dead person has already been determined. The Holy Spirit who handles our prayer to Jesus and then to God will NOT violate teachings.
I repeat it is pointless in praying for the dead. I will again list what the Bible states:
1Cor.5:3
[3] For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed,
2Cor.5:6
[6] Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord:
My comment: There is NO purgatory either. Either a dead person is present WITH the Lord or they are NOT present with the Lord.
[8] We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.
For those that are saved; to be absent from the body (death) is to be present with the Lord. The converse is true as well. So praying FOR the dead is fairly pointless. The fate has already been determined.
I know, some will say "tradition" over rules God. I say "tradition" doesn't over rule God. It is God that determined the rules; not mere fallible mortals regardless of how ingrained a man made "tradition" is.
"False teaching is from the evil and not from God. Matthew 12: 30, “He who is not with me is against me.”
I couldn't agree more with your statement and WHY I take the time to point out that the Bible is at odds with praying to the dead and purgatory.
*** “There is no need to touch on purgatory since you haven't mastered that praying to the dead is wrong according to the Bible.“ ***
Prayer for the dead and purgatory are related. Souls in heaven and hell do not need our prayers for we can’t do anything to change their conditions just as the verses you quoted. By the way, thank you for your arguments which prompted me to review the Catholic Apologetic book and amazingly, I found these responses. I shall briefly summarize them as follows:
1 Peter 3: 19 “In it He (Jesus) also went to preach to the SPIRITS IN PRISON, who had once been DISOBEDIENT while God patiently waited in the days of Noah during the building of the ark…”
Note that this is a PRISON FOR DISOBEDIENT SPIRITS and yet they were saved when Jesus preached to them.
1 Peter 4: 6 “For this is why the gospel was preached even to the dead that, though condemned in the flesh in human estimation, they might live in the spirit in the estimation of God.”
Preaching the gospel to the dead may be just as well as praying for them since prayer is also a form of communication..
1 Cor 15: 29 “Otherwise, what will people accomplish by having themselves baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, then why are they having themselves baptized for them?”
In his argument for the resurrection of the body, Paul mentions the practice of early Christians having themselves baptized for the benefit of the dead.
2 Tim 1: 16 “May the Lord grant mercy to the family of Onesiphorus because he often… 18 May the Lord grant him to find mercy from the Lord on that day…”
Paul prays for his departed friend Onesiphorus.
Book of Maccabbees is considered inspired in the Greek Septuagint, the Old Testament Scriptures used by Christ and all the New Testament writers.
I hope these are more than adequate proofs to show that “Praying for the dead” is scriptural.
*** ”I haven't noticed that the Jews walked on water in the Old Testament. Have you? So their practices may not be proper with God. The Old Testament simply tells you what they did and how God reacted to it." ***
Moses as God’s messenger did separate the Red Sea and gave us the Ten Commandments. We honor Abraham by calling him “Father Abraham” (John 8:53, Luke 16:25).
Jesus said in Matthew 5: 17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. 18 Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place….”
The words “Law” and “Scripture” used in the New Testament texts are referring to the Old Testament’s law and scripture. Jesus was still living and there were no NT texts yet. Even when Paul wrote his letters later, he had no idea that some of his letters would become the scriptures of the NT.
Matthew 23: 1 “Then, Jesus spoke to the crowds and to his disciples, 2 saying, ‘The scribes and the Pharisees have taken their seat on the chair of Moses. 3 Therefore, do and observe all things whatsoever they tell you, …”
“Do and observe all things whatsoever they tell you” since they seated on the chair of Moses, a “priestly official position” in Judaism. Also, the “Chair of Moses” is not found in the Old Testament text. Jesus was quoting from Tradition.
*** "What I elevate above that is what is written in the Bible." ***
Amen.
I will get back to you on this since it is taken out of context and other verses CLARIFY why you are wrong in interpreting this.
I am extremely concerned at your response. Thank goodness YOU didn't create although if you were more familiar with the Bible you would see the flaws of it. I will address each verse and comment made using Scripture it its proper context. I pray you will see the difference. I also encourage you in advance to read through the passages someone else used to wrongly apply these verses. It is often more meaningful when the individual discovers the error rather than someone "preaching" at you. ;)
What you listed is really twisting Scripture and if taken seriously could easily jeopardizes where eternity is spent. I will have an answer prepared by tomorrow.
While I'm off doing my own research to correct what you have written, you have not responded to the verses I have listed. There is little point in moving on BEFORE you explain WHY these verses are not clear enough on WHY there is NO purgatory and WHY praying to the dead is needed.
Clearly these verses make it crystal clear that praying to the dead is pointless and that there is NO purgatory.
Please respond to these verses:
I repeat it is pointless in praying for the dead. I will again list what the Bible states:
1Cor.5:3
[3] For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed,
2Cor.5:6
[6] Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord:
My comment: There is NO purgatory either. Either a dead person is present WITH the Lord or they are NOT present with the Lord.
[8] We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.
For those that are saved; to be absent from the body (death) is to be present with the Lord. The converse is true as well. So praying FOR the dead is fairly pointless. The fate has already been determined.
I know, some will say "tradition" over rules God. I say "tradition" doesn't over rule God. It is God that determined the rules; not mere fallible mortals regardless of how ingrained a man made "tradition" is.
"False teaching is from the evil and not from God. Matthew 12: 30, “He who is not with me is against me.”
I couldn't agree more with your statement and WHY I take the time to point out that the Bible is at odds with praying to the dead and purgatory.
