Posted on 03/07/2014 10:14:06 AM PST by matthewrobertolson
Only trusting the Bible without the Church would be like loving "Romeo & Juliet" and hating Shakespeare's explanation of it.
"Follow" me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/crucifixwearer
"Like" Answering Protestants on Facebook: http://facebook.com/AnsweringProtestants
Add Answering Protestants to your Circles on Google+: http://plus.google.com/106938988929282894016
"Subscribe" to my YouTube videos: http://youtube.com/user/crucifixwearer
in regards to prayers directed TO anyone, other than God Himself.
Where does the the Apostle Paul instruct people to pray to anyone other than God?
How about Peter? Did he teach anyone to do so? The answer to that question is not only "no", but we can find place where Peter's own instincts (as a man) to move in that direction, were corrected by God as it is written, while the man Peter was yet speaking(!)
God put a stop to that right quick ---nipping it in the bud so to speak.
Do you know the scripture I'm talking about?
Yet what do [Roman] Catholics do but erect shrines to the departed...
It's a natural-man sort of thing to do, was corrected away from doing --- by occasion where God's voice was heard from on High speaking audibly, with those on earth (Peter, James, and John) hearing Him.
< I do think they got the message, or else-- there would have been in the holy land, the church of/shrines to Moses, and one to Elijah. But God said --- don't do that --- erect 'booths' or tabernacle to Moses (who represented the Law) & Elijah (who represented the Prophets) but instead look to Jesus instead --- as is written that God the Father spoke, "this is my beloved Son, hear him".
[Roman] Catholic theology long ago creeped into fully avoiding (the meaning of) that passage... resulting in preaching a Gospel different than Paul preached (or that Christ preached, for that matter!) for Paul was aware of the writings of other Apostles, arguably as soon as those where disseminated among the earliest, most primitive "church". I'm sorry the Romans cannot see the passage I'm talking about, and understand it. It's one of those instances where scripture refutes a portion of [Roman] Catholicism --- which is likely why Roman Catholics are blind to it.
Don't look now -- but you lose again. Of course it's not your own fault, for you did not invent the convoluted theology which is [Roman] Catholicism. Yet that same you do here espouse --- which is why you keep losing.
No doubt what you posted is the Roman Catholic teachings. Still looking for the apostolic teachings of Mary as an intercessory.
RLH,
Apostolic teachings arose before there were any established Canon of the Bible. Other than the very few archeological documents preserved to today such as the ‘Didache’ what we definitely have is the drawings, frescoes, and carvings and graffiti of ‘the catacombs’ - the hiding place of the first century Christians. Beyond that, the early second century writings of the Church Fathers who studied at the feet of the apostles. The following is a well footnoted summary that directly bears on your question:
As in Scripture, so too in the infant Church we see the attention of the faithful rightfully focused first and foremost on Jesus Christ. The divine primacy of Jesus Christ (with its appropriate worship of adoration) had to be clearly established before any subordinate corresponding devotion to his Mother could be properly exercised. Nonetheless, the beginnings of acknowledgement and devotion to the Mother of Jesus is present from apostolic times in the living Tradition of the early Church.
The first historic indications of the existing veneration of Mary carried on from the Apostolic Church is manifested in the Roman catacombs. As early as the end of the first century to the first half of the second century, Mary is depicted in frescos in the Roman catacombs both with and without her divine Son. Mary is depicted as a model of virginity with her Son; at the Annunciation; at the adoration of the Magi; and as the orans, the “praying one,” the woman of prayer. (1)
A very significant fresco found in the catacombs of St. Agnes depicts Mary situated between St. Peter and St. Paul with her arms outstretched to both. This fresco reflects, in the language of Christian frescoes, the earliest symbol of Mary as “Mother of the Church.” Whenever St. Peter and St. Paul are shown together, it is symbolic of the one Church of Christ, a Church of authority and evangelization, a Church for both Jew and Gentile. Mary’s prominent position between Sts. Peter and Paul illustrates the recognition by the Apostolic Church of the maternal centrality of the Savior’s Mother in his young Church.
