Rest For Your Souls

Stella1000 said:
We certainly do. He is our intercessor regarding the virtue of patience. As I said before, where nonCC's close the door at the death of people, Catholics don't. Our communion never ends with the death of the temporal body.
Click to expand...

None of the apostles EVER approved of any form of adulation of them. And neither did the angels. NONE, NADA, ZIP, ZILCH. Any time any person tried that, the apostles flat out, and out told the person to NOT do it. Worship God only. And for you to be attempting to talk to someone who is no longer alive on earth is necromancy. People don't speak prayers to the dead to hear themselves, they expect the dead to hear them. You just said communication never ends with death. Communicating with the dead in any way, is necromancy. . Doesn't matter if your not conjuring up the dead through a medium. It is, what it is.... even if you have cut out the middle man
 
A new day said:
None of the apostles EVER approved of any form of adulation of them.
Click to expand...
People recognised Pauls righteousness and holiness so much so that they came to him to touch him and then bring healing to their loved ones. Is that adulation? To me it is Gods Will for us to recognise His presence in others.

And neither did the angels. NONE, NADA, ZIP, ZILCH. Any time any person tried that, the apostles flat out, and out told the person to NOT do it. Worship God only. And for you to be attempting to talk to someone who is no longer alive on earth is necromancy. People don't speak prayers to the dead to hear themselves, they expect the dead to hear them. You just said communication never ends with death. Communicating with the dead in any way, is necromancy. . Doesn't matter if your not conjuring up the dead through a medium. It is, what it is.... even if you have cut out the middle man
Click to expand...
Angels have been communing with man since the days of Genesis. An angel appeared to Mary. The book of Hebrews records this bit of info...

“Do not forget to show hospitality to strangers, for by so doing some people have shown hospitality to angels without knowing it” (Hebrews 13:2).

And for you to be attempting to talk to someone who is no longer alive on earth is necromancy. People don't speak prayers to the dead to hear themselves, they expect the dead to hear them. You just said communication never ends with death. Communicating with the dead in any way, is necromancy. . Doesn't matter if your not conjuring up the dead through a medium. It is, what it is.... even if you have cut out the middle man
Click to expand...
I actually said 'communing' which is a more appropriate word for expressing a supernatural relationship but my perspective is that complete detachment from ancestors and forebears is more a modern atheistic trait. Throughout their history both Jews and Gentiles have always been open with remembrances and communion with their forebears/ancestors/martyrs.
 
Stella1000 said:
People recognised Pauls righteousness and holiness so much so that they came to him to touch him and then bring healing to their loved ones. Is that adulation? To me it is Gods Will for us to recognise His presence in others.
Click to expand...
There is NOTHING in Scripture which even hints that anyone is to give the apostles or anyone else other than God any form of adulation. Just because God authenticated paul's preaching, does not mean, that paul deserved adulation. And it certainly was NOT permitted.
 
A new day said:
There is NOTHING in Scripture which even hints that anyone is to give the apostles or anyone else other than God any form of adulation. Just because God authenticated paul's preaching, does not mean, that paul deserved adulation. And it certainly was NOT permitted.
Click to expand...
You are the one who keeps saying 'adulation'. I've never mentioned it. But just as Pauls righteousness and holiness were recognised and he was sort out, so it is with other Saints.
 
Acts 14

11 When the crowd saw what Paul had done, they shouted in the Lycaonian language, “The gods have come down to us in human form!” 12 Barnabas they called Zeus, and Paul they called Hermes because he was the chief speaker. 13 The priest of Zeus, whose temple was just outside the city, brought bulls and wreaths to the city gates because he and the crowd wanted to offer sacrifices to them.

14 But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of this, they tore their clothes and rushed out into the crowd, shouting: 15 “Friends, why are you doing this? We too are only human, like you. We are bringing you good news, telling you to turn from these worthless things to the living God, who made the heavens and the earth and the sea and everything in them. 16 In the past, he let all nations go their own way. 17 Yet he has not left himself without testimony: He has shown kindness by giving you rain from heaven and crops in their seasons; he provides you with plenty of food and fills your hearts with joy.” 18 Even with these words, they had difficulty keeping the crowd from sacrificing to them.
 
Stella1000 said:
I actually said 'communing' which is a more appropriate word for expressing a supernatural relationship but my perspective is that complete detachment from ancestors and forebears is more a modern atheistic trait. Throughout their history both Jews and Gentiles have always been open with remembrances and communion with their forebears/ancestors/martyrs.
Click to expand...

