Sister Nyaatha To Be Beatified

[Bella]

Daily Bread: Maybe when you find the verse forbidding intercession, I will respond to the verses. I just dont see the point of responding to irrelevant verses to this discussion, though. 

[vooke]

It's no surprise all the quotations you can come up with are from the intertesamental period, after Malachi and before Matthew.

So you admit your "4,000" year claim was bunk.

Apocrypha, summarily dismissed by Jesus himself.

Chapter and verse, please. I would like to see Jesus "summarily" dismissing the books of the Septuagint read all over Palestinian synanogues in Jesus' day. I must have missed that verse in over 10 years of reading the Gospels.

Those 'oral' traditions EVOLVED from Babylon that's why there is zero trace of them before captivity

Another arbitrary claim, arbitrarily denied.

Am saying we have 4,000 years of God's relationship with man documented in the scriptures and ZERO prayers to the dead yet prayer is a central theme.

If you are intellectually honest, dig about Judaism history With careful attention to Captivity. There was no prayer to dead men before captivity

[Bella]

Am saying we have 4,000 years of God's relationship with man documented in the scriptures and ZERO prayers to the dead yet prayer is a central theme.

In other words, you are saying I have FIRST to reject books you have rejected on your own authority and cut off from scripture, and THEN consider those you have kept, and THEN I'll be able to see your point about "4,000 years of scripture"!?!?!?! I mean, how about first you just accept there's more books than you like, and then see MY point? See how esay it is to pretend to make points without establishing the premises? And by the way, you claimed Jesus dismissed them summarily: IF anything is DISHONEST, that certainly is dishonest, otherwise, find the chapter/verse, s'il vous plait!

If you are intellectually honest, dig about Judaism history With careful attention to Captivity. There was no prayer to dead men before captivity

If you are intellectually honest, first establish WHY you have put a cut off point at which ancient Jewish practices, beliefs and books become irrelevant?

[vooke]

Luke 11:50-51 (ESV)
50 so that the blood of all the prophets, shed from the foundation of the world, may be charged against this generation, 51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who perished between the altar and the sanctuary. Yes, I tell you, it will be required of this generation.

Pay attention to this verse;
1. The blood of ALL the prophets
2. From Abel in Genesis to Zechariah-2 Chronicles 24:20

Where is your beloved apocrypha?

[Bella]

Luke 11:50-51 (ESV)
50 so that the blood of all the prophets, shed from the foundation of the world, may be charged against this generation, 51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who perished between the altar and the sanctuary. Yes, I tell you, it will be required of this generation.

Pay attention to this verse;
1. The blood of ALL the prophets
2. From Abel in Genesis to Zechariah-2 Chronicles 24:20

Where is your beloved apocrypha?

1) Which prophet do you think is missing there?

2) Are you saying that you know the exact arrangement of books used in that particular canon he cited?

3) Jews had NO SETTLED canon when Jesus walked the earth. Jesus when condemning the Sadduccees only cited the 5 books of the Torah because the Sadduccess rejected the other books, and when he condemned the Pharisees, he cited the books that the Pharisees accepted. I don't see a condemnation there, only much "reading-into" the bible to support a position already believed.

[vooke]

Luke 11:50-51 (ESV)
50 so that the blood of all the prophets, shed from the foundation of the world, may be charged against this generation, 51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who perished between the altar and the sanctuary. Yes, I tell you, it will be required of this generation.

Pay attention to this verse;
1. The blood of ALL the prophets
2. From Abel in Genesis to Zechariah-2 Chronicles 24:20

Where is your beloved apocrypha?

Which prophet do you think is missing there?

Jewish Hebrew canon my sista, that's how they arranged it, unlike us who terminate at Malachi. Now, from history, we can easily CONFIRM Jesus' words. All God's prophets slain by the Jews are contained here.

[Bella]

Luke 11:50-51 (ESV)
50 so that the blood of all the prophets, shed from the foundation of the world, may be charged against this generation, 51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who perished between the altar and the sanctuary. Yes, I tell you, it will be required of this generation.

