Results 1401 - 1420 of 1443
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Emmaus Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1401 | Rev 1:20 | Rev 1:20 | Emmaus | 27911 | ||
Brannon, If there was ever a book that requires a lot of help and even then leaves many questions it is the Book of Revelation. Below is a passage from one commentary I have regarding Rev 1:20. "The angels of the seven churches may stand for the bishops in charge of the them, or else the guadian angels who watch over them, or even the churches themselves insofar as they have a heavenly dimension and stand in God's presence as angels do. Whichever is the case, the best thing is to see the angels of the churches, to whom the letters are addressed, as meaning those who rule and protect each church in Christ's name. He is the only Lord, which is why He is shown holding the stars (angels) in his right hand. In the Old Testament the "angel of Yahweh" is the one charged to guide the people of Israel (cf. Ex 14:19; 23:20 etc.); and in the Apocalypse itself angels are given the mission of ruling the material world (cf. Rev 7:1; 14 ;18; 16:5). So Christ exercises his loving care and government of each church through the mediation of "angels", but it is difficult to say whether this means angels as such, or bishops or both." The Navarre Bible, commentary on Revelation Emmaus |
||||||
1402 | "am I wrong in thinking that you pray to | Bible general Archive 1 | Emmaus | 27558 | ||
Nolan, Peter's three fold denial and the threefold questioning of Jesus are obviously related. I think also related to those passages is Luke 22:31-32. Jesus redeems the fallen and makes His strength known through the weak by the power of the Holy Spirit. I have often pondered also the different way Peter's story ended compared to that of Judas. Faith in Jesus even in the face of cowardice and failure can lead to repentence and redemption and being lifted up, but despair and lack of faith in the same situation is deadly to body and soul. |
||||||
1403 | "am I wrong in thinking that you pray to | Bible general Archive 1 | Emmaus | 27507 | ||
Hank, I feel I have probably not done justice to this subject about which so much has been written. I have tried to stick strictly to the biblical roots of the subject. The dogmatic documents on Papal Infallibility are very narrow in scope. Only under very limited specific circumstances does the doctrine apply and only in matters of faith and morals. All other circumstances do not apply and it has rarely been exercised outside of a Council setting and then only after extensive consultation with bishops worldwide. I am not going to post Church Council document on the subject because it seems inappropriate on this list and seems likely to generate more heat than light. You can find the Vatican I document at the following link. It is rather formal in tone and structure like most official church document. http://www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/V1.HTM#6 The Vatican II document on that touches on the subject can be found at the following link: http://www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/V2CHURCH.HTM starting at paragraph 18 as you scroll down. If I had to recommend a single book on the subject it would be: Jesus, Peter and the Keys, A Scriptural Handbook on the Papacy By Scott Butler, Norman Dahlgren and David Hess It is an exhaustive treatment that cites Catholic and Protestant scholars along with the Scripture and the Fathers. I assume like very other book in print it can probably be found at Amazon.com if you have that much interest. I have taken the time to read the archives of your other earlier posts as well as your profile. I enjoy your style of humor and repartee. It is somewhat reminiscent of J. Vernon McGee’s style. It seems only fair you should know something about me. We have an insurance background in common. I am a claims adjuster with prior police experience. I grew up in Washington D.C. and have lived in Baltimore for 33 years. I was raised in a large Catholic family. We did read and discuss the bible at home as well as hear it at Mass. I often wonder what Church all those other Catholics went to who say they never heard scripture there and were told not to read the Bible. Thanks you for your patience. I think I will take a break. |
||||||
1404 | "am I wrong in thinking that you pray to | Bible general Archive 1 | Emmaus | 27496 | ||
