Posted on 09/02/2011 9:07:47 AM PDT by marshmallow
Minneapolis, Minnesota (CNN) –Prior to 2006, few people even knew that then-Minnesota state legislator Keith Ellison was a Muslim. Because of his English name, he said, no one thought to ask.
But five years ago, when he ran for a seat in the United States House of Representatives - a race he would go on to win - word of his religious affiliation began to spread.
“When I started running for Congress it actually took me by surprise that so many people were fascinated with me being the first Muslim in Congress,” said Ellison, a Democrat now serving his third term in the House.
“But someone said to me, ‘Look Keith, think of a person of Japanese origin running for Congress six years after Pearl Harbor–this might be a news story.’”
Though Ellison's status as the first Muslim elected to Congress is widely known, fewer are aware that he was born into a Catholic family in Detroit and was brought up attending Catholic schools.
But he said he was never comfortable with that faith.
“I just felt it was ritual and dogma,” Ellison said. “Of course, that’s not the reality of Catholicism, but it’s the reality I lived. So I just kind of lost interest and stopped going to Mass unless I was required to.”
It wasn’t until he was a student at Wayne State University in Detroit when Ellison began, “looking for other things.”
(Excerpt) Read more at religion.blogs.cnn.com ...
It seems some will take any opportunity to be hurtful to another with whom they disagree. Everyone can read in Scripture that we can and should be praying for each other. Paul asked many times for this both for himself and his ministry as well as other Christians and the lost. I do not agree, however, that we are EVER told to pray FOR or TO those who are dead already. But it is part of your Dogma, so do what you want, just don't expect all of us to believe it.
Met, I will always be happy to pray for you!
The protestants discovered Saul telling the Witch of Endor to summon up Samuel from the grave, and from that episode in the OT concluded that asking for intercessory prayers from saints was the same thing: witchcraft, that would send any believer who prayed to a saint, to hell.
Short version, but essentially accurate, I think. Any protestant who wants to argue about it is, of course, encouraged to do so.
bb, you are a charming FReeper, and I often read your posts with interest. However, I have read many times from your friends here that any prayer to anyone who is dead is absolutely verboten! The same as witchcraft, as I recall.
What do you think about prayers to the saints in heaven? Do you think it is witchcraft? Or not? I am asking you, because I think if anyone can be more or less rational on the subject, you can.
Thanks. The idea that speaking with or prayers to one who has died was called "necromancy" and entailed using one who had a "familiar spirit", in other words, a witch or a medium. God strictly forbid it and it was the primary reason King Saul was removed from his reign and died. Repeatedly in Scripture, the Jews were commanded to NOT try to contact the dead under penalty of death. If you remember, King Saul went to the Witch of Endor to conjure up the prophet Samuel, knowing full well it was gravely sinful. Why he thought God wouldn't know about it, mystifies me, but don't we all sometimes think God is off busy somewhere else. I read many places where in both the Old and New Testament prayers are either to God or asked of someone alive still. Nowhere are we EVER told to pray for the dead.
Where the idea even came about is interesting. From http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04653a.htm:
Catholic teaching regarding prayers for the dead is bound up inseparably with the doctrine of purgatory and the more general doctrine of the communion of the saints, which is an article of the Apostle's Creed.
The doctrine was developed many centuries after the Apostles had all died. The Catholic Encyclopedia admits that the Catholic Church has no clear or explicit Scriptures on which to base the doctrine other than a vague reference from the Apocryphal book of II Maccabees. I do not believe that there is a purgatory simply because the Bible is so clear about our "standing" in Christ that means all our sins have been paid in full. Christ IS our place of purgation because he has made us white as snow by his shed blood. When we die, we go to be with the Lord because we have been made righteous through him. So just as the dogma of purgatory is not a Scriptural one, the doctrine tied to this - prayers to and/or for the dead - has no Scriptural one either.
I know that your Church has developed the doctrine of prayers to/for the dead from several things such as a few passages from Scripture that may have some allusion to it, ancient liturgies, catacomb writings and ECF writings. For me, I do not consider those evidence enough to draw the conclusion since none of those things ARE clearly stated in Scripture.