Pay attention to this verse;
1. The blood of ALL the prophets
2. From Abel in Genesis to Zechariah-2 Chronicles 24:20

Where is your beloved apocrypha?

Which prophet do you think is missing there?

Jewish Hebrew canon my sista, that's how they arranged it, unlike us who terminate at Malachi. Now, from history, we can easily CONFIRM Jesus' words. All God's prophets slain by the Jews are contained here.

Jews had nothing close to a closed canon in Jesus' day, much less a canon accepted by all. It was Christians who first closed the Canon, and they did this simply by accepting all the books used by Jews in the septuagint and not playing God. Jews had no reason to expect that God would not be sending prophets any more. And Jesus cited books to groups according to the books those groups accepted. Thus, he never cited prophets to Sadduccees, because they only recognized the 5 Torah books, only to Pharisees. There's no "summary dismissal" there, only you are reading things into that verse. Jesus would have to have been stupid to quote prophets to Sadduccees or to quote to Pharisees books they didnt already accept while debating them. If he had said that to his own disciples, you'd have a point.

[vooke]

Jews had nothing close to a closed canon in Jesus' day, much less a canon accepted by all. It was Christians who first closed the Canon, and they did this simply by accepting all the books used by Jews in the septuagint and not playing God. Jews had no reason to expect that God would not be sending prophets any more. And Jesus cited books to groups according to the books those groups accepted. Thus, he never cited prophets to Sadduccees, because they only recognized the 5 Torah books, only to Pharisees. There's no "summary dismissal" there, only you are reading things into that verse. Jesus would have to have been stupid to quote prophets to Sadduccees or to quote to Pharisees books they didnt already accept while debating them. If he had said that to his own disciples, you'd have a point.

ALL Prophets are those found in whatever Jesus said. Am going with Jesus on this one

[Bella]

Luke 11:50-51 (ESV)
50 so that the blood of all the prophets, shed from the foundation of the world, may be charged against this generation, 51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who perished between the altar and the sanctuary. Yes, I tell you, it will be required of this generation.

Pay attention to this verse;
1. The blood of ALL the prophets
2. From Abel in Genesis to Zechariah-2 Chronicles 24:20

Where is your beloved apocrypha?

Which prophet do you think is missing there?

Jewish Hebrew canon my sista, that's how they arranged it, unlike us who terminate at Malachi. Now, from history, we can easily CONFIRM Jesus' words. All God's prophets slain by the Jews are contained here.

Also, quote just what you mean, that page is far too large.

Jews had nothing close to a closed canon in Jesus' day, much less a canon accepted by all. It was Christians who first closed the Canon, and they did this simply by accepting all the books used by Jews in the septuagint and not playing God. Jews had no reason to expect that God would not be sending prophets any more. And Jesus cited books to groups according to the books those groups accepted. Thus, he never cited prophets to Sadduccees, because they only recognized the 5 Torah books, only to Pharisees. There's no "summary dismissal" there, only you are reading things into that verse. Jesus would have to have been stupid to quote prophets to Sadduccees or to quote to Pharisees books they didnt already accept while debating them. If he had said that to his own disciples, you'd have a point.

ALL Prophets are those found in whatever Jesus said. Am going with Jesus on this one

Are you sure Jesus quoted ALL prophets, even all those in the books you accept? And if Jesus did not quote them, or certain books, will you reject them?

[GeeMail]

Daily Bread: Maybe when you find the verse forbidding intercession, I will respond to the verses. I just dont see the point of responding to irrelevant verses to this discussion, though. 

Daily Bread: Maybe when you find the verse forbidding intercession, I will respond to the verses. I just dont see the point of responding to irrelevant verses to this discussion, though. 

