The Saints are God's Children [Archive]

Eurogal

12-22-2003, 04:48 PM

:hi: Greetings,

I know from personal experience that the RCC interpretation of the words holy, sanctify, sanctification and saint are not the same as mainstream Protestants. May I give you how I see these words and believe most of the non-Catholics here see them also?

Holy : belonging to God’s divine power…..anyone consecrated to the service of the Divine…. he who is dedicated, devoted to and set apart for a high purpose in serving God ….. That “purpose” is serving God with our whole mind, our whole heart, our whole emotions, our whole being. God is not in this side of the Cross interested in us making unanimated ‘things’ holy. He has called us as His children to be holy as He is holy. Holy in the sense of being separated from the rebellion of sin and not even touching the unclean evils of this world.

Santification : is the process starting in the new creature born-again person who has dedicated their life to God by accepting the atonement of His son Jesus. Sanctify ourselves is just the way of Paul saying we are to daily crucify the flesh of lusts and be filled with the Spirit of God to live out Christ to others in the world we live in. Our baptism was the initial rites of the beginning of our santification. We came up out of the body of water unto the newness of a holy life to be lived in devotion to God.

The sanctified life is one that is being circumspect in holy behaviour while in the presence of God. We are always in the sight of God. He knows everything going on in our life. Our problem is denying that truth and living as if we can overrule the Golden Rule of our manners toward our fellow beings. When our heart is really changed from the condition of being in sin to holiness, there will be a fear of offending God. The purpose of sanctification in the Christians life is to learn to accutely practive the presence of God daily. This is prepartion for eternity so that no rebellion pops up again where humans are living with God.

Saint : is all of us genuine children of God as persons of notible holiness. Everyone of us who are genuinely consecrated unto God in holiness is a saint. We are saints at home, at the workplace, at school, with friends and socializing. Our fruit of the Holy Spirit in our lives bear witness to our being saints of God as we now live and breathe. The RCC strives to get it’s members to higher moral lives by using the title of "Saint" to mean something extraordinary. Erroneously they judge the validity of one to wear that title by weighing up the extraordinary sacrifice of deeds done in their lives as standard of measurment after the person dies.

They have over emphasized the word saint to make it above what apostle Paul meant it to be.
Philippians 4:21 Salute every saint in Christ Jesus. The brethren which are with me greet you.

Have a look at just these 20 verses out of 61 to be found in the NT talking about saints :
Matthew 27:52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
Acts 9:13 Then Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem:
Acts 9:32 And it came to pass, as Peter passed throughout all quarters, he came down also to the saints which dwelt at Lydda.
Acts 9:41 And he gave her his hand, and lifted her up, and when he had called the saints and widows, presented her alive.
Romans 1:7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.
Romans 8:27 And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God.
Romans 12:13 Distributing to the necessity of saints; given to hospitality.
Romans 15:25 But now I go unto Jerusalem to minister unto the saints.
Romans 16:2 That ye receive her in the Lord, as becometh saints, and that ye assist her in whatsoever business she hath need of you: for she hath been a succourer of many, and of myself also.
Romans 16:15 Salute Philologus, and Julia, Nereus, and his sister, and Olympas, and all the saints which are with them.
1 Corinthians 1:2 Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours:
2 Corinthians 8:4 Praying us with much intreaty that we would receive the gift, and take upon us the fellowship of the ministering to the saints.
2 Corinthians 9:1 For as touching the ministering to the saints, it is superfluous for me to write to you:
2 Corinthians 9:12 For the administration of this service not only supplieth the want of the saints, but is abundant also by many thanksgivings unto God;
2 Corinthians 13:13 All the saints salute you.

There are 61 listings in my NT concordance for the word saints. I gave here only a sample of twenty. It is very evident in careful readings of all the verses pertaining to ‘saints’ in the NewTestament that the writers were always refering to normal born-again baptized in deep water believers in Jesus as their Christ. Or those in the graves who died in the expected waiting for the coming Messiah.
As we are in Christ now covered with His righteousness God sees us as his saints already. Not because of our planned works of good deeds but because of the fruit of the Spirit validating that we belong to God as His child.

Eurogal

itsjustdave1988

12-22-2003, 05:09 PM

I am a saint, according to Catholic teaching, as I have been made a "holy one" (sancti) in Christ Jesus and share in the holy things (sancta) of God. So, how is that different from your understanding?

From Catholic doctrine...

"What is the Church if not the assembly of all the saints?" (Nicetas, Expl. Symb., 10:PL 52:871B.) The communion of saints is the Church. (CCC 946)

"The Church is a "communion of saints": this expression refers first to the "holy things" (sancta), above all the Eucharist, by which "the unity of believers, who form one body in Christ, is both represented and brought about" (LG 3)." (CCC 960)

"The term "communion of saints" refers also to the communion of "holy persons" (sancti) in Christ who "died for all," so that what each one does or suffers in and for Christ bears fruit for all." (CCC 961)

Eveningstar

12-23-2003, 10:43 AM

Quite the claim. I do not judge your claim one way or the other, but if it is true, :wow: you are blessed.

BIBLE DICTIONARY
SAINT
The word saint is a translation of a Greek word also rendered “holy,” the fundamental idea being that of consecration or separation for a sacred purpose; but since what was set apart for God must be without blemish, the word came to mean “free from blemish,” whether physical or moral. In the N.T. the saints are all those who by baptism have entered into the Christian covenant (see Acts 9: 13, 32, 41; Rom. 1: 7; 1 Cor. 1: 2; Philip. 1: 1; 1 Pet. 1: 14-15).

HOLINESS
According to the O.T. things or places were holy that were set apart for a sacred purpose; the opposite of holy is therefore common or profane (1 Sam. 21: 5; Ezek. 22: 26; Ezek. 42: 20; Ezek. 44: 23; Ezek. 48: 13-15). Similarly a holy person meant one who held a sacred office. The Israelites were a holy people because they stood in a special relationship to Jehovah. under the guidance of the Prophets it was seen that what distinguished Jehovah from the gods of the heathen was his personal character. The word HOLY therefore came to refer to moral character (Lev. 11: 44; Lev. 19: 2; Lev. 21: 8; Isa. 6: 3-8). Israel must be holy in character because the God of Israel was holy (Jer. 7: 4-7; cf. Matt. 5: 48). The Law of Holiness (Lev. 17 - 26) shows how the attempt was made by means of ceremonial observance to secure this holiness of character. The attempt failed because the later Jews observed the letter and neglected the spirit; they attached more importance to the ceremonial than to the moral; and the result was a lapse into formalism. But in the writings of the Prophets it is clearly laid down that the value of worship in the eyes of God depends upon the personal character of the worshipper.

Eveningstar

12-23-2003, 10:48 AM

We are traveling in the footsteps
Of those who’ve gone before
But we’ll all be reunited (but if we stand reunited)
On a new and sunlit shore (then a new world is in store)

Oh when the saints go marching in
When the saints go marching in
Oh lord I want to be in that number
When the saints go marching in

And when the sun refuse (begins) to shine
And when the sun refuse (begins) to shine
Oh lord I want to be in that number
When the saints go marching in

When the moon turns red with blood
When the moon turns red with blood
Oh lord I want to be in that number
When the saints go marching in

On that hallelujah day
On that hallelujah day
Oh lord I want to be in that number
When the saints go marching in

Oh when the trumpet sounds the call
Oh when the trumpet sounds the call
Oh lord I want to be in that number
When the saints go marching in

Some say this world of trouble
Is the only one we need
But I’m waiting for that morning
When the new world is revealed

When the revelation (revolution) comes
When the revelation (revolution) comes
Oh lord I want to be in that number
When the saints go marching in

When the rich go out and work
When the rich go out and work
Oh lord I want to be in that number
When the saints go marching in

When the air is pure and clean
When the air is pure and clean
Oh lord I want to be in that number
When the saints go marching in

When we all have food to eat
When we all have food to eat
Oh lord I want to be in that number
When the saints go marching in

When our leaders learn to cry
When our leaders learn to cry
Oh lord I want to be in that number
When the saints go marching in

itsjustdave1988

12-23-2003, 11:08 AM

Eurogal,

I've lost track ... are we in agreement or disagreement. Your initial post seemed to claim something of Catholic doctrine that quite frankly, I believe was poorly researched. All baptized in Christ are saints, right?

