Don’t know if I am understanding you correctly: Are you accusing Sola Scripturists of being idolators? Idolatry is a serious sin.
They say we worship statues I’m gonna return the favor and say they worship a book…
They say it because it is in the Bible! When they say “Well the Bible says this” it means they are giving the source of God’s word (generally giving a reference so that you can look it up yourself so that you yourself can interpret whether they are misinterpreting it).
Maybe you should say “When anything contrary to my interpretation of Scripture is decreed in a council, we ought to believe my interpretation of Scripture rather than my interpretation of council.” Don’t we also have to interpret the words of the council? Everything we read is interpreted, even these posts.
When one interprets some text that does not mean that you decide whatever you want about the text to your own liking.In all humilty, I ask you to consider the teaching of Jesus: Do unto others, as you would have them do unto you
No one specifically. I just meant if someone did do that then it would be idolatrous. But as I showed, even Catholics venerate Scripture.
True, but at some point do we not have to appeal to sentience and even if someone insists the sky is yellow that it’s really blue? But you raise an interesting issue----what happens when two Christians disagree on a truth? Acts 15 or Luke 10:16 give us the answer—it is the authentic successors of the Apostles who have the Spirit’s guaranteed guidance, not the individual who “disagrees” with the successors. That’s where Luther went awry.
Agreed. I also say, “The Bible says…” when speaking about something that is not specifically spoken by Jesus but spoken of in the Bible, and so do many other Catholics, so this is hardly some kind of “Protestant phenomenon”. I also say, “Well, the Pope has said…”, but that hardly means that I worship the Pope.
Not everything that the Church Councils have said can be interpreted in a variety of ways. When the Church says, “Mary is perpetually virginal,” that can mean nothing other than what it says. When the Church says, “Jesus Christ is 100% God and 100% man,” it can’t be interpreted in any way other than what it says. I can’t have “my own interpretation” of what the Church Councils have said because they make it pretty clear exactly what they are saying when they say it.Maybe you should say “When anything contrary to my interpretation of Scripture is decreed in a council, we ought to believe my interpretation of Scripture rather than my interpretation of council.” Don’t we also have to interpret the words of the council? Everything we read is interpreted, even these posts.
I agree, because we don’t worship statues and they don’t worship the Bible.
Does it not marvel you the way that Protestants have no problem with showing reverence for what, say, the American flag represents, and even going as far as pledging allegiance to it, but, God forbid, when a Catholic prays to Jesus in front of a crucifix, it’s complete and total idolatry?
Honestly, I can’t think of any time that this has happened in the Catholic Church. I don’t think any Catholic has turned against Jesus over one of his images. That would be like attacking your mother because you somehow love her picture more than her… That really makes no sense to anyone without a severe mental illness.
What a pity that they apparently haven’t read John 2:2-11.
Hmmm… this is a good point. I forgot that some denominations do use the Bible in the same way we sometimes use relics, etc… while still rejecting to our use of relics and statues.
Clever, clever, clever.
I disagree, it certainly can be interpreted in different ways. It could very well depend on the interpretation of the word virginal. Does it mean she was physically ever virgin? It can be argued that this is medically impossible as we know that she delivered Jesus naturally, as that is part of the mystery of Christ. Of course, the most realistic interpretation of the word is that Mary never had relations with a man, and remained ever devoted to God. You can laugh the first interpretation off as silly (which is is), but it’s still a valid question.
Really? I don’t know if you did the math, but that’s 200%! If there wasn’t room for interpretation there, then this wouldn’t be something many disparage as completely impossible. Now I believe this, 200%, but I can’t explain it and I can’t totally understand it. I’ve been trying to rationalize it for decades and it’s just something beyond the scope of the human mind, I think. This is something I have to take on faith. There is a lot of that in our religion, you know, and that’s OK.When the Church says, “Jesus Christ is 100% God and 100% man,” it can’t be interpreted in any way other than what it says. I can’t have “my own interpretation” of what the Church Councils have said because they make it pretty clear exactly what they are saying when they say it.
Again, it’s lack of understanding caused by centuries of misrepresentation. It’s no different than politicians of today spinning a story to their ends. Early protestants spun the story to make us out to be worshiping idols.
You’re missing what I mean, I think. I’m talking about on a person to person basis and what a particular person believes, not what the church officially teaches. I know it happens where people believe that a statue or a set of beads, or some other such symbol becomes the source of the graces and is more important than what it represents. This is because the person puts too much emphasis on the symbol and not enough on what it symbolizes. Such a person is obviously missing the true teaching of the church and has gone a bit astray, and is flirting with dangerous ground.
It goes deeper though. Remember that most protestant churches don’t recognize anyone anyone as a mediator between us and Jesus. They point to “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” They don’t realize that nowhere did he say no one comes to me except through themselves. We pray for each other all the time, yet they just can’t conceive of asking Mary to pray for them.What a pity that they apparently haven’t read John 2:2-11.