What IS MATT 16:18 REALLY TEACHING ?

[ozso]

Actually Psalm 103 addresses the angels in Heaven. Catholics believe the Psalms are God-breathed. We don't question "why" the Lord says we are to pray for one another, we believe the Word of God.

I know about Psalm 103:20 and James 5:16. I've been over all this before numerous times. Neither supports praying to Mary. Reading something into scripture that's not really there is not believing in the word of God. It's trying to make the word of God fit a man made idea.

The SDA do the same exact thing. I've debated with Catholics and SDA extensively and the reading things into scripture that's not there is virtually the same.

 

[Valletta]

I know about Psalm 103:20 and James 5:16. I've been over all this before numerous times. Neither has anything to do with praying to Mary. Reading something into scripture that's not really there is not believing in the word of God. It's trying to make the word of God fit a man made idea.

We address the angels in Heaven when we pray Psalm 103. Those in Heaven are alive, not dead, and asking Mary or the angels to pray for us is a good thing according to the Word of God. I understand many Christians have dropped this practice, I don't know whether it was during the reformation or after. The benefit of intercessory prayer was realized by Christians for most of Christianity. Saint Augustine explained it well:

“A Christian people celebrates together in religious solemnity the memorials of the martyrs, both to encourage their being imitated and so that it can share in their merits and be aided by their prayers” (Against Faustus the Manichean [A.D. 400]).

“At the Lord’s table we do not commemorate martyrs in the same way that we do others who rest in peace so as to pray for them, but rather that they may pray for us that we may follow in their footsteps” (Homilies on John 84 [A.D. 416]).

 

[ozso]

Mary makes requests on our behalf. She made a request for others when Jesus performed the miracle of Cana, she told Jesus they were out of wine. Even though Jesus told her His time had not yet come, she did not withdraw her request, she made it clear she would accept whatever response Jesus gave. Asking those in Heaven to pray for us is an old practice, going back as far as Psalm 103. I know many Christians have dropped the practice, that is their choice. Of course a personal relationship with Jesus is at the heart of Catholicism and I do make prayer requests directly to Jesus, but Holy Scripture tells us to pray for one another and I take the Word of God seriously.

I've already addressed this. There is absolutely nothing whatsoever in scripture that supports praying to Mary. The saying that John 2:1-11, Psalm 103:20 and James 5:16 does, isn't just eisegesis, it's really bad eisegesis. I'm sorry, I don't mean to be hurtful, but it just simply is not there in scripture. It is a 5th century man made contrivance.

 

[Valletta]

I've already addressed this. There is absolutely nothing whatsoever in scripture that supports praying to Mary. The saying that Psalm 103:20 and James 5:16 does, isn't just eisegesis, it's really bad eisegesis.

Incorrect. I strongly disagree with your personal interpretation of Scripture.

 

[ozso]

Incorrect. I strongly disagree with your personal interpretation of Scripture.

In order to stay faithful to Catholocism, you don't really have any choice in the matter. You have to go with what the RCC says even when it's clearly not there. That's why I can't become a Catholic. I can not agree that scripture says something when it does not. That's not even an interpretation. It's just not seeing what is not there.

 

[One God and Father of All]

In order to stay faithful to Catholocism, you don't really have any choice in the matter. You have to go with what the RCC says even when it's clearly not there. That's why I can't become a Catholic. I can not agree that scripture says something when it does not. That's not even an interpretation. It's just not seeing what is not there.

You know it’s not there, I know it’s not there and anyone who reads it will know it’s not there. It’s a phantom of his imagination.

 

[Valletta]

In order to stay faithful to Catholocism, you don't really have any choice in the matter. You have to go with what the RCC says even when it's clearly not there. That's why I can't become a Catholic. I can not agree that scripture says something when it does not. That's not even an interpretation. It's just not seeing what is not there.

The Catholic Church has rarely made a specific interpretation of a Biblical passage, I believe in the single digits times in almost 2000 years. Catholics have a wide variety of opinions about many Biblical passages. But I just can't deny that we address the angels in the Psalm. Why would the angels even be mentioned if they could not hear the prayers? It just doesn't make any sense. And I know from the Bible we are to pray for one another. I can't pretend it isn't right there in Holy Scripture. The "communion of saints" is in our Creed as well.

