For those having questions and wishing to know what the Catholic position is on communication with the deceased, please read the following information:

EVP and Vatican (http://www.evp-itc-australia.org/29.html)

Do you have a question?

Yes, the same as with all Christians, communication with the dead is strictly forbidden within any Christian denomination and over all religion since it is specificly listed as something that we should not do.

Do you have a question?

Certainly, I do! If communication within "every" Christian denomination is forbidden (that is inaccurate at best), then why does the Vatican, with a sitting Pope, of all places, allow it (as shown in the link)? And why do Catholics communicate with "dead" saints and ask those proposed to become saints to intercede for them in a matter concerning a miracle, a requirement for the person's sainthood? They should thus refrain from doing so immediately if they want to live up to their teachings on this. Otherwise, it is just idle talk and people can continue to do so as they feel led.

You obvously do not understand saints, asking them to intercede ( pray to Jesus for you) is for from sitting down and talking with them.

And yes, it is in the bible directly about talking to, and calling up the dead to talk to them. And it is very strictly warned against.
So yes, if any Christian church follows the bible, ( and if they don't they are not Christians of course) then communication with the dead is not allowed.

Sad you wish to attack a religion you obvoiusly know nothing about.

Just a couple of thoughts on this topic.

The passages in scripture refer to communication with those who are dead in the flesh (no differentiation given for saints or not that I can find).

I personally do not understand why we would even want to pray to a saint who is dead in the flesh when we can pray directly to the Father in the name of the Son. What could be more effective than coming, in person, and speaking one to one to the Almighty God, the creator of the universe? Most people find it hard to find time to pray, and if I have a choice between spending the time that I have by going to Almighty God or to someone else, the decision, for me at least, is simple.

.... Sad you wish to attack a religion you obvoiusly know nothing about.

Do not many attacks come from those that know the least?

You obvously do not understand saints, asking them to intercede ( pray to Jesus for you) is for from sitting down and talking with them.

And yes, it is in the bible directly about talking to, and calling up the dead to talk to them. And it is very strictly warned against.
So yes, if any Christian church follows the bible, ( and if they don't they are not Christians of course) then communication with the dead is not allowed.

Sad you wish to attack a religion you obvoiusly know nothing about.

Chuck, and I don't use the word "Father" as that is reserved for the One and Only Father, God in the Holy Trinity, not for mere mortals. I understand more about Christianity than Catholics who don't even read the Bible by their own admission.

What? You say "You obvously do not understand saints, asking them to intercede ( pray to Jesus for you) is for from sitting down and talking with them." If asking them to intercede or pray to Jesus for you is "far" from sitting down and talking with them then what form of communication are you carrying on? Even if it is mental (and it should never be 'praying' as we should NEVER pray to mere saints), it is still a form of communication with those who are not around in physical bodies, i.e., those who have passed on, FYI.

Again, if it is in the Bible about directly talking to and calling up the dead to talk to them and it is warned against, then what are Catholics doing allowing the practice as the Webpage LINK so clearly shows? You failed to answer that question, Chuck, please don't shirk from answering it if you claim to know so much.

And your comment about attacking a religion leaves much to be desired. I am not attacking a "religion" but trying to understand the hypocrisy within the Catholic Church in saying one thing and doing another. Now, that's what is truly sad. If that isn't the height of hypocrisy I don't know how it could come any closer.

Catholics in america get abortions, use birth control and speed in their cars. Baptists have sex before marriage, and Anglicans have gay relastionships Just because people have a religioius denomination they claim to go to, does not mean they follow proper religious teachings.

And you are not trying to understand, since you have some preconcieved ideas about saints, and the differnece in a one sided request and calling them forward to appear or calling them up to talk with them.

Another Catholic bashing, it sure gets old and meaningless. Praying, as asking for intercession, is praying. It is a form of communication, yes, but it is not like conjuring up a dead spirit and talking to them.

Another Catholic bashing, it sure gets old and meaningless. Praying, as asking for intercession, is praying. It is a form of communication, yes, but it is not like conjuring up a dead spirit and talking to them.

This could be ended simply without accusations of "Catholic bashing". Just point out the passages in scripture where scripture tells us to pray to saints who are dead in the flesh.

I am in NO WAY an expert about religion, and/or Catholic religion, but I do have some views on this subject. I was raised Catholic, but by the time I was in 3rd grade in my neighborhood Catholic school I had decided I didn't believe most of what they were telling me. At that time I stopped going to church and as luck would have it, my mother remarried and when we moved the new Catholic school didn't have room for me. So I left the school as well.

As that child, many things confused me, and I can't say I'm any more clear about it as an adult. One of those things was the "false God" thing and the "do not pray to objects" thing. Yet, as we all know, statues of saints and the Blessed Mother are prayed to all the time. I have to agree, that if I'm going to pray, I'm going to pray to God, not a statue.

Again as a teen, I was invited to participate in some teen activities at a non-Catholic church and was told by doing so it was against my religion--and a sin. Well, I went and had fun and the only thing I can think of that might have happened was that I was treated nicely and respectfully by those who I participated with. Why that would be a sin, I have no idea... and don't really want to know at this point.

Now, to the topic of speaking to the dead. Jesus is physically dead, although in some beliefs he either never existed, never existed but is still coming, or he has already "risen" from the dead. Saints are dead. You have to be dead to be named a saint I think. When people talk to Jesus and/or saints, they are not usually doing any kind of ritual to "call them to come"... usually the only thing happening is a one-sided conversation between the prayer and the being they feel can help them with their problem.

When humans try to converse with the dead, often in the past, but not so much now, there are rituals. I would think it's the "ritual" that becomes problematic. This can be considered taking steps to purposely "calling up" the dead. I have experienced many oddities that I have, after much thought, identified as paranormal experiences. I have never spoken to a ghost nor has one spoken to me. But I talk to my mother all the time; she's been deceased for 8 years. She doesn't answer me... at least I've never heard her. But I can't think that doing this is a sin. And even if it was, I'd do it anyway... I love and miss my mother.

When the Vatican issues documents, they can be found on the Vatican website:
Vatican: the Holy See (http://www.vatican.va/)

I do not find an article on the Vatican website like the article says.

Catholics believe the saints are alive in Heaven. In a way, more alive than we are here on Earth. We ask our family and friends to pray for us who are living with us. We also ask those who have gone before us, and are in God's presence in Heaven, to pray for us too. After all those who are in Heaven, see God face to face. And this isn't an ether/or thing. We ask the Saints to pray for us, but we also pray straight to God too.

Exactly.

Another Catholic bashing, it sure gets old and meaningless. Praying, as asking for intercession, is praying. It is a form of communication, yes, but it is not like conjuring up a dead spirit and talking to them.

Yes it is completely sad when I will assume one Christian attacks another Christian because of they way they wish to Worship Jesus. The Catholic Church in combination with the Orthodox Church seem to get attacks I guess because they are the largest and oldest groups.

But as for as Saints, they are in the Teaching of most of the Protestant groups also but many forget, in all the early Lutheran churches, saints were fully used as with the Catholic Church today, the Methodist Church, the Anglican churches, Episcopal churches. All use saints, maybe not to the extent of the Catholic Church but named and used in most of the formal services. All of the Protestant Anglican and Episcopal have saint days, have services on those holy days and more.

Most of the ones that attack I will normally assume have just not taken the time to openly study the early churches history, or even worst they wish to take the faults of a church 500 years ago and hold it against them today.

Roll away the stone and jesus stood before the tume and called to lazeruth to come forth and he did.

Catholics believe the saints are alive in Heaven. In a way, more alive than we are here on Earth. We ask our family and friends to pray for us who are living with us. We also ask those who have gone before us, and are in God's presence in Heaven, to pray for us too. After all those who are in Heaven, see God face to face. And this isn't an ether/or thing. We ask the Saints to pray for us, but we also pray straight to God too.

The difficulty that I have with this is that we do not find that differentiation in scripture, and the references in scripture to communication with the dead are not speaking about whether a person is alive in Christ or not but whether they are dead in the flesh. The best argument for that point would be if the prayer was limited to the two persons who were taken to heaven without dying in the flesh.

Are you aware of any Biblical references which demonstrate communication with those who are dead in the flesh being endorsed by God? I ask because ultimately regardless of what anyone believes personally, that would be the defining source for me.

What about on the mount when Moses and Elijah, came down and talked with Jesus.

Also there are many sourses that relate to the saints being alive in heaven, from the 12 sitting and judging the tribes of Isreal, or others.

And are we not all to pray for one another.? Do you not pass out a prayer list in church for each to pray, doyou call up friends to pray for a family member. Then why not ask one of the saints in heaven to also pray for you, to go to Christ on your behalf.

What about on the mount when Moses and Elijah, came down and talked with Jesus.

Jesus is God and was transfigured in His glory at that time.


Also there are many sourses that relate to the saints being alive in heaven, from the 12 sitting and judging the tribes of Isreal, or others.


But none that tell us to communicate with them. And the reference to communication with the dead does not relate to their state of salvation, but specifically refers to the state of their flesh. We have one case in scripture of someone speaking with a saint in heaven and that was Saul - and that did not end well.


And are we not all to pray for one another.? Do you not pass out a prayer list in church for each to pray, doyou call up friends to pray for a family member. Then why not ask one of the saints in heaven to also pray for you, to go to Christ on your behalf.

The ones to whom I pass out prayer requests are all alive in the flesh.

Hi, communication with the dead is impossible, so I don't know what we're all arguing about.

Hi, communication with the dead is impossible, so I don't know what we're all arguing about.

2 Samuel 28 records one occasion where God permitted it to occur, but this one event did result in judgment against Saul.

But even if that event had not occurred, a sin does not occur simply because something can be done, but it results from disobedience, and in the case of sin against God, this involves sin in the heart even where no actual deed has occurred. Read Matthew 5:21-26 for example.

The difficulty that I have with this is that we do not find that differentiation in scripture, and the references in scripture to communication with the dead are not speaking about whether a person is alive in Christ or not but whether they are dead in the flesh. The best argument for that point would be if the prayer was limited to the two persons who were taken to heaven without dying in the flesh.

Are you aware of any Biblical references which demonstrate communication with those who are dead in the flesh being endorsed by God? I ask because ultimately regardless of what anyone believes personally, that would be the defining source for me.

Hi Tj3

It seems to me that the Old Testament prohibitions were against sorcery, witchcraft, the conjuring of the dead, seeking counsel of the dead, or trying to bring back the dead. In Luke, we see that God is the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. And He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living. For to Him all are alive.

Now it is true that I do not hold Scripture alone as my final and only authority on maters of faith and morals. I take into consideration what the church fathers believed and the teachings that have been passed down through the centuries. I know in this we disagree. So, I will have to leave it at that.

Hi Tj3

It seems to me that the Old Testament prohibitions were against sorcery, witchcraft, the conjuring of the dead, seeking counsel of the dead, or trying to bring back the dead.

The word which is used covers a multitude of different situations regarding communication with the dead, and is not as restrictive as you might hope.


In Luke, we see that God is the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. And He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living. For to Him all are alive.
Keep in mind that all whether in heaven or hell are alive, the difference being that those in hell are in eternal torment. If we ignore the Biblical context which refers to being dead in the flesh, and take your suggested definition, then communication with the dead in hell should also be acceptable.

Also, let's deal with the context of the scriptural passage that you mentioned by going to the question that Jesus was asked which resulted in that comment:

Mark 12:18-23
18 Then some Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to Him; and they asked Him, saying: 19 "Teacher, Moses wrote to us that if a man's brother dies, and leaves his wife behind, and leaves no children, his brother should take his wife and raise up offspring for his brother. 20 Now there were seven brothers. The first took a wife; and dying, he left no offspring. 21 And the second took her, and he died; nor did he leave any offspring. And the third likewise. 22 So the seven had her and left no offspring. Last of all the woman died also. 23 Therefore, in the resurrection, when they rise, whose wife will she be? For all seven had her as wife."
NKJV

Note that Jesus was speaking in the context of answering the Sadducees regarding whether the dead resurrect or not. The Sadducees denied the resurrection of the dead and Jesus countered, so Jesus answered them thusly:

Mark 12:24-27
24 Jesus answered and said to them, "Are you not therefore mistaken, because you do not know the Scriptures nor the power of God? 25 For when they rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. 26 But concerning the dead, that they rise, have you not read in the book of Moses, in the burning bush passage, how God spoke to him, saying, 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? 27 He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living. You are therefore greatly mistaken."
NKJV

I used the passage in Mark, but the passage in Luke says the same. Here is an excerpt from Jesus' answer as recorded in Luke:

Luke 20:37-40
37 Now even Moses showed in the burning bush passage that the dead are raised, when he called the Lord 'the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.' 38 "For He is not the God of the dead but of the living, for all live to Him." 39 Then some of the scribes answered and said, "Teacher, You have spoken well." 40 But after that they dared not question Him anymore.
NKJV

The Sadducees position would have those that die stay dead, whereas Jesus countered them by saying that God is a God of the living, not a God of the dead. This passage therefore has no relevance regarding whether we are permitted to communicate with saints in heaven.

Hello everyone, I have a little question. Does Christianity believes in communicating with the dead at all i.e. is possible ? If you don't believe in it in the first place then there is no point in arguing on whether it is allowed or not.

I am a Muslim, we don't believe in communicating with the dead. I don't know about the Jews. Would like to know their opinion as well. Thanks.

Hello everyone, I have a little question. Does Christianity believes in communicating with the dead at all i.e. is possible ? If you don't believe in it in the first place then there is no point in arguing on whether it is allowed or not.

I am a Muslim, we don't believe in communicating with the dead. I don't know about the Jews. Would like to know their opinion as well. Thanks.


I responded a similar question raised earlier today by Capuchin. My answer was:

2 Samuel 28 records one occasion where God permitted it to occur, but this one event did result in judgment against Saul.

But even if that event had not occurred, a sin does not occur simply because something can be done, but it results from disobedience, and in the case of sin against God, this involves sin in the heart even where no actual deed has occurred. Read Matthew 5:21-26 for example.

Tj3, I have read that post of yours before putting my question :)

Actually I wanted a straight and simple answer. YES or NO type. It's not easy for me to collect many versions of the Bible. So giving references from Bible is not of much help since I cannot verify it. For the time being I will just trust your words :)

Tj3, I have read that post of yours before putting my question :)

Actually I wanted a straight and simple answer. YES or NO type. It's not easy for me to collect many versions of the Bible. So giving references from Bible is not of much help since I cannot verify it. For the time being I will just trust your words :)

Clearly if it happened once, the answer is YES, it is possible, but it is forbidden in scripture. You can check out the references on Blue Letter Bible (http://blb.org)

Happened once, may be more than once too if someone could lookup all versions the Bibles. But these are biblical characters, not ordinary people like you and me. Ever seen an ordinary Christian communicating with a dead person ? My definition of ordinary Christian is an average man who practices his religion properly.

Happened once, may be more than once too if someone could lookup all versions the Bibles. But these are biblical characters, not ordinary people like you and me. Ever seen an ordinary Christian communicating with a dead person ? My definition of ordinary Christian is an average man who practices his religion properly.

The versions of the Bibles are for the most part just different translations.

The Biblical characters are just ordinary people, with the same temptations, the same faults, the desires, etc. and that is what is so remarkable, the Bible shows how God can work in and through the lives of fallible humans like you and me if we are willing to turn our lives over to Him and accept His offer of payment for our sins - the price of which was paid on the cross. What made many of these people different was their faith in the one true God.

Have I see an ordinary person communicating with a dead person? As I pointed out previously, the sin starts in the heart. A person has sinned by trying to communicate with the dead whether God permits the communication to occur.

Hello everyone, I have a little question. Does Christianity believes in communicating with the dead at all i.e. is possible ? If you don't believe in it in the first place then there is no point in arguing on whether it is allowed or not.

I am a Muslim, we don't believe in communicating with the dead. I don't know about the Jews. Would like to know their opinion as well. Thanks.

Hi, Red. I can answer from the perspective of a Christian who believes that Acts 2:4 applies to the Church of all ages, and with some knowledge of other groups within Christianity. I have never known of a Christian attempting to communicate with a deceased person, for the simple fact that we recognize it as a forbidden activity. This is because we have no way to determine whether we speak with a departed soul or with a demonic (unclean) spirit. It is most likely to be the latter, in which case we would be conversing with an enemy of God who would surely deceive us. As to the matter of prayer, the Master of prayer, Jesus, told us how and to whom we should pray. "Our Father, who is in Heaven".

Hi, Red. I can answer from the perspective of a Christian who believes that Acts 2:4 applies to the Church of all ages, and with some knowledge of other groups within Christianity. I have never known of a Christian attempting to communicate with a deceased person, for the simple fact that we recognize it as a forbidden activity. This is because we have no way to determine whether we speak with a departed soul or with a demonic (unclean) spirit. It is most likely to be the latter, in which case we would be conversing with an enemy of God who would surely deceive us. As to the matter of prayer, the Master of prayer, Jesus, told us how and to whom we should pray. "Our Father, who is in Heaven".


Hi Galveston1, thanks for the nice answer. So what I understand now is that, no good christian would even think of communicating with a dead person since this thought will make him/her a sinner at heart. Very well, I don't want anybody to become a sinner. I just wanted to look at this from a logical point of view. Is it possible at all ? Have any real person ever communicated with a dead person ? I think references from myths/legends/scriptures are not acceptable in this context as we cannot verify them.

Hi Galveston1, thanks for the nice answer. So what I understand now is that, no good christian would even think of communicating with a dead person since this thought will make him/her a sinner at heart. Very well, I don't want anybody to become a sinner. I just wanted to look at this from a logical point of view. Is it possible at all ? Have any real person ever communicated with a dead person ? I think references from myths/legends/scriptures are not acceptable in this context as we cannot verify them.
Well, before we get a lot of replies on this, also consider that it is impossible to ascertain who (if anyone) we would be talking to in a séance setting (the normal thing for those claiming communicatiion with the dead). From what I understand, the room is darkened, which of course makes fraud possible. Of more importance, there are such things as evil/unclean spirits. They have access to history and past deeds of people and can masquerade as anyone they choose. (Refer back to that passage about King Saul and the witch of Endor). What Saul spoke with seems to be an evil spirit, because it tells Saul that he, Saul, will be with that spirit by the end of the day. Now, the prophet Samuel was a godly man who went to Paradise, while Saul became a suicide in the course of his rebellion and obviously went to Hell. Do Muslims believe that there are evil spirits?

