PDA

View Full Version : Praying to Mary is worshiping Mary



Pages : [1] 2 3 4

foudroyant
04-02-2014, 07:40 PM
Roman Catholics attempt to say that it is ok to pray to Mary because it is not worshiping her. That is, only God is to receive latria while Mary can receive hyperdulia.
The Bible doesn't allow for this false dichotomy that Catholics attempt to create.

1. Prayer is worship
a. Isaiah 44:17 - And the residue thereof he maketh a god, even his graven image: he falleth down unto it, and worshippeth it, and prayeth unto it, and saith, Deliver me; for thou art my god. (KJV)
By praying to this false god the person is worshiping this false god.

b. Matthew 21:13 - And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves. (KJV)
Isaiah 56:7 - Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people. (KJV)
Keil and Delitzsch: (Isaiah 56:7) But here the temple is called “the house of prayer,” from the prayer which is the soul of all worship.
http://www.studylight.org/com/kdo/view.cgi?bk=22&ch=56
Barnes: (Isaiah 56:7) In my house of prayer - In the temple - here called the house of prayer. The language here is all derived from the worship of the Jews, though the meaning evidently is, that under the new dispensation, all nations would be admitted to the privileges of his people, and that the appropriate services of religion which they would offer would be acceptable to God.
http://www.studylight.org/com/bnb/view.cgi?bk=22&ch=56

c. Luke 2:37 - And she was a widow of about fourscore and four years, which departed not from the temple, but served God with fastings and prayers night and day. (KJV)
One of the ways Anna offered worship (the Greek word here is latreuo) to God is by praying to Him.
1.TDNT: The Ministry of Prayer: Elsewhere the references of latreuein is to the general ministry of prayer and praise, e.g., adoration in Mt. 4:10; Rev. 7:15; 22:3, prayer and supplication in Lk. 2:37; Acts 26:7. (TDNT 4:62, latreuo, Strathmann).

d. 2 Timothy 1:3 - I thank God, whom I serve from my forefathers with pure conscience, that without ceasing I have remembrance of thee in my prayers night and day. (KJV)
2 Timothy 2:22 - Flee also youthful lusts: but follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart. (KJV)
The Greek word for "serve" is latreuo and since to call on the name of the Lord (which means praying to the Lord) is the same as worshiping the Lord we once again see that praying is worshiping.
TDNT: Calling on the Lord out of a pure heart (2 Tm. 2:22) is the same as worship with pure conscience (2Tm. 1:3). (7:918, sunoida, Maurer).



2. Roman Catholics will often claim that asking Mary to pray for you is much like asking a friend to pray for you. You do not think your friend is God anymore than the Roman Catholics think Mary is God.
This analogy doesn't work because many times prayers are silent. Imagine having millions upon millions of people asking you to pray for them at the same time but they only think it within their hearts. You would not be able to understand all of the hearts behind such requests. That would take omniscience - and only God is omniscient. So by praying to Mary Roman Catholics (whether they realize it or not) are ascribing knowledge to her that is reserved for God alone.

a. NIDNTT: The kidneys (Heb. kelayot; Gk. nephros, only in plur.; in the NT only Rev. 2:23, citing Jer. 11:20) are frequently mentioned in close connection with the heart. They are - in the metaphorical sense - the seat of the deepest spiritual emotions and motives (Ps. 7:9[10]; 26:2; Jer. 17:10; 20:12; cf. 1 Sam. 24:5[6]; 25:31; leb conscience), so secret that men cannot fathom them. Only God is able to search and test them (2:181-182, Heart, T. Sorg).
b. NIDNTT: kardiognwstes is unknown to secular Gk. and to the LXX, and occurs in the NT only in Acts 1:24 and 15:8 and later in patristic writings. It describes God as the knower of hearts. The fact that God sees, tests and searches the hidden depths of the human heart is commonly stated in both the OT and the NT (1 Sam. 16:7; Jer. 11:20; 17:9f.; Lk. 16:15; Rom. 8:27; 1 Thess. 2:4; Rev. 2:23). This belief in the omniscience of God is expressed succinctly by the adj. kardiognwstes (2:183, Heart, T. Sorg).
c. TDNT: The designation of God as ho kardiognwstes, "the One who knows the heart," expresses in a single term (Ac. 1:24; 15:8) something which is familiar to both the NT and OT piety (Lk. 16:15; R. 8:27; 1 Th. 2:4; Rev. 2:23 of Christ, cf. 1 Bas. 16:7; 3 Bas. 8:39; 1 Par. 28:9; Psalm 7:9; Ier. 11:20; 17:10; Sir. 42:18 ff.), namely that the omniscient God knows the innermost being of every man where the decision is made either for Him or against Him (3:613, kardiognwstes, Behm).
d. Danker: knower of hearts, one who knows the hearts, of God Ac 1:24; 15:8 (on these pass. s. JBauer, BZ 32, 88, 114-117); Hm 4, 3, 4. - M-M. DELG s.v. gignwskw. TW (A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, kardiognwstes, page 509).
---> TW stands for the TDNT - Theologisches Worterbuch zum NT, ed. GKittel (d. 1948)
e. EDNT: On the one hand God is "in heaven" (Matt 6:9f. par.; 7:11; 11:25) and strictly distinguishable from everything that is of this world. On the other hand, however, he is present (Matt 6:1-18; Rev 1:8) and omniscient (Matt 6:8, 32; Acts 1:24; 15:8) (2:141, theos, G. Schneider).
f. Keil and Delitzsch: The reins are the seat of the emotions, just as the heart is the seat of the thoughts and feelings. Reins and heart lie naked before God - a description of the only kardiognwstes, which is repeated in Jer. 11.20, 20.12, Apoc. 2.23 (Commentary on the Old Testament, Psalms, Volume 5, C.F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, page 144).
g. Mounce: While people may be deceived by their own hearts and the deceitful hearts of others (Jas. 1:26), and while sin and evil reside in the human heart (Rom. 1:21; Jas. 3:14), before the Lord the heart is an open book. He knows our hearts (Lk. 9:47; 16:15), tests them (1Thess. 2:4), searches them (Rom. 8:27; Rev. 2:23), strengthens them (1 Thess. 3:13), and reveals their motives (1 Cor. 4:5) (Mounce's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, Heart, page 328).
h. Joel B. Greene: The Lord is addressed as "the one who knows the heart" (kardiognwsta). This is an expression used only twice in the New Testament (here and in Acts 15:8), but that points to a concept almost proverbial in biblical literature - that is, that God is omniscient (Into God's Presence: Prayer in the New Testament, Editor: Richard N. Longenecker:; From Chapter 9, Persevering Together in Prayer: The Significance of Prayer in the Acts of the Apostles by Joel B. Greene, page 190).

3. The fact that there are passages in the Bible which demonstrate the Lord Jesus is the proper recipient of prayer/worship (which means He is omniscient) is powerful testimony that He is God. Many heretics deny His Deity so Roman Catholics and others who claim Mary can be prayed to (yes, that is worship) really discredit who the Lord Jesus is.
a. William Mounce: The fact that people pray to both God (Mt. 6:9) and Jesus (Acts 1:24) is part of the proof of Jesus' deity (Mounce's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old & New Testament Words, Pray, page 531).
b. A.H. Leitch: Christ possesses the attributes of God: omniscience (Acts 1:24) (2:94, deity of Christ, The Zondervan Encyclopedia of the Bible).
c. EDNT: On the one hand God is "in heaven" (Matt 6:9f. par.; 7:11; 11:25) and strictly distinguishable from everything that is of this world. On the other hand, however, he is present (Matt 6:1-18; Rev 1:8) and omniscient (Matt 6:8, 32; Acts 1:24; 15:8) (2:141, theos, G. Schneider).

Darth Xena
04-02-2014, 07:58 PM
I am grateful Mary is at peace and not having to be troubled by us pestering her constantly. No one in the NT asked a departed saint to pray for them. One would think Paul would have prayed to Stephen to pray for him.

foudroyant
04-02-2014, 08:02 PM
Amen to that!

Even those who buried Stephen made loud lamentation over him...not "to" him.

Some devout men buried Stephen, and made loud lamentation over him. (Acts 8:2, NASB)

Darth Executor
04-02-2014, 09:07 PM
Jews worship David in 1 Chronicles 29:20 to the complaint of nobody.

foudroyant
04-02-2014, 09:59 PM
Jews worship David in 1 Chronicles 29:20 to the complaint of nobody.

Won't work.

See Post 10
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?1152-Determinism-amp-Paul&p=26126#post26126

Darth Executor
04-02-2014, 10:42 PM
Won't work.

See Post 10
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?1152-Determinism-amp-Paul&p=26126#post26126

That post has you arguing that David wasn't worshiped in the same way God was. The argument sounds rather... familiar.

Leonhard
04-03-2014, 12:02 AM
We owe the saints in general dulia (honouring their sanctity and seeking their favours) and Mary hyperdulia (dulia in the highest form), only God do we owe latria (from whom, by whom and to whom all glory ultimate belongs. All the glory the saints have derive ultimately from him, so by honouring them by extension we honour him as the source). There's nothing wrong with this distinction, and there's nothing in the Bible that teaches anything against it. We do owe honour to people who are superior to us in station, and we need an appropriate word to express that. Since the saints in heaven are alive, near God and are considered fully righteous and unblemished (no stain of sin left, they're as white as snow), there's nothing wrong with asking them to pray for us.

None of the biblical passages given show that every prayer said is a worship, the first is an edict against worshipping false idols as well as praying to them. Since statues or icons of Mary are neither considered to be her, or to be God, and they're considered merely to be focal points and to help the person focus in prayer Catholics aren't guilty of that.

Yes one of the way that Anna offered worship was to pray to God, likely by singing the psalms of David, however since Catholics consider that kind of prayer to be a form of latria there's nothing here against Catholic practice.

In fact everytime you bring up an example which is about how humans worship, or ought to worship God, then you're talking about latria.

The fact that you recognise that the Bible indicates different means of recognising office and authority, as well as holiness of a person exists in the bible, without it being equivalent with the kind of worship we owe to God alone indicates that the Bible isn't unfriendly to this concept. To me its just part and parcel of a universe with a hierarchy.

If an Angel came into the room in visible form I'd fall onto my knees, I wouldn't dare to shake hands with him.


I am grateful Mary is at peace and not having to be troubled by us pestering her constantly.

Somehow I don't think Heaven will include the licence to grow lazy, or a cessation of loving people. Even if you don't have a body you can still pray, and if your love was made perfect, wouldn't you pray for the people on Earth? If the angels or God made you aware of someone asking you to pray to God for specific issue, wouldn't you then do that (or pray for something better than what the person asked for)?

Don't try to think about it in earthly terms. You won't grow tired of praying, it won't detract from your love of God, since you're completely healed and sinless it would be effortless.

It depends on course on what your expectations of the afterlife is, whether you believe in Soul Sleep and so forth.

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 03:43 AM
That post has you arguing that David wasn't worshiped in the same way God was. The argument sounds rather... familiar.

The Hebrew word used there doesn't always refer to worship but obeisance. (Genesis 33:3)

And he passed over before them, and bowed himself to the ground seven times, until he came near to his brother. (KJV)

Why couldn't the people be offering obeisance to David while affording worship to God?

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 03:44 AM
Leonard,

Concerning Isaiah 44:17 I am pointing out that this passage makes zero distinction between praying to an idol and worshiping it.

Anna offering prayers is one of the ways she offered latreuo. Thus there is no distinction.

An angel from God would not be able to understand the totality of millions of silent prayers offered to him.

Also, 2 Timothy 1:3 and 2 Timothy 2:22 demonstrates once again that prayer is worship (latreuo).

Leonhard
04-03-2014, 05:29 AM
Concerning Isaiah 44:17 I am pointing out that this passage makes zero distinction between praying to an idol and worshiping it.

Anna offering prayers is one of the ways she offered latreuo. Thus there is no distinction.

Both are still non sequitors as both are examples of worship of God, and not indictments against appropriately honouring holy people or seeking their favours.


An angel from God would not be able to understand the totality of millions of silent prayers offered to him.

Care to demonstrate that?


Also, 2 Timothy 1:3 and 2 Timothy 2:22 demonstrates once again that prayer is worship (latreuo).

No they don't. In the first quote Paul reassures a community that he gives thanks to God when he remembers them in prayer, and in the other he exhorts people to 'call on the Lord from a pure heart'. Nothing here about what Catholics doing being unlawful, and nothing here about prayer being equivalent with worship.

You need to either find a quote that makes it illegal to seek the favour of departed Saints or one that clearly says that all prayers (of any kind) is equivalent to the kind of worship owed to God alone - you won't find that in the OT or the NT - Or you need to document teachings that contradict it... say that people in Heaven aren't aware of anything (Soul Sleep), or that nobody is in Heaven, etc... However I don't believe in Soul Sleep, and I don't see that there's anything else to prevent anyone from praying to them, or be reprimanded for that.

The Bible doesn't condemn the practice.

Spartacus
04-03-2014, 05:47 AM
And now Foud points to his heart-knowing/omniscience equivocation again. Its flaws have been pointed out to him as often as he's brought it up, but it hasn't stopped him from repeating it over and over and over and over...

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 05:48 AM
Both are still non sequitors as both are examples of worship of God, and not indictments against appropriately honouring holy people or seeking their favours.



Care to demonstrate that?



No they don't. In the first quote Paul reassures a community that he gives thanks to God when he remembers them in prayer, and in the other he exhorts people to 'call on the Lord from a pure heart'. Nothing here about what Catholics doing being unlawful, and nothing here about prayer being equivalent with worship. You need to either find a quote that makes it illegal to seek the favour of departed Saints. You won't find that in the OT or the NT, as they're silent on the subject. Or you need to document teachings that contradict it... say that people in Heaven aren't aware of anything (Soul Sleep), or that nobody is in Heaven, etc... However I don't believe in Soul Sleep, and I don't see that there's anything else to prevent anyone from praying to them, or be reprimanded for that.

The Bible doesn't condemn the practice.

1. Once again Isaiah 44:17 is an example of prayer being worship. There are zero passages where prayer as such is used in the Bible where worship is not taking place.
2. If an angel from God understood the totality of millions of silent prayers offered to him that would mean he is omniscient (See Part 2 in the OP).
3. I already cited a very good source that teaches calling on the name of the Lord is the same thing as rendering latreuo to the Lord.
4. Luke 2:37 clearly demonstrates that one of the way Anna rendered latreuw unto God was by prayers. I'd like to see a passage where anyone else is to receive prayers in the way Anna offered.

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 05:50 AM
And now Foud points to his heart-knowing/omniscience equivocation again. Its flaws have been pointed out to him as often as he's brought it up, but it hasn't stopped him from repeating it over and over and over and over...

And now Sparty repeats an assertion without proof.

Spartacus
04-03-2014, 05:52 AM
And now Sparty repeats an assertion without proof.

In order for Mary to hear the prayers of everyone who prays to her, she would have to know more than any normal human could possibly know. However, this is a finite increase in her knowledge and perception, not an infinite one.

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 05:57 AM
She would also have to be aware of the hearts behind the silent words of these prayers.....or can people pray to her and trick her in that they were not sincere?

Spartacus
04-03-2014, 05:59 AM
She would also have to be aware of the hearts behind the silent words of these prayers.....or can people pray to her and trick her in that they were not sincere?

Knowing that as well would also be an incremental, not infinite increase in knowledge. She knows more, but still not everything-- and everything that she does know, she knows only through God's power in the first place.

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 06:00 AM
A simple yes or no will do.

Spartacus
04-03-2014, 06:03 AM
A simple yes or no will do.

No, it wouldn't do, because then you'd dive right back into your inane equivocation. In any case, I think that my post was sufficient for you to gather that I do not believe that Mary would be fooled.

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 06:04 AM
Pathetic.

So Mary knows the hearts of all these people. That means she too is the heartknower which means she is omniscient (God).

Welcome to Roman Catholic heresy.

Spartacus
04-03-2014, 06:09 AM
Pathetic.

So Mary knows the hearts of all these people. That means she too is the heartknower which means she is omniscient (God).

Welcome to Catholic heresy.

Knowing hearts does not require complete omniscience. It is, as I have said repeatedly, a finite and not an infinite increase in her ability to know. If there is anyone here who agrees with Foudroyant on this particular point, I'd be very interested to know about it.

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 06:11 AM
Knowing hearts does not require complete omniscience.

Wrong!

I cited several sources in the OP that refute what you just wrote. I'd like to see the Greek qualifications of you and anyone else who disagrees with them.

One Bad Pig
04-03-2014, 07:02 AM
I am grateful Mary is at peace and not having to be troubled by us pestering her constantly.
I'm not sure why you think this would be bothersome.

No one in the NT asked a departed saint to pray for them. One would think Paul would have prayed to Stephen to pray for him.
One is not sure why the practice would necessarily come up. The NT is not meant to be a comprehensive guide to the Church; it is a collection of documents written for specific purposes, all of which have been deemed to be "God-breathed."

Darth Executor
04-03-2014, 07:13 AM
The Hebrew word used there doesn't always refer to worship but obeisance. (Genesis 33:3)

And he passed over before them, and bowed himself to the ground seven times, until he came near to his brother. (KJV)

If Israelis offered obeisance to idols how do you think that would sit with God?


Why couldn't the people be offering obeisance to David while affording worship to God?

Because they are both offered the same thing in that verse. More importantly, bowing to both God and the king is already described before the word is used. Your interpretation, which looks like the same type of terminology fudging you accuse Catholics of in the OP makes for nonsensical writing. "They bowed to David, then they bowed to David."

Darth Executor
04-03-2014, 07:18 AM
I cited several sources in the OP that refute what you just wrote.

None of your sources do anything of the sort. Omniscience = knowing everything. You don't need to know everything to know people's thoughts. One can be an uber-psychic who can read every mind on the planet but not now exactly how many atoms Neptune is composed of. You don't need "Greek qualifications" to figure this out, just a functional brain.

Catholicity
04-03-2014, 07:40 AM
I am in agreement with Spart, OBP and Leonhard here.

Leonhard
04-03-2014, 07:44 AM
First of all omniscience is all knowledge, if even one iota of truth is lacking its not omniscience. I won't evaluate the claim that only God can know the hearts of men. Even if that was true, it would not imply that knowing hearts would be the same as omniscience, only that the only one to have this kind of knowledge is God. Potentially another being could have been made that only knew the states of the hearts of men, but lacked other sorts of knowledge.

Mary knows the content of the prayers, either by God revealing it to her (I doubt it would take more than her asking), or by Angels (all it takes is one lone Angel knowing enough of your thoughts to know what you've prayed, same for everyone else, it doesn't require one angel who knows all prayers of everyone though even that isn't impossible) carrying the prayers and intentions up to her. Nothing is implied in order for Mary to know the prayers given to her. She doesn't even have to have full knowledge of all the aspects of a persons heart in order to know the prayer, silent or spoken.

Even if what you said was right it wouldn't even condemn prayer to Mary, only silent forms of prayer.