2tim

12-23-2003, 11:26 AM

I admit, I didn't realize that was the case with the RCC Dave, but I also think I know what Eurogal is trying to get at. There is, according to my recollection and according to the RRC a St. Paul and St. Augustine and St. Mary but no St. Simon, is there? (or is there?) Is there a St. Lydia?

You know what I mean? The RCC Cannonizes (spelling?) people, making them "saints."

kevingaily

12-23-2003, 01:26 PM

Originally posted by 2tim
I admit, I didn't realize that was the case with the RCC Dave, but I also think I know what Eurogal is trying to get at. There is, according to my recollection and according to the RRC a St. Paul and St. Augustine and St. Mary but no St. Simon, is there? (or is there?) Is there a St. Lydia?

You know what I mean? The RCC Cannonizes (spelling?) people, making them "saints."

Yeah, like they elevate people(beautification/Cannonization) and then say prayers to them, though the call it other than praying to them they say it's intercessory prayer just like we do with living folks and that it's ok since they are looking down on us from heaven. I have many who are catholic in my family. One actually sent me a pendant with the saint of fertility or childbirth, I forget the guy's name, with instructions of how to pray to them for the saftey of my unborn child!

Another is an add that runs in the local paper. It gives this special prayer to st. Jude. If you say it so many times for so many days he will answer your prayer! :eek:

Dave, or other RCC's why does this go on? Forget the fact that they are dead and gone either in heaven or whatever, why is this so prevailant? Since we have an open way to the throne of grace and we are in the beloved why call on aid from a deceased person? Sure it says to pray together in Scripture and that when we are gathered together in his(Jesus) name he's there in the midst, but why take that from meaning your brother or sister with you to meaning someone who died and is in heaven? Yes it mentions that there is a great cloud of witnesses in heaven but God hears my prayers as well as anyone since I'm his child. And these witnesses in heaven; how do we know it means they are watching us anyway. A witness may simply mean that they have witnessed the grace of God during their time on earth. Yet it's proported to mean that these "saints" are watching over us like angels and we can beceech them for aid. I don't find that as scriptural. Of course, you are not bound by scripture since you see church tradition as equal footing. So, maybe you can never give me an answer I'd accept. However, please let us know the whys and hows of it. I simply want to know the details of it. I do know that not all catholics are into this. Some are all about Jesus, and others are all about Mary and the saints.

Being raised catholic I've heard some good preaching from some of the clergy. One's name was father Bob. He was so passionate about Christ and was just as good as any southern Baptist preacher! :D He didn't focus on Mary or the "saints" but on Christ. I so respected him for that. His illustrations will live with me for the rest of my life. If all clergy were more or less like him, I'd have never left the catholic church. He gave real spiritual meat for us to eat and grow with without all the extra's. I miss him, actually.

itsjustdave1988

12-23-2003, 01:35 PM

I would say that the RCC "recognized" many (but not all) saints by ancient tradition and then latter by the more modern canonization process. The RCC does not "make them" saints, God does.

Many other saints who are not formally canonized by the RCC, are celibrated by the Catholic Liturgical Feast of All Saints Day (1 Nov) and All Souls Day (2 Nov).

I know of a St. Simon ...

St. Simon of Zealot
Feastday October 28
Simon was surnamed the Zealot for his rigid adherence to the Jewish law and to the Canaanite law. He was one of the original followers of Christ. Western tradition is that he preached in Egypt and then went to Persia with St. Jude, where both suffered martyrdom.

And a St. Lydia...

St. Lydia Purpuraria
Feastday August 3
Lydia Purpuraria (1st century) was born at Thyatira (Ak-Hissar), a town in Asia Minor, famous for its dye works, (hence, her name which means purple seller). She became Paul's first convert at Philippi. She was baptized with her household, and Paul stayed at her home there. Her feast date is August 3.

Here's a list of canonized (formally recognized) Saints. I don't know if includes the thousands upon thousands of those saints formally canonized or not, but it seems like a pretty comprehensive list: http://www.catholic.org/saints/

itsjustdave1988

12-23-2003, 02:10 PM

Kevin,

He didn't focus on Mary or the "saints" but on Christ.

I believe that my pastor is Christ-focused, as well as his asst. pastor. That's why I like St. Patrick's here in C.Springs. I've visited many parishes and spoken to many priests within the Colorado Springs diocese and I don't they all seem to be orthodox. Perhaps this diocese is less Marian than others?

Nonetheless, I'm in the military, and I am not at liberty to pick and choose the parish I go to as easily as civilians can. I can say, because of my military tendency to move around alot, I've been a member of more parishes than most. With that said, I have never been to a parish that was not Christ-focused.

North has described some practices of Marian devotion that I would cringe at. Nevertheless, I've never directly experienced them. However, after Leo's bizzaro position (heretical I might add), nothing surprises me anymore.

The Church has stated it's position with regard to the "dulia" afforded to creatures and the "latria" that is only for God. It is up to each Catholic layperson, priest, Bishop to abide by this teaching, and when it is not, the Bishops need to do a better job of pastoring.

itsjustdave1988

12-23-2003, 02:26 PM

Kevin,

Yet it's proported to mean that these "saints" are watching over us like angels and we can beceech them for aid. I don't find that as scriptural.

I do. I can go over it again if you wish. I find it astonishing that for 1500 years nobody disagreed with the orthodox and Biblically based teaching with regard to the communion of saints. It, in my opinion, is a "subtraction" found only in Protestantism, not an "addition" found in Orthodoxy and Catholicism.

Of course, you are not bound by scripture since you see church tradition as equal footing. So, maybe you can never give me an answer I'd accept.

And this would be another example of anti-Catholic rhetoric having no basis in fact, Kevin. If you disagree, please show me in Catholic teaching the support for such an absurd claim that I am not bound by Scripture!!!

I have posted on several occasions the Catholic teaching with regard to the inerrancy and authority of Sacred Scritprue, and yet your nonsensical bias continues nonetheless. Here ... let me referesh EVERYBODY's memory in the hopes that you turn down your ANTICATHOLIC flame, just a bit ...

Thesis: Catholicism teaches that the teaching office of the Church is subordinate to word of God.

My support:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"[the] teaching office [of the church] is not above the Word of God but serves it." (Pope Paul VI, Dei Verbum, 1965, par. 10)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ah, and I absolutely love this Catholic's teaching:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In regard to the divine and holy mysteries of the faith, not the least part may be handed on without the Holy Scriptures. Do not be led astray by winning words and clever arguments. Even to me, who tell you these things, do not give ready belief, unless you receive from the Holy Scriptures the proof of the things which I announce. The salvation in which we believe is proved not from clever reasoning, but from the Holy Scriptures. (St. Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, 4, 17, c. 350)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I would very much prefer that you avoid telling me WHAT I BELIEVE!!! I'm fairly certain I KNOW what I believe much better than YOU KNOW what I believe.

kevingaily

12-23-2003, 02:39 PM

Dave,

I guess it depends where you go. I know that in Latin America esp. in Mexico there is a huge cult Mary following. It's all about her. There are huge parades to her and the saints, and they seem to be very unorthodox. In areas like Puerto Rico there is a mix of orthodoxy with witchcraft and spiritism.