Hank, A few other passages that deal with Peter’s unique position among the Apostles are: Luke 22:31-32 “ And the Lord said unto Simon, Simon, behold, Satan has desired to have you that he may sift you as wheat; But I have prayed for you, that your faith does not fail; and when you are converted, strengthen your brethren.” John 21:2, 15-17. In this passage Jesus questions Peter three times whether he loves Him. “Do you love me more than these?” Jesus tells Peter, “feed my lambs…, tend my sheep…, feed my sheep.” He is appointing Peter as the Shepherd of his flock. But he does not address the several other Apostles who are present. It is clear that Peter is to shepherd not only the flock of lambs but also the other sheep. This has been interpreted by some to refer to the laity as lambs, and the clergy as sheep. All including Peter himself are sheep of Christ’s flock with Jesus the ultimate shepherd. But again Jesus is here delegating His authority to Peter to be a shepherd of the flock and the other shepherds. Earlier Jesus had promised the special guidance of the Holy Spirit to guide the Apostles and the Church in all truth. John 14:16-18, 26 and John 16:12-13. It is the Holy Spirit who will preserve the Church and the successors of the Apostles from teaching error. There are too many passages of Scripture Old and New Testament to list indicating the imagery of the shepherd as ruler. But this is the image in which the Apostles are cast by Jesus, with Peter as the chief shepherd by Jesus’ delegation of authority. The other Apostles do have similar authority invested in them by Jesus, but Jesus never gives them the keys nor deals with them in the special individual manor He deals with Peter. Their authority is real but must be in unity with Peter, the guarantor of the unity of the Church on earth by Christ’s investiture. The other Apostles or bishops represent the diversity of the Church and Peter its essential unity. I will not go into all the early Church Fathers who support this general understanding. I will only mention one of the earliest, a successor of Peter who asserted his universal authority over another local Church. That is Clement of Rome whose Letter to the Corinthians some wanted o be included in the Canon of Scripture. In that letter, circa 80-98 A.D., Clement asserted his authority over the Corinthian Church as Peter’s successor. The letter is easily available on any number of web sites. I cite it only because it is so early in the apostolic succession and because some argue that papal authority was an invention of the fifth century. The outward dressing of that authority may have developed over the years but the inner essential has remained the same. The dogmatic formulation was done at the Vatican Council I, 1870 and further refined at Vatican II. ……… |
||||||
1405 | "am I wrong in thinking that you pray to | Bible general Archive 1 | Emmaus | 27231 | ||
Hank, A scriptural antecedent or Old Testament type of the kind of commission Jesus gives to Peter in Matt: 16:18-19 can be found in Isaiah 22:15-25. It is the description of the delegation of authority to the chief steward or minister of the king. The steward is given the key of the House of David It is an office with succession. The authority over the House of David is transferred from one servant to a new servant and his line. Much as the stewards of temple worship in Jerusalem were cut off and Jesus the Son of David passes the authority of His house to Peter. You see there also the transfer of authority to bind and loose even as given to Peter in Matthew. What examples do we have in scripture of Peter exercising this authority? They are found in Acts 1:15 Peter leads the other apostles in the selection of Matthias to succeed Judas in his office. Acts 2:14 Peter is first to proclaim the Gospel at Pentecost. Acts 3:1-12 The first public miracle is worked through Peter. Acts 4:8-12 Peter professes the faith before the Sanhedrin. Acts 5:1-5 Peter exercises Church discipline on Ananias and Sapphira dramatically and Acts 5:3-10 speaks with amazing and frightening authority. Acts 5:15 The faith of the people in Peter’s authority is demonstrated by their actions. Acts 8:14-15 Peter goes to Samaria to lay on hands so the Holy Spirit would come. Acts 8:20-24 Peter speaks for the Apostles rebuking Simon Magus. Acts 10:1-48 Peter baptizes the first Gentiles into the Church. Acts 11:18 Peter’s authority in baptizing Gentiles is accepted after he explains actions. His decision was binding on the Jewish Christians to accept the Gentiles and loosing for the Gentiles, loosing them from any obligation to be circumcised. Acts 15:1-35 At the Council of Jerusalem after much debate on the matter of the Gentiles Peter again states his position on the question. The assembly falls silent, Paul and Barnabas speak, and James accepts and supports Peter’s doctrinal Declaration. James then addresses the issues of minimum disciplines the Gentiles must practice now that they are accepted without having to be circumcised. If one accepts the scriptural evidence of Peter’s primacy among the Apostles, which Catholics do, the next question is whether the office of the Apostles and their authority can be transmitted from generation to generation within the Church. The first scriptural evidence that the office of the Apostles can be transmitted is found in Acts 1:15-30.When Matthias is chosen to succeed in the office left vacant by Judas Iscariot. Later in Acts 13:1-3 Hands are laid on Barnabas and Paul. The true apostles after the original twelve are recognized because they are sent the original Apostles who have laid hands on them so that they speak with true authority. See also 1Timothy 4:14, 2 Timothy 1:6, Titus 1:5 See Matt: 10:40-41, John 14:16-18 and John 16:12-13. This extremely brief treatment, excludes the Church Fathers witness on the subject. Continuing.... |