It is also clear from the number of representations of the Blessed Virgin and their locations in the catacombs that the Mother of Jesus was also recognized for her maternal intercession of protection and defense. Her image was present on tombs, as well as on the large central vaults of the catacombs. Clearly, the early Christians dwelling in the catacombs prayed to Mary as intercessor to her Son for special protection and for motherly assistance. As early as the first century to the first half of the second century, Mary’s role as Spiritual Mother was recognized and her protective intercession was invoked. (2)
The early Church Fathers, (also by the middle of the second century), articulated the primary theological role of the Blessed Virgin as the “New Eve.” What was the basic understanding of Mary as the “New Eve” in the early Church? Eve, the original “mother of the living,” had played an instrumental, though secondary role, in the sin of Adam which resulted in the tragic fall of humanity from God’s grace. However, Mary, as the new Mother of the living, played an instrumental, though secondary, role to Jesus, the New Adam, in redeeming and restoring the life of grace to the human family.
Let us examine a few citations from the early Church Fathers that manifest this growing understanding of Mary’s spiritual and maternal role as the “New Eve,” who as the “new Mother of the living,” participates with Christ in restoring grace to the human family.
St. Justin Martyr (d.165), the early Church’s first great apologist, describes Mary as the “obedient virgin” through whom humanity receives its Savior, in contrast to Eve, the “disobedient virgin,” who brings death and disobedience to the human race:
(The Son of God) became man through the Virgin that the disobedience caused by the serpent might be destroyed in the same way in which it had originated. For Eve, while a virgin incorrupt, conceived the word which proceeded from the serpent, and brought forth disobedience and death. But the Virgin Mary was filled with faith and joy when the Angel Gabriel told her the glad tidings.... And through her was he born…. (3)
St. Irenaeus of Lyon (d.202), great defender of Christian orthodoxy and arguably the first true Mariologist, establishes Mary as the New Eve who participates with Jesus Christ in the work of salvation, becoming through her obedience the “cause of salvation for herself and the whole human race”:
Just as Eve, wife of Adam, yet still a virgin, became by her disobedience the cause of death for herself and the whole human race, so Mary, too, espoused yet a Virgin, became by her obedience the cause of salvation for herself and the whole human race.... And so it was that the knot of Eve’s disobedience was loosed by Mary’s obedience. For what the virgin Eve bound fast by her refusal to believe, this the Virgin Mary unbound by her belief. (4)
The teaching of St. Irenaeus makes evident the Early Church’s faith and understanding that Mary freely and uniquely cooperates with and under Jesus, the New Adam, in the salvation of the human race. This early patristic understanding of Mary’s unique cooperation appropriately develops into the later and more specified theology of Marian Coredemption.
St. Ambrose (d.397) continues to develop the New Eve understanding, referring to Mary as the “Mother of Salvation”:
It was through a man and woman that flesh was cast from Paradise; it was through a virgin that flesh was linked to God....Eve is called mother of the human race, but Mary Mother of salvation. (5)
St. Jerome (d.420) neatly summarizes the entire patristic understanding of the New Eve in the pithy expression: “death through Eve, life through Mary.” (6)
The Second Vatican Council confirms this early understanding of Mary as the “New Eve” by the Church Fathers, as well as the Fathers’ certain testimony to her active and unique participation in man’s salvation:
Rightly, therefore, the Fathers see Mary not merely as passively engaged by God, but as freely cooperating in the work of man’s salvation through faith and obedience.... Hence not a few of the early Fathers gladly assert with him (Irenaeus) in their preaching: “the knot of Eve’s disobedience was untied by Mary’s obedience: what the virgin Eve bound by her disbelief, Mary loosened by her faith.” Comparing Mary with Eve, they call her “Mother of the living” and frequently claim: “death through Eve, life through Mary” (Lumen Gentium, No. 56).
The Christian witness of the first centuries of the Church also provides us with examples of direct prayer to Mary as a means of intercession to the graces and the protection of her Son.
For St. Irenaeus, Mary is an “Advocate,” or interceding helper, for Eve and for her salvation. (7) St. Gregory Thaumaturgis (d.350) depicts Mary interceding for those on earth from her position in Heaven. (8)
St. Ephraem (d.373), the great Eastern doctor and deacon, directly addresses the Blessed Virgin in several Marian sermons. Direct prayer to Mary is also found in a sermon of the great Eastern Father, St. Gregory Nazianzen (330-389). (9) By the last part of the fourth century and the beginning of the fifth, we have numerous explicit examples of direct prayer to the Mother of God, for example in the writings of St. Ambrose, as well as by St. Epiphanius. (10)
As already referred to, the most complete ancient prayer to the Blessed Mother historically preserved is the Sub Tuum Praesidium (250 A.D.):
We fly to your patronage,
O holy Mother of God,
despise not our petitions
in our necessities,
but deliver us from all dangers.
O ever glorious and blessed Virgin.