I respect what Mary and the saints that have gone on before have done in Christ's name and would not wish to slander any of them. Many have set great examples to follow, and there is much to learn from those examples.

I just see that there is a division in the Catholic church as to their role. Some do elevate them to a sort of demigod status and this is a sore point with the protestants, myself included. I want people to focus on who can save them; namely Jesus Christ. I try to lift up his name. It is the only name under heaven by which we must be saved. So when an outsider comes in many may see how people venerate Mary or the saints and rather that seek Christ they focus more on the others. I almost never see any art depicting Christ, it's almost always Mary or the saints. My mom(biological) picked up a picture of a little boy bowing to a statue of Mary. The inscription underneath was, "his prayer."

I see an inordinate focus on the periphery of catholicism and so many just become a cultural indoctrinated follower of a religion and not truely grasp the faith that has been laid out before us that Mary and the "saints" are pointing to. When anything takes peoples eyes off the Lord, then it is dangerous. Even the Apostle Paul said to follow him....as he followed Christ. So Paul pointed to Christ. I really like how John the baptist put it. He said, I'm a voice crying out in the wilderness." and "I must decrease he must increase." Clearly he wanted the focus to not be on them but the Lord. This what I saw in father Bob that really stuck with me more than all my catechism classes and all the other things I saw and did. He helped me to put my focus on the Lord. I believe God used this as a sort of foundation he was building to set the stage for my truly comming to faith in Jesus Christ. Had the influential leaders and others kept me focusing on these other things I may well be lost and hellbound.

kevingaily

12-23-2003, 02:47 PM

And this would be another example of anti-Catholic rhetoric having no basis in fact, Kevin. If you disagree, please show me in Catholic teaching the support for such an absurd claim that I am not bound by Scripture!!!

I have posted on several occasions the Catholic teaching with regard to the inerrancy and authority of Sacred Scritprue, and yet your nonsensical bias continues nonetheless. Here ... let me referesh EVERYBODY's memory in the hopes that you turn down your ANTICATHOLIC flame, just a bit ...

Again you attack me as if I'm flaming you???? Why? I wrote with much love and you jumped the gun again. If you can't refrain from blasting me then what further dialog can we share? I didn't say you weren't bound by scripture. I know you love the scriptures and never said otherwise. You must have misunderstood me. I was implying that since you hold tradition as equal footing you will quote some sources as authoritative that I don't consider to be so. I was stating a fact of life, not an attack on you. I was actually saying bottom line that I may not agree with your conclusions, but still wanted to hear what you had to say. Is this an anti-catholic flame? I share from my heart about a priest who meant a lot to me and I'm anti catholic? I say that if there had been more like him I'd probably still be catholic and that's a flame??? Perhaps you need to look at your own reflection lest you be judged by the same measure you are judging me with. Are you the accuser of the brethern? Then don't act this way, please. Didn't we just have this happen on another thread?

You know, it's this stuff that makes people not want to share. Now you have me not wanting to post to you lest you blast me for all to see and make a fool of me when all I wanted to do is ask some questions and share with you as well.

Perhaps you should take a rest from here and come back when you're in better spirits.

itsjustdave1988

12-23-2003, 03:20 PM

Kevin,

How could I have misunderstood this?

you are not bound by scripture

I will be in much better spirits when people refrain from telling me what I am and am not bound by. And Yes, I consider the above assertion about my beliefs an anti-Catholic flame.

John Oscar

12-23-2003, 03:39 PM

Dave, you said about praying to the saints:

I do. I can go over it again if you wish. I find it astonishing that for 1500 years nobody disagreed with the orthodox and Biblically based teaching with regard to the communion of saints. It, in my opinion, is a "subtraction" found only in Protestantism, not an "addition" found in Orthodoxy and Catholicism.

Please do, as I see no scriptural backing to this.

Thanks and blessings
John O

John Oscar

12-23-2003, 03:40 PM

By the way, this is not an attack or flaming you as a Catholic. If anything, cudo's to you, as you are the only Catholic I've ever met that can even begin to intellegently defend what they believe!

Blessings
John O

Eveningstar

12-23-2003, 03:42 PM

Am I a Saint?

itsjustdave1988

12-23-2003, 04:03 PM

Thanks John. I'll start another thread.

Kevin, if I misunderstood you, I apologize for my response. I saw the words you used and could not intepret it any other way. Perhaps you mistyped or meant it differently than it reads.

ES, you may very well be a saint. Only God knows what is in our hearts. Catholicism teaches that all those baptised in Christ are saints, forgiven of their sins and sanctified by the blood of Christ. But, as you may already have read elsewhere, we don't believe in once saved, always saved. So ... once a saint, unfortunately, not always a saint. I find your beliefs unorthodox and inconsistent, but I am not your judge.

itsjustdave1988

12-23-2003, 04:06 PM

ES,

By the way ... what an adorable dog!!!

John Oscar

12-23-2003, 04:16 PM

Dave,
Do me a favor and toss the link here. I'm still getting used to this forum.

Thanks!
John

Little Lamb

12-23-2003, 04:27 PM

ES,

That dog is adorable.

kevingaily

12-23-2003, 05:07 PM

Originally posted by itsjustdave1988
Thanks John. I'll start another thread.

Kevin, if I misunderstood you, I apologize for my response. I saw the words you used and could not intepret it any other way. Perhaps you mistyped or meant it differently than it reads.

ES, you may very well be a saint. Only God knows what is in our hearts. Catholicism teaches that all those baptised in Christ are saints, forgiven of their sins and sanctified by the blood of Christ. But, as you may already have read elsewhere, we don't believe in once saved, always saved. So ... once a saint, unfortunately, not always a saint. I find your beliefs unorthodox and inconsistent, but I am not your judge.

Dave,

I did mean it another way. Let me explain further. I try to stick only with the Bible. You will also use tradition as well. Thus you are not bound solely to scripture. This doesn't mean you take away from scripture, but that you add to it the meanings of what certain theologians give it as well as traditions and customs that are not observed nor reguarded by others . So I have no defence against what they say because i don't recognise their authority. Therefore I said that i may not accept your answer as being 'right' but didn't begrudge you your view.

That all aside, you need to lay off the attacks. This I speak as a facilitator. We all need to be careful. When one always assumes to worst and launches out then it's a problem. By all means speak freely, but even IF I had flamed you, as you supposed, it still isn't in good character to attack back. As the saying goes two wrongs don't make a right. please keep that in mind as you dialogue.

That said, I do look forward to sharing, in a non combative way. If in another post of mine you think I'm flaming try to give me the benefit of the doubt. I'n not a fast typer and may not express things as well as possible. Plus we all communicate differently.

itsjustdave1988

12-23-2003, 05:19 PM

John,

The discussion started prior to the switch to the new TheologyReview software format and cannot be linked to. Here's an excerpt I found from another thread...
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Intercession of the Saints

quoted from Little Lamb:
-----------------------------

Other objections I have about the Catholic Church are praying to the saints and praying to Mary.
------------------------------

I was in a Baptist Church last night, thumbing through their hymnal when I saw "Angels We Have Heard on High." I love than hymn. However, I found it odd that it was in a Baptist hymnal, since within the song, we request the aid of Joseph and Mary. I wonder sometimes if most Baptists actually understand the implications of this song. Do they not know that contained within the hymn is a prayer to Joseph and Mary?