Its a pretty bad argument foudroyant. You make an argument from silence in the Bible, then you bring up a bunch of examples which aren't relevant and finally even if its successful it doesn't show what you want it to show.

Spartacus
04-03-2014, 08:02 AM
Wrong!

I cited several sources in the OP that refute what you just wrote. I'd like to see the Greek qualifications of you and anyone else who disagrees with them.

:haha: you can't quote the entirety of my post because it's obvious even to you that your argument can be refuted with only a few words.

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 02:06 PM
If Israelis offered obeisance to idols how do you think that would sit with God?



Because they are both offered the same thing in that verse. More importantly, bowing to both God and the king is already described before the word is used. Your interpretation, which looks like the same type of terminology fudging you accuse Catholics of in the OP makes for nonsensical writing. "They bowed to David, then they bowed to David."


If they were offering obeisance to idols then they were worshiping idols - not necessarily always the case concerning people.

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 02:09 PM
None of your sources do anything of the sort. Omniscience = knowing everything. You don't need to know everything to know people's thoughts. One can be an uber-psychic who can read every mind on the planet but not now exactly how many atoms Neptune is composed of. You don't need "Greek qualifications" to figure this out, just a functional brain.

Then you don't know how to read properly.

Here's one more:
The Zondervan Encyclopedia of the Bible: Christ possesses the attributes of God: omniscience (Acts 1:24) (2:94, deity of Christ, A.H. Leitch).

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 02:10 PM
First of all omniscience is all knowledge, if even one iota of truth is lacking its not omniscience. I won't evaluate the claim that only God can know the hearts of men. Even if that was true, it would not imply that knowing hearts would be the same as omniscience, only that the only one to have this kind of knowledge is God. Potentially another being could have been made that only knew the states of the hearts of men, but lacked other sorts of knowledge.

Mary knows the content of the prayers, either by God revealing it to her (I doubt it would take more than her asking), or by Angels (all it takes is one lone Angel knowing enough of your thoughts to know what you've prayed, same for everyone else, it doesn't require one angel who knows all prayers of everyone though even that isn't impossible) carrying the prayers and intentions up to her. Nothing is implied in order for Mary to know the prayers given to her. She doesn't even have to have full knowledge of all the aspects of a persons heart in order to know the prayer, silent or spoken.

Even if what you said was right it wouldn't even condemn prayer to Mary, only silent forms of prayer.

Its a pretty bad argument foudroyant. You make an argument from silence in the Bible, then you bring up a bunch of examples which aren't relevant and finally even if its successful it doesn't show what you want it to show.

Yeah a bad argument that is backed up by several authorities.
So someone can pray to Mary and deceive her?

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 02:14 PM
:haha: you can't quote the entirety of my post because it's obvious even to you that your argument can be refuted with only a few words.

The fact that you go against all of them proves the kind of person I am dealing with. If you can't even get something this basic in order then it is useless trying to get anything else through to you.

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 02:14 PM
I am in agreement with Spart, OBP and Leonhard here.

Your losername says it all.

RBerman
04-03-2014, 02:21 PM
This argument will not be solved either way by appeal to terms like latria and dulia and hyperdulia. The theoretical distinctions between them might or might not matter in the practice of some particular person, just as the honor that we give to a country, or a romantic interest, or a family member, or a religious, political, or cultural leader might practically speaking supersede our devotion to God and thus become a form of idolatry.

The other complication is that when we come from different cultures, we are prone to misread each other's signals. A Brazilian friend once asked my sister why Americans think snot is so valuable. Huh? We don't. Why did he say that? He had noticed that when we clean our nose, we blow into a tissue or handkerchief, which we then carry around in our pocket. (Apparently Brazilians just spray their snot on the ground or something. I don't know.) He interpreted this as a sign of the value that we assigned to our mucus, based on his own cultural cues applied to our behavior.

This same issue in religious discussions makes it difficult to have cross-cultural debates about the meanings of different practices. Do American Christians worship a fir tree in December? An egg-laying bunny in April? The Stars and Stripes in July? And so on. We have been taught that such practices should not be construed as contrary with the First Commandment or Second Commandment of the Decalogue. That doesn't make it so, though. So too with Protestants looking at Roman practices regarding statues or candles or Mary, or Eastern Orthodox practices regarding icons. We shouldn't just assume that they are clearly engaging in idolatry simply because their spiritual habits differ from ours. Conversely, they are not off of the hook of testing their own hearts as to whether they really are being idolatrous, even though they have been raised to assume that they are not.

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 02:33 PM
We shouldn't just assume that they are clearly engaging in idolatry simply because their spiritual habits differ from ours. Conversely, they are not off of the hook of testing their own hearts as to whether they really are being idolatrous, even though they have been raised to assume that they are not.

The RCC do admit they pray to Mary. This use of prayer is always used in the Bible in terms of worship.

I'd like to see one example where it doesn't.

RBerman
04-03-2014, 03:04 PM
The RCC do admit they pray to Mary. This use of prayer is always used in the Bible in terms of worship. I'd like to see one example where it doesn't.

Both of those are slippery words. Historically, to "pray" was just to ask some one something. They might be your parent, or your friend, or your boss, not necessarily God. Similarly "worship" was just respect or esteem in general, whether idolatrous or not. It just meant that you felt someone was "worth" something.

That said, it's not a stretch to think that the lofty titles ascribed to Mary might mean that some people thinking of her in those ways step over the line into idolatry. Again, it doesn't mean anything that a person has been assured that adoring Mary is by definition not idolatry. It still could be. Functionally, I'd argue that if someone's first thought in times of trouble is, "Help me, Blessed Virgin!" rather than, "Help me, Lord Jesus!" they probably have an idolatrous view of Mary rather than just a healthy respect for one of God's people.

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 03:10 PM
Both of those are slippery words. Historically, to "pray" was just to ask some one something. They might be your parent, or your friend, or your boss, not necessarily God. Similarly "worship" was just respect or esteem in general, whether idolatrous or not. It just meant that you felt someone was "worth" something.

That said, it's not a stretch to think that the lofty titles ascribed to Mary might mean that some people thinking of her in those ways step over the line into idolatry. Again, it doesn't mean anything that a person has been assured that adoring Mary is by definition not idolatry. It still could be. Functionally, I'd argue that if someone's first thought in times of trouble is, "Help me, Blessed Virgin!" rather than, "Help me, Lord Jesus!" they probably have an idolatrous view of Mary rather than just a healthy respect for one of God's people.

We know though in what sense prayer and worship are being used depending on the situation. The lexicons clearly make this distinction.


1. In worship, narrowly conceived, men and women recognize that God himself is of highest worth. They give to him their highest respect...Because others are creatures of God, they are due respect, but not the highest respect that only God deserves. Our ultimate affection is focused on God himself (4:950, The Zondervan Encyclopedia of the Bible, Prayer, G.R. Lewis).
2. NIDNTT: It is significant that, wherever the NT speaks of requests made to God, it emphasizes that such requests are heard (cf. Matt. 6:8; 7:7-11; 18:19; 21:22; Jn. 14:13f.; 15:7, 16; 16:23f., 26; 1 Jn. 3:22; 5:14f.; Jas. 1:5). It is as if the NT witnesses wished particularly to encourage men to pray, by assuring the suppliant that his requests are heard by God. The NT is aware that this certainty keeps all prayer alive; let such certainty become weakened or diminished through doubt, and prayer dies...In prayer we are never to forget whom we are addressing: the living God, the almighty One with whom nothing is impossible, and from whom therefore all things may be expected (2:857, Prayer, H. Schonweiss).
3. NIDOTTE: Prayer is, indeed a serious matter. It is regarded in the Bible as the most fundamental of all expressions of religion. It concerns the deepest feelings and most central motivation of the persons who are offering their prayer to their God, and it concerns the covenant relationship, with its blessings and sanctions, as the inevitable fabric of the living communion between the people and their God. To pray is an act of faith in the almighty and gracious God, who responds to the prayers of his people (4:1062, Prayer, P.A. Verhoef).
4. Harper's Bible Dictionary: the act of petitioning, praising, giving thanks, or confessing to God (Arland J. Hultgren, Prayer, page 816).
5. Eerdman's Dictionary of the Bible: In sum, both the OT and the NT portray prayer as a principal means by which Creator and creature are bound together in an ongoing, vital, and mutually important partnership (Samuel E. Balentine, Prayer, page 1079, David Noel Freedman, Editor).

So I would still like to see an example of prayer in the Bible that isn't worship.

RBerman
04-03-2014, 04:02 PM
So I would still like to see an example of prayer in the Bible that isn't worship.

How many examples would you like?

Genesis 12:13 Say, I pray thee, that thou art my sister, that I may fare well for thy sake, and that my life may be preserved by thee.

Genesis 13:8-9 Then said Abram unto Lot, Let there be no strife, I pray thee, between thee and me, neither between mine herdsmen and thine herdsmen: for we be brethren. Is not the whole land before thee? depart I pray thee from me: if thou wilt take the left hand, then I will go to the right: or if thou go to the right hand, then I will take the left.

Genesis 16:2 And Sarai said unto Abram, Behold now, the Lord hath restrained me from childbearing, I pray thee go in unto my maid: it may be that I shall receive a child by her. And Abram obeyed the voice of Sarai.

Genesis 19:1-2 And in the evening there came two Angels to Sodom: and Lot sat at the gate of Sodom, and Lot saw them, and rose up to meet them, and he bowed himself with his face to the ground. And he said, See my lords, I pray you turn in now into your servant’s house, and tarry all night, and wash your feet, and ye shall rise up early and go your ways. Who said, Nay, but we will abide in the street all night.

Genesis 19:7 And [Lot] said, I pray you, my brethren, do not so wickedly.

Genesis 19:17-18 And when they had brought them out, the Angel said, Escape for thy life: look not behind thee, neither tarry thou in all the plain: escape into the mountain, lest thou be destroyed. And Lot said unto them, Not so, I pray thee, my Lord.

Genesis 23:12-13 Then Abraham bowed himself before the people of the land, And spake unto Ephron in the audience of the people of the country, saying, Seeing thou wilt give it, I pray thee, hear me, I will give the price of the field: receive it of me, and I will bury my dead there.

And so on, hundreds of times. "Pray" means "request." In modern Protestant usage, the word has become specialized so that we only use it with respect to God, as your dictionaries show. But that's not the only meaning.


pray [prey] verb (used with object)
1. to offer devout petition, praise, thanks, etc., to (God or an object of worship).
2. to offer (a prayer).
3. to bring, put, etc., by praying: to pray a soul into heaven.
4. to make earnest petition to (a person).
5. to make petition or entreaty for; crave: She prayed his forgiveness.

TimelessTheist
04-03-2014, 04:08 PM
He still hasn't answered that passage in Revelations 5:8, where the Saints are depicted handing "the prayers of the people" to God. If that's not Saints interceding on behalf of the people, then what is it?

TimelessTheist
04-03-2014, 04:09 PM
I am grateful Mary is at peace and not having to be troubled by us pestering her constantly. No one in the NT asked a departed saint to pray for them. One would think Paul would have prayed to Stephen to pray for him.

You're a Protestant? Huh, didn't know that.

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 04:11 PM
How many examples would you like?

Genesis 12:13 Say, I pray thee, that thou art my sister, that I may fare well for thy sake, and that my life may be preserved by thee.

Genesis 13:8-9 Then said Abram unto Lot, Let there be no strife, I pray thee, between thee and me, neither between mine herdsmen and thine herdsmen: for we be brethren. Is not the whole land before thee? depart I pray thee from me: if thou wilt take the left hand, then I will go to the right: or if thou go to the right hand, then I will take the left.

Genesis 16:2 And Sarai said unto Abram, Behold now, the Lord hath restrained me from childbearing, I pray thee go in unto my maid: it may be that I shall receive a child by her. And Abram obeyed the voice of Sarai.

Genesis 19:1-2 And in the evening there came two Angels to Sodom: and Lot sat at the gate of Sodom, and Lot saw them, and rose up to meet them, and he bowed himself with his face to the ground. And he said, See my lords, I pray you turn in now into your servant’s house, and tarry all night, and wash your feet, and ye shall rise up early and go your ways. Who said, Nay, but we will abide in the street all night.

Genesis 19:7 And [Lot] said, I pray you, my brethren, do not so wickedly.

Genesis 19:17-18 And when they had brought them out, the Angel said, Escape for thy life: look not behind thee, neither tarry thou in all the plain: escape into the mountain, lest thou be destroyed. And Lot said unto them, Not so, I pray thee, my Lord.

Genesis 23:12-13 Then Abraham bowed himself before the people of the land, And spake unto Ephron in the audience of the people of the country, saying, Seeing thou wilt give it, I pray thee, hear me, I will give the price of the field: receive it of me, and I will bury my dead there.

And so on, hundreds of times. "Pray" means "request." In modern Protestant usage, the word has become specialized so that we only use it with respect to God, as your dictionaries show. But that's not the only meaning.


pray [prey] verb (used with object)
1. to offer devout petition, praise, thanks, etc., to (God or an object of worship).
2. to offer (a prayer).
3. to bring, put, etc., by praying: to pray a soul into heaven.
4. to make earnest petition to (a person).
5. to make petition or entreaty for; crave: She prayed his forgiveness.

This completely ignores what I wrote in Post 36.
See the first sentence and then the citations.

See also Thayer
http://www.blbclassic.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G1189&t=KJV

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 04:13 PM
He still hasn't answered that passage in Revelations 5:8, where the Saints are depicted handing "the prayers of the people" to God. If that's not Saints interceding on behalf of the people, then what is it?

They can transmit them but nowhere does the text say or teach that they are prayed "to".

That you can not prove.

Wishful thinking won't help.

RBerman
04-03-2014, 04:16 PM
This completely ignores what I wrote in Post 36.
See the first sentence and then the citations.

I read it and responded. If you don't have any more substantive response to my comments, then I do not to yours, either.

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 04:17 PM
You responded to something I already addressed.

Leonhard
04-03-2014, 04:21 PM
This argument will not be solved either way by appeal to terms like latria and dulia and hyperdulia. The theoretical distinctions between them might or might not matter in the practice of some particular person, just as the honor that we give to a country, or a romantic interest, or a family member, or a religious, political, or cultural leader might practically speaking supersede our devotion to God and thus become a form of idolatry.

Isn't this a problem of practice rather than principle?

Lets say a hypothetical Catholic crosses the line and starts to consider the graces of Mary's prayers as originating in her, or places her as the fourth person of The Trinity, or ignores the sacraments because she's considered superior, then something's clearly broken.

Since all those examples lie outside of approved Marian devotion it can't rightfully be said to be part of it.

We both agree that abnormal Marian devotion is abnormal.

Praying to Mary in a state of emergency I wouldn't say counts. Idolatry of Mary is possible, but I think you need to be more specific about what form would be idolatry.

I guess the real suspicion on your part is on her honorific titles, and whether God bestowed certain graces on her, such as her assumption into Heaven like Enosh, Moses and Elijah, her being born free of sin as a new Eve, her perpetual virginity, her being crowned Queen of Heaven and the greatest Saint, Mirror of Justice, Gate of Heaven... You said something to the effect that it smelled like Athena worship to you in another thread.

However why the Church agreed that she had these titles is a discussion of authority and our disagreement there is ultimately sola scriptura vs tradition. I take it you'd agree on that point?


Conversely, they are not off of the hook of testing their own hearts as to whether they really are being idolatrous, even though they have been raised to assume that they are not.

I haven't, I'm a fresh convert to Catholicism. Marian devotion is something I've approached carefully.

I definitely agree on the testing of your heart though. Same with everything. You shouldn't do anything unreflectingly.

If Mary is crowned Queen of Heaven by her Son and she administers the angels and enjoys a position of derived glory super omnes spesiosa. Then if I didn't honor her authority, position, beauty, etc..., I would be diminishing a work of grace by Christ and thereby diminishing Him by extension.

I owe her at-least as much admiration as I do my own country. More so because in Catholic theology Christ gave her as a gift to the Church.

Its not a zero sum game. Mary is all about Christ, and many of the prayers involve her intercession with Him. You'd need to show that my devotion to Mary makes me love Christ less. I pray to Him more than I would without that devotion; I think about the deeds of his life, death and resurrection because that's part of Mary devotion; he's more kingly and sovereign to me, he's not best-buddy-Jesus; etc...

Now the basic premises you might disagree with (Mary crowned Queen of Heaven and given as a gift to the Church). However I only need to defend how this works within Catholicism.

Whether its true is ultimately a question of the sources we build our faithes on. If sola scriptura is true I have no leg to stand on. If the bishops were given teaching authority, then vice versa.

RBerman
04-03-2014, 04:23 PM
You responded to something I already addressed.

Huh? I was responding to post #36. You then told me to read post #36, the very post I quoted and to which I was responding. It's simply not true that "pray" only refers to requests made to God. Yes, that is the most common meaning of the word. No, it is not the only meaning of the word, which is why I was able to quote several out of the hundreds of times that the Bible itself uses "pray" for someone other than God.

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 04:27 PM
Here's my quote from Post 36:
"We know though in what sense prayer and worship are being used depending on the situation. The lexicons clearly make this distinction."

Then you cite passages where "pray" is used in a different sense. There was no need of you to do something in which I already addressed.

This is also why I cited Thayer in Post 40. Need I cite others lexicons that verify my point?

RBerman
04-03-2014, 04:29 PM
Isn't this a problem of practice rather than principle? Lets say a hypothetical Catholic crosses the line and starts to consider the graces of Mary's prayers as originating in her, or places her as the fourth person of The Trinity, or ignores the sacraments because she's considered superior, then something's clearly broken. Since all those examples lie outside of approved Marian devotion it can't rightfully be said to be part of it. We both agree that abnormal Marian devotion is abnormal. Praying to Mary in a state of emergency I wouldn't say counts. Idolatry of Mary is possible, but I think you need to be more specific about what form would be idolatry.
If your instinct, in times of prayer, is first and foremost to pray to Mary, then I do not know on what grounds you could claim that you have not put Mary before God.


I guess the real suspicion on your part is on her honorific titles, and whether God bestowed certain graces on her, such as her assumption into Heaven like Enosh, Moses and Elijah, her being born free of sin as a new Eve, her perpetual virginity, her being crowned Queen of Heaven and the greatest Saint, Mirror of Justice, Gate of Heaven... You said something to the effect that it smelled like Athena worship to you in another thread. However why the Church agreed that she had these titles ia a discussion of authority and our disagreement there is ultimately sola scriptura vs tradition. I take it you'd agree on that point?
Yes. Really, pretty much every difference between Protestantism and Roman Catholicism is going to boil down to a difference of authority eventually.