 

[ozso]

You know it’s not there, I know it’s not there and anyone who reads it will know it’s not there. It’s a phantom of his imagination.

I wouldn't make this personal as it applies to most. If one wants to be a faithful member of a particular denomination, one has to fully agree with and accept what that denomination says and defend it.

 

[ozso]

The Catholic Church has rarely made a specific interpretation of a Biblical passage, I believe in the single digits times in almost 2000 years. Catholics have a wide variety of opinions about many Biblical passages. But I just can't deny that we address the angels in the Psalm. Why would the angels even be mentioned if they could not hear the prayers? It just doesn't make any sense. And I know from the Bible we are to pray for one another. I can't pretend it isn't right there in Holy Scripture. The "communion of saints" is in our Creed as well.

Other than a few certain specific Catholic doctrines, beliefs, practices you and I probably would agree on many things regarding Christianity.

As for Psalm 103:20 it's just one verse out of 2461 verses in Psalms. And it's just a brief little added on salutation, not an entire prayer, all of the rest of it is to the Lord. There's simply no instance whatsoever of someone faithful to God regularly praying to and or conversing with the spirit of someone who died.

The only instance remotely close to it is when King Saul and a Witch held a seance (1 Samuel 28). I mean think about that. The only example of conversing with the spirit of someone who died in all of scripture was a matter of witchcraft being practiced.

 

[One God and Father of All]

When the Bible speaks of praying for one another it refers to the living praying for the other living. There is no indication in the N.T. Of anyone praying to someone who died.
There is one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus.

The Catholics invented another mediator. So instead of believing that there is only one mediator they now have two..
A mediator is a go-between . In the case of Christ, he is the only(there is one) go-between God and man.
Praying to Mary makes Mary a go-between because prayer is petition to God.

 

[RandyPNW]

You are aware that James only believed Jesus is God only after the resurrection?

Yes, I know the story, though I wouldn't claim to know more than a few details. Even Jesus' disciples did not fully show cognizance of his Messianic role until after the resurrection. Spirituality is not conditioned on a full knowledge of events. It is a focus on and a knowledge of God, even if there is not a full awareness of what God is doing presently.

I wouldn't at all say that James was a pagan unbeliever in his upbringing, though that appears to be your inference? Not knowing his older brother's place as Messiah, or skepticism about it, is not the same thing as pagan unbelief! Mary clearly knew the prophecies about her son Jesus. And so, James had to be aware, as well. But James was subject to the same kind of skepticism and critical attitude that affects all of us.

I don't think James stepped into his Christian role out of paganism, or out of failure to believe in God. Under the Law James was probably fairly upright in his upbringing. Coming into a full knowledge of who is older brother was had to be an earth-shaking experience, even if he had long known of the prophecies surrounding him!

Reading James is an eye-opening experience, as he shows a full capture of Jesus' message in the light of Judaism. There is not a hint of jealousy or doubt at that point! I can't think of a more advanced or mature essence in a Christian letter. And James was not even one of the 12 chosen apostles!

I am not saying Peter "caused" the diminishing of Israel, I am saying his status "correlated" with the state of Israel in God's eyes.

You know the correlation does not imply causation point?

Yes, I understand--thank you. I just don't agree that there is any real correlation, caused or not. Peter did not diminish. Israel did. Peter is still being read today, with great admiration. Israel is still viewed as a rejected people.

 

[One God and Father of All]

Yes, I know the story, though I wouldn't claim to know more than a few details. Even Jesus' disciples did not fully show cognizance of his Messianic role until after the resurrection. Spirituality is not conditioned on a full knowledge of events. It is a focus on and a knowledge of God, even if there is not a full awareness of what God is doing presently.

I wouldn't at all say that James was a pagan unbeliever in his upbringing, though that appears to be your inference? Not knowing his older brother's place as Messiah, or skepticism about it, is not the same thing as pagan unbelief! Mary clearly knew the prophecies about her son Jesus. And so, James had to be aware, as well. But James was subject to the same kind of skepticism and critical attitude that affects all of us.