||||||
1406 | "am I wrong in thinking that you pray to | Bible general Archive 1 | Emmaus | 27130 | ||
Hank, This will require multiple posts. As you may already be aware the Catholic position on Peter, the papacy and papal infallibility starts at Matthew 16:18-19. “And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." Anyone demanding a proof text that says literally: “the popes are Peter’s successors and are infallible” should read no further. It isn’t in the bible and you won’t find it here. A discussion of Church structure and authority also presumes a belief in a visible Church. Catholics believe in that also, based on their understanding of scripture, others may not. Catholics as everyone knows are not “ Sola Scriptura” or “Bible Alone” people. Which is not to say they are unbiblical people, opinions to the contrary notwithstanding. Infallibility is not impeccability. Popes can and do sin. Some few seem to have wallowed in sin. That is not what this discussion is about. Let’s start with Matt 16:18 in its context: Matt 16:13-19 When Jesus went into the region of Caesarea Philippi he asked his disciples, "Who do people say that the Son of Man is?" They replied, "Some say John the Baptist, others Elijah, still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets." He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" Simon Peter said in reply, "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God." Jesus said to him in reply, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." At this point a few facts indicating Peter’s primacy among the Apostles seems in order. In the New Testament, Peter, under his various names, Simon, Peter, Cephas, Kephas, Simon Peter, is mentioned 195 times. The closest after him is the Apostle John mentioned 29 times. Whenever all the names of the Apostles are listed Peter is always first and Judas Iscariot is always last. Matt 10:2-5, Mark 3:16-19, Luke 6:14-17, Acts 1:13. Sometimes they are referred to only as “Peter and his companions” or in a similar manner. Luke 9:32, Mark 16:7, Acts 2:37. Peter is seen as the spokesman for the whole group in Matt 18:21, Mark 8:29, Luke 8:45, Luke 12:41, John 6:68-69. |
||||||
1407 | "am I wrong in thinking that you pray to | Bible general Archive 1 | Emmaus | 26992 | ||
When did I ever say Mary or we merited grace? We have no dispute on the definition of grace. You seem set on finding points to argue. That is not my purpose on this forum. I am here give my answers or notes on scriptual questions and to hear others. I do not attack them or their positions. If you can show where I have initiated an attack please do so. You have accused me of blasphemy, heresy and idolatry. I must admit I have grown to expect this from certain quarters, but I have never grown used to it. It is not a very good strategy for winning hearts minds or souls. |
||||||
1408 | Where did the word Rapture come from? | Bible general Archive 1 | Emmaus | 26987 | ||
The English word rapture is not found in English translations of 1 Thessalonians 4:17. Rapture is a transliteration of "rapiemur" in the Latin Vulgate New Testament of St Jerome. 1 Thes 4:17 deinde nos qui vivimus qui relinquimur simul rapiemur cum illis in nubibus obviam Domino in aera | ||||||
1409 | "am I wrong in thinking that you pray to | Bible general Archive 1 | Emmaus | 26985 | ||
"Let's look at Luke 1:28" and Ephesians 1: 6 The angel went to her and said, "Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you." Luke 1:28 (NIV) And what is grace but God’s favor freely bestowed? Highly favored, full of grace, perfected in grace. The Greek work is in the perfect tense participle, “kecharitomene”. ”All of these versions use the word "favored" or "highly favored." The exact Greek word is used in one other place in the New Testament. Does it refer to Mary? No. Jesus? Nope. Then to whom does it refer? Let's take a look: “ Yes, let’s take a closer look. This is not the “exact Greek word” in both verses. In Ephesians 1: 6 it is “echaritosen” the aorist tense indicative form of an action brought to pass, grace bestowed on us. Greek is a much more precise language than English. "to the praise of the glory of His grace, which He freely bestowed on us in the Beloved." --Ephesians 1:6 (NASB) However there is a perfect participle in Ephesians 1:6.It is the “beloved” referring to Jesus. No comparison to us and him. We are aorist tense, He is perfect tense. ”Make Christ the center of your theology. He certainly is the center of Scripture! “ Christ is the center of my theology. My whole input began in response to a question about Mary, not Jesus. It is only the fact that Mary is the subject of this particular thread that may make it appear to you my theology is centered on her. It is not. Ask me about Jesus. We will probably agree on everything about him. I fell pretty certain this will not be acceptable to you but there it is. I am done with this thread. As I said before, ask we about Jesus and we will probably find nothing to debate. Which was not what I intended when I answered the first question on where Catholics get the idea of Mary Queen of Heave, I was just giving the correct answer. That is where Catholic get it. Others may not but Catholics do. |