If Mary is crowned Queen of Heaven by her Son and she administers the angels and enjoys a position of derived glory super omnes spesiosa. Then if I didn't honor her authority, position, beauty, etc., I would be diminishing a work of grace by Christ and thereby diminishing Him by extension. I owe her at-least as much admiration as I do my own country. More so because in Catholic theology Christ gave her as a gift to the Church. Its not a zero sum game. Mary is all about Christ, and many of the prayers involve her intercession with Him. You'd need to show that my devotion to Mary makes me love Christ less. I pray to Him more than I would without that devotion; I think about the deeds of his life, death and resurrection because that's part of Mary devotion; he's more kingly and sovereign to me, he's not best-buddy-Jesus; etc. Now the basic premises you might disagree with (Mary crowned Queen of Heaven and given as a gift to the Church). However I only need to defend how this works within Catholicism. Whether its true is ultimately a question of sources to build the faith on.

Certainly if Jesus told you to do X, you'd better do X.

RBerman
04-03-2014, 04:34 PM
Here's my quote from Post 36:
"We know though in what sense prayer and worship are being used depending on the situation. The lexicons clearly make this distinction."

Then you cite passages where "pray" is used in a different sense. There was no need of you to do something in which I already addressed.

This is also why I cited Thayer in Post 40. Need I cite others lexicons that verify my point?

Essentially you're arguing for a restricted definition of "pray" so that it's always prayer to God, and then railing against someone who, under a different definition, uses the word in a way that violates your demands. This is not an issue that a modern lexicon is going to solve one way or the other. Post #36 betrays no awareness that "pray" is used in contexts other than to God. A link to a lexicon is not an argument one way or the other. In order for discussion to advance, you would have to first respond to the question of whether you realize that "pray" can be used in a context other than prayer to God. Can you clear that up for me?

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 04:41 PM
I am only citing what they affirm. If I restrict it it is because that is how it is defined.
Several lexicons all affirm this but you insist they won't be able to solve. Thanks form your authoritative pronouncement.

Leonhard
04-03-2014, 04:47 PM
If your instinct, in times of prayer, is first and foremost to pray to Mary, then I do not know on what grounds you could claim that you have not put Mary before God.

I'll giving an explanation, though since you don't give an argument I hope you agree that the criteria for success would just be your subjective evaluation.

If Mary is given as intercessor for us then basically whatever prayer I give her she gives to her Son, only with her wisdom and position of authority.

Tradition tells me I can trust this confidently.

However its more complicated because there are many kinds of prayers. The mass is a prayer, all God all the time with a small interrim asking for the saints prayers (lasting under 20s usually). Confession, Christ centric again. Worshipping the blessed sacrament hours of silence looking at a consecrated host contemplating Christ's offering.

I pray to Mary (and other saints depending on circumstances) before many of those things, usually for her petitions to make me ready for it. To be more like her Son, to love Christ more.

So in the end if all I do is centered around Christ, then in what way can you say that I'm putting something else ahead of Christ?

Short of arguing that what I'm doing are heretical mistakes based on following false authorities of course. However we both agree that this would be a question of authority.

RBerman
04-03-2014, 04:49 PM
I am only citing what they affirm. If I restrict it it is because that is how it is defined.

I have shown that this is not the case, as evidenced by hundreds of times in the Bible that "prayer" is not to God.


Several lexicons all affirm this but you insist they won't be able to solve. Thanks form your authoritative pronouncement.

My point is that you are misusing lexicons in approaching this question, because the word "pray" in the passages I cited is not its own separate word that you'll find in a lexicon. It's a specific way of modifying another Hebrew word grammatically to make it into a prayer/request.

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 05:06 PM
I have shown that this is not the case, as evidenced by hundreds of times in the Bible that "prayer" is not to God.



My point is that you are misusing lexicons in approaching this question, because the word "pray" in the passages I cited is not its own separate word that you'll find in a lexicon. It's a specific way of modifying another Hebrew word grammatically to make it into a prayer/request.


The same word is not always used in the same exact way. There are variations.
You are the one who misunderstands that the lexicons make this distinction.

In fact, there are times when prayer to God is being offered and it simply reads that the person "said" or "inquired". How someone says or inquires something to another person would not be the exact same way as saying something or inquiring something to God.

Yeah the lexicons are all wrong about this and you are right.


Credentials please..........................

Leonhard
04-03-2014, 05:11 PM
The same word is not always used in the same exact way. There are variations.
You are the one who misunderstands that the lexicons make this distinction.

So how aren't you contradicting what you've said before. Prayer isn't always


Yeah they are all wrong about this and you are right.

Credentials please..........................

Strawman, RBerman wasn't arguing from
authority but from specific examples.

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 05:14 PM
1. What contradiction?

2. Examples which the lexicons have already taken into account.
If 500,000 people said "I pray you" to a person and they said it silently along with the request and the other person knew all of those requests that is not the exact same thing as praying to God.

If you know anyone besides God who is capable of knowing what those 500,000 silently requested please tell me.

Leonhard
04-03-2014, 05:42 PM
1. What contradiction?

Admitting that prayer can be taken to mean different things vs holding that it applies exclusively to worship of God.


If 500,000 people said "I pray you" to a person and they said it silently along with the request and the other person knew all of those requests that is not the exact same thing as praying to God.

Why is the silence important? And why is this example relevant, I have no reason to think that God has given you the grace of hearing all those prayers.

The saints in Heaven are not participating in time so they have an eternity to consider the individual prayers if need be. Again individual angels will carry up individual prayers, or God will tell them.

Why would it take more than for them to ask?


If you know anyone besides God who is capable of knowing what those 500,000 silently requested please tell me.

Tradition tells us that Mary knows our prayers, probably by being informed of them by God or the angels carrying the prayers.

Some angel, likely your guardian angel, knows your thoughts. If you think a prayer (which I assume is what you mean by a silent prayer) then he'll know and that's all that is necessary.

Why would anymore be required?

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 07:03 PM
Admitting that prayer can be taken to mean different things vs holding that it applies exclusively to worship of God.



Why is the silence important? And why is this example relevant, I have no reason to think that God has given you the grace of hearing all those prayers.

The saints in Heaven are not participating in time so they have an eternity to consider the individual prayers if need be. Again individual angels will carry up individual prayers, or God will tell them.

Why would it take more than for them to ask?



Tradition tells us that Mary knows our prayers, probably by being informed of them by God or the angels carrying the prayers.

Some angel, likely your guardian angel, knows your thoughts. If you think a prayer (which I assume is what you mean by a silent prayer) then he'll know and that's all that is necessary.

Why would anymore be required?

1. It is not a contradiction because it is supported by several excellent authorities.
2. Silence is important because it proves my point in number 1 as well. The word is not used in the exact same sense.
3. If Mary or anyone else besides God knows all the hearts behind the prayers are offered that would make her and them omniscient (God) - because kardiognwsta is properly defined as such.

Leonhard
04-03-2014, 07:31 PM
You didn't answer any of my questions, you just reiterated the same points. This conversation is rapidly ceasing to have any purpose.


1. It is not a contradiction because it is supported by several excellent authorities.
2. Silence is important because it proves my point in number 1 as well. The word is not used in the exact same sense.
3. If Mary or anyone else besides God knows all the hearts behind the prayers are offered that would make her and them omniscient (God) - because kardiognwsta is properly defined as such.

I was talking about silent prayers. Why is it important for the prayers to be silent?

Do you consider spoken prayers to be a problem as well?

And knowing the prayers of people is equivalent with knowing the content of their hearts?

I'll ignore whether you're right about that heart-knower is God stuff.

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 07:40 PM
You didn't answer any of my questions, you just reiterated the same points. This conversation is rapidly ceasing to have any purpose.



I was talking about silent prayers. Why is it important for the prayers to be silent?

Do you consider spoken prayers to be a problem as well?

And knowing the prayers of people is equivalent with knowing the content of their hearts?

I'll ignore whether you're right about that heart-knower is God stuff.



The conversation is rapidly ceasing because you refuse to see how words are PROPERLY defined - why would you "ignore" about God being the heart-knower?
Silent prayers prove that when the word "prayed" is used in reference to people addressing other people it is not in the same sense as when it is used of people addressing God. Notice further that when it is used of people addressing other people it is not multiple people with various needs all addressing the person at the same time and having that person fully understand every thing that was being said.

Fully knowing the prayers of people is equivalent to fully knowing the contents of their hearts.

Leonhard
04-03-2014, 08:01 PM
Fully knowing the prayers of people is equivalent to fully knowing the contents of their hearts.

I guess you could always play on the word 'fully'. Maria doesn't need exhaustive knowledge, in principle she just needs your prayer intentions. Since you're quite capable of delivering those verbally, then even by your own standards Maria doesn't need knowledge that goes beyond verbal communication.

Leonhard
04-03-2014, 08:03 PM
You still ignore my questions, and get mad for not answering every little bit from you.


I guess you could always play on the word 'fully'. Maria doesn't need exhaustive knowledge, in principle she just needs your prayer intentions. Since you're quite capable of delivering those verbally, then even by your own standards Maria doesn't need knowledge that goes beyond verbal communication.

robrecht
04-03-2014, 08:04 PM
Are we supposed to imagine that the angels and saints in heaven only hear by mechanical sound vibrations and physical ears?

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 08:28 PM
I guess you could always play on the word 'fully'. Maria doesn't need exhaustive knowledge, in principle she just needs your prayer intentions. Since you're quite capable of delivering those verbally, then even by your own standards Maria doesn't need knowledge that goes beyond verbal communication.

Prayer intentions would necessitate fully knowing the heart.
Not all prayers are give verbally thus your point collapses.

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 08:29 PM
Are we supposed to imagine that the angels and saints in heaven only hear by mechanical sound vibrations and physical ears?

Not sure but they do not fully know the hearts.

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 08:30 PM
You still ignore my questions, and get mad for not answering every little bit from you.
In Post 58 I answered your questions.

This is what you asked in Post 57:
Why is it important for the prayers to be silent?

Do you consider spoken prayers to be a problem as well?

And knowing the prayers of people is equivalent with knowing the content of their hearts?

Here is my post 58
The conversation is rapidly ceasing because you refuse to see how words are PROPERLY defined - why would you "ignore" about God being the heart-knower?
ANSWER TO YOUR FIRST AND SECOND QUESTIONS:Silent prayers prove that when the word "prayed" is used in reference to people addressing other people it is not in the same sense as when it is used of people addressing God. Notice further that when it is used of people addressing other people it is not multiple people with various needs all addressing the person at the same time and having that person fully understand every thing that was being said.

ANSWER TO QUESTION NUMBER 3: Fully knowing the prayers of people is equivalent to fully knowing the contents of their hearts.

Spartacus
04-03-2014, 08:35 PM
Foud: is there any reason to believe that heart-knowing is not synecdotal with respect to omniscience?

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 08:37 PM
What does synecdotal mean?

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/synecdotal?s=t

robrecht
04-03-2014, 08:40 PM
Not sure but they do not fully know the hearts.Do you think that the Catholic church teaches that any of the angels or saints are Omniscient or fully know the hearts of all people everywhere?

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 08:44 PM
I don't know if they teach if others fully know the hearts of all people - in practice they do. This is why I wrote in the OP:
So by praying to Mary Roman Catholics (whether they realize it or not) are ascribing knowledge to her that is reserved for God alone.

In Post 20 Spartacus affirms that others knowing the hearts is possible.

Spartacus
04-03-2014, 08:44 PM
What does synecdotal mean?

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/synecdotal?s=t

Adjective form of synecdoche.

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 08:46 PM
Adjective form of synecdoche.

I have never seen kardiognwsta defined as such.

Spartacus
04-03-2014, 08:48 PM
I have never seen kardiognwsta defined as such.

There is more to omniscience than knowing the heart, correct? But in the Bible, knowledge of the heart is used to mean omniscience, or something like it. One part of omniscience (knowing the heart) is used to communicate the whole of omniscience. That's synecdoche.

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 08:52 PM
If one knows the totality of all hearts of all people that is stating they are omniscient.

Spartacus
04-03-2014, 08:54 PM
If one knows the totality of all hearts of all people that is stating they are omniscient.

Is it possible that God could tell a person about the totality of every heart at any given moment without making that person completely omniscient? Is is possible to know the totality of every heart without at the same time knowing how many stars are in the sky?

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 08:56 PM
No to both questions.
That would mean that God created another one who is omniscient (God).

The same would apply to God being omnipotent. God created all people. God also created the stars.

robrecht
04-03-2014, 09:09 PM
I don't know if they teach if others fully know the hearts of all people - in practice they do. This is why I wrote in the OP:
So by praying to Mary Roman Catholics (whether they realize it or not) are ascribing knowledge to her that is reserved for God alone.

In Post 20 Spartacus affirms that others knowing the hearts is possible.
Please let me know if you (or anyone else here) find out. It would be good to know. I am not sure of Catholic teaching on this precise point, but nothing comes to mind.

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 09:12 PM
OK. I tried doing a search on the computer and couldn't find anything.

I know the Mormons believe it refers to omniscience.

Spartacus
04-03-2014, 09:14 PM
http://www.padrepio.catholicwebservices.com/ENGLISH/knowledge.htm

There are a few examples (which you may or may not believe to be pious fictions) of God granting special knowledge to saints here on Earth, including knowledge of the hearts of people coming to them for the Sacrament of Confession.

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 09:16 PM
I couldn't access the web page.
God can grant prophets special ability to know some things that others wouldn't know but not the totality.

Spartacus
04-03-2014, 09:18 PM
I couldn't access the web page.
God can grant prophets special ability to know some things that others wouldn't know but not the totality.

So you can know enough to know whether a person is lying to you, or more or less their true intentions, without knowing the complete totality of a person's heart? If so, then you've handed me victory, whether you like it or not.

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 09:19 PM
If some say that prophets were able to read the hearts of people (cf. 1 Kings 14:5; 2 Kings 6:12; 8:11 Acts 5:3-5) we must remember that although they had more insight than others they were never said to be able to know the totality of the hearts of all people (2 Kings 4:27). Only God has this knowledge (omniscience).

So don't give yourself any high fives.

Spartacus
04-03-2014, 09:24 PM
If some say that prophets were able to read the hearts of people (cf. 1 Kings 14:5; 2 Kings 6:12; 8:11 Acts 5:3-5) we must remember that although they had more insight than others they were never said to be able to know the totality of the hearts of all people (2 Kings 4:27). Only God has this knowledge (omniscience).

So don't give yourself any high fives.

Would knowing the prayers of people require much - if any - more knowledge than the prophets had in those circumstances?

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 09:25 PM
Yes, it would require omniscience because even the prophets did not know EVERTHING.

Spartacus
04-03-2014, 09:27 PM
Yes, it would require omniscience because even the prophets did not know EVERTHING.

No one is arguing that the saints know everything. I am arguing that they know more-- far more-- than any human being could without God's assistance (as we see with the prophets), but not that they know everything.

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 09:32 PM
They don't know enough to pray to them.

robrecht
04-03-2014, 09:33 PM
If some say that prophets were able to read the hearts of people (cf. 1 Kings 14:5; 2 Kings 6:12; 8:11 Acts 5:3-5) we must remember that although they had more insight than others they were never said to be able to know the totality of the hearts of all people (2 Kings 4:27). Only God has this knowledge (omniscience).

So don't give yourself any high fives.
Is there an infinite number of people alive at any one time? Is God's Omniscience limited to knowing only the prayerful intentions of those who pray?

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 09:34 PM
1. No
2. No

robrecht
04-03-2014, 09:36 PM
1. No
2. No
So those who believe that Mary can know the prayerful intentions of others do not necessarily attribute Omniscience to her, correct?

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 09:37 PM
No, because if you know the totality of the prayerful intentions of other this means you are omniscient.

See the OP for the definition of kardiognwsta.

robrecht
04-03-2014, 09:37 PM
They don't know enough to pray to them.
How do you know what saints and angels do and do not know? Are you Omniscient perhaps?

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 09:38 PM
I'm not omniscient but to know the totality of all the hearts of all people means the same thing as being omniscient. Thus no else knows but God.

Around and around we go.

robrecht
04-03-2014, 09:42 PM
I'm not omniscient but to know the totality of all the hearts of all people means the same thing as being omniscient. Thus no else knows but God.

Around and around we go.
But you said that Is God's Omniscience is not limited to knowing only the prayerful intentions of those who pray. Do you now want to limit God's Omniscience?

foudroyant
04-03-2014, 09:46 PM
It's not limited but since He knows all the hearts it already proves His omniscience.
Knowing the totality of all the hearts proves He knows the totality of everything else.

Just hit page 10 here. Enough has been said over and over again.

Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. (2 Timothy 3:7, KJV)

I got other places to be.


Goodbye

robrecht
04-03-2014, 09:50 PM
It's not limited but since He knows all the hearts it already proves His omniscience.
Knowing the totality of all the hearts proves He knows the totality of everything else.

Just hit page 10 here. Enough has been said over and over again.

Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. (2 Timothy 3:7, KJV)

I got other places to be.


GoodbyeOK, goodbye, then, but please return when you achieve Omniscience. I will have many more questions for you!

Leonhard
04-03-2014, 11:23 PM
Prayer intentions would necessitate fully knowing the heart.

Why? I don't see that at all.

One Bad Pig
04-04-2014, 06:08 AM
OK. I tried doing a search on the computer and couldn't find anything.

I know the Mormons believe it refers to omniscience.
Surely you're not using the Mormons as an authority.

robrecht
04-04-2014, 06:11 AM
Any port in a storm.

RBerman
04-04-2014, 07:45 AM
Is it possible that God could tell a person about the totality of every heart at any given moment without making that person completely omniscient? Is is possible to know the totality of every heart without at the same time knowing how many stars are in the sky?

It is not usually helpful to frame questions in terms of what God can or cannot do. Rather, the question is: On what grounds would we think that God does such a thing? No one in the Bible treats deceased saints as if it were so. No parts of the Bible instruct us to do such things. Hebrews 11, the passage which most strongly encourages us to think about our spiritual forebears, simply says that their lives serve as witnesses to us, without a hint that they currently help us through prayers we offer to them in general, or in some alleged area of expertise-- the saint of music, the saint of travel, etc.

Catholicity
04-04-2014, 08:56 AM
Surely you're not using the Mormons as an authority.
I think that's called "arguing out of desperation"

foudroyant
04-04-2014, 07:37 PM
I think that's called "arguing out of desperation"

I am not using them as an authority to support my claim. Duh people! Robtrainwreck asked me about if I knew of any Catholic documentation about knowing hearts in Post 75. I wrote in Post 76 that I couldn't find any. The Mormon reference was simply a side comment that others also believe it refers to omniscience.

I cited plenty of excellent Greek scholars in the OP who affirm what I believe. Do you believe them? No. Has anyone cited any scholars who disagree with them? No.
So as the Mary worshiping heretics you are I appealed to other heretics (the Mormons) that know better than you. Get a clue.

I'm willing to debate this in the one on one section of TWEB...but as usual no one will accept for your blasphemous heresy will be stomped on.

