How am I taking that statement out of context? It is true we hold in higher
esteem oral tradition than do protestants. Which preceded scripture. I was
not questioning the legitimacy of your Faith. I would never do so. I am
merely attempting to explain the reasoning behind Catholic belief regarding
the Saints, and their continued relationship with us here on earth. My
question was: How can you be so quick to dismiss Catholic teaching, while
being so quick to believe something written to make a profit. Such can be
illustrated by the film which followed the book?
----- Original Message -----
From: "john schwery" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2014 10:23 AM
Subject: Catholic teaching
> Angel, the reason we don't believe Catholic teaching, and I was raised
> Catholic, is because they aren't in the Scriptures. You are stretching
> the cloud of witnesses statement and taking it out of context.
>
> earlier, Angel, wrote:
>>I am not angry,, I apologize if it seems that I am,. I just can't
>>understand for the life of me why protestants find it so hard to believe
>>in some Catholic teachings, such as those claiming the Saints are
>>interceding for us constantly in heaven, and that they constantly are with
>>us on earth watching over us with our personal angels. They being the
>>cloud of witnesses of which Saint Paul spoke, and they so easily accept
>>something they read from a book shelf. Almost as if it were gospel
>>itself? It seems to me, protestants will bee almost willing to believe
>>anything from almost anyone who claims it to be true. Some are almost as
>>bad as those who believe the shroud of Turin is real. When Saint Paul
>>didn't even recount what he saw in heaven, and don't you think he would
>>have at least raved about how he saw Saint Steven there. If he saw him.
>>Because, we know he suffered from the guilt over the part he played in his
>>martyrdom, if he saw him in heaven. Why should I believe any modern
>>recounts of heavenly experiences. When, in order for A Saint to be
>>canonized, two miracles must be verified as having been done by that
>>Saint. It is those recounting from such Saints as Paul and John in whom I
>>put my trust concerning heavenly accounts. I ask, what is the litmus test
>>to which you all have put this recounting from this young man whom no one
>>on the list knows personally? Now I am not saying the experiences
>>themselves aren't real experiences. I am just saying why I don't believe
>>they should be taken at face value. Only God knows whether those
>>experiences weren't hallucinations. My late husband suffered from a load
>>of those. Each of which seemed perfectly real to him. I know what they
>>were too, because he spoke each he saw.
>>----- Original Message ----- From: "Donna Bell" <[log in to unmask]>
>>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2014 5:56 AM
>>Subject: Re: Angel, Please first read Heaven is for real: a little boy's
>>astounding story of his trip to heaven and back.
>>
>>
>>>Hi All,
>>>I haven't read the book yet, but I intend too. My first reaction to
>>>what I'm reading is that this family needs our prayers, and
>>>compassion.
>>>Any book that talks about miracles should be weighed against scripture,
>>>but it seems like what happened to this little one is meant to
>>>encourage us.
>>>I haven't walked on water, or raised the dead, but God has saved my
>>>life more than once, and the testimonies from these events have lead
>>>people to salvation, which is what really matters.
>>>We'll know the book by it's fruit. Angel, I'm sorry you seem so angry.
>>>Blessings,
>>>Donna
>>>On 7/23/14, Phil Scovell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>Then tell us everything that is theologically wrong with this miraculous
>>>>experience. I get the feeling you don't want to read this little book
>>>>and
>>>>I'm wondering why. Why do you want to argue what you believe when you
>>>>haven't read this book of a little boy's testimony confirmed by
>>>>Scripture
>>>>from beginning to end. Are you worried it might challenge some of your
>>>>most
>>>>closely held beliefs?
>>>>
>>>>Phil.
|