Are you uncomfortable, then, with people who kiss and bow before icons? It is actually heresy, according to the Church Fathers, to say that the veneration of icons is wrong/idolatry. There is no latria involved in the veneration of icons.That’s an interesting statement. I’ve been to some freinds of ours’ church where about ten very large statues of Mary decorate the church and the grounds. They are of a wide variety including Our Lady of Guadeloupe and one which depicts her as the queen of heaven with a very large and prestigeous gold crown on her head. I have seen on occasion people mainly hispanics bow and kneel in front of the statue and petition Mary for divine favors and pray to her for an hour of more on their knees kissing her feet. If this isn’t worship and heresy, I and many many others surely don’t have a clue what it would be then. I personally find it offensive and idolotrous on the simple fact that this all takes place where we are supposed to worship our Lord and God and celebrate the sacrements. Honor and respect and a high regard for what St. Mary did and the kind of life she lived? Absolutely. But, this is worship and its wrong.
Jesus is the Word.Jesus is also called The Word. Does that mean Jesus is the Bible?
Peter, Paul and Mary really make beautiful music don’t they…Peter, Paul and Mary as well as all the Apostles were Jewish Christians…Dr. Kessler is talking about “jewish christians”…that are Protestant…years ago the rabbi of Rome became a Christian when he converted to Catholicism…he became a Jew that became a Christian, not a Jewish Christian…I see nothing in the NT about jewish christians…this is a modern day protestant phenomenon and the entire article makes no sense…Kessler makes no sense…he speaks for himself…he formulates thoughts sayingCajunhillbilly—
Yes, I do know that dispensationalist thought, as a fairly elaborate system, is relatively new. As I said in a previous post, I’m not really a dispensationalist, I’m an “I don’t know”-ist. This is a very complicated subject. However–though this is indeed a topic for another thread—making a “distinction between Israel and the Church” is done by others besides dispensationalists.
As for the “Church as the continuation and fulfillment of the types and shadows of the Old Covenant”–yes. While I’m not speaking for dispensationalists, from what I’ve read, I think most if not all would agree with this…with the disclaimer that this still doesn’t answer how to view the very specific promises of God in the OT to a particular people. Do we just “spiritualize” them away, and thereby do considerable violence to the OT?
Here’s a thoughtful article by Dr. Edward Kessler: axt.org.uk/essays/Kessler.htm
Catholics for Israel also has a good entry under “Replacement Theology”.
Way off topic…I’d start another thread but I’m really tied up with work. I just asked for a brief clarification from CopticChristian himself. Or, he can defer his answer to another thread and another time, too.
What Church is he speaking for…he also says this…IF REPLACEMENT theology is not official teaching of **the Church **to what extent does it exist in the pew?
I said earlier that Replascement is a Protestant notion and lives in the mind of Protestants…Christianity is the fulfillment and incorportation of Judaism…The problem of replacement theology is more evident in Protestant and Orthodox churches, as the Roman Catholic Church has done more than most to explicitly reject–or at least distance itself from—a Christian invalidation and/or replacement of Judaism.
And then of course since this thread is about Mary the mother of God…Mary would then be the mother of the Bible and that makes no sense.Jesus is the Word.
The bible is the word, lower case W.
It is this confusion that makes many people bibliolators, worshippers of the bible rather than the bible’s ultimate author.
CopticChristian----Peter, Paul and Mary really make beautiful music don’t they…Peter, Paul and Mary as well as all the Apostles were Jewish Christians…Dr. Kessler is talking about “jewish christians”…that are Protestant…years ago the rabbi of Rome became a Christian when he converted to Catholicism…he became a Jew that became a Christian, not a Jewish Christian…I see nothing in the NT about jewish christians…this is a modern day protestant phenomenon and the entire article makes no sense…Kessler makes no sense…he speaks for himself…he formulates thoughts saying
What Church is he speaking for…he also says this…
I said earlier that Replascement is a Protestant notion and lives in the mind of Protestants…Christianity is the fulfillment and incorportation of Judaism…
Go back to what I said earlier…Ezra is the father of Judaism, no temple, no ark…it is no surprise that the one hope for the Davidic Kingdom via an heir fell by the wayside when Zerubabbel did not become the High Priest so that their would be no Davidic heir until Jesus…Recall that the Northern Kingdom was Israel with the capital of Samaria and that the Southern Kingdom was the tribes of Benjamin and Judah…with the capital of Jerusalem…Israel is a people, a nation, Jacob/Israel…recall him and the tribes united were people called Israel…not dirt…
As I said, the OT is the key to understanding this and seeing the fulfillment of Israel as a people of God as Paul says so that all can come to God…through the Church…the Israel of God Old and New…just people…people are not replaced they are incorporated…
This is all part of this thread. If you understand that the Jews fathered by Ezra, had no Ark, no Levitic Priesthood and a temple waiting for the earthly, political kingdom and Jesus shows up and establishes the Kingdom…those who understood the Kingdom to be spiritual and not political would have understood…Ok, then they would have understood the Father saying…here is Jesus…Psalm 110CopticChristian----
This would be a good thing to discuss on another thread at some other time.