In fact, this hymn appears in many Protestant hymnals. Protestant Rev. Charles Dickson points this out in his book "A Protestant Pastor Looks at Mary." In his book, Dickson contends that the practice of requesting intercessory prayers from the saints is a valid ancient Christian practice that was continued and encouraged by the fathers of Protestantism. It was only later Protesters who began condemning such practice, although without much support for their condemnation in sacred scripture--strangely ironic for “Bible only” Christians.

On the contrary, our most holy hymns, the Psalms, direct us to invoke those in heaven and ask them to pray with us...

"Bless the Lord, O you his angels, you mighty ones who do his word, hearkening to the voice of his word! Bless the Lord, all his hosts, his ministers that do his will!" (Ps. 103:20-21).

"Praise the Lord! Praise the Lord from the heavens, praise him in the heights! Praise him, all his angels, praise him, all his host!" (Ps. 148:1-2).

Scripture shows that those in heaven not only pray with us, but they also pray for us.

"[An] angel came and stood at the altar [in heaven] 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).

"the twenty-four elders [the leaders of the people of God in heaven] fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and with golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the holy ones" (Rev. 5:8).

The above passages show that the saints in heaven offer to God the prayers of the saints on earth.

Now, does this mean that we do not pray to the blessed Trinity directly? Of course not. That’s as absurd as saying that because I asked my pastor to pray for me that I am worshipping him instead of God. If it is ok to ask my pastor to pray for me then it is certainly ok to ask the angels and heavenly hosts to pray for me. Neither violates the “one mediator of Christ” teaching, as it is in the name of Christ Jesus that my pastor and heavenly ministers offer their prayers.

Paul says that Christians should interceed: "First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all men, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way. This is good, and pleasing to God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth" (1 Tim. 2:1–4). Are the saints in heaven Christian? Are they not joined to us in Christ’s love? Why then would they stop interceding?

Can they know our prayers? Yes. Paul teaches us that our way of knowing is perfected in heaven. “At present we see indistinctly, as in a mirror, but then face to face. At present I know partially; then I shall know fully, as I am fully known” (1 Cor 13:12). The letter of Hebrews describes the heavenly spirits as, “the spirits of the just made perfect” (Heb 12:23). Furthermore, the Book of Revelations shows that the souls in heaven are aware of what goes on here on earth. “They called out in a loud voice, "How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?’” (Rev 6:10).

Is this necromancy? No. Necromancy is conjuring up a spirit to elicit information. Scripture teaches against this, as we need no other prophecy than the word of God made incarnate in Christ Jesus. Catholics neither conjure up spirits, nor do we ask for prophecy. We merely continue the scriptural practice of invoking all the angels and heavenly hosts to pray with us and to pray for us.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A portion of the discussion is missing I think (I believe I still have it on my hard drive at home). However, after the TR software switch, the discussion continued here ...
http://www.theologyreview.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=22&highlight=padre+and+saints+and+pray+and+primer

Also this thread discusses Catholic doctrines about Mary...
http://www.theologyreview.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=198&highlight=Mary+and+Doctrines+and+biblical

John Oscar

12-23-2003, 05:36 PM

Dave,
I think it's a little bit of a stretch to take any of the scriptures you've offered and apply them to the thought of asking departed saints to pray for us.

Perhaps I take a practical view on this:

I think that we can agree that only God (along with the rest of the Trinity) possesses the three attributes of deity, which are omniscience, omnipresence, and omnipotence.

If we can agree on this, then how could any saint, Mary, Francis, John, Peter, ect, know every request for prayer offered to them?

Does the Catholic Church hold that God granted them a form of omniscience, or omnipresence for this? Mary is an excellent example of my dilemma here, as there are probably hundreds, if not thousands of people praying a rosary right now. Does Mary hear all of them? Or does God impart the knowledge to her of who to intercede for? If Mary can hear everyone, does she see into the heart and know who is fulfilling a religious observance, and who is actually trying to connect with God?

These are not questions meant to attack you or Catholics, but legitimate philosophical and theological questions that this doctrine raises.

Blessings
John O

Eveningstar

12-23-2003, 06:21 PM

Originally posted by itsjustdave1988

ES, you may very well be a saint. Only God knows what is in our hearts. Catholicism teaches that all those baptised in Christ are saints, forgiven of their sins and sanctified by the blood of Christ. But, as you may already have read elsewhere, we don't believe in once saved, always saved. So ... once a saint, unfortunately, not always a saint. I find your beliefs unorthodox and inconsistent, but I am not your judge.

Thanks for the vote of confidence, but I know what I am, and it's not a Saint. I'm a sinner. I do a lot less backsliding then I use to, and I'm trying to perfect it. On the road from sinner to saint?
We'll see.
I keep it real and honest between myself and my God and my brethren.
A lot of people thought Jesus' beliefs were unorthodox and inconsistent, but He taugfht them all The Way.
Good luck on your road to redemption, I hope to see you some day, up yonder.:)

itsjustdave1988

12-24-2003, 12:35 PM

John,

I didn't expect we'd find agreement. Nonetheless, I appreciate that your questions are not wrapped in accusation.

I likewise don't see strong evidence of Sola Scriptura, Sola Fide, once saved, always saved, Calvinist TULIP, etc., etc. Seems the history of interpretation of Scripture is filled with disagreement. I prefer to use the rule of faith used by the ancient Church, vice the rule of private interpretation of Scripture.

Your question is similar to that asked by Padre ...

Padre,

Thanks for your question.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, the one sticking point that I have yet to have addressed to my satisfaction is how it is that I can call upon Mary or any saint in heaven to intercede for me?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Simple, just ask. The saints in heaven can hear us. They don't have to be omnipresent because God is both omnipresent and omnipotent. The medium of communication is Christ himself--the vine between the branches. We and the saints form one communion, one body of Christ, being members of Him and member of one another. That's what is meant by the creedal statement in the ancient Apostle's Creed, "we believe in the communion of saints." Heb 12:1 tells us that we are surrounded by "a cloud of witnesses." These witnesses are aware of and concerned for our welfare. I don't think space and time exists in heaven. To God, his angels, and heavenly hosts, I think everything appears as one eternal present. Their way of knowing is perfected, as Paul teaches us, "At present we see indistinctly, as in a mirror, but then face to face. At present I know partially; then I shall know fully, as I am fully known” (1 Cor 13:12). The letter of Hebrews also describes the heavenly spirits as, “the spirits of the just made perfect” (Heb 12:23). Although God alone possesses all perfection, we can participate in God's perfection by sharing in His divine life. For example, the Bible says only God is good (Mk 10:18). Yet we can share in that absolute Goodness: "Well done, my good and faithful servant" (Mt 15:23).

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I do not see a "biblical precedent" for this
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I see biblical precedent for invoking the angels and heavenly hosts to pray with us (Ps. 103:20-21; Ps. 148:1-2) and I also see biblical precedent for believing the prayers of the holy ones on earth are delivered to God on our behalf by the angels and saints in heaven (Rev. 5:8, Rev. 8:3-4).

