Angel, don't brand me with the same brush.  I haven't read the book 
and won't read it.  I don't care about oral tradition; God's word is 
trump.  How are you taking it out of context?  Read Hebrews 11 and 12 
and find out.  I know about the teaching; I just don't agree with 
it.  The teaching is not in Scripture so I discount it.

earlier, Angel, wrote:
>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.