||||||
1410 | When did the catholic church go wrong? | Bible general Archive 1 | Emmaus | 26983 | ||
Well I guess we can now agree on one thing. I did use the word prod instaed of urge after instigate. My mistake. I can only say I did not intend it in the meaning you attributed to me. On the rest we will have to disagree. |
||||||
1411 | When did the catholic church go wrong? | Bible general Archive 1 | Emmaus | 26951 | ||
Joe,You make many demands and three serious accusations in your post. "Demonstrate to me that Revelation 12 literally refers to a single individual. Then go through the whole chapter and demonstrate to me that it refers to Mary." And just how much of Revelation and especially Revelation 12 do you take "literally"? Am I to suppose you do no interpretation at all? "Is Satan really a dragon, too?" The correct question is: "Is the dragon really Satan, too?" Yes. And is the son of the woman Jesus? Yes, but does it say that literally naming Jesus? No. And if the other two main characters are persons, logic would allow that the woman is also a real person. It might even be Mary, don’t you think? Or do you have another real person candidate that follows logically? "If your view of Revelation 12 is the best you have to go on in proving Mary is the "new Eve," you have a pretty paper-thin argument. Christ is specifically called the Second Adam in Scripture. We see NO such reference to Mary being the second Eve outside of Catholic dogma." Do you mean that the opinions of the Church Fathers are not outside Catholic dogma? Or are you admitting that they agree with Catholic dogma? "Why can't you just read the New Testament in its entirety and realize that while Mary was indeed blessed by God and honored to bear Jesus in her womb, that she is not in any way a central figure in the Biblical narrative. Jesus? Absolutely; first and foremost. Paul? Certainly. Peter? Without a doubt. Mary? A few scant references outside of the Advent story. It just doesn't wash." Jesus is the central figure in the biblical narrative and all history for that matter. It is just that Mary was literally wrapped around Him body and soul. He was flesh of her flesh and bone of her bone. Is there any better example of complete dedication to God? "Stop making so much of the wedding at Cana! It is such blasphemy to suggest that Mary has to "prod" Jesus -- very God of very God -- into doing what He purposed to do before the foundation of the world. A contemptible heresy is what it is, Emmaus. A violation of the First Commandment, too, at its heart." I did not say Mary “prodded” Jesus, I said Eve prodded Adam and Mary instigated the beginning of Jesus’ ministry. Webster’s defines instigate as "to urge on". "Romans 5:19 refers to Christ, not Mary. Stop ripping it out of its context and that becomes crystal clear. Hint: refer to verse 17 to see who "the One" is." "I did not say Romans 5:19 referred to Mary. I was using it to draw the parallel analogy of Eve and Mary. "When tradition takes precedence over the clear understanding of Scripture, theological gymnastics results." And there is no Calvinist tradition that influences your understanding of scripture? |
||||||
1412 | "am I wrong in thinking that you pray to | Bible general Archive 1 | Emmaus | 26887 | ||
Hank, You asked me to explain the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception and how it can be justified by scripture.The key text for the doctrine is Luke 1:28. “Hail full of grace!” Implicit, not explicit, in that passage is the fullness of holiness by God’s grace. The Greek word used for full of grace is “kecharitome”, a perfect passive participle indicating “one (she) who has been perfected in grace,” a past action that is ongoing. Fullness of grace is incompatible with sin. Nevertheless, one who demands an explicit “proof text” might says Luke 1:28 does not satisfy their demand. However, there is more to the matter than a single verse from the Catholic perspective. Christians read scripture in several ways. Two of them are the literal and the typological senses. St. Paul was a master of typological interpretation of the Old Covenant in light of the New Covenant. This sense of interpretation is also prominent in the writings of the early Church Fathers following his pattern. As Paul saw Jesus Christ prefigured in many inferior ways in the Old Testament (Hebrews 1:1, Colossians 2:17; 1 Corinthians 15: 22, 45; Romans 5:14; Hebrews 10: 1; Hebrews 17 are just a few examples, so you see the same pattern in reference to Mary in my original posts on Mary, Ark of the New Covenant and Mary the New Eve on 