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further, why is it necessary to call upon the saints in heaven to pray for us when I have brothers and sisters here who are capable of praying? Does this not militate against "community" within Christ's church on earth?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is not necessary to request any intercessory prayer from anyone, not a saint in heaven, nor a saint on earth. However, requesting and providing intercessory prayers is fitting and apostolic teaching. Why can't I ask my mom to pray for me AND ask Mary to pray for me? It is merely a consequence of communion--a communion of saints on earth AND in heaven. I believe leaving the saints in heaven out of the communion of saints is without biblical precedence.

We are certain that the saints in heaven enjoy the face-to-face vision of God (1 Cor 13:12; 1 Jn 3:2). It is in this vision that they are aware of our prayers to them.

John Oscar

12-24-2003, 01:35 PM

Dave,
If I understand you correctly, and if I don't please elaborate, you are saying that once we are in heaven, the saints are able to "tap" into the divine attributes of God in order to be able to pray for others.

Is this an at least somewhat accurate portyral of what you are saying?

Blessings, and Merry Christmas!

John O

John Oscar

12-24-2003, 01:39 PM

John Oscar

12-24-2003, 01:47 PM

Dave, you said:

"I see biblical precedent for invoking the angels and heavenly hosts to pray with us (Ps. 103:20-21; Ps. 148:1-2)"
You supplied these verses as proof of your theory/theological premise

Ps 148:1-4
Praise the LORD!
Praise the LORD from the heavens,
praise him in the heights!
2 Praise him, all his angels,
praise him, all his host!

3 Praise him, sun and moon,
praise him, all you shining stars!
4 Praise him, you highest heavens,
and you waters above the heavens!
RSV

Ps 103:19-22

19 The LORD has established his throne in the heavens,
and his kingdom rules over all.
20 Bless the LORD, O you his angels,
you mighty ones who do his word,
hearkening to the voice of his word!
21 Bless the LORD, all his hosts,
his ministers that do his will!
22 Bless the LORD, all his works,
in all places of his dominion.
Bless the LORD, O my soul!
RSV
I used RSV in honor of Catholic's :)

Even though we might disagree on this, proper exegesis of these verses would conclude that the psalmist is simply calling on all God's creation to praise in with exuberant praise.
I would not attempt to use these to say that it is proof of asking angels to pray for us or even with us.
If we did, we could continue that vein of logic from these verses and say that we can call upon the earth, sun, moon, and stars to pray for us.

My humble opinion

Blessings
John O

itsjustdave1988

12-24-2003, 02:24 PM

John,

I believe our way of knowing on earth is only partial. I believe our way of knowing is made perfect in heaven. As only God is perfect, this perfected way of knowing can only come from God, just as any goodness or holiness of any on earth or in heaven can only come from God. See Heb 12:13, where the "spirits of the just" are "made perfect."

I agree the Psalmist is invoking all of God's creation to praise God together. That's my point. All of God's creation include the angels and the spirits of the holy ones made perfect in heaven. ;) There certainly no Biblical precedent which says this is against the will of God, right? In fact, if I want to ask the sun, moon, and stars to praise God, as the Psalmist does, it's still quite Biblical to do so, no?

The awareness of the souls of those in heaven is seen in John's Apocalypse through their act of crying out for the vengance that had not yet come. How did they know this? I dunno. But it seems clear that they did know it. Likewise, the angels and saints offer prayers to God in John's Apocalypse.

I wouldn't say creatures "tap" into the divine attributes of God. Seems very Pelagian a viewpoint. Instead I see Divine gifts being given (not tapped into) to those on earth in communion with God, but these gifts being given in greater perfection to those sharing the beatific vision of God in heaven.

Christians pray for one another. Death, I believe, separates the soul from the human body until bodily resurrection. Death does not separate the soul from the body of Christ for those who have died in Christ.

I'm certain that our disgreement will remain, most certainly as a result of our differing rules of faith.

The rule of faith of the ancient church to which I maintain, and I made reference to in my last post is described by non-Catholic church historian Ellen Flessman-Van Leer:

"Irenaeus and Tertullian point to the church tradition as the authoritative locus of the unadulterated teaching of the apostles, they cannot longer appeal to the immediate memory, as could the earliest writers. Instead they lay stress on the affirmation that this teaching has been transmitted faithfully from generation to generation. One could say that in their thinking, apostolic succession occupies the same place that is held by the living memory in the Apostolic Fathers." (Scripture and Tradition in the Early Church, p.188)

Likewise, Protestant patristic scholar J.N.D. Kelly states:

"It should be unnecessary to accumulate further evidence. Throughout the whole period Scripture and tradition ranked as complementary authorities, media different in form but coincident in content. To inquire which counted as superior or more ultimate is to pose the question in misleading terms. If Scripture was abundantly sufficient in principle, tradition was recognized as the surest clue to its interpretation, for in tradition the Church retained, as a legacy from the apostles which was embedded in all the organs of her institutional life, an unerring grasp of the real purport and meaning of the revelation to which Scripture and tradition alike bore witness" (Early Christian Doctrines, pp. 47-48)

Neither during NT times, nor afterward was the ancient Christian rule of faith Sola Scriptura. And so Protestants use a rule of faith distinctly different than Eastern/Oriental Orthodoxy and Catholicism. Orthodoxy and Catholicism do not agree on everything, yet their disagreements are small in comparison to the wildly variant disagreements found within differing Sola Scriptura denominations of Protestantism. The early church used a rule of faith that was in my opinion, beautifully described by St. Vincent de Lerins in the 5th century:

St. Vincent de Lerins, Commonitory, Ch II, AD 434:

I have often then inquired earnestly and attentively of very many men eminent for sanctity and learning, how and by what sure and so to speak universal rule I may be able to distinguish the truth of Catholic faith from the falsehood of heretical pravity; and I have always, and in almost every instance, received an answer to this effect: That whether I or any one else should wish to detect the frauds and avoid the snares of heretics as they rise, and to continue sound and complete in the Catholic faith, we must, the Lord helping, fortify our own belief in two ways; first, by the authority of the Divine Law, and then, by the Tradition of the Catholic Church.

But here some one perhaps will ask, Since the canon of Scripture is complete, and sufficient of itself for everything, and more than sufficient, what need is there to join with it the authority of the Church's interpretation? For this reason, - because, owing to the depth of Holy Scripture, all do not accept it in one and the same sense, but one understands its words in one way, another in another; so that it seems to be capable of as many interpretations as there are interpreters. For Novatian expounds it one way, Sabellius another, Donatus another, Arius, Eunomius, Macedonius, another, Photinus, Apollinaris, Priscillian, another, Iovinian, Pelagius, Celestius, another, lastly, Nestorius another. Therefore, it is very necessary, on account of so great intricacies of such various error, that the rule for the right understanding of the prophets and apostles should be framed in accordance with the standard of Ecclesiastical and Catholic interpretation.

Moreover, in the Catholic Church itself, all possible care must be taken, that we hold that faith which has been believed everywhere, always, by all. For that is truly and in the strictest sense "Catholic," which, as the name itself and the reason of the thing declare, comprehends all universally. This rule we shall observe if we follow universality, antiquity, consent. We shall follow universality if we confess that one faith to be true, which the whole Church throughout the world confesses; antiquity, if we in no wise depart from those interpretations which it is manifest were notoriously held by our holy ancestors and fathers; consent, in like manner, if in antiquity itself we adhere to the consentient definitions and determinations of all, or at the least of almost all priests and doctors.

Pope John XXIII is quoted as saying "In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all things charity." From a Catholic viewpoint, you don't have to ask any saint in heaven or on earth to pray for you. Nonetheless, Catholics believe we are at liberty to do so, as nothing in Scripture or the ancient tradition of the Church suggests otherwise.