Regardless of any reasons or excuses for doing this, Scripture is clear that we are NOT to attempt in any way, to communicate with the dead or pray and worship them or worship angels

Scripture calls any attempt to communicate in any way with the spirit world “sorcery” or “witchcraft”, a sin that is severely condemned in many passages of Scripture. And it is written in God's laws in the OT, that any person found doing so, was to be put to death. That is how strongly God feels about it. Scripture forbids talking to the dead, because it relies on supernatural guidance that comes from a source other the God. Whatever the ultimate source may be, their desire is to lead people away from the living God.
 
Stella1000 said:
I've not said worship either. I refer to whatever the sensation that drew the people to Paul to touch him for the healing that God worked through him. That's what we identify with.
Click to expand...

Does NOT matter what word you used, whether it is communication, veneration, adoration, extra recognition, reverence, etc.... There are many synonyms for the word worship. People don't as you put it, "communicate" with the dead, to hear themselves talk. They do it with the expectation of being heard and with the expectation of receiving something in return from the dead person.

Prayer is, like it or not a form of worship. And like it or not, any form of "communicating" with or TO the dead is necromancy. And whether your just merely giving "extra recognition" to a dead person. God says in Scripture not to do it. No form of it at all.

Any time anyone spoke the way your speaking, the apostles always stopped them and redirected the person or persons to Jesus. They never accepted any form of "extra recognition". Why? Because "extra recognition" belongs to God.

Acts 3:12-13
When Peter saw this, he said to them: “Fellow Israelites, why does this surprise you? Why do you stare at us as if by our own power or godliness we had made this man walk? The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified his servant Jesus.

move down to verse 16

By faith in the name of Jesus, this man whom you see and know was made strong. It is Jesus’ name and the faith that comes through him that has completely healed him, as you can all see.

Acts 14:15
“Men! What are you doing? We are merely human beings like yourselves! We have come to bring you the Good News that you are invited to turn from the worship of these foolish things and to pray instead to the living God,

Acts 10:25-26
As Peter entered the house, Cornelius met him and fell at his feet in reverence. 26 But Peter made him get up. “Stand up,” he said, “I am only a man myself.”
 
Stella1000 said:
You are the one who keeps saying 'adulation'. I've never mentioned it. But just as Pauls righteousness and holiness were recognised and he was sort out, so it is with other Saints.
Click to expand...

Your posts give the impression of and imply that paul was deserving of adulation. peter's question in regard to the above statement is spot on, here it is again.

Acts 3:12-13
When Peter saw this, he said to them: “Fellow Israelites, why does this surprise you? Why do you stare at us as if by our own power or godliness we had made this man walk?
 
balshan said:
Yes he knew. He had excuses for not doing anything. The article I posted had links to the report. He said he was not sure Risdale should be allowed to go on a school camp, he knew that Risdale was the gossip at the local pub and then made out he wasn't sure. Then there are so many more priests he knew about in his career one from Dandenong was gross. You can read about Searson at Kelsolawyers - Peter Searson. This man killed animals in front of children, the rest should be read but I do not feel suitable for here.
Click to expand...
Thanks. I just saw this, about Pell's funeral, from UPI:

 
pilgrim said:
The man is dead. What exactly does your "what then" mean?
Click to expand...
If you had read my entire post, you would have seen where I wrote "IF he is guilty--then what?"

First, I wrote "IF." Then I wrote "then what?"

How do you get judgment out of "then what?"?
 
Bonnie said:
Ah! Did your auto-correct go a bit wild? :)
Click to expand...
Ha ha yes. I hate auto correct. On Friday afternoon I texted my husband to please get a wine on his way home and auto correct corrected that to a 'winery'. :) Which would have been quite nice as well.
 
Bonnie said:
Thanks. I just saw this, about Pell's funeral, from UPI:

Click to expand...
Oh there is so much more than can be said about Pell and I have not mentioned things that have not been proven. I have stated the truth about his trial, appeal and second appeal. I noticed the RCs do not seem to read the truth about their leaders, as if that somehow makes them clean. I mean really some will want him declared a saint, are they kidding. If this man is ever named a saint we will have prove that their so called saints are phoney. Because this man did not expose sin.
 
Stella1000 said:
Ha ha yes. I hate auto correct. On Friday afternoon I texted my husband to please get a wine on his way home and auto correct corrected that to a 'winery'. :) Which would have been quite nice as well.
Click to expand...
A whole winery? Wow! That WOULD have been great! ?

I have put this on here before, but you know what autocorrect REALLY is, don't you? It is a teeny, tiny little elf that lives in your electronic devices, works very hard, and means well, but in reality, is just drunk.

Maybe the elf owns his own winery...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top