Catholics who know history: please answer

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jesuspaiditall
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hisalone said:
De 4:16 -
so that you do not act corruptly and make a graven image for yourselves in the form of any figure, the likeness of male or female,

**Hi Hisalone,👋 **
**Boy, you are jumping all over the place with your different agruments, and lies. Now you are on “graven images” 😃 . **

**What is an “graven Image”? The catholic church has never had, bought, endorsed, condoned, supported nor made any graven images! We worship the one True God! The creator not a creation of man such as a Book of words?:eek: **

De 4:23 -
"So watch yourselves, that you do not forget the covenant of the LORD your God which He made with you, and make for yourselves a graven image in the form of anything {against} which the LORD your God has commanded you.

AMEN! We never have never would! 👍

Next argument? Lets try false religions! We can discuss Counterfeit denominations, altered Bibles, false prophets, and the list goes on! 👍

God Bless
Click to expand...
 
In brief

ccc 2141 The veneration of sacred images is based on the mystery of the Incarnation of the Word of God. It is not contrary to the first commandment. unquote.

Are you going to deny the Incarnation of the Word now?
 
rinnie said:
Yes I agree with this 100% again whats your point?

finish it

2132 Religious worship is not directed to images in themselves, considered as mere things but under their distinctive aspect as images leading us on to God incarnate, The movememt toward the image does not terminate in it as image, but tends toward that whose image it is. unquote

Please if you are going to quote CCC quote it all. What that means is just what I said. We look at a statue of Jesus and consider him the image of God. Please tell me where I am wrong? Just curious when you see a statue of Jesus who is he to you?
Click to expand...
It still does not make a difference.
The teaching is still different from the command!
 
Realcatholicgk said:
Originally Posted by Hisalone
De 4:16 -
so that you do not act corruptly and make a graven image for yourselves in the form of any figure, the likeness of male or female,

Hi Hisalone,
Boy, you are jumping all over the place with your different agruments, and lies. Now you are on “graven images” .

What is an “graven Image”? The catholic church has never had, bought, endorsed, condoned, supported nor made any graven images! We worship the one True God! The creator not a creation of man such as a Book of words?

De 4:23 -
"So watch yourselves, that you do not forget the covenant of the LORD your God which He made with you, and make for yourselves a graven image in the form of anything {against} which the LORD your God has commanded you.

AMEN! We never have never would!

Next argument? Lets try false religions! We can discuss Counterfeit denominations, altered Bibles, false prophets, and the list goes on!
Click to expand...
No lies all in black and white for all to see.
 
Hisalone said:
Here you have it the teaching is different than the command.

2132 The Christian veneration of images is not contrary to the first commandment which proscribes idols. Indeed, “the honor rendered to an image passes to its prototype,” and “whoever venerates an image venerates the person portrayed in it.”[70] The honor paid to sacred images is a “respectful veneration,” not the adoration due to God alone:
Religious worship is not directed to images in themselves, considered as mere things, but under their distinctive aspect as images leading us on to God incarnate. The movement toward the image does not terminate in it as image, but tends toward that whose image it is.[71]
Click to expand...
But the thing I really don’t understand you are accusing us of breaking the first commandment, and read the first line. It say’s itself it is not contrary to the first commandment. What really was your point? Just curious. If you are going to lie about the church why would you write the truth?
 
Hisalone said:
Does not Peter equate Pauls epistles with inspired scripture?
2Ptr 3:
15 and consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation–as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, 16 as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Hisalone said:
De 4:16 -
so that you do not act corruptly and make a graven image for yourselves in the form of any figure, the likeness of male or female,

De 4:23 -
"So watch yourselves, that you do not forget the covenant of the LORD your God which He made with you, and make for yourselves a graven image in the form of anything {against} which the LORD your God has commanded you.
Click to expand...
Hi Hisalone 👋

The Second Commandment reads: “Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.” - (Exodus 20:4-6)