BTW, this is ALL from the NEW TESTAMENT. In the NEW TESTAMENT, things change. We, as Christians, are NOT under the Law. Christ fulfilled the Law.
You: Prayer for the dead and purgatory are related. Souls in heaven and hell do not need our prayers for we can’t do anything to change their conditions just as the verses you quoted. By the way, thank you for your arguments which prompted me to review the Catholic Apologetic book and amazingly, I found these responses.
Me: I suppose some see them as related however Scripture clarifies Scripture and eliminates the concept of purgatory and that it is pointless to attempt to communicate with the dead. In fact communicating with the dead is a no no. I'll give you a verse on that later. That verse specifically states that God sees that as an abomination just as He see homosexuality as an abomination.
1Cor.5:3
[3] For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed,
2Cor.5:6
[6] Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord:
My comment: There is NO purgatory either. Either a person is present WITH the Lord or they are NOT present with the Lord.
[8] We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.
For those that are saved; to be absent from the body (death) is to be present with the Lord. The converse is true as well. So praying FOR the dead is fairly pointless. The fate has already been determined. I don't see how it could be much clearer.
I am not surprised that the website you viewed had something there to attempt to justify this practice. Anyone who makes a claim typically tries to rationalize what they say. BTW, have you noticed that in the OLD Testament there is NO reference to heaven but there are references to sheol and Hades? Both of these are terms for hell. Jesus changed that through taking on past, present and future punishment of sinners. The wages of sin is death. Jesus is the ultimate sacrificial lamb.
You: I shall briefly summarize them as follows:
You: 1 Peter 3: 19 “In it He (Jesus) also went to preach to the SPIRITS IN PRISON, who had once been DISOBEDIENT while God patiently waited in the days of Noah during the building of the ark…”
You: Note that this is a PRISON FOR DISOBEDIENT SPIRITS and yet they were saved when Jesus preached to them.
Me: I want to list a few other verses with 1 Peter 3:19 for context reasons.
[18] For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
[19] By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
[20] Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
[21] The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
[22] Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him.
I hope I am not assuming things but I'd bet you are familiar with the Apostles Creed. I have no doubt that Jesus visited those in hell who died in the flood from Noah's day but nowhere does it state that they were saved.
Again the Bible clarifies this through Hebrews 9:27
[26] For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.
[27] And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but AFTER THIS IS THE JUDGMENT:
[28] So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.
Man will die once and then judgment. In Revelation 20:11-15 it states this:
[11] And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.
[12] And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
[13] And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
[14] And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
[15] And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.
For those not in the Book of Life will be sent to the Lake of Fire. Hell is a REAL place and NOT a state of mind. Interestingly, it is Jesus who spoke the most about hell. He doesn't want anyone to be there.
Luke also informs us Luke 15:26 that once a person dies, he goes either to heaven (Abraham's bosom) or to hell and that there is a great gulf fixed that those who want to pass from one to the other cannot. I'm big on context so I'll include the surrounding verses in the passage.
[19] There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:
[20] And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores,
[21] And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.
[22] And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;
[23] And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.
[24] And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.
[25] But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.
[26] And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.
[27] Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:
[28] For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.
[29] Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
[30] And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
[31] And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.
There is NO hope beyond the grave. One must decide while they are alive on this earth. God offers numerous chances while on this earth but after death, there is NO second chance. He wants you to make your choice willingly based on FAITH.
John 3:36
[36] He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.
John 5:24
[24] Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.
Of course there is John 3:16. You're probably familiar with that one. The point is that either you believe or you don't and if you do you'll be in heaven. If you don't you will be condemned for eternity.
It's rather clear that 1 Peter 3:19 does not offer a second chance after death. There are too many other verses in the Bible that nix this hope. Some have claimed that the phrase "spirits in prison" doesn't refer to human beings since that no where else is that phrase used for human beings in hell. They claim these spirits are fallen angels, since the "Sons of God" (fallen angels (see Job 1:6, 2:1. 38:7) were "disobedient" ... in the days of Noah" Peter may be referring to this in 2 Peter 2:4, when he mentions the angels sinning immediately before he refers to the Flood in verse 5. Angels cannot marry (Matt. 22:30) and not allowed to marry with human beings, since angels being spirits lack reproductive organs.
Still another view is that this refers to Christ's announcement to departed spirits of the triumph of His resurrection over death as pointed out in the previous verse of 1 Peter 3:18.
[18] For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
The text does NOT say that Jesus evangelized them ("spirits in prison") but simply that He proclaimed the victory of His resurrection to them. They will insist that there is nothing stated that He preached the Gospel to them in hell.
You: 1 Peter 4: 6 “For this is why the gospel was preached even to the dead that, though condemned in the flesh in human estimation, they might live in the spirit in the estimation of God.”
You:
Preaching the gospel to the dead may be just as well as praying for them since prayer is also a form of communication..
Me: Again 1 Peter 4:6 violates Hebrews 9:27
[27] And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
I've seen this many times ... people desperately seeking to justify misguided belief on ambiguous passages that can be interpreted in many ways. No doctrine should be based on such. It is a universal rules for Christians that difficult texts should be interpreted in the light of CLEAR ones and NOT the reverse! Rather than rehashing previously mentioned verses and adding more to the pile I will offer other interpretations of this verse. BY taking the interpretation that is at issue then YOU create a contradiction in the Bible. I don't mean you personally but whoever originated this wrong interpretation.