Hi Galveston1, thanks for the nice answer. So what I understand now is that, no good christian would even think of communicating with a dead person since this thought will make him/her a sinner at heart. Very well, I don't want anybody to become a sinner. I just wanted to look at this from a logical point of view. Is it possible at all ? Have any real person ever communicated with a dead person ? I think references from myths/legends/scriptures are not acceptable in this context as we cannot verify them.

If I may jump into this conversation for a moment to bring out some things: The act of communication with those who have passed on to the Afterlife or Hereafter is not only being thought about but is actually happening now (with direct EVIDENCE about the communication, both in voice form to actual materializations of those who have passed on)! So, YES it IS not only possible but a real fact. Many Christians, not falling for the control-oriented churches that tend to prohibit it are engaging in such communications, with God by their side to assure it is not mere trickery from the adversary. The Biblical passage that most applies to such communications is the following:

"But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. For to one is given by the Spirit the Word of Wisdom; to another the Word of Knowledge by the same Spirit; To another Faith by the same Spirit; to another the Gifts of Healing by the same Spirit; To another the Working of Miracles; to another Prophecy; to another DISCERNING OF SPIRITS; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the Interpretation of Tongues:" -- 1 CORINTHIANS 12:7,8,9,10 (KJV)

However, you say you do not want Scriptures as you cannot verify them. In other words, Scripture is unverifiable according to your beliefs. It is not, I can assure you, to we who are Christians, however, if you want something that you CAN readily verify about spirit communication, please visit the following website and I encourage you to write to the lawyer who owns the website for verification and empirical evidence of communication with those in the Afterlife. There is even an offer of One Million Dollars to anyone who can disprove the Afterlife and after eight years, no one has been able to do so! How's that for a great track record on the Afterlife and its residents!

Look at the various links, including some concerning the Pope and Christians, at:
AFTERLIFE- DOES IT EXIST? THE OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE (http://victorzammit.com/)

But please DO read through it thoroughly and then I would be very interested in hearing what you have to say about it! Thanks.

Many Christians, not falling for the control-oriented churches that tend to prohibit it are engaging in such communications, with God by their side to assure it is not mere trickery from the adversary.


Scripture itself prohibits communication with the dead, for example:

Deut 18:10-13
10 There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, or one who practices witchcraft, or a soothsayer, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer, 11 or one who conjures spells, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead. 12 For all who do these things are an abomination to the LORD, and because of these abominations the LORD your God drives them out from before you.
NKJV


The Biblical passage that most applies to such communications is the following:

"But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. For to one is given by the Spirit the Word of Wisdom; to another the Word of Knowledge by the same Spirit; To another Faith by the same Spirit; to another the Gifts of Healing by the same Spirit; To another the Working of Miracles; to another Prophecy; to another DISCERNING OF SPIRITS; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the Interpretation of Tongues:" -- 1 CORINTHIANS 12:7,8,9,10 (KJV)

How do you come to the belief that this endorses communication with the dead?

Well, before we get a lot of replies on this, also consider that it is impossible to ascertain who (if anyone) we would be talking to in a seance setting (the normal thing for those claiming communicatiion with the dead).

If I am not wrong, interested living people are supposed to talk to the dead person through a medium in a séance setting. Muslims don't believe in any sort of mediumship. We believe (as per our teachings of Islam) any person can communicate directly with the Almighty Lord all by himself through his prayers. No medium, magic, relic or help of a priest is required. Just be true to yourself. And it is said that the Almighty is pleased when the believers are communicating i.e. praying. If I can communicate with my Lord without any intermediate medium, then I don't need any medium at all to communicate with any other dead or living being. And if it is possible at all, then it should be possible in daylight. Dark room , etc. mumbo-jumbo not accepted.


Do Muslims believe that there are evil spirits?

We do believe in Satan, and satan is also a creation of the Almighty. But has the ability to influence peoples mind, not interact with their real world. i.e. satan cannot hurt a fly, but influence you to kill others or do other sort of sins. But again, satan can only influence you, cannot make the decision for you. The decision is always yours. So one cannot say that he is innocent because he did not do it on his own will, satan made him do it and thus escape the punishments.
Regarding other spirits, we also believe that there are intelligent beings other than humans. But they are not really spirits as presented in myths. They are referred to as 'jin' in our religion. The meaning of the word 'jin' (origin arabic) is foreigner, alien, unknown person, strangers and things like that. According to references from the Quran, jins are also creations of the Almighty God and they can be good or evil people just like humans. And they will also be judged on the final judgment day. As if they are another complete race like humans. And it is possible to communicate with them. According to Quranic history, both good and evil men have communicated with their respective counterparts of the jin-kind for cooperation, sharing knowledge, helping each-other etc. I ,personally, am not sure whether it means communicating with an spiritual race or just communicating with people living on other side of the ocean or any other planet. If you take foreigner as meaning of jin then it is indeed possible to communicate these days. If you take aliens from other planets as a meaning of jin, then we can say that will also be possible in future as well provided that we find those intelligent life form on other planets or they find us.

But no evidence or reference of talking to dead people. Sorry for the loooooong answer.

Scripture itself prohibits communication with the dead, for example:

Deut 18:10-13
10 There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, or one who practices witchcraft, or a soothsayer, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer, 11 or one who conjures spells, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead. 12 For all who do these things are an abomination to the LORD, and because of these abominations the LORD your God drives them out from before you.
NKJV



How do you come to the belief that this endorses communication with the dead?

The portion of the Scripture I was using for some reason does not appear in your quote, so I shall answer your question. I was making reference to I CORINTHIANS 12:7, 8, 9, 10 (KJV). This Scripture plainly tells us that God has given us gifts with which to help ourselves and humanity. The particular gifts are then listed. One of them that applies is DISCERNING OF SPIRITS. In discerning of spirits, spirits must first be present in order to discern; and where do they come from or how do they arrive before us in order for us to discern? The fact that Jesus now lives in Spirit as does God, clearly demonstrates that since we communicate with Him (Jesus and God, one and the Same), we, in effect, summon Him each time we communicate through prayer or when simply speaking to Him in asking for advice, aid with our petitions, etc. as we feel led. We do not try to conjure Him up in any physical way but rather in a very natural way to commune with Him.

We must understand that there are also evil forces that may indeed use conjuration for purposes other than actually helping oneself or another in an appropriate manner. Inappropriate conjuration or contact as with Black Magic, Voodoo, etc. is clearly wrong and that is what Scripture is speaking to. If it was not, then the Catholic Church, for instance, would be forbidden from communicating with those on the other side which includes saints they pray to, as you can clearly find prayers to the saints in most any Catholic supply store in individual prayers or in prayer books. One can try to say praying to saints (which one shouldn't do) is not the same as communicating, but to be correct, it is. Communication is communication whether we use prayer, thinking about them, seeing a picture of them in our mind and starting a mental dialogue, etc. Again, do we summon up a "dead" body to do this? No, we don't if there is indeed a way, and there is, (but read further). But we are not trying to do this when we talk to God or another who now resides in the world of Spirit. Scientifically speaking, there is hard EVIDENCE that such communication is possible and not just a figment of one's imagination. Just visit AFTERLIFE- DOES IT EXIST? THE OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE (http://victorzammit.com) and read about the Christians (including the Vatican) that now allows it. And it mentions a high Vatican person who relayed this message of the Vatican allowing such communication, so it would be quite easy, I would imagine, to contact that person for verification, should you actually need it.

Now, to go a bit further, if we are to have the spirit of fear to use the gifts that God has given to us, then we will live in fear forever and that is not the way to do with such precious gifts. They should be used to help ourselves and people better understand things, just as many professionals help people understand things when people go to them for a session. The difference here is that many work with Spirit rather than things learned from books in the case of other professionals. And why would someone do this? You must remember that Jesus called up the Spirit of Lazarus and others. But before you say that that was Jesus and we are not Jesus, you must also remember that He gave us the SAME authority to do that very thing and more! Where? In the following Scripture:

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and GREATER works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father." -- JOHN 14:12 (KJV). This is very clear. He could summon up the departed and even bring them back to life. He says, indeed gives us the AUTHORITY to do the very same! So, why the fear in doing so? I listen to HIS word and Authority, not to man's or other Scripture such as the one you quoted which would contradict His word in this regard and was undoubtedly written by some of the thousands of Bible interpreters throughout history who may not have heard or understood Jesus' word on this (John 14:12), for a clearer picture and authority in that we can do what He does and even GREATER works. You, of course, are free to believe as you will but I believe in what Jesus told me in Scripture I can do In His Name! Again, we cannot and must not be afraid or try to drive away or discourage others from doing that which Jesus did. We can only ENCOURAGE it In His Name, as He has given us the authority to do so and people should know and understand that there is no greater power or authority!

Hi, Sky. Do I understand you correctly? Are you saying that we can communicate with, say, my departed mother in the same way that we communicate with our Father, or Jesus? I am a Spirit Filled follower of Jesus and am well acquainted with the Scriptures that you quote, but if that is what you are saying, then friend, you are seriously confused. I hope I have misunderstood you.

[B]The portion of the Scripture I was using for some reason does not appear in your quote, so I shall answer your question.


Perhaps you did not read my post carefully, but I was responding to two different points that you raised - I note however that you did not address the scripture that I posted for some reason. Keep in mind that the Holy Spirit does not contradict himself, so you cannot ignore one part of scripture that you don't happen to like.


I was making reference to I CORINTHIANS 12:7, 8, 9, 10 (KJV). This Scripture plainly tells us that God has given us gifts with which to help ourselves and humanity.


Actually, the purpose of the gifts was explained by Jesus:

Acts 1:8
8 But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth."
NKJV

It is to be witnesses of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Therefore any spirit which causes you to have "power" which does not move you in concert with the gospel for Christ as given in scripture is not from God.


The particular gifts are then listed. One of them that applies is DISCERNING OF SPIRITS. In discerning of spirits, spirits must first be present in order to discern; and where do they come from or how do they arrive before us in order for us to discern? The fact that Jesus now lives in Spirit as does God, clearly demonstrates that since we communicate with Him (Jesus and God, one and the Same), we, in effect, summon Him each time we communicate through prayer or when simply speaking to Him in asking for advice, aid with our petitions, etc. as we feel led. We do not try to conjure Him up in any physical way but rather in a very natural way to commune with Him.


Jesus is God. Praying to God is a form of worship. That is not the same as praying to dead saints.


We must understand that there are also evil forces that may indeed use conjuration for purposes other than actually helping oneself or another in an appropriate manner.

Scripture makes no such differentiation.

Hi, Sky. Do I understand you correctly? Are you saying that we can communicate with, say, my departed mother in the same way that we communicate with our Father, or Jesus? I am a Spirit Filled follower of Jesus and am well acquainted with the Scriptures that you quote, but if that is what you are saying, then friend, you are seriously confused. I hope I have misunderstood you.

Hi, Galveston. You indeed have misunderstood me. I did not say that one can communicate with a departed loved one the same way as they do with God as with God we pray to Him as a form of communication. With a loved one, such as a mother as you say, it can be a mental form of communication when we think about her, along with other ways. Communication is indeed communication but one is about PRAYER (to God) whilst the other is about mere communication in the various ways.

Now let's get further into the part that you may have run into confusion with where I said "One can try to say praying to saints (which one shouldn't do) is not the same as communicating, but to be correct it is." Now, here, in essence, I am saying that even if it is wrong for people to 'pray' to saints, many do and that is a form of communication. Well, of course it is. Then I go on to say "Communication is communication whether we use prayer, thinking about them, seeing a picture .... ". And here I am saying that whether we pray, or think about someone, or see a picture of them and start mentally addressing them, etc. it is "communication". Once again, of course it is. But what I am not saying is that we 'pray' to our beloved departed in the way we pray to God as we can pray FOR our departed but not to them. Therefore, we 'communicate' with each in a very different way. It may have taken this much to address your question, but hope this clarifies matters now. Thank you for seeking further clarification.

Perhaps you did not read my post carefully, but I was responding to two different points that you raised - I note however that you did not address the scripture that I posted for some reason. Keep in mind that the Holy Spirit does not contradict himself, so you cannot ignore one part of scripture that you don't happen to like.

I read the post for your information. The Scripture that you cited I also addressed in the body of my message, in effect, calling it a contradiction to what JESUS says in JOHN 14:12 (KJV). Go back and re-read it. Also, The Holy Spirit is not speaking in the verse you quoted. Let me make it simpler for you, this time around, by going back and using the Chapter that you cited from and going to the Bottom Line of that Chapter for the answer.

DEUTERONOMY 18:22 (KJV) says the following: "When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him." This Scripture is the Bottom Line of the Chapter which you originally quoted from and it quite plainly states that if something one of those who are named in your passage (since all can say they speak from God) speaks in God's Name and what they say does not happen, then simply Do Not Be Afraid Of Him. That is all it says and one cannot read any more into it. Read it for yourself as it is part of your Chapter. I felt you would understand the way I answered but unfortunately you did not.

The Holy Spirit indeed makes no contradictions, however, man when trying to interpret things that suits his conveniences, may very well. Therein lies the problem.


Actually, the purpose of the gifts was explained by Jesus:

Acts 1:8
8 But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth."
NKJV

It is to be witnesses of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Therefore any spirit which causes you to have "power" which does not move you in concert with the gospel fo Christ as given in scripture is not from God.

And what part of my reply did you not further understand? Was it the part where I said, "Inappropriate conjuration or contact as with Black Magic, Voodoo, etc. is clearly wrong and that is what Scripture is speaking to."?


Jesus is God. Praying to God is a form of worship. That is not the same as praying to dead saints.

Certainly Jesus is God and I have said that when I said "The fact that Jesus now lives in Spirit as does God, clearly demonstrates that since we communicate with Him (Jesus and God, One and the Same) ... ". Praying to God IS a form of worship. I certainly have no problem with that at all. Praying to "dead" saints is something I know is wrong as we should not ever pray to saints, living or dead, period. Yes, there are some religions that have "living" saints, believe it or not. We pray only to God (One in the Holy Trinity).

Scripture makes no such differentiation.

You quote me as saying: "We must understand that there are also evil forces that may indeed use conjuration for purposes other than actually helping oneself or another in an appropriate manner."

Your reply is: "Scripture makes no such differentiation." Of course it does. Read the following Scriptures. "Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist" -- 1 JOHN 4:1-3 (KJV). Also, Scripture further differentiates between good and evil forces by saying "And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of Light." -- 2 CORINTHIANS 11:14 (KJV).

That is, in essence, what I am saying about using God's power as given to us by Jesus Christ only for Good purposes. I note that you did not reply to my reference to JOHN 14:12 (KJV). Jesus gives us the Power to do what He did and does, which includes speaking with the deceased as He did that also. That Scripture is Jesus, Himself speaking, which contradicts the verse you cited that apparently forbids it. I thought my statement had made that clear to you.

[B]You quote me as saying: "We must understand that there are also evil forces that may indeed use conjuration for purposes other than actually helping oneself or another in an appropriate manner."

Your reply is: "Scripture makes no such differentiation." Of course it does. Read the following Scriptures. "Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist" -- 1 JOHN 4:1-3 (KJV). Also, Scripture further differentiates between good and evil forces by saying "And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of Light." -- 2 CORINTHIANS 11:14 (KJV).


But not within the context of what we are discussing which is communication with the dead. Absolutely nowhere is any differentiation made regarding communicating with one type of spirit versus another. It is a flat out prohibition. Also, scripture in context is clear that the war between good and evil spirits is between the holy and fallen angels - these versus are not speaking about the spirits of the dead.


That is, in essence, what I am saying about using God's power as given to us by Jesus Christ only for Good purposes. I note that you did not reply to my reference to JOHN 14:12 (KJV). Jesus gives us the Power to do what He did and does, which includes speaking with the deceased as He did that also. That Scripture is Jesus, Himself speaking, which contradicts the verse you cited that apparently forbids it. I thought my statement had made that clear to you.

I addressed that as part of the overall statement. Aas for you calling it a contradiction, I cannot imagine how you could read it on context and come to that conclusion or even conclude that it had anything to do with the topic at hand. First, Jesus in the flesh as man never spoke to the dead. If you disagree, find me any such context. He communication with those previously deceased is only as God.

John 14:12 speaks about the works that Jesus did while on earth as a man, and was speaking to men. Further, as shown previously, we are told specifically was the empowerment of the Holy Spirit is for. Let me repeat:

----------
Acts 1:8
8 But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth."
NKJV

It is to be witnesses of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Therefore any spirit which causes you to have "power" which does not move you in concert with the gospel of Christ as given in scripture is not from God.
----------

If you believe that John 14:12 has anything to do with communication with the dead then show us that in context.

But not within the context of what we are discussing which is communication with the dead. Absolutely nowhere is any differentiation made regarding communicating with one type of spirit versus another. It is a flat out prohibition. Also, scripture in context is clear that the war between good and evil spirits is between the holy and fallen angels - these versus are not speaking about the spirits of the dead.

That is not correct. What we are discussing is communication with spirit in general. Since there is no "death", except in the sense that the physical body loses its abililty to remain animated, we thus move to the spirit that one transforms to after physical passing. What you are interpreting as a "prohibition" has to be allowed under JOHN 14:12 (KJV) because Jesus did it. As to holy and fallen angels, they are both spirits but spirits live in Heaven, the Afterlife, the Hereafter or the spirit world where there are different levels, one is commonly called "Hell" for the fallen angels. There is communication with those in spirit (except for those in "Hell" but for those who may do Black Magic, etc. who knows who they may communicate with? That is what is not allowed by God.) But there is communication with good and benevolent spirits and even science has discovered that fact. The Virgin Mary, for example, has appeared (in Spirit) to mankind in Egypt and other places and has even been photographed. It showed her as a white spiritual outline on top of a Coptic Church in Cairo, Egypt. The photograph, it is said, was authenticated by the Catholic Church. She has appeared there as well as many other places. She comes to communicate with us and we speak to her (a Spirit). She also appeared to the children of Portugal as many Christians across the world should know.

I addressed that as part of the overall statement. Aas for you calling it a contradiction, I cannot imagine how you could read it on context and come to that conclusion or even conclude that it had anything to do with the topic at hand. First, Jesus in the flesh as man never spoke to the dead.

But of course He did. He was in the flesh when He raised Lazarus and others, according to Biblical teachings and I have already spoken to that in my past response. But here is Scripture to back me up. Jesus was talking to His disciples, while very much in the flesh. "These things said He: and after that He saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep. Then said His disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well. Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep. Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead." -- JOHN 11:11-14 (KJV). What we have here, most plainly, is Jesus speaking to His disciples about Lazarus while Jesus is still in the flesh. But after Jesus learns that Lazarus has died, He says the following (while STILL very much in the flesh).