If Jesus is the Lord, recall that David put Solomon in charge while they both lived…two Kings…then the people in the know would have understood…Ok…Jesus is King…the Lord said to the Lord…and they would have been looking for all the elements…the Temple…the Ark…the Gabira…and lo and behold…<> The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
2The LORD shall send the rod of thy strength out of Zion: rule thou in the midst of thine enemies.
I don’t agree.Are you uncomfortable, then, with people who kiss and bow before icons? It is actually heresy, according to the Church Fathers, to say that the veneration of icons is wrong/idolatry. There is no latria involved in the veneration of icons.
I’m not a betting man, but if I were, I would bet you a great deal that if you asked these folks what the reason was for them kneeling and bowing, they would associate it all to God and not Mary. Humongous difference!But bowing down and kneeling is not necessarily worshipping, is it?
Or would you say that these Evangelical Christians are worshipping a box of kleenex?
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Y-DbBvf7R5Y/Sa7IGRcPfyI/AAAAAAAAWDA/K6_bG1fYWw0/s400/altar_call.jpg
Is it, then, considered a form of dulia?Are you uncomfortable, then, with people who kiss and bow before icons? It is actually heresy, according to the Church Fathers, to say that the veneration of icons is wrong/idolatry. There is no latria involved in the veneration of icons.
What’s the difference, Omar? They appear to be bowing to a box of kleenex, but they are not worshipping the kleenex, correct?I’m not a betting man, but if I were, I would bet you a great deal that if you asked these folks what the reason was for them kneeling and bowing, they would associate it all to God and not Mary. Humongous difference!
But the US Constitution isn’t protected by the Holy Spirit. There can be only one correct interpretation if you are guided by the Holy Spirit, because the Holy Spirit would not guide two people in two different ways.No it’s not logical that all evangelicals would agree on Biblical interpretations. Look at the Constitution of the United States. After more than 200 years of jurisprudence there continues to be disputes over what it means. Even the supreme arbiters, the U.S. Supreme Court, usually divide over its meaning. Actually the amazing thing is that there is so much agreement among evangelicals.
Yes that was a serious question. Too often the Catholic Church is accused of ‘making up dogma’.I will assume this a serious, rather than a rhetorical, question. A thing is implied when not expressly stated, although a consideration of the surrounding circumstances would suggest to reasonable minds that the thing might exist.
Yet many Christians do not accept this doctrine no matter how it is implied or how it has been inspired by the Holy Spirit through the Catholic Church for centuries.Purgatory is one of the best examples of a doctrine implied from the Bible that I can think of. There are about a dozen places in scripture where purgatory is implied.
I do not agree…No it’s not logical that all evangelicals would agree on Biblical interpretations. Look at the Constitution of the United States. After more than 200 years of jurisprudence there continues to be disputes over what it means. Even the supreme arbiters, the U.S. Supreme Court, usually divide over its meaning. Actually the amazing thing is that there is so much agreement among evangelicals. I will assume this a serious, rather than a rhetorical, question. A thing is implied when not expressly stated, although a consideration of the surrounding circumstances would suggest to reasonable minds that the thing might exist.
Purgatory is one of the best examples of a doctrine implied from the Bible that I can think of. There are about a dozen places in scripture where purgatory is implied.
Yes, I believe so. What many people fail to realize was that bowing before the emperor’s empty throne was considered to be an act of veneration (dulia) with no worship (latria) going on. It would only be natural for the Eastern Christians to treat holy images, icons, with similar reverence. One cannot have idolatry (or more properly termed, iconolatry) going on if there is no intent for latria to happen (after all, how does one accidentally worship something?).Is it, then, considered a form of dulia?
Jon
So you think the Orthodox worship icons? Interesting view, but kind of silly unless you believe people can accidentally worship something. Have you read St. John of Damascus’ defense of holy images?I don’t agree.
'zactly!So you think the Orthodox worship icons? Interesting view, but kind of silly unless you believe people can accidentally worship something.
CopticChristian–This is all part of this thread. If you understand that the Jews fathered by Ezra, had no Ark, no Levitic Priesthood and a temple waiting for the earthly, political kingdom and Jesus shows up and establishes the Kingdom…those who understood the Kingdom to be spiritual and not political would have understood…Ok, then they would have understood the Father saying…here is Jesus…Psalm 110
If Jesus is the Lord, recall that David put Solomon in charge while they both lived…two Kings…then the people in the know would have understood…Ok…Jesus is King…the Lord said to the Lord…and they would have been looking for all the elements…the Temple…the Ark…the Gabira…and lo and behold…
Mary is the Ark and the Gabira…lo and behold the Temple is the Church and the heavenly Kingdom…and lo and behold…the seed of the woman, the mother in Revelation, the Ark…wow…the Mother of God…it all fell into place for them…so it is relevant to this thread and that is why when you understand the OT you understand Mary…Jesus…the Kingdom…and see Israel as People and the Kingdom as spiritual…
I learned this from a Protestant by the way and his name is Scott Hahn…you may want to look into seeing what he is teaching…Protestants sure know how to teach Catholics the Bible…
There is nothing better than a good Theology to form your life…Eschatology is a part of that Theology and Dispensational thought ignores the relevant parts of the OT.CopticChristian–
I wanted to let you know I saw your post. Hopefully I’ll have some time free tonight or tomorrow to reply.