Note that by the third century, our early Christian brothers and sisters already accepted Mary under the title of “Mother of God,” even though this title would not be solemnly defined for another two hundred years. Further, the early Church realized that direct prayer to Mary did not consist of forms of idolatry or adoration, as is sometimes mistakenly interpreted in our day, but rather as a spiritual communication of love and petition to the Mother of Jesus, who continues to care for the Mystical Body of her Son by her intercession.
Moreover, the Sub Tuum prayer tells us that the early Christian community went to their motherly Advocate especially in times of trial and danger. The acknowledgement of Our Lady’s special intercession, especially for the Church in times of danger, continues to our present day. (11)
By the time of the Council of Ephesus in 431 A.D., where Mary is formally declared the “Mother of God,” we have cathedrals dedicated to her in the central ecclesial locations of Rome, Jerusalem and Constantinople. After the Council of Ephesus, the Church experiences an extraordinary flourishing of devotion to the Blessed Virgin both in the East and the West, the quantity and quality of which would exceed the most comprehensive study. Historians have compared the expansive spreading of Marian devotion in both Eastern and Western “lungs” of the Church to the post Anno Domini development of Western civilization itself. Marian prayers, Marian liturgical feast days, Marian icons, Marian paintings and Marian artwork became ubiquitous throughout the Christian world after the Council of Ephesus.
The Second Vatican Council attests to this tremendous flourishing of Marian devotion from the early Church onward:
From the earliest times the Blessed Virgin is honored under the title of Mother of God, whose protection the faithful take refuge together in prayer in all their perils and needs. Accordingly, following the Council of Ephesus, there was a remarkable growth in the cult of the People of God towards Mary, in veneration and love, in invocation and imitation, according to her own prophetic words: “all generations shall call me blessed, because he that is mighty hath done great things to me” (Lk 1:48) (Lumen Gentium, No. 66).
Historians have further testified to the vast influence of Marian devotion upon the overall development of Western civilization. The British historian, Kenneth Clark (not a Catholic) describes in his excellent work, Civilization, the dramatic effect of devotion to the Blessed Virgin on Western civilization. He describes Mary as:
the supreme protectress of civilization. She had taught a race of tough and ruthless barbarians the virtues of tenderness and compassion. The great cathedrals of the Middle Ages were her dwelling places upon earth…in the Renaissance, while remaining Queen of Heaven, she became also the human Mother in whom everyone could recognize qualities of warmth and love and approachability…. The all-male religions (a reference to Israel, Islam and the Protestant North) have produced no religious imagery—in most cases have positively forbidden it. The great religious art of the world is deeply involved in the female principle. (12)
Along with the impact of devotion to Mary on Western civilization, the fruitful effects of Marian devotion on the proper dignity of woman has also been historically verified. The noted historian, William Lecky (neither Catholic nor Christian but a self-professed rationalist), offered these comments about the influence of Mary on the West:
The world is governed by its ideals, and seldom or never has there been one which has exercised a more salutary influence than the medieval concept of the Virgin. For the first time woman was elevated to her rightful position, and the sanctity of weakness was recognized, as well as the sanctity of sorrow.
No longer the slave or toy of man, no longer associated only with ideas of degradation and of sensuality, woman rose, in the person of the Virgin Mother, into a new sphere, and became the object of reverential homage, of which antiquity had no conception.... A new type of character was called into being; a new kind of admiration was fostered. Into a harsh and ignorant and benighted age, this ideal type infused a conception of gentleness and purity, unknown to the proudest civilizations of the past.
In the pages of living tenderness, which many a monkish writer has left in honor of his celestial patron; in the millions who, in many lands and in many ages, have sought to mold their characters into her image; in those holy maidens who, for love of Mary, have separated themselves from all glories and pleasures of the world, to seek in fastings and vigils and humble charity to render themselves worthy of her benedictions; in the new sense of honor, in the chivalrous respect, in the softening of manners, in the refinement of tastes displayed in all walks of society; in these and in many other ways we detect the influence of the Virgin. All that was best in Europe clustered around it, and it is the origin of many of the purest elements of our civilization. (13)
As no other besides her Son, the Mother of Jesus and the rightful doctrine and devotion granted to her from Scripture and the early Church, and further developed throughout the ages, has borne fruit in a proper respect for person, a proper respect for the unique dignity of woman, and a new cultivation of all that is good in Western civilization.