"And when He thus had spoken, He cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth." -- JOHN 11:43 (KJV). There Jesus is speaking very much in the flesh. What would make you think He was not in the flesh when He did this? All know and understand that He spoke these things and did these things (recalling Lazarus' spirit back to his body) while still in the flesh. However, I believe you have very different opinions about what the Bible is actually saying and want to say them to try to save your arguments. However, this is what Scripture says and I shall just have to keep repeating these things as long as you wish to discuss this matter as nothing can change.

If you disagree, find me any such context. He communication with those previously deceased is only as God.

Incorrect Again. Read the passage just above in reference to Lazarus and for the umpteenth time, KNOW and UNDERSTAND that Jesus was ALIVE (though He still is) but He was incarnate when He spoke and did these things. I will repeat this time and again from now on, I have no problem with that except that it is basically repetition and bandwidth is taken in the process.

John 14:12 speaks about the works that Jesus did while on earth as a man, and was speaking to men.

And the works that Jesus did while on Earth as a man and speaking to men was what He said we could also do as He was going to The Father (in JOHN 14:12 (KJV)). He spoke to Lazarus' spirit to raise Him from the dead and He also spoke at a distance to the spirit of the son of a commander of soldiers whose son was dying and he was made well. This was done not after Jesus' crucifixion but when He was very much incarnate. Why you do not seem to understand that I do not know.

Further, as shown previously, we are told specifically was the empowerment of the Holy Spirit is for. Let me repeat:

----------
Acts 1:8
8 But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth."
NKJV

It is to be witnesses of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Therefore any spirit which causes you to have "power" which does not move you in concert with the gospel of Christ as given in scripture is not from God.

As I have said before, I have no problem with that as there are good spirits and bad ones that can influence one's way of thinking and one must know, unequivocally, where those spirits are coming from in order to differentiate between the two and be empowered by God.
----------

If you believe that John 14:12 has anything to do with communication with the dead then show us that in context.

I simply cannot believe that you would keep asking this question. But here we go again (yes, with some people we must be patient until they understand). Jesus, while in the flesh, raised Lazarus from the dead. He spoke to His spirit in order for his spirit to return to his body. It did and Lazarus woke up and was alive in physical body again. This is a miracle from Jesus that He said we too could do as He was going to The Father. He said this in JOHN 14:12 (KJV). Shall I repeat this one more time for you? I would be glad to!

I simply cannot believe that you would keep asking this question. But here we go again (yes, with some people we must be patient until they understand). Jesus, while in the flesh, raised Lazarus from the dead. He spoke to His spirit in order for his spirit to return to his body. It did and Lazarus woke up and was alive in physical body again. This is a miracle from Jesus that He said we too could do as He was going to The Father. He said this in JOHN 14:12 (KJV). Shall I repeat this one more time for you? I would be glad to!

First - a suggestion - it would help to keep the discussion more physically concise if you just quoted the specific context that you are responding to rather than a long two sided discussion.

You are making assumptions regarding Lazarus - let's look at the passage in context:

John 11:42-44
42 And I know that You always hear Me, but because of the people who are standing by I said this, that they may believe that You sent Me." 43 Now when He had said these things, He cried with a loud voice, "Lazarus, come forth!" 44 And he who had died came out bound hand and foot with graveclothes, and his face was wrapped with a cloth. Jesus said to them, "Loose him, and let him go."
NKJV

Jesus performed a miracle and raised him from the dead. You appear to make the following assumptions:

- That God did not raise him from the dead, but he chose to come forward and re-enter his body on his own.

- That it is even possible for a person who has been dead for days to come back into their own body on their own doing.

Your apparent assumptions are contrary to scripture which says that Jesus (in the flesh) asked God the Father to raise Lazarus, and God the Father did so. This has absolutely nothing to do with Jesus in the flesh speaking to the dead. So please, if you are going to make this claim, please come forward with some in context validation of this claim - don't just keep repeating it.

That being said, your constant use of John 14:12 also does not stand as having anything to do with communication with the dead.

I have to go back to the clearest Bible record of communicating with the dead where King Saul attempted to talk to the prophet Samuel. That could not be called prayer, and a strong case can be made that he did not talk to Samuel, but to a spirit impersonating Samuel. Now, the Scriptures are not self-contridictary. What is flatly forbidden in one passage cannot be permitted in another. Your use of the reference to gifts of the Spirit to support the idea of communicating with the dead is is incorrect. Of course, I accept the Bible as our rule of faith and conduct without any other input, a view that not everyone shares.

First - a suggestion - it would help to keep the discussion more physically concise if you just quoted the specific context that you are responding to rather than a long two sided discussion.

First of all, I have to make a point-by-point reply since much of what you say that I said is inaccurate and must be corrected. Secondly, I must make mention of the fact that the original topic I had posted had to do with Electronic Voice Phenomena commonly known as EVP. A link was provided saying the Vatican approves of such spiritual communication. I realize that it is hard for some to swallow that the Vatican (head of the Roman Catholic Church) would approve of such communications but it is clearly in the report on the site. What I would strongly suggest, since apparently you do not believe this could happen, is that you contact the Vatican official listed and inquire about the validity of the article and we can then continue discussions on the original topic.

You are making assumptions regarding Lazarus - let's look at the passage in context:

John 11:42-44
42 And I know that You always hear Me, but because of the people who are standing by I said this, that they may believe that You sent Me." 43 Now when He had said these things, He cried with a loud voice, "Lazarus, come forth!" 44 And he who had died came out bound hand and foot with graveclothes, and his face was wrapped with a cloth. Jesus said to them, "Loose him, and let him go."
NKJV

Jesus performed a miracle and raised him from the dead. You appear to make the following assumptions:

- That God did not raise him from the dead, but he chose to come forward and re-enter his body on his own.

When did I say that, I would like to know? For the record, I never would have said that as that would have been grossly incorrect. I said JESUS raised him from the dead. But are we not in agreement that Jesus and God are One and the same? I thought we were or are you just trying to obfuscate the issue here.

- That it is even possible for a person who has been dead for days to come back into their own body on their own doing.

Wrong. That is not a correct assumption and I must correct you on that. It would have not been possible for Lazarus or any other person who had already passed on to spirit to return to their own body aside from Jesus recalling their soul and spirit so they could continue to live in physical body. I have been consistent on that Biblical stance.

Your apparent assumptions are contrary to scripture which says that Jesus (in the flesh) asked God the Father to raise Lazarus, and God the Father did so. This has absolutely nothing to do with Jesus in the flesh speaking to the dead. So please, if you are going to make this claim, please come forward with some in context validation of this claim - don't just keep repeating it.

It bears repeating because again you are trying to obfuscate the issue here. When Jesus spoke the words "Lazarus come forth!" He did so with the authority given to Him by God The Father. Remember, God said that ALL things are done through His Son Jesus. And Jesus has said "I and my Father Are One." You can find this Scripture in JOHN 10:30 (KJV). So, quite obviously, if Jesus and The Father are One, Jesus has raised Lazarus from the dead. End of story.

That being said, your constant use of John 14:12 also does not stand as having anything to do with communication with the dead.

I believe it is very germane to the subject matter inasmuch as other Scripture cannot supersede what Jesus Himself has told us we can do in JOHN 14:12 (KJV). You simply prefer to believe other passages that were written and re-interpreted thousands of times throughout history rather than Jesus' Historical Words that give us Clear Authority to do that which He did and more, including the gift of knowing beforehand what is going to happen such as when He clearly demonstrated that Peter was going to deny Him three times before the cock crowed (See MATTHEW 26:34 (KJV). He told us we can do that also. Why is it so difficult to embrace that we can also know things that are going to happen beforehand, among many other things, especially when Jesus Son of God tells us that we can? If you care not to embrace that authority then be it far from me to change your mind as you have free will choice. But I will continue to stand by my position.

I have to go back to the clearest Bible record of communicating with the dead where King Saul attempted to talk to the prophet Samuel. That could not be called prayer, and a strong case can be made that he did not talk to Samuel, but to a spirit impersonating Samuel. Now, the Scriptures are not self-contridictary. What is flatly forbidden in one passage cannot be permitted in another. Your use of the reference to gifts of the Spirit to support the idea of communicating with the dead is is incorrect. Of course, I accept the Bible as our rule of faith and conduct without any other input, a view that not everyone shares.

Greetings, Gal, I will assume that you are addressing this post to me as we have posted back and forth before on this same matter. I notice you have also not addressed the "Catholic Position on EVP" that the Vatican o.ks which entails communication with those who have passed on as exemplified in my original posting. If you have reservations about this, I would suggest you also take it up with the Vatican and ask the Pope's representatives why he would allow it since you feel Scripture forbids it.

Since you obviously did not read my previous post in reply to you, I am reposting it so that you can read it this time if you would.

"Hi, Galveston. You indeed have misunderstood me. I did not say that one can communicate with a departed loved one the same way as they do with God as with God we pray to Him as a form of communication. With a loved one, such as a mother as you say, it can be a mental form of communication when we think about her, along with other ways. Communication is indeed communication but one is about PRAYER (to God) whilst the other is about mere communication in the various ways.

"Now let's get further into the part that you may have run into confusion with where I said "One can try to say praying to saints (which one shouldn't do) is not the same as communicating, but to be correct it is." Now, here, in essence, I am saying that even if it is wrong for people to 'pray' to saints, many do and that is a form of communication. Well, of course it is. Then I go on to say "Communication is communication whether we use prayer, thinking about them, seeing a picture .... ". And here I am saying that whether we pray, or think about someone, or see a picture of them and start mentally addressing them, etc. it is "communication". Once again, of course it is. But what I am not saying is that we 'pray' to our beloved departed in the way we pray to God as we can pray FOR our departed but not to them. Therefore, we 'communicate' with each in a very different way. It may have taken this much to address your question, but hope this clarifies matters now. Thank you for seeking further clarification."

The above was my original answer to you. I hope I have now made my position clear.

You say that communicating with the dead where King Saul attempted to talk to the prophet could not be called prayer. Well, of course it couldn't! We pray only to God as I have said so many times before and I'm sure everyone else reading my posts clearly understands that. I can clearly see now that you and the other person who asks the same-type questions do not truly read my replies for a better understanding of what it is I have actually said. If you also wish to believe only a certain Scripture as the basis for your argument in this case, then I cannot change that but I can only continue to provide what Jesus has clearly told us we can do, based on the things He did while incarnate, which would supersede anything else when seen in context. I believe what Jesus says in this regard as to our spiritual gifts, which is indeed in conflict with that verse, but you may believe what you wish. That will continue to be my position.

I believe it is very germane to the subject matter inasmuch as other Scripture cannot supersede what Jesus Himself has told us we can do in JOHN 14:12 (KJV).


Only if it is taken in context. Your comments about Lazarus are not found in scripture, nor are they in concert with scripture nor is your use of John 14:12 in context of scripture. You cannot simply take verses out of context, or add to scripture and then say that is is the word of God and we have to accept it.

That is the point that I have made with reference to the context of scripture many times.

Only if it is taken in context. Your comments about Lazarus are not found in scripture, nor are they in concert with scripture nor is your use of John 14:12 in context of scripture. You cannot simply take verses out of context, or add to scripture and then say that is is the word of God and we have to accept it.

That is the point that I have made with reference to the context of scripture many times.

It is obvious that you wish to believe as you will and again that is your prerogative. But I maintain my position in this matter and will continue to as long as we maintain this discussion. If what you are saying was to be accurate then no matter what Jesus did it would not count when compared to other Scripture you prefer, even when He tells us that we too can do it. Can one be greater and purport to know more than He who is God? Certainly only the misinformed would think so. It is not expected that the Holy Bible list, in chronological order or sequence in JOHN 14:12 (KJV) all Our Heavenly Father Jesus did and then compare it with everything else in other Scriptures. It is apparent that you cannot or will not see what is being said in JOHN 14:12 that very much applies to ALL works that Jesus did that can be compared with other Biblical passages, to include not only that with Lazarus but with many others. To discount it is to be a non-believer in the works that Jesus has done and has told us we too can do. If JOHN 14:12 (KJV) was to be compared only to the raising of Lazarus from the grave as Jesus did, and the statement was "Jesus tells us in this Scripture that we too can do that", I strongly believe you would not be able to accept His word. Therefore, as to your having to accept it, that is your individual choice due to free will that God gave you. I, likewise maintain the same prerogative in my belief from what I see the Word say in JOHN 14:12 (KJV).

[B]It is obvious that you wish to believe as you will and again that is your prerogative. But I maintain my position in this matter and will continue to as long as we maintain this discussion.

I am simply asking you to validate your claims using scripture. You do indeed have the right to add to what scripture says, and to subtract from what it says, but if you do so, you do not have the right to expect anyone else to accept it as though it were part of scripture.

If you wish to have me accept it, then you must validate it. That is the one point where I will not budge.


If what you are saying was to be accurate then no matter what Jesus did it would not count when compared to other Scripture you prefer, even when He tells us that we too can do it.

The problem is that you added something to scripture which is not there (claiming that Jesus communicated to the dead as a man) but that is not found in scripture, and then you try to make John 14:12, which is not in that context, as an authoritative verse on that matter. IO accept ALL of the 66 books of the Bible as authoritative, but I do not accept what others choose to change as authoritative. That is why we are coming to a stalemate here.

I am simply asking you to validate your claims using scripture. You do indeed have the right to add to what scripture says, and to subtract from what it says, but if you do so, you do not have the right to expect anyone else to accept it as though it were part of scripture.

If you wish to have me accept it, then you must validate it. That is the the one point where I will not budge.



The problem is that you added something to scripture which is not there (claiming that Jesus communicated to the dead as a man) but that is not found in scripture, and then you try to make John 14:12, which is not in that context, as an authoritative verse on that matter. IO accept ALL of the 66 books of the Bible as authoritative, but I do not accept what others choose to change as authoritative. That is why we are coming to a stalemate here.

You keep saying that if I wish for you to accept it, to validate it. I have told you time and again you are free to believe as you choose just as am I based on what I see in context to things. The Bible has not been changed in any way, shape or form I can assure you of that. But I do understand your angle here in trying to make it seem as if it has. There are many things contained in the Bible which are not fully explained and one needs to understand that. Even Jesus spoke in parables, remember? Those who wished to know what He meant had to figure out what He was saying. Some didn't, just as is prevalent here.

You keep saying that if I wish for you to accept it, to validate it. I have told you time and again you are free to believe as you choose just as am I based on what I see in context to things. The Bible has not been changed in any way, shape or form I can assure you of that. But I do understand your angle here in trying to make it seem as if it has. There are many things contained in the Bible which are not fully explained and one needs to understand that. Even Jesus spoke in parables, remember? Those who wished to know what He meant had to figure out what He was saying. Some didn't, just as is prevalent here.

Now that we have hopefully had what should be our final words on this, we can get back to the Original topic and discuss why the VATICAN permits communication with the deceased and says it is no longer sinful to do so. Everyone is certainly more than WELCOME to come on in and join this important discussion.

Fr. Gino Concetti, a theologian with authority at the Vatican has apparently informed the flock it is alright to communicate with the departed. What I want to find out in this original thread is what people think of that. Is it right to allow such communication? If not, why not and what should be done about it? Please go to the top of the page for the link to the website.

Okay. I read the page from the Vatican. I probably won't post again on this subject. I will offend some of you by this, but no man, not even the Pope has authority to contramand the command of God. I also noticed with interest the article about priests trained in exorcism. If these priests are not filled with the Holy Ghost, they will find themselves in the same predicament as the sons of Sceva:
Acts 19:14-16
14 And there were seven sons of one Sceva, a Jew, and chief of the priests, which did so.
15 And the evil spirit answered and said, Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are ye?
16 And the man in whom the evil spirit was leaped on them, and overcame them, and prevailed against them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded.
(KJV)

[B]You keep saying that if I wish for you to accept it, to validate it. I have told you time and again you are free to believe as you choose just as am I based on what I see in context to things.


Anyone can believe what they wish, but that does not mean that it is appropriate exegesis to take passages out of context or alter it to agree with what you want to believe. Anyone is certainly able to do so, if they do so, they are no closer to what scripture actually teaches.


But I do understand your angle here in trying to make it seem as if it has. There are many things contained in the Bible which are not fully explained and one needs to understand that. Even Jesus spoke in parables, remember?


Yes, but there are many things clearly and specifically spoken and this is one area where scripture is specific. Also, where scripture is not clear, that is not an invite to fill in the blanks to suit our personal theology.

As for parables - was Jesus unclear?

Matt 13:10-17
10 And the disciples came and said to Him, "Why do You speak to them in parables?" 11 He answered and said to them, "Because it has been given to you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given. 12 For whoever has, to him more will be given, and he will have abundance; but whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken away from him. 13 Therefore I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. 14 And in them the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled, which says:

'Hearing you will hear and shall not understand,
And seeing you will see and not perceive;
15 For the hearts of this people have grown dull.
Their ears are hard of hearing,
And their eyes they have closed,
Lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears,
Lest they should understand with their hearts and turn,
So that I should heal them.'

16 "But blessed are your eyes for they see, and your ears for they hear; 17 for assuredly, I say to you that many prophets and righteous men desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it.
NKJV

When you look in the context of this passage, you will see that Jesus DID explain the parables - it was those who have the kingdom of heaven within them who understand. Those who do not see them as mysteries, according to Jesus.

Okay. I read the page from the Vatican. I probably won't post again on this subject. I will offend some of you by this, but no man, not even the Pope has authority to contramand the command of God. I also noticed with interest the article about priests trained in exorcism. If these priests are not filled with the Holy Ghost, they will find themselves in the same predicament as the sons of Sceva:
Acts 19:14-16
14 And there were seven sons of one Sceva, a Jew, and chief of the priests, which did so.
15 And the evil spirit answered and said, Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are ye?
16 And the man in whom the evil spirit was leaped on them, and overcame them, and prevailed against them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded.
(KJV)

Thank you, Galveston1. This original thread is about the Vatican and EVP. It got side-tracked somehow with posts and another person. People should not feel offended when one presents their truth as they see it. It may not be agreeable to them but one's truth is their truth. Thanks again.

16 "But blessed are your eyes for they see, and your ears for they hear; 17 for assuredly, I say to you that many prophets and righteous men desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it.
NKJV

When you look in the context of this passage, you will see that Jesus DID explain the parables - it was those who have the kingdom of heaven within them who understand. Those who do not see them as mysteries, according to Jesus.