**This is one of the longest commandments, although people don’t generally realize this because in most lists the vast majority is cut out. If people remember it at all they remember only the first phrase: “Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image,” but that alone is sufficient to cause controversy and disagreement. It is believed by most theologians that this commandment was designed to underscore the radical difference between God as creator and God’s creations.
It was common in various Near East religions to use representations of the gods to facilitate worship, but in ancient Judaism this was prohibited because no aspect of the creation could adequately stand in for God. Human beings come closest to sharing in the attributes of divinity, but other than them it simply isn’t possible for anything in creation to suffice.
Most scholars believe that the reference to “graven images” was a reference to idols of beings other than God. It does not say anything like “graven images of men” and the implication seems to be that if someone makes a graven image, it cannot possible be one of God. Thus, even if they think they have made an idol of God, in reality any idol is necessarily one of some other god. This is why this prohibition of graven images is normally regarded as being fundamentally connected to the prohibition of worshipping any other gods. **
It seems likely that the aniconic tradition was adhered to consistently in ancient Israel. Thus far no definite idol of Yahweh has been identified in any Hebrew sanctuaries. The closest that archaeologists have come across are crude depictions of a god and consort at Kuntillat Ajrud. Some believe that these may be images of Yahweh and Asherah, but this interpretation is disputed and uncertain.
**An aspect of this commandment that is often ignored is that of intergenerational guilt and punishment. According to this commandment, punishment for the crimes of one person will be placed on the heads of their children and children’s children down through four generations — or at least the crime of bowing down before the wrong god(s). For the ancient Hebrews, this wouldn’t have seemed a strange situation. An intensely tribal society, everything was communal in nature — especially religious worship. People didn’t establish relationships with God on a personal level, they did so on a tribal level. Punishments, too, could be communal in nature, especially when the crimes involved communal acts. It was also common in Near East cultures that an entire family group would be punished for the crimes of an individual member. This was no idle threat - Joshua 7 describes how Achan was executed alongside his sons and daughters after he was caught stealing things that God wanted for himself. All of this was done “before the Lord” and at God’s instigation; many soldiers had already died in battle because God was angry with the Israelites on account of one of them sinning. This, then, is was the nature of communal punishment — very real, very nasty, and very violent. That was then, though, and society has moved on. Today it would be a grave crime in itself to punish children for the acts of their fathers. No civilized society would do it — not even half-way civilized societies do it. Any “justice” system that visited the “iniquity” of a person on their children and children’s children down to the fourth generation would be rightly condemned as immoral and unjust. **
**Should we not do the same for a government that suggests this is the right course of action? That, however, is exactly what we have when a government promotes the Ten Commandments as a proper foundation for either personal or public morality. Government representatives might try to defend their actions by leaving out this troubling portion, but in doing so they aren’t really promoting the Ten Commandments anymore, are they? Picking and choosing what parts of the Ten Commandments they will endorse is just as insulting to believers as endorsing any of them is to nonbelievers.
“If you believe what you like in the gospels, and reject what you don’t like, it is not the gospel you believe, but yourself.” Saint Augustine **
**In the same way that the government has no authority to single out the Ten Commandments for endorsement, the government has no authority to creatively edit them in an effort to make the as palatable as possible to the widest possible audience. **
 
rinnie said:
But the thing I really don’t understand you are accusing us of breaking the first commandment, and read the first line. It say’s itself it is not contrary to the first commandment. What really was your point? Just curious. If you are going to lie about the church why would you write the truth?
Click to expand...
Is if in fact contrary to Deut 4:
15 "So watch R157 yourselves carefully, since you did not see any form R158 on the day the LORD spoke to you at Horeb from the midst of the fire, 16 so that you do not act R159 corruptly and make R160 a graven image for yourselves in the form of any figure, the likeness of male or female, 17 the likeness of any animal that is on the earth, the likeness of any R161 winged bird that flies in the sky, 18 the likeness of anything that creeps on the ground, the likeness of any fish that is in the water below the earth.

The CC says it is not but does reason prevail and that you can see that it in fact does.
 
rinnie said:
oneGODoneCHURCH;4511643:
AMEN TO THAT! Just like he didn’t have to use the Blessed Mother to give birth to Jesus, but he did. God has a reason for everything. And It kills me that people can’t except that. It is what it is. What kills me is when people make so many false statements about the Church. WHY? I will never know. Have a good day!
Click to expand...
It’s mans stubbornness. You have a great day as well.
Click to expand...
 
Realcatholicgk said:
What exactly do you believe the Magisterium has decreed about “separated brethren” that I am not in compliance with?

The Magisterium has recognized the authenticity of the faith of non-Catholic Christians. The tone of your rhetoric belittled the faith of non-Catholic Christians by stating that we are in jeopardy of eternal damnation for not submitting to the RCC pope and some RCC doctrines. Vatican II refuted that idea over 40 years ago. By your statements, I would say that you not in submission to the teaching of your own Magisterium regarding “separated brethren” (please note that we are called “brethren” by your Magisterium).
Click to expand...
 
Metamorphoo said:
Realcatholicgk;4511413 said:
What exactly do you believe the Magisterium has decreed about “separated brethren” that I am not in compliance with?
Click to expand...
The Magisterium has recognized the authenticity of the faith of non-Catholic Christians. The tone of your rhetoric belittled the faith of non-Catholic Christians by stating that we are in jeopardy of eternal damnation for not submitting to the RCC pope and some RCC doctrines. Vatican II refuted that idea over 40 years ago. By your statements, I would say that you not in submission to the teaching of your own Magisterium regarding “separated brethren” (please note that we are called “brethren” by your Magisterium).
See Decree on Ecumenism quoted in one of my earliest posts on this thread.
“And yet, almost everyone, though in different ways longs for the one visible Church of God, a Church truly universal and sent forth in the whole world that the world may be converted to the Gospel and so be saved, to the glory of God.”
Vatican II “set forth before all Catholics guidelines, helps and methods, by which they too can respond to the grace of this divine call.”
“It follows that the separated Churches and communities as such, though we believe they suffer from the defects already mentioned, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. for the Spirit of God has not refrained from using them as means of salvation which derive their efficacy form the very fullnes of grace and truth entrusted to the Catholic Church.”
Click to expand...
 