I'm making the same point as Voke though from a slightly different angle. I'll let him proceed lest you feel you are under attack. Suffice it to say that most of the apocryphal writings rejected by the protestant reformation and accepted by the Catholic church tend to dwell on the theme of dead people communicating messages of dubious origin to the living.

[Bella]

Daily Bread: Maybe when you find the verse forbidding intercession, I will respond to the verses. I just dont see the point of responding to irrelevant verses to this discussion, though. 

Daily Bread: Maybe when you find the verse forbidding intercession, I will respond to the verses. I just dont see the point of responding to irrelevant verses to this discussion, though. 

I'm making the same point as Voke though from a slightly different angle. I'll let him proceed lest you feel you are under attack. Suffice it to say that most of the apocryphal writings rejected by the protestant reformation and accepted by the Catholic church tend to dwell on the theme of dead people communicating messages of dubious origin to the living.

You have clearly never read those books, dead people are in perhaps 2 verses only. You are also wrong in that Protestants follow the canon of the pharisees rather than that followed by the earliest christians (septuagint) who were Jews themselves and were simply following the jewish practice they found. The pharisees rejected that larger Jewish canon precisely because CHRISTIANS were using those books to claim that Jesus was the Jewish messiah because the prophecies there were so accurate. Ironic that christians then come along 1500 years later and support those same pharisees!

The language of much of the early Christian church was Greek, and it was in the Septuagint text that many early Christians located the prophecies they claimed were fulfilled by Christ. Jews considered this a misuse of Holy Scripture, and they stopped using the Septuagint. Its subsequent history lies within the Christian church.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/535154/Septuagint

[GeeMail]

Bella, one need not read Playboy to know it contains porn.
Catholic doctrines based on conscious dead people communicating with the living are borrowed directly from Gnosticism that began to creep into the early church but which the apostles rejected offhand.

From Gnostics website:
http://gnosis.org/gnintro.htmInferno of matter and the Purgatory

And the day following Judas came with his company, to take away the bodies of them that were slain, and to bury them with their kinsmen, in the sepulchers of their fathers. And they found under the coats of the slain some of the donaries of the idols of Jamnia, which the law forbiddeth to the Jews: so that all plainly saw, that for this cause they were slain. Then they all blessed the just judgment of the Lord, who had discovered the things that were hidden. And so betaking themselves to prayers, they besought him, that the sin which had been committed might be forgotten. But the most valiant Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves from sin, forasmuch as they saw before their eyes what had happened, because of the sins of those that were slain. And making a gathering, he sent twelve thousand drachmas of silver to Jerusalem for sacrifice to be offered for the sins of the dead, thinking well and religiously concerning the resurrection, (For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should rise again, it would have seemed superfluous and vain to pray for the dead,) And because he considered that they who had fallen asleep with godliness, had great grace laid up for them. It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins. (2 Maccabees 12:39-46)

[Bella]

Bella, one need not read Playboy to know it contains porn.
Catholic doctrines based on conscious dead people communicating with the living are borrowed directly from Gnosticism that began to creep into the early church but which the apostles rejected offhand.

From Gnostics website:
http://gnosis.org/gnintro.htmInferno of matter and the Purgatory

I assure you the catholic church did not author the encyclopedia Britannica. I have read those books, not websites, and they are all TYPICAL Old Testament Jewish books urging Jews not to abandon their covenant or the Torah and hoping in the coming of the Messiah. You are relying on rumours, my sister. In the 21st century of free information, there is no excuse for such ignorance.

[GeeMail]

Are you saying the Jews used the apocrypha/Septuagint as the word of God before and during Jesus' time in Palestine? The Bible of old and in the 21st century shows the dead know not anything and that God explicitly condemns prayers to dead people. You asked for verses and I gave you some.
There is no biblical basis for canonization or prayers to the dead by living saints. If you have such a verse (outside the apocrypha of course), post it.

Bella, one need not read Playboy to know it contains porn.
Catholic doctrines based on conscious dead people communicating with the living are borrowed directly from Gnosticism that began to creep into the early church but which the apostles rejected offhand.