That is precisely the passage I had hoped you would post and why I feel that JOHN 14:12 (KJV) was revealed to me by God in context with other's use of Scriptures. Perhaps it is that God wishes for people to understand that Jesus' word is Supreme to other passages that unfortunately have been translated and re-translated time and time again by man, many who may have held certain prejudices about things since Jesus was incarnate. I feel blessed in knowing this truth and again I say I will maintain this as my position.

As for the continuation of dialog about this matter, I know I had said I would be glad to repost what I have already said but in consideration of the owner to this website and the great amount of bandwidth it takes to repost basically the same thing, since my viewpoint will not change, I will now entertain dialog concerning the Original Posting concerning the Vatican and EVP. Please know that my position is clear and firm in what you have replied to when we dialog. Now, I want to hear only on the Vatican and EVP or communication with those who have passed on and the Vatican's allowance of it. Should you not wish to discuss that, please let this serve as notice that I will not reply further as you can simply go back and re-read my previous postings to remind you of my basic position and thereby save bandwidth. Galveston 1 has already understood this and has replied with an answer. Can you do the same? You will find the link to the website at the top of the page. I would be interested in hearing your comments on this.

I can find no direct evidence that the Vatican has a stance on this beyond that of bibical obedence.

The fact that some priests are doing this or that, sorry but there are nuns handing out condoms ( does not mean the vatican supports it) There are preists walking in gay parades and there were even a group of priests who had a magizine in support of gay life style ( it was finally shut down by the church but not before it was in operation for years.
There are Bishops who in secret ordain women priests each year, and the list of these things can go on and on.

[B]That is precisely the passage I had hoped you would post and why I feel that JOHN 14:12 (KJV) was revealed to me by God in context with other's use of Scriptures. Perhaps it is that God wishes for people to understand that Jesus' word is Supreme to other passages that unfortunately have been translated and re-translated time and time again by man, many who may have held certain prejudices about things since Jesus was incarnate. I feel blessed in knowing this truth and again I say I will maintain this as my position.


God never contradicts His word, and so when someone tells me that He has been revealed something from God in opposition to His word, then I have no choice but to reject it.

I can find no direct evidence that the Vatican has a stance on this beyond that of bibical obedence.

The fact that some priests are doing this or that, sorry but there are nuns handing out condoms ( does not mean the vatican supports it) There are preists walking in gay parades and there were even a group of priests who had a magizine in support of gay life style ( it was finally shut down by the church but not before it was in operation for years.
There are Bishops who in secret ordain women priests each year, and the list of these things can go on and on.

Um, glad you brought that out. And on top of all that, the sex scandals that have literally brought many dioceses to their knees! Doesn't sound good at all for a denomination that claims to be the only true religion does it! And to further think that many of those you speak about were supposed to be giving their life to Jesus as part of their calling! What would Jesus say? What would He say of the Vatican that knew about all of this, for the most part, but did nothing about it for years until it got to be too much.

God never contradicts His word, and so when someone tells me that He has been revealed something from God in opposition to His word, then I have no choice but to reject it.

Again, as is your choice. Sure wish you had been at THE INQUISITION to tell all of those crazy people to stop the killings as murder is against God's Sixth Commandment. Sorry you weren't! God certainly speaks to people and works in mysterious ways much of which we shall never fully understand. But the only contradiction about what others may be receiving from God is only in your mind as you are of that mind-set already in that things have to be a certain way or no way at all. Knowing you for the short amount of time that I have, I certainly understand that only too well.

For those having questions and wishing to know what the Catholic position is on communication with the deceased, please read the following information:

EVP and Vatican (http://www.evp-itc-australia.org/29.html)

Let's have more discussion on this Important if not controversial item! I would like to hear what others have to say about the Vatican allowing communication with the departed. The article says that an official from the Vatican says it is alright to engage in such communications. Now, let's hear what you think.

Another Catholic bashing, it sure gets old and meaningless. Praying, as asking for intercession, is praying. It is a form of communication, yes, but it is not like conjuring up a dead spirit and talking to them.

No one is "bashing" anyone. So far everyone that have seen is dealing with the topic.

Scripture prohibits communication with the dead - that is the point.

Again, as is your choice. Sure wish you had been at THE INQUISITION to tell all of those crazy people to stop the killings as murder is against God's Sixth Commandment. Sorry you weren't! God certainly speaks to people and works in mysterious ways much of which we shall never fully understand. But the only contradiction about what others may be receiving from God is only in your mind as you are of that mind-set already in that things have to be a certain way or no way at all. Knowing you for the short amount of time that I have, I certainly understand that only too well.

The contradiction is between you and scripture. You said that Jesus spoke to the dead and called Lazarus back into his body. Scripture says that God the father brought Lazarus back to life.

We are told to test every spirit, and any spirit which contradicts God's word is not of God.

The contradiction is between you and scripture. You said that Jesus spoke to the dead and called Lazarus back into his body. Scripture says that God the father brought Lazarus back to life.

We are told to test every spirit, and any spirit which contradicts God's word is not of God.

I know and understand Scripture, believe me. But how interesting that you are revealing your disbelief of Scripture due to what you are saying here since you apparently do not recognize nor want to admit that Jesus and the Father are One, we now truly know where you are coming from.

I know and understand Scripture, believe me. But how interesting that you are revealing your disbelief of Scripture due to what you are saying here since you apparently do not recognize nor want to admit that Jesus and the Father are One, we now truly know where you are coming from.


Are you denying the trinity? Are you denying that the One true God is made up of three persons, father, Son and Holy Spirit?

Let's have more discussion on this Important if not controversial item! I would like to hear what others have to say about the Vatican allowing communication with the departed. The article says that an official from the Vatican says it is alright to engage in such communications. Now, let's hear what you think.

Communication with the dead according to the bible is communicating with demonic spirits posing as a dead relative. The bible teaches us that when one dies they either go to Hell or heaven. As paul said Absent from the Body is present with Christ. There is no way to communicate with the dead because their spirits are not on earth as people would like to believe. Jesus never tried to communicated with the dead so why should we? I don't agree with the catholics saying it is okey and I don't agree with praying through Mary or dead saints because it is not biblical. Jesus said no one can come to the father but by me, and the word said the Holy Spirit is the one that interceeds for us.

Are you denying the trinity? Are you denying that the One true God is made up of three persons, father, Son and Holy Spirit?

Anyone who has read my posts would immediately know the answer to the questions you are asking, that being that I would NEVER deny the Holy Trinity and have often said that Jesus is One in the Holy Trinity (God The Father, God The Son and God The Holy Spirit). I have said that time and again, especially as given on Jan 5, 2008, 09:39 PM. Conversely, since it is you who have not given a clear answer to those questions in this forum, I therefore, turn the tables on you at this time and ask Do you deny the Holy Trinity? Are you in denial about God The Father, God The Son and God The Holy Spirit being One in The Holy Trinity? I ask you again, Do you believe that Jesus is ONE in The Holy Trinity, Tj3? Your answer is important in context to my replies and I will show you why once you answer this question. Since you opened this "door", from now on I will continue asking you this question in each subsequent post until you give us a clear answer.
[/B]

I have to ask that because anyone who has read my posts would immediately know the answer to the questions you are asking, that being that I would NEVER deny the Holy Trinity and have often said that Jesus is One in the Holy Trinity (God The Father, God The Son and God The Holy Spirit).

Good. Now, perhaps you should check out the references.

You claimed that Jesus spoke to Lazarus in the flesh when he was dead. What does scripture says:

John 11:38-44
38 Then Jesus, again groaning in Himself, came to the tomb. It was a cave, and a stone lay against it. 39 Jesus said, "Take away the stone." Martha, the sister of him who was dead, said to Him, "Lord, by this time there is a stench, for he has been dead four days." 40 Jesus said to her, "Did I not say to you that if you would believe you would see the glory of God?" 41 Then they took away the stone from the place where the dead man was lying. And Jesus lifted up His eyes and said, "Father, I thank You that You have heard Me. 42 And I know that You always hear Me, but because of the people who are standing by I said this, that they may believe that You sent Me." 43 Now when He had said these things, He cried with a loud voice, "Lazarus, come forth!" 44 And he who had died came out bound hand and foot with graveclothes, and his face was wrapped with a cloth. Jesus said to them, "Loose him, and let him go."
NKJV

Note two things. Jesus prayed to the father and the Father answered His prayer. The Father refers to God the Father.

After the prayer to raise Lazarus from the dead was answered, Jesus calls to Lazarus.

Note that there are two persons of the trinity involved, and note that Jesus called Lazarus AFTER the Father answer His prayer.

You said that the Son and the father were one and the same. They are two persons of the trinity, but your argument was that Jesus in the flesh spoke to the dead. You are wrong on many points as shown in this passage:

1) Jesus was God manifest in the flesh (1 Tim 3:16). God the father was NEVER manifest in the flesh.

2) God the Son (Jesus) and God the father are not one and the same person, or they would both have to be manifest in the flesh at the same time. They are two of the three persons of the trinity (One God) (Thus also the answer to your question - if you want a more detailed answer, go my article on this topic - [ http://www.geocities.com/smithtj.geo/whoisjesus.pdf ).

3) God the father, not Jesus raised Lazarus. Lazarus therefore was not raised by Jesus calling to Him in the spirit to return to his body when he was dead.

Now, please rather than getting abusive, kindly deal with the issue at hand.

Now, please rather than getting abusive, kindly deal with the issue at hand.

Be glad to and no "abuse" needed as that is just not my style. When Jesus said "I and my Father are One" He was in the flesh not in Spirit. That tells the story. Since Jesus and His Father are One, when Jesus called upon His Father, He was also calling upon Himself and His Divine power that then raised Lazarus. That is the point I have been trying to get across to you.

Now, you still haven't answered my question: Do you believe that Jesus and The Father are One?

The idea of comparing Jesus or the times the 12 raised people from the dead has anything in common with talking to the dead is just silly reaching for strays that just don't exist, First there was no converstation, a command to come back to life, is not talking ( two way converstation)

One has to really have no idea of bibical teachings if that is what you have to fall back to.

Be glad to and no "abuse" needed as that is just not my style.

Good. I am glad that you agree and I hope that is the last that we see of it.


When Jesus said "I and my Father are One" He was in the flesh not in Spirit. That tells the story. Since Jesus and His Father are One, when Jesus called upon His Father, He was also calling upon Himself and His Divine power that then raised Lazarus. That is the point I have been trying to get across to you.


That sounds similar the modalist teachings. The trinitarian doctrine is that The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are all one God, but three distinct persons. Thus when Jesus is speaking to the Father, He is speaking to the first person of the trinity. It is only Jesus who is fully God and fully man, God the father is not fully man. The best summary of the orthodox doctrine of the trinity which I hold to and which we find taught in scripture is "Three persons, one God".


Now, you still haven't answered my question: Do you believe that Jesus and The Father are One?[/B]

I answered your question in complete detail already. I notice however, that you gave no response to what I said. Read what I said, and if you have further questions after you have read what I said, you are welcome to ask.

I said I wouldn't, but just can't help myself! Off the subject again, but---.

Luke 4:17-19
17 And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,
18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,
19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.
(KJV)

Col 2:9
9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
(KJV)
More could be cited, but these should do. It seems no one is realizing that Jesus did His miracles because of the anointing of the Holy Spirit, not because of His divinity. He later sent that same Holy Spirit back to His followers so that they could do the same works as He did. Col. 2:9 lets us know that He contained the Holy Spirit completely, whereas we may not have the same capacity.

The idea of comparing Jesus or the times the 12 raised people from the dead has anything in common with talking to the dead is just silly reaching for strays that just don't exist, First there was no converstation, a command to come back to life, is not talking ( two way converstation)

One has to really have no idea of bibical teachings if that is what you have to fall back to.

With all due respect, Chuck, you apparently are making reference to being a priest from the way you sign your name, I don't know if it is merely metaphorical or real, nevertheless, if you knew the Bible you would realize that when Jesus cried out in a loud voice "Lazarus Come Forth!" (JOHN 11:43 (KJV), He spoke (conversed) with Lazarus' spirit. If that isn't talking to the dead (after all, was Lazarus alive at that time?) where Lazarus obeyed by his spirit coming back into his body in response to Jesus' calling Him, then I don't know how it can come any closer.

And you, as the "pot" are one to talk trying to call the "kettle" black about having no idea of Biblical teachings when you can't even spell the word (look above) much less know what it stands for. It's truly sad, but we've been warned Catholics just don't study the Bible. End of my "converstation" with you. Now, I'll have to go as I am awaiting a response from Tj3 as I have something for him.

With all due respect, Chuck, you apparently are making reference to being a priest from the way you sign your name, I don't know if it is merely metaphorical or real, nevertheless, if you knew the Bible you would realize that when Jesus cried out in a loud voice "Lazarus Come Forth!" (JOHN 11:43 (KJV), He spoke (conversed) with Lazarus' spirit. If that isn't talking to the dead (after all, was Lazarus alive at that time?) where Lazarus obeyed by his spirit coming back into his body in response to Jesus' calling Him, then I don't know how it can come any closer.

And you, as the "pot" are one to talk trying to call the "kettle" black about having no idea of Biblical teachings when you can't even spell the word (look above) much less know what it stands for. It's truly sad, but we've been warned Catholics just don't study the Bible. End of my "converstation" with you. Now, I'll have to go as I am awaiting a response from Tj3 as I have something for him.


Hey, Chuck, You know, of course, that I am saying all this with a wink of one eye, don't you? Just want to make sure. I like everyone, you, and Tj3 no matter what! We all exhibit passion when we speak but that is what life is all about. If it wasn't for "converstation" like the one we three, especially, have had going, it would probably not attract the very people we need to come to this site to learn more about God and how to become Born Again. Praise Be To God! May every person seeking Him, find Him, and if we can help in one small way, then it would have been all worth the effort! Hugs to you dear friend!

That sounds similar the modalist teachings. The trinitarian doctrine is that The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are all one God, but three distinct persons. Thus when Jesus is speaking to the Father, He is speaking to the first person of the trinity. It is only Jesus who is fully God and fully man, God the father is not fully man. The best summary of the orthodox doctrine of the trinity which I hold to and which we find taught in scripture is "Three persons, one God".

Well, of course. That is what I was trying for you to realize all this time. Jesus spoke to The Father but He was nevertheless One in God (I and my Father are One). Why did you not acknowledge that to begin with and we could have avoided much span of bandwidth with the ensuing discussion? And why did you have to infer that I would deny the Trinity? That is not right of you to do in God's eyes and I hope you now know better. After all, put yourself in my place and imagine what you would have felt like had I asked you if you denied God in favor of satan.

Here is a website you and others might wish to visit for further information:
More about Christian Beliefs: The Trinity
The Trinity (http://geneva.rutgers.edu/src/christianity/trinity.html)

I answered your question in complete detail already. I notice however, that you gave no response to what I said. Read what I said, and if you have further questions after you have read what I said, you are welcome to ask.

Just one question. In your response, right above, that starts with "That sounds similar to modalist teachings.", you discuss "The trinitarian doctrine" of which I am very familiar with, but you still do not indicate that you personally believe Jesus to be One in The Holy Trinity. Do you see what I am asking? It is one thing to speak about what the "doctrine" says and another to answer the question as to your own personal belief. Or is it that you do not wish to commit yourself to the answer? Please understand that it is your own personal choice to do so.

Just one question. In your response, right above, that starts with "That sounds similar to modalist teachings.", you discuss "The trinitarian doctrine" of which I am very familiar with, but you still do not indicate that you personally believe Jesus to be One in The Holy Trinity. Do you see what I am asking? It is one thing to speak about what the "doctrine" says and another to answer the question as to your own personal belief. Or is it that you do not wish to commit yourself to the answer? Please understand that it is your own personal choice to do so.

You really need to slow down and go back and read my messages, and the link that I gave to my article on this topic. I have been quite specific on that point a number of times. Indeed - read, slowly and in detail the very paragraph that I wrote, and to which you refer.

You, on the other hand, have not. Nor have you addressed what appear to be modalist teachings on your part.

With all due respect, Chuck, you apparently are making reference to being a priest from the way you sign your name, I don't know if it is merely metaphorical or real, nevertheless, if you knew the Bible you would realize that when Jesus cried out in a loud voice "Lazarus Come Forth!" (JOHN 11:43 (KJV), He spoke (conversed) with Lazarus' spirit. If that isn't talking to the dead (after all, was Lazarus alive at that time?) where Lazarus obeyed by his spirit coming back into his body in response to Jesus' calling Him, then I don't know how it can come any closer.

And you, as the "pot" are one to talk trying to call the "kettle" black about having no idea of Biblical teachings when you can't even spell the word (look above) much less know what it stands for. It's truly sad, but we've been warned Catholics just don't study the Bible. End of my "converstation" with you. Now, I'll have to go as I am awaiting a response from Tj3 as I have something for him.


Im sorry Sky Gem but I agree with Chuck 100%. It is a huge stretch for you to justify people who communicate with the dead by quoting this incident in the Bible. Jesus was merely calling Laz from the dead (as Tj3 said) after God the father answered His prayer. It was not for the purpose of communicating with the dead but it was a comand to bring him back to life. Like I have said before there is no where in the Bible that tells us that dead people can communicate with people on earth. But people can summon evil spirits who can pose as dead family members.

For those having questions and wishing to know what the Catholic position is on communication with the deceased, please read the following information:

EVP and Vatican (http://www.evp-itc-australia.org/29.html)
If we ask our friends on earth to pray for us, why not ask our friends in heaven to do the same? Saints remind us of the belief that we are all called to holiness, to share life with God. Saints and angels inspire us to do just that. They are holy because they cooperated with the grace of God and they help us by encouraging us to respond as generously as they did.

But people can summon evil spirits who can pose as dead family members.Now THAT's a huge stretch of the imagination!

Now THAT's a huge stretch of the imagination!

I am just merely stating what the Bible has to say on the subject.

If we ask our friends on earth to pray for us, why not ask our friends in heaven to do the same? Saints remind us of the belief that we are all called to holiness, to share life with God. Saints and angels inspire us to do just that. They are holy because they cooperated with the grace of God and they help us by encouraging us to respond as generously as they did.

Asking for a friend to pray for us and praying for one another is Biblical. However asking dead saints and angels to pray for us is not biblical. The word of God says Christ is seated at the right hand of the Father interceeding for us, it also says that the Holy spirit interceed for us with grownings. So if God Himself prays for us, why then should we ask dead people to pray for us? Jesus said HE is the only way to God. Not Mary, not the saints.

