What Catholic Doctrine or Beliefs are in error, and whats the origin?

[John317]

Are you prepared to catagorically deny that Jesus' mother Mary is in heaven? Where is your proof text? mel

We don't need a proof text showing someone is NOT in heaven. What we need is a text saying someone IS in heaven.

If it was a matter of needing a text that says someone is NOT in heaven, I guess we could pretty well say that almost everyone is there, couldn't we? But that is not the way we determine who is in heaven at this time. Or is that how you do it?

If the Bible doesn't say she is in heaven, then we have no reason to believe that she is.

Are you prepared to say that you know she is in heaven? (Perhaps you believe that all the dead go immediately to heaven.)

If someone tells you that Peter is in heaven, are you also prepared to believe it, simply because the Bible does not say he is not there?

What if I tell you that my mother is there? Are you prepared to state categorically that my mother is not there? Where is the text that says my mother is not there?

If the argument is good for Mary or any other dead person, why not for my mother or for anyone else, including the popes or maybe even Hitler?

Fortunately that is not how we decide that someone is in heaven.

My wife used to pay money to priests to pray that her mother would be released from Purgatory into heaven. Why? Because she was not sure if she was in heaven or not. And the priests could not tell her for sure. So she worried.

My wife knows what the Bible teaches about death now, so she no longer worries about her mother. She knows her mother is sleeping in the grave. "The dead know nothing." Eccl. 9: 5.

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:jasd

But, that’s just it! Are the saints ‘dead’ as in dodo ‘dead’?

>>We know not which are not as it is not mentioned anywhere,<<

I suppose you missed my reference of Revelation 5:8. That does not yet recourse to other texts in Revelations that reference sentient saints – being already, in heaven.

>>...however we know of 3 that are definitelly there, Moses, Elijah and Enoch.<< [ed.jasd]

Respectfully, that would be error, imho.

>>Somehow it makes me wonder why the RCC did not canonize any of these, I never heard St. Moses, St. Elijah or St. Enoch, funny hey?<<

They probably left that up to jasd – as Holy Writ already canonized the saints.

>>Prehaps it is because these are true saints and are really mentioned as being in heaven for sure!<<

Holy Writ called the NT Xtians – saints. I wonder at the hubris of many Protesting .orgs, which steadfastly refuse, or otherwise, unknowingly, do not follow Writ upon this matter. Though the RCCs are somewhat confused upon the issue – at least they go farther in expositing text re saints – then do the Protestors.

>>But do not fit into their esoteric religion?<<

Given, that Alexander Hislop, et al, is/are reputed to have unveiled “the secrets” of the Universal Church, it is laid rather bare and esotericism would hardly define that which is not hidden, yes? One might have to search farther afield, or redefine dogma, to identify the “Mystery woman”, yes?

>>Let's just agree that IHS, stands for Iris, Hosiris and Seth, now isn't that funny? So they esoteric thinking is father, mother, son? Wow!<<

The early Xtian symbol IHS really identifies with “Iris, Hosiris, Seth”? Okay, some hooplaphile said this, yes?

So, my use of the chi X as in Xtian – is more esoterica than it is sigla?

Actually, there are more than several meanings ascribed to the monogram IHS; one being, that it is an abbreviation for the Christ name IHESUS.

That said, the histories of man are replete with the “father, mother, son” motif.

Should I seem to ramble, it is because I am rambling - I am watching the Olympic ceremonies. Never could multi-task.

[melvin mccarty]

((((((( yawn )))))...

mel

[jasd]

>>...and then...let's see who actually is in Heaven that we can substantiate from the bible:<<

Quote:

Gen 5:24 And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him.

>>From the above we can see that Enoch went to heaven, so he was the first human.<< [ed.jasd]

Not so, Fausto.

Jn 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, [even] the Son of man which is in heaven.

It may be that he was translated, but he did not go to the third heaven or the heaven of heavens. It may be that he did go to other worlds...

Quote:

Mat 17:2 - 5 And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light. And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elijah talking with him. Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elijah. While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.

Matt 17:9 And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead.

Jesus defines the ‘transfiguration’ as a vision. Granted, this ‘vision’ carries the sense of the spectacle; however, one might select his or her own vision of spectacle - it yet remains a vision.

Anyway, bear in mind the previous words of Jesus Christ in John 3:13.

>>We could find some more to show how each one is taken up, but it will be unecessary.<<

Per “taken up”: several years after Elijah was ‘taken up’ 2 Chronicles 21:12-15 records Elijah as writing a letter to King Jehoram. Bear in mind John 3:13.