Leonhard
04-04-2014, 11:12 PM
2 Sam. 1:1-3:

"Now it came to pass, after Saul was dead, that David returned from the slaughter of the Amalecites, and abode two days in Siceleg. And on the third day, there appeared a man who came out of Saul's camp, with his garments rent, and dust strewed on his head: and when he came to David, he fell upon his face, and adored. And David said to him: From whence comest thou? And he said to him: I am fled out of the camp of Israel."

foudroyant
04-05-2014, 04:38 AM
2 Sam. 1:1-3:

"Now it came to pass, after Saul was dead, that David returned from the slaughter of the Amalecites, and abode two days in Siceleg. And on the third day, there appeared a man who came out of Saul's camp, with his garments rent, and dust strewed on his head: and when he came to David, he fell upon his face, and adored. And David said to him: From whence comest thou? And he said to him: I am fled out of the camp of Israel."

The Hebrew word for prostrated is shachah and it could mean the worship of God or obeisance rendered unto people.

It happened as David was coming to the summit, where God was worshiped, that behold, Hushai the Archite met him with his coat torn and dust on his head. (2 Samuel 15:32, NASB)

There is no Hebrew word in the Bible used for the exclusive worship of God.

Your point is invalid.

foudroyant
04-05-2014, 04:47 AM
delete

RBerman
04-05-2014, 07:30 AM
I cited plenty of excellent Greek scholars in the OP who affirm what I believe.

But you didn't. You quoted a lexicon to show that some specific Hebrew words translated as "pray" are only used in the Bible with respect to God. Then I showed numerous examples of a grammatical (not lexical, and thus not found in a lexicon) feature in Hebrew which was repeatedly translated as "pray" in the Bible even when the object was not God.

foudroyant
04-05-2014, 02:49 PM
From Post #58:
Notice further that when it is used of people addressing other people it is not multiple people with various needs all addressing the person at the same time and having that person fully understand every thing that was being said.
-----------------------------
If 500,000 people all said to one person at the same time "I pray thee..." and then they presented various requests (many of them silent) for various amounts of time that person would not be able to fully understand all the requests rendered unto him/her.
When multiple people addressed the commander in Acts 21:34 he was unable to fully understand what all the people were saying.

Both cases would present no difficulty to the heart-knowing (omniscient) God.



So I will repeat my point once again. The word "pray" or "prayed" is not used in the exact same way.

Catholicity
04-06-2014, 07:47 AM
But you didn't. You quoted a lexicon to show that some specific Hebrew words translated as "pray" are only used in the Bible with respect to God. Then I showed numerous examples of a grammatical (not lexical, and thus not found in a lexicon) feature in Hebrew which was repeatedly translated as "pray" in the Bible even when the object was not God.
I think Rberman pointed out a fundamental flaw in your argument. I know he's not Catholic and we've certainly had some disagreements, over Catholicism. But you have taken this to a new level of lunacy foud. At best you have misinterpretation of scripture, and you don't have a single decent source that actually backs the claim up. You're claim is that if Catholics pray to an angel or saint, we are worshipping them. That's not what I was taught, nor what I learned. We do not attribute Omniscience, nor any attribute of God to any saint. When we as a saint or an angel to pray for us it is no different than if we ask a fellow Christian who is here to pray for us. The Saints are just as much alive as we are. But they are present with the Lord. Secondly if any miracle is attributed to a Saint, they cannot do it by their own power, but it is God who does it by using them as a vessel to reveal himself. You may consider it blasphemy, But you should at least try to understand it, before you criticize it.

RBerman
04-06-2014, 01:14 PM
I think Rberman pointed out a fundamental flaw in your argument. I know he's not Catholic and we've certainly had some disagreements, over Catholicism. But you have taken this to a new level of lunacy foud. At best you have misinterpretation of scripture, and you don't have a single decent source that actually backs the claim up. You're claim is that if Catholics pray to an angel or saint, we are worshipping them. That's not what I was taught, nor what I learned. We do not attribute Omniscience, nor any attribute of God to any saint. When we as a saint or an angel to pray for us it is no different than if we ask a fellow Christian who is here to pray for us. The Saints are just as much alive as we are. But they are present with the Lord. Secondly if any miracle is attributed to a Saint, they cannot do it by their own power, but it is God who does it by using them as a vessel to reveal himself. You may consider it blasphemy, But you should at least try to understand it, before you criticize it.

I don't think it's blasphemy to ask other saints to pray for you. I do wonder two things:

1) Those of you who ask dead saints to pray for you, how often do you ask living saints to pray for you? The Biblical instructions to "pray for each other" seem to assume bi-directional communication, as between two living Christians.

2) Those of you who ask living or dead saints (including Mary) to pray for you, how often do you pray directly to God yourself in comparison?

foudroyant
04-06-2014, 01:24 PM
I think Rberman pointed out a fundamental flaw in your argument. I know he's not Catholic and we've certainly had some disagreements, over Catholicism. But you have taken this to a new level of lunacy foud. At best you have misinterpretation of scripture, and you don't have a single decent source that actually backs the claim up. You're claim is that if Catholics pray to an angel or saint, we are worshipping them. That's not what I was taught, nor what I learned. We do not attribute Omniscience, nor any attribute of God to any saint. When we as a saint or an angel to pray for us it is no different than if we ask a fellow Christian who is here to pray for us. The Saints are just as much alive as we are. But they are present with the Lord. Secondly if any miracle is attributed to a Saint, they cannot do it by their own power, but it is God who does it by using them as a vessel to reveal himself. You may consider it blasphemy, But you should at least try to understand it, before you criticize it.

Not a single decent source that actually backs me up? See the OP #3.

I supplied plenty of passages in the OP that teach prayer is worship.
In terms of Omniscience this is why I also pointed out in the OP: "So by praying to Mary Roman Catholics (whether they realize it or not) are ascribing knowledge to her that is reserved for God alone."

Here's another passage that proves prayer is worship:
And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves. (Matthew 21:13. KJV)
The Temple is where worship took place and the Lord Jesus calls the Temple "the house of prayer".
Isaiah 56:7 - Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people. (KJV)
Keil and Delitzsch: (Isaiah 56:7) But here the temple is called “the house of prayer,” from the prayer which is the soul of all worship.
http://www.studylight.org/com/kdo/view.cgi?bk=22&ch=56
Barnes: (Isaiah 56:7) In my house of prayer - In the temple - here called the house of prayer. The language here is all derived from the worship of the Jews, though the meaning evidently is, that under the new dispensation, all nations would be admitted to the privileges of his people, and that the appropriate services of religion which they would offer would be acceptable to God.
http://www.studylight.org/com/bnb/view.cgi?bk=22&ch=56

Again I already addressed the argument about asking a friend to pray for you in the OP (#2).

And also I already addressed the fact that if God gave anyone this ability this would mean that God would have created another God in Post #74.

You haven't presented any refutation of what I have already addressed nor have you presented anything new.

robrecht
04-06-2014, 01:31 PM
I don't think it's blasphemy to ask other saints to pray for you. I do wonder two things:

1) Those of you who ask dead saints to pray for you, how often do you ask living saints to pray for you? The Biblical instructions to "pray for each other" seem to assume bi-directional communication, as between two living Christians.

2) Those of you who ask living or dead saints (including Mary) to pray for you, how often do you pray directly to God yourself in comparison?I think you mean 'God himself' or 'you yourself' instead of 'God yourself'. Personally, I do not really keep track of something like this. And, actually, I do not really think of myself as 'praying to' Mary or other saints (I think of them as resurrected saints, not dead saints) but rather as praying with them, including all the choirs of angels. For me, the saints seem more like an example of a prayerful life and communion with God that I might try to imitate. I think of the whole church as praying together, living, resurrected, near and far. I think of prayer as changing me and my attitude of praise and not as changing God or others, 'though when I ask someone else (someone here on earth) to pray for me, I do see it as an expression of communal faith that changes each of us by sharing this bond of prayerful faith.

One Bad Pig
04-06-2014, 02:22 PM
I don't think it's blasphemy to ask other saints to pray for you. I do wonder two things:

1) Those of you who ask dead saints to pray for you, how often do you ask living saints to pray for you? The Biblical instructions to "pray for each other" seem to assume bi-directional communication, as between two living Christians.
While I do occasionally ask living saints to pray for me for something specific, I do not typically ask people whom I do not know personally to pray for me in general; they only have limited time available to pray, after all. I am certain many people whom I do know personally pray for me in general without my having to ask, just as I pray for many others whom I know personally without them asking for it. Prayer to the saints does draw me into a relationship with them somehow, even though there is not explicit two-way communication.



2) Those of you who ask living or dead saints (including Mary) to pray for you, how often do you pray directly to God yourself in comparison?
I don't keep track, but I generally pray directly to God much more often than I ask others to pray for me.

RBerman
04-06-2014, 03:26 PM
I think you mean 'God himself' or 'you yourself' instead of 'God yourself'.

What I meant was: If you are in the habit of asking other people to pray to God on your behalf, do you also pray directly to God, on your own behalf?


Personally, I do not really keep track of something like this. And, actually, I do not really think of myself as 'praying to' Mary or other saints (I think of them as resurrected saints, not dead saints) but rather as praying with them, including all the choirs of angels. For me, the saints seem more like an example of a prayerful life and communion with God that I might try to imitate. I think of the whole church as praying together, living, resurrected, near and far. I think of prayer as changing me and my attitude of praise and not as changing God or others, 'though when I ask someone else (someone here on earth) to pray for me, I do see it as an expression of communal faith that changes each of us by sharing this bond of prayerful faith.
Regardless of the terminology, I am still interested in the answers to my two questions.

1) Compared to how often you request prayer from the dead, how often do you request prayer from the living? Is it 50/50, or 10/90, or what?

2) Compared to both of those, how often do you speak directly to God?

RBerman
04-06-2014, 03:29 PM
While I do occasionally ask living saints to pray for me for something specific, I do not typically ask people whom I do not know personally to pray for me in general; they only have limited time available to pray, after all. I am certain many people whom I do know personally pray for me in general without my having to ask, just as I pray for many others whom I know personally without them asking for it. Prayer to the saints does draw me into a relationship with them somehow, even though there is not explicit two-way communication.
I wouldn't expect you to ask total strangers to pray for you. I was thinking more of the context of your local church.


I don't keep track, but I generally pray directly to God much more often than I ask others to pray for me.
That is good.

robrecht
04-06-2014, 03:39 PM
What I meant was: If you are in the habit of asking other people to pray to God on your behalf, do you also pray directly to God, on your own behalf? Yes.


Regardless of the terminology, I am still interested in the answers to my two questions.

1) Compared to how often you request prayer from the dead, how often do you request prayer from the living? Is it 50/50, or 10/90, or what? Already said I don't keep track of this. Wouldn't even hazard a guess. Given my clarifications above, it seems rather meaningless, because I think of all prayer as the whole church praying together with all the angels and saints, living, resurrected, near and far. See what I mean?


2) Compared to both of those, how often do you speak directly to God?Again, this seems like a false dichotomy to me for the reasons stated above in this post and in the preceding one. Sorry if that is not helpful, but that is how I think of prayer, even as the Spirit praying within me.

Catholicity
04-06-2014, 04:36 PM
I don't think it's blasphemy to ask other saints to pray for you. I do wonder two things:

1) Those of you who ask dead saints to pray for you, how often do you ask living saints to pray for you? The Biblical instructions to "pray for each other" seem to assume bi-directional communication, as between two living Christians.

2) Those of you who ask living or dead saints (including Mary) to pray for you, how often do you pray directly to God yourself in comparison?
To answer question one, as often as I feel the need arises, certainly since my pastor is on my facebook, my friends, in laws and so on as well as the mother's groups I am in, I offer daily prayers for them and have asked often for their prayers epsecially lately.

To answer question number two, much much much more. I consider Mary a friend or a help, and a couple of times a day I may find myself saying a Hail Mary, but more often I recite the Lord's Prayer, or another familiar prayer, and often something of my own. Despite where I attend church, Prayer is daily and often.

Catholicity
04-06-2014, 04:37 PM
Foudroyant, all you've supplied is you're personal interpretation of scripture. That's it. I'd hardly call that an informed source.

foudroyant
04-06-2014, 04:42 PM
From the OP (#3):
The fact that there are passages in the Bible which demonstrate the Lord Jesus is the proper recipient of prayer/worship (which means He is omniscient) is powerful testimony that He is God. Many heretics deny His Deity so Roman Catholics and others who claim Mary can be prayed to (yes, that is worship) really discredit who the Lord Jesus is.
a. William Mounce: The fact that people pray to both God (Mt. 6:9) and Jesus (Acts 1:24) is part of the proof of Jesus' deity (Mounce's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old & New Testament Words, Pray, page 531).
b. A.H. Leitch: Christ possesses the attributes of God: omniscience (Acts 1:24) (2:94, deity of Christ, The Zondervan Encyclopedia of the Bible).
c. EDNT: On the one hand God is "in heaven" (Matt 6:9f. par.; 7:11; 11:25) and strictly distinguishable from everything that is of this world. On the other hand, however, he is present (Matt 6:1-18; Rev 1:8) and omniscient (Matt 6:8, 32; Acts 1:24; 15:8) (2:141, theos, G. Schneider).


Just my personal interpretation?
No way.


Based on what Mounce wrote above for those who pray to Mary it teaches:
The fact that Roman Catholics and others pray to God (Mt. 6:9) and Mary is part of the proof that they believe Mary is omniscient (God).

Based on what Leitch (and Schneider) wrote above for those who pray to Mary it teaches:
Mary possesses the attributes of God: omniscience (kardiognwsta).

RBerman
04-06-2014, 04:49 PM
Already said I don't keep track of this. Wouldn't even hazard a guess. Given my clarifications above, it seems rather meaningless, because I think of all prayer as the whole church praying together with all the angels and saints, living, resurrected, near and far. See what I mean?
I do not. Honestly, it seems like a cop out to say that it does not matter.

robrecht
04-06-2014, 04:53 PM
I do not. Honestly, it seems like a cop out to say that it does not matter.I did not say exactly that it does not matter, but that such a characterization seems rather meaningless to me, given my understanding of prayer. Should I change my views regarding prayer in order to give you an answer to your question? No, I don't think so. I answered your question as honestly as I could. Your welcome.

RBerman
04-06-2014, 04:53 PM
To answer question one, as often as I feel the need arises, certainly since my pastor is on my facebook, my friends, in laws and so on as well as the mother's groups I am in, I offer daily prayers for them and have asked often for their prayers epsecially lately.

So you often ask for prayer from the living, which is good and biblical. You don't specifically address how that compares to the percentage of prayer requests you direct toward deceased saints, but I get the impression that the latter is a minority.


To answer question number two, much much much more. I consider Mary a friend or a help, and a couple of times a day I may find myself saying a Hail Mary, but more often I recite the Lord's Prayer, or another familiar prayer, and often something of my own. Despite where I attend church, Prayer is daily and often.
OK.

RBerman
04-06-2014, 04:57 PM
I did not say exactly that it does not matter, but that such a characterization seems rather meaningless to me, given my understanding of prayer. Should I change my views regarding prayer in order to give you an answer to your question? No, I don't think so. I answered your question as honestly as I could. Your welcome.

You may think it is meaningless into which of my three categories your various prayers fall, and you may not be keeping a tally sheet that would permit a precise response, but I do not see how you could actually be incapable of providing a ballpark estimate as Catholicity has done. That is why I said that your answer seems like a cop out.

One Bad Pig
04-06-2014, 05:19 PM
Foudroyant, all you've supplied is you're personal interpretation of scripture. That's it. I'd hardly call that an informed source.
Foudroyant is hardly limiting his selective interpretation of sources to scripture. He's misusing a wide variety of sources.

robrecht
04-06-2014, 05:46 PM
You may think it is meaningless into which of my three categories your various prayers fall, and you may not be keeping a tally sheet that would permit a precise response, but I do not see how you could actually be incapable of providing a ballpark estimate as Catholicity has done. That is why I said that your answer seems like a cop out. Your questions simply do not fit my understanding of prayer. If I were to ask whether you agree more with Pope Pius IX or Pope Pius X about papal infallibility, how would you answer? If you could not prefer one over the other, would it help if I just asked for a ballpark estimate of your preference for one over the other?

Or, to shift to a more personal matter, if I asked you which of your children you loved more, and you could not honestly give me a precise or ballpark answer, and I said that was a cop-out, might you consider me a little bit rude to insist that you ought to answer a personal question with my preferred categories?

foudroyant
04-06-2014, 06:28 PM
Foudroyant is hardly limiting his selective interpretation of sources to scripture. He's misusing a wide variety of sources.

An assertion without proof.

RBerman
04-06-2014, 08:39 PM
Your questions simply do not fit my understanding of prayer. If I were to ask whether you agree more with Pope Pius IX or Pope Pius X about papal infallibility, how would you answer? If you could not prefer one over the other, would it help if I just asked for a ballpark estimate of your preference for one over the other?

Or, to shift to a more personal matter, if I asked you which of your children you loved more, and you could not honestly give me a precise or ballpark answer, and I said that was a cop-out, might you consider me a little bit rude to insist that you ought to answer a personal question with my preferred categories?

Are you saying that when you pray, you have no particular concept of a specific person whom you are addressing, and do not consciously address anyone in particular? Catholicity mentioned the "Hail Mary" and the Lord's Prayer, both of which have specific audiences in mind.

robrecht
04-06-2014, 09:17 PM
Are you saying that when you pray, you have no particular concept of a specific person whom you are addressing, and do not consciously address anyone in particular? Catholicity mentioned the "Hail Mary" and the Lord's Prayer, both of which have specific audiences in mind.
I noticed you didn't answer my question. Cop out. I do say the Our Father and Hail Mary sometimes, but neither particularly often, 'though I'm guessing the Our Father more often. But both of these are verbal prayers, ie, with words, which make up a very small percentage of my prayer, which is primarily nonverbal, contempative. I'm not typically aware of words, more a matter of feelings, joy, or just waiting, perhaps most typically just silently acknowledging the presence of God and goodness in all things, searching for goodness in all people. Sometimes meditating on the scriptures, especially Genesis 1, Philippians 2, or whatever text has been brought to mind recently. My favorite form of prayer is quiet adoration in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament, which come to think about it, sounds like prayer to Jesus, but I only think about it as being in the silent presence of Jesus, who is always accompanied by the Father and Holy Spirit. I typically think of Jesus as my brother, with both of us communing in the Spirit and acknowledging the Father who cannot be named, hence not really addressed with words. I don't consciously think of praying to specific saints or angels, but it feels like they are always present. If it feels like God is not present, eg, an arid desert experience, then I might feel especially close to saints who have written about their dark night of the soul. There's one particular painting of St Francis by Cimabue that helps me to meditate on the passion during such times, as he also did.

RBerman
04-07-2014, 07:28 AM
I noticed you didn't answer my question. Cop out.
I took your three questions as rhetorical. If you did want answers:

1) I am not familiar enough with their specific statements to comment.

2) If I had absolutely no basis for preferring one over the other, it would not help if you just asked for a ballpark estimate of my preference for one over the other. I am not sure that situation would actually arise, though. If you asked me whether I preferred the distinctives of Mormon doctrine or Jehovah's Witness doctrine, even though I think they are both wrong, I could probably give an intelligible response on the matter.