We conclude with the words of Dante from the classic The Divine Comedy, which typifies well the strength of devotion to the Blessed Virgin that has been evidenced throughout the history of the Church, based on the truth about her as revealed in the Bible and Apostolic Tradition:
With living mortals you are a living spring of hope. Lady, you are so great and have such worth, that if anyone seeks out grace and flies not to thee, his longing is like flight without wings. (14)
This article was excerpted from Introduction to Mary: The Heart of Marian Doctrine and Devotion, Queenship, Third Edition, June 2006, and is available from Queenship Publishing at 1-800-647-9882, www.queenship.org., or PO Box 220, Goleta, California, 93116, U.S.A.
Notes
(1) Cf. John Murphy, “Origin and Nature of Marian Cult” in Juniper Carol, O.F.M., ed., Mariology, Vol. III, Milwaukee: Bruce, 1961, pp. 4-5.
(2) Ibid., pp. 3ff.
(3) St. Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, ch. 100, Patrologia Graeca (PG) Migne, 6, 709-712.
(4) St. Irenaeus, Adversus haereses, Bk. 3, pg. 32, I; PG 7, 958-959.
(5) St. Ambrose, Epist. 63, No. 33, Patrologia Latina (PL) Migne, 16, 1249-1250; Sermon 45, No. 4; PL, 17, 716.
(6) St. Jerome, Epist. 22, No. 21, PL 22, 408; cf. Walter Burghart, S.J. “Mary in Western Patristic Thought,” in Carol, ed., Mariology, Vol. I, Bruce, 1955.
(7) St. Irenaeus, in J. Barthulot, Saint Irénée: Démonstration de la Prédication Apostolique, traduite de l’Arménien et annotée, in R. Graffin and F. Nau, Patrologia Orientalis (PO), vol. 12, Paris, 1919, pp. 772 et seq.
(8) Murphy, “Origin and Nature of Marian Cult,” Mariology, Vol. III, p. 6.
(9) PG 35, 1181; Murphy, “Origin and Nature of Marian Cult,” Mariology, Vol. III, p. 6.
(10) Cf. Ambrose, De virginibus, lib. 2, cap. 2; PL 16, 221ff; De instit. virginis, nn. 86-88; PL 16, 339-340; Epiphanius, Adv. haer., 3, t. 2; PG 42, 735, 742; Murphy, “Origin and Nature of Marian Cult,” Mariology, Vol. III, p. 6.
(11) Cf. John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation Christifidelis Laici, December 30, 1988, end of closing prayer.
(12) Kenneth Clark, Civilization, as quoted in Dan Lyons, The Role of Mary Through the Centuries, Washington, New Jersey, World Apostolate of Fatima.
(13) Cf. Lyons, The Role of Mary Through the Centuries.
(14) Dante, “Paradise” in The Divine Comedy, Canto 33.
from: “Mary in the Early Church” by Dr. Mark Miravalle
http://www.piercedhearts.org/hearts_jesus_mary/heart_mary/mary_early_church_miravalle.htm
Dr. Mark I. Miravalle, S.T.D., Mariology and Spiritual Theology professor at Franciscan University of Steubenville and President of the International Catholic movement, Vox Populi Mariae Mediatrici (Voice of the People for Mary Mediatrix). Besides being one of the most respected Mariologists in the world, he is an accomplished author, a prolific writer of numerous articles, a sought-after lecturer and an ordained permanent deacon in his Diocese.
Ad Majoram Dei Gloriam
Thanks. Your long post answers the question. Which is “no.”
None of the apostles epistles address the need or importance of Mary as an intercessor.
You could have saved the key strokes.
Do you honestly think that it was called the Catholic Church in the second century?
Do you honestly believe that the Christian martyrs hiding in the catacombs were Catholic?
Did the protestant church which hadn’t started for another 1500 years reject the Early Christians as Catholic?
Again I post this to all protestants if you don’t know, read and understand the Early Church Fathers you are ignorant of your own faith - what can be called Vincible Ignorance.
AMDG
My faith is not based on the writings of the ECF.
It is based on Jesus Christ alone for salvation.
The opinion pieces of the ECF’s matter little if they contradict Scripture, and are redundant if they agree.
I asked a simple question and received reams of elections which had no bearing on the matter.
I’ll ask again. Which apostle clarifies Mary’s role with regards to intercession?
it is obvious that you believe that when the last apostle died all revelation from and by the Holy Spirit died with them.
So all you have is what is written in the Bible, which you received from the Catholic Church.
The same Catholic Church which holds the original complete works, and oldest fragment of works of the books of the bible.
The same Catholic Church who voted on the Canon of the Bible and who accepted and rejected the very books you read.