Metamorphoo said:
Realcatholicgk;4511413 said:
What exactly do you believe the Magisterium has decreed about “separated brethren” that I am not in compliance with?
Click to expand...
The Magisterium has recognized the authenticity of the faith of non-Catholic Christians. The tone of your rhetoric belittled the faith of non-Catholic Christians by stating that we are in jeopardy of eternal damnation for not submitting to the RCC pope and some RCC doctrines. Vatican II refuted that idea over 40 years ago. By your statements, I would say that you not in submission to the teaching of your own Magisterium regarding “separated brethren” (please note that we are called “brethren” by your Magisterium).

I am not sure what this is about it sound’s like you are angry. But the only thing I can say that in order to have the true Church you must have all of the sacraments. That is according to the Church teachings. IF your Church has all of the Sacraments you are in the true Church. As far as the Pope from what I understand he does say that he recognize some truths that other Church’s have but welcomes all brethren to come back to the RCC to the fullness of the truth. That is not the exact words I can get them later if you want. But that is the way I understand it.
Click to expand...
 
DebChris said:
oneGODoneCHURCH;4511643:
To follow up with what you have written. It is the magisterium, the teaching authority of the Church that decided what was to be included and what to be excluded from Sacred Scripture. It is the Church who decided the final books to be included in the Bible. The Gnostic gospels, for instance were excluded.
As as already been mentioned, the written Word comes from Tradition (the teachings of the Christ as given to the Apostles and handed down to us) and not the other way around. Each informs the other.

Ours is a living faith. It is not confined to the pages of a book. Rather it lives within us through the power of the Holy Spirit. Each of us is a living testament to the power of God working within our lives to the extent that each of us is open to that power.
Click to expand...
👍
Thank you an very good post.
Click to expand...
 
Realcatholicgk said:
Well, if you can’t trust Wikipedia who could you trust?:rolleyes: I have an idea :newidea: the RCC!😃
Click to expand...
You can access any of the things that were cited from Wikipedia in any of the historical writings concerning the Church. What part of the Church’s history that was cited do you disagree with?

Oh and by the way, I am a member of the Roman Catholic Church.
 
Curious ?

Quote by: Realcatholicgk

The Catholic church is 2,000 years old and still teaching the same things. Protestant religions, only 500 years old , are teaching 1,375 different doctrines and dogmas in 61,000 seperate denominations using over 100 different bibles with altered words and verses.

Isn’t the Jewish “church” older than the Catholic church? If so, who is it then that holds more authority?
 
hoi_polloi said:
Curious ?

Quote by: Realcatholicgk

The Catholic church is 2,000 years old and still teaching the same things. Protestant religions, only 500 years old , are teaching 1,375 different doctrines and dogmas in 61,000 seperate denominations using over 100 different bibles with altered words and verses.

Isn’t the Jewish “church” older than the Catholic church? If so, who is it then that holds more authority?
Click to expand...
not really sure what you are talking about with authority between the Jewish faith and the Catholic church? you seem to be comparing apples and oranges here.
 
Metamorphoo said:
realcatholicgk said:
** What exactly do you believe the Magisterium has decreed about “separated brethren” that I am not in compliance with?**
Click to expand...
The Magisterium has recognized the authenticity of the faith of non-Catholic Christians.

Actually they said it is “faulty”, the same as I do! Anyone who doesn’t follow the teachings of the Catholic Church are heretics! Another way of saying that is “separated brethren” of course!

The tone of your rhetoric belittled the faith of non-Catholic Christians by stating that we are in jeopardy of eternal damnation for not submitting to the RCC pope and some RCC doctrines.

**So, my oratory became rhetoric to your eyes? What a shame,!“None as as blind as those that refuse to see”:cool: Actually, your jeopardy lies in your not eating the real Body and drinking the real Blood of Jesus as He personally “commanded”. Plus by not submitting yourself to Jesus’ will and following His teachings! For willfully disobeying Him and His real church’s teachings! Can you still be saved? Of course, Are all “Catholics” saved? Of course not!

Is your church “correct” in what it teaches?freesmileys.org/smileys/laughing024.gif**Let’s just say: NO!

Vatican II refuted that idea over 40 years ago.

It did? Hmm, did I "misread something?:rolleyes: What is your exact quote on that? You mean we finally admitted that we were wrong and you are correct? That all your modifications, changes and corruptions of the things we are required to follow was right? Did the RCC admitted we were wrong? I have to see that! Yea! Please, send me that reference.

By your statements, I would say that you not in submission to the teaching of your own Magisterium regarding “separated
brethren” (please note that we are called “brethren” by your Magisterium).

**By your statements, I would say that you think that the Catholic church has given some kind of approval for your corrupt beliefs? :rolleyes: (Please note that you are also called Heretics by the entire world, and I mean that in the nicest way possibly, my brethren!) :console:

God Bless **
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top