Religion Forum threads labeled “Ecumenical”
Ecumenical threads are closed to antagonism.
To antagonize is to incur or to provoke hostility in others.
Unlike the “caucus” threads, the article and reply posts of an “ecumenical” thread may discuss more than one belief, but antagonism is not tolerable.
More leeway is granted to what is acceptable in the text of the article than to the reply posts. For example, the term “gross error” in an article will not prevent an ecumenical discussion, but a poster should not use that term in his reply because it is antagonistic. As another example, the article might be a passage from the Bible which would be antagonistic to Jews. The passage should be considered historical information and a legitimate subject for an ecumenical discussion. The reply posts however must not be antagonistic.
Contrasting of beliefs or even criticisms can be made without provoking hostilities. But when in doubt, only post what you are “for” and not what you are “against.” Or ask questions.
Ecumenical threads will be moderated on a “where there’s smoke, there’s fire” basis. When hostility has broken out on an “ecumenical” thread, I’ll be looking for the source.
Therefore “anti” posters must not try to finesse the guidelines by asking loaded questions, using inflammatory taglines, gratuitous quote mining or trying to slip in an “anti” or “ex” article under the color of the “ecumenical” tag.
The same family religious divisions I’ve experienced over Christmas, with paternal family not observing Christmas as a religious holy day and maternal family observing and celebrating at length from Advent through “Old Christmas” extends into this difference in belief and practice as well.
There is scriptural support for “soul sleep” just as surely as there is for conscious, living souls with God. I’ve wrangled with it for years. All I can say is, the Word is truth and is not contradictory, therefore neither is wrong. But, to accept one at the expense of denying the other is not entirely correct, either.
I’ve encountered fairly learned individual Christians who have wrangled with this over the course of my own efforts to gain a better grasp of the matter. Some have claimed that the living souls attested Biblically are all from the Old Testament, therefore they’re the righteous dead freed from captivity.
Others have stated, fairly convincingly, that the nature of humanity being an image or likeness of God is of necessity triune in nature, and that the soul dies along with the body, being of the blood according to Leviticus, not to be heard from again until resurrection, as several passages indicate. But, the spirit returns to Him that gave it, so the truth is that both are true, not at all contradictory, but we conflate soul and spirit when in fact the two are not the same.
I’m open to further discussion and interpretation. Much of it amounts to speculation, and I would certainly not advocate the creation of any dogmatic requirement of believing one way or the other.
Praying to people physically dead from this world in addition to Jesus Christ does seem wrong to me, though, regardless of their Biblical notoriety or greatness. I need look no further than Saul and Solomon to see scriptural condemnation of it, imho.
You’re free to believe otherwise within the bounds of scriptural support. That’s how I’ve made peace with seemingly contradictory beliefs among people I’ve known to be strong in their Christian faith, who practiced differently.
I suppose the people Paul was writing to here were actually in heaven as well then? How about believers who are instructed to go “boldly before the throne”? Are they actually transported into heaven? Are they all spiritually in heaven?
If they are spiritually in heave along with those who have died why do Catholics need to pray to Mary and the saints to get a better chance of being heard by God if they are already “before the throne”?