I don't think James stepped into his Christian role out of paganism, or out of failure to believe in God. Under the Law James was probably fairly upright in his upbringing. Coming into a full knowledge of who is older brother was had to be an earth-shaking experience, even if he had long known of the prophecies surrounding him!

Reading James is an eye-opening experience, as he shows a full capture of Jesus' message in the light of Judaism. There is not a hint of jealousy or doubt at that point! I can't think of a more advanced or mature essence in a Christian letter. And James was not even one of the 12 chosen apostles!

Yes, I understand--thank you. I just don't agree that there is any real correlation, caused or not. Peter did not diminish. Israel did. Peter is still being read today, with great admiration. Israel is still viewed as a rejected people.

Oh, that’s another thing. Catholics say that Jesus had no siblings. When the Bible says that he did have siblings the RCC says they were his cousins. It gets even worse than that.

 

[Valletta]

Other than a few certain specific Catholic doctrines, beliefs, practices you and I probably would agree on many things regarding Christianity.

As for Psalm 103:20 it's just one verse out of 2461 verses in Psalms. And it's just a brief little added on salutation, not an entire prayer, all of the rest of it is to the Lord. There's simply no instance whatsoever of someone faithful to God regularly praying to and or conversing with the spirit of someone who died.

The only instance remotely close to it is when King Saul and a Witch held a seance (1 Samuel 28). I mean think about that. The only example of conversing with the spirit of someone who died in all of scripture was a matter of witchcraft being practiced.

The saints were not in Heaven in OT times. It's just a very rare example in OT times that shows the angels in Heaven can hear our prayers. It would be foolish to address the angels if they could not hear the prayers. We pray portions of Psalms at mass. Revelation shows the prayers of the saints, and asking for intercession from those in Heaven was an early Christian practice.

“In this way is he always pure for prayer. He also prays in the society of angels, as being already of angelic rank, and he is never out of their holy keeping; and though he pray alone, he has the choir of the saints standing with him [in prayer]” Clement of Alexandria (Miscellanies 7:12 [A.D. 208]).

"Neither are the souls of the pious dead separated from the Church, which even now is the Kingdom of Christ. Otherwise there would be no remembrance of them at the altar of God in the communication of the Body of Christ. " St. Augustine (354 - 430)

 

[ozso]

Oh, that’s another thing. Catholics say that Jesus had no siblings. When the Bible says that he did have siblings the RCC says they were his cousins. It gets even worse than that.

That of course is because of the many things Catholicism came up with about Mary including her being a perpetual virgin. Along with being an immaculate conception, the queen of heaven etc. Fortunately, as far as I know, when it comes to Jesus himself, nothing extrabiblical was added on.

 

[ozso]

The saints were not in Heaven in OT times. It's just a very rare example in OT times that shows the angels in Heaven can hear our prayers. It would be foolish to address the angels if they could not hear the prayers. We pray portions of Psalms at mass. Revelation shows the prayers of the saints, and asking for intercession from those in Heaven was an early Christian practice.

I'm sure there's a great deal of focus on Psalm 103:20 since an entire complex practice and doctrine is built upon that single verse.

“In this way is he always pure for prayer. He also prays in the society of angels, as being already of angelic rank, and he is never out of their holy keeping; and though he pray alone, he has the choir of the saints standing with him [in prayer]” Clement of Alexandria (Miscellanies 7:12 [A.D. 208]).

He, attracted by his own hope, tastes not the good things that are in the world, entertaining a noble contempt for all things here; pitying those that are chastised after death, who through punishment unwillingly make confession; having a clear conscience with reference to his departure, and being always ready, as a stranger and pilgrim, with regard to the inheritances here; mindful only of those that are his own, and regarding all things here as not his own; not only admiring the Lord's commandments, but, so to speak, being by knowledge itself partaker of the divine will; a truly chosen intimate of the Lord and His commands in virtue of being righteous; and princely and kingly as being a Gnostic; despising all the gold on earth and under the earth, and dominion from shore to shore of ocean, so that he may cling to the sole service of the Lord. Wherefore also, in eating, and drinking, and marrying (if the Word enjoin), and even in seeing dreams, he does and thinks what is holy.