From Gnostics website:
http://gnosis.org/gnintro.htmInferno of matter and the Purgatory

I assure you the catholic church did not author the encyclopedia Britannica. I have read those books, not websites, and they are all TYPICAL Old Testament Jewish books urging Jews not to abandon their covenant or the Torah and hoping in the coming of the Messiah. You are relying on rumours, my sister. In the 21st century of free information, there is no excuse for such ignorance.

[vooke]

Luke 11:50-51 (ESV)
50 so that thee blood of all the prophets, shed from the foundation of the world, may be charged against this generation, 51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who perished between the altar and the sanctuary. Yes, I tell you, it will be required of this generation.

Pay attention to this verse;
1. The blood of ALL the prophets
2. From Abel in Genesis to Zechariah-2 Chronicles 24:20

Where is your beloved apocrypha?

Which prophet do you think is missing there?

Jewish Hebrew canon my sista, that's how they arranged it, unlike us who terminate at Malachi. Now, from history, we can easily CONFIRM Jesus' words. All God's prophets slain by the Jews are contained here.

Also, quote just what you mean, that page is far too large.

Jews had nothing close to a closed canon in Jesus' day, much less a canon accepted by all. It was Christians who first closed the Canon, and they did this simply by accepting all the books used by Jews in the septuagint and not playing God. Jews had no reason to expect that God would not be sending prophets any more. And Jesus cited books to groups according to the books those groups accepted. Thus, he never cited prophets to Sadduccees, because they only recognized the 5 Torah books, only to Pharisees. There's no "summary dismissal" there, only you are reading things into that verse. Jesus would have to have been stupid to quote prophets to Sadduccees or to quote to Pharisees books they didnt already accept while debating them. If he had said that to his own disciples, you'd have a point.

ALL Prophets are those found in whatever Jesus said. Am going with Jesus on this one

Are you sure Jesus quoted ALL prophets, even all those in the books you accept? And if Jesus did not quote them, or certain books, will you reject them?

Kadame,
Can't put it better than Jesus
'the blood of all the prophets, shed from the foundation of the world, may be charged against this generation, 51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah,'

Blood of ALL prophets shed from the foundation of the world FROM Abel TO Zechariah. The two are reference points; them and all between them. It would have been absurd/illogical if outside the ALL from Abel to Zechariah you had others

Point remains,
Jesus defined ALL, am with Jesus on this one

[GeeMail]

Luke 11:50-51 (ESV)
50 so that the blood of all the prophets, shed from the foundation of the world, may be charged against this generation, 51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who perished between the altar and the sanctuary. Yes, I tell you, it will be required of this generation.


Pay attention to this verse;
1. The blood of ALL the prophets
2. From Abel in Genesis to Zechariah-2 Chronicles 24:20

Where is your beloved apocrypha?

Jesus knew what the prophets had said. If Maccabbees was right that the dead are conscious, Jesus would have been freely roaming Jerusalem for three days and three nights before the resurrection and assuring the distraught disciples that He wasn't really dead. 

Luke 24
25 Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:
26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?
27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

[/b]

[vooke]

Jesus knew what the prophets had said. If Maccabbees was right that the dead are conscious, Jesus would have been freely roaming Jerusalem for three days and three nights before the resurrection and assuring the distraught disciples that He wasn't really dead. 

Nonsensical reasoning. Consciousness beyond death is not derived from apocrypha. It is in the 66 books. Maccabaeus among other apocrypha Catholicism cling to them becausethey teaches praying FOR the the dead,stuff you NEVER find in scriptures. This later evolved to praying TO the dead, some christianized necromancy

[Bella]

Kadame,
Can't put it better than Jesus
'the blood of all the prophets, shed from the foundation of the world, may be charged against this generation, 51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah,'

Blood of ALL prophets shed from the foundation of the world FROM Abel TO Zechariah. The two are reference points; them and all between them. It would have been absurd/illogical if outside the ALL from Abel to Zechariah you had others

Point remains,
Jesus defined ALL, am with Jesus on this one

I don't think Jesus is with you, though. If he was defining ALL the prophets, where would you place St. John the Baptist, the greatest of them all, according to Jesus?

