I don’t interpret any verses as meaning soul sleep. We can’t both be right.
We’d sure be in a pickle if God hadn’t left us a teaching authority to settle disputes.
 November 21, 2015 at 8:03am
In Revelation 6:9-10, John writes, “When he [Christ] opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the witness they had borne; they cried out with a loud voice, ‘O Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long before thou wilt judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell upon the earth?’”
Genesis 4:10 - "The Lord said, “What have you done? Listen! Your brother’s blood cries out to me from the ground." Clearly God's statement here to Cain is symbolic. And so is this scene John sees. This group is part of a larger group he also sees in other contexts along with the risen and permanently saved multitude (Rev. 19:1-2). Rev. 6:9-10 refers to the cry of all people through history, "How long O Lord?" who long for God's justice. The larger context and many other references are very similar. For instance Ps. 79:1-10 and Habakkuk 1:1-4.
Revelation has 404 verses. More than 200 of them are either direct quotes from the Old Testament or allusions. The first and best interpretation of Revelation, therefore, is an understanding of the OT references, i.e., justice, the sanctuary and sacrificial system. Along with the Hebrew understanding of life (as opposed to a Greek understanding, because John is a Jew).
God bless you too.
I don't interpret any verses as meaning soul sleep. We can't both be right.
We'd sure be in a pickle if God hadn't left us a teaching authority to settle disputes.
November 21, 2015 at 7:57am
You are partly right but it sounds like you are conflating two types of revelation, if I may gently suggest.
Public revelation has ended. It ended with the death of the last Apostle. But private revelation has never ended. True private revelation can’t go against Christian truths (including Scripture) so in that way you are right about extreme caution. But private revelation is for the individual to whom it was given, not something anyone else has to believe, so you are free to reject this lady’s story. If it violates true Christian tenets, we all should, herself included. Having not read the book, I can’t say what I think.
@LestWeForget - Define, "public revelation". Why would Christ stop revealing his truths to the world? Does he not love us as much today as he has always? Christ has always spoken to God's children, since the beginning. Why would He stop now when there is so much confusion in the world surrounding His word?
I testify that Christ still speaks to all the world through His chosen prophets, just as He has always done, He continues to do. It is up to us to open our hearts and listen.
 November 21, 2015 at 7:43am
awesome comment, chdorb
November 19, 2015 at 9:31am
Suggestion: MEDIA, let’s not use the term “Mastermind.” Their egos love it. Why flatter them, enticing the next one, in case 72 virgins wasn’t enticing enough?
Call him a “Planner.”
November 14, 2015 at 10:39pm
read it again. no assumptions.
an objective general statement.
 November 14, 2015 at 1:33pm
I did have the impression he nearly died, which is a near death experience, because you said he nearly died a few months ago. I didn’t think you would be sensitive to bluntness after you referred to Christianity as a myth. If a man can speak bluntly a man ought be able to hear bluntness with the same level of cool demeanor.
If you find it condescending, then you don’t understand Christian thought. To condescend I’d have to look down upon you. I don’t. Christians don’t look down on anyone, we are sinners in need of a savior. We are the ones looked down upon for believing in something a person can’t prove with the physical senses. What we have though is all the physical senses and an additional sense of the beyond-natural, the super-natural. We have a superabundance of understanding compared to the non-believer, but that is what makes us want such a thing for others, even those who ridicule or disrespect us. It’s love. True love wants eternal bliss for others.
So, no, it’s not condescending to say “a parent who loves his child…” in fact it is only a statement of faith and revealed truth attained through the natural and supernatural senses.
The final question exemplifies it. You didn’t answer. Will you?
“If heaven and hell are real, which one do you want for your son?”
 November 14, 2015 at 8:51am
Great Catholic cross you got there. But your nontrinitarian belief doesn’t match it.
 November 14, 2015 at 8:46am
When you make a doctrinal statement that flies in the face of 2000 years of Church teaching, those who disagree with you might comment or ask you to explain. That’s what happens in a comment section. Why is it so upsetting to you? I enjoy discussing the things of God because they are true and defensible, joyous and beautiful. I find there’s nothing to shy away from or say to others “just stop it.”
If you don’t want to back up your doctrine, don’t open the can of worms yourself. Know what I mean?
 November 14, 2015 at 8:10am
No. God turns His back on no one.
Your son has made a choice but he still has time to change his mind so that his soul can be eternally happy. The near death experience he had should remind him that you never know when that time will run out.
A loving parent would encourage their child to explore the option. If heaven and hell are real, which one do you want for your son?
LestWeForget, my apologies if you had gotten the impression that he had a NDE, he did not.
Your last statement is more than a little condescending. I love all three of my children dearly. My ex-wife and I have always allowed our children to follow their own paths. My son decided to read the christian bible on his own. He didn't make it past Genesis due to the shear absurdity of how everything began according to the bible.
