Posted on 11/02/2011 9:26:44 AM PDT by DogwoodSouth
Well, I'm not a theological expert, so I can't explain exactly how praying for anyone (dead or not) works. I just know that we are commanded to pray for one another. Scripture commands us to "pray without ceasing" (1 Thessalonians 5:17) and specifically demands that we intercede "for one another" (James 5:16) and that we pray "for all" (1 Timothy 2:1). There are no qualifiers in these instructions; nothing that would act as though death has separated the Body of Christ or made prayers ineffective. In addition to this, we know that praying for the souls of the dead was a Jewish practice that Christians continued. 2 Maccabees 12:46 reads: "It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they might be loosed from sins."
Interestingly, the Apostle Paul seems to refer to praying for the dead (in this case, his friend Onesiphorus) in his second letter to Timothy. Specifically, he wrote (important part highlighted): "May the Lord grant mercy to the house of Onesiphorus, for he often refreshed me, and was not ashamed of my chains, but when he was in Rome, he sought me diligently, and found me (the Lord grant to him to find the Lord's mercy on that day); and in how many things he served at Ephesus, you know very well." At the very least, reasonable people could conclude that at the time Paul wrote this, Onesiphorus had died and left behind a family (i.e. "house"), and that Paul was praying in the highlighted words that Onesiphorus would be granted God's mercy on the Day of Judgement.
(Excerpt) Read more at southernfriedcatholicism.com ...
Only the elect go to purgatory.
So, you believe God is bound to time?
Where is it written that God turns a deaf ear to the pleas of His children when they ask for mercy for the dead?
Define elect.
That’s precisely what the Catholic Church teaches. He give his grace to us through the sacraments as a result of prayer, etc.
Maybe you should think about not praying because that adds to what Jesus did.
And you are coming at me with all sorts of Catholic dogma. I could take your points apart piece by piece. I could demand that you show Biblical authority for all your Holy Roman concepts. I could debunk all the papal traditions that have usurped the Gospel over the years. I could go on and on.
But I’ll just take my stand on the New Testament Church that Jesus died for and reject Catholicism, Protestantism and all sorts of other man made theologies and ignore your arguments as I stand on God’s word - not the Pope.
Have a Blessed Day.
I seem to recal that the Bible speaks to this.
Jesus Himself tells a story, (I believe it reads more like an EYEWITNESS account) Of a rich man and poor man. Both die. The poor man goes to Heaven, the rich to hades. The rich man is in torment, pleads for water and mercy, receives neither.
Further, he is told that no one will go back to warn his brothers. They have the same opportunity to believe or not.
For each man it is appointed to die, THEN (as in, after that)the Judgement.
So, while God is not bound by time, WE are bound by it. The time is NOW for all of us. WE have a decision, here and now, believe or dont. Having decidied, God honors that decision.
I do not pray for those who have apssed on, their die is cast.
I do pray for the living, especially those lost. Big difference
Hell isn’t Purgatory.
And prayers for mercy are prayers for mercy.
You seem to think that we are saying that prayer can change God’s mind and convert a dead, damned person into a saved person.
That’s not what we are saying at all. Purgatory is for the elect.
The simple fact is the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible) does not include the deuterocanonical books. Protestants do not include them as scripture because:
1) their authorship is unknown and none of the books claim to be inspired works.
2) there are doctrines in the deuterocanonical books that are at odds with the New Testament, such as salvation by works (Ecclesiasticus 3:30) and magic (Tobit 6:5-8)
3) Jesus never quoted from the Apocrypha
4) further, none of the Apocryphal books are quoted in the New Testament at all (yet the Tanakh is quoted from in many places.
Rejecting is a lot easier than understanding.
No, I am not saying that at all.
I AM saying that the idea of purgatory denigrates, diminishes Jesus. It puts forth that He is not sufficient to get you to Heaven, that you MUST have prayers of men to finish the deal.