12-8-01. Please refer back to them. A rule of biblical typology is that the New Testament fulfillment is always greater and more perfect that the Old Testament foreshadowing type. As Jesus is superior to Adam and the perfect new Adam, so Mary is superior to Eve. Both Adam and Eve were created or “conceived” in the mind and action of God without sin, yet they both fell. So Jesus and Mary must be superior to Adam and Eve in that they are both conceived without sin, but remained obedient and did not sin. Jesus is perfect of course due to His own merits, Mary due to God’s prevenient saving grace in fulfillment of God plan of Salvation. This is a very brief treatment of the subject, but something worth exploring on your own if you are so inclined. Thank you for your kind words. Peter, popes and infallibility, next post, per your request. |
||||||
1413 | "am I wrong in thinking that you pray to | Bible general Archive 1 | Emmaus | 26738 | ||
Hank, I will have to answer your questions in a series of responses due to space limitations and the nature of your questions and my time limitations due to other responsibilities. The brief answer to why we call Mary holy is because she is the Mother of God Incarnate, Emmanuel, God with us, Jesus Christ, who by his very presence in her womb sanctified her and made her holy, even as his presence in us sanctifies us and makes us holy. Luke 1:28, 43, Matt 1:23. The angel calls Mary "Full of grace," or highly favored" depending on your translation. It is God who sanctified and made her holy. We fulfill the scripture when we call her "the Blessed Mother" Luke 1:48. We wonder why other Christians who focus so intently on scripture seem afraid to fulfill the same passage and call her blessed as we do with natural ease. To love and honor Mary is not to reduce our love for Jesus. No one could honor her more than God who chose her and Jesus who surely perfectly fulfilled the commandment to honor father and mother. We imitate Jesus in honoring her. But it is not the worship we give to Jesus. The reason it may seem to you that Catholics place more emphasis on Mary than the scripture do, I believe is because we may approach scripture some what differently and in a different context. Paticularly in how we view the communion of saints in the broad sense of all the faithful here and in heaven. Mary of course because she was chosen by God to bear Jesus, the Lord, holds a higher status than any other saint. She is also considered the perfect model of humble discipleship and obedience to God and symbolizes the whole Church and its mission to carry Christ and the gospel into the world as obedient disciples. |
||||||
1414 | John-author of Gospel and Revelation? | Revelation | Emmaus | 26506 | ||
I am for the one John, the beloved disciple also. |
||||||
1415 | "am I wrong in thinking that you pray to | Bible general Archive 1 | Emmaus | 26505 | ||
Hank, We do pray "to" Mary in the old sense of the word in this case. Such as Elizabethean english, i.e. "I pray you Sir, hear me out and join me in prayer to the Lord on this matter." It is a pleading to the person of dignity being addressed. In the case of the Hail Mary the prayer says "Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with you! Blessed are you among women and blessed is the fruit of your womb, Jesus! Holy Mary Mother of God, pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death." You see that we are first "praying the scriptures" Luke 1:28, 42, 48, 43, and then we are asking Mary to pray for us to the Lord even as I might ask you to do the same. For "the prayer of a righteous man availeth much." James 5:16. I might add that Catholics are not required to pray to Mary. But then we are not required to ask anyone else to pray with or for us either. It is simply the natural and scriptural thing to do. Family members and friend pray with and for one another. We are the family of God. |
||||||
1416 | "am I wrong in thinking that you pray to | Bible general Archive 1 | Emmaus | 26362 | ||
Well I do wish you the best in your walk with the Lord. Believe me, I am not relying on luck but on Jesus. It has been an honest exchange I think. I pray God bless you in every way, without any intention to offend. | ||||||
1417 | "am I wrong in thinking that you pray to | Bible general Archive 1 | Emmaus | 26359 | ||