The goal is NOT to put verse against verse but rather to harmonize and clarify with clear verses. Instead what you are demonstrating is to use unclear verse to transcend CLEAR doctrine. It's backwards! Anyway ... here are three other ways of interpreting that verse:
1. It is possible that this verse refers to those who are now dead who heard the Gospel while they were alive.
2. It might NOT be a reference to human beings. but to the "spirits in prison" (angels) (1 Peter 3:19, 2 Peter 2:4, & Gen 6:2).
Honestly, don't you think the verses that are CLEAR on this should supercede unclear or ambiguous verses? I do! If you give credence to clearer verses then they clearly rule out a second chance AFTER death.
You: "Preaching the gospel to the dead may be just as well as praying for them since prayer is also a form of communication.."
Preaching is NOT the same thing as "praying". Both are forms of communication BUT the dead are separated from you and the Holy Spirit will NOT violate what is written in the Bible about contact with the dead.
Deut. 18:10-12 forbids a Christian from making contact with the dead in ANY form.
10] There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch,
[11] Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer.
[12] For all that do these things are an abomination unto the LORD: and because of these abominations the LORD thy God doth drive them out from before thee.
Of course you can do as you see fit but I wouldn't recommend it. Some pay no heed to this. I think their is a show called "Crossing Over" with John Edwards. It is my understanding that his show is based on communicating with the dead and it quite popular. He is clearly in violation of this yet the public doesn't care what God says about this.
You:
1 Cor 15: 29 “Otherwise, what will people accomplish by having themselves baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, then why are they having themselves baptized for them?”
In his argument for the resurrection of the body, Paul mentions the practice of early Christians having themselves baptized for the benefit of the dead.
I'm sorry ... but to believe that you can be baptized FOR someone you fear maybe in hell and make things right FOR that OTHER person is absurd!
Accepting Jesus Christ as you personal Savior is an INDIVIDUAL decision. You either personally accept Him or reject Him. Even ignoring Him is a response - rejection! This is VERY clear in the Bible.
BTW, are you noticing a pattern here where obscure verses that can be interpreted in many ways are being used to INVALIDATE CLEAR verses for DOCTRINE ? It's completely backwards and again a desperate attempt to cloud the water even though elsewhere it is CRYSTAL CLEAR what God wants. In the secular world, I'd say someone is trying to "pull the wool over your eyes" or a "fast one". They are counting on you to be ignorant. Fortunately I and others are not.
Okay ... 1 Corth. 15:29
[29] Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?
If interpreted as you suggest it is in DIRECT conflict with:
John 3:16
[16] For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
AND
Romans 10:9-13
[9] That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
[10] For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
[11] For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
[12] For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.
[13] For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
AND
Ezek 18:20
[20] The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall NOT bear the iniquity of the father, NEITHER shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.
There are lots of others but I don't want this to get to unwiedly.
Again with the other verses you list it would be most UNWISE to base doctrine on verses that can be viewed as obscure when other verses CLARIFY this subject. The rule is to use CLEAR verses or passages to interpret those that are less clear.
The Bible is emphatic that single act of baptism does NOT save anyone. We are saved by grace through FAITH, not by works. Baptism is a "work". These verses clarify that fact:
Eph. 2:8-9
[8] For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
[9] Not of works, lest any man should boast.
Titus 3: 5-7
[5] Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
[6] Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
[7] That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
Romans 4:5
[5] But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
We can NOT do anything that would obtain salvation for ANOTHER person. EACH person must personally believe as stated in John 1:12
[12] But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
Everyone must make their OWN free choice:
Matt. 23:37
[37] O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would NOT!
AND
2 Peter 3:9
[9] The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
Scholars differ in their interpretation of 1 Corth. 15:29 but Christian theologians don't interpret baptism for a dead person as another way of "saving" a person since clear Scripture clarifies this is NOT a possibility. So Christian theologians have come up with this:
Some believe Paul is referring to cultic practices among the Corthinians who had many other false beliefs. I would highly recommend reading 1 Cor. to get the tone of Paul and the audience to whom he is speaking.
In effect Paul would be saying "If you don't believe in the Resurrection, then hwy engage in the practice of baptizing people for the dead. You are inconsistent in your own (false) beliefs. This group believes that the practice of baptizing for the dead is so obviously wrong that Paul does not need to explicitedly condemn it. They point to the fact that Paul says "they" (others) not "we" baptize the dead in verse 29.
[29] Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?
If you read 1 Cor. 15 the entire TONE is one of questioning the hypocrisy of the people. I wasn't going to list it but it is important to see WHO Paul is directing his reply to and the content of the reply in context:
[12] Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?
[13] But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen:
[14] And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.
[15] Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.
[16] For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised:
[17] And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.
[18] Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.
[19] If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.
[20] But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.
[21] For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
[22] For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
[23] But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.
[24] Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
[25] For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.
[26] The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.
[27] For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith, all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him.
[28] And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.
[29] Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?
[30] And why stand we in jeopardy every hour?
[31] I protest by your rejoicing which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die daily.
[32] If after the manner of men I have fought with beasts at Ephesus, what advantageth it me, if the dead rise not? let us eat and drink; for to morrow we die.
[33] Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners.
[34] Awake to righteousness, and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God: I speak this to your shame.
[35] But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?
[36] Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die:
[37] And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other grain:
[38] But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body.
[39] All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds.
[40] There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.
[41] There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.