3) Love is difficult to quantify, and I would not be surprised if the answer was, "I love them all equally." That would not be a cop-out, if it were true. Nor would "I have an answer, but it's none of your business, so I'm not going to tell you" be a cop-out, though it would certainly put an end to the conversation.


I do say the Our Father and Hail Mary sometimes, but neither particularly often, 'though I'm guessing the Our Father more often. But both of these are verbal prayers, ie, with words, which make up a very small percentage of my prayer, which is primarily nonverbal, contempative. I'm not typically aware of words, more a matter of feelings, joy, or just waiting, perhaps most typically just silently acknowledging the presence of God and goodness in all things, searching for goodness in all people. Sometimes meditating on the scriptures, especially Genesis 1, Philippians 2, or whatever text has been brought to mind recently. My favorite form of prayer is quiet adoration in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament, which come to think about it, sounds like prayer to Jesus, but I only think about it as being in the silent presence of Jesus, who is always accompanied by the Father and Holy Spirit. I typically think of Jesus as my brother, with both of us communing in the Spirit and acknowledging the Father who cannot be named, hence not really addressed with words. I don't consciously think of praying to specific saints or angels, but it feels like they are always present. If it feels like God is not present, eg, an arid desert experience, then I might feel especially close to saints who have written about their dark night of the soul. There's one particular painting of St Francis by Cimabue that helps me to meditate on the passion during such times, as he also did.

Thank you for clarifying your experience. I would not classify nonverbal meditation as prayer, since all the prayers in the Bible are verbal. But accepting your paradigm, my questions could still stand if reframed with respect to verbal prayers, whether spoken aloud or simply formed as coherent thoughts within your mind.

robrecht
04-07-2014, 07:54 AM
I took your three questions as rhetorical. If you did want answers:

1) I am not familiar enough with their specific statements to comment.

2) If I had absolutely no basis for preferring one over the other, it would not help if you just asked for a ballpark estimate of my preference for one over the other. I am not sure that situation would actually arise, though. If you asked me whether I preferred the distinctives of Mormon doctrine or Jehovah's Witness doctrine, even though I think they are both wrong, I could probably give an intelligible response on the matter.

3) Love is difficult to quantify, and I would not be surprised if the answer was, "I love them all equally." That would not be a cop-out, if it were true. Nor would "I have an answer, but it's none of your business, so I'm not going to tell you" be a cop-out, though it would certainly put an end to the conversation.



Thank you for clarifying your experience. I would not classify nonverbal meditation as prayer, since all the prayers in the Bible are verbal. But accepting your paradigm, my questions could still stand if reframed with respect to verbal prayers, whether spoken aloud or simply formed as coherent thoughts within your mind.
Thank you for confirming that you would not answer the question on my terms. You may not consider my life of prayer to be prayer according to your use of the Bible, but I do. Prayerful meditation is indeed prayerful. Perhaps you did not understand that I was speaking about prayerful meditation in response to your question about my prayer life. I think the Bible tells us somewhere to pray always and I doubt that means endlessly repeating merely verbal prayers.

RBerman
04-07-2014, 08:56 AM
Thank you for confirming that you would not answer the question on my terms. You may not consider my life of prayer to be prayer according to your use of the Bible, but I do. Prayerful meditation is indeed prayerful. Perhaps you did not understand that I was speaking about prayerful meditation in response to your question about my prayer life.

I do appreciate your clarification that you were talking about prayerful meditation, though I still feel none the wiser as to how you divide the audience of your verbal prayers.


I think the Bible tells us somewhere to pray always and I doubt that means endlessly repeating merely verbal prayers.

I suspect you are referring to this sequence of brief exhortations:


See that no one repays anyone evil for evil, but always seek to do good to one another and to everyone. Rejoice always, pray without ceasing, give thanks in all circumstances; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you. Do not quench the Spirit. Do not despise prophecies, but test everything; hold fast what is good. Abstain from every form of evil. (1 Thessalonians 5:15-22)

You can see all the superlative language here: always, without ceasing, no one, everything, every form, etc. These various injunctions speak to the behaviors and attitudes which should typify the Christian life; one of those is praying. Paul uses the specific word for "without ceasing" here, ἀδιαλείπτως, in three other passages:


For God is my witness, whom I serve with my spirit in the gospel of his Son, that without ceasing I mention you always in my prayers... (Romans 1:9-10)

We give thanks to God always for all of you, constantly mentioning you in our prayers... (1 Thessalonians 1:3)

And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it... (1 Thessalonians 2:13)

All three of these seem like examples of hyperbole, just as you or I might describe something that we do "all the time." "Mentioning you" would be a verbal act which would preclude other simultaneous verbal acts, and we know that Paul did not literally spend 100% of his time verbally mentioning the Roman or Thessalonian churches in prayer; the two would contradict each other, while leaving room for nothing else ever. The point is that Paul often thought of them and prayed for them in a conscious, verbal fashion.

robrecht
04-07-2014, 09:16 AM
I do appreciate your clarification that you were talking about prayerful meditation, though I still feel none the wiser as to how you divide the audience of your verbal prayers.



I suspect you are referring to this sequence of brief exhortations:


See that no one repays anyone evil for evil, but always seek to do good to one another and to everyone. Rejoice always, pray without ceasing, give thanks in all circumstances; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you. Do not quench the Spirit. Do not despise prophecies, but test everything; hold fast what is good. Abstain from every form of evil. (1 Thessalonians 5:15-22)

You can see all the superlative language here: always, without ceasing, no one, everything, every form, etc. These various injunctions speak to the behaviors and attitudes which should typify the Christian life; one of those is praying. Paul uses the specific word for "without ceasing" here, ἀδιαλείπτως, in three other passages:


For God is my witness, whom I serve with my spirit in the gospel of his Son, that without ceasing I mention you always in my prayers... (Romans 1:9-10)

We give thanks to God always for all of you, constantly mentioning you in our prayers... (1 Thessalonians 1:3)

And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it... (1 Thessalonians 2:13)

All three of these seem like examples of hyperbole, just as you or I might describe something that we do "all the time." "Mentioning you" would be a verbal act which would preclude other simultaneous verbal acts, and we know that Paul did not literally spend 100% of his time verbally mentioning the Roman or Thessalonian churches in prayer; the two would contradict each other, while leaving room for nothing else ever. The point is that Paul often thought of them and prayed for them in a conscious, verbal fashion.
Unlike the other contexts, I do not consider prayer to be only, merely, or primarily verbal. There is a strong tradition about this in the East and in religious life in the West.

I did guess the I said the Our Father more frequently than the Hail Mary. We recite the former in our liturgy but not the latter. But insofar as I do not really divide the audience of my verbal prayers (see above), I think I've already given you what I consider to be wisdom with respect to this topic.

One Bad Pig
04-07-2014, 09:46 AM
Unlike the other contexts, I do not consider prayer to be only, merely, or primarily verbal. There is a strong tradition about this in the East and in religious life in the West.
In the East, sort of. There is a strong tradition of silent prayer (hesychasm), but it is never wordless (in fact, it focuses on the words). Many monastics in the East do succeed in prayer without ceasing, in the sense that once the "Jesus prayer" is repeated often enough it begins to be repeated non-stop in the back of the mind without conscious effort. The ascetic fathers warn that this should not be attempted without spiritual oversight, because it brings to light the bad things we've done or seen as it purifies the mind, and the process can be distressing (and can take months or years).

The "Jesus prayer" is some variant of "Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior, have mercy on me, a sinner."

robrecht
04-07-2014, 10:18 AM
In the East, sort of. There is a strong tradition of silent prayer (hesychasm), but it is never wordless (in fact, it focuses on the words). Many monastics in the East do succeed in prayer without ceasing, in the sense that once the "Jesus prayer" is repeated often enough it begins to be repeated non-stop in the back of the mind without conscious effort. The ascetic fathers warn that this should not be attempted without spiritual oversight, because it brings to light the bad things we've done or seen as it purifies the mind, and the process can be distressing (and can take months or years).

The "Jesus prayer" is some variant of "Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior, have mercy on me, a sinner."
Thanks, One Bad Pig. It's been a long, long time since I've read anything about the Jesus prayer or Eastern spirituality in general. I vaguely recall someone saying that the prayer may be reduced to a single word, eg, 'Jesus' or 'mercy'. Does that sound familiar? The West agrees whole-heartedly regarding the necessity of spiritual direction in contempative prayer. I understand the prayer of presence, in which one is united with the whole church, to be a little less individualized than the long form of the Jesus prayer, ie, ... have mercy on me, a miserable sinner, but those words would become so ingrained as to become an unconscious part of one's self understanding so I would not understand these, or any other, words of the prayer to be lost, just not necessarily part of one's immediate consciousness. Are there good sources on hesychasm that discuss other prayers besides the Jesus Prayer. Also, while I would not expect to find prayers addressed to angels and saints, is their presence or communal participation ever discussed in hesychasm?

One Bad Pig
04-07-2014, 10:52 AM
Thanks, One Bad Pig. It's been a long, long time since I've read anything about the Jesus prayer or Eastern spirituality in general. I vaguely recall someone saying that the prayer may be reduced to a single word, eg, 'Jesus' or 'mercy'. Does that sound familiar?
Not especially.

The West agrees whole-heartedly regarding the necessity of spiritual direction in contempative prayer. I understand the prayer of presence, in which one is united with the whole church, to be a little less individualized than the long form of the Jesus prayer, ie, ... have mercy on me, a miserable sinner, but those words would become so ingrained as to become an unconscious part of one's self understanding so I would not understand these, or any other, words of the prayer to be lost, just not necessarily part of one's immediate consciousness.
From what I understand, in hesychasm the words are always a part of one's consciousness, though not necessarily in the foreground.

Are there good sources on hesychasm that discuss other prayers besides the Jesus Prayer.
I don't recall any, though I haven't yet read nearly as much as I'd like to on the topic.

Also, while I would not expect to find prayers addressed to angels and saints, is their presence or communal participation ever discussed in hesychasm?
Generally, the presence of such is to be rejected, as the focus is to be exclusively on God. Exceptions are made for those who have progressed sufficiently that the presence of angels/saints no longer distracts them, but few reach such heights.

Paprika
04-07-2014, 11:01 AM
Is there any tradition of prayer based on Romans 8, ie. "Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness. For we do not know what to pray for as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words"?

One Bad Pig
04-07-2014, 11:15 AM
Is there any tradition of prayer based on Romans 8, ie. "Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness. For we do not know what to pray for as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words"?
Not AFAIK. The Spirit can and does intercede for us, but we need to keep praying ourselves.

This prayer is in my prayer book:

O Lord, I do not know what to ask of You. You alone know what my real needs are. You love me more than I myself know how to love. Help me to see my real needs which are hidden from me. I am afraid to ask for either a cross or consolation. I can only wait on You. My heart is open to You. Visit me and help me for the sake of Your great mercy. Strike me and heal me, cast me down and raise me up. In silence I worship Your holy will and Your ways which are beyond understanding. I offer myself as a sacrifice to You. I put all my trust in You. I want nothing more than to fulfill Your will. Teach me how to pray. Pray Yourself in me. Amen.

robrecht
04-07-2014, 11:38 AM
Not especially.

From what I understand, in hesychasm the words are always a part of one's consciousness, though not necessarily in the foreground.

I don't recall any, though I haven't yet read nearly as much as I'd like to on the topic.

Generally, the presence of such is to be rejected, as the focus is to be exclusively on God. Exceptions are made for those who have progressed sufficiently that the presence of angels/saints no longer distracts them, but few reach such heights.
Thanks. Good point about distraction. I consider their presence as a help, not a distraction. I really resonated with your earlier quote from St. Clement of Alexandria:

"In this way is he [the true Christian] 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]"

Miscellanies 7:12
Alexandria, AD 208

Pentecost
04-07-2014, 10:48 PM
Is there any tradition of prayer based on Romans 8, ie. "Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness. For we do not know what to pray for as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words"?

Pentecostalism. We believe that the gift of tongues is basically the ability to speak the heavenly tongue of the Spirit, and by the practice we are actively praying for things we might not know to pray for. A common experience for those wih tongues that I have spoken to is that we will pray as best we can but if we don't know what to say to God we'll say it in tongues. Even if it is intercessory prayer I've never seen it done in a way where it is meant to be more than that persons personal prayer. Definitely not something I've seen done by a Pastor to a congregation.

--
It's fascinating to read about the supposed intercession by dead saints and the use of icons, and a standard liturgy. I'm personally curious about exploring the latter two for myself.

Leonhard
04-08-2014, 02:28 AM
1) Compared to how often you request prayer from the dead, how often do you request prayer from the living? Is it 50/50, or 10/90, or what?

For many reasons I ask saints to pray for me more often than with living people.

If I'm reading you right the preference from your point of view is that we ask only other 'living saints', or mostly. Would you be okay with someone asking St Paul to pray for him?

Whenever I'm in a prayer group, or I talk to devout friends, we reassure each other that we'll be praying and we tell about each others the intentions. So in that sense I'm not sure how much more frequently I can ask for prayer from other Christians, without making it an intrusive business.

Prayers to the saints can happen anywhere and at any time, so for that reason alone I end up praying to them more often. And there's so many of them to address, and on earth there's only so many social engagements you get into. And I can reflect on their lives. Take Saint Maria Goretti who died a martyr-virgin, calling out to her attacker not to do it because it would be a sin against God and she didn't want him to go to Hell, she's often call to pray for the sake of chastity.

However since one is not done to the exclusion of the other, I don't see what problem you could have even if 99% of my requests for prayer were to the saints.


2) Compared to both of those, how often do you speak directly to God?

That's a good question.

I think I'll try to give an short account of the prayer life I've been having, then you can judge for yourself. This is just a dry content listing, and sometimes things are different.

In my prayer life I tend to address God first if its a spontaneous prayer, and then perhaps a saint or two if appropriate. If I'm approaching the tabernacle I tend to visit an icon of Maria first and pray to her (not to the icon its just there as an aid to prayer), about being ready to be before her Son's human presence and have only Him on my mind there. When there I spend the time quiet silent prayer to Christ for at least ten or twenty minutes.

If I'm praying the Rosary at the tabernacle with my friends, we tend to close it with calling upon the saints before the final prayer "Saint Joseph, pray for us; Saint Ansgar, pray for us; Saint Maximillian Kolbe, pray for us; Saint Agnes, pray for us; Saint Maria Goretti, pray for us..." Closing off with first a prayer to Mary (First Salve Regina, closed off with 'Pray for us Holy Mother of God, that we may be made worthy of the promises of Christ') and then asking God that he would make us imitate what the Rosary is talking about and achieve its promises.

However the Rosary is a meditative prayer on the life of Christ's life, death and resurrection, there's ritual morning and evening prayers and those are addressed directly to God. Then there's the Divine Office which again is solely God, you pray/sing the Psalms from the bible along with various other prayers to God.

I haven't made a count, but I hope you can respect that its not clear cut. If you counted up the number of Hail Mary's it would dominate the list simple because of the Rosary. However that assumes that all prayers are equally important, and its the number of times said that marks it as important.

In the Rosary each Hail Mary is typically accompanied by a reflection on a gospel account, you can see an example of doing that here (http://www.rosary-center.org/sorrow.htm). However I would never do that with the Our Father, where each individual line of the prayer is its own mini-prayer. "Our Father who art in Heaven", you instantly think of God and His most supreme nature and the division of this world from that of His at the moment; "Hallowed be thy name", how do I make God's name holy or how can I fail to respect it? "Thy Kingdom Come", resurrection, judgement; "Thy Will be Done", Gethsemany, obedience, the supremacy of God... I would never want to recall on anything other than these things during the Our Father.

With the Hail Mary instead I can place myself standing with Mary (the first, most humble, most faithful, most Christ loving and most obedient Christian by our reckoning) considering these events of Christ's time on earth.

I know I pray a lot more than when I was a protestant, even if you took out all the prayers to the saints and just focused on prayers to God.

RBerman
04-08-2014, 06:19 AM
For many reasons I ask saints to pray for me more often than with living people. If I'm reading you right the preference from your point of view is that we ask only other 'living saints', or mostly. Would you be okay with someone asking St Paul to pray for him?Whenever I'm in a prayer group, or I talk to devout friends, we reassure each other that we'll be praying and we tell about each others the intentions. So in that sense I'm not sure how much more frequently I can ask for prayer from other Christians, without making it an intrusive business. Prayers to the saints can happen anywhere and at any time, so for that reason alone I end up praying to them more often. And there's so many of them to address, and on earth there's only so many social engagements you get into. And I can reflect on their lives. Take Saint Maria Goretti who died a martyr-virgin, calling out to her attacker not to do it because it would be a sin against God and she didn't want him to go to Hell, she's often call to pray for the sake of chastity. However since one is not done to the exclusion of the other, I don't see what problem you could have even if 99% of my requests for prayer were to the saints.
You raise a fair point that the volume of prayers could factor into the percentages. If you're known as someone who is constantly opening up to his brothers and sisters in the church, requesting and offering prayer on every imaginable occasion when you're with them in person, you might still be a person who also constantly asks for prayer during the majority of the day when you're not in the company of your church. I think you had an editing error; I do not know what "we tell about each others the intentions" means. Hopefully it means that you are doing what I described: asking specific people for specific prayer for specific needs in your life.


In my prayer life I tend to address God first if its a spontaneous prayer, and then perhaps a saint or two if appropriate. If I'm approaching the tabernacle I tend to visit an icon of Maria first and pray to her (not to the icon its just there as an aid to prayer), about being ready to be before her Son's human presence and have only Him on my mind there. When there I spend the time quiet silent prayer to Christ for at least ten or twenty minutes. If I'm praying the Rosary at the tabernacle with my friends, we tend to close it with calling upon the saints before the final prayer "Saint Joseph, pray for us; Saint Ansgar, pray for us; Saint Maximillian Kolbe, pray for us; Saint Agnes, pray for us; Saint Maria Goretti, pray for us..." Closing off with first a prayer to Mary (First Salve Regina, closed off with 'Pray for us Holy Mother of God, that we may be made worthy of the promises of Christ') and then asking God that he would make us imitate what the Rosary is talking about and achieve its promises. However the Rosary is a meditative prayer on the life of Christ's life, death and resurrection, there's ritual morning and evening prayers and those are addressed directly to God. Then there's the Divine Office which again is solely God, you pray/sing the Psalms from the bible along with various other prayers to God. I haven't made a count, but I hope you can respect that its not clear cut. If you counted up the number of Hail Mary's it would dominate the list simple because of the Rosary. However that assumes that all prayers are equally important, and its the number of times said that marks it as important. In the Rosary each Hail Mary is typically accompanied by a reflection on a gospel account, you can see an example of doing that here (http://www.rosary-center.org/sorrow.htm). However I would never do that with the Our Father, where each individual line of the prayer is its own mini-prayer. "Our Father who art in Heaven", you instantly think of God and His most supreme nature and the division of this world from that of His at the moment; "Hallowed be thy name", how do I make God's name holy or how can I fail to respect it? "Thy Kingdom Come", resurrection, judgement; "Thy Will be Done", Gethsemany, obedience, the supremacy of God... I would never want to recall on anything other than these things during the Our Father. With the Hail Mary instead I can place myself standing with Mary (the first, most humble, most faithful, most Christ loving and most obedient Christian by our reckoning) considering these events of Christ's time on earth. I know I pray a lot more than when I was a protestant, even if you took out all the prayers to the saints and just focused on prayers to God.
I think of each line in the paternoster as a separate petition, but all part of the same prayer, the "Lord's Prayer." But I can see how, when set beside something like, "Saint Joseph, pray for us; Saint Ansgar, pray for us; Saint Maximillian Kolbe, pray for us; Saint Agnes, pray for us; Saint Maria Goretti, pray for us...," which invokes several different saints in a brief and generic fashion (i.e. without asking them to pray for anything in particular; don't take "generic" as necessarily a criticism), the individual petitions in the Lord's Prayer might seem similar. To me, a separate prayer means a change of speaker or audience, not just a separate thought.

