For my Catholic friends here, how does 2 Samuel 12:21-23 relate to prayers with the dead?

2 Samuel 12:21-23 Good News Translation (GNT)
21 “We don't understand this,” his officials said to him. “While the child was alive, you wept for him and would not eat; but as soon as he died, you got up and ate!”

22 “Yes,” David answered, “I did fast and weep while he was still alive. I thought that the Lord might be merciful to me and not let the child die. 23 But now that he is dead, why should I fast? Could I bring the child back to life? I will some day go to where he is, but he can never come back to me.”


For my Catholic friends here, how does 2 Samuel 12:21-23 relate to prayers with the dead?

I don't see how this is related to Catholics in general.

Its the foundation by which they believe as a source of faith (false) . Remove it Catholicism falls .

From the OT they use this:

2 Maccabees 12:39–45

39 On the next day, as had now become necessary, Judas and his men went to take up the bodies of the fallen and to bring them back to lie with their kindred in the sepulchres of their ancestors. 40 Then under the tunic of each one of the dead they found sacred tokens of the idols of Jamnia, which the law forbids the Jews to wear. And it became clear to all that this was the reason these men had fallen. 41 So they all blessed the ways of the Lord, the righteous judge, who reveals the things that are hidden; 42 and they turned to supplication, praying that the sin that had been committed might be wholly blotted out. The noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had happened as the result of the sin of those who had fallen. 43 He also took up a collection, man by man, to the amount of two thousand drachmas of silver, and sent it to Jerusalem to provide for a sin offering. In doing this he acted very well and honorably, taking account of the resurrection. 44 For if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead. 45 But if he was looking to the splendid reward that is laid up for those who fall asleep in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought. Therefore he made atonement for the dead, so that they might be delivered from their sin.

Except that's not from the OT; it's from the Apocrypha.

It doesn't have anything to do with prayers for the dead, nor prayers to the dead. (I'm not sure which misguided Catholic practice you were referring to, but I don't think they have anything like prayers WITH the dead.)

I was speaking from the Catholic point of view - though the Apocrypha was included in the 1611 KJV.

"he can never come back to me.” Gives an indication that the dead can not hear you.

Maccabees is also in the LXX.

read to here

like some one already said, it is part of the LXX. it was part of the Hebrew bible hundreds of years before any NT book was ever written and was also among the DSS Hebrew scriptures. it was part of the Christian bible up until the 1800s until it was thrown aside by groups of men who thought they were the ones that decide what is scripture.

By the inspiration of God, of course.

inspiration is between the individual and the Most High. IMO its not correct to proclaim divine inspiration in order to manipulate the masses. if that were so we would have no choice but to follow men like Stalin, Hitler and Idi Amin.

This doesn't seem to be related to what I was saying.

I just figure that if God is powerful enough to inspire men to write the Bible, He is probably powerful enough to keep His word saying what He wants it to say at the various stages of history. You make it sound like a group of men could foil God's plan by tossing out chunks of the Bible against His will or something.

its very much related. any decision some self appointed council makes, we must obey it because they say the Most High guided them.
the Most High gives us free will to make our own decisions, if not we are puppets on strings not responsible for our actions. these same councils made doctrines such as the earth being the center of the universe, people like Galileo and Bruno were persecuted for it. Bruno was burned alive, Galileo was friends with the Medici family so his life was spared. not only do we know these decisions are wrong, their judgment didn't apply if you were cousins with the right person.

And that has what to do with the dictators you mentioned (Stalin, Hitler, Amin)?

I don't believe that position is adequately supported by scripture.

Scripture is much more supportive of this position (except for the part about not being responsible for the evil we are created to do):

"So then He has mercy on whomever He wills (chooses) and He hardens (makes stubborn and unyielding the heart of) whomever He wills. You will say to me, Why then does He still find fault and blame us [for sinning]? For who can resist and withstand His will? But who are you, a mere man, to criticize and contradict and answer back to God? Will what is formed say to him that formed it, Why have you made me thus? Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same mass (lump) one vessel for beauty and distinction and honorable use, and another for menial or ignoble and dishonorable use?" --Romans 9:18-21 (Amplified Bible)

We are His puppets, His creations, some created for salvation and some created for destruction.

People didn't make those doctrines, those doctrines are found in the Bible. They sound just as stupid today when people still want to use the Bible as a science book.

it means that if any of them claim to be guided by the Most High, we have to, according to you, follow them down that dark path.


the 10 commandments say different, why give any command when we dont have the free will to make a decision on that command.

Jesus taught ask, seek, knock. if we are puppets we have no way to do this.

people didnt make them, they are in the bible, and they are stupid?

It was part of Luther's Bible https://www.christianitytoday.com/history/2017/october/most-dangerous-thing-luther-did.html

Calvin quoted those books as authoritative https://www.patheos.com/blogs/davearmstrong/2015/12/calvins-citations-of-the-apocrypha.html

Calvin names these "ecclesiastical books" in his 1547 Antidote to the Council of Trent:

It is well known what Jerome states as the common opinion of earlier times. And Ruffinus, speaking of the matter as not at all controverted, declares with Jerome that Ecclesiasticus, the Wisdom of Solomon, Tobit, Judith, and the history of the Maccabees, were called by the Fathers not canonical but ecclesiastical books, which might indeed be read to the people, but were not entitled to establish doctrine.https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/43764/what-books-did-calvin-consider-canonical

You may note that he mentions here every deuterocanonical book other than Baruch.

Geneva Bible (1599) is still revered by many Reformed Protestants today.

Like nearly all early Protestant Bibles, the Geneva Bible contained the Deuterocanon gathered together into an appendix between the Old and New Testaments titled "Apocrypha" (Right - the 1599 Geneva Bible's table of contents). By "Apocrypha," the early Reformers meant those books that are good and beneficial for Christians to read, but not for the purpose of confirming doctrine. http://www.handsonapologetics.com/Geneva_Bible.htm


https://nortonsafe.search.ask.com/w...u1JJ-cOI4HbfTXxq_s81xfcalasQ&ts=1553087497294

read to here