Posted on 12/09/2006 8:03:09 AM PST by stfassisi
Catholic Ping!
This writer is not well informed so take it with a grain of salt. Only God has immortality!
According to God's Word, souls do die! We are souls, and souls die. Man is mortal (Job 4:17). Only God is immortal (1 Timothy 6:15, 16). The concept of an undying, immortal soul goes against the Bible, which teaches that souls are subject to death.
Do souls die?
"The soul that sinneth, it shall die." Ezekiel 18:20. "Every living soul died in the sea." Revelation 16:3.
The holy messengers are still with us...
The Lord's messengers... warriors... healers...
And then, when he presented his honored Son to the world, God said, “Let all the angels of God worship him.
God calls his angels...
“messengers swift as the wind,
...and servants made of flaming fire.
--Hebrews 1:6-7 (NLT)
You,re not making any sense.
Re read the article again.
FYI,the thread I posted is for Catholics, if have not noticed
So you are saying this a devotional post and only for Catholics?
That would explain why you all are putting up with the blatent falsehoods portrayed here.
Point to a "falsehood."
The expression for death in Scipture is probably better translated as a 'state of existence involving separation'. 20th century secular philosophers have attempted to replace the existence of the soul with an existential materialism, positing the soul is merely a process of materialism. That is not the meaning of the soul or spirit in Scripture.
Additionally, the word 'soul' is frequently used in the Old Testament translations in a fashion which merges soul and spirit, whereas the New Testament tends to discern between soul and spirit.
When we say the soul is dead, it might be better understood that the soul is separate from an object which has life or is associated with life. For example, when we sin, we disobey God, by His immutable nature, He remains righteous, but in our sin we have separated ourselves from Him, i.e. dead to Him.
There may also be the separation of soul and spirit upon the second death. Our first death is generally associated with the separation of soul and/or spirit from the body.
The descriptor in Job 4:17 is of 'mortal man', identifying our present state of body soul and spirit which will undergo the first death or separation of the soul from the body. The body may also die or collapse falling into its constituent dust.
1Tim 6:15,16 testifies to the immortality and uniqueness of that immortality attributed in His essence, or His deathlessness.
Some express these observations by stating the soul of the believer has eternal life. This is because believers who die before the resurrection are always associated with a body throughout that eternal life. The first body is corruptible and will return to the dust, while we have an interim body immediately upon death but prior to the resurrection, at which time we receive our thirs body or resurrection body. The eternal life of the believer was given him by God at salvation by the regeneration of the spirit.
With this stated, you are correct in that the soul experiences a death or state of existence involving separation when leaving the mortal body for heaven.
Perhaps the intent is better expressed that Christians who advance in faith believe in angels.
Anything added to faith in God through Christ voids that faith as a saving faith. Accordingly, it is possible to be a believer, i.e. a Christian, with faith in God through Christ, yet not yet have been cognizant of angels or further advanced in faith and sanctification to yet recognize them. There may be many testimonies yet to be made in resolving the angelic conflict which still call upon a saint, uncognizant of the angelic domain, to bear an appropriate witness for their observation.
1. There was no angel in the burning bush.
2. Just because angels are not married or given in marriage does not mean that they have no bodies. Ezeikel sites two angels as female.
3. heirarchy is not God like, mearly a word designating order.
4. Holy simply means set apart; not "like God"
Now of course you hide under your auspices of your supposed authority even when it contradicts common usage of words and speculation beyond reason.
The other mistakes and blatant falsehoods are simply props used to maintain the mistakes made by priests and bishop too arogant to recant.
I can list more if you like. You simply wont deal with them. I have seen your post before.
Finanly as difficult as it would have been to simply answer my original question, was this a devotional post, I would then have refrained from posting again.
Oh really? Does my reputation really proceed me? I think you simply don't know what you're talking about, and ask that you retract your comment.
The scriptures are for ALL people! The bible is the light unto our path and a lamp at our feet, and it is not a book of fables.
Thanks, the article was so poor and so lacking in truth, that I did not bother to go over it all. Of course, it was not an angel in the Burning Bush. Thanks for trying to help this poor writer.
I simply mean to say that you are not interested in intelectual honesty when it comes to catholasim. You do not deal with the contradictions of tradition and dogma that are clearly a problem in your tradition. You have gone out of your way to belittle others and then hide behind your acusation of their huberis by saying they wont submit to authority. If that is untrue or inacruate then I will retract that statement.
This article is case in point; their were obvious fabrications based on assumptions that are making the text and common sense stand on it's head. But I clearly see the mark of man made tradition and the monopoly of catholasims behind them. To state that an angel has no body based on the simple statement that they " are neither married nor given in marriage" is taking it too far.
This article is repleat with many of these flagrent speculations presented as truth.
That sir, is what I have noted that you do not deal with.
No, I do not deal what YOU see as apparent contradictions. I do not accept your sola scriptura theology.
You have gone out of your way to belittle others and then hide behind your acusation of their huberis by saying they wont submit to authority. If that is untrue or inacruate then I will retract that statement.
Where have I belittled others? I'd like to point to at least one example.
Overall, if you want to be credible, it helps to spell-check your posts. You may be the most intelligent person in the world, but if you come across as sloppy through your numerous typos/misspellings, how can people take you seriously?
Do not call the scripture "SACRED" if you regard it as some sort of a meaningless joke.
It is very presumptuous of you to think that I hold Sacred Scripture as a "meaningless joke."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.