You can say better than I how much you are thinking about Christ while repeating a prayer to Mary. As for the number of times: the human brain works through repetition. The things that we spend time repeating are the things that shape us; that's how an athlete or musician increases in skill. So it would seem to me that the total volume and the total number of repeats are both highly relevant to shaping what we actually value, potentially in opposition to what we say we value.

One Bad Pig
04-08-2014, 06:34 AM
It's fascinating to read about the supposed intercession by dead saints and the use of icons, and a standard liturgy. I'm personally curious about exploring the latter two for myself.
There's at least as much proof for the actual intercession by saints (whom we don't consider as dead - Matt. 22:32) as there is for healing at Pentecostal services.

Here (http://saintsilouan.org/orthodoxy/worship/liturgy/) is a short article on liturgy. In communist Russia, the government put severe restrictions on what the priest could say in a homily or teach. Since the theology of the church is present in the cycle of services, however, the church remained alive.

Pentecost
04-08-2014, 07:11 AM
There's at least as much proof for the actual intercession by saints (whom we don't consider as dead - Matt. 22:32) as there is for healing at Pentecostal services. I believe that God takes the prayers of His people seriously, even when they are misguided. I do not know if it is a mistake to pray to saints (who do not live on Earth?), my use of "supposed" was not meant to be derisive, but if it is a mistake I see no issue with God answering them anyways. I am not sure how one would refer to deceased saints in contrast to those saints who have not died the first physical death. EDIT: I found the answer on the website you linked to. I'm not certain it is entirely correct, but I think I see the point. It is something I will have to think and pray about.


Here (http://saintsilouan.org/orthodoxy/worship/liturgy/) is a short article on liturgy. In communist Russia, the government put severe restrictions on what the priest could say in a homily or teach. Since the theology of the church is present in the cycle of services, however, the church remained alive. Thank you for the link, I will have to examine it later when I have more time. :)EDIT: So far I have been delighted with reading the link and what I've seen so far appeals to me greatly. A strict daily pattern is something that I think would help me personally (and I've heard many Pentecostal teachers advise congregations to use a devotational book which seems like a weaker form of liturgy). And additionally the idea of "experiencing" God is borrowed by Pentecostals from the Moravians by means of John Wesley, so again there is a parallel and I see a certain fullness in the use of sight and scent in addition to sound.

The form is different but I hope you are not offended if I say I perceive a sameness in purpose.

robrecht
04-08-2014, 07:13 AM
I don't think it's blasphemy to ask other saints to pray for you. ... Hi, again, RBerman. I am curious what you think of Clement of Alexandria's statement that One Bad Pig linked to:

"In this way is he [the true Christian] 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]"

Miscellanies 7:12
Alexandria, AD 208

I think I've read somewhere that some believe that all the saints are now sleeping until the general resurrection. Do you believe what Clement of Alexandria said is true? According to some, he too is a saint now, so I am sure he will be interested in your evaluation of his statement. If not, I'll be sure to let him know anyway. ;)

RBerman
04-08-2014, 07:41 AM
Hi, again, RBerman. I am curious what you think of Clement of Alexandria's statement that One Bad Pig linked to:

"In this way is he [the true Christian] 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]"

Miscellanies 7:12
Alexandria, AD 208

I think I've read somewhere that some believe that all the saints are now sleeping until the general resurrection. Do you believe what Clement of Alexandria said is true? According to some, he too is a saint now, so I am sure he will be interested in your evaluation of his statement. If not, I'll be sure to let him know anyway. ;)

If Clement was ever one of God's saints while on earth, then he is one now too. I don't hold to the doctrine of soul-sleep. Clement appears to be speaking of the heavenly-mindedness of the "Gnostic," by which he means the thoughtful Christian. That phrase about the "choir of the saints" appears several times in that section of the Miscellanies:


[As part of the exposition of 1 Corinthians 6]"Wherefore," he says, "ye are justified in the name of the Lord." Ye are made, so to speak, by Him to be righteous as He is, and are blended as far as possible with the Holy Spirit. For "are not all things lawful to me? yet I will not be brought under the power of any," so as to do, or think, or speak aught contrary to the Gospel. "Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats, which God shall destroy," -- that is, such as think and live as if they were made for eating, and do not eat that they may live as a consequence, and apply to knowledge as the primary end. And does he not say that these are, as it were, the fleshy parts of the holy body? As a body, the Church of the Lord, the spiritual and holy choir, is symbolized. Whence those, who are merely called, but do not live in accordance with the word, are the fleshy parts. "Now" this spiritual "body," the holy Church, "is not for fornication." Nor are those things which belong to heathen life to be adopted by apostasy from the Gospel. For he who conducts himself heathenishly in the Church, whether in deed, or word, or even in thought, commits fornication with reference to the Church and his own body. He who in this way "is joined to the harlot," that is, to conduct contrary to the Covenant becomes another "body," not holy, "and one flesh," and has a heathenish life and another hope. "But he that is joined to the Lord in spirit" becomes a spiritual body by a different kind of conjunction...

Wherefore also he who holds converse with God must have his soul immaculate and stainlessly pure, it being essential to have made himself perfectly good. But also it becomes him to make all his prayers gently with the good. For it is a dangerous thing to take part in others' sins. Accordingly the Gnostic will pray along with those who have more recently believed, for those things in respect of which it is their duty to act together. And his whole life is a holy festival. His sacrifices are prayers, and praises, and readings in the Scriptures before meals, and psalms and hymns during meals and before bed, and prayers also again during night. By these he unites himself to the divine choir, from continual recollection, engaged in contemplation which has everlasting remembrance...

He having acquired the habit of doing good, exercises beneficence well, quicker than speaking; praying that he may get a share in the sins of his brethren, in order to confession and conversion on the part of his kindred; and eager to give a share to those dearest to him of his own good things. And so these are to him, friends. Promoting, then, the growth of the seeds deposited in him, according to the husbandry enjoined by the Lord, he continues free of sin, and becomes continent, and lives in spirit with those who are like him, among the choirs of the saints, though still detained on earth...

It seems to me that Clement is emphasizing the reality of the spiritual world, that we are "surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses," in the words of the Epistle to the Hebrews (12:1). Certainly they are spiritually with us when we pray. As to whether it's proper to speak of them as praying, I am aware of no Biblical warrant for such an idea. Probably some of the things we pray for, they would say, "Hoo boy, what a goof that one is!" Nor does Clement suggest that we should pray to them, but only in their company, as best I can tell.

robrecht
04-08-2014, 08:56 AM
Thanks for quoting that, RBerman. Makes me feel like I'm back in the monastery during the Office of Readings.

foudroyant
05-27-2014, 10:02 PM
Still waiting for a response from Post #122.

One Bad Pig
05-28-2014, 06:32 AM
From the OP (#3):
The fact that there are passages in the Bible which demonstrate the Lord Jesus is the proper recipient of prayer/worship (which means He is omniscient) is powerful testimony that He is God. Many heretics deny His Deity so Roman Catholics and others who claim Mary can be prayed to (yes, that is worship) really discredit who the Lord Jesus is.
a. William Mounce: The fact that people pray to both God (Mt. 6:9) and Jesus (Acts 1:24) is part of the proof of Jesus' deity (Mounce's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old & New Testament Words, Pray, page 531).
b. A.H. Leitch: Christ possesses the attributes of God: omniscience (Acts 1:24) (2:94, deity of Christ, The Zondervan Encyclopedia of the Bible).
c. EDNT: On the one hand God is "in heaven" (Matt 6:9f. par.; 7:11; 11:25) and strictly distinguishable from everything that is of this world. On the other hand, however, he is present (Matt 6:1-18; Rev 1:8) and omniscient (Matt 6:8, 32; Acts 1:24; 15:8) (2:141, theos, G. Schneider).


Just my personal interpretation?
No way.


Based on what Mounce wrote above for those who pray to Mary it teaches:
The fact that Roman Catholics and others pray to God (Mt. 6:9) and Mary is part of the proof that they believe Mary is omniscient (God).

Based on what Leitch (and Schneider) wrote above for those who pray to Mary it teaches:
Mary possesses the attributes of God: omniscience (kardiognwsta).
Here is quite sufficient proof to back up my assertion in post #122. You're merrily burning the strawman that we believe Mary is omniscient. In doing so, you're misusing Mounce, Leitch, and Schneider. Your assertions are so painfully bad that it's just not worth my time to refute them more than the first couple times they come up; I have better things to do with my time.

foudroyant
05-28-2014, 03:28 PM
Citing Acts 1:24, Mounce teaches that part of the proof that Jesus is God is that He is prayed to.

How is that a misuse of Mounce?

One Bad Pig
05-28-2014, 05:59 PM
Citing Acts 1:24, Mounce teaches that part of the proof that Jesus is God is that He is prayed to.

How is that a misuse of Mounce?
I don't know that that is, since I don't have the rest of what he wrote. However, your statement, "Based on what Mounce wrote above. . . " is most certainly a misuse of Mounce.

foudroyant
05-28-2014, 06:35 PM
You don't know that it is a misuse of Mounce but then you add later that it is most certainly a misuse of Mounce.

Yeah that makes sense.

Go check out page 531 and whatever else you can find in what he wrote concerning "pray" in this section. It's there for anyone to see. Thing is you can't refute it so now you resort to playing this stupid game of denial.


NIDNTT: In prayer we are never to forget whom we are addressing: the living God, the almighty One with whom nothing is impossible, and from whom therefore all things may be expected (2:857, Prayer, H. Schonweiss).

Catholics and others of their ilk add Mary and countless other "saints" to the mix identifying them as "the living God" as well in that they are also prayed to.

Now two sources of pray/prayer are against the blasphemy of praying to anyone/anything else but God alone.

Kristian Joensen
07-26-2014, 06:42 PM
If one knows the totality of all hearts of all people that is stating they are omniscient.

I know this posts of yours is old and you may not respond by this point, but I felt I had to address this.

Granting for the sake of argument that Mary would have to know "the totality of all hearts" in stead of being given part of that knowledge in a piecemeal fashion by God or angels(each angel only knowing one part of this), I would like to point out that you could know the totality of the hearths of all people:

1. Without knowing all the events of history.
2. Without knowing how to build a CPU.
3. Without knowing how to fly an aeroplane.
4. Without knowing what things are located at every coordinate point in the universe.

Etc

However omniscience requires that you know all of those things. So it is very much possible to know "the totality of all hearts of all people" without being omniscient. Now it could well be the case that such knowledge of hearts is limited to God and if you can show this by scripture and/or philosophy I will glady accept this. But a certain piece of knowledge being limited to God doesn't mean that possessing that piece of knowledge is the same thing as possessing omniscience. It would even be possible to know "the totality of all hearts of all people" without knowing ANYTHING ELSE! You wouldn't even need to know your own name.

foudroyant
07-28-2014, 06:18 AM
Both 1 Kings 8:39 and 2 Chronicles 6:30 teach that God alone has this knowledge.

Furthermore, to know the totality of all the hearts of all people is the same thing as being omniscient.
See Part "B"
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?443-Jesus-as-the-heart-knower-of-all-%28%CE%BA%CE%B1%CF%81%CE%B4%CE%B9%CE%BF%CE%B3%CE%B D%E1%BD%BD%CF%83%CF%84%CE%B7%CF%82-omniscience%29%E2%80%8F

Kristian Joensen
07-28-2014, 06:35 AM
Both 1 Kings 8:39 and 2 Chronicles 6:30 teach that God alone has this knowledge.

Furthermore, to know the totality of all the hearts of all people is the same thing as being omniscient.
See Part "B"
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?443-Jesus-as-the-heart-knower-of-all-%28%CE%BA%CE%B1%CF%81%CE%B4%CE%B9%CE%BF%CE%B3%CE%B D%E1%BD%BD%CF%83%CF%84%CE%B7%CF%82-omniscience%29%E2%80%8F

Omniscience implies knowing the heart of people but not vice versa. It is possible for you to be correct about only God knowing the heart of man as those verses seem to imply without you being correct that that implies omniscience. There may be knowledge that only God has without God needing his omniscience to have that knowledge.

This is a valid argument and sound argument:

1. If God is omniscient he knows the hearts of all people.
2. God is omniscient.
Conclusion: God knows the heart of all people.

This is NOT a valid argument:
1. If God is omniscient he knows the hearts of all people.
2. God knows the hearts of all people.
Conclusion: God is omniscient.

This does not follow logically. It is committing the fallacy of affirming the consequent (http://www.philosophy-index.com/logic/fallacies/affirming-consequent.php).

foudroyant
07-28-2014, 06:45 AM
The lexicons/dictionaries I cited all teach that being the heart-knower of all is the same thing as being omniscient.
Now if you can cite a lexicon that says otherwise I'd like to see it but so far I have cited several that affirm my position.

Besides the ones I cited in my link in Post #149 this is from the New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis:
the psalmist acknowledged the omniscience of God who knows the secrets of the heart (44:21[22]) (3:426, ta`alummah - hidden, secret, Andrew Hill).

Once again, to know the totality of all hearts of all people is the same thing as being omniscient.

Kristian Joensen
07-28-2014, 06:55 AM
The lexicons/dictionaries I cited all teach that being the heart-knower of all is the same thing as being omniscient.
Now if you can cite a lexicon that says otherwise I'd like to see it but so far I have cited several that affirm my position.

No. You have cited lexicons that affirm the former logically valid argument, not the latter logically invalid one. But even if they did the lexicons would be wrong. It is not a question that is proper to use a lexicon to answer. It is a strictly logical question and can only be solved using the laws of logic.

foudroyant
07-28-2014, 06:57 AM
The lexicons are wrong and you are correct? Please cite your credentials in both Hebrew and Greek.

Kristian Joensen
07-28-2014, 07:03 AM
The lexicons are wrong and you are correct? Please cite your credentials in both Hebrew and Greek.

A. None of your cited lexicons say what you want them to say. They only say that God knows the hearts of people because he is omniscient. They do NOT say that he is omniscient because he knows the hearts of people.
B. It is not a question of Greek or Hebrew. It is simply a question of applying the rules of logic. Affirming the consequent (http://www.philosophy-index.com/logic/fallacies/affirming-consequent.php) is and remains a logical fallacies. This would be the case even if a bunch of lexicons commit that fallacy. But they don't.
C. Please read up on and think about the affirming the consequent fallacy and how it relates to your claim.

foudroyant
07-28-2014, 08:47 AM
EDNT: On the one hand God is "in heaven" (Matt 6:9f. par.; 7:11; 11:25) and strictly distinguishable from everything that is of this world. On the other hand, however, he is present (Matt 6:1-18; Rev 1:8) and omniscient (Matt 6:8, 32; Acts 1:24; 15:8) (2:141, theos, G. Schneider).

Acts 1:24 reads, And they prayed and said, You, Lord, who know the hearts of all men, show which one of these two You have chosen (NASB)

So your assertion is false about God not being omniscient because He knows all the hearts.

Kristian Joensen
07-28-2014, 08:56 AM
EDNT: On the one hand God is "in heaven" (Matt 6:9f. par.; 7:11; 11:25) and strictly distinguishable from everything that is of this world. On the other hand, however, he is present (Matt 6:1-18; Rev 1:8) and omniscient (Matt 6:8, 32; Acts 1:24; 15:8) (2:141, theos, G. Schneider).

Acts 1:24 reads, And they prayed and said, "You, Lord, who know the hearts of all men, show which one of these two You have chosen to occupy this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside to go to his own place." (NASB)

So your assertion is false about God not being omniscient because He knows all the hearts.

"EDNT: On the one hand God is "in heaven" (Matt 6:9f. par.; 7:11; 11:25) and strictly distinguishable from everything that is of this world. On the other hand, however, he is present (Matt 6:1-18; Rev 1:8) and omniscient (Matt 6:8, 32; Acts 1:24; 15:8) (2:141, theos, G. Schneider)."

This just affirms God's omnscience. As a Christian I too affirm God's omnscience.

"Acts 1:24 reads, And they prayed and said, "You, Lord, who know the hearts of all men, show which one of these two You have chosen to occupy this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside to go to his own place." (NASB)"

This just affirms that God knows the hearts of all men. As a Christian I too affirm this.

Neither of your quotes says that God is omniscient BECAUSE he knows the hearts of all men.

Here is my stance:

1. I affirm that God is omniscient.
2. I affirm that God knows the heart of all men.
3. I affirm that 1 implies 2. That is God's omniscience implies that he know the heart of all men.
4. I deny that God knowing the heart of all men implies he is omniscient.

foudroyant
07-28-2014, 09:05 AM
You are correct that Acts 1:24 does affirm God's omniscience. This is because the Greek word καρδιογνῶστα (lit. heart-knower) is found in this passage.


From The Zondervan Encyclopedia of the Bible: Christ possesses the attributes of God: omniscience (Acts 1:24) (2:94, deity of Christ, A.H. Leitch).

Kristian Joensen
07-28-2014, 09:20 AM
You are correct that Acts 1:24 does affirm God's omniscience. This is because the Greek word καρδιογνῶστα (lit. heart-knower) is found in this passage.


From The Zondervan Encyclopedia of the Bible: Christ possesses the attributes of God: omniscience (Acts 1:24) (2:94, deity of Christ, A.H. Leitch).

Read what I said once again. I specifically denied that Acts 1:24 affirmed the omniscience of God.

foudroyant
07-28-2014, 09:21 AM
"EDNT: On the one hand God is "in heaven" (Matt 6:9f. par.; 7:11; 11:25) and strictly distinguishable from everything that is of this world. On the other hand, however, he is present (Matt 6:1-18; Rev 1:8) and omniscient (Matt 6:8, 32; Acts 1:24; 15:8) (2:141, theos, G. Schneider)."

This just affirms God's omnscience. As a Christian I too affirm God's omnscience.

One of the passages cited is Acts 1:24 above while your comment is beneath.

One Bad Pig
07-28-2014, 09:24 AM
You don't know that it is a misuse of Mounce but then you add later that it is most certainly a misuse of Mounce.

Yeah that makes sense.