The same Catholic Church who translated the bible from the original Greek and Aramaic texts into Latin via St Jerome.
The same Catholic church who copied and recopied the bibles BY HAND through the dark ages.
The same Catholic Church who printed the Bible (Gutenberg was a Catholic); but, probably unknown to you, that there had already been three or four printed versions of the Latin/German bible PRIOR to Gutenberg.
The same Catholic Church whose Councils defended early Christians against all heresies, which they did in writing and for which there is a printed record.
So today, I make and say The Sign of The Cross, repeat the Nicean Creed, sing the Sanctus, hold a Crucifix, gaze upon pictures of icons that are still today in the catacombs in Rome all whose origins are from the 1st Century AD.
In addition, I read the writings of Clement of Rome, Mathetes, Polycarp, Ignatius, Barnabas, Papias, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus; all who wrote in the First Century.
In addition, I read the bible and hear more Scripture read at Mass everyday, than most protestants hear in a month of Sundays (I know this from personal experience and complaints from protestant friends.)
However, your protestant predecessors have thrown out: the Sign of the Cross, the Crucifix, Latin prayers, the Mass, Icons, the books of the Apocrypha, prayers to the saints, the writings of the Early Church Fathers, and the list is endless - all of that thrown away.
I believe to be protestant is to be dead to history; since everything that was thrown out was also history - your history.
The protestants have a shell of a faith left over - it is no wonder they love the Bible - it is the only thing they have.
For The Greater Glory of God
Was that an answer sir?
I looked for any apostolic references in your reply and saw none.
I will take your response as a “no.”
PREFACE.
This volume, containing the equivalent of three volumes of the Edinburgh series of the Ante-Nicene Fathers, will be found a library somewhat complete in itself. The Apostolic Fathers and those associated with them in the third generation, are here placed together in a handbook, which, with the inestimable Scriptures, supplies a succinct autobiography of the Spouse of Christ for the first two centuries. No Christian scholar has ever before possessed, in faithful versions of such compact form, a supplement so essential to the right understanding of the New Testament itself. It is a volume indispensable to all scholars, and to every library, private or public, in this country.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.html
written I believe by protestant scholars who understand that first to fifth century Church History is their History.
AMDG
hey the Bible the only thing you have so you might as well just go for it - don’t confuse yourself by reading any thing else.
Lurking’
I read (and continue as such) most of the church fathers. None ever claimed to be an apostle of Jesus Christ.
I asked if you had an evidence of the NT apostles discussing the intercessory roles of Mary.
Again I will accept you circuitous “no” again.
As the “great Carnac” once said “the answer is no.”
“None ever claimed to be an apostle of Jesus Christ.”
so you are saying that ALL Divine Revelation stopped with the death of the last apostle, even the men who studied at the feet of the apostles and were ordained where never inspired by the Holy Spirit.
If so then that means that everyone who came after the apostles including the Apostolic fathers were frauds, including: Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, Polycarp of Smyrna, the Didache and the Shepherd of Hermas.
Apostolic authority
St. Polycarp, depicted with a book as a symbol of his writings.
The “Apostolic Fathers” are distinguished from other Christian authors of this same period in that their practices and theology largely fell within those developing traditions of Pauline Christianity or Proto-orthodox Christianity that became the mainstream. They represent a tradition of early Christianity shared by many different churches across cultural, ethnic, and linguistic differences. The tradition they represent holds the Jewish Scriptures to be inspired by God (against Marcionism) and holds that the Jewish prophets point to the actual flesh and blood of Jesus through which both Jew and Gentile are saved. Furthermore, they present the picture of an organized church made up of many different cross-cultural, sister churches sharing one apostolic tradition. Their ecclesiology, rejection of some Judaic values, and emphasis upon the historical nature of Jesus Christ stand in stark contrast to the various ideologies of more paganized Christianities, on the one hand, and more Jewish Christianities on the other.[22] They speak of certain other views as heterodoxy or heresy.[23]
Other texts written much later are not considered apostolic writings. They were actively denounced from the very beginning by men such as Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, and the writer of the canonical First Epistle of John as being “anti-christ” and contrary to the tradition received from the apostles and eyewitnesses of Jesus Christ. The texts presenting alternative Christianities were then actively suppressed in the following centuries and many are now “lost” works, the contents of which can only be speculated.
The writings of the Apostolic Fathers are in a number of genres, some, e.g. the writings of Clement of Rome are letters (also called epistles), others relate historical events, e.g. the Martyrdom of Polycarp, and one (the Didache) is a guide for ethical and liturgical practice.