Asking for a friend to pray for us and praying for one another is Biblical. However asking dead saints and angels to pray for us is not biblical. The word of God says Christ is seated at the right hand of the Father interceeding for us, it also says that the Holy spirit interceed for us with grownings. So if God Himself prays for us, why then should we ask dead people to pray for us? Jesus said HE is the only way to God. Not Mary, not the saints.

Yep.

If we can go directly to the throne of Almighty God with our prayers, in the name of Jesus, why would we need to, or even want to go through a dead saint?

Im sorry Sky Gem but i agree with Chuck 100%. It is a huge stretch for you to justify people who communicate with the dead by quoting this incident in the Bible. Jesus was merely calling Laz from the dead (as Tj3 said) after God the father answered His prayer. It was not for the purpose of communicating with the dead but it was a comand to bring him back to life. Like i have said before there is no where in the Bible that tells us that dead people can communicate with people on earth. But people can summon evil spirits who can pose as dead family members.

I just finished having a long discussion about this concerning other related areas and of course you can go back and read what was said about it, but what I am now actively looking for (which very much ties in with what you are saying) is continuing comments about The Vatican and EVP since the website brings out information that The Vatican now actively allows communication with the departed and even encourages studies in that area. With what you are saying, they, as the Head of the Roman Catholic Church should have no business allowing it, correct? And certainly your argument, if it is indeed that, should also be addressed to them. How do you feel about this? Is the Vatican, thus the Pope, wrong for allowing such communication or are they right? I might assume you think the Pope, as the head, is dead wrong in allowing it. Am I further correct to assume that?

If we ask our friends on earth to pray for us, why not ask our friends in heaven to do the same? Saints remind us of the belief that we are all called to holiness, to share life with God. Saints and angels inspire us to do just that. They are holy because they cooperated with the grace of God and they help us by encouraging us to respond as generously as they did.

Thank you for your comments, musynina. Since we should all know that the "dead" are not really dead but continue to live, as God has told us in LUKE 20:38 (KJV) and in other Scripture, e.g., JOHN 11:26 (KJV), I also feel we can communicate our message or request to them to pray to God for us as in the case of the saints and others. Quite naturally, we would not pray to the saints or anyone other than God but rather communicate with them. Perhaps that is why the Vatican allows communication with the saints. Remember, communication can also be one way and does not always have to be two-sided where we would actually physically hear the other side talking. As it relates to "communication" in general, we need look no further than radio announcers. For the most part, they speak only one way to people but it is still communication. True, they speak to living people but since God is not a God of the dead, quite obviously that is the reason many Catholics as well as many others "speak" or rather communicate with saints and departed loved ones and ask for their intercession.

To support this, please go to the following website (very short but knowledgeable reading). It is Catholic-related and I am not Catholic but nevertheless this site does provide excellent food for thought!

Answering Objections to the Intercession of the Saints (http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/a118.htm)

[B]Thank you for your comments, musynina. Since we should all know that the "dead" are not really dead but continue to live, as God has told us in LUKE 20:38 (KJV) and in other Scripture, e.g. JOHN 11:26 (KJV), I also feel we can communicate our message or request to them to pray to God for us as in the case of the saints and others.

Let's look at Luke 20:38 in context:

Luke 20:27-40
27 Then some of the Sadducees, who deny that there is a resurrection, came to Him and asked Him, 28 saying: "Teacher, Moses wrote to us that if a man's brother dies, having a wife, and he dies without children, his brother should take his wife and raise up offspring for his brother. 29 Now there were seven brothers. And the first took a wife, and died without children. 30 And the second took her as wife, and he died childless. 31 Then the third took her, and in like manner the seven also; and they left no children, and died. 32 Last of all the woman died also. 33 Therefore, in the resurrection, whose wife does she become? For all seven had her as wife." 34 And Jesus answered and said to them, "The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage. 35 But those who are counted worthy to attain that age, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage; 36 nor can they die anymore, for they are equal to the angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection. 37 Now even Moses showed in the burning bush passage that the dead are raised, when he called the Lord 'the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.' 38 "For He is not the God of the dead but of the living, for all live to Him." 39 Then some of the scribes answered and said, "Teacher, You have spoken well." 40 But after that they dared not question Him anymore
NKJV

Note that this has to do with a discussion with the Sadduccees who denied the resurrection of the dead, and Jesus refuting them, showing that the dead were indeed resurrected.

Let's look at John 11:26 in context:

John 11:22-27
23 Jesus said to her, "Your brother will rise again." 24 Martha said to Him, "I know that he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day." 25 Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live. 26 And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?" 27 She said to Him, "Yes, Lord, I believe that You are the Christ, the Son of God, who is to come into the world."
NKJV

This has absolutely nothing to do with the prohibition in scripture against communicating with those who are dead in the flesh.


Quite naturally, we would not pray to the saints or anyone other than God but rather communicate with them.

Interesting distinction - care to share with us where you would find such a distinction in scripture?

Now THAT's a huge stretch of the imagination!

What would an Atheist know about such things?

What would an Atheist know about such things?Was that meant to be insulting to me? C'mon, try to play nice with others. :)

Let's look at Luke 20:38 in context:

38 "For He is not the God of the dead but of the living, for all live to Him." 39 Then some of the scribes answered and said, "Teacher, You have spoken well." 40 But after that they dared not question Him anymore
NKJV

Note that this has to do with a discussion with the Sadduccees who denied the resurrection of the dead, and Jesus refuting them, showing that the dead were indeed resurrected.

Of course. And just imagine, if the dead are resurrected, then they are not really "dead" are they? There is a lesson here about the continuation of life! And God is INDEED the God of the LIVING, therefore, how could communication not be possible? That is the main point.

Let's look at John 11:26 in context:

John 11:22-27
23 Jesus said to her, "Your brother will rise again." 24 Martha said to Him, "I know that he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day." 25 Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live. 26 And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?" 27 She said to Him, "Yes, Lord, I believe that You are the Christ, the Son of God, who is to come into the world."
NKJV

This has absolutely nothing to do with the prohibition in scripture against communicating with those who are dead in the flesh.

Perhaps to your understanding. But just try to feed that line to the Vatican! That is my continuous point and thank you for helping me to make it. Now, do you feel The Vatican is right in allowing communication with the departed?



Interesting distinction - care to share with us where you would find such a distinction in scripture?

Isn't it obvious? Or would you pray to any other but to God through Jesus Christ? Let me give you a little lesson here so you'll understand that you pray only to God through Jesus. Can we pray to the Holy Spirit? (http://www.neverthirsty.org/pp/corner/read1/r00417.html)

[B]Isn't it obvious? Or would you pray to any other but to God through Jesus Christ?


You did not answer my question. Where do you find any distinction in scripture that perhaps you to "communicate" with the saints who are dead in the flesh?


Let me give you a little lesson here so you'll understand that you pray only to God through Jesus.

Who was arguing that? But you argued that we can "communicate" with the dead. I am still waiting for you to justify that from scripture.

You did not answer my question. Where do you find any distinction in scripture that perhaps you to "communicate" with the saints who are dead in the flesh?



Who was arguing that? But you argued that we can "communicate" with the dead. I am still waiting for you to justify that from scripture.

Tell you what. In order to simplify matters, after you admit that The Vatican and of course, the Pope are very wrong in allowing communication with the "dead", we can continue dialogue. Fair enough?

Tell you what. In order to simplify matters, after you admit that The Vatican and of course, the Pope are very wrong in allowing communication with the "dead", we can continue dialogue. Fair enough?


Yes The Pope is VERY wrong because he has no Biblical justification for allowing people to communicate with dead people. Just as an FYI the Pope is just a man like you and me. He is not God and he is not the head of "The Church" he is just the head of the Catholic Church.

Let's look at Luke 20:38 in context:

Luke 20:27-40
27 Then some of the Sadducees, who deny that there is a resurrection, came to Him and asked Him, 28 saying: "Teacher, Moses wrote to us that if a man's brother dies, having a wife, and he dies without children, his brother should take his wife and raise up offspring for his brother. 29 Now there were seven brothers. And the first took a wife, and died without children. 30 And the second took her as wife, and he died childless. 31 Then the third took her, and in like manner the seven also; and they left no children, and died. 32 Last of all the woman died also. 33 Therefore, in the resurrection, whose wife does she become? For all seven had her as wife." 34 And Jesus answered and said to them, "The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage. 35 But those who are counted worthy to attain that age, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage; 36 nor can they die anymore, for they are equal to the angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection. 37 Now even Moses showed in the burning bush passage that the dead are raised, when he called the Lord 'the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.' 38 "For He is not the God of the dead but of the living, for all live to Him." 39 Then some of the scribes answered and said, "Teacher, You have spoken well." 40 But after that they dared not question Him anymore
NKJV

Note that this has to do with a discussion with the Sadduccees who denied the resurrection of the dead, and Jesus refuting them, showing that the dead were indeed resurrected.

Let's look at John 11:26 in context:

John 11:22-27
23 Jesus said to her, "Your brother will rise again." 24 Martha said to Him, "I know that he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day." 25 Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live. 26 And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?" 27 She said to Him, "Yes, Lord, I believe that You are the Christ, the Son of God, who is to come into the world."
NKJV

This has absolutely nothing to do with the prohibition in scripture against communicating with those who are dead in the flesh.



Interesting distinction - care to share with us where you would find such a distinction in scripture?


I think it is very sad that people create an entire dictrine (faulse doctrines) based on one sentence taken completely out of context.

What would an Atheist know about such things?

Galveston1,
The best way to deal with hecklers is to Just ignore, by replying you are just giving them the attention they are desparately seeking.

I think it is very sad that people create an entire dictrine (faulse doctrines) based on one sentence taken completely out of context.Same issue with false prophets i.e Joe Smith.

Tell you what. In order to simplify matters, after you admit that The Vatican and of course, the Pope are very wrong in allowing communication with the "dead", we can continue dialogue. Fair enough?



Okay. The Pope and the Vatican are very wrong in allowing any communication with the dead. That has been my consistent position all along. It seems to be you supporting communication with the day, in concert with the Pope and the Vatican.

Now, how about you answer my question.

Okay. The Pope and the Vatican are very wrong in allowing any communication with the dead. That has been my consistent position all along. It seems to be you supporting communication with the day, in concert with the Pope and the Vatican.

Now, how about you answer my question.

In a previous response to my question of whether or not you believe that Jesus and God are One, you replied "You really need to slow down and go back and read my messages, and the link that I gave to my article on this topic. I have been quite specific on that point a number of times. Indeed - read, slowly and in detail the very paragraph that I wrote, and to which you refer."

Therefore, in answer to your question now, I likewise believe I have made my position quite clear in all of my previous posts and there is little else to be said. As to communication with the deceased, while you and others believe the Vatican and the Pope is wrong for allowing it, the fact that evidence of the continuation of life has surfaced, as shown in previous links, it may be that the Vatican has also taken note of this and has changed its stance on the matter. They may have even had other experiences as well? One has to also realize that back in Biblical days there were no electronic devices that could actually record voices or materializations as can happen today for "hard evidence"of such communications. Remember, the Old Testament Bible also prohibits wearing different fabric clothes together, eating shellfish, etc. There are other instances and prohibitions as well. While I cannot speak for The Vatican, in my personal opinion, it could be that they saw that some of these prohibitions have now been removed/lifted from the Old Testament in the New Testament, therefore, with new evidence of communication with the Afterlife, former restrictions could also be relaxed (after all, the Catholic Church claims to be able to do many things with their authority). I realize we could go on and on about this matter but this topic has now been exhausted as I said previously, and it's time to move on to other areas. You have now made your position and I have made mine. You may continue to post as you wish, but for any further replies on this that you may be seeking from me, please go back and re-read what I have posted previously.

We are now going back to the original posting of The Vatican and EVP. Anyone else who believes The Vatican and the Pope are wrong for allowing communication with the departed may continue to post as they wish. Likewise, those who support the Vatican's decision in this may likewise make their feelings known. Thank you.

Skygem, the bottom line is that the Bible does not indorse speaking to dead people or asking dead people to pray for you. So if you feel comfortable with creating a doctrine of your own that is not biblical, then that is on you. God is the same yestereday today and forever. The word of God is timeless, it doesn't mean people should change it according to the times.

The word of God is timeless, it doesnt mean people should change it according to the times.So how does the bible help you understand cars or computers or Pepsi or fast food or scotch tape or the internet or railroads.. None of those existed when the bible was written; I'm assuming some interesting "interpretation" is required.

[B]In a previous response to my question of whether you believe that Jesus and God are One, you replied "You really need to slow down and go back and read my messages, and the link that I gave to my article on this topic. I have been quite specific on that point a number of times. Indeed - read, slowly and in detail the very paragraph that I wrote, and to which you refer."


You appeared to suggest earlier that Jesus and God the father were not distinct persons in the trinity, which is a teaching of the modalists, or "Oneness pentecostals", and I asked you to address that. You didn't.



Therefore, in answer to your question now, I likewise believe I have made my position quite clear in all of my previous posts and there is little else to be said. As to communication with the deceased, while you and others believe the Vatican and the Pope is wrong for allowing it, the fact that evidence of the continuation of life has surfaced, as shown in previous links, it may be that the Vatican has also taken note of this and has changed its stance on the matter. They may have even had other experiences as well? One has to also realize that back in Biblical days there were no electronic devices that could actually record voices or materializations as can happen today for "hard evidence"of such communications. Remember, the Old Testament Bible also prohibits wearing different fabric clothes together, eating shellfish, etc. There are other instances and prohibitions as well. While I cannot speak for The Vatican, in my opinion, it could be that they saw that some of these prohibitions have now been removed/lifted from the Old Testament in the New Testament, therefore, with new evidence of communication with the Afterlife, former restrictions could also be relaxed (after all, the Catholic Church claims to be able to do many things with their authority). I realize we could go on and on about this matter but this topic has now been exhausted as I said previously, and it's time to move on to other areas. You have now made your position and I have made mine. You may continue to post as you wish, but for any further replies on this that you may be seeking from me, please go back and re-read what I have posted previously.


I have read all you posts. I have asked you several times to validate from scripture your claim that it is okay to communicate with the dead but not pray to them. You haven't.

So how does the bible help you understand cars or computers or Pepsi or fast food or scotch tape or the internet or railroads...? None of those existed when the bible was written; I'm assuming some interesting "interpretation" is required.

These are not doctrinal issues, are they?

These are not doctrinal issues, are they?
doctrine - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/doctrine)
Sure. It fits in with the Electronic Voice Phenomena question doesn't it?

For those having questions and wishing to know what the Catholic position is on communication with the deceased, please read the following information:

EVP and Vatican (http://www.evp-itc-australia.org/29.html)

Sounds like an anti-Catholic website which makes a bunch of false accusations against the Church. For instance, the idea of "releasing infants from Limbo". Since Limbo is not and has never been a doctrine of the Catholic Church, there is no Limbo from which infants may be released.

If anyone in the Vatican made that statement, they meant it metaphorically.

Sincerely,

doctrine - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/doctrine)
Sure. It fits in with the Electronic Voice Phenomena question doesn't it?


You asked about "cars or computers or Pepsi or fast food or scotch tape or the internet or railroads". None of these are doctrinal.

Asking for a friend to pray for us and praying for one another is Biblical. However asking dead saints and angels to pray for us is not biblical.

However, asking saints and angels to intercede for us, that is biblical.

For instance, we see these words in Scripture:
Luke 16 24 And he cried, and said: Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, to cool my tongue: for I am tormented in this flame.

Now Father Abraham was long dead. Yet the Rich Man was asking for his intercession.

And we see in Scripture that the Saints in heaven are paying close attention to what is happening on earth and they are praying for us:

Hebrews 12 1 And therefore we also having so great a cloud of witnesses over our head, laying aside every weight and sin which surrounds us, let us run by patience to the fight proposed to us:

2 Machabees 15 12 Now the vision was in this manner: Onias who had been high priest, a good and virtuous man, modest in his looks, gentle in his manners, and graceful in his speech, and who from a child was exercised in virtues, holding up his hands, prayed for all the people of the Jews: 13 After this there appeared also another man, admirable for age, and glory, and environed with great beauty and majesty: 14 Then Onias answering, Raid: This is a lover of his brethren, and of the people of Israel: this is he that prayeth much for the people, and for all the holy city, Jeremias the prophet of God. 15 Whereupon Jeremias stretched forth his right hand, and gave to Judas a sword of gold, saying:

16 Take this holy sword a gift from God, wherewith thou shalt overthrow the adversaries of my people Israel.


The word of God says Christ is seated at the right hand of the Father interceeding for us, it also says that the Holy spirit interceed for us with grownings.

That is true. Scripture also says that we are to imitate Jesus. Who imitates Jesus better than those who have learned to imitate Him in this life and having been perfected have joined Him in the next?

Hebrews 12 23 And to the church of the firstborn, who are written in the heavens, and to God the judge of all, and to the spirits of the just made perfect,



So if God Himself prays for us,

I could ask you the same question? If God Himself prays for us, why should you or I pray at all? The answer is, becaust it is God's will. And we don't cease to do God's will in heaven. That is what the prayer says, "God's will on earth as it is in heaven."

Therefore the Saints in heaven are doing God's will and we should strive to emulate them.


why then should we ask dead people to pray for us?

Because the prayer of a just man is very efficacious.


Jesus said HE is the only way to God. Not Mary, not the saints.

Yet we can lead them to Jesus, can't we? And so do Mary and the Saints:

John 2 5 His mother saith to the waiters: Whatsoever he shall say to you, do ye.


Sincerely,

However, asking saints and angels to intercede for us, that is biblical.

For instance, we see these words in Scripture:
Luke 16 24 And he cried, and said: Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, to cool my tongue: for I am tormented in this flame.

Now Father Abraham was long dead. Yet the Rich Man was asking for his intercession.


You mean the rich man who was also dead? In what way does this have anything to do with those alive in the flesh communicating with thos dead in the flesh?


And we see in Scripture that the Saints in heaven are paying close attention to what is happening on earth and they are praying for us:

Hebrews 12 1 And therefore we also having so great a cloud of witnesses over our head, laying aside every weight and sin which surrounds us, let us run by patience to the fight proposed to us:

I missed the part where it says that they are praying for us and that we are to pray for them. Could you please point that out?