>>There is not one verse though saying that Mary is in heaven, not one, so now I ask you, where is your proof text that she is?<<

So, what is it!? the words of Jesus Christ as recorded in John 11:26 “And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?” is given for naught?

You seem to say that "Thou believest not this.”

Yet, though contraindicated by the very words of Jesus Christ in John 3:13 – the .Org persists in purporting that Enoch, Elijah, and Moses, all – were in heaven and even now are - though, sans the mother of Jesus Christ, Gd. And what of the elders of

Revelation 5:8? Maybe, one of those elders is, in fact, St Mary, yes? [/kidding]

>>Its not there right? So how can we assume anything that is not in the Holy Writ? It is a lie!<<

Speaking of lies: John 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, [even] the Son of man which is in heaven.

Enoch, Elijah, and Moses – all lived before Jesus Christ. It is only now - post crucifixion, that we are permitted to expositorily proffer by construction - that Enoch, Elijah, and Moses may be or are in heaven. However, to do so, one is compelled to admit as much for St Mary – else, one engages in deceptive exegesis.

[Fausto]

Quote:

You seem to say that you “Believest not thou this.”

Of course I believe it, but you know there are conditions and one can never "go to town" based on one single verse it is a weak argument!

Quote:

Revelation 5:8? Maybe, one of those elders is St Mary, yes?

I looked at it but seriously (I'm glad you joking)! We don't knwo who they are!

[Fausto]

Not so, Fausto.

[melvin mccarty]

Consider the group of people who came to life at the earthquake at Jesus' death. What do you think happened to them? Where are they now? If Jesus is the kind of person that I believe He is He would have his mother with him in heaven. I have no proof she is there and you have no proof that she is not there This is entirely apart from what her role might be. (re catholic doctrine)

mel

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:jasd

You seem to say that you “Believest not thou this.”

>>Of course I believe it, but you know there are conditions and one can never "go to town" based on one single verse...<<

Perhaps not, if the “verse” is isolated from the cumulative. Then again, one verse may have ‘legs’; whereas, another, would not.

Also, would it matter – Who is speaking what – in the verse? I’d proffer that if Jesus Christ said it, you can take it to town.

>>...it is a weak argument!<<

Okay, so, what do you think of the verb tense - following?

1 Jn 5:13 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.

The text employs the present/active verb tense; that is, you possess eternal life [now]. It does not state, as so many .orgs posit – that ‘eternal life’ is an effervescing pie-in-the-sky-bye-and-bye expectation, but it is the present/active [tense].

Quote:

Quote:jasd

Revelation 5:8? Maybe, one of those elders is St Mary, yes?

>>I looked at it but seriously (I'm glad you joking)!<<

...misogynistic? [/kidding, again]

>>We don't knwo who they are!<<

Indeed.

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:jasd

Not so, Fausto.

>>Where else did God take him then?<<

Anywhere but...

Quote:

Quote:jasd

Jn 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, [even] the Son of man which is in heaven.

>>Even though this could be the argument, where do Moses and Elijah come from then? They came to encourage Jesus, obviously from heaven, there must be another meaning to that message!<<

Jesus Christ labeled the event a vision. That defines it as a vision. Jesus Christ’s words, as recorded John 3:13, precludes the transfiguration as indicator that Moses and Elijah were, at that time, in heaven. (semantics over the definition of ‘heaven’, aside)

Quote:

Quote:jasd

It may be that he was translated, but he did not go to the third heaven or the heaven of heavens. It may be that he did go to other worlds...

>>Preposterous!<<

Impossible? Why?

Quote:

Originally Posted By: Desire of ages - He Was Transfigured (419-421)

His prayer is heard. While He is bowed in lowliness [...] never to come under the power of death. [ed.jasd]

>>I had to use these passages as they beautifully describe the moment as no other!<<

Indeed, the prose is superbly done; however, Patience Worth wrote excellent prose – but one would not be advised to base one’s religious convictions upon what Patience Worth wrote. (That comparison applies only to the

subject “prose”)

Quote:

Originally Posted By: =Desire of ages - He Was Transfigured (422)

But He who is “able to do exceeding abundantly [...] “this corruptible must put on incorruption.” 1 Cor. 15:51-53. [ed.jasd]

>>"Elijah, who had been translated to heaven without seeing death, represented those who will be living upon the earth at Christ’s second coming,”<<

And who are those whom Enoch represents?

