If Perchance Catholicism Is Mistaken

[Dan_473]

"The first instance of the formal invocation of Mary occurs in the prayers of Ephraim Syrus († 379), addressed to Mary and the saints, and attributed by the tradition of the Syrian church, though perhaps in part incorrectly, to that author. "

http://prayerfoundation.org/why_protestants_dont_pray_to_mary.htm

Hey Nehemiah6, thanks for that reference!

 

[Jackson123]

The reason I brought up Protestants bowing to a cross is that I understand that according to your personal interpretation of the scripture, bowing to a cross is prohibited. But many people interpret the Bible differently than that. And it's not just Catholics, it's Protestants as well.

But that's the beauty of everyone having their own personal interpretation. You can read the Bible and say it's wrong, someone else can read the Bible and say it's okay.

Yes, some Protestants commit adultery. But I think your analogy is faulty, because most Protestants will say that adultery is wrong, so it's a different situation than bowing to a cross.

Bowing unto statue is simple Bible prohibited like adultery, why you interprate opposite?

Bowing unto statue is pagan tradition.

Yes people have different interpretation on complex verse. This is simple, like do not commit adultery.

 

[Jackson123]

Yes, that's a possible interpretation, that Jesus could talk with Moses just because he's God.

But I if I remember right, you had asked questions about if it was right to talk to a dead person. Jesus did obey the law of Moses, yet he talked to a dead person.

Also I think there had been a question about how a dead person could talk in the first place. But Moses talks at the time of Jesus, and the disciples see him.

The law of Moses prohibit human talk to the dead. Jesus is God, if God prohibit talk to the dead, how God judge the dead?

 

[Dan_473]

Bowing unto statue is simple Bible prohibited like adultery, why you interprate opposite?

Bowing unto statue is pagan tradition.

Yes people have different interpretation on complex verse. This is simple, like do not commit adultery.

Well, but remember how we talked about how something that can seem simple can turn out to have different interpretations?

We talked about the simple verse that says women shouldn't talk in church. Do you remember what I'm talking about?

(and of course I want to add that I think it's fine for women to talk in church.)

 

[Dan_473]

The law of Moses prohibit human talk to the dead. Jesus is God, if God prohibit talk to the dead, how God judge the dead?

Yes Jesus is God.

But most Protestants, along with Catholics and Eastern Orthodox, also agree that he was human.

This is called the dual nature of Christ. That Jesus is fully God and fully man.

It's a teaching that most people find in the scriptures, but again, there's always room for interpretation so maybe you interpret it different.

Do you believe Jesus is fully God and fully man?

 

[Dan_473]

The law of Moses prohibit human talk to the dead. Jesus is God, if God prohibit talk to the dead, how God judge the dead?

If Jesus is fully human along with being fully God, then the law of Moses as it applies to humans applied to him.

So if the law of Moses forbids talking to dead people, then Jesus broke the law when he talked to Moses on Earth. At least, that's how it would look to me.

But maybe the law of Moses doesn't forbid talking to dead people, maybe what it forbids is necromancy, which means trying to figure out the future by talking to a dead person.

So again, interpretation.

 

[Dan_473]

@Jackson123 Say, my brother, did you want to talk anymore about athanasius?

I think he came up because I had talked about tradition and the Canon of scripture (which books are in the Bible) being tied together.

I think that you asked what kind of tradition it was.

So, something that athanasius said. Would that be apostolic tradition, in your view? Or some other kind?

 

[Jackson123]

If Jesus is fully human along with being fully God, then the law of Moses as it applies to humans applied to him.

So if the law of Moses forbids talking to dead people, then Jesus broke the law when he talked to Moses on Earth. At least, that's how it would look to me.

But maybe the law of Moses doesn't forbid talking to dead people, maybe what it forbids is necromancy, which means trying to figure out the future by talking to a dead person.

So again, interpretation.

Like I say, human like us do not know if the spirit we talk to is real human spirit. Devil pretend to be human spirit talk to catholic. They claim mary talk to some people about future etc

They believe mary heal people in Lourdes, my rich neighbor went there and brought back water that he believe being bless by Mary spirit.

That is not real Mary spirit, it is evil spirit that bless that water.

Catholic base on tradition of the pagan not tradition if the apostle. Show me a verse an apostle pray to the dead.

Yes Jesus was human but Zheng was and is God, that has no limit.

Like I say, God know who Spirit he talk to. Human not.

 

[Jackson123]

@Jackson123 Say, my brother, did you want to talk anymore about athanasius?

I think he came up because I had talked about tradition and the Canon of scripture (which books are in the Bible) being tied together.

I think that you asked what kind of tradition it was.

So, something that athanasius said. Would that be apostolic tradition, in your view? Or some other kind?

Let define tradition as a habit.

There are a lot of traditions in the world.

Pagan tradition, apostolic tradition etc.

Pray and Boeing unto statue is pagan tradition.

 

[garee]

When I was growing up, we had the idea that the early church believed just like we did as Pentecostals. After the death of the apostles, though, true Christianity began to disappear from the Earth. Or the true church went to sleep. Or true Christians went deep underground and that's why you don't see them in the history books.

That's the result of those who change the meaning of the word "apostle" They as a law of men can make it whatever one desires. And therefore violate the commandment (Deuteronomy 4:2) not to add other meanings to a word. . changing the meaning of the word apostle did destroy the integrity of the word .