So is he always pure for prayer. He also prays in the society of angels, as being already of angelic rank, and he is never out of their holy keeping; and though he pray alone, he has the choir of the saints standing with him.

CHURCH FATHERS: The Stromata (Clement of Alexandria)

Featuring the Church Fathers, Catholic Encyclopedia, Summa Theologica and more.

www.newadvent.org

"Neither are the souls of the pious dead separated from the Church, which even now is the Kingdom of Christ. Otherwise there would be no remembrance of them at the altar of God in the communication of the Body of Christ. " St. Augustine (354 - 430)

Yeah one has to go centuries away from the timeline of the NT and the early Church to start finding support for the practice. It's a real head scratcher as why no one in scripture nor any apostolic father nor directly succeeding early church father said one iota about the Pope, Mary and praying to the souls of the dead. Nothing nada zip zero zilch.

 

[One God and Father of All]

That of course is because of the many things Catholicism came up with about Mary including her being a perpetual virgin. Along with being an immaculate conception, the queen of heaven etc. Fortunately, as far as I know, when it comes to Jesus himself, nothing extrabiblical was added on.

I wonder how Mary’s mother gave birth to a child who was free of what they call “original sin”. Was Mary’ mother free of “original sin”.

I ask because the Bible never teaches anything about it.

 

[Valletta]

I'm sure there's a great deal of focus on Psalm 103:20 since an entire complex practice and doctrine is built upon that single verse.

Actually there's very little focus, it happens to be the oldest example and comes up when people incorrectly claim there is nothing in the Bible about intercessory prayers or claiming those in Heaven can't hear us.

 

[Valletta]

Yeah one has to go centuries away from the timeline of the NT and the early Church to start finding support for the practice. It's a real head scratcher as why no one in scripture nor any apostolic father nor directly succeeding early church father said one iota about the Pope, Mary and praying to the souls of the dead. Nothing nada zip zero zilch.

One does not need to do so to find intercessory prayer:

“[The Shepherd said:] ‘But those who are weak and slothful in prayer, hesitate to ask anything from the Lord; but the Lord is full of compassion, and gives without fail to all who ask him. But you, [Hermas,] having been strengthened by the holy angel [you saw], and having obtained from him such intercession, and not being slothful, why do not you ask of the Lord understanding, and receive it from him?’” (The Shepherd 3:5:4 [A.D. 80])..

Revelation 5:8 And when he had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and with golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints;
RSVCE

 

[Guojing]

Yes, I understand--thank you. I just don't agree that there is any real correlation, caused or not. Peter did not diminish. Israel did. Peter is still being read today, with great admiration. Israel is still viewed as a rejected people.

If Peter status had not diminished, he would have be the one heading the Jerusalem council instead in Acts 15.

If Peter status had not diminished, he would not have been afraid of the men from James, after that event, as recorded in Galatians 2:12.

If Peter status had not diminished, it would be Peter and the elders that Paul would be meeting in Acts 21:18.

Whether his letters are being read today or not, has nothing to do with the above reading of Acts.

 

[The Liturgist]

Then why was he was listed among the first of the apostles, and all of the early Church Fathers thought of the Church of Rome as chief of the Churches throughout the ancient world?

To be clear they regarded Rome as having a primacy of honor, along with the other two Petrine Sees, Antioch and Alexandria.

Canons VI and VII of Nicaea explicitly declare that these three sees, along with the newly rebuilt Jerusalem, as having essentially the same rights and authority.

One reason the early Roman church was also highly regarded is because it was extremely traditional and conservative from a liturgical perspective. It had already compromised this reputation to some extent by the reign of Pope St. Gregory I Diologos, known also as St. Gregory the Great, who greatly repaired relations with the church in Constantinople as he had served for many years as a legate there, and also who wrote the Presanctified Liturgy which became standard in both the Roman Rite and the Byzantine Rite liturgies, along with other contributions, for example implementing a system of chant in Rome similar to the eight mode Byzantine system (this had already existed in Milan as Ambrosian Chant, where it was introduced by St. Ambrose the Great during a vigil in 386 to prevent the Arians from taking over one of his basilicas).