Now, using my rule of faith, can you tell me why I shouldn't ask the heavenly angels and saints to pray for me?

John Oscar

12-25-2003, 12:21 AM

Dave,
You, me and some of the other believers on this board are running into the same problem that we had in our homeschool group. There was a movement within our group to align with the Wisconsin Homeschool group.
In order to do that, we had to adopt their statement of faith, which included the following phrase:

The bible is the inspired word of God, and is our only rule for faith, conduct, and practice.

Obviously, the Catholic people in our group felt very uncomfortable with this statement, and threatened to leave the group and start a Catholic only group.

My point is that since we come from two different views on religious authority, it is unlikely that we will ever agree on the prinicple differences between our faith...

Blessings, and have a blessed New Year!

John O

John Oscar

12-25-2003, 12:26 AM

Oh, by the way, you asked the question why you shouldn't ask the saints or anyone else to pray for you

The answer, I just take it straight to God!

Heb 10:19-23

19 Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus, 20 by a new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is, his body, 21 and since we have a great priest over the house of God, 22 let us draw near to God with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water. 23 Let us hold unswervingly to the hope we profess, for he who promised is faithful.
NIV

Little Lamb

12-25-2003, 08:47 AM

If Catholics have triouble with this,
The bible is the inspired word of God, and is our only rule for faith, conduct, and practice.
There is definetly something wrong.

saved

12-25-2003, 02:00 PM

Dave,
it would be permissible to call on the creation to praise the Lord God in the same context as David did, but not to call on it to intercede for you which is what the catholic church does. One is simply calling without any idea that the creation hears, but gives tribute through your call/prayer to God. The other is giving the creation worship seeking intercession on its part which is only to be given directly to God from the person who prays and not from some other source. There are many forms of worship and only One can receive it. Praying to an individual is one form of worship and only God can receive that. When saints or heavenly bodies are prayed TO they are in fact robbing God of His due worship and the one doing the praying is in sin.

Little Lamb

12-25-2003, 04:06 PM

saved,

I agree. I see praying to those who have gone on before us as sin. We have our Lord and Saviour to go to. He opened up His throne to His children.

We don't need to side step that by asking someone who has gone on before us something.

To me, that insults what Jesus did on the cross. To me, that's an insult to God.

itsjustdave1988

12-26-2003, 12:36 PM

I agree that the Bible is the inspired, inerrant word of God. I disagree that it ALONE is the rule of faith. Why? The Bible calls the Church the "pillar and foundation of truth." Sola Scriptura is nothing but a post-16th century tradition of men that does not come from Scripture.

Everyone here wants me to show them by THEIR unscriptural rule of faith why so-and-so doctrine is orthodox. Yet nobody here is brave enough to show me by MY rule of faith why my beliefs are heterodox. Hmmmm?

MY rule of faith has existed in every century since NT times. When you can show that YOUR rule of faith is Scriptural and why MY rule of faith is opposed to Scripture, your "burden for Catholics" will be much more effective.

saved

12-26-2003, 01:39 PM

Dave,
you are very confused. I have no "burden for Catholics." I do however for the Lost and for truth no matter what they call themselves. many catholics are just some of many. For those who reject the word for tradition I am to dust my feet off and I do. I read your testimony and it is clear that you have been one tossed about by many doctrines. hanging on now for dear life not knowing what is true. Jesus spoke of this in Mat 23:15. A difficult passage but one that needs to be taken with much care.
Faith is not believing tradition, but God's word and your tradition makes the word void. Your only hope is to reject the traditions and accept the God of the bible and His Word then you will be set free for the knowledge of the truth will make you free in deed.

John Oscar

12-26-2003, 01:43 PM

Savedd,
I like this quote on the bottom of your post:

Knowledge without repentance will be but a torch to light men to hell. - Thomas Watson

It's a warning to me, as I would rather study on most days then pray and worship.

Blessings
John O

saved

12-26-2003, 01:51 PM

Originally posted by John Oscar
Savedd,
I like this quote on the bottom of your post:

Knowledge without repentance will be but a torch to light men to hell. - Thomas Watson

It's a warning to me, as I would rather study on most days then pray and worship.

Blessings
John O

John,
it is a warning to us all and something that most churches seldom hear about today or if they do they get a false understanding of what repentance is.

itsjustdave1988

12-26-2003, 01:56 PM

John,

I take it staight to God as well. I also pray for others, and ask others to pray for me. This is what Scritpure teaches us. I merely count among those "others" those Christians who have died in Christ and continue to pray in heaven, as has been the practice of Christians since NT times.

itsjustdave1988

12-26-2003, 01:58 PM

Saved,

I don't reject Scripture for tradition. I accept the deposit of faith that has been handed on, both oral and written. Your false dichotomy is unconvincing.

saved

12-26-2003, 02:07 PM

dave you are so deceived that you cannot see that your own words contradict what you say.

John Oscar

12-26-2003, 02:21 PM

I think that what Dave is trying to say is that Catholic's don't put a period at the end of the book of Acts, but that since the church has continued, then the apostolic authority has continued through the Catholic church.

Correct me if I have mis-represented your thinking Dave :rolleyes:

I would agree with Dave in that Acts did not stop the move or authority of the church, but that it (the book of Acts) did stop when the full revelation of what God wanted in His Word stopped, and that is the chief arguement that we will forever burn up cable servers, and telephone lines over.

For us non-catholic's, the word is the final authority, and for Catholic's the word as interpreted through the church and it's tradition is it's final authority.

Neither of us is going to budge, so it's better to shake hands in love and wait until the judgment to see who is right....

Blessings
John O

saved

12-26-2003, 03:01 PM

Amo 3:3 Can two walk together, except they be agreed?
:no:

John Oscar

12-26-2003, 03:10 PM

They must agree to walk together despite their differences, because if you expect that you can find two Christians on this planet that honestly agree on every little jot and tittle that you could bring up, then you are sadly mistaken :(

I would agree though that this is not pleasing to God for His children are so obstinant that they can't put aside their small differences and just work to advance the kingdom.
Blessings
John O

saved

12-26-2003, 03:27 PM

Originally posted by John Oscar
They must agree to walk together despite their differences, because if you expect that you can find two Christians on this planet that honestly agree on every little jot and tittle that you could bring up, then you are sadly mistaken :(

I would agree though that this is not pleasing to God for His children are so obstinant that they can't put aside their small differences and just work to advance the kingdom.
Blessings
John O

John,
you give me just one verse that suggests what you just said and I will change my beliefs on this.

John Oscar

12-26-2003, 03:45 PM

Saved,
My intention was not to change you, but to share my opinion. You can accept it or reject it, but either way I'll still love you and honor your opinions, even when they differ from mine.

Blessings
John

saved

12-26-2003, 03:54 PM

John,
loving another even when we differ on beliefs is not the same as walking with them or even having fellowship with them. The Lord loves us all, even those who hate Him, but does no0t carry on with them as friends.. I hope I can do the same, but I do not agree that we are to act as we are busom buddies when we disagree on fundamental doctrine. As I said I am willing to change my mind on anything IF scripture can be produced without twisting it or taking it out of context. As to you not wanting to change my mind that is too bad. I want to change yours and anyones who does not hold to what scripture says. I assume that is what we are suppose to do. That IS my understanding of love although not comprehensive.

John Oscar

12-26-2003, 04:00 PM

But this post is not a central doctrine, and therefore not worth going to the mat about.