[42] So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
[43] It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
[44] It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
[45] And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
[46] Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
[47] The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.
[48] As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.
[49] And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.
[50] Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.
[51] Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
[52] In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
[53] For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
[54] So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
[55] O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?
[56] The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.
[57] But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.
[58] Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye stedfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord.
There are others views of this and if you wish for me to elaborate on them I will BUT NONE of them see baptism for the dead as "saving" the dead person! It is contrary to clear Scripture.
The next verse you highlight is this:
You: 2 Tim 1: 16 “May the Lord grant mercy to the family of Onesiphorus because he often… 18 May the Lord grant him to find mercy from the Lord on that day…”
Paul prays for his departed friend Onesiphorus.
Me: We don't know if he is dead or about to die or simply traveling about. There is nothing wrong with praying for someone while they are on this earth.
Where does it say someone is dead in 2 Tim. 1:16? It does NOT since Oneisiphorous was STILL ALIVE when Paul prayed for him! Praying that someone alive receive mercy on the Day of Judgment is a far cry from praying for a person AFTER they have died. There is NO indication in the Bible that anyone ever prayed to a person AFTER they died! If you believe otherwise cite the verse and passage.
[16] The Lord give mercy unto the house of Onesiphorus; for he oft refreshed me, and was not ashamed of my chain:
[17] But, when he was in Rome, he sought me out very diligently, and found me.
[18] The Lord grant unto him that he may find mercy of the Lord in that day: and in how many things he ministered unto me at Ephesus, thou knowest very well.
You: Book of Maccabbees is considered inspired in the Greek Septuagint, the Old Testament Scriptures used by Christ and all the New Testament writers.
Me: Oh my! Don't you see WHY the praying to, for and baptizing the dead MUST be true? Maccabbeess is WHERE this idea originated and WHY the agonizing Scripture twist to justify this practice and other erroneous belief. None of this is condoned in the Bible so to rationalize this we have the hair splitting Scripture twist at the expense of CLEAR verses that do NOT condone this. The problem I have is where to start! The Catholic church canonized this so they must try and justify their created contradictions with the Bible and they try to do this through ignoring CLEAR Scripture and manipulating less clear Scripture.
Maccabees is part of the apocryphal books which are NOT inspired. I will comment on that next. No one is debating that Maccabbees does not say praying to the dead is okay. The debate is whether it belongs in the canon of Scripture.
2 Maccabees 12:42-45
[42] Betook themselves unto prayer, and besought him that the sin committed might wholly be put out of remembrance. Besides, that noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves from sin, forsomuch as they saw before their eyes the things that came to pass for the sins of those that were slain.
[43] And when he had made a gathering throughout the company to the sum of two thousand drachms of silver, he sent it to Jerusalem to offer a sin offering, doing therein very well and honestly, in that he was mindful of the resurrection:
[44] For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should have risen again, it had been superfluous and vain to pray for the dead.
[45] And also in that he perceived that there was great favour laid up for those that died godly, it was an holy and good thought. Whereupon he made a reconciliation for the dead, that they might be delivered from sin.
There is NO clear New Testament quotations from the apocrypha. Not once is there a direct quotation. The New Testament cites the Hebrew OLD Testament but it NEVER quotes from any of the 14 or 15 apocrypha books as divine authority or canonical. For example there is NO introductory phrases such as "thus says the Lord" or "as it is written" or "Scripture says" as are typically found in canonical books.
The fact that the NEW Testament often quotes from the Greek OLD Testament in no way proves that the apocryphal books contained in the Greek manuscripts of the Old Testament are inspired. First, it is not certain that the Septuagint (LXXX) of the first century contained the Apocrypha. The earlier Greek manuscripts that include them date from the fourth century A.D.. Even if they were in the Septuagint of apostolic times, JESUS and the APOSTLES NEVER QUOTED FROM THEM even though they were SUPPOSED to be included. Even the notes of the Roman Catholic Bible (NAB) make the revealing admission that the apocryphal books are
"religious books used to both Jews and Christians which were NOT included in the collection of INSPIRED writings". Instead they were "introduced rather late into the collection of the Bible".
Citations of the church fathers in support of the canonicity of the Apocrypha are selective and misleading. While some fathers accepted their inspiration, others did not.
Some in the early church had a high regard for the Apocrypha but MANY opposed it. For example ARthanasius, Cyril of Jersusalem, Origen and the GREAT Roman Catholic biblical scholar and translator of the Latin Vulgate, Jerome, ALL opposed the Apocrypha. Even the early Syrian churches did not accept the Apocrypha in the second century A.D..
Without getting into too much minutia, NO Greek manuscripts has the SAME list of apocryphal books accepted by the Council of Trent (A.D. 1543-63).
Citing church councils for credibility doesn't work either since only LOCAL councils were used and they were NOT binding on the whole church. Local councils have been known to err in their decisions and have later been over ruled by the universal church.
These books were NOT part of the Christian (New Testament period) and writings were not under the province of the Christian church to decide. They were of the province of the Jewish community that wrote them and had centuries BEFORE REJECTED THEM as part of the canon, for books were accepted by the contemporary generations who were in the best position to verify the prophetic claims of their authors.
Hebrews 2:3-4
[3] How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;
[4] God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will?
The books accepted by these Christian councils may not have been the same ones in each case. They cannot be used as evidence of the exact canon later as infallibly claimed by the Roman Catholic Church in A.D. 1546.
