Derf
Well-known member
Are you talking to me? Please include a quote from a post of mine or tag me with the "@" before my user name.Sorry for my delay. Did you read the article?
I read your article. It's not persuasive.
Are you talking to me? Please include a quote from a post of mine or tag me with the "@" before my user name.Sorry for my delay. Did you read the article?
Are you talking to me? Please include a quote from a post of mine or tag me with the "@" before my user name.
I read your article. It's not persuasive.
Of course you would think that, since you posted the article. The problem is the article mostly assumed the saints are "alive" in some spiritual form without any proof. Then it tried to prove the other things about them receiving prayers could happen, but mostly it was an appeal to new characteristics that weren't proven biblically. That won't bother you, I'm sure, since you are quite willing to accept extra-biblical authority.Really. So despite all the scriptures that note that saints are alive and well in the spirit. you don't think that they are?
So if there's even one scripture that talks about non-corporeal beings resting or sleeping, you'll retract this paragraph?And how about the very nature of spiritual beings themselves? Sleep and Rest are things that corporeal beings do. Spirits do not sleep because they have no need of sleep. They do not have physical bodies that need nutrition and rest and so on. The idea that spirits of those who have died before are somehow in some sort of unconscious state is a bit of a physiological absurdity. Theologically, a spiritual being - and that's what angels and saints are, spiritual - does not sleep. Plus we have the preponderance of scriptures which note that state saints in heaven are alive and well and aware. So I am not quite sure what it is that you are not persuaded by.
Hahahahahahahahaha!But that is okay. I am not here to convert people or proselytize.
The assumption you're making is that any human can actually go anywhere without a body. The author of your article admitted this is a problem, without realizing it: "These twenty-four elders are human beings in heaven". A human being that is a spirit without a body is not a human being. The son of God became a human being, which we are celebrating today, by taking on a human body--that's why it's called the "incarnation".I believe scripture is clear that when you die you are judged by God for heaven or hell and if you go to heaven, or even if you go to hell, your spirit is alive and well immortal.
And if you go to heaven, just like the angels are aware of what happens on earth (Luke 15:10) the Saints are as well.
So if there's even one scripture that talks about non-corporeal beings resting or sleeping, you'll retract this paragraph?
The assumption you're making is that any human can actually go anywhere without a body
We'll return to this statement a number of times, no doubt, but Rev 6:9 speaks of souls that rest. Some translations say “wait”, but that doesn’t fit your description that there is no time for those in heaven.There is no scripture that when properly interpreted that says such a thing.
I’m fine with friendly disagreements, but to start out that way seems odd for a debate forum. Are you getting your position from biblical or non biblical sources?When the body dies, your spirit lives on. If you don't believe that then we are certainly done with this conversation, a friendly irreconcilable disagreement.
And you know this how? Angels go from here to there, why not saints?In the spiritual realm there is no "where" or "here" or "there". Spirit is spirit. Spirit does no go from "here" to "there" as we would recon things in the physical realm.
The judgment I’ve read about and that Jesus talked about was following something called “resurrection”. Resurrection doesn’t make sense unless some part of us died and came back to life. Bodiless spirits that never died haven’t experienced any sort of resurrection.When you die and your are judged your spirit either remains in blessed union with God (heaven) or eternally separated from God (hell). It does not physically "go" anywhere.
. . . It is clear the Christian has approached a number of heavenly beings: the heavenly Jerusalem, the angels, God the judge, and Jesus the mediator. “The assembly and church of the firstborn who have been enrolled in heaven” and the phrase “spirits of righteous ones who have been made perfect” can refer only to the saints in heaven.First, they are spirits, not flesh and blood. Second, they are righteous people, presumably made righteous by Jesus Christ, “who is our righteousness.” Third, they have been made perfect. The only place where spirits of perfected righteous people can dwell is heaven.Furthermore, “spirits of righteous ones who have been made perfect” is a perfect definition of the saints in heaven. This passage is saying that, just as Christians approach the angels, God the judge, Jesus Christ, and his saving blood, so also must we approach the saints in heaven.
Does the Bible say we should approach the saints with our prayers? Yes, in two places. In Revelation 5:8
Approach can certainly mean more than “pray to”, don’t you think? And just because the saints and angels pour out the prayer incense, doesn’t mean we are told to pray or even approach to saints and angels.Similarly, in Revelation 8:3-4 we are told that something similar happened when the Lamb opened the seventh seal of the book: “Another angel came and stood on the altar, having a golden censer
I’m fine with friendly disagreements, but to start out that way seems odd for a debate forum. Are you getting your position from biblical or non biblical sources?
But you agree that all believers benefit from reading the scriptures personally, right?THAT question is a loaded question believe it or not, and because I am constrained for time I am going to address that one point and leave the others for a little bit later.
YES, I believe that I have pointed to many scriptures that support my point of view. But there is also a larger issue, Authority, which is where these discussions end up sometimes.
That discussion is: Who has the authority or the final say about what the scriptures actually say: Is it each individual, which has resulted in thousands of denominations with thousands of conflicting doctrines in the Protestant world? Or does that final Authority reside with the Church, i.e. the successors of Peter and the apostles who carry with them the authority to teach that was given to them by Jesus?
As a Catholic, and I may speak for the Orthodox here as well, I believe the latter and not the former because that is also what the Bible teaches.
So there's a double shot for you:
The Bible supports my point of view
The Bible supports the authority Church which has proclaimed such things to be Doctrine
Maybe the Authority issue is a better one to address. Here is a link to that discussion.
I suppose you realize that such diversity of faith drove the founding of our nation--on principles different than any nation founded by RCC proponents??Is it each individual, which has resulted in thousands of denominations with thousands of conflicting doctrines in the Protestant world?
Where unquestioning allegiance has led to many, many atrocities against true believers?Or does that final Authority reside with the Church, i.e. the successors of Peter and the apostles who carry with them the authority to teach that was given to them by Jesus?
But you agree that all believers benefit from reading the scriptures personally, right?