If we were discussings, say, that Christ is not God, then of course I'd burn up the internet over it, but I try not to get my undies in a bunch over the little stuff.

2 Tim 2:24-25

24 And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient,
25 In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;
KJV

2 Tim 2:14-15

14 Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers.

15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
KJV

Blessings!
John O

saved

12-26-2003, 04:17 PM

Originally posted by John Oscar
But this post is not a central doctrine, and therefore not worth going to the mat about.

If we were discussings, say, that Christ is not God, then of course I'd burn up the internet over it, but I try not to get my undies in a bunch over the little stuff.

2 Tim 2:24-25

24 And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient,
25 In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;
KJV

2 Tim 2:14-15

14 Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers.

15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
KJV

Blessings!
John O

John,
those are great passages and I certainly need and want to learn how to walk in them better. However In this thread it covers several things. From praying to those who have died, scripture alone, and more. I do not see any of this as non essential. I have a great burden for the church today. I see it as weak and more then weak in great error. I honestly feel that God is greatly grieved about what is taking place. I know I am. I realize that just about everyone sees the problems in another church but we are blind to our own. That is sad. I feel that one of the main problems is the attitude is "we all cannot agree on everything." The statement may be true, but it carries false undertones.
I believe that the problem is not simply with the people, but a great deal is with the leadership.
Here is why. I feel that it has become more important to get numbers then it is to keep sound doctrine. Pastors who allow people to join the church because they have a letter or just ask or want baptized is wrong I believe. These people need to be questioned about what they believe on the major Doctrines. if they do not understand they need to be taught BEFORE they are accepted for membership. If they refuse to change their mind then they should not be accepted. It is that simple!
One of the qualifications of pastor is that his children are subject to him. The reason is if he cannot lead his own household he cannot lead the church. being a good father requires him to put limits on who his children play with and run with. We all know that bad company corrupts good morals. The same needs to be applied in the church. Not perfect, but a spirit of seeking truth and not in rebellion. This is not happening today in the church's. We are told not to have fellowship with a contentious person. In other words those who reject scripture. I practice that and wish more did.

John Oscar

12-26-2003, 04:24 PM

Saved,
I agree with much of what you have said about modern Christianity, especailly in America.

I'll give this more attention later, as my wife and I have a date ;)

Blessings
John O

saved

12-26-2003, 04:30 PM

Originally posted by John Oscar
Saved,
I agree with much of what you have said about modern Christianity, especailly in America.

I'll give this more attention later, as my wife and I have a date ;)

Blessings
John O

That's great! More men need to date their wives.

Leo Volont

12-26-2003, 10:43 PM

No. You don't want to cheapen the appelation of 'Saint' by applying it to everybody. As soon as you do, then you have to come up with another word for.... well.... 'Saint'.

A Saint is Christ-like in Holiness and Power. A Saint is in full possession of God's Grace and the Holy Spirit. God and Our Lady refuses nothing to a Saint.

There are never more than a few Saints in each Century. So it is ridiculous to pretend that each heretical sect is littered with congregations of them.

Remember, that even after Peter took one or two steps on the water before falling in, Christ blamed him for lack of faith. It is by this standard that we are measured when it comes to Sainthood. We must stay on top of the water the whole time. But all your 'saints' are still in the boat.

John Oscar

12-27-2003, 05:43 AM

Leo, you are giving an opinion while ignoring what the scripture says:

First, the definition of a saint:

NT:40

hagios (hag'-ee-os); from hagos (an awful thing) [compare NT:53, NT:2282]; sacred (physically, pure, morally blameless or religious, ceremonially, consecrated):

KJV - (most) holy (one, thing), saint.

Isn't that the very definition of what we are when we are washed with the blood of Christ? If God still sees sin there, then we are still damned to hell! Christ is the complete sacrifice for all sin, yesterday, today, and forever for all those who believe.
Now, I agree from the practical side, sanctification (being made holy in your daily walk and life) takes a life time and beyond to work out in the person.

The scripture is clear that we are considered saints even so:

Rom 1:7

7 To all in Rome who are loved by God and called to be saints:
NIV

Rom 8:26-27
27 And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints in accordance with God's will.
NIV

Rev 19:7-9
7 Let us rejoice and be glad
and give him glory!
For the wedding of the Lamb has come,
and his bride has made herself ready.
8 Fine linen, bright and clean,
was given her to wear."

(Fine linen stands for the righteous acts of the saints.)

9 Then the angel said to me, "Write: 'Blessed are those who are invited to the wedding supper of the Lamb!'" And he added, "These are the true words of God."
NIV

I know that most people have a problem applying the word saint to themselves, as they don't feel worthy to bear such a title, but that is the reality of scripture, and one more reason to praise our Lord and savior!

Blessings
John O

Eveningstar

12-27-2003, 10:35 AM

Psa 24:3-5 Who shall ascend into the hill of the LORD? or who shall stand in his holy place?
He that hath clean hands, and a pure heart; who hath not lifted up his soul unto vanity, nor sworn deceitfully.
He shall receive the blessing from the LORD, and righteousness from the God of his salvation.

Hbr 12:13-16 And make straight paths for your feet, lest that which is lame be turned out of the way; but let it rather be healed.
Follow peace with all [men], and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord:
Looking diligently lest any man fail of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble [you], and thereby many be defiled;
Lest there [be] any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright.

itsjustdave1988

12-27-2003, 11:22 AM

John,

You said:

For us non-catholic's, the word is the final authority, and for Catholic's the word as interpreted through the church and it's tradition is it's final authority.

I agree except I believe that non-Catholics too understand the word as interpreted through THEIR church and/or THEIR theological judgment and/or THEIR tradition and/or THEIR history. Protestants have their favorate scholars and traditions too. Presuppositions of the post-16th century have influenced Protestant scholarship. The post-16 century Hegelian and existential philosophies have influenced Protestant exegesis just as surely as ancient Greek philosophy influenced Catholic/Orthodox exegesis. These are the presuppositions one cannot help but have while studying Holy Writ. Protestantism just happens to interpret Holy Writ with post-16th century scholars/traditions/philosophies/history. A study of comparative religions may reveal that American Protestantism is quite unique when compared to European Protestantism. Why? Differe culture, history, traditions ... which result in different presuppositions ... resulting in different interpretation of the same Sacred text.

Most repudable Bible scholars assert that we need to come to know the historical and cultural context of the era in which the text was written to truly understand the authorial intent. Why? Because the historical and cultural context INFLUENCES the understanding of Scripture. It is the same message for the past 2000 years, yet what it meant in the 1st century may not be what it means in the 16th or 21st century. The message has not changed, but the mindset of the audience has. This is what I mean by presuppositions.

21st cent. readers have more of a common mindset compared to each other than when compared to ancient readers in 1st century Jerusalem, Rome, Antioch, Alexandria, etc. Nonetheless, the attempt to put away your own personal mindset and place yourself in ancient times is common among all repudable Christian scholars, whether Protestant, Orthodox, or Catholic. How can we better do this?

Are there ancient biblical commentaries available to us that might allow use to better put away our 21st cent. mindset and adopt an ancient mindset which more closely resemble that of NT times? I think so. That's why the study of patristics is valuable, because it helps to see things from the viewpoint of those not-so-far removed from NT times.

I think this is what Protestant reformer John Wesley was getting at when he wrote:

Can any who spend several years in those seats of learning, be excused if they do not add to that reading of the (early Church) Fathers? the most authentic commentators on Scripture, as being both nearest the fountain, eminently endued with that Spirit by whom all Scripture was given.

