An interesting deconstruction of the Catholics' claim that Mary is analogous to the Ark of the Covenant.

Status
Not open for further replies.
The problem with this analogy is the God is not the Pope and God has not just now asked a question. God has a standing invitation out for anyone to ask of him, but that is not the same thing as the social situation you used for comparison. In that social situation with Pope, the incongruity comes from defying social norms to answer when directly asked a question. With God and has standing invitation, the same incongruity does not exist.
Really that is so but RCs like to make out their leaders are in persona Christi and the pope vicar of Christ.
 
The problem with this analogy is the God is not the Pope and God has not just now asked a question. God has a standing invitation out for anyone to ask of him, but that is not the same thing as the social situation you used for comparison. In that social situation with Pope, the incongruity comes from defying social norms to answer when directly asked a question. With God and has standing invitation, the same incongruity does not exist.
Then go see my analogy of a father and two children.
 
No, they don't. And I don't accept your definition of prayer.

I don't care if you accept that definition or not, you've proven your god is anything but the Lord. The biggest factor in this is the telling me that the biblical gospel was told to me wrong. The rc god is certainly NOT the Lord, and your proving it by what you post.
 
You certainly are assuming. "It would be wrong to assume that the chosen people never prayed to the prophets" Thats you assuming something. I gave a verse where Daniel prayed to God. My point stands. You assume something nowhere found in the bible. But that goes for all distinct rc doctrine isn't it? Nothing you believe that is distinctly roman catholic is in the bible;

papacy
sacerdotal priesthood
auricular confession
penance
marian dogmas....

Your church makes excuses for all of these. "Its a later development"...acorn to oak tree..Why is it we can find what we believe but you can't? You have to assume your practices. I couldn't be in a religion so full of holes. I don't know why that doesn't bother you or other catholics more...or at all.
We can't find where scripture teaches that it alone is the final/sole authority for the Christian faith. Scripture clearly teaches us, though, that the Holy Spirit would guide us into all the truth. It doesn't limit truth to just what is found in scripture alone.
 
The problem with this analogy is the God is not the Pope and God has not just now asked a question. God has a standing invitation out for anyone to ask of him, but that is not the same thing as the social situation you used for comparison. In that social situation with Pope, the incongruity comes from defying social norms to answer when directly asked a question. With God and has standing invitation, the same incongruity does not exist.

RiJoRi is spot on with his assessment.
 
True. But since he was supposedly the first pope, should the rest of the church gone along with him in his hypocrisy, obeying and copying him without question, as Catholics are supposed to do with their popes, as Catherine of Siena stated?
matt23: 3 do what they tell you, then, continue to observe what they tell you, but do not imitate their actions, for they tell you one thing and do another.
 
True. But since he was supposedly the first pope, should the rest of the church gone along with him in his hypocrisy, obeying and copying him without question, as Catholics are supposed to do with their popes, as Catherine of Siena stated?
Catherine of Siena, as I have explained before, was using hyperbole to illustrate the importance of respecting the authority of the Pope. She was not claiming that popes never behave badly. She was responding to people who took it upon themselves to decide the truth without considering what the Church and it's Pope have said about it.
 
Exactly. Which is why he circumcised Timothy so that they could evangelize to the Jews together.
isn't this what peter did when he dined with the gentiles and then drew back overawed by the presence of the christian jews?
 
I am talking about the inspiration of the Scriptures. What Paul wrote ("he stood condemned" etc.) was true because the Spirit moved him to write those words.
same as what is in the scripture. infallibility is on matters of faith and morals, it is not about sinlessness. Paul condemned the behavior of Peter but it does not mean he does not believe in what peter taught on faith and morals.
 
[[
same as what is in the scripture. infallibility is on matters of faith and morals, it is not about sinlessness. Paul condemned the behavior of Peter but it does not mean he does not believe in what peter taught on faith and morals.
ramcam2 said:
same as what is in the scripture. infallibility is on matters of faith and morals, it is not about sinlessness. Paul condemned the behavior of Peter but it does not mean he does not believe in what peter taught on faith and morals.
================================== end Ram post


Paul, an apostle,​
not of men, neither by man,​
but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father,​
who raised him from the dead;​
..​
But I certify you, brethren,​
that the gospel which was preached of me​
is not after man.​
12 For I neither received it of man,​
neither was I taught it,​
but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.​

ahhh Ram;
Paul had no part in what
"Peter taught on faith and morals"

"The just shall live by faith"​
not the words of the Law​

in fact, Paul vehemently rebuked Peter
for teaching the Gentiles had to be circumcised

------------Binding and Loosing--------​
See Acts ch. 15

And certain men which came down from Judaea
taught the brethren,
and said,
Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses,
ye cannot be saved.

and Peter was to be blamed

Matt.18:17​
Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee,​
go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone:​
if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.​
16 But if he will not hear thee,​
then take with thee one or two more,​
that in the mouth of two or three witnesses​
every word may be established​
17 And if he shall neglect to hear them,​
[/INDENT]
When therefore Paul and Barnabas​
had no small dissension and disputation with them,​
they determined that Paul and Barnabas,​
and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem
unto the apostles and elders about this question.​
tell it unto the church:​
but if he neglect to hear the church,​
let him be unto thee as​
an heathen man and a publican.​
18 Verily I say unto you,​
Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth
shall be bound in heaven:​
and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth​
shall be loosed in heaven.​

See Acts ch. 15

And certain men which came down from Judaea​
taught the brethren,​
and said,​
Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses,​
ye cannot be saved.​

and Peter was to be blamed​
 
Last edited:
There is no prohibition against praying to the saints in heaven.