2 Machabees 15 12 Now the vision was in this manner: Onias who had been high priest, a good and virtuous man, modest in his looks, gentle in his manners, and graceful in his speech, and who from a child was exercised in virtues, holding up his hands, prayed for all the people of the Jews: 13 After this there appeared also another man, admirable for age, and glory, and environed with great beauty and majesty: 14 Then Onias answering, Raid: This is a lover of his brethren, and of the people of Israel: this is he that prayeth much for the people, and for all the holy city, Jeremias the prophet of God. 15 Whereupon Jeremias stretched forth his right hand, and gave to Judas a sword of gold, saying:

16 Take this holy sword a gift from God, wherewith thou shalt overthrow the adversaries of my people Israel.



As I am sure you are aware, Maccabees is only accepted as scripture by a few denominations. In 2 Maccabees 15:38, the writer does not claim divine inspiration.


That is true. Scripture also says that we are to imitate Jesus. Who imitates Jesus better than those who have learned to imitate Him in this life and having been perfected have joined Him in the next?

Where did Jesus tell us to pray to the dead? How is praying to the dead imitating Jesus?



Because the prayer of a just man is very efficacious.

Is a man truly just if he defies God's prohibition against communication with the dead?

Yawn, yawn, is anyone else getting tired of the haggle back and forth.

Both sides will not ever believe the other, so is there a point to this any longer.

You mean the rich man who was also dead?

Correct. Note that the dead Rich Man is very aware of life on earth.
Note that the dead Rich Man was INTERCEDING for his brethren.


In what way does this have anything to do with those alive in the flesh communicating with thos dead in the flesh?

It illustrates the communion of Saints. This is confirmed by St. Paul who explains that the dead Saints are in heaven witnessing what we do.


I missed the part where it says that they are praying for us and that we are to pray for them. Could you please point that out?

I guess you didn't read the part in Maccabees which depicts Jeremiah praying for us. And the dead Rich Man is praying for his brethren. Therefore he is praying for the living.

In this verse, St. Paul prays for the dead Onesiphorus:
2 Timothy 1
16 The Lord give mercy to the house of Onesiphorus: because he hath often refreshed me, and hath not been ashamed of my chain: 17 But when he was come to Rome, he carefully sought me, and found me. 18 The Lord grant unto him to find mercy of the Lord in that day: and in how many things he ministered unto me at Ephesus, thou very well knowest.


As I am sure you are aware, Maccabees is only accepted as scripture by a few denominations. In 2 Maccabees 15:38, the writer does not claim divine inspiration.

The Baghada Vita and the Quran also claim Divine inspiration. Do you believe they are divine?

The only two books which claims divine inspiration in the Christian Bible is the Second Epistle to Timothy and it doesn't claim it for itself but for the Old Testament.

And the Second Epistle by Peter, which also claims inspiration for St. Paul's epistles and for the entire Bible but is not clear about inspiration for its own words.


Where did Jesus tell us to pray to the dead? How is praying to the dead imitating Jesus?

Jesus informed us that God is a God of the Living and not of the dead. It follows that we can communicate with the living.

St. Paul taught us that we are all members of the Body of Christ and that all members rejoice when one is happy and are saddened when one is sad. Therefore, the members of the Body of Christ who have passed into the next life must be aware of what is happening in this life. Otherwise they couldn't rejoice for us.


Is a man truly just if he defies God's prohibition against communication with the dead?

The Saints in heaven are not dead. They are more alive than we.
John 10 10 The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy. I am come that they may have life, and may have it more abundantly.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Correct. Note that the dead Rich Man is very aware of life on earth.
Note that the dead Rich Man was INTERCEDING for his brethren.


Nothing says that he was aware. He had only just died. The topic is communication with the dead and we see nothing of the sort here.


It illustrates the communion of Saints. This is confirmed by St. Paul who explains that the dead Saints are in heaven witnessing what we do.

But again topic is communication with the dead and we see nothing of the sort here.


I guess you didn't read the part in Maccabees which depicts Jeremiah praying for us. And the dead Rich Man is praying for his brethren. Therefore he is praying for the living.

It would not matter in any case. This is not inspired scripture.


In this verse, St. Paul prays for the dead Onesiphorus:
2 Timothy 1
16 The Lord give mercy to the house of Onesiphorus: because he hath often refreshed me, and hath not been ashamed of my chain: 17 But when he was come to Rome, he carefully sought me, and found me. 18 The Lord grant unto him to find mercy of the Lord in that day: and in how many things he ministered unto me at Ephesus, thou very well knowest.

Note that he is praying for the "household" of Onesiphorus, who are very much alive because later we read:

2 Tim 4:19-20
19 Greet Prisca and Aquila, and the household of Onesiphorus.
NKJV


The Baghada Vita and the Quran also claim Divine inspiration. Do you believe they are divine?

The only two books which claims divine inspiration in the Christian Bible is the Second Epistle to Timothy and it doesn't claim it for itself but for the Old Testament.

And the Second Epistle by Peter, which also claims inspiration for St. Paul's epistles and for the entire Bible but is not clear about inspiration for its own words.

Your lost me here. 2 Maccabees specifically speaks against inspiration. That has nothing to do with whether other books specifically claim inspiration. Read 2 Maccabees 15:38. Further, as pointed out, only a few denominations have ever accepted Maccabees as inspired.


Jesus informed us that God is a God of the Living and not of the dead. It follows that we can communicate with the living.


As ;pointed out many many times, that passage is refuting the Sadducees claim that there is no resurrection of the dead.

Mark 12:18-27
18 Then some Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to Him; and they asked Him, saying: 19 "Teacher, Moses wrote to us that if a man's brother dies, and leaves his wife behind, and leaves no children, his brother should take his wife and raise up offspring for his brother. 20 Now there were seven brothers. The first took a wife; and dying, he left no offspring. 21 And the second took her, and he died; nor did he leave any offspring. And the third likewise. 22 So the seven had her and left no offspring. Last of all the woman died also. 23 Therefore, in the resurrection, when they rise, whose wife will she be? For all seven had her as wife." 24 Jesus answered and said to them, "Are you not therefore mistaken, because you do not know the Scriptures nor the power of God? 25 For when they rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. 26 But concerning the dead, that they rise, have you not read in the book of Moses, in the burning bush passage, how God spoke to him, saying, 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? 27 He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living. You are therefore greatly mistaken."
NKJV

It has absolutely no relevance to communication with those who are dead in the flesh which is specifically prohibited - why bring up the same point once again?


St. Paul taught us that we are all members of the Body of Christ and that all members rejoice when one is happy and are saddened when one is sad. Therefore, the members of the Body of Christ who have passed into the next life must be aware of what is happening in this life. Otherwise they couldn't rejoice for us.

I notice that you gacve no reference, so we cannot look aty the context. But once again, it would be at best a moot point since it has nothing to do with communication with the dead.


The Saints in heaven are not dead. They are more alive than we.
John 10 10 The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy. I am come that they may have life, and may have it more abundantly.

John 10:7-11
7 Then Jesus said to them again, "Most assuredly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. 8 All who ever came before Me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not hear them. 9 I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture. 10 The thief does not come except to steal, and to kill, and to destroy. I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly.
NKJV

This is speaking, in context, about salvation, not about speaking to those who are dead in the flesh.

Nothing says that he was aware. He had only just died. The topic is communication with the dead and we see nothing of the sort here.

How do you define "aware"? Note that Abraham, who had certainly not just died was also aware of the Rich Man's brothers. Note that the Rich Man was aware of Abraham and of Lazarus. Therefore, the Rich Man and Abraham were aware and in fact behaving very much as living souls.


But again topic is communication with the dead and we see nothing of the sort here.

We see the dead communicating as though they are alive.


It would not matter in any case. This is not inspired scripture.

To you. Yet it is included in many Protestant Bibles. Why?


Note that he is praying for the "household" of Onesiphorus, who are very much alive because later we read:

2 Tim 4:19-20
19 Greet Prisca and Aquila, and the household of Onesiphorus.

You have broken it in half and taken it out of context.

Let me show you how to break out the relevant part:

16 The Lord give mercy to the house of Onesiphorus: because he hath often refreshed me, and hath not been ashamed of my chain:

Here he prays for the house of Onesiphorus.

17 But when he was come to Rome, he carefully sought me, and found me.[/quote]

Here he recalls that Onesiphorus found him while he was alive.

[b] 18 The Lord grant unto him to find mercy of the Lord in that day:

Here he prays for Onesiphorus.

and in how many things he ministered unto me at Ephesus, thou very well knowest.

Here he recalls Onesiphorus goodness.


Your lost me here. 2 Maccabees specifically speaks against inspiration. That has nothing to do with whether other books specifically claim inspiration. Read 2 Maccabees 15:38. Further, as pointed out, only a few denominations have ever accepted Maccabees as inspired.

But they were in the original Bible which Jesus used. The few denominations which rejected the Deuterocanon did so in imitation of the Jews who rejected the Scriptures which Christians used.

Here St. Paul does not seem to be certain if he is inspired:
1 Cor 7 6 But I speak this by indulgence, not by commandment...
1 Cor 7:40 But more blessed shall she be, if she so remain, according to my counsel; and I think that I also have the spirit of God.

So who decided that these words would be included in the inspired Canon?


As ;pointed out many many times, that passage is refuting the Sadducees claim that there is no resurrection of the dead.

Mark 12:18-27
18 Then some Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to Him; and they asked Him, saying: 19 "Teacher, Moses wrote to us that if a man's brother dies, and leaves his wife behind, and leaves no children, his brother should take his wife and raise up offspring for his brother. 20 Now there were seven brothers. The first took a wife; and dying, he left no offspring. 21 And the second took her, and he died; nor did he leave any offspring. And the third likewise. 22 So the seven had her and left no offspring. Last of all the woman died also. 23 Therefore, in the resurrection, when they rise, whose wife will she be? For all seven had her as wife." 24 Jesus answered and said to them, "Are you not therefore mistaken, because you do not know the Scriptures nor the power of God? 25 For when they rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. 26 But concerning the dead, that they rise, have you not read in the book of Moses, in the burning bush passage, how God spoke to him, saying, 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? 27 He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living. You are therefore greatly mistaken."
NKJV

It has absolutely no relevance to communication with those who are dead in the flesh which is specifically prohibited - why bring up the same point once again?

I believe it does.

Unless you don't believe that the dead do not immediately go to the presence of God.

2 Corinthians 5 8 But we are confident, and have a good will to be absent rather from the body, and to be present with the Lord.


I notice that you gacve no reference, so we cannot look aty the context. But once again, it would be at best a moot point since it has nothing to do with communication with the dead.

I was certain all were familiar with this passage.

Here it is:
1 Corinthians 12 12 For as the body is one, and hath many members; and all the members of the body, whereas they are many, yet are one body, so also is Christ. 13 For in one Spirit were we all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Gentiles, whether bond or free; and in one Spirit we have all been made to drink. 14 For the body also is not one member, but many. 15 If the foot should say, because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?

16 And if the ear should say, because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? 17 If the whole body were the eye, where would be the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where would be the smelling? 18 But now God hath set the members every one of them in the body as it hath pleased him. 19 And if they all were one member, where would be the body? 20 But now there are many members indeed, yet one body.

21 And the eye cannot say to the hand: I need not thy help; nor again the head to the feet: I have no need of you. 22 Yea, much more those that seem to be the more feeble members of the body, are more necessary. 23 And such as we think to be the less honourable members of the body, about these we put more abundant honour; and those that are our uncomely parts, have more abundant comeliness. 24 But our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, giving to that which wanted the more abundant honour, 25 That there might be no schism in the body; but the members might be mutually careful one for another.

26 And if one member suffer any thing, all the members suffer with it; or if one member glory, all the members rejoice with it.

27 Now you are the body of Christ, and members of member.

Does a member of the Body of Christ fall off simply because his body dies?


John 10:7-11
7 Then Jesus said to them again, "Most assuredly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. 8 All who ever came before Me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not hear them. 9 I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture. 10 The thief does not come except to steal, and to kill, and to destroy. I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly.
NKJV

This is speaking, in context, about salvation, not about speaking to those who are dead in the flesh.

This does not say that prayer to the Saints is not efficacious.

Sincerely,

De Maria

How do you define "aware"? Note that Abraham, who had certainly not just died was also aware of the Rich Man's brothers. Note that the Rich Man was aware of Abraham and of Lazarus. Therefore, the Rich Man and Abraham were aware and in fact behaving very much as living souls.


Again, it does not matter. I am not arguing whether people in heaven can be aware of us or not. It is not relevant. In this passage we have no communication between those who are dead and those who are alive. That is the point. Let's not distract this from that point.

If you feel that it is relevant, then make your point.


We see the dead communicating as though they are alive.


Dead to dead communication. No one said that was an issue.


To you. Yet it is included in many Protestant Bibles. Why?

I am not sure what you mean by a Protestant Bible. I have a Christian Bible, and many do have reference material. I have a study Bible which is probably 25% non-inspired reference material. I see no issue with that.

But the point here is not whether you accept it or not, but the point is that if you wish to discuss this, be aware that if you use non-canonical sources such as this, I will look to see if canonical sources validate the claim and if not, I will reject the specific reference as valid.


You have broken it in half and taken it out of context.

Let me show you how to break out the relevant part:

16 The Lord give mercy to the house of Onesiphorus: because he hath often refreshed me, and hath not been ashamed of my chain:

Here he prays for the house of Onesiphorus.

17 But when he was come to Rome, he carefully sought me, and found me.

Here he recalls that Onesiphorus found him while he was alive.

[b] 18 The Lord grant unto him to find mercy of the Lord in that day:

Here he prays for Onesiphorus.

and in how many things he ministered unto me at Ephesus, thou very well knowest.

Here he recalls Onesiphorus goodness.


Okay, now show me where it says that Onesiphorus is dead.


But they were in the original Bible which Jesus used. The few denominations which rejected the Deuterocanon did so in imitation of the Jews who rejected the Scriptures which Christians used.

Yep, but were not accepted by any denomination that I am aware of until the Roman Catholic Church added it to the canon at the Council of Trent.


Here St. Paul does not seem to be certain if he is inspired:
1 Cor 7 6 But I speak this by indulgence, not by commandment...
1 Cor 7:40 But more blessed shall she be, if she so remain, according to my counsel; and I think that I also have the spirit of God.


Paul was very careful to point out where it came from his own opinion. In 2 Maccabees 15:38, he refers to the whole account, as we see in verse 37.


I believe it does.

We can believe whatever we want, but that does not make it true. Look at the context. Find a single reference in the context to speaking with the dead and show it to me.



Does a member of the Body of Christ fall off simply because his body dies?

I have no problem with that, and agree that the whole of Christ's body includes those in heaven and earth, but note nothing in the context of the passage that you quoted even touched on speaking with the dead.


This does not say that prayer to the Saints is not efficacious.

That approach is a defined logic fallacy. Let me demonstrate the error - I also could say that it does not say that you do not have green hair and pink eyes, therefore you must.

Both are equivalent because the passage is not speaking about your hair and eyes, nor is it speaking about communication with the dead.

The Saints in heaven are not dead. They are more alive than we.
John 10 10 The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy. I am come that they may have life, and may have it more abundantly.

Sincerely,

De Maria

The saints are indeed not "dead" in Heaven but have lost only their physical bodies. They continue to live in their Spiritual body as does Jesus Christ and others in that Holy Realm. Since there have been arguments back and forth about whether a person who is deceased in this world still continues living in the next, therefore capable of communication with us, a learned lawyer and Afterlife researcher has written Open Letters to Dr. Billy Graham as well as to the Pope in defense of his findings. Both necessitate reading in their entirely since too many things have been happening that shows/proves that those who would be presumed "dead" are now reappearing in this world to speak to the "living" (as JESUS did after the third day following His "death"). Another great example is Jesus' Mother Mary who has come numerous times since the children at Fatima saw her (several times) and she has even been photographed in her Spiritual body (pictures available for skeptics). Therefore, if the Mother of Jesus (Jesus=God in the Holy Trinity) can appear to us so many times (including in Cairo, Egypt) and communicate with us and we with her during her appearances, it appears a non-issue to even suggest that such things are not possible. The Word would have to reflect that with full clarity (and does reflect Jesus' resurrection, at least, and His speaking to His disciples and we are assured that by being Born Again we do not "die" either but continue life in Heaven or other realms). As to Mary reappearing, she may have not done so when the Holy Bible was being written for the very first time therefore is not spoken about. But she has done so NOW and subsequent versions of the Bible have not reflected that fact. So what does that tell us? The re-interpreters may indeed not want to give credibility to that very real fact! But then, would 'man' with his draconian personal prejudices and short-comings allow for that possibility in their interpretations? That continues to be the question facing many.

But please read Mr. Zammit's Open Letter to Dr. Billy Graham as well as the Open Letter to the Pope for more on this matter. Perhaps, this letter has helped to make the Vatican better understand that communication is possible with the deceased and that may be why they have now eased restrictions. Remember, there was a strong prohibition against eating meat on Fridays by Catholics. Now that prohibition has been lifted. Important and stringent things that were in the Old Testament are not now in the New Testament, so things indeed do change and ways of thinking change as do the eras between 1A.D. to 2008 A.D. and since there have been so many, many people who have interpreted the Bible and re-interpreted it throughout time, it would indeed be hard for those interpreters to hold on to the original Scriptures to pass on to others to be sure they too interpreted it perfectly each time. Could we then dare ask if they, as interpreters of the Bible, held each subsequent piece of Scripture in their hands to directly translate from it? Or should we merely assume and presume that they did? God's word is indeed infallible but that of the translators could leave much to be desired due to the thoughts of that time as well as personal prejudices. Therefore, since the Bible did not write itself as did the Ten Commandments from God that was given to Moses, is there anyone who can absolutely, unequivocally prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that those human men who interpreted the Bible so many times did so without prejudice and with direct physical evidence from which Scripture was taken?

Here is the link to the Open Letter to Dr. Billy Graham.
VICTOR ZAMMIT - Lawyer's Open Letter to Billy Graham - and Christian Fundamentalists (http://victorzammit.com/religion/billygraham.htm)

Mr. Zammit also wrote a similar Open Letter to the Pope. An Open Letter to the Pope (http://victorzammit.com/religion/pope.html)

Again, both letters should be read by everyone interested in this matter if discussions are to ensue as issues could be raised in direct relation to what was said.

Again, it does not matter. I am not arguing whether people in heaven can be aware of us or not. It is not relevant.

Why? Scripture says we should do God's will on earth as it is in heaven. Since it is God's will that we intercede for each other on earth, it follows that the Saints in heaven are already interceding for us because they are doing God's will..


In this passage we have no communication between those who are dead and those who are alive. That is the point. Let's not distract this from that point.

But we have communication between souls in two different states of being. And we see that they are as aware as we or even more so.


If you feel that it is relevant, then make your point.