The local councils of Hippo and Carthage in North Africa were influenced by Augustine however his endorsement is ill founded. His contemporary, Jermone, a greater Biblical authority over Augustine flat out rejected the entire Apocrypha. Augustine recognized that the Jews REJECTED these books as part of their canon. Augustine reasoned that they should be part of the Catholic canon because of their mention of "extreme and wonderful suffering of certain martyrs" (City of God 18.36). With that logic then Foxe's Little Book of Marty's should also be canon! Later Augustine did acknowledge the superiority of Jerome's Hebrew text over the Septuagint's Greek and lead him to accept Jerome's Hebrew canon which did NOT include the Apocrypha.
The Greek church has not always accepted the Apocrypha. At the synods of Constantinople (A.D. 1638) Jaffa (1642), and Jersalem (1672) these books were declared canonical BUT as late as 1839 their Larger Catechism expressly omitted the Apocrypha on the grounds that its books did NOT exist in the Hebrew Bible. This is STILL their position. The Jews are noted for their METICULOUS writings.
At the Roman Catholic Council of Trent (A.D. 1546) the infallible proclamation was made accepting it was came after a millennium and a half later after the books were written and in an obvious polemic against Luther. It was only a few years after Luther protested this as well as other Catholic church abuses like indulgences (money to the church to save a soul in purgatory etc..) It has all the appearances to conjure up ecclesiastical support for the Roman Catholic doctrines that lack biblical support.
I could go on and on and on but to be gentle ... the Apocrypha is very questionable when it comes to being "inspired".
You: I hope these are more than adequate proofs to show that “Praying for the dead” is scriptural.
Me: No, it is not Scriptural and contradicts the Bible. Neither of us listed "proofs". You attempted to use vague or unclear verses to validate this unbiblical act at the expense of CLEAR verses that do NOT condone this.
Me: *** ”I haven't noticed that the Jews walked on water in the Old Testament. Have you? So their practices may not be proper with God. The Old Testament simply tells you what they did and how God reacted to it." ***
You: Moses as God’s messenger did separate the Red Sea and gave us the Ten Commandments. We honor Abraham by calling him “Father Abraham” (John 8:53, Luke 16:25).
Me: You missed my point. While Moses was up on the mountain getting the Ten Commandments his people below were melting down gold for a golden calf to be worshipped. This was not proper and what I was referring to.
Me: John 8:53
[53] Art thou greater than our father Abraham, which is dead? and the prophets are dead: whom makest thou thyself?
Notice how "father" is LOWERCASE. Christians are forbidden to call anyone else
As for me, I go by what Jesus says about a father:
Matt. 23:8
8] But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.
[9] And call NO man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
[10] Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.
[11] But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.
[12] And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.
What Jesus is saying is that do NOT take on human beings as infallible spiritual mentors. Paul was a spiritual father to Timothy ->
1 Cor. 4:15
[14] I write not these things to shame you, but as my beloved sons I warn you.
[15] For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.
[16] Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me.
[17] For this cause have I sent unto you Timotheus, who is my beloved son, and faithful in the Lord, who shall bring you into remembrance of my ways which be in Christ, as I teach every where in every church.
Paul was also careful to instruct his spiritual children ONLY to imitate me just as I imitate Christ.
1 Cor.11:1
[1] Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.
We are to show respect to our spiritual leaders however UNQUESTIONED OBEDIENCE and reverence that is due ONLY to God is another. Have you also noticed that ONLY, God the Father has an UPPERCASE "F" whereas any other "father" reference is in LOWERCASE. Beyond my biological father I would NEVER address another mortal as "Father". My spiritual "Father" is in heaven and to whom I look for guidance and read His Word.
I'm not sure how Luke 16:25 fits into your thought ... on father.
You: Luke 16:25
25] But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.
Me: I'm not sure what your point is here with listing Luke 16:25.
You: Jesus said in Matthew 5: 17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. 18 Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place….” 3)
Me: Jesus fulfilled the Law since NO mere mortal was perfect. Jesus took on our punishment. The wages of sin is death. He was the sacraficial Lamb. While we as Christians are NOT under the Law we still have to strive to follow the Ten Commandments knowing that ALL will fall short.
You: The words “Law” and “Scripture” used in the New Testament texts are referring to the Old Testament’s law and scripture. Jesus was still living and there were no NT texts yet. Even when Paul wrote his letters later, he had no idea that some of his letters would become the scriptures of the NT.
Me: I would like to see you show me the above paragraph in Scripture. This is pure conjecture.
You: Matthew 23: 1 “Then, Jesus spoke to the crowds and to his disciples, 2 saying, ‘The scribes and the Pharisees have taken their seat on the chair of Moses. 3 Therefore, do and observe all things whatsoever they tell you, …”
Me: Yes, that is written in the Bible but did you read the entire passage?
I'm going to save my fingers some typing and appeal to a CATHOLIC interpretation of this. Yes, sometimes non-Catholic can agree on things!