Wrong. The Word of God explicitly condemns asking anything of the dead on behalf of the living.





Yes. It says exactly that.


the Scripture condemns the spiritualism practices of the pagan nations near by

Which asked things of the dead on behalf of the living.


Just when I think Catholics cannot say anything more insane, here we go.

Jesus Christ is NOT dead.
And just when I think my words cannot be misrepresented any more, here we go. I didn't say Jesus Christ is dead. I said that he has died.

You would know that would not be relevant in a discussion about prayers to the dead.

Stop playing all innocent. You attempted to lump Jesus Christ in among the dead to justify prayers to the dead.

"I could also point out that Jesus himself has passed on, and yet we pray to him."
 
We can't find where scripture teaches that it alone is the final/sole authority for the Christian faith. Scripture clearly teaches us, though, that the Holy Spirit would guide us into all the truth. It doesn't limit truth to just what is found in scripture alone.
We know that scripture limits us to God's will and nowhere does it say follow men. You have to meet God's requirements to be guided by the HS and your leaders do not meet those requirements.

Of course it doesn't limit truth to scripture but it limits spiritual truth to God's word. I mean planes are a truth not in scripture. RCs say the most absurd things to support their false beliefs.

It is scripture that reveals the truth about what God wants, what His will is and how to judge, test and discern the truth. Your institution fails the scriptural tests except the bad tree, its leaders do not pass the scriptural requirements for leaders, their behaviour throughout the centuries shows who they follow and it is a sad history of defiance against God.

Scripture is speaks strongly about God's word, here are some verses. Scripture never speaks that way about the RCC and its leaders.

Heb 4:12

12 For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.
God's word brings life to us, changes us. I don't know why RCs belittle God's word and make out it is not enough because it is alive, it is active, it is not dead and dusty words in an old book.

John 17:17

Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth
God's word is truth, the RCC has a problem with truth throughout history. It has destroyed the history of others, whitewashed its history, it has lied about people, it lied about and to its many, many victims.

2 Tim 3:16+

All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work

Interesting this is not said about the word of men.

The authority of scripture is declared by Peter and Paul:

2 Peter 1

21 For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

This is showing that God is the real author of scripture

2 Peter 1

20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things.

It is Satan who attacked God's word and threw doubt on it. This is what most RCs have done. This attack started in the garden.

Gen 3:1

Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?”

The RCC has been taken captive, yet they were warned against this:

Col 2:8

8 See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ.

Jude 1

4 For certain individuals whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord.

How often have we heard RCs tell us about the philosophies of men and the connection with their beliefs. This should immediately throw up the warning signs.

Got questions sums it up nicely:

This makes it clear that no other writings, no matter how godly the pastor, theologian, or denominational church they may come from, are to be seen as equal to or completing the Word of God.


Scripture is clear DO NOT ADD, or go BEYOND or take away/ignore the word of God. Even though RCs have tried to make up this isn't the case. They are wrong. The NT is not an addition to scripture as they claim because these words are repeated in the NT and the NT is the finishing off of God's covenants with His people. The NT is repeating a lot of the OT. Peter confirms Paul's writings as scripture etc.

Rev 22:18

I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book,

Th
e very words do not add, go beyond or takeaway limits us to the word of God. Any thing else is the word of man.
 
Catherine of Siena, as I have explained before, was using hyperbole to illustrate the importance of respecting the authority of the Pope. She was not claiming that popes never behave badly. She was responding to people who took it upon themselves to decide the truth without considering what the Church and it's Pope have said about it.
Yep so you say. Her meaning is clear, it does not matter how rotten a pope is follow him. That is wrong we are ONLY to follow Jesus.
 
------------Prayers to the Dead--------

Ecc.9:6
For the living know that they shall die:
but the dead know not any thing,
neither have they any more a reward;
for the memory of them is forgotten.

6 Also their love, and their hatred,
and their envy, is now perished;
neither have they any more a portion for ever
in any thing that is done under the sun.

-----------so -----------

Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do,
do it with thy might;
for there is no work, nor device,
nor knowledge, nor wisdom,
in the grave, whither thou goest.​

as Job says
The Dead don't even know if you showed up at their funeral

His sons come to honour,
and he knoweth it not;
and they are brought low,
but he perceiveth it not of them.​

Why pray too those that cannot hear you,
help you, nor have ever again
"a portion or knowledge for ever
in any thing that is done under the sun
."

and those that tell you different
are really saying to
"Seek unto them that have familiar spirits"

And when they
(these teachers / councilors)
shall say unto you,
Seek unto them that have familiar spirits,
and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter:​

Bind up the testimony, seal the law among my disciples.

should not a people seek unto their God?
for the living to (about) the dead?​

To the law and to the testimony:
(these teachers / councilors)
if they speak not according to this word,
it is because there is no light in them.

and ; OHHHhhhh, how great is that darkness
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top