>>Further proof is not required as I understand it!<<

I say this with all seriousness; one must be careful when engaging in iconic adoration – it may be misunderstood as iconolatry.

The quotes you've posted withstand the direct words of Jesus Christ and texts found elsewhere throughout Writ.

[Fausto]

Quote:

I say this with all seriousness; one must be careful when engaging in iconic adoration – it may be misunderstood as iconolatry.

I think you are mistaken there is no iconic adoration, but I am not to embark into apologetics!

Luk 9:30 And, behold, there talked with him two men, which were Moses and Elijah: 31 Who appeared in glory, and spake of his decease which he should accomplish at Jerusalem. 32 But Peter and they that were with him were heavy with sleep: and when they were awake, they saw his glory, and the two men that stood with him. 33 And it came to pass, as they departed from him, Peter said unto Jesus, Master, it is good for us to be here: and let us make three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elijah: not knowing what he said. 34 While he thus spake, there came a cloud, and overshadowed them: and they feared as they entered into the cloud. 35 And there came a voice out of the cloud, saying, This is my beloved Son: hear him.

36 And when the voice was past, Jesus was found alone. And they kept it close, and told no man in those days any of those things which they had seen.

[Fausto]

Consider the group of people who came to life at the earthquake at Jesus' death. What do you think happened to them? Where are they now? If Jesus is the kind of person that I believe He is He would have his mother with him in heaven. I have no proof she is there and you have no proof that she is not there This is entirely apart from what her role might be. (re catholic doctrine)

[Robert]

Originally Posted By: BibleShockers

>>>...From my standpoint, one of the most dangerous teachings of the Catholic Church is that tradition and decisions of church counsels are authoritative for determining what is truth. A lot of Catholics don't know this...

I'm sorry, but how is that different from SDA?

Bill Ross

While the decisions of the SDA Church in general session may be authoritative, they are ALWAYS subject to the authority of Scripture, never equal to it nor can they ever supersede it.

Gerry

Yes, but the Bible was ignored in the 1888 GC.....You should know the story.

The point is that the authority of the Bible isn't always the measuring stick among SDA....But then things have away of correcting themselves too....This can't happen where the Pope is the final word.

[Fausto]

Yes, but the Bible was ignored in the 1888 GC.....You should know the story.

[Fausto]

Well its getting late here, and no one is entertaining me now so...

[John317]

>>...and then...let's see who actually is in Heaven that we can substantiate from the bible:<<

Quote:

Gen 5:24 And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him.

>>From the above we can see that Enoch went to heaven, so he was the first human.<< [ed.jasd]

Not so, Fausto.

Jn 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, [even] the Son of man which is in heaven.

It may be that he was translated, but he did not go to the third heaven or the heaven of heavens. It may be that he did go to other worlds...

The context shows clearly that Jesus is saying that no one has gone up to heaven in order to tell people on earth what heaven is like. The whole conversation taking place between Jesus and Nicodemus has to do with knowledge of heavenly things (v. 12). It has nothing to do with Enoch's translation, because Enoch never told anyone what heaven is like. Only Jesus has done that, He who came down from heaven for the purpose of explaining the Father (John 1:18).

[John317]

Most of the Protestant churches are aware that the NT refers to believers as "saints." Certainly the Seventh-day Adventist church is aware of it. Anyone who truly believes in Christ and has acceted Him as their Savior and Lord has been sanctified, or set apart, for God's own possession and use. This is what is meant by being a "saint." It doesn't refer to someone who is sinless or to someone who has attained a special status of holiness.

Of course, it is true, though, that a lot of individual members of protestant churches don't understand what the Bible teaches on this point.

[John317]

[quote name="jasd

Mat 17:2 - 5 And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light. And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elijah talking with him. Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elijah. While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.

Quote:

Matt 17:9 And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead.

Jesus defines the &#145;transfiguration&#146; as a vision. Granted, this &#145;vision&#146; carries the sense of the spectacle; however, one might select his or her own vision of spectacle - it yet remains a vision.

Anyway, bear in mind the previous words of Jesus Christ in John 3:13.

The word for "vision" in the Greek simply means something unusual or fantastic that that one has seen. It doesn't necessarily signify that what was seen was not real. The context and language used in the chapter shows that the transfiguration was a real event and not something that occurred only in the heads of the disciples.

The "Jehovah's Witnesses" also use that reasoning to avoid any notion that either Enoch or Moses went to heaven, because they believe that no one but spirit beings can go to heaven.