The problem is you are trying to force Jesus to say things he never did, so you are making Jesus contradict Jesus in order to help vooke make a point. That whole verse in context:

Woe to you! You build the memorials of the prophets whom your ancestors killed. 48 Consequently, you bear witness and give consent to the deeds of your ancestors, for they killed them and you do the building. 49 Therefore, the wisdom of God said, 'I will send to them prophets and apostles; some of them they will kill and persecute' 50 in order that this generation might be charged with the blood of all the prophets shed since the foundation of the world, 51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah who died between the altar and the temple building. Yes, I tell you, this generation will be charged with their blood!

Jesus condemning Pharisees for pretending to honour prophets whose example they did not follow, it is to these prophets honoured by pharisees that "ALL" refers to. 

[GeeMail]

Jesus knew what the prophets had said. If Maccabbees was right that the dead are conscious, Jesus would have been freely roaming Jerusalem for three days and three nights before the resurrection and assuring the distraught disciples that He wasn't really dead. 

Nonsensical reasoning. Consciousness beyond death is not derived from apocrypha. It is in the 66 books. Maccabaeus among other apocrypha Catholicism cling to them becausethey teaches praying FOR the the dead,stuff you NEVER find in scriptures. This later evolved to praying TO the dead, some christianized necromancy

I thought you had been delivered of the demon of ad hominem. You're splitting dead hairs here. Praying for and to mean one recognizes that the dead are not dead, and if they are not dead, they are conscious, and if conscious they can hear prayers for and to them. You cannot argue for prayers FOR the dead without accepting the Catholic position of prayers TO the dead because they are two sides of the same coin.

What does "pray" mean? It means to implore, ask. When people ask Mary to pray for them, they are praying to her first, just like Mozambicans are reported to have prayed to Nyaatha for water to last them their period of suffering. "She" answered the prayer (asking) hence the canonization. Please post any of the 66 books which show consciousness in death and support your previous arguments against Bella's beliefs.

[vooke]

Kadame,
Can't put it better than Jesus
'the blood of all the prophets, shed from the foundation of the world, may be charged against this generation, 51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah,'

Blood of ALL prophets shed from the foundation of the world FROM Abel TO Zechariah. The two are reference points; them and all between them. It would have been absurd/illogical if outside the ALL from Abel to Zechariah you had others

Point remains,
Jesus defined ALL, am with Jesus on this one

I don't think Jesus is with you, though. If he was defining ALL the prophets, where would you place St. John the Baptist, the greatest of them all, according to Jesus?

The problem is you are trying to force Jesus to say things he never did, so you are making Jesus contradict Jesus in order to help vooke make a point. That whole verse in context:

Woe to you! You build the memorials of the prophets whom your ancestors killed. 48 Consequently, you bear witness and give consent to the deeds of your ancestors, for they killed them and you do the building. 49 Therefore, the wisdom of God said, 'I will send to them prophets and apostles; some of them they will kill and persecute' 50 in order that this generation might be charged with the blood of all the prophets shed since the foundation of the world, 51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah who died between the altar and the temple building. Yes, I tell you, this generation will be charged with their blood!

Jesus condemning Pharisees for pretending to honour prophets whose example they did not follow, it is to these prophets honoured by pharisees that "ALL" refers to. 

kadame,
John had just been slain and there was no record of John in the Hebrew canon. Jesus himself excluded himself from that. On the other hand, the apocrypha had existed for hundreds of years before he said this word. This verse clearly shows what Jesus deemed as prophets and who he didn't.

Apocrypha are good for historical value but zero doctrine. Deriving a doctrine from there at the expense of the scriptures is desperation incarnate.