On a side note, our children are agnostic/atheist, not because that's what we've taught them. They've come to that decision on their own.
I did have the impression he nearly died, which is a near death experience, because you said he nearly died a few months ago. I didn't think you would be sensitive to bluntness after you referred to Christianity as a myth. If a man can speak bluntly a man ought be able to hear bluntness with the same level of cool demeanor.
If you find it condescending, then you don't understand Christian thought. To condescend I'd have to look down upon you. I don't. Christians don't look down on anyone, we are sinners in need of a savior. We are the ones looked down upon for believing in something a person can't prove with the physical senses. What we have though is all the physical senses and an additional sense of the beyond-natural, the super-natural. We have a superabundance of understanding compared to the non-believer, but that is what makes us want such a thing for others, even those who ridicule or disrespect us. It's love. True love wants eternal bliss for others.
So, no, it's not condescending to say "a parent who loves his child..." in fact it is only a statement of faith and revealed truth attained through the natural and supernatural senses.
The final question exemplifies it. You didn't answer. Will you?
"If heaven and hell are real, which one do you want for your son?"
I agree with your reply to Joxer. God tries to get our attention in many ways, and it's up to us to "GET IT". If we keep choosing not to, we leave our selves vulnerable to Satan and evil. My theory is: Why take the chance of not allowing God into your life? He represents total goodness and LOVE. It WILL help and gives you something to look forward to--it CAN'T hurt!
[-3] November 14, 2015 at 8:05am
There are ways to spread the story without making money off of it.
They could give all profits to missionary workers.
You are making an assuption. How do you know that any money made wasn't given to charity?
read it again. no assumptions.
an objective general statement.
There is nothing wrong with them making money from the story. Jesus told her to go back and tell her story. The worker is worthy of his hire. The money is just the representation of the value of her work, in this case, her ability to spread her testimony. If every Christian were held to your standard we would all be beggars. Instead we created capitalism.
November 14, 2015 at 7:54am
The Bible says to …Gather together on the Day of the Lord.
How do you gather one person?
November 14, 2015 at 7:53am
Look up “Mystics of the Church.” There are countless stories of visits and visions of/from heaven and purgatory. For hundreds of years people have said such miracles were over. It’s good to see mainstream Christianity acknowledging “we were wrong.” Unlike their fellow Protestants, Pentecostals never held to cessationism.
 November 13, 2015 at 8:19am
I read your response to Gita. I had to correct you.
No heartfelt prayer is ever wasted.
Why do you think Christian prayer is unnecessary? The desire to pray Christian prayer comes from the Holy Spirit. Where is your faith?
A sincere prayer for a neighbor fulfills the two greatest commands, as it places total trust in God whom we love above all else, and is an act of charity toward a neighbor.
Each individual is not a church. UNITED we make up one Body. Please read 1 Cor 12-13:2 and Eph 4:3. Closely and in prayer. God would not ship us off to be tossed about by every wave of doctrine and human trickery and self-deception, but
He helps us grow in UNITY.
 November 8, 2015 at 10:13pm
maybe you can bookmark this thread and re read it in a few weeks and come away with a different perspective. good luck with your personal interpretations. I will pray for you to soften toward the great gifts Jesus offers us through His Church and sacraments.
if called to be a Berean, beware what God is calling you to. They only read the old testament in written form. The Good News they accepted through oral teaching (sacred tradition) by Paul the Apostle who was called and chosen to authoritatively serve Jesus in His Church. (The New Testament was compiled by Paul’s successors 350+ years later, the Catholic bishops). so, to be a Berean means you accept scripture, teaching authority and sacred tradition, which is what Catholics do. “scripture alone” isn’t Berean and isn’t in scripture.
but God bless and have a fruitful journey.
no hard feelings, 4.
 November 8, 2015 at 1:50pm
I haven’t missed the fact that you don’t address the validity of Scriptures, despite your continuing to claim you know what they mean. You can’t say why your view is the right one while /simultaneously/ claiming no one is infallible, still insisting the 2000 year old Church is wrong.
What’s important is that you haven’t missed these facts either. It’s statistically improbable that you missed our 10-15 questions about it. So you get to wrestle with those dilemmas in private.
“Peter wasn’t Catholic” – that statement calls into question your understanding of Church history. The word Catholic means something and was used since the first Century to define the one true Church against false teachers who also claimed to follow Christ.
When you cite Scripture, remember, we already believe all of it, but nothing requires me or the Church to believe in your interpretation.As for “Father”, citing Mt 23 is well and good. Are you claiming the Church doesn’t know that verse? or that the 2000 year old One Holy Apostolic Catholic Church misinterprets it? Who is stubborn here?