If you disagree with them write to them at:
New American Bible
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
3211 4th Street, N.E., Washington, DC 20017-1194 (202) 541-3000
Here's the link:
http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/matthew/matthew23.htm I'm quoting from below:
2 [2-3] Have taken their seat . . . Moses: it is uncertain whether this is simply a metaphor for Mosaic teaching authority or refers to an actual chair on which the teacher sat. It has been proved that there was a seat so designated in synagogues of a later period than that of this gospel. Do and observe . . . they tell you: since the Matthean Jesus abrogates Mosaic law (Matthew 5:31-42), warns his disciples against the teaching of the Pharisees (Matthew 14:1-12), and, in this speech, denounces the Pharisees as blind guides in respect to their teaching on oaths (Matthew 16-22), this commandment to observe all things whatsoever they (the scribes and Pharisees) tell you cannot be taken as the evangelist's understanding of the proper standard of conduct for his church. The saying may reflect a period when the Matthean community was largely Jewish Christian and was still seeking to avoid a complete break with the synagogue. Matthew has incorporated this traditional material into the speech in accordance with his view of the course of salvation history, in which he portrays the time of Jesus' ministry as marked by the fidelity to the law, although with significant pointers to the new situation that would exist after his death and resurrection (see the note on Matthew 5:17-20). The crowds and the disciples (Matthew 23:1) are exhorted not to follow the example of the Jewish leaders, whose deeds do not conform to their teaching (Matthew 23:3).
3 [4] Tie up heavy burdens: see the note on Matthew 11:28.
4 [5] To the charge of preaching but not practicing (Matthew 23:3), Jesus adds that of acting in order to earn praise. The disciples have already been warned against this same fault (see the note on Matthew 6:1-18). Phylacteries: the Mosaic law required that during prayer small boxes containing parchments on which verses of scripture were written be worn on the left forearm and the forehead (see Exodus 13:9, 16; Deut 6:8; 11:18). Tassels: see the note on Matthew 9:20. The widening of phylacteries and the lengthening of tassels were for the purpose of making these evidences of piety more noticeable.
5 [6] Cf Mark 12:38-39. "Rabbi': literally, "my great one," a title of respect for teachers and leaders.
6 [8-12] These verses, warning against the use of various titles, are addressed to the disciples alone. While only the title "Rabbi' has been said to be used in addressing the scribes and Pharisees (Matthew 23:7), the implication is that Father and "Master' also were. The prohibition of these titles to the disciples suggests that their use was present in Matthew's church. The Matthean Jesus forbids not only the titles but the spirit of superiority and pride that is shown by their acceptance. Whoever exalts . . . will be exalted: cf Luke 14:11.
7 [13-36] This series of seven "woes," directed against the scribes and Pharisees and addressed to them, is the heart of the speech. The phrase woe to occurs often in the prophetic and apocalyptic literature, expressing horror of a sin and punishment for those who commit it. Hypocrites: see the note on Matthew 6:2. The hypocrisy of the scribes and Pharisees consists in the difference between their speech and action Matthew 23:3 and in demonstrations of piety that have no other purpose than to enhance their reputation as religious persons (Matthew 23:5).
8 [13] You lock the kingdom of heaven: cf Matthew 16:19 where Jesus tells Peter that he will give him the keys to the kingdom of heaven. The purpose of the authority expressed by that metaphor is to give entrance into the kingdom (the kingdom is closed only to those who reject the authority); here the charge is made that the authority of the scribes and Pharisees is exercised in such a way as to be an obstacle to entrance. Cf Luke 11:52 where the accusation against the "scholars of the law" (Matthew's scribes) is that they "have taken away the key of knowledge."
9 [14] Some manuscripts add a verse here or after Matthew 23:12 "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites. You devour the houses of widows and, as a pretext, recite lengthy prayers. Because of this, you will receive a very severe condemnation." Cf Mark 12:40; Luke 20:47. This "woe" is almost identical with Mark 12:40 and seems to be an interpolation derived from that text.
10 [15] In the first century A.D. until the First Jewish Revolt against Rome (A.D. 66-70), many Pharisees conducted a vigorous missionary campaign among Gentiles. Convert: literally, "proselyte," a Gentile who accepted Judaism fully by submitting to circumcision and all other requirements of Mosaic law. Child of Gehenna: worthy of everlasting punishment; for Gehenna, see the note on Matthew 5:22. Twice as much as yourselves: possibly this refers simply to the zeal of the convert, surpassing that of the one who converted him.
11 [16-22] An attack on the casuistry that declared some oaths binding (one is obligated) and others not (it means nothing) and held the binding oath to be the one made by something of lesser value (the gold; the gift on the altar). Such teaching, which inverts the order of values, reveals the teachers to be blind guides; cf Matthew 15:14. Since the Matthean Jesus forbids all oaths to his disciples (Matthew 5:33-37), this woe does not set up a standard for Christian moral conduct, but ridicules the Pharisees on their own terms.
12 [23] The Mosaic law ordered tithing of the produce of the land (Lev 27:30; Deut 14:22-23), and the scribal tradition is said here to have extended this law to even the smallest herbs. The practice is criticized not in itself but because it shows the Pharisees' preoccupation with matters of less importance while they neglect the weightier things of the law.
13 [24] Cf Lev 11:41-45 that forbids the eating of any "swarming creature." The Pharisees' scrupulosity about minor matters and neglect of greater ones (Matthew 23:23) is further brought out by this contrast between straining liquids that might contain a tiny "swarming creature" and yet swallowing the camel. The latter was one of the unclean animals forbidden by the law (Lev 11:4), but it is hardly possible that the scribes and Pharisees are being denounced as guilty of so gross a violation of the food laws. To swallow the camel is only a hyperbolic way of speaking of their neglect of what is important.
14 [25-26] The ritual washing of utensils for dining (cf Mark 7:4) is turned into a metaphor illustrating a concern for appearances while inner purity is ignored. The scribes and Pharisees are compared to cups carefully washed on the outside but filthy within. Self-indulgence: the Greek word here translated means lack of self-control, whether in drinking or in sexual conduct.