Apostolic connection
The early church relied on apostolic authority in separating orthodox from unorthodox works, teachings, and practices. The four Gospels were each assigned, directly or indirectly to an apostle,[24] as were certain other New Testament books. Earlier church fathers were also associated with apostles: Clement with Peter (associated closely with Rome) and with Paul (as the Clement Paul wrote about in Philippians 4:3), Papias and Polycarp with John (associated with Asia Minor). Due to various overlaps between the writings that later were included into the New Testament and the writings of the Apostolic Fathers, the latter ones have drawn an increasing attention of the New Testament scholarship.[25]
AMDG
Where do the church fathers claim their works are on equal footing with the OT and NT Scriptures?
Still I will accept “no” as the answer since I have yet to see Scriptures quoted for the intercessory role of Mary. Unless you view the writings of the church fathers as equal to the NT Scriptures?
Yes, those Fundamentalists who do not subscribe to the liberal revisionism sanctioned under Rome, in their own Bibles.
But the Bible directs us to invoke those in heaven and ask them to pray with us. Thus, in Psalm 103 we pray:
That is absurd! You cannot find even ONE prayer in all of the hundreds of prayers in Scripture , so you attempt to use a parroted polemic which wrests poetic language in order to support it.. But which is no more invoking those in heaven and to pray with us than it asking the sun and moon and stormy wind to do so, as calling upon such to praise the Lord is exactly what such language also does:
"Praise ye him, all his angels: praise ye him, all his hosts. Praise ye him, sun and moon: praise him, all ye stars of light. Praise him, ye heavens of heavens, and ye waters that be above the heavens." "Let them praise the name of the Lord: for he commanded, and they were created." (Psalms 148:2-5)
"Praise the Lord from the earth, ye dragons, and all deeps: Fire, and hail; snow, and vapour; stormy wind fulfilling his word: Mountains, and all hills; fruitful trees, and all cedars:" (Psalms 148:7-9)
"Let them praise the name of the Lord: for his name alone is excellent; his glory is above the earth and heaven." (Psalms 148:13)
Thus the specious Catholic hermeneutic would support praying to the sun and moon, and is like that of the Mormons who invoked poetic language that ascribes human body parts to God in order to support their doctrine that God is an exalted man.
Yet as the late Walter Martin pointed out to them, this hermeneutic renders God to be a bird, since it also states, "He shall cover thee with his feathers, and under his wings shalt thou trust: his truth shall be thy shield and buckler." (Psalms 91:4)
Psalms do convey literal truths, (Ps. 69, etc.) including asking of God, "let the angel of the Lord persecute them" (Psalms 35:6) but the language here is not speaking of literally asking angels to praise God, which is nowhere seen. Moreover, even it was, then it is not asking them to intercede on their behalf, which surely would be exampled or taught if that was sanctioned.
But it never is, nor does asking others on earth to pray for us equate to that, and praying to those in Heaven ascribed to them the ability to personally hear virtual unlimited amounts of prayer, and mentally at that, which is an attribute only God is shown as having.
And to whom believers have direct access to by the sinless shed blood of Christ. (Heb. 10:19)
And the risen Lord Jesus is the only Heavenly intercessor we are exhorted to come to, seeing as He ever liveth to make intercession for the saints, and alone was tempted in all aspects as we are, yet without sin. (Heb. 4:15; 7:25) "For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted." (Hebrews 2:18)
More on this here .
No red herrings for you, eh?
I can't find it for ANY dead person!!!
I can find, however, that the dead in CHRIST will rise at the sound of the last trump; to be with the Lord FOREVER!
“Unless you view the writings of the church fathers as equal to the NT Scriptures”
Are you surprised when I tell you that all Catholics view the writings of the Church Father to have significant standing in our beliefs.
Good grief man that’s what make you a protestant and me a Catholic.
As said before protestants threw out the the Sign of the Cross, the Crucifix, Latin prayers, the Mass, Icons, the books of the Apocrypha, prayers to the saints, the writings of the Early Church Fathers, and the list is endless - all of that thrown away and they were part and parcel of the Church life for early Christians.
These things we have because we BELIEVE the Church to be both Scriptural and traditional.
That’s why I said you have to rely 100% on the Bible it’s the only thing you’ve got. I just believe that your history is the same as our history of which the Apostolic and Early Church Fathers were and integral part.
BTW I appreciate the manner and detail of my discussions with you - even though we do disagree.
Regards
AMDG
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.