Go check out page 531 and whatever else you can find in what he wrote concerning "pray" in this section. It's there for anyone to see. Thing is you can't refute it so now you resort to playing this stupid game of denial.
It would help if you read what I posted for understanding instead of just looking for something to attack. I don't have a copy of Mounce to check, so I cannot tell if you are misusing Mounce by misquoting him or quoting him out of context.


NIDNTT: In prayer we are never to forget whom we are addressing: the living God, the almighty One with whom nothing is impossible, and from whom therefore all things may be expected (2:857, Prayer, H. Schonweiss).

Catholics and others of their ilk add Mary and countless other "saints" to the mix identifying them as "the living God" as well in that they are also prayed to.

Now two sources of pray/prayer are against the blasphemy of praying to anyone/anything else but God alone.
You are patently misusing this, because no one identifies Mary and the saints as "the living God." You're assuming prayer can only be to God, an assumption I've debunked more than once.

foudroyant
07-28-2014, 09:27 AM
It would help if you read what I posted for understanding instead of just looking for something to attack. I don't have a copy of Mounce to check, so I cannot tell if you are misusing Mounce by misquoting him or quoting him out of context.

You are patently misusing this, because no one identifies Mary and the saints as "the living God." You're assuming prayer can only be to God, an assumption I've debunked more than once.

Then in Post #144 you should not have said I am misusing Mounce if you aren't sure. You would think before posting again you would have at least found his dictionary to prove that I am misusing him.
You flunked in your debunk for I cited more than one dictionary that disagrees with your assertion concerning prayer.

Kristian Joensen
07-28-2014, 09:40 AM
One of the passages cited is Acts 1:24 above while your comment is beneath.

The text it self affirms omniscience and that is it. I was only addressing that and not the biblical passages the author cites in support. But I will note that the Matthew passage is NOT talking about knowing the hearts. This is just G. Schneider citing some passages with examples of things that God knows as a consequence of omniscience. God knows what people are going to ask for before they pray because he is omniscient. God is not omniscient because he knows what people are going to ask for before they pray. Schneider is just showing some example of God's omniscience in action. God knowing the hearts of all men is a consequence of God's omniscience. God's omniscience is not a consequence of God knowing the hearts of all men. It is possible to know the hearts of all men without being omniscient. It is not possible to be omniscient without knowing the hearts of all men.

You can become rich without winning the lottery. But you can't win the lottery without becoming rich*. You can't truly know me as a person without knowing my name, but you can know my name without truly knowing me as a person. If your head gets chopped off you die, but just because you are dead doesn't mean your head was chopped off. You can't know how to speak English without knowing how to speak. You can know how to speak without knowing how to speak English(by knowing othe languages such as Faroese (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faroese_language)). You can not know how to program in the programming language Haskell (http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Haskell) without knowing how to program but you can know how to program without knowing how to program in Haskell(by knowing other language such as Pascal (http://www.freepascal.org/)). You can not be the President of the United States without having a lot of power but you can have a lot of power without being President of the United States. I could go on....

* Assuming we are talking about the grand prize of the lottery here

One Bad Pig
07-28-2014, 10:18 AM
Then in Post #144 you should not have said I am misusing Mounce if you aren't sure. You would think before posting again you would have at least found his dictionary to prove that I am misusing him.
:doh: Once again, you show that you failed to read for understanding. I clarified in post #146 about what I wasn't sure. Thank you for continuing to make my point for me.

foudroyant
07-28-2014, 04:30 PM
The text it self affirms omniscience and that is it. I was only addressing that and not the biblical passages the author cites in support. But I will note that the Matthew passage is NOT talking about knowing the hearts.

The text itself affirms omniscience. Agree. That is what Acts 1:24 affirms.
So your assertion in Post #154 that not one of the citations I provided proves this is false.

foudroyant
07-28-2014, 04:33 PM
I don't know that that is, since I don't have the rest of what he wrote. However, your statement, "Based on what Mounce wrote above. . . " is most certainly a misuse of Mounce.

This is clarification in Post #146?
No, this is repeating once again that you don't know what Mounce wrote.
Go to the library and get his book or ask a friend who has this book for the information you so desperately lack and need. I'll tell you this though, you won't find what you are asserting.

tabibito
07-28-2014, 04:58 PM
The paragraph in full

The fact that people pray to both God (Mt. 6:9) and Jesus (Acts 1:24) is part of the proof of Jesus’ deity. Stephen does pray to Jesus (Acts 7:60), but the norm is to pray to God the Father (Mt 6:9). Only once in the NT does this verb seem to suggest praying took place to pagan deities (Mt. 6:7); that is, praying is a uniquely Christian activity.
The clauses of the final sentence, marked in grey and pink, contradict each other.
That however is a minor difficulty -

The whole section concerned with proseuchomai is focussed on the use of the word in the Bible - its use in other contexts is not addressed. Mounce has stated that only one occurrence of proseuchomai with regard to pagan deities is recorded - in the Bible that is. That one occurrence shows that proseuchomai does have uses other than in the context of prayer to God.

The use of proseuchomai does not show that prayer, even in the Bible, is the sole preserve of Christians. That being the case, context - not the use of the word itself - shows that Jesus is addressed in prayer by people faithful to God. It is evidence that Jesus is God, but by no means proof.

The Biblical record shows that proseuchomai is used almost exclusively (in the Bible) to show that prayer is addressed to God.
No more than that can be said.

foudroyant
07-28-2014, 05:02 PM
Thanks Tab,

OK OBP, how did I misuse Mounce?

One Bad Pig
07-28-2014, 06:00 PM
Thanks Tab,

OK OBP, how did I misuse Mounce?
By asserting that those who pray to Mary therefore believe that she is omniscient and God. To do that, you would need to show that proseuchomai is used only in prayer to God/gods, that proseuchomai is used to describe prayer to Mary in Greek, and explain why that, nonetheless, those who pray to Mary and the saints hold dogmatically to God being solely a trinity comprised of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. You are familiar with the Nicene Creed, yes?

foudroyant
07-28-2014, 06:24 PM
Praying to the Lord Jesus is proof of His Deity.
The people who pray to Mary, whether they realize it or not, are ascribing to her what is meant for God alone.

NIDNTT: In prayer we are never to forget whom we are addressing: the living God, the almighty One with whom nothing is impossible, and from whom therefore all things may be expected (2:857, Prayer, H. Schonweiss).

Those who pray to Mary:
In prayer we are never to forget THOSE we are addressing: the living GODS, the almighty ONES with THEM nothing is impossible, and from THEM therefore all things may be expected.

tabibito
07-28-2014, 06:36 PM
The tribes of the barbarians, he says, are wiser than these; I know thy teachers, even if thou wouldst conceal them. You have learned geometry from the Egyptians, astronomy from the Babylonians; the charms of healing you have got from the Thracians; the Assyrians also have taught you many things; but for the laws that are consistent with truth, and your sentiments respecting God, you are indebted to the Hebrews,(1)

Who do not worship through vain deceits
The works of men, of gold, and brass, and silver, and ivory,
And images of dead men, of wood and stone,
Which other men, led by their foolish inclinations, worship;
But raise to heaven pure arms:
When they rise from bed, purifying themselves with water,
And worship alone the Eternal, who reigns for evermore.

Most interesting.

foudroyant
07-28-2014, 06:45 PM
Worship God alone.
Agree.

And yes, prayer in the sense we are discussing here, is worship.

Those who pray to Mary try in vain to make a dichotomy between praying to her and worshiping her.

The lengths they will go...........

One Bad Pig
07-28-2014, 07:10 PM
Praying to the Lord Jesus is proof of His Deity.
The people who pray to Mary, whether they realize it or not, are ascribing to her what is meant for God alone.
You are ascribing to Mounce a certainty which he does not affirm.


NIDNTT: In prayer we are never to forget whom we are addressing: the living God, the almighty One with whom nothing is impossible, and from whom therefore all things may be expected (2:857, Prayer, H. Schonweiss).
Assumes your narrow definition of prayer.


Those who pray to Mary:
In prayer we are never to forget THOSE we are addressing: the living GODS, the almighty ONES with THEM nothing is impossible, and from THEM therefore all things may be expected.
Appears to be something you made up. Forgive me for not accepting your word as gospel.

One Bad Pig
07-28-2014, 07:10 PM
Worship God alone.
Agree.

And yes, prayer in the sense we are discussing here, is worship.

Those who pray to Mary try in vain to make a dichotomy between praying to her and worshiping her.

The lengths they will go...........
It would help if you didn't project so much.

foudroyant
07-28-2014, 07:15 PM
Eerdman's Dictionary of the Bible: In sum, both the OT and the NT portray prayer as a principal means by which Creator and creature are bound together in an ongoing, vital, and mutually important partnership (Samuel E. Balentine, Prayer, page 1079).

The evidence just keeps mounting against your blasphemous position.

tabibito
07-28-2014, 07:20 PM
44:17 τὸ δὲ λοιπὸν ἐποίησεν εἰς θεὸν γλυπτὸν καὶ προσκυνεῖ αὐτῷ καὶ προσεύχεται λέγων ἐξελοῦ με ὅτι θεός μου εἶ σύ
OK - προσεύχεται definitely is used in the Bible to address idols.
So - is it possible to προσευχομαι a person. Logically, it should be possible.

Search continues.

foudroyant
07-28-2014, 07:25 PM
Proseuchomai is just like latreuo in that it can be rendered unto others besides God but it ought not to be done.

One Bad Pig
07-28-2014, 07:32 PM
Eerdman's Dictionary of the Bible: In sum, both the OT and the NT portray prayer as a principal means by which Creator and creature are bound together in an ongoing, vital, and mutually important partnership (Samuel E. Balentine, Prayer, page 1079).

The evidence just keeps mounting against your blasphemous position.

Imagine that, Protestant sources that ignore prayer to the saints.

tabibito
07-28-2014, 07:44 PM
It is possible for an employee to λατρευω an employer without any violation of Christian service to God. It is also possible for a volunteer to λατρευω in a number of areas without any violation of Christian precepts.

Again, the only time that the word is used for properly rendering λατρευω in the Bible is when service is rendered to God.

tabibito
07-28-2014, 07:57 PM
And One Bad Pig is correct.

If it cannot be shown that prayers, as offered in the Roman and Orthodox traditions, to saints are prayers offered as to gods - it also cannot be shown that such prayers are idolatrous.

foudroyant
07-28-2014, 08:30 PM
It has been shown that prayer is due unto God alone.
Greek dictionaries and lexicons have been repeatedly cited.



And the list goes on....

Robert Reymond: Jesus declared that he will answer the prayers of his disciples (John 14:13), but equally significant for our purpose, he represents himself as One to whom prayers may properly be addressed. In verse 14, Jesus stated again that he himself will answer his disciples' prayers - surely an implicit claim to deity since one would have to be divine to hear, in all the languages of the world, the myriads of prayers being offered up to him at any one moment and then wisely to answer each prayer. While many other examples might be cited, the instances of prayer addressed to Jesus in Acts 1:24, 7:59, 9:10-17, 2 Corinthians 12:8, 1 Thessalonians 3:11, and 2 Thessalonians 2:16 bear out the literalness with which the disciples understood Jesus' promise, and reflect the immediacy on their part of the recognition of his divinity. (A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith, pages 232-233).

tabibito
07-28-2014, 08:38 PM
It has been shown that prayer is due unto God alone.
Greek dictionaries and lexicons have been repeatedly cited.

It is possible to προσεθχομαι anyone for anything. The word means pray or petition. "Prithee tell me / give me / help me" is not an act of worship.
You cannot acknowledge the fact that these dictionaries and lexicons you are so fond of include propaganda in their entries. The problem is yours.

foudroyant
07-28-2014, 09:08 PM
Your words:

No formal qualifications in Koine Greek whatever.
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?2442-The-baptism-with-the-Holy-Spirit/page6

Post #53


It shows - for proseuchomai is never used in the NT the way you erroneously describe.

tabibito
07-28-2014, 09:31 PM
It shows - for proseuchomai is never used in the NT the way you erroneously describe.
Proseuchomai is never used in the New Testament in the way that I describe. The New Testament is hardly the sum of Koine Greek usage.

You read the bible with other people's tongues instead of your own eyes - and think that qualifies you as an accuser and judge of the brethren. To the best of my knowledge (and hopefully I am wrong) - no one can disagree with you on a point of scripture or doctrine without that you vilify him (or her).

foudroyant
07-28-2014, 09:52 PM
There are no examples that this word is used the way you describe in the NT.

You want to make up the meanings of words then go ahead. The serious Bible student will know better than to do that.


http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?2442-The-baptism-with-the-Holy-Spirit/page2
Posts #12 and #13

37818 disagreed with me concerning the baptism with the Holy Spirit.

Where did I vilify him?

tabibito
07-28-2014, 10:14 PM
You want to make up the meanings of words then go ahead. I'm not the one making up meanings. The only time people in the New Testament are said to pray is when they pray to Christ or God. I never said otherwise. προσευχομαι however, means pray. And others can be prayed to - the New Testament never records such an event.


37818 disagreed with me concerning the baptism with the Holy Spirit.

Where did I vilify him? As I said: hopefully I'm wrong. Seems that maybe I was.

foudroyant
07-28-2014, 10:34 PM
Since the inspired NT does not record it used in any other way then there is zero justification for OBP saying that I misused Mounce.

tabibito
07-28-2014, 10:59 PM
Yes he does (maybe). The New Testament does not define the word to have a meaning or application in the Bible that is in any way different to its common meaning. The Septuagint explicitly uses the word with reference to worship of other gods.

According to Mounce, "praying is a uniquely Christian activity." - The Septuagint shows that to be false. The Jews were proseuchomai-ing long before Christianity was thought of, and they were still doing it after Christianity was established. And not only the Jews, but Pagans as well. That's in the Septuagint.
According to Mounce, "praying is a uniquely Christian activity." - The writings of the Early Church Fathers show that to be false.
According to Mounce, "praying is a uniquely Christian activity." in the same sentence that he says "Only once in the NT does this verb seem to suggest praying took place to pagan deities". It doesn't take any knowledge of Koine Greek whatever to realise that Mounce has contradicted himself in the same sentence. THAT sentence is written in English.

This time, you seem to have understood Mounce correctly - and the evidence is there - in his own writing - in one English sentence - that he got it wrong.

tabibito
07-28-2014, 11:10 PM
THIS is a definition:
Original Word: προσεύχομαι
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: proseuchomai
Phonetic Spelling: (pros-yoo'-khom-ahee)
Short Definition: I pray, pray for
Definition: I pray, pray for, offer prayer.

THIS is a definition
properly, to exchange wishes; pray

THIS is commentary:
– literally, to interact with the Lord by switching human wishes (ideas) for His wishes as He imparts faith ("divine persuasion"). Accordingly, praying (4336/proseuxomai) is closely inter-connected with 4102 /pístis ("faith") in the NT. See: Ac 6:5,6,14:22,23; Eph 6:16-18; Col 1:3,4; 2 Thes 3:1,2; Js 5:13-15; Jude 20.

and not only commentary, but 75% denominationally tainted claptrap. It is written there - not to assist with understanding the nuances of the word, but to make a point. Even if it was accurate, it still would not belong in a dictionary.

foudroyant
07-28-2014, 11:39 PM
Mounce didn't get it wrong. You did.
When he wrote "praying is a uniquely Christian activity" it refers to the Greek word proseuchomai in relation to how it is used in the New Testament.

Once again the INSPIRED text.

tabibito
07-28-2014, 11:54 PM
Ya ya - Mounce's is an inspired text that just happens to contradict itself in the same sentence.

foudroyant
07-28-2014, 11:55 PM
Try figuring out what a possible exception means.

Oh while you're at it clue up and check these out:

W.E. Vine: "to pray," is always used of "prayer" to God (proseuchomai)
http://www.studylight.org/dictionaries/ved/view.cgi?n=2181

Louw/Nida: Citing proseuchomai:
to speak to or to make requests of God - 'to pray, to speak to God, to ask God for, prayer' (Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains, 33.178, page 409).

Robert F. O'Toole: All but one example of prayer, proseuchomai and its cognates, are predicated of God; however, if our interpretation of "Lord" as the risen Jesus in Acts 1:24 be correct, the apostles would be praying to him as normally was done only to God. Prayer belongs to the area of worship. Jesus' reply to the devil defines who should be worshipped. "It is written, 'You shall worship the Lord, your God, and him alone shall you serve'" (Luke 4:8) establishes a clear principle (Luke's Presentation of Jesus: A Christology, page 220).

Kim Se-Yoon: Concerning the Lord Jesus: He is addressed in prayer, a clear indication of His deity (Acts 1:24-25) (Origin of Paul's Gospel, page 105).

The case still continues to mount against those that deny the obvious.

tabibito
07-29-2014, 12:22 AM
Mounce didn't say "possible" he said "only once in the New Testament does this verb seem to suggest" - The verse doesn't "seem to suggest" anything, it says quite plainly, "don't pray the same way that the pagans do."
But that is only a quibble:

"Praying is a uniquely Christian activity" is outright false. There isn't even a mention of "In the New Testament it is uniquely Christian" that would lend even the slightest hint that it has other uses elsewhere.

Repeating:

According to Mounce, "praying is a uniquely Christian activity." - The Septuagint shows that to be false. The Jews were proseuchomai-ing long before Christianity was thought of, and they were still doing it after Christianity was established. And not only the Jews, but Pagans as well. That's in the Septuagint.
According to Mounce, "praying is a uniquely Christian activity." - The writings of the Early Church Fathers show that to be false.

Pagans are explicitly said to προσευχομαι their gods in both the LXX and in the writings of the Early Church Fathers. "Praying is a uniquely Christian activity" is false.

The gospels according to Mounce, Vine, TDNT et al aren't in any copy of the Bible that I know of. So - if you want to cite word chapter and verse of where the "infallible scripture" declares that προσευχομαι is reserved strictly for use regarding prayer to God, be kind enough to do so.

foudroyant
07-29-2014, 12:27 AM
Give it up man.

You're correct and all of them are in error.

Grand prize for you for your pride and arrogance.

tabibito
07-29-2014, 12:29 AM
Yup - every time you can't refute something, you trot out the old "pride and arrogance" line.

foudroyant
07-29-2014, 12:37 AM
For people who act stupid by insisting that somehow all the authors of the lexicons got it wrong but rest assured people like you are there to come in and set them straight.


Bunch of bumbling idiots.



You used the word "trot".