Which Church wrote the early Creeds and how did that Church interpret the communion of saints? Here is how a few members of that early Church understood the communion of saints. All predate 325 A.D. while the Church was still being persecuted and before Constantine declared the Edict of Milan. I do not think these were people who had abandoned the faith of the Apostles or who were unfamiliar with their writings in Scripture. Scriptures follow. You may disagree with the early fathers or the intreptation of the scripture as presented, but this is how I see it. Clement of Alexandria "In this way is he [the true Christian] always pure for prayer. He also prays in the society of angels, as being already of angelic rank, and he is never out of their holy keeping; and though he pray alone, he has the choir of the saints standing with him [in prayer]" (Miscellanies 7:12 [A.D. 208]). Origen "But not the high priest [Christ] alone prays for those who pray sincerely, but also the angels . . . as also the souls of the saints who have already fallen asleep" (Prayer 11 [A.D. 233]). Cyprian of Carthage "Let us remember one another in concord and unanimity. Let us on both sides [of death] always pray for one another. Let us relieve burdens and afflictions by mutual love, that if one of us, by the swiftness of divine condescension, shall go hence first, our love may continue in the presence of the Lord, and our prayers for our brethren and sisters not cease in the presence of the Father’s mercy" (Letters 56[60]:5 [A.D. 253]). Methodius "Hail to you for ever, Virgin Mother of God, our unceasing joy, for to you do I turn again. You are the beginning of our feast; you are its middle and end; the pearl of great price that belongs to the kingdom; the fat of every victim, the living altar of the Bread of Life [Jesus]. Hail, you treasure of the love of God. Hail, you fount of the Son’s love for man. . . . You gleamed, sweet gift-bestowing Mother, with the light of the sun; you gleamed with the insupportable fires of a most fervent charity, bringing forth in the end that which was conceived of you . . . making manifest the mystery hidden and unspeakable, the invisible Son of the Father—the Prince of Peace, who in a marvelous manner showed himself as less than all littleness" (Oration on Simeon and Anna 14 [A.D. 305]). "Therefore, we pray [ask] you, the most excellent among women, who glories in the confidence of your maternal honors, that you would unceasingly keep us in remembrance. O holy Mother of God, remember us, I say, who make our boast in you, and who in august hymns celebrate the memory, which will ever live, and never fade away" (ibid.). "And you also, O honored and venerable Simeon, you earliest host of our holy religion, and teacher of the resurrection of the faithful, do be our patron and advocate with that Savior God, whom you were deemed worthy to receive into your arms. We, together with you, sing our praises to Christ, who has the power of life and death, saying, ‘You are the true Light, proceeding from the true Light; the true God, begotten of the true God’" (ibid.). After the divisions of the Reformation some churches do interpret communion of saints as you do. Are we still alive in Christ after we die? Asleep is a euphemism that means we are not truly dead and without hope but are truly alive in Christ but are dead only in the flesh. It is true a few groups such as the Adventists and The Jehovah witnesses, I believe, who subscribe to the sleep theory as you appear to interpret sleep in Thessalonians. Moses and Elijah when they appeared with Jesus on the mount of Transfiguration did not seem asleep to the three apostles who were present. In Revelation, "the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and with golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints" (Rev. 5:8). This looks like the saints in heaven offering to God the prayers of the saints on earth. The elders look like the saints in heaven to me. " Another angel came and stood at the altar with a golden censer; and he was given much incense to mingle with the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar before the throne; and the smoke of the incense rose with the prayers of the saints from the hand of the angel before God" (Rev. 8:3–4). "See that you do not despise one of these little ones; for I tell you that in heaven their angels always see the face of my Father who is in heaven" (Matt. 18:10). Looks like intercession by angels to me. The peace of Christ to you Bob. |
||||||
1418 | "am I wrong in thinking that you pray to | Bible general Archive 1 | Emmaus | 26354 | ||
As I said before,satisfaction with my answers is not guarenteed. But I do not believe that a personal relationship with Jesus precludes a personal relationship with His friends and my brothers and sisters in Christ whether they be here on earth or in heaven with the Lord. I do the Lord no disservice by acknowleging his companions here or in heaven. The fact that Jesus is in heaven does not keep me from having a personal relationship with Him here in my heart. | ||||||
1419 | When did the catholic church go wrong? | Bible general Archive 1 | Emmaus | 26244 | ||
My faith is in Jesus Christ and the Holy Trinity. I relate to Mary and any other saints only in the context that they are in Christ. Without Jesus there is no context or significance. |
||||||
1420 | When did the catholic church go wrong? | Bible general Archive 1 | Emmaus | 26212 | ||
Done. My last response to the person who posed the original question about Mary was not intended to extend any debate. In fact my intention was never to ignite a debate, just to answer to the question posed. | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 ] Next > Last [73] >> |