I thought I had.
1. The Rich Man is addressing Abraham as "Father". He is communicating with him directly and assumes that Father Abraham has the authority to respond without asking for permission from higher authority.
2. Father Abraham does not correct him, but responds politely calling the Rich Man son and explaining why his prayer is rejected. Note that Father Abraham does not say, "Sorry son, you must pray directly to God." He accepts the prayer and rejects the request of his own authority.
3. Bot the Rich Man and Father Abraham show complete awareness of life on earth and in heaven.


Dead to dead communication. No one said that was an issue.

Life after death communication. It is one half of the issue. We pray to those who are alive after death. Scripture shows that they are aware of events on earth, that they are listening and that they are capable of answering communication.


I am not sure what you mean by a Protestant Bible.

A Bible which follows the tradition established by Martin Luther.


I have a Christian Bible, and many do have reference material. I have a study Bible which is probably 25% non-inspired reference material. I see no issue with that.

So you consider the Deuterocanonicals "reference material"? I wonder why since you believe they contradict the word of God?


But the point here is not whether you accept it or not, but the point is that if you wish to discuss this, be aware that if you use non-canonical sources such as this, I will look to see if canonical sources validate the claim and if not, I will reject the specific reference as valid.

This is another case of our different assumptions. The Deuterocanon is the so called "second" canon. The Catholic Church considers them inspired. We recognize 73 canonical books.

So, that begs the question, you consider the Deuterocanonicals "reference" materials, but you say that when I refer to them you will not consider the reference valid? That sounds like a contradiction. Please explain how that makes sense?


Okay, now show me where it says that Onesiphorus is dead.

It is in the martyrology: :
St. Onesiphorus:
Martyr with Porphyrius. Onesiphorus was mentioned in St. Paul’s Second Letter to Timothy. According to tradition, they went to Spain in the footsteps of St. Paul and then suffered martyrdom on the Hellespont, under Emperor Domitian. They were tied to wild horses and torn to pieces. Porphyrius was said to be a member of Onesiphorus’ household.
St. Onesiphorus - Catholic Online (http://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=4910)

Why would St Paul pray for mercy on his soul in the day of judgement if Onesiphorus weren't dead?


Yep, but were not accepted by any denomination that I am aware of until the Roman Catholic Church added it to the canon at the Council of Trent.

The Council of Trent confirmed the decision of several councils held on the matter from the early centuries.

360 AD Laodocia Council meets to decide which books and writings will be accepted as Holy Scripture. The Greek Septuagint is accepted for the Old Testament. (note: the Septuagint includes the Deuterocanon.)
390 AD Jerome’s Latin Vulgate translation of the Bible is produced and in wide circulation. It includes all 80 books including the Apochrypha (aka the Deuterocanon by Catholics).
History of the Bible (http://agards-bible-timeline.com/q2_bible_english.html)

As far as I know, the information provided above is from a non-Catholic source.


Paul was very careful to point out where it came from his own opinion. In 2 Maccabees 15:38, he refers to the whole account, as we see in verse 37.

I don't see a denial of "inspiration". Please provide the quotation and explain why you arrive at that conclusion.


We can believe whatever we want, but that does not make it true. Look at the context. Find a single reference in the context to speaking with the dead and show it to me.

The reference calls the dead in Christ "living". I believe I can communicate with the living. In addition, correlation with other Scriptures shows that we can communicate with heavenly creatures, that the Saints are aware of those on earth and they are called witnesses.


I have no problem with that, and agree that the whole of Christ's body includes those in heaven and earth, but note nothing in the context of the passage that you quoted even touched on speaking with the dead.

But it does touch on the awareness.

We can easily duplicate the same situation on earth. Let us say that you are in one room and your children in another and you hear one of your children mention to his brother that he is hurt. Since you are aware of him but he is not aware of you, will you ignore his need? Of course not. You love your child.

In the same way, the Saints are our brethren and they love us and are aware of us and they will listen to us and try to help us at every turn.


That approach is a defined logic fallacy. Let me demonstrate the error - I also could say that it does not say that you do not have green hair and pink eyes, therefore you must.

It works both ways however. It does not say I have brown eyes and brown hair. And I do.

Here's the fallacy in which you've fallen. The verse does not address prayer to Saints. The verse you presented says that Jesus is the sheepgate. I believe it. But that doesn't mean that Jesus will prevent his sheep from guiding each other to the sheepgate. Or from assisting each other no matter what side of the sheep gate they are on.

Job 5 1 Call now if there be any that will answer thee, and turn to some of the saints.

Deuteronomy 33

1And this is the blessing, wherewith Moses the man of God blessed the children of Israel before his death. 2And he said, The LORD came from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them; he shined forth from mount Paran, and he came with ten thousands of saints: from his right hand went a fiery law for them. 3Yea, he loved the people; all his saints are in thy hand: and they sat down at thy feet; every one shall receive of thy words.

Note this passage in the KJV which seems to say that God has provided us thousands of saints which sat down at our feet and everyone shall receive our words.

And of course this famous verse by Elisha:
2 Kings 6: 16And he answered, Fear not: for they that be with us are more than they that be with them.17 And Elisha prayed, and said, LORD, I pray thee, open his eyes, that he may see. And the LORD opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw: and, behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha.


Both are equivalent because the passage is not speaking about your hair and eyes, nor is it speaking about communication with the dead.

Correct. It is not addressing communication with the dead. Nor it is addressing communication with the Saints in heaven.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Well, I read Victor Zammit's letter to Billy Graham (and me). The only thing I care to say is to quote:
Rom 1:18-22
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
(KJV)

I know this is referring to idolatry and you will say it dosen't fit. I submit that it does because this man is exalting man's thinking as the ultimate authority. Man can worship intellect as readily as he can a carved image.

Why? Scripture says we should do God's will on earth as it is in heaven. Since it is God's will that we intercede for each other on earth, it follows that the Saints in heaven are already interceding for us because they are doing God's will..



But we have communication between souls in two different states of being. And we see that they are as aware as we or even more so.

To discuss this is a distraction since it has nothing to do with communicating with the dead. You may note that I chose not to respond to many of your comments because they likewise focus on "awareness" and other such things which distract from the topic - which is the prohibition between those alive and dead in the flesh.


I thought I had.
1. The Rich Man is addressing Abraham as "Father". He is communicating with him

Both dead - this has nothing to do with communication between living and dead.


Life after death communication. It is one half of the issue.

No one denied dead can communicate with dead.


We pray to those who are alive after death. Scripture shows that they are aware of events on earth, that they are listening and that they are capable of answering communication.

The point is that it is prohibited, and so far you appear to be avoiding that topic.


A Bible which follows the tradition established by Martin Luther.


Irrelevant. I do not follow His tradition.


So you consider the Deuterocanonicals "reference material"? I wonder why since you believe they contradict the word of God?

Some do, some is interesting and valuable historical reference material. But it is not scriptural. So if you choose to use non-scriptural material such as this, be aware that it will be rejected as authoritative. I notice that you keep bringing up the apochrypha - if you wish to discuss the make-up of the canon, I suggest that you start a new thread, because I will ignore any future arguments of that type in this thread. As in our other discussion, you do appear to have a tendency to try to expand the scope of discussions and thus distract from the key topic.


It is in the martyrology: :
St. Onesiphorus:
Martyr with Porphyrius. Onesiphorus was mentioned in St. Paul's Second Letter to Timothy. According to tradition, they went to Spain in the footsteps of St. Paul and then suffered martyrdom on the Hellespont, under Emperor Domitian. They were tied to wild horses and torn to pieces. Porphyrius was said to be a member of Onesiphorus' household.
St. Onesiphorus - Catholic Online (http://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=4910)

These are once again simply unvalidated claims of your denomination.


Why would St Paul pray for mercy on his soul in the day of judgement if Onesiphorus weren't dead?

I fail to see why you think praying for a future event is a problem.


The reference calls the dead in Christ "living".

You are ignoring the context. No one argues that those who are dead are not alive - whether they are in Christ or not. But that is not the topic of this passage, (which is about the resurrection of the dead), nor does it address the prohibition of communicating between those who are dead in the flesh with those who are alive in the flesh.


Job 5 1 Call now if there be any that will answer thee, and turn to some of the saints.

This has nothing to do with communication with the dead.


Deuteronomy 33
1And this is the blessing, wherewith Moses the man of God blessed the children of Israel before his death. 2And he said, The LORD came from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them; he shined forth from mount Paran, and he came with ten thousands of saints: from his right hand went a fiery law for them. 3Yea, he loved the people; all his saints are in thy hand: and they sat down at thy feet; every one shall receive of thy words.

Note this passage in the KJV which seems to say that God has provided us thousands of saints which sat down at our feet and everyone shall receive our words.

Thousands of saints were at their feet - notice how we today receive their words. Again nothing to do with communication with the dead.


And of course this famous verse by Elisha:
2 Kings 6: 16And he answered, Fear not: for they that be with us are more than they that be with them.17 And Elisha prayed, and said, LORD, I pray thee, open his eyes, that he may see. And the LORD opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw: and, behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha.

Are you saying that you consider angels to be dead people? That is a belief of Mormonism.

To discuss this is a distraction since it has nothing to do with communicating with the dead. You may note that I chose not to respond to many of your comments because they likewise focus on "awareness" and other such things which distract from the topic - which is the prohibition between those alive and dead in the flesh.

Essentially then, you are setting the parameters for the discussion. I believe that awareness is a very cogent subject in this matter.

Obviously, if I believe that someone is aware of my presence and is listening to me, I will speak to that person even if that person can't speak to me. And there is no prohibition my speaking to the Saints. The only prohibition is my speaking to the dead through witchcraft and other satanic mediums.


Both dead - this has nothing to do with communication between living and dead.

I choose to look at it from the Spiritual aspect. Both living:
Romans 8 6 For the wisdom of the flesh is death; but the wisdom of the spirit is life and peace.


No one denied dead can communicate with dead.

Ok.


The point is that it is prohibited, and so far you appear to be avoiding that topic.

By whom and when? Have you posted a verse which prohibits prayer to the Saints?


Irrelevant. I do not follow His tradition.

Then why do you consider the Deuterocanonicals uninspired? Do you follow the Hebrew tradition?


Some do, some is interesting and valuable historical reference material. But it is not scriptural.

Then why is it included in Scripture?


So if you choose to use non-scriptural material such as this, be aware that it will be rejected as authoritative.

So you use unauthoritative documents as references?


I notice that you keep bringing up the apochrypha

We prefer the term "deuterocanon". And I use it because we consider them inspired and they confirm many of our doctrines.


- if you wish to discuss the make-up of the canon, I suggest that you start a new thread, because I will ignore any future arguments of that type in this thread.

You mean you will ignore my explanations. As we have acknowledged before, we use separate criteria and have different assumptions for our beliefs. The most significant of these centers on the belief that the Bible is the only standard of faith.

Here we are having a dispute as to what constitutes the Bible.


As in our other discussion, you do appear to have a tendency to try to expand the scope of discussions and thus distract from the key topic.

I don't see how explaining the support for our doctrine by using a reference from a book which you admit you keep as a reference is expanding the scope of the discussion. It seems you who is focusing on the issue of the inspiration of the Deuterocanon.


These are once again simply unvalidated claims of your denomination.

Again, I am not restricted to Scripture alone. Are you saying that you don't believe in the martyrs. Or that you don't believe in this one particular martyr?


I fail to see why you think praying for a future event is a problem.
Are you saying that St. Paul is anticipating Onesiphorus death and is praying for God's mercy on his soul after he dies in the future? Isn't that the same as praying for his soul after he has passed?


You are ignoring the context. No one argues that those who are dead are not alive - whether they are in Christ or not. But that is not the topic of this passage, (which is about the resurrection of the dead), nor does it address the prohibition of communicating between those who are dead in the flesh with those who are alive in the flesh.

You've brought up that prohibition twice. Please provide the Scripture.


This has nothing to do with communication with the dead.

As I said, I consider them alive in Christ.


Thousands of saints were at their feet - notice how we today receive their words. Again nothing to do with communication with the dead.

I think it says they receive our words. This is confirmed in Revelations:
Revelation 5:8
And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints.


Are you saying that you consider angels to be dead people? That is a belief of Mormonism.

No. We consider angels to be Saints. Have you ever heard of St. Michael, St. Rafael and St. Gabriel? The archangels of the Lord?

We pray to them as well.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Well, I read Victor Zammit's letter to Billy Graham (and me). The only thing I care to say is to quote:
Rom 1:18-22
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
(KJV)

I know this is referring to idolatry and you will say it dosen't fit. I submit that it does because this man is exalting man's thinking as the ultimate authority. Man can worship intellect as readily as he can a carved image.

In my opinion, what I sense him strongly questioning is man's interpretation of the Holy Bible, not God's Word which is infallible. What is being brought out is the ultimate price people had to pay for the misinterpretation of Scripture, such as the Inquisition, wars and other destruction which are against God. Knowing that God is Love and about Love, this cannot be held to a double standard. He also questions why the Church and teachings have suppressed information about the Afterlife when so many have experienced it and there is so much more information coming from that realm through communication which leaders do not wish to reveal, therefore, causing harm later on when a person enters the Afterlife (feeling some may go to "Hell" or most will be kept in "purgatory" as Catholic teachings say). He is ultimately questioning man, not God, but trying to set the record straight about Scripture and man's mis-interpretation of it to justify destructive acts which ultimately hurt others which is very much against God. Many feel the same way since ultimately there is no proof that those who re-interpreted Scripture throughout the ages did so with original Scriptures in hand and without prejudice. The Bible did not write itself nor simply appeared already written. Most unfortunately, man with his prejudices and short-comings interpreted it and re-interpreted it many times until many see that there is a strong possibility of man adding his own feelings and message into it. That, cannot be God's Ultimate Word.

Essentially then, you are setting the parameters for the discussion. I believe that awareness is a very cogent subject in this matter.


The topic is communication between those dead in the flesh and alive in the flesh. Who is aware of what matters not at all. For example, if a man walks along a street and a prostitue becomes aware of him, the man's wife would not care at all. If the man were to call to the prostitute, that would make all the difference in the world. Likewise, who is aware of who does not matter. No sin has been committed until an attempt is made to communicate with the dead, in violation of God's command.


I choose to look at it from the Spiritual aspect. Both living:

It does not matter how you or I choose to look at it. What matters is what God says in His word.


By whom and when? Have you posted a verse which prohibits prayer to the Saints?

Deut 18:10-12
10 There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, or one who practices witchcraft, or a soothsayer, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer, 11 or one who conjures spells, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead.
NKJV

Note: This refers to communication with ANYONE who is dead in the flesh. No exceptions given.


Are you saying that St. Paul is anticipating Onesiphorus death and is praying for God's mercy on his soul after he dies in the future? Isn't that the same as praying for his soul after he has passed?

No. The man is alive.


I think it says they receive our words. This is confirmed in Revelations:
Revelation 5:8
And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints.

Who are the prayers given to? The Lamb - Jesus who is God - no one else.


No. We consider angels to be Saints. Have you ever heard of St. Michael, St. Rafael and St. Gabriel? The archangels of the Lord?

This is irrelevant. The angels are not people who are dead in the flesh, even if you consider them saints contrary to the scriptural usage of the term.


We pray to them as well.

Worship belongs only to God.

Rev 22:8-10
8 Now I, John, saw and heard these things. And when I heard and saw, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel who showed me these things. 9 Then he said to me, "See that you do not do that. For I am your fellow servant, and of your brethren the prophets, and of those who keep the words of this book. Worship God."
NKJV

The topic is communication between those dead in the flesh and alive in the flesh. Who is aware of what matters not at all.

"Awareness" is essential to communication. It would be ridiculous for anyone to try to communicate with someone who wasn't aware of anything.


For example, if a man walks along a street and a prostitue becomes aware of him, the man's wife would not care at all. If the man were to call to the prostitute, that would make all the difference in the world.

This is not relevant to the issue. In this case, one party is not aware of the other. The man is not aware of the prostitute. Scripture is clear that the Saints are aware of us, and we are aware of the Saints.


Likewise, who is aware of who does not matter. No sin has been committed until an attempt is made to communicate with the dead, in violation of God's command.

It does not matter how you or I choose to look at it. What matters is what God says in His word.

Deut 18:10-12
10 There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, or one who practices witchcraft, or a soothsayer, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer, 11 or one who conjures spells, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead.

We know it is God's will that we pray for each other on earth.
1 Thessalonians 5 25 Brethren, pray for us.

Therefore, it must be God's will that those in heaven also pray for those on earth.
Matt 6:10 Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.

And Jesus says that God is not a God of the dead but of the living. And Father Abraham is certainly portrayed in Scripture as living in Heaven.


Note: This refers to communication with ANYONE who is dead in the flesh. No exceptions given.

Through soothsayers and witchery.


No. The man is alive.

But he isn't praying for the man while he's alive but on the day of Judgement.


Who are the prayers given to? The Lamb - Jesus who is God - no one else.

And that is precisely what we ask of the Saints. For their intercession before God.


This is irrelevant. The angels are not people who are dead in the flesh, even if you consider them saints contrary to the scriptural usage of the term.

The word "Saint" means "holy".
Sanctus is the Latin word for holy or saint, and is the name of an important hymn of Christian liturgy.
Sanctus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctus)

SAINT , in Christianity O.Fr., from Latin sanctus =holy, in Christianity, a person who is recognized as worthy of veneration.
Sanctus: Free Encyclopedia Articles at Questia.com Online Library (http://www.questia.com/library/encyclopedia/sanctus.jsp)

Angels are holy are they not?
Mark 8 38 For he that shall be ashamed of me, and of my words, in this adulterous and sinful generation: the Son of man also will be ashamed of him, when he shall come in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.


Worship belongs only to God.

Rev 22:8-10
8 Now I, John, saw and heard these things. And when I heard and saw, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel who showed me these things. 9 Then he said to me, "See that you do not do that. For I am your fellow servant, and of your brethren the prophets, and of those who keep the words of this book. Worship God."
NKJV


Correct. We don't worship the Saints. We honor those whom God has honored:
Genesis 12:3 I will bless them that bless thee, and curse them that curse thee, and IN THEE shall all the kindred of the earth be blessed:

Sincerely,

"Awareness" is essential to communication. It would be ridiculous for anyone to try to communicate with someone who wasn't aware of anything.

But awareness is not communication. You keep ignoring that point.


We know it is God's will that we pray for each other on earth.
1 Thessalonians 5 25 Brethren, pray for us.

We are not dead in the flesh. You keep ignoring that point also.


And Jesus says that God is not a God of the dead but of the living. And Father Abraham is certainly portrayed in Scripture as living in Heaven.