Define it.

tabibito
07-29-2014, 12:55 AM
Phrasal verb
trot something out
informal Provide an explanation or piece of information that has already been used many times before: everyone trots out the old excuse

tabibito
07-29-2014, 01:01 AM
Proseuchomai is directed only to God

SEPPA

Isaiah 45:20 συνάχθητε καὶ ἥκετε βουλεύσασθε ἅμα οἱ σῳζόμενοι ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν οὐκ ἔγνωσαν οἱ αἴροντες τὸ ξύλον γλύμμα αὐτῶν καὶ προσευχόμενοι ὡς πρὸς θεούς οἳ οὐ σῴζουσιν

foudroyant
07-29-2014, 01:04 AM
Phrasal verb
trot something out
informal Provide an explanation or piece of information that has already been used many times before: everyone trots out the old excuse


Citation please. I don't want just what you think it means. Back up your assertion.

foudroyant
07-29-2014, 01:04 AM
Proseuchomai is directed only to God

SEPPA

Isaiah 45:20 συνάχθητε καὶ ἥκετε βουλεύσασθε ἅμα οἱ σῳζόμενοι ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν οὐκ ἔγνωσαν οἱ αἴροντες τὸ ξύλον γλύμμα αὐτῶν καὶ προσευχόμενοι ὡς πρὸς θεούς οἳ οὐ σῴζουσιν

As used in the New Testament? Isaiah is not in the New Testament.

Try again.

tabibito
07-29-2014, 01:05 AM
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/trot

tabibito
07-29-2014, 01:06 AM
Vine didn't say "in the New Testament" according to your quotation. Are you saying that you misquoted him?

No - I see that your citation was accurate.

<A-2,Verb,4336,proseuchomai>
"to pray," is always used of "prayer" to God, and is the most frequent word in this respect, especially in the Synoptists and Acts, once in Rom. 8:26; Eph. 6:18; Phil. 1:9; 1 Tim. 2:8; Heb. 13:18; Jude 1:20. For the injunction in 1 Thess. 5:17, see CEASE, C.

foudroyant
07-29-2014, 01:13 AM
You don't accept my sources so I don't accept what you supplied.

So the word that you used remains undefined.

See what happens when we choose to redefine words.....hello Humpty Dumty!

When I use a word it means just what I choose it to mean (Humpty Dumpty in Through the Looking Glass).

tabibito
07-29-2014, 01:18 AM
The difference is - you haven't been able to provide evidence that calls what I have said into question.

And no - your "expository" dictionaries don't comprise evidence, because the actual usage of the word has been demonstrated. The theory hasn't been supported by evidence, it has been given seppa.

That is of course, if the intended meaning by the authors was not

"The only time that the word is used in the New Testament (as opposed to other places) is when prayer is addressed to God."
If the lexicons mean that, then your capacity to understand what you are reading is (to be polite) sub par.

foudroyant
07-29-2014, 01:20 AM
Sure I have. Every time proseuchomai is used in the NT it refers to praying to God.

tabibito
07-29-2014, 01:26 AM
That is a very different interpretation to the one you were espousing before - that prayer (προσευχομαι) was only to be addressed to God.
Your CURRENT definition can't be used to support the argument that προσευχομαι to anyone except God is wrong.

And your definition is even then still wrong - one occurrence does in fact refer to prayer to gods other than the Christian God.

foudroyant
07-29-2014, 01:47 AM
How is it different?
Proseuchomai is due only unto God. This is what the NT teaches.

Please supply the passage where proseuchomai in the NT is not used in reference to God.

tabibito
07-29-2014, 01:56 AM
At that, you are going further than even the dictionaries are going. Cite chapter and verse to demonstrate that your assertion is valid.
The key word is "pray" - where does the New Testament state that one person is not permitted to pray to another, or to any except God?
I'm not saying that such a verse can't be found - I've never looked for it.

foudroyant
07-29-2014, 02:08 AM
I cited plenty of dictionaries that assert what I have been saying.
You don't believe them so it is back again for me not to believe your source for the word that you used.

tabibito
07-29-2014, 02:11 AM
Please supply the passage where proseuchomai in the NT is not used in reference to God. That has already been done by your own references. Matt 6:7
incidentally - to offer prayers, to pray (everywhere of prayers to the gods or to God)
Whether he means "everywhere" or "everywhere in the Bible" I don't know.

A further complication for your argument is that there are a number of words that translate as pray. Could you demonstrate that the Roman procedure with regard to the saints is definitely προσευχομαι?

foudroyant
07-29-2014, 02:16 AM
Proseuchomai is just like latreuo in that it can be rendered unto others besides God but it ought not to be done.

Already addressed that here.

tabibito
07-29-2014, 02:18 AM
I cited plenty of dictionaries that assert what I have been saying.
You don't believe them so it is back again for me not to believe your source for the word that you used.

And no - if a dictionary claims something, I want to see where that claim comes from. A dictionary reference that cites NO scriptural support, nor support from a full fledged grammatical analysis is nothing more than bare assertion. No-one with any common sense will accept bare assertions as proof of anything. Too many dictionary definitions derive from denominational precepts that have no basis in scripture.

foudroyant
07-29-2014, 02:20 AM
Cite one passage in Scripture where prayer is being done and it is not worship.
Now I know RC's will say that prayer is just like talking to someone or asking someone to do something, etc.

But I know no one (besides God) who can fully know what 1 million people with different requests are asking at the same time if they do so silently.

tabibito
07-29-2014, 02:27 AM
You really want to do that? Which of the words that translate as "prayer" do you want me to find?
Would it not be appropriate to find out which of those words are applicable to Roman practice when they pray to saints?
Their concept of "praying to a saint" might not translate as προσευχομαι.

foudroyant
07-29-2014, 02:29 AM
Find anyone with just one example with the criteria I wrote about in Post #212.

tabibito
07-29-2014, 02:38 AM
When Simon was rebuked for trying to buy the authority of an apostle - Peter did not tell him to προσευχομαι: he did not ask Peter to προσευχομαι, the word they used was δεομαι.
The Ethiopian eunuch likewise said δεομαι "prithee tell me of whom the prophet speaks"

So - if the Romans δεομαι their saints, how do you propose to prosecute any charge against them?

foudroyant
07-29-2014, 02:42 AM
None of them fit the criteria in Post #212.

tabibito
07-29-2014, 03:20 AM
Post 212 hardly sets reasonable parameters, but even so.

Cite one passage in Scripture where prayer is being done and it is not worship.
is in fact fulfilled by the eunuch's direct address to Philip - "I pray you" ... I feel reasonably confident that Philip wasn't being worshipped. Of course, modern translations will translate that as "I ask you" or "I beg of you", but as can be seen from the exchange between Peter and Simon, the word does have equivalence as "pray" - particularly given how ancient the Roman practice is. Or will you deny that the prayers to the saints are requests? Does Rome promote obeisance to the saints?

If I drop back to King James - even παρακαλεω will translate as pray.

But how about ευχομαι?
2 Corinthians 13:7 I pray to God - Would there be a problem with ευχομαι-ing someone?

But again - If the Roman practice is merely one of δεομαι-ing, how do you propose to prosecute a charge of heresy?

tabibito
07-29-2014, 04:13 AM
What is the significance of a word having only one association in the New Testament? Do we assign any significance to the fact that the only time the word "colt" is used in the New Testament, that word applies to the colt that Jesus rode? Or do we use a bit of nous and realise that the only time the word "colt" has any relation to the narrative is when a colt was set aside for use by Jesus? The fact that a word has only one use in the New Testament is, of and by itself, of no significance whatever.

What evidence can be advanced in support of the contention that Rome promotes προσευχομαι, rather than δεομαι of the saints? By its own testimony, Rome δεομαι-s its saints. Can anyone refute that claim? If not, a charge of blasphemy or heresy against Rome because of the practice redounds to the accuser's detriment.

foudroyant
07-29-2014, 05:20 AM
Your other example doesn't work either. When the eunuch spoke to Philip he not only did so audibly but he was the only one speaking to Philip so it isn't the same as prayer to God who can fully understand all the silent prayers rendered unto Him all at once by myriads of people.

Here is Post #212 again:
Cite one passage in Scripture where prayer is being done and it is not worship.
Now I know RC's will say that prayer is just like talking to someone or asking someone to do something, etc.

But I know no one (besides God) who can fully know what 1 million people with different requests are asking at the same time if they do so silently.

tabibito
07-29-2014, 07:11 AM
When the eunuch spoke to Philip he not only did so audibly but he was the only one speaking to Philip so it isn't the same as prayer to God who can fully understand all the silent prayers rendered unto Him all at once by myriads of people. Nonetheless, the eunuch δεομαι-ed to Philip.

1 John 3:2 Beloved, now we are children of God; and it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is.
1 Corinthians 6:3 Do you not know that we shall judge angels? How much more, things that pertain to this life?

I have no idea to what extent, or what limits might apply to, "we shall be like him." Nor do I have any idea what sort of authority or capability a man will need to make him fit to judge angels.

One thing is certain though, there will be far fewer limitations on a person after he is resurrected than before. So, having only the vaguest idea of what the circumstances of a resurrected person might be, I can't answer your objection.

foudroyant
07-29-2014, 06:15 PM
Nonetheless, the eunuch δεομαι-ed to Philip.

It still doesn't apply.

The Bible records people saying things to God (in prayer) but that is not anywhere near people saying things to one another.

tabibito
07-29-2014, 06:20 PM
One person δεομαι-s God, another person δεομαι-s his neighbour. The object of the action is different, but the action is the same.
One person προσευχομαι-s God, another δεομαι-s God. The object of the action is the same, but the action is (only subtly perhaps) different.

foudroyant
07-29-2014, 06:32 PM
It's different in that myriads of people can do this at the same time to God silently and He will still be able to fully understand all of them.

Not so with anyone else.

tabibito
07-29-2014, 06:39 PM
It's different in that myriads of people can do this at the same time to God silently and He will still be able to fully understand all of them.

Not so with anyone else.

Bare assertion, and you (presumably) don't know any more than I about what a resurrected person is capable of.

One Bad Pig
07-29-2014, 07:43 PM
It's different in that myriads of people can do this at the same time to God silently and He will still be able to fully understand all of them.

Not so with anyone else.
Does Mary have the Holy Spirit?

Is the Holy Spirit God?

Is there a limit to what God can do through a person?

Is there some biblical text you can point me to to support that answer?

tabibito
07-29-2014, 08:01 PM
Does Mary have the Holy Spirit? unknown - depending on precept, may have been resurrected already, maybe in something like soul sleep. The former being the Church of Rome's precept, it would then become a matter of whether the Holy Spirit remains with a person who has become like Christ (post resurrection). Still unknown - nothing in the scriptural record addresses the issue.

Is the Holy Spirit God? Indubitably

Is there a limit to what God can do through a person? Seems not.

Is there some biblical text you can point me to to support that answer? Not a one as far as I know. (except for the Holy Spirit being God, that is)

foudroyant
07-30-2014, 02:32 AM
Nothing in Scripture even hints at myriads of people speaking silently within their hearts and anyone else but God being able to fully understand all of what they express (1 Kings 8:39; 2 Chronicles 6:30).

tabibito
07-30-2014, 02:42 AM
Beyond stating that "we shall be like him" the scriptures tell us almost nothing about what the resurrected person will be capable of. As far as the Bible is concerned, the matter of a resurrected person's capabilities is off topic.

foudroyant
07-30-2014, 03:04 AM
The Bible does not show one example of it being proper for any Christian to communicate with any person (except the Lord Jesus) who has departed.
For good reason. This would constitute prayer which is worship.

And prayer/worship is due unto God alone.

tabibito
07-30-2014, 03:15 AM
Provide the scripture that declares all prayer to be worship.
With προσευχομαι you might have a case, but not with δεομαι - and δεομαι is also pray, as is ευχομαι, neither of which is restricted to prayer to a deity.
To make your case, you need to show that what Rome promotes is in fact προσευχομαι. You haven't even begun to show that to be the case.


The Bible does not show one example of it being proper for any Christian to communicate with any person (except the Lord Jesus) who has departed.
You won't begin to make a case here either, except that you can show where and how the New Testament prohibits communication with the dead.

foudroyant
07-30-2014, 04:58 AM
I already provided several examples in the OP that prayer is worship.
What has not been supplied is an example where prayer is not worship.

In terms of deomai this is why Danker in his lexicon differentiates its usage. I also pointed out that prayer is used not used in the sense I described in Post #212.

At the time of the offering of the evening sacrifice, Elijah the prophet came near and said, O LORD, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Israel, today let it be known that You are God in Israel and that I am Your servant and I have done all these things at Your word. (1 Kings 18:36, NASB)

In 1 Kings 18:36 Elijah prayed unto the LORD but the text reads that he "said" this unto the LORD.
The other day I "said" something to my dog.

Guess which example above is praying and which one isn't despite the word "said" being used in both examples.

So once again go back to Post #212 and provide an example where prayer is not worship from Scripture.
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?1526-Praying-to-Mary-is-worshiping-Mary/page22

tabibito
07-30-2014, 05:46 AM
If he "said", I'd expect the LXX to read as ειπεν. So I'll go have a look. Meanwhile, two words other than προσευχομαι also translate as pray. You still haven't shown that what Rome offers to Mary is προσευχομαι. If you can't do that, you don't have any business laying a charge of heresy or blasphemy on the basis of "prayer is worship".

tabibito
07-30-2014, 05:48 AM
1 Kings 18:36 καὶ ἀνεβόησεν Ηλιου εἰς τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ εἶπεν κύριε ὁ θεὸς

foudroyant
07-30-2014, 05:50 AM
It's a prayer.

I'm still waiting for a passage from the Bible where prayer is not worship (see Post #212).

tabibito
07-30-2014, 05:53 AM
1 Kings 18:36 καὶ ἀνεβόησεν Ηλιου εἰς τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ εἶπεν κύριε ὁ θεὸς



In terms of deomai this is why Danker in his lexicon differentiates its usage.

I also pointed out that prayer is used not used in the sense I described in Post #212.
The word that YOU want the Roman use of pray (to Mary) defined is of less than no significance. If they aren't using "pray" in the sense that you want the word defined so that you can justify tossing allegations at them, your allegation is false witness. So - and again - PROVE that they προσευχομαι to Mar or mark yourself a slanderer.

foudroyant
07-30-2014, 05:57 AM
Mark yourself an idiot for not supplying a passage.

tabibito
07-30-2014, 06:41 AM
erótaó: to ask, question
Original Word: ἐρωτάω
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: erótaó
Phonetic Spelling: (er-o-tah'-o)
Short Definition: I ask, question, request
Definition: (a) I ask (a question), question, (b) I request, make a request to, pray.

John 17:20 “I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; - ερωταω
John 17:9 “I pray for them. I do not pray for the world but for those whom You have given Me, for they are Yours. - ερωταω

foudroyant
07-30-2014, 06:52 AM
Post #234. Second sentence.

tabibito
07-30-2014, 06:55 AM
You don't get to define which "pray" Rome uses when it promotes prayer to the saints. They say it isn't προσευχομαι, you say it is. Prove your case.

foudroyant
07-30-2014, 06:59 AM
Where do they say it is isn't proseuchomai?

Prove your case.

tabibito
07-30-2014, 07:04 AM
They claim that the prayers to the saints are not the same kind as the prayers to God. And they also claim that the saints are lesser than God.

The accuser needs to be able to present a convincing case that the accusation is valid - no one else has to prove anything.
You accused members of the Church of Rome of blasphemy: but when it comes down to supplying evidence in support of the claim, you didn't even get off the batter's plate.

foudroyant
07-30-2014, 07:07 AM
You didn't answer the question in Post #240.

foudroyant
07-30-2014, 07:10 AM
You don't get to define which "pray" Rome uses when it promotes prayer to the saints. They say it isn't προσευχομαι, you say it is. Prove your case.

You asserted they say it isn't proseuchomai.

Prove this assertion.

tabibito
07-30-2014, 07:19 AM
Already did - But I'll let Rome answer your objection as well: They don't teach that people should pray to the saints that the saints answer their prayers, but that the saints present their petitions to God.


Another charge commonly levelled against asking the saints for their intercession is that this violates the sole mediatorship of Christ, which Paul discusses: "For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (1 Tim. 2:5).

But asking one person to pray for you in no way violates Christ’s mediatorship, as can be seen from considering the way in which Christ is a mediator. First, Christ is a unique mediator between man and God because he is the only person who is both God and man. He is the only bridge between the two, the only God-man. But that role as mediator is not compromised in the least by the fact that others intercede for us. Furthermore, Christ is a unique mediator between God and man because he is the Mediator of the New Covenant (Heb. 9:15, 12:24), just as Moses was the mediator (Greek mesitas) of the Old Covenant (Gal. 3:19–20).
You are the accuser - you are the one who accused members of Rome of blasphemy - it is incumbent on you to prove your case. Until you prove your case, Rome is innocent.

foudroyant
07-30-2014, 01:48 PM
Already did

No you didn't.

You made the assertion that the RC does not claim that proseuchomai is not to be rendered unto the saints.

I asked you to prove your assertion. This means you get official Roman Catholic teaching that agrees with what you assert they believe.

One Bad Pig
07-30-2014, 03:53 PM
They claim that the prayers to the saints are not the same kind as the prayers to God. And they also claim that the saints are lesser than God.

The accuser needs to be able to present a convincing case that the accusation is valid - no one else has to prove anything.
You accused members of the Church of Rome of blasphemy: but when it comes down to supplying evidence in support of the claim, you didn't even get off the batter's plate.

That's because he has no evidence. There is material which, if taken out of context, could support his claim, but I doubt he's even bothered to look; his mind is already made up.

foudroyant
07-30-2014, 05:47 PM
You were the one who said I misused Mounce.

Still no evidence supplied to support that idiotic assertion.

One Bad Pig
07-30-2014, 06:22 PM
You were the one who said I misused Mounce.

Still no evidence supplied to support that idiotic assertion.
No evidence that you accept. Does Mounce say that praying to Mary means that the person thinks she's God? Does Mounce say anything about the prayer practices of Roman Catholics or Orthodox?

foudroyant
07-30-2014, 06:35 PM
No evidence that you accept.

Because none has been presented. You asserted I misused Mounce but as we have seen it is an assertion without proof.

William Mounce: The fact that people pray to both God (Mt. 6:9) and Jesus (Acts 1:24) is part of the proof of Jesus' deity (Mounce's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old & New Testament Words, Pray, page 531).

By writing the above NONE but God is to be addressed in prayer.

tabibito
07-30-2014, 07:00 PM
William Mounce: The fact that people pray to both God (Mt. 6:9) and Jesus (Acts 1:24) is part of the proof of Jesus' deity (Mounce's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old & New Testament Words, Pray, page 531).




Acts 1:24 καὶ προσευξάμενοι εἶπαν σὺ κύριε καρδιογνῶστα πάντων ἀνάδειξον ὃν ἐξελέξω ἐκ τούτων τῶν δύο ἕνα And they prayed, saying "you O Lord, knower of the hearts of all men, show which of these two you have chosen"
Unless "Lord" can be shown to refer solely to Christ, and not to the "Father" or to "God", that is shaky ground on which to make the assertion that they are praying to Christ. (evidence is fairly sure from the sum of New Testament entries that this is most likely, as far as I know.)
Then arises the problem that προσευχομαι only signifies prayer to a deity - προσευχομα-ing to Hachiman wouldn't signify prayer to the Christian God. It would only show that the one praying regards Hachiman as a god.

So, does Mounce back the claim that the Lord being prayed to is in fact, specifically, Jesus - and neither the Father nor the Trinity? Or is this just another bare assertion with no scriptural evidence provided in support?