Catholicism as a law of men violate with a oral traditions of the fathers the other warning (Revelations 22) at the end of Cannon, the closing statement sealing it till the end of time with 7 seals .Both needed to protect the integrity of the word a safe guard against Plagiarism a form of Blasphemy.

The Catholic fathers, venerable ones, simply see no value in all things written in the law and the prophets (sola scriptures ) as it is written.

They have another teaching authority . Mystical theology as a different source of faith. if you believe, and it is proven true, you will be happy that you have believed, because our Holy Mother asked it.

“In cases which concern private revelations, it is better to believe than not to believe, for, if you believe, and it is proven true, you will be happy that you have believed, because our Holy Mother asked it. If you believe, and it should be proven false, you will receive all blessings as if it had been true, because you believed it to be true.”
(Pope Urban VIII, 1623-44)

The law of the fathers that keeps the airways open. . . you will receive all blessings as if it had been true, because you believed our Holy Mother (exercised faith as a work working in one ) it to be true.”

 

[garee]

Well, the particular tradition that you are talking about, when did it start?

When the scribes as Catholic fathers entered it into the book of their law. The CCC. What would the date have to do with that Devine reference ?

 

[garee]

Yes, that's a possible interpretation, that Jesus could talk with Moses just because he's God.

But I if I remember right, you had asked questions about if it was right to talk to a dead person. Jesus did obey the law of Moses, yet he talked to a dead person.

Also I think there had been a question about how a dead person could talk in the first place. But Moses talks at the time of Jesus, and the disciples see him.

He did not literally talk to Moses Moses and Elijah were used to represent all things written in the law (typified by Moses) and prophets(typified by Elias ) . The law and the prophets. The two witness's by which we can hear God not seen .

Catholisicim attempts to use that to develop their necromancy doctrine as a law of the fathers.

Matthew 22:40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

Matthew 17:1 5 King James Version (KJV) And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart, And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.
And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him.

Then before the explanation was finished fleshly Peter interrupted and desired to build a teraphim an idol image used to speak to the unseen (necromancy).

Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.

The Holy Spirit interrupted faithless Peter and finished the explanation .

While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.

Not hear ye Moses and Elias .

 

[Dino246]

He did not literally talk to Moses Moses and Elijah were used to represent all things written in the law (typified by Moses) and prophets(typified by Elias ) . The law and the prophets. The two witness's by which we can hear God not seen .

Scripture clearly states that Moses and Elijah were talking with Jesus (i.e.: having a two-way conversation). You claim that Jesus did not literally talk to Moses. You are wrong. Your propensity to assume everything is symbolic is leading you to serious error.

 

[garee]

Scripture clearly states that Moses and Elijah were talking with Jesus (i.e.: having a two-way conversation). You claim that Jesus did not literally talk to Moses. You are wrong. Your propensity to assume everything is symbolic is leading you to serious error.

And what we they talking about the good old days when they had flesh and blood.?

Yes and your literal interpretation like that of Peter is leading towards necromancy .The signs and wonders gospel. . . or sign gifts.

They had been literally dead corpse for thousand of years. It as vision evaporated as quickly as it came into sight . No different than the father of lies showing Jesus all the kingdom of the world except the vison with Jesus prompted the gospel...... hearing God as it is written

Clearly Moses and Elijah are speaking of the law and the prophets the two witness of God. Just as in the Luke 16 parable hear ye them. the law and the prophets God's word

And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets,(the gospel) neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.Luke 16:31

 

[Dino246]

And what we they talking about the good old days when they had flesh and blood.?

Yes and your literal interpretation like that of Peter is leading towards necromancy .The signs and wonders gospel. . . or sign gifts.

Scripture doesn't tell us what they were discussing. This isn't about me, it isn't about necromancy, and it isn't about signs and wonders. Stop dragging in unrelated issues.

Clearly Moses and Elijah are speaking of the law and the prophets

You are still wrong.

 

[garee]

Scripture doesn't tell us what they were discussing. This isn't about me, it isn't about necromancy, and it isn't about signs and wonders. Stop dragging in unrelated issues.


You are still wrong.

Really what were they talking about the good ole days when they had flesh and blood?

 

[Dino246]

Really what were they talking about the good ole days when they had flesh and blood?

I would encourage you to read my post in its entirety before responding next time.

 

[garee]

Scripture doesn't tell us what they were discussing. This isn't about me, it isn't about necromancy, and it isn't about signs and wonders. Stop dragging in unrelated issues.


You are still wrong.

Then what does Moses and Elijah represent in that parable if not the two witnesses (sola scriptura)?

 

[Dino246]

Then what does Moses and Elijah represent in that parable if not the two witnesses (sola scriptura)?

How about this radical concept:

Moses represents Moses, and Elijah represents Elijah.

It IS NOT a parable.

 

[garee]

How about this radical concept:

Moses represents Moses, and Elijah represents Elijah.

It IS NOT a parable.

Really Moses and Elijah were literally there. . . flesh and blood? Sounds like Catholicism. . They use it to connect their necromancy doctrines. What purpose do you think it is in respect to?

I have heard mention of the prescription. . if the first sense seems to make sense don't look for the spiritual application .

Can't find that kind of ideaolgy in the Bible?

Matthew 13:34 All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them:

Mark 4:11 And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:

A good prescription like below helps us walk by faith (the unseen) helps us to find the spiritual understanding, the gospel, in all parables .

2 Corinthians 4:18 While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal

Apply it to the parable using Moses and Elijah.