15 [27-28] The sixth woe, like the preceding one, deals with concern for externals and neglect of what is inside. Since contact with dead bodies, even when one was unaware of it, caused ritual impurity (Numbers 19:11-22), tombs were whitewashed so that no one would contract such impurity inadvertently.
16 [29-36] The final woe is the most serious indictment of all. It portrays the scribes and Pharisees as standing in the same line as their ancestors who murdered the prophets and the righteous.
17 [29-32] In spite of honoring the slain dead by building their tombs and adorning their memorials, and claiming that they would not have joined in their ancestors' crimes if they had lived in their days, the scribes and Pharisees are true children of their ancestors and are defiantly ordered by Jesus to fill up what those ancestors measured out. This order reflects the Jewish notion that there was an allotted measure of suffering that had to be completed before God's final judgment would take place.
18 [34-36] There are important differences between the Matthean and the Lucan form of this Q material; cf Luke 11:49-51. In Luke the one who sends the emissaries is the "wisdom of God." If, as many scholars think, that is the original wording of Q, Matthew, by making Jesus the sender, has presented him as the personified divine wisdom. In Luke, wisdom's emissaries are the Old Testament "prophets" and the Christian "apostles." Matthew's prophets and wise men and scribes are probably Christian disciples alone; cf Matthew 10:41 and see the note on Matthew 13:52. You will kill: see Matthew 24:9. Scourge in your synagogues . . . town to town: see Matthew 10:17, 23 and the note on Matthew 10:17. All the righteous blood shed upon the earth: the slaying of the disciples is in continuity with all the shedding of righteous blood beginning with that of Abel. The persecution of Jesus' disciples by this generation involves the persecutors in the guilt of their murderous ancestors. The blood of Zechariah: see the note on Luke 11:51. By identifying him as the son of Barachiah Matthew understands him to be Zechariah the Old Testament minor prophet; see Zechariah 1:1.
19 [37-39] Cf Luke 13:34-35. The denunciation of Pharisaic Judaism ends with this lament over Jerusalem, which has repeatedly rejected and murdered those whom God has sent to her. How many times: this may refer to various visits of Jesus to the city, an aspect of his ministry found in John but otherwise not in the synoptics. As a hen . . . under her wings: for imagery similar to this, see Psalm 17:8; 91:4. Your house . . . desolate: probably an allusion to the destruction of the temple in A.D. 70. You will not see me . . . in the name of the Lord: Israel will not see Jesus again until he comes in glory for the final judgment. The acclamation has been interpreted in contrasting ways, as an indication that Israel will at last accept Jesus at that time, and as its troubled recognition of him as its dreaded judge who will pronounce its condemnation; in support of the latter view see Matthew 24:30.
You: “Do and observe all things whatsoever they tell you” since they seated on the chair of Moses, a “priestly official position” in Judaism. Also, the “Chair of Moses” is not found in the Old Testament text. Jesus was quoting from Tradition.
Me: You couldn't have gotten it MORE wrong. Jesus was CONDEMNING them. Jesus was NOT quoting from "tradition". He was actually saying what they are doing is wrong!
Here's the entire passage with no commentary. Please re-read it and see that Jesus was actually condemning them:
Matt.23
[1] Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,
[2] Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:
[3] All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
[4] For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.
[5] But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments,
[6] And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues,
[7] And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi.
[8] But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.
[9] And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
[10] Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.
[11] But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.
[12] And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.
[13] But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.
[14] Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.
[15] Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.
[16] Woe unto you, ye blind guides, which say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor!
[17] Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifieth the gold?
[18] And, Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoever sweareth by the gift that is upon it, he is guilty.
[19] Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifieth the gift?
[20] Whoso therefore shall swear by the altar, sweareth by it, and by all things thereon.
[21] And whoso shall swear by the temple, sweareth by it, and by him that dwelleth therein.
[22] And he that shall swear by heaven, sweareth by the throne of God, and by him that sitteth thereon.
[23] Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
[24] Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.
[25] Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess.
[26] Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also.
[27] Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.
[28] Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.
[29] Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous,
[30] And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.
[31] Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.
[32] Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.
[33] Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?
[34] Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:
[35] That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.
[36] Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.
[37] O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children
together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
[38] Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
[39] For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.
I hope that clears up your misunderstanding of Matt. 23
Now as for "tradition" this is what the Bible says on that:
Col.2:8
[8] Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
1Pet.1:18
[18] Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers;
It reinforces what is stated by Jesus in Matt. 23. We are ONLY to follow Christ and what is written in the Bible. Tradition and vain philosophy is condemned. This stuff, tradition and vain philosophy is precisely what got the Jews in trouble, spiritually.
I got alittle tired while typing this up so please excuse the typos. Hope this helps you out.
Me: I noticed another reply from you and thought I'd address it quickly. I truly don't have more time to spend on this. You are worth it, no doubt however I believe I have given you enough Scripture to have you reconsider your position and hopefully your source of knowledge - the Bible. You will NOT go wrong reading it. You will go wrong when you let others with an agenda drive your understanding. Read it yourself and avoid this compromise.
You: I seem to have a different interpretation on Chapter 5 of 2 Corinthian. It mentions in the bible’s commentary that “Paul may desire to put the resurrected body on over his mortal body, without dying”. Hence, verses 6 and 8 clarify that being in the mortal body, we can’t be in the resurrected body prepared by God for us (verse 5) and vice-versa.”
