Posted on 05/26/2008 4:50:16 AM PDT by NYer
You said: How about showing me in scripture where God says that anyone other than he himself DOES hear prayer?
It does not work that way. You are the sola scriptura believer. Where does it say only God can hear us?
I reject sola scriptura as the heretical recent man-made tradition that it is.
Sacred Tradition, that has been around for over 2000 years, vs. the recent protestant invention of sola scriptura, teaches the ability of the saints to hear us and pray for us the same way I might pray for you.
He was making a comment about me to another poster and did not add me to the ping. The other poster was pinged, not me.
Who claimed they were identical or interchangeable?
“Fit together perfectly” does not mean they are redundant, but rather more like complementary.
You said: And, to me, praying to anyone or anything other than God is practicing idolatry.
Another self-anointed magisterial interpretation of Holy Scripture which makes individuals the final arbitrator of Truth instead of God through His Church. If you put that kind of exegesis in place you end up with chaos, division and ever-expanding numbers of competing interpretations of scripture....hmmm..sounds like protestantism.
Wow, even before Jesus did His teaching.
You are conflating prayer with worship.
I tried to explain to the poster in #253 that commanding and “dids” are not different things, that the act of commanding is something someone does and that the other things Jesus “did” that were too numerous to be included in scripture includes things He commanded that were to be passed on.
Sacred Tradition IS HIS teaching.
Oops..I see what you mean..sorta like Christians writing the old testament...you knew what I meant.
To reach the conclusion that was reached, the subject had to be interchangeable and they weren't. Therefore the logic of the argument failed. You can not say that all things Jesus commanded to be taught are so much that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written, as the argument went unless the subjects were interchangeable.
Prayer IS worship.
Some interesting definitions, if one wishes to appeal to a dictionary:
Prayer (noun)
a solemn request for help or expression of thanks addressed to God or an object of worship : I’ll say a prayer for him | the peace of God is ours through prayer.
Worship (noun)
the feeling or expression of reverence and adoration for a deity : the worship of God | ancestor worship.
So, actually, when we pray, we DO reverence and adore God...so we DO worship him when we pray. So, to pray to anyone other than God is to worship that person or entity. And, again, to do that is to practice idolatry.
So, yes, I do conflate prayer with worship. I do so because prayer IS a form of worship.
Hoss
I am not the one limiting. You are the one. God's abilities are infinite as John stated, God's commandments to teach us were finite as Matthew discussed.
Note the "or's". Not all prayer is worship. A request for help is not worship. The Mass is a prayer of worship. A prayer like "Heavenly Father I adore Thee..." is worship. A prayer like "Heavenly Father I ask that the Indians beat the Yankees" is not worship it is intercessory prayer.
Nope. Some prayer is worship. Some is not.
Pray means ask. Look at the ENTIRE entry of one popular internet dictionary:
PRAY
v.intr.1. To utter or address a prayer or prayers to God, a god, or another object of worship.
2. To make a fervent request or entreaty.v.tr.
1. To utter or say a prayer or prayers to; address by prayer.
2. To ask (someone) imploringly; beseech. Now often used elliptically for I pray you to introduce a request or entreaty: Pray be careful.
3. To make a devout or earnest request for: I pray your permission to speak.
4. To move or bring by prayer or entreaty.
False.
God is infinite, not the limited God created by protestantism.
If you are referring to John’s last verse as indicating that God’s abilities are infinite then I can just say...wow... I have no idea how one would arrive at that, even with a self-created personal magisterial interpretation authority. That verse has NOTHING to do with what God can do. It has to do with a statement that Jesus did many more things that were not written by John.
You said: God’s commandments to teach us were finite as Matthew discussed.
Where in Matthew does it say Jesus made no other commandments?
Thanks, that brings up a most excellent point:
MATTHEW 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
The word 'commanded' is past tense. Therefore, Jesus had already taught the disciples 'all things' which Jesus commanded to be taught. QED.
The Catholics have this one right in my humble (Protestant) opinion. They have Scripture on their side, and there’s no use denying it. The little non-denominational church I attend has held to a basically transubstantiationist position for over a century.
______________________________________________________________________
I agree with you. My church does not believe it is meant to be the body of Christ, but all you have to do is look at what the people in the region believed after the crucifixion and it’s pretty hard to argue against the Cathollic/orthodox/Copic/syrian/ etc. position. Eventually you get to Europe and the Protestant Reformation and things are considered differently.
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.