Define elect.
Since no one in any way discounts the efficacy of Christ just because they believe the Bible and what Christ said the really amazing thing is to see so many people who lap up the lies and propaganda they've been fed. Especially when they need only read the Bible to correct their faulty understanding.
I would really, Really, REALLY like to see where Christ tells of Purgatory. Perhaps even the concept thereof, if not the word.
Show me.
Not the same thing. We are not talking about that. Jesus’ passion and death on the cross accomplished salvation for us. The holy souls are SAVED already! Don’t you get it?
I give up! :-)
No one believes you “must” have prayers from others in order to “finish the deal” while in Purgatory.
You might be better served studying Catholicism rather than pontificating about it.
Do you believe that your prayers for someone’s conversion are a “must”? Does God decide to save someone based on your actions?
I would think not.
Your prayers are not a “must” and do not denigrate Jesus.
Neither do mine.
The apocrypha are books like Enoch, the Testaments of the 12 Patriarchs, 4th Maccabees, etc., not 1&2 Maccabees, Judith, etc.
So, Jesus never quoted from Esther. I guess Protestants should toss it from their canon. The Hebrew version doesn’t even mention God.
There are numerous allusions or references to the deuterocanonicals: http://www.scripturecatholic.com/deuterocanon.html
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/767812/posts
2) there are doctrines in the deuterocanonical books that are at odds with the New Testament, such as salvation by works (Ecclesiasticus 3:30) and magic (Tobit 6:5-8)
You mean they are at variance with Protestant theology. Your attack there is kind of like the gay theologians who reject St. Paul’s comments about homosexuality because Jesus was silent on the issue in the gospels.
1) their authorship is unknown and none of the books claim to be inspired works.
Response: Plenty of the “canonical” books of the Bible do not claim to be inspired works. If this is a prerequisite for being recognized as canonical, we should throw out a lot more than 7 Old Testament books.
2) there are doctrines in the deuterocanonical books that are at odds with the New Testament, such as salvation by works (Ecclesiasticus 3:30) and magic (Tobit 6:5-8)
Response: Ecclesiasticus (aka Sirach) 3:30 in no way teaches “salvation by works.” Don’t understand that reference at all. And Tobit 6:5-8 in no way teaches magic. The Archangel Raphael teaches the young man to keep parts of the fish for medicinal purposes. To say that he was teaching magic is an extreme stretch in logic.
3) Jesus never quoted from the Apocrypha
Response: First of all, Jesus never quoted from many of the 39 OT books that you do consider canonical, so this argument is irrelevant. I mean, what about the Book of Ruth or the Song of Songs? Jesus didn’t quote from these, so are they not canonical? Secondly, we don’t really know if Jesus quoted from the “Apocrypha” because, as John 21:25 says, everything he said and did was not recorded.
4) further, none of the Apocryphal books are quoted in the New Testament at all (yet the Tanakh is quoted from in many places.
Response: I (and many biblical scholars) disagree. The writer of James almost certainly quotes Sirach 5:13-14 in James 1:19. Matthew 27:41-43 matches Wisdom 2:12-20, and John 10:22-36 matches both 1 Maccabees 4:36-59 and 2 Maccabees 10:1-8.
All in all, the Protestant Reformers unwisely threw out part of Sacred Scripture that had been used by Christians since the earliest days of the Church. What’s more mind-blowing in my mind, is that Protestants unhesitatingly accept the 27 books of the New Testament that were canonized by Church councils such as those at Rome, Carthage, Hippo, Florence and Trent. But the reject the some of the 46 Old Testament books defined by those same councils.
And for nearly 500 years, the heirs of the Reformation have been scrambling to defend this incoherent inconsistency and (amazingly) insist that THEY are right, but the REST of Christendom is wrong on this issue. Amazing.
The Catholic Church is the New Testament Church. BTW, it looks like you just called your own theology manmade.
Those destined for 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.