Idolatry & Disordered Affection

  • Thread starter Thread starter JoyToBeCatholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
JoytobeCatholic - I have an ultrasound picture of the baby I lost in a special picture frame.
I am sorry for your loss.:gopray:
It sits on my desk and I look at it daily, often saying a prayer for him/her as I do so. Should I destroy it since it is only a likeness of my deceased child? What about pictures of my living children – should I destroy them too, since they are only likenesses? As you say, it is forbidden by God to have a likeness of any living thing.
No, I did not say that. True Scripture says that, but I clearly explained why I do not believe it means all images and likeness using the example of Jesus, the coin and the question of the tax.
Also – you could change your username and put “formerly JoytobeCatholic” in your signature so people don’t get confused. That’s what I did on another forum after a name change. Just a suggestion. 🙂
I actually did try doing that but I can’t seem to get a new username. It said only 1 username per email addy (I think - it was a while ago)
 
I don’t see the point of so many of you posting on this topic.

It is obvious to me that Joy has already made up her mind and every post she makes is simply to refute what was posted above her.

If her husband whom is a well versed Catholic by her own admission cannot change her mind on this what sense does it make to discuss it here?
B/c my husband doesn’t know the Catholic faith very well. I never said he was a well-versed Catