Posted on 01/05/2010 9:46:47 PM PST by the_conscience
I just witnessed a couple of Orthodox posters get kicked off a "Catholic Caucus" thread. I thought, despite their differences, they had a mutual understanding that each sect was considered "Catholic". Are not the Orthodox considered Catholic? Why do the Romanists get to monopolize the term "Catholic"?
I consider myself to be Catholic being a part of the universal church of Christ. Why should one sect be able to use a universal concept to identify themselves in a caucus thread while other Christian denominations need to use specific qualifiers to identify themselves in a caucus thread?
No thanks!
To a trinitarian they are one in the same.
Great reasoning! Also, nowhere in the bible does it say specifically don't do a host of other things,so I obviously can do all the things not specifically listed! Pharisee heaven Yippee
That is all I have been asking for!!! Please, tell me the scriptures!! If it's in the Bible, I WILL believe it!
There is none that says "pray to St. Mary (or St. Christopher, etc)". There are multiple verses where one asks for prayers of others.
Now that we are behind this little misconception, where does it say in the Bible that we should only do things mentioned in it?
I am not whining. If you think I am show me where.
NoGrayZone's request has been asked and answered several times.
Acts 8:34. the eunuch prayed to Philip.
You didn't like the answer. That is not my problem. But for you to start making false characterizations of my posts and my emotions, ...
Hey, I guess that's not my problem either.
If I don’t get scripture, all else is nonsensical. =)
So we obviously should think with our own heads before we do anything, listed or not listed.
The life of Mary is a great story....what I am looking for is SCRIPTURE IN THE BIBLE stating it is a okay to PRAY TO MARY.
Would SOMEONE just post the scripture already!!!! Why all the secrecy???
Well I disagree. You are claiming we are mocking you and are silly for calling you out. Then someone is ‘crawling you”, whatever that is. And you refuse to offer scripture to support your views.
Oh OK!:>)
I agree with you there.
How about this one - KJV? I read my Bible in Greek. I can send you that link, if you like
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=luke%2016:19-16:31&version=KJV
I guess this won't satisfy you. But it's in the Bible. Now the next move is you try to express WHY you don't think this answers your prayer, uh, request that we show you something from the Bible.
And then we look at that.
What if I were to say, Show me a verse from the Bible that says it's okay for you to discuss Christianity on the Internet. Imagine how that would go: You'd show a verse, I'd look at it and point out where I thought it was deficient, and so on.
So I have showed you a verse. A man prays to an apostle, it's right there in the King James version. Your move.
Yes, fact.
When Philip says “I pray you” all that is is old English translation for “Please” He’s addressing Phillip as one would a superior, he isn’t praying to him.
Unless THEY COME TO YOU, on Christs' behalf, no.
The examples you have given are ANGELS COMING TO THEM...NOT THEM EVOKING ANGELS.
You remain wrong and give every indication of persisting as such.
Correct; but He also does not state "do not pray to the one who lives under a rock"; however, it does say in John 14:13-14 that prayer to God MUST be said through Jesus.
If that doesn't say "don't pray to Mary", then we are at a standstill.
I am not a trinitarian (whatever that means, maybe I am and just don't know it!) so I don't give a flying who!
Saint Cyril wrote a series of letters to Nestorius, the heretic regarding this issue. You might like to read these letters.
In particular His 3rd Letter to the heretic might help.
http://www.orthodoxunity.org/document03.html
It was said firmly and more than once that God certainly does not share his glory with another. Here is a passage where there are angels and shepherds, but no theophany right there. BUT there IS the Glory of the Lord shining around them. You all made a claim, I addressed that claim. NOW your comment is:
Doesn't mean they should have bowed to worship or pray to the angel.
But that wasn't the matter I was addressing. Part of your over all claim was about God's glory. I addressed that part of the claim.
Now nobody is saying they should worship the angels. Nobody is saying anyone should worship Mary. Why are you arguing against something we are not saying? And the situation was not one in which the shepherds are recording as having anything they wanted to say to the angels, (well, maybe "Yipes!") so there's nothing here about praying to the angels.
The claim was about Glory. I have addressed that claim. You set a task, I complete it and then you complain I have not done some other task!
What does the Ethiopian eunuch have to do with Peter or paralysis? You guys! The text in the KJV is "And the eunuch answered Philip, and said, I pray thee, ...." And how or why I should start at Acts 9:26 and end at (;35 to interpret 8:34 utterly escapes me.
You asked for a text. I gave a text.
The problem is, I think, that you think "pray" means something you only do toward or with God. The KJV shows that the word is used in other ways. But that's not persuasive to you.
We AGREE that there are some things that belong only to God. Because of God's uniqueness and His unique due, some aspects of communication with Him are different from aspects of communication with saints and angels. We think communication with saints and angels is possible. You don't. So let's talk about that, not go around and around in circles about prayer where you insist the word means one thing and we insist it means another.
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.