[John317]

[quote name="jasd

Fuasto-->>We could find some more to show how each one is taken up, but it will be unecessary.<< [/quote"]

JASD-- Per &#147;taken up&#148;: several years after Elijah was &#145;taken up&#146; 2 Chronicles 21:12-15 records Elijah as writing a letter to King Jehoram. Bear in mind John 3:13.

The letter was written by the prophet before he was "taken up." The fact of the letter itself is no evidence that Elijah was not taken to heaven.

For those who accept Ellen White, see her comments in Prophets and Kings regarding this letter by Elijah. She says the same thing that many non-Advetnist Bible scholars and commentators say about this.

"Jehovah's Witnesses" use the text in 2 Chron. 21: 12-15 to try and prove that Elijah was not taken to heaven but rather to a different location on earth. They believe the same thing about Enoch. The reason they teach this is that otherwise they would have to reject the teaching they hold which says that only spirit-beings can be in heaven. For that reason, they also teach that Jesus Himself was raised as an invisible spirit-being and that the Lord only appeared to be resurrected with a body. Thus, on this view, Jesus was not being totally honest when he told the disciples that he had a body. He said these things, and ate something in front of them, only in order to help to believe in the "resurrection."

This in turn leads "Jehovah's Witnesses" to their belief that Jesus returned invisibly in 1914, and that He will never return visibly. They don't believe that the resurrected saints will go to heaven. In their view, only the 144,000 go to heaven as spirit-beings, and most of these are already in heaven.

These false teachings are the consequences of misunderstanding the translation of Enoch, Moses, and Elijah, as well as a few other important verses on the subject.

[John317]

[quote name="jasd

Fausto-->>There is not one verse though saying that Mary is in heaven, not one, so now I ask you, where is your proof text that she is?<<

Quote:

JASD--So, what is it!? the words of Jesus Christ as recorded in John 11:26 &#147;And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die....

The words of Jesus refer to the second death-- eternal death-- which is the only death of real importance. Everyone dies the first death, but it is viewed as an unconcious sleep in the grave, because people will be awakened from this sleep.

That people who believe in Christ die is well proven from many scriptures which speak of believers dying. To give two examples: in Acts 8, Stephen dies, and in Acts 12, James dies.

[melvin mccarty]

Why do you attach a meaning to my post which is not there? Is that being honest? mel

[Fausto]

[/quote=mel]Why do you attach a meaning to my post which is not there? Is that being honest?

[jasd]

Quote:

KJVR

“Mat 17:9 And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead.”

But why doesn't Luke say it too?

“Luk 9:36 And when the voice was past, Jesus was found alone. And they kept it close, and told no man in those days any of those things which they had seen.” [ed.jasd]

>>Neither does Mark<<

Quote:

KJVR

Mar 9:9 And as they came down from the mountain, he charged them that they should tell no man what things they had seen, till the Son of man were risen from the dead.

>>Now let us see what a few concordances have to say about vision:

Quote:

Strong's - G3705

horama = hor'-am-ah

From G3708; something gazed at, that is, a spectacle (especially supernatural): - sight, vision. [...]

>>Ok, I see where you may be refering to:<<

Quote:

Thayes concordance

as comparison:

horama

Thayer Definition:

1) that which is seen, spectacle

2) a sight divinely granted in an ecstasy or in a sleep, a vision

Part of Speech: noun neuter

A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: from G3708

Citing in TDNT: 5:371, 706

>>By virtue of only 1 epistle saying it, I will thus refute that it is a vision as such as I am sure the others would have written it as such if it indeed was a vision,<<

Good post, Fausto. That said, take a look at the greater specificity that Louw & Nida provides, following:

-horama:: an event in which something appears vividly and credibly to the mind, although not actually preset, but implying that influence of some divine or supernatural power or agency – ‘vision.’

Refer: Acts 9:12; 2 Cor 12:1; Rev 9:17

So, one takes issue with the very recorded words of Jesus Christ as opposed to simple observation(s)?

>>...besides Luke was a doctor, whom better to say it as it was!<<

Well, perhaps he tended to omission. You cannot find the account of the Magi in the Book of Luke. For that matter, neither can you find a reference to Joseph and Mary’s flight to Egypt by that same author...

Quote:

KJVR

Jud 1:9 Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.

>>The above says there was a dispute over the body of Moses between the devil and Michael,<<

Indeed, it does. However, there is nothing within the text that would sustain an inference that the issue was one defined as – the ‘resurrection’ of Moses, body and soul.

>>Michael, whom we believe is Jesus,<<

Of course, I cannot agree with that posit.