Me: I urge to compare what I wrote and read the entire passage and then make up your mind. Paul did not have this kind of authority. I don't understand your answer but when I read the passage I do not see this as a valid understanding.
You: Incidentally, verse 10: “For we must all appear, before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive recompense, ACCORDING TO WHAT HE DID IN THE BODY, WHETHER GOOD OR EVIL.” Another blow to Luther’s tradition of “Faith Alone”? .
Me: EXACTLY! No it does not make Luther a liar. Luther was RIGHT that FAITH is what qualifies you to SAVED and that is the PROPER context of his statement on "faith". The Catholic Church was advocating "works" not "faith" to get to heaven. Let's not fabricate things ... . All will stand before the throne but those that are saved will NOT be condemned. The saved will also have their deeds exaluated but they will not be going to hell as the unbelievers will. The judgement throne is for all but here the unbelievers will be punished. I really wish folks would stop hating Luther so. He is not your enemy. It is the Jews in the Old Testament that taught other Jews the practice of hating your enemy. For some reason Catholics have this incredible venom for him and it is completely unjustified.
Me: *** “I know, some will say "tradition" over rules God. I say "tradition" doesn't over rule God. It is God that determined the rules; not mere fallible mortals regardless of how ingrained a man made "tradition" is. “ ***
You: For man made tradition, I couldn’t agree more with your statement, especially “It is God that determined the rules.”
(My explanation on tradition below based on my limited knowledge may not be accurate and adequate. Any Catholic out there, please correct and help.)
However, Apostolic Tradition refers to the oral teachings of Christ entrusted to the Apostles. Many of these teachings were recorded in different manuscripts like the writings of the Apostles and the early church Fathers."
Me: I'm not sure whatyou are referring to but I would caution you to be VERY careful about "oral tradition". "Oral tradition" as you are describing it too often turns out like the "Whisper down the lane game". Bet on what is written in the Bible.
You: Some of these writings were compiled and canonized as the New Testament Scriptures in the third century by the Catholic church through the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Again, going back to John 21: 25. “There are also many other things that Jesus did, but if these were to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written.” Therefore, Paul said in:
1 Cor 11: 2 “ … hold fast to the traditions, just as I handed them on to you.”
Me: Let's take a look at 1 Cor. 11:2
[1] Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.
[2] Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.
[3] But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.
[4] Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.
[5] But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.
[6] For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.
[7] For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.
It goes on but there is nothing about "tradition" there. It's purly instructions on things.
You: 2 Thes 3:15 “Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours.”
Hence, the Apostolic Tradition can not have anything contradicting to the Holy Scripture for both come from the same source, our Lord Jesus Christ.
Me: Let's look briefly at 2 Thes 3:15
[13] But ye, brethren, be not weary in well doing.
[14] And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed.
[15] Yet count him not as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother.
[16] Now the Lord of peace himself give you peace always by all means. The Lord be with you all.
[17] The salutation of Paul with mine own hand, which is the token in every epistle: so I write.
[18] The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.
2Thes 3:15 and some verses for context say nothing abot oral tradion.
Me: I'm sure there are other writing on Jesus but at this point in time we do NOT know what is valid and what is not. Too much time has passed and we know nothing or little about the authors. Years from now they'll be some singing the praises of Bill Clinton's reign; yet you and I survived it and know otherwise. The same applies to those writings if they still exist.
Me: *** “In the NEW TESTAMENT, things change." ***
You: God’s law is timeless and applies to all mankind. Christianity is just an extension from Judaism. We can also say that Judaism is the forefather of Christianity. We Christians believe that Jesus is the son of God, who is also the God of Judaism. We also respect and honor their prophets and laws. Had Judaism accepted Jesus as the Messiah, then, Judaism and Christianity would be one; there won’t be a division or distinction.
Me: No problem with the above!
Me: *** “We, as Christians, are NOT under the Law. Christ fulfilled the Law.” ****
You: Paul wanted us to imitate Christ as in 1 Cor 11:1 “Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ.”
Matthew 5:48: “So be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect.”
The ten commandments are still our guides to righteousness and holiness,
Me: See we CAN AGREE on some things! Yes they are our dear guidlines even though we all fall short.
You: Note: It has been interesting, closed to additive in corresponding with you. However, I have many pending works that need my attentions and involvements. I have to refrain from writing for at least a week or two, that is if I can control myself. I learned a lot from our dialogs which prompted me to do research, an interesting but also time consuming task. Do write as from time to time, I will be checking and looking forward to your reply. May our good Lord lead us to all Truths.
Me: I've enjoyed talking to you too! It is good to have discussions like this. I also can't spend the time I would like on debating more. The real world is calling ... If you wish to add to this thread just give me a heads up via private e-mail on FR otherwise I'll miss it.
May you be blessed abundently and I hope we meet in heaven someday (soon). It's getting darker out there ... . Keep looking up!
Well, remember the sinles LIFE as only possible through Him, also, and His DEATH is what pays the penalty for our sins, not His resurrection!
Yes. His book was promoted by Dave Reagan years ago and I heard Renald speak at one of Reagan's conferences.
"Christ quoted from the book of Enoch, of which only the Orthodox include in their canon. Does this make Enoch Scripture? Nope! This is not a test of valid scripture."
Jude quoted Enoch. In my mind, that makes THAT portion only of Enoch inspired.
I dunno about the rest of the book.