Here is a test to know if an interpretation is of God or your own concupiscent mind. God can’t contradict, right? St. Paul says “For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel” (1 Cor. 4:15) So the Apostle calling himself a spiritual father in the Church shows the interpretation you have is not, can’t be, from God. It’s yours and it’s errant. The Church’s is consistent with its Bible.
November 8, 2015 at 11:25am
Yes, the Father gave Peter a revelation. This is because Peter, like his successors, don’t achieve authority or infallibility on their own merits. Like Peter, his successors receive a special Grace, a special CHARISM from God.
Peter was given an office. He holds the keys. Bestowed upon Him by the KING OF KINGS. This office didn’t die with the man, but like keys are handed down, the authority continues on in unbroken line of Popes numbering 266 so far. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12272b.htm
You have to decide for yourself – Would Jesus let His Church fall into doctrinal error or would He protect His bride and keep His promise that the Holy Spirit would guide the Church into ALL truth? No matter how hard satan tries to divide and destroy the Church, the gates of hell wouldn’t prevail?
If you decide the Church CAN teach error, then we cannot be certain about anything we know about God. The Bible grew out of the Church. So if we can’t trust the Church, the Bible is not trustworthy. You can’t trust the Bible because someone told you to. You can only trust the Bible to be the inerrant Word of God because His Church said so. (The One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.) Without the Church, there is no Bible (even Calvin and Luther knew that).
If you decide Jesus would never allow His Church to teach error because it would lead souls to hell, then go see your local parish priest and ask about RCIA classes.
November 8, 2015 at 11:13am
Review what you typed.Here is is: “You know what I find very interesting ..?
You didn’t even ask for the bible verses that prove WHAT I SAID and not what you say.”
That sounds to me like you are deriding her for failing to do something she SHOULD have as a Christian – a sin of omission.
Why? Why do you believe she is SUPPOSED to ask for Bible verses to prove your point? Tell you what, show me a Bible verse that says we must demand a Bible verse to understand someone’s perspective?
Regarding the defense of your post:
One – bias from the moon doesn’t justify why your interpretation is correct and Catholics’ are not. Please explain.
Two – one’s walk with the Lord has nothing to do with OBJECTIVE truth. You are talking about one’s formation of opinion, I am talking about the Holy Spirit NOT LYING OR TEACHING TWO DIVERGENT THINGS AS EQUALLY TRUE. God is not whoever someone interprets Him to be. HE IS WHO IS. So Please explain how the Holy Spirit tells you A and tells Gita and Billions of Catholics for 2000 years, NotA.
Three – Saying “nonsense” is cognitive dissonance. Your Bible is 66 books. Ours is 73. Please explain.
Four & Five – You have derided Gita for not asking for verses and I am saying NOTHING in Scripture says demanding verses is a requirement for conversation/understanding. Do you concur?
Six – Doesn’t contradict a thing I said or believe. THESE ARE YOUR BASES FOR THE FAITH AND YET YOU WILL NOT EXPLAIN HOW, USING SCRIPTURE ALONE. I’ve asked alot.
 November 8, 2015 at 8:28am
P.S. Any answer to this? Repeating:
Without Isa 22 and the clear historical Jewish understanding of the Keys and authority that is bestowed by God to open/loose and shut/bind, then how do you explain Jesus’ saying this in conjunction with a blessing, a revelation from the Father, a new name, and a promise to build His Church upon Rock and not allow the gates of hell to prevail against?
 November 8, 2015 at 8:26am
Regarding your latest reply to Gita, why do you accuse Gita of some sin of omission that is no sin (not asking you to give verses)?
Problems with that:
One, you haven’t established yourself to be an infallible interpreter of Scripture, so why would Gita need to consult you to understand the Bible?
Two, if as you assert we are led to interpret perfectly by the Holy Spirit, as individuals, Gita, a baptized believer, has the Holy Spirit and therefore HER understanding is exactly as valid and truthful as yours. (This is a logical, theological, and scriptural fallacy, but it is what you assert with sola scriptura, private interpretation so you MUST apply these rules to every other believer. In other words, you have no rational basis to say anyone’s interpretation is wrong, if we are all “led” to our wrong/rightness.)
Three, Gita has ALL the Scripture at her fingertips and in her heart. You have a biased translation of 90% of it and therefore find yourself at a disadvantage, deficient in access to ALL of God’s Written Word.
Four, contained in those Scriptures, the shortened or the full canon, is no requirement that two Christians must sling verses at one another in a conversation.
Five, contained in those Scriptures, either canon, is no requirement that all truth is contained in Scripture. It says the OPPOSITE is true. (This is indisputable.)
Six, contained in those Scriptures, is no teaching that Bible-alone or personal interpretation are true. The OPPOSITE is taught.