The Protestant publisher of my King James Version of Scripture gives many “helps” to allow the reader of scripture to better understand the historical and cultural context of Old Testament and New Testament times. However, he makes it clear in his preface that, “In no instance, however, has the emerging light of these extra-Biblical sources ever done violence to or disturbed the central message of the eternal word of God. These helps only serve to illuminate and make the brilliant gems of truth even brighter.”

I agree with the publisher’s statement in general, yet I believe it betrays the actual practice of Protestantism as contrary to Sola Scriptura. If one need no other authority but scripture to understand scripture, these “helps” would be entirely unnecessary. Furthermore, I suspect the publisher would disagree with my assertion that the “helps” of the Catholic Church “only serve to illuminate and make brilliant gems of truth even brighter.” I find when I assert the same with my Protestant friends and family, I’m confronted with the polemic that I need to use “scripture alone” and not let “traditions of men” influence me. It seems somewhat arbitrary which “helps” they consider “traditions of men” and which “helps” illuminate scripture. I contend that the most ancient “helps” of the Church since the time of Christ are most illuminating.

So I would characterize the difference as: Protestants use Scripture + new tradition. (e.g., Sola Scriptura, Sola Fida, OSAS, TULIP, 66-book Bible, etc., etc.) Catholics use Scripture + ancient tradition.

itsjustdave1988

12-27-2003, 11:28 AM

John,

To clarify my point, this is what Saved wrote:

I want to change yours and anyones who does not hold to what scripture says.

What I READ is:

I want to change yours and anyones who does not hold to [MY OPINION OF] what scripture says.

There are some Christians who are convinced that their exegesis is GOD'S WORD and all other exegesis is MAN'S WORD. I find this position absurd.

Eveningstar

12-27-2003, 02:23 PM

Originally posted by itsjustdave1988

There are some Christians who are convinced that their exegesis is GOD'S WORD and all other exegesis is MAN'S WORD. I find this position absurd.

I dunnot t'ink he was saying anything about his "exegesis," (you'll have to ask him yourself, saved has me on ignore for some reason, I think...)

Though that (his exegesis) maybe what leads him to believe whatever he believes about God's Word, because he definitely is a frequent expositor of notions large and small...and thus frequently wrong, as are any of us who tag on our own little agenda whether it be conscious or unconscious, such an privilege is none of ours and sinful.

God's Word is God's Word, anything added or subtracted from It, can be taken in any number of ways, God's Word can only be taken One Way. We have One Teacher, The Christ, The Holy Spirit. No one else should consider himself a teacher, but all should be doers...

Jhn 16:5-15 But now I go my way to him that sent me; and none of you asketh me, Whither goest thou?
But because I have said these things unto you, sorrow hath filled your heart.
Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.
And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:
Of sin, because they believe not on me;
Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more;
Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.
I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.
Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, [that] shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew [it] unto you.
All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew [it] unto you.

Leo Volont

12-27-2003, 09:33 PM

Originally posted by John Oscar
Leo, you are giving an opinion while ignoring what the scripture says:

First, the definition of a saint:

Blessings
John O

Dear John,

The Scriptures couldn't possibly give a definition for Sainthood. At the times the scriptures were written, what did anybody know about Sainthood. All our Knowledge of Saintliness comes AFTER the Scripture.

Besides much of one's study of the Saints will take one outside of Christianity. I have to bite my tongue not to say "most" of one's study...

John Oscar

12-27-2003, 10:05 PM

Leo, with all respect-

HUH????

I'm not sure how you study a scriptural idea outside or without using scripture. That would be like studying a word without a dictionary.

Blessings
John O

Eveningstar

12-28-2003, 12:18 PM

Would Mahatma Gandhi be considered a Saint if he had accepted Jesus Christ?

Little Lamb

12-28-2003, 01:04 PM

Originally posted by Eveningstar
Would Mahatma Gandhi be considered a Saint if he had accepted Jesus Christ?
Yes, if he got saved God's way. All the saved people are saints.

Eveningstar

12-28-2003, 01:17 PM

Originally posted by Little Lamb
Yes, if he got saved God's way. All the saved people are saints.

I can't agree, most saved people are unworthy sinners.

John Oscar

12-28-2003, 01:47 PM

If you are saying that he would have been a saint in regards that all believers are saints, then yes.

If you are referring to the tradition found in the RC of giving special recognition to people who were particularly used of God, you'd have to ask Dave, as I have no idea how they go about that process.

Blessings
John O

Little Lamb

12-28-2003, 03:34 PM

Originally posted by Eveningstar
I can't agree, most saved people are unworthy sinners.
I, for one, am unworthy to go to Heaven, let alone to be called a saint. Who I am that Jesus died for me? Who am I that Jesus should even care what happens to me? He owes me nothing. I owe all to Him.

Eveningstar

12-28-2003, 04:20 PM

Col 1:3-13 We give thanks to God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, praying always for you,
Since we heard of your faith in Christ Jesus, and of the love [which ye have] to all the saints,
For the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, whereof ye heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel;
Which is come unto you, as [it is] in all the world; and bringeth forth fruit, as [it doth] also in you, since the day ye heard [of it], and knew the grace of God in truth:
As ye also learned of Epaphras our dear fellowservant, who is for you a faithful minister of Christ;
Who also declared unto us your love in the Spirit.
For this cause we also, since the day we heard [it], do not cease to pray for you, and to desire that ye might be filled with the knowledge of his will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding;
That ye might walk worthy of the Lord unto all pleasing, being fruitful in every good work, and increasing in the knowledge of God;
Strengthened with all might, according to his glorious power, unto all patience and longsuffering with joyfulness;
Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light:
Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated [us] into the kingdom of his dear Son:

kevingaily

12-29-2003, 07:19 AM

Originally posted by Eveningstar
I can't agree, most saved people are unworthy sinners.

I agree! The good thing is that we get HIS righteousness! :D Therefore, when the Father looks at us he sees his son's righteousness rather than our pathetic flesh.

Eveningstar

12-29-2003, 09:43 AM

1Jo 3:1-3 Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.
Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.
And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure.

Eurogal

12-30-2003, 10:59 AM

We are made saints by the act of being dedicated holy (wholly) unto God. Our watery-grave baptism is to be a sincere expression of starting the holy unto the Lord dedication of our life.

The saints go marching into heaven.

ONLY them and them ONLY !

Admittedly there are religious ones totally confused when agreeing to baptism and are still carnally dead in sin when they come up out of the water of baptism. They have not yet totally consecrated their hear to the Lord and have not rightly confessed sin of their lives. They never had a moment of personal repentance. All was an intellectually motivated decision.

We all are sinners because we all have fallen short of the glory of God by the spirit of rebellion in us to his laws.

Those of us who have accepted and submitted to the atonement of the sacrifice of Jesus as our Christ Messiah become Saved Sinners by the grace of God.

The guarantee of the Holy Spirit is come to us when we make a full commitment to be baptized with His Spirit and to be baptized unto death of the carnal nature in a grave of water. The Lord raises us up to newness in life of holiness unto God. We are stamped as His children in a special way. He knows who belongs to him in obedience of love by keeping His commandments. Those who hear his voice keep His commandments.

He sees them as his saints. Not because of some worthiness of vitures they are producing. But because they are saints in His eyes from their attitde of a submissive heart to God. Not because of works they do or have done.

The saints of God are producing the fruit of the Spirit of God dwelling in them. The law of God is written on their hearts which is the essence of the new Testiment being the new Covenant in the believer this side of the coming of the Comforter.

Eurogal