Heb 1:4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

Heb 1:5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?

>>...and why would they bother with a dead body unless there was something important such as resurrection?<<

2 Kings 13:21 And it came to pass, as they were burying a man, that, behold, they spied a band [of men]; and they cast the man into the sepulchre of Elisha: and when the man was let down, and touched the bones of Elisha, he revived, and stood up on his feet.

Mebbe, to preclude the devil making merchandise of the body of Moses? Or to rebury Moses nearer to the cross of Jesus Christ that he might arise with the resurrection of Jesus Christ? Or...

>>Anyway the fact that he appeared to Jesus confirms it.<<

Matt 17:9 And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead.

Jn 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, [even] the Son of man which is in heaven.

>>Man...I am no theologian, but you sure are turning me into one!<<

You are already a theologian.

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:jasd

Not so, Fausto.

Jn 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, [even] the Son of man which is in heaven.

It may be that he was translated, but he did not go to the third heaven or the heaven of heavens. It may be that he did go to other worlds...

>>The context shows clearly that Jesus is saying that no one has gone up to heaven in order to tell people on earth what heaven is like.<<

Not so, John317. The “context” does not allow for that construction.

>>The whole conversation taking place between Jesus and Nicodemus has to do with knowledge of heavenly things (v. 12). It has nothing to do with Enoch's translation, because Enoch never told anyone what heaven is like. Only Jesus has done that, He who came down from heaven for the purpose of explaining the Father (John 1:18).<<

You seem to suggest that Jesus Christ would suspend facts for rhetoric.

There is absolutely nothing, contextual or otherwise, that indicates that the statement – “And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, [even] the Son of man which is in heaven.” – is anything other than a statement of fact. Additionally,

the “And”, which begins that statement of fact, that is, verse 13 – is a conjunction conveying the sense of ‘moreover’ or ‘futhermore’...

[jasd]

Quote:

Quote:jasd

....Holy Writ called the NT Xtians - saints. I wonder at the hubris of many Protesting .orgs, which steadfastly refuse, or otherwise, unknowingly, do not follow Writ upon this matter. Though the RCCs are somewhat confused upon the issue - at least they go farther in expositing text re saints - then do the Protestors.

>>Most of the Protestant churches are aware that the NT refers to believers as "saints." Certainly the Seventh-day Adventist church is aware of it.<<

Then why is the use of the designation – saint(s) – seemingly, anathema to them. Does your .Org employ the term when referring to one another?

>>Anyone who truly believes in Christ and has acceted Him as their Savior and Lord has been sanctified, or set apart, for God's own possession and use.<<

I believe you are more strictured re the Xtian saint – than Writ.

>>This is what is meant by being a "saint."<<

Xtian is saint; well, excepting the nominal.

>>It doesn't refer to someone who is sinless or to someone who has attained a special status of holiness.<<

Perhaps, not so much “sinless”, but by today’s standard or vernacular use, definitely “special”.

>>Of course, it is true, though, that a lot of individual members of protestant churches don't understand what the Bible teaches on this point.<<

Writ does not so much teach upon the matter of ‘saint’ – but declares it.

[John317]

The context of John 3:13 is shown here. Jesus is clearly talking about his authority to tell about the things of heaven, authority that comes from His having come down from heaven. It is saying the same thing as found in John 1:18. Jesus was with the Father and can therefore explain Him. John 3: 13 concerns the fact that Jesus alone can tell about the things of heaven because no one has gone up to heaven and returned to tell about it. Therefore it is twisting the verse to conclude that Jesus is here denying what the Bible teaches concerning Enoch and Elijah

John 3: 5-13---

5 Jesus answered:

I tell you for certain that before you can get into God's kingdom, you must be born not only by water, but by the Spirit. 6Humans give life to their children. Yet only God's Spirit can change you into a child of God. 7Don't be surprised when I say that you must be born from above. 8Only God's Spirit gives new life. The Spirit is like the wind that blows wherever it wants to. You can hear the wind, but you don't know where it comes from or where it is going.

9"How can this be?" Nicodemus asked.

10Jesus replied:

How can you be a teacher of Israel and not know these things? 11 I tell you for certain that we know what we are talking about because we have seen it ourselves. But none of you will accept what we say. 12 If you don't believe when I talk to you about things on earth, how can you possibly believe if I talk to you about things in heaven?

13 No one has gone up to heaven except the Son of Man, who came down from there. 14 And the Son of Man must be lifted up, just as that metal snake was lifted up by Moses in the desert.