Posted on 01/15/2012 10:10:29 PM PST by bibletruth
1 Timothy 2:5 ...one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.
If there is a debate here then it must follow Bible Scriptures to advocate reproofs, corrections, and instructions on how God the Father has ordained and appointed someone other than HIS SON Christ Jesus as that mediator. In light of 1 Timothy 2:5 - there is no debate here since God's Word clearly points out that that mediator is is Christ Jesus, who has been appointed 2,000 years ago between God and men.
So you pray to a creation, rather than the Creator?
The prayers of the Church go directly to Christ, as our head. Even on earth, there are people who we trust to speak what we feel in our hearts, because they are more gifted. What you are denying implicitly is that Mary and the other saints are members of the Church. That they are can be our spokesman, because they are oblivious to us or unable to hear us.
So you pray to a creation, rather than the Creator?
_
The term “pray,” when commonly used by Catholics, simply means “to ask.” It’s the old English usage, I.e., “I pray thee, etc.” We simply ask Mary, the other saints in heaven, and the saints here on earth, to pray to God for us. We are all parts of Christ’s mystical Body —a united Body. We pray for each other. Why object?
It is a non-biblical tradition of some Protestants to demand that every Christian activity be described explicitly or mandated by Scripture, but regardless, we see in Revelation angels offering to God the prayers of the saints:
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/praying-to-the-saint.
Because talking to the dead is forbidden in Scripture.
Because Christ Himself taught us how to pray (and it wasn't to Mary).
Because you are indicating doubt in His promises when you pray to another.
Because you indicate pride in yourself, thinking that you can pressure God from another vantage point to grant your prayers.
Is that enough?
Well, I ask that the saints pray for me, just as I ask the members of my congregation. We have a concept known as the communion of the saints. That includes the faithful departed as well as the living.
So you think that all human relationships end with the grave?
Romans 8:26-27 26 Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness. For we do not know what to pray for as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words. 27 And he who searches hearts knows what is the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints according to the will of God.
Romans 8:34 Who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who diedmore than that, who was raisedwho is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us.
What you are denying implicitly is that Mary and the other saints are members of the Church.
Not in the least. Show me where I said that if you think it.
That they are can be our spokesman, because they are oblivious to us or unable to hear us.
Yeah, that I'm denying. There is no Scriptural support for that at all. There is no indication that they can hear us, that they have the ability to answer those prayers.
They are redeemed men and women and not omniscient nor omnipotent.
And besides, nobody knows for sure if any of the men or women the RCC has canonized as saints are actually, really in heaven. It's only assumed they are because the church says so, but I don't see that there's any way of verifying it.
He or she can use the term subconsciously and cannot use the term unconsciously? I fail to see the distinction.Please explain.
It appears that you don’t get what *making it personal* is, since I recall seeing you confused about it before.
*Making it personal* to the moderator is wording something in a manner that indicates you know what the person is thinking or deliberately doing, IOW, you know the motive behind what they’re doing, or what they were thinking when they made their comment.
A direct comment like *you ignore* is attributing motive, implying that you know what the person is thinking. (post 159)
In post 144, Iscool said *You probably do it subconsciously... *, which is just guessing at what’s going on inside your head.
Flat out out statements of *you do such and such*, or *you know* or some sort of thing, are making it personal.
It’s also a focus on the poster instead of what they said.
It takes a while to get the sense of when someone is making it personal and even veterans of the RF sometimes slip and get caught up in it in the heat of the moment.
Yes, do you think we believe otherwise? And besides, nobody knows for sure if any of the men or women the RCC has canonized as saints are actually, really in heaven. It's only assumed they are because the church says so, but I don't see that there's any way of verifying it.
That follows from your rejection of the authority of the Church. But if you are wrong on the one, you are wrong on the other. Indeed, the same argument can be made about the canon of Scriptures. Apart from what the Church says, we have no way of verifying what is Holy Scripture and what is not. You use us and we"in a way that implies Paul is addressing us as individuals. but he is specifically addressing the Church of Rome and by extension Church in general. It is, of course, the Spirit who addresses you and me, and unlike you I do not exclude the role of the Church in providing these words to us.
Except that a huge chunk of the prayers to Mary and the saints are FOR things, not merely asking them to pray for us.
In addition, time spent in prayer to them is time not spent in prayer to God to whom are are commanded by Jesus Himself to pray.
God has promised us that He Himself would hear and answer our prayers. What's the point of going to someone else, when God Almighty, the Creator of the heavens and earth, our loving heavenly Father who knows how to give good gifts to His children, promises us HIMSELF that He will answer HIMSELF.
This is part of the subtle way that Catholicism teaches that God is a capricious, demanding, judgmental and harsh taskmaster. It teaches that we need to go through someone else because it's going to be easier for us to get what we want from Mary, for example, than if we went to the Father Himself.
But really? Mary is going to do something for us that God wouldn't do for us Hinself? She's going to counter His will?
Sure you do.
It does require that you do your own thinking and make your own decision, however...
In order for Mary to hear and answer all the prayers that go to her every day across the globe, she would have to be.
Does Catholicism teach it in so many words? No. Do they act as if they believe it? Certainly.
That follows from your rejection of the authority of the Church.
Christ is our authority. Darn straight I reject the authority of the church. Jesus did not come to establish another system of religious observances and hierarchy. If that's what He was after, the one sent down from Mt. Sinai was just fine.
Apart from what the Church says, we have no way of verifying what is Holy Scripture and what is not.
What was recognizes as Scripture was recognized as Scripture before the RCC came into existence.
You use us and we"in a way that implies Paul is addressing us as individuals. but he is specifically addressing the Church of Rome and by extension Church in general.
That's because the real true church IS individuals. The Bride of Christ is composed of redeemed individuals who've put their faith in Christ for their salvation. It is NOT a religious institution or hierarchy.
Catholics are hopelessly confused about the NT definition of the body of Christ, the church. It's not their fault. It's all they know because it's all they've been taught.
It is, of course, the Spirit who addresses you and me, and unlike you I do not exclude the role of the Church in providing these words to us.
If we have the Holy Spirit and Scripture, there is no need for the filter of a *church* or any other such body that lays claim to being able to interpret Scripture better than anybody else.
No doubt, but I suspect that you still don’t get it; what *making it personal* is all about.
Address what was said, not the person who said it.
This is a caricature of Catholic teaching, although not of the way some Catholics think. It seems to have been the way that Luther thought, and why despite his gifts he was a bad monk. He should have listened to his dad and become a lawyer. No, Catholics think in more communitarian terms than some protestants, except for those sects who form communities, such as the Amish. or the Pilgrims. In many respects these are much like the monastic communities, except they embrace a wider segment of society. Anyway, Catholics believe in what Chesterton called the democracy of the dead. It is not only we who matter, but all Christians living and dead. The dead wait for us at the end of time, waiting for the resurrection, joined with us by the law of Charity.
But there’s no Scriptural support for that theology or philosophy.
I've been following your posts with mm, and would like to ask one question here. Are you saying it is the "law of Charity" that unites believers? Whether living or dead, the "law of Charity" is the unifier?
It gets complicated. Dont know about you but I am trying to argue back from stated conclusions.
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.