When are you going to read the context of that verse? I keep pointing it out to you. It has zilch todo with communication with those who are dead in the flesh.


Through soothsayers and witchery.

Anyone - no exceptions are given.


But he isn't praying for the man while he's alive but on the day of Judgement.

Sign - he is praying for hiom now while he is alive.


And that is precisely what we ask of the Saints. For their intercession before God.

Communication with the dead is forbidden.

You did not address my point. This is irrelevant. The angels are not people who are dead in the flesh, even if you consider them saints contrary to the scriptural usage of the term.


Correct. We don't worship the Saints.

And prayer is a form of worship.

But awareness is not communication. You keep ignoring that point.

But awareness is essential to communication. You seem to be ignoring that part.


We are not dead in the flesh. You keep ignoring that point also.

The Saints are alive in Christ. You keep ignoring that as well.


When are you going to read the context of that verse? I keep pointing it out to you. It has zilch todo with communication with those who are dead in the flesh.

But it has everything to do with proving that the Saints are alive in heaven. And since the Scriptures also call them witnesses and that means they are aware of our presence and situation. As is also proven by the teaching on Lazarus and the Rich Man where Abraham shows remarkable awareness of the Rich Man's brothers.


Anyone - no exceptions are given.

But the context is "witchcraft". There is a big difference between a medium who conjures up the dead by some unknown force and praying to the Saints in the body of Chrst.


Sign - he is praying for hiom now while he is alive.

I don't agree. It is obvious from the context that St. Paul is concerned for the family in their hour of distress. It is obvious from the context that St. Paul is praying for his soul. And we know from Tradition that St. Onesiphorus was martyred.


Communication with the dead is forbidden.

Conjuring up the dead through black arts is forbidden. Communication with the Saints in Heaven is permitted.


You did not address my point. This is irrelevant. The angels are not people who are dead in the flesh, even if you consider them saints contrary to the scriptural usage of the term.

It is perfectly relevant. And the Scriptures do call the Angels "Holy" which is the meaning of the word "Saint" And Christ says that those in heaven are like the angels:

Matthew 22 30 For in the resurrection they shall neither marry nor be married; but shall be as the angels of God in heaven.


And prayer is a form of worship.

Not always. Prayer is also a form of communication.

Our Church is an ancient Church. Established by Christ Himself. We still use the archaic meaning of words. And "pray" used to mean "ask". We still see it in documents written in Olde English:

Luke 14 18 And they began all at once to make excuse. The first said to him: I have bought a farm, and I must needs go out and see it: I pray thee, hold me excused.

We still use that meaning in the Catholic Church when we speak to the Angels and Saints.

Sincerely,

De Maria

But awareness is essential to communication. You seem to be ignoring that part.

You really make me wonder if you read what I say. Awareness in and of itself means nothing. You need to prove that communication with the dead is permitted and endorsed in scripture - something that you have not and apparently cannot do, or you would have done so long before this.


The Saints are alive in Christ. You keep ignoring that as well.

That doesn't matter. The proibition is against communication with those dead in the flesh. Must I keep repeating that?


But the context is "witchcraft". There is a big difference between a medium who conjures up the dead by some unknown force and praying to the Saints in the body of Chrst.

No difference is given in scripture.


I don't agree. It is obvious from the context that St. Paul is concerned for the family in their hour of distress. It is obvious from the context that St. Paul is praying for his soul. And we know from Tradition that St. Onesiphorus was martyred.

Again, I will go by what scripture says, not your denomination's tradition. The context is clear that he is alive.


Communication with the Saints in Heaven is permitted.

You keep saying this, but I am waiting for scripture which says that.


It is perfectly relevant. And the Scriptures do call the Angels "Holy" which is the meaning of the word "Saint" And Christ says that those in heaven are like the angels:

Sigh. You keep trying to distract from the point. Angels are not dead in the flesh.


Not always. Prayer is also a form of communication.

With God.

You really make me wonder if you read what I say.

Its very simple Tj. You simply don't like what I say and you would rather I not say it.

The simple fact is, you have an outlook for which you think you have evidence upon which to stand.

I'm of the same opinion concerning my outlook.

The difference between you and I is that I provide my opinions and the evidence in support of my opinions without at the same time trying to force you to change yours.


Awareness in and of itself means nothing. You need to prove that communication with the dead is permitted and endorsed in scripture

No, I don't.

I have proven that communication with Saints is permitted and endorsed by the Church in Her Traditions, including Scripture, no matter where they may be.

I have proven that Scripture depicts the Saints in heaven as beings who are aware of their surroundings, of our existence and our circumstances.

I have proven that Scripture calls the Saints "witnesses".

And I have proven that I follow a different standard than you. I have confirmed my standard is also taught in Scripture. That standard being that the Church is our authority to decide disputes (Matt 18:17). And that the Church is called the Pillar of Truth in Scripture (1 Tim 3:15).

Whereas, although you claim your standard is in Scripture, you have not provided the chapter and verse which says one must live by Scripture alone.


- something that you have not and apparently cannot do, or you would have done so long before this.

Because I don't believe in communication with the "dead". I communicate with the Saints who are alive and well in the Body of Christ.

You want to redefine my beliefs.


That doesn't matter. The proibition is against communication with those dead in the flesh. Must I keep repeating that?

No. The prohibition is with soothsaying and witchcraft. The black arts.

The first Christians, who were much closer to the Apostles than the Reformers by 1300 years, they prayed to the Saints in heaven. There is evidence from earliest Church history. Just becaiuse you won't accept this evidence doesn't mean it isn't there.


No difference is given in scripture.

Scripture doesn't even make the comparison. But the Church which canonized the Scriptures does make the comparison and permits prayer to the Saints. And the Scriptures describe this Church as authoritative and truthful.


Again, I will go by what scripture says, not your denomination's tradition. The context is clear that he is alive.

Should we agree to disagree then. Not only on this but on the whole discussion because we seem to be repeating the same things over and over.


You keep saying this, but I am waiting for scripture which says that.

Luke 16depicts the Rich Man crying out to Father Abraham.
It also depicts Father Abraham conversing with the Rich Man and speaking with authority.

Scripture confirms the Saints in heaven are living.
Scripture depicts humans conversing with Angels. Scripture confirms that the Saints in heaven are as the Angels.
Scripture calls the Saints in heaven a "cloud of witnesses". Witnesses are watching and listening and reporting what they hear and see.
Scripture says God's will should be done earth as it is in heaven. Since it is God's will that we pray for each other on earth, that is evidence that the Saints in heaven are already praying for us.


Sigh. You keep trying to distract from the point. Angels are not dead in the flesh.

But Angels are Saints.


With God.

And the Saints.

Should we agree to disagree?

Its very simple Tj. You simply don't like what I say and you would rather I not say it.


No, your outright appear to ignore what I say in many cases and too often use strawman arguments to bolster your point.


I have proven that communication with Saints is permitted and endorsed by the Church in Her Traditions, including Scripture, no matter where they may be.

By the private interpretation of the teachings of your denomination. This is the crux of the matter. That is your standard for doctrine, mine is what scripture says prohibiting communication with those dead in the flesh. Since your establish your standard as being the teachings of your denomination and mine is the scripture, we have no common basis of understanding and no hope of coming to common ground on this issue.


And I have proven that I follow a different standard than you.

Bingo! I'll stick with scripture.


I have confirmed my standard is also taught in Scripture.

I disagree. You have redefined the word "church" to mean your denomination which did not exist at that time.


No. The prohibition is with soothsaying and witchcraft. The black arts.

That is your private interpretation and does not align either with the English or Hebrew texts.


The first Christians, who were much closer to the Apostles than the Reformers by 1300 years, they prayed to the Saints in heaven. There is evidence from earliest Church history. Just becaiuse you won't accept this evidence doesn't mean it isn't there.

I could argue from the early Christians also, but what believers were earlier than those who penned scripture? And we know that scripture is inspired by God and therefore is not a private interpretation of man.


Should we agree to disagree then. Not only on this but on the whole discussion because we seem to be repeating the same things over and over.

Yep. As long as you rely upon your denominational private interpretation as the standard, and I go to the Bible as interpreted by itself, we have no hope of ever coming to common ground.

No, your outright appear to ignore what I say in many cases and too often use strawman arguments to bolster your point.

You keep saying but simply repeating it won't make it so.


By the private interpretation of the teachings of your denomination.

The Church is not private. It is very Public.

Your teachings on the other hand, they are private.


This is the crux of the matter. That is your standard for doctrine, mine is what scripture says prohibiting communication with those dead in the flesh. Since your establish your standard as being the teachings of your denomination and mine is the scripture, we have no common basis of understanding and no hope of coming to common ground on this issue.

Again, your standard is not Scripture but your INTERPRETATION thereof.

A good example would be the Government of the United States. We have a Constitution. But we aren't allowed to interpret it privately. We have a Supreme Court to do that.

The US Government is not wiser than God.

God inspired the Christian Constitution. The Bible. And He has provided one Institution to interpret it, the Church.


Bingo! I'll stick with scripture.

Scripture says:
Matthew 18 17 And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican.

So, if you really stick to Scripture, you'll listen to the Church.


I disagree. You have redefined the word "church" to mean your denomination which did not exist at that time.

Not so. I have identified my Church as the one described in Scripture. Its easy and logical to do so.

After all, Jesus built one Church and He said it would never fail. I believe in Jesus and in His Promises. Therefore, the Church He built is out there. But which is it?

I believe it is the Catholic Church because I went through the Scriptures and identified all the points which described the Church.

Then I went through history and compared the teachings of the early Churches to Scripture. They all believe in Tradition and never heard of Sola Scriptura.


That is your private interpretation and does not align either with the English or Hebrew texts.

I disagree.


I could argue from the early Christians also,

Be my guest.


but what believers were earlier than those who penned scripture?

None. But the believers which followed those who penned Scripture confirm by their behavior what they were taught by those who penned Scripture.


And we know that scripture is inspired by God

Yes. In men.


and therefore is not a private interpretation of man.

Correct. We must strive to interpret Scripture in the same Spirit as those who penned Scripture.


Yep. As long as you rely upon your denominational private interpretation as the standard, and I go to the Bible as interpreted by itself, we have no hope of ever coming to common ground.

Actually, we do. My "interpretation" is based upon the Word of God in Sacred Tradition. That is, in Word and Scripture. Yours is based on the Word of God in Scripture alone. But the Word of God does not contradict. We know the Word of God is not in error. One of us is. All that one has to do is identify the error.

Now, when I used to believe in Sola Scriptura, all I did was go through the centuries and observe that no one believed that doctrine until right before Luther. And Luther picked it up and ran with it.

I believe I've identified the error.

And I have an institution which has stood for 2000 years to back me up.

Sincerely,

The Church is not private. It is very Public.

Scripture refers to a contrast between those that comes from men as private and those that come from the Holy Spirit, not in contrast to public.


Again, your standard is not Scripture but your INTERPRETATION thereof.

Strawman


And He has provided one Institution to interpret it, the Church.

Now if only God had said that in the Bible, you'd have an argument.


After all, Jesus built one Church and He said it would never fail.

The body of all believers is what he said in the Bible, not a denomination.


Then I went through history and compared the teachings of the early Churches to Scripture. They all believe in Tradition and never heard of Sola Scriptura.

You missed some.


None. But the believers which followed those who penned Scripture confirm by their behavior what they were taught by those who penned Scripture.

Scripture was inspired by the Holy Spirit not men.


Correct. We must strive to interpret Scripture in the same Spirit as those who penned Scripture.

No, the Holy Spirit according to scripture is the only one authorized to interpret it.


Actually, we do. My "interpretation" is based upon the Word of God in Sacred Tradition.

I'll stick with the Bible which we are told is the word of God (2 Tim 3:16).


And I have an institution which has stood for 2000 years to back me up.

You follow the teaching and private interpretation of an almost 1700 institution. But age is no proof of accuracy. I'll stick with what the Bible says.

Scripture refers to a contrast between those that comes from men as private and those that come from the Holy Spirit, not in contrast to public.

No. The contrast is between those that come from men alone

21 For prophecy came not by the will of man at any time:

And those that come from holy men of God inspired by the Holy Spirit:

but the holy men of God spoke, inspired by the Holy Ghost.


Now if only God had said that in the Bible, you'd have an argument.

He did when He said, "take him to the Church" to settle disputes (Matt 18:17).


The body of all believers is what he said in the Bible, not a denomination.

Where? I see where He built a Church and gave Her the authority to bind and loose:

Matthew 18 18 Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven.


You missed some.

Again, you make statements without support. I provided the historical and Scriptural evidence. All you have to say is, "you missed some".


Scripture was inspired by the Holy Spirit not men.

The Word of God was spoken and written by Holy men of God inspired by the Holy Spirit.


No, the Holy Spirit according to scripture is the only one authorized to interpret it.

Where does Scripture say that?

2 Timothy 2 15 Carefully study to present thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.


I'll stick with the Bible which we are told is the word of God (2 Tim 3:16).

I'll stick with the Church which contains the Bible which She canonized and the New Testament which She wrote because Scripture says She is the Pillar of Truth.


You follow the teaching and private interpretation of an almost 1700 institution. But age is no proof of accuracy. I'll stick with what the Bible says.

Truth stands the test of time.

Sincerely,

No. The contrast is between those that come from men alone

Sigh... I cannmot help you if we cannot deal with what scripture says. There is nothing about public vs private in that passage.


He did when He said, "take him to the Church" to settle disputes (Matt 18:17).

Are we going to keep going around in circles forever? How many times must I refute that?


Where? I see where He built a Church and gave Her the authority to bind and loose:

The body of all believers. Not a denomination.


Again, you make statements without support. I provided the historical and Scriptural evidence. All you have to say is, "you missed some".

Tell me why I should waste my time when you ignore anything that I write, keep asking me to repeat it over and over and post strawman arguments? Show me that it is worth my effort, and maybe I will help you further. But up to now, I have seen no interest from you in actually dealing with what I have had to say.


I'll stick with the Church which contains the Bible which She canonized and the New Testament which She wrote because Scripture says She is the Pillar of Truth.

No denomination, including yours existed at the time that scripture was written.

sigh... I cannmot help you if we cannot deal with what scripture says. There is nothing about public vs private in that passage.

Message #125, You said:
Scripture refers to a contrast between those that comes from men as private and those that come from the Holy Spirit, not in contrast to public.

I responded:

Message #126,

No. The contrast is between those that come from men alone

21 For prophecy came not by the will of man at any time:

and those that come from holy men of God inspired by the Holy Spirit:

but the holy men of God spoke, inspired by the Holy Ghost.

Now, if something isn't private, it is public. And the Scriptures weren't meant for anyone to take aside to himself, "privately" and interpret them by eschewing the rest of the world. And the Church is not a private matter either. God didn't call us to Himself by ourself. We are to join His Church and believe His teachings which are passed down by His Church in Word and Scripture. So, interpretation of the Word of God in Traditon and Scripture is a very PUBLIC matter indeed.


Are we going to keep going around in circles forever? How many times must I refute that?

I don't see any refutation.


The body of all believers. Not a denomination.

I believe it is precisely the denomination now called the Catholic Church. I realize you don't agree, but you have yet to trace your beliefs to the Scriptures or to the early Church. Whereas I have traced the beliefs of the Catholic Church to both.


Tell me why I should waste my time when you ignore anything that I write, keep asking me to repeat it over and over and post strawman arguments? Show me that it is worth my effort, and maybe I will help you further. But up to now, I have seen no interest from you in actually dealing with what I have had to say.

Its just an exchange of information. You don't have to convince me, I don't have to convince you. Just explain your side, I'll explain mine. Hopefully, our conversation will be edifying to those who are interested in the matter.

Although, if you feel it is time to agree to disagree, that is fine also.


No denomination, including yours existed at the time that scripture was written.

I believe the Catholic Church did exist in Apostolic Times. I believe the Catholic Church is the Apostolic Church.

Sincerely,

Now, if something isn't private, it is public. That is your private interpretation but that is not what scripture says. If "public" interpretation was okay, then you would be required to accept the interpretation of any group (whoever they are) that chooses to discuss it publicly.


I don't see any refutation.

I am not surprised. You have not see a lot of things.


I believe it is precisely the denomination now called the Catholic Church.
You can believe what you wish - that does not make it true.


I realize you don't agree, but you have yet to trace your beliefs to the Scriptures or to the early Church. Whereas I have traced the beliefs of the Catholic Church to both.

You have yet to acknowledge or deal with what I have posted in this regard. That does not mean that I did not post it.


Its just an exchange of information. You don't have to convince me, I don't have to convince you. Just explain your side, I'll explain mine. Hopefully, our conversation will be edifying to those who are interested in the matter.

It makes no sense if you are are not discussing or responding to what I am saying.


I believe the Catholic Church did exist in Apostolic Times. I believe the Catholic Church is the Apostolic Church.

Believe as you wish - history and even your Cardinal John H. Newman disagree.

As I said in the other thread, since you refuse to actually discuss anything from scripture but rather simply promote the private interpretation of your denomination, and refuse to consider the responses, but rather just repeat the same old same old, I see no value in continuing.

I will stand on what God's word says, not the private interpretation of your denomination or any other denomination.

That is your private interpretation but that is not what scripture says. If "public" interpretation was okay, then you would be required to accept the interpretation of any group (whoever they are) that chooses to discuss it publicly.

Not so. But the Apostles did expect you to accept the public interpretation of the Word of God that they passed on.

Acts Of Apostles 4 31 And when they had prayed, the place was moved wherein they were assembled; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spoke the word of God with confidence.

Acts Of Apostles 8 4 They therefore that were dispersed, went about preaching the word of God.


You can believe what you wish - that does not make it true.

But it doesn't make it false, either.


You have yet to acknowledge or deal with what I have posted in this regard. That does not mean that I did not post it.

It makes no sense if you are are not discussing or responding to what I am saying.



Believe as you wish - history and even your Cardinal John H. Newman disagree.

As I said in the other thread, since you refuse to actually discuss anything from scripture but rather simply promote the private interpretation of your denomination, and refuse to consider the responses, but rather just repeat the same old same old, I see no value in continuing.

I will stand on what God's word says, not the private interpretation of your denomination or any other denomination.

Thanks for taking time out of your day to respond to my messages. Sounds like we've come to the end of the road on this discussion as well.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Not so. But the Apostles did expect you to accept the public interpretation of the Word of God that they passed on.
They did not say public. That is your private interpretation.



Thanks for taking time out of your day to respond to my messages. Sounds like we've come to the end of the road on this discussion as well.

It appears so.