I just noticed that it is after 3 a.m., and I need to go to bed. We can discuss more if you want tomorrow. If you're still up, have a peaceful sleep. My first paragraph reminded me of a joke:
Did you hear about the midget witch that escaped from jail?
The headline read, Small Medium at Large :o)
Thanks bb. That is the discussion, summarized as I recall.
Throughout my life, I have had experiences after my parents died and more recently after my husband’s death that convinced me that they were happy, in heaven and that they were close to Christ and His angels and saints.
I do not consider it “contacting the dead” or using a “familiar spirit” when I talk to my parents or my husband. Protestants can call it whatever they wish, it won’t bother me a bit. For what it’s worth, I did not experience any of them as in purgatory, either.
For what it’s worth, I’ve never sought any information from any of them, just enjoyed the perception of their joy and peace. I have no idea if they hear me or not, when I talk to them, but I’m certain I’m not the only FReeper who has talked to a loved one who has died. I’m even told that it is a normal part of the grieving process.
The doctrine of purgatory is a familiar one to me, and I agree, let’s leave it for another time.
3:00 am is a normal time of prayers for me, so I bid you a restful night.
check your freepmail
From DEAD people?
Ain't computers wunnerful!
But if the argument against the intercession of the saints (and asking for it) is based on the direct access to Jesus, then the intercession of the not-yet-croaked saints comes into play. If someone is going to argue against my view on the grounds of direct access being completely sufficient so that asking for the prayers of the previously-croaked-for-your-convenience saints is superfluous, then they've ruled out asking for the prayers of their homies as well.
It's a matter of parsing out the issues of contention. One is communion with the dead. ANOTHER is direct access to Jesus. Isn't that fair?
So we have counter-positions to the dead thing, and it seems that "the other side" themselves have counter-positions (or, at least, some 'splainin' to do) on the direct access question.
"My side" is all over asking for prayers. But when we advocate asking for the prayers of those who, we think, behold God's face, then an argument is offered which SEEMS to say we should only pray directly to Jesus. That seems inconsistent. Therefore we raise the issue.
However, the idea of the communion of the saints hinges on the question of the power of the Spirit to establish koinonia versus the power of death to divide.
We hold the Spirit prevails. Love is stronger than death.
However, the idea of the communion of the saints hinges on the question of the power of the Spirit to establish koinonia versus the power of death to divide.
We hold the Spirit prevails. Love is stronger than death.
I'm sorry. Nothing personal. But I get mightily sick of 'the other side' raising an issue and then objecting that an argument against ONE aspect of it is not an argument against ALL aspects of it.
Work with me here. TWO (at least) arguments are raised against the intercession of the saints. ONE is that they're supposedly dead. ANOTHER is that it makes no sense to ask for the prayers of another person since we all have direct access to our Lord.
The argument against the matter of their being dead or having died is ONE argument. The argument against whether it makes sense to ask for the intercession of anybody but Jesus is ANOTHER argument.
Now, IF the aim is to obfuscate, to confuse, or to avoid the appearance of having been refuted, then it makes rhetorical sense, but not 'sense' in the more important meaning of the word, to criticize the OTHER argument because it does not address the issues of the ONE argument.
But if the aim is to examine the issues with the use of reason, then to raise the issue of "I see dead people" when we're looking at "whether there's a good reason to ask for the intercession of anybody but Jesus" is in the theological world what demagoguery is in the political.
Are we about trying to think clearly and to approach the Truth, or are we about appearing to vanquish our opponents and sowing confusion?
No, he didn't:
We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.
Not according to the Book:
Revelation 20:11-1511 Then I saw a great white throne and him who was seated on it. The earth and the heavens fled from his presence, and there was no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. 13 The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done. 14 Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. 15 Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.
I know a lot of great saints, but I don't know any great Saints, and neither does any one else...
Not according to the Book:
Daniel 12:2And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.
What about Drew Brees? ;)
Not according to the Book:
1 Thessalonians 413 Brothers and sisters, we do not want you to be uninformed about those who sleep in death, so that you do not grieve like the rest of mankind, who have no hope. 14 For we believe that Jesus died and rose again, and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him. 15 According to the Lord’s word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever. 18 Therefore encourage one another with these words.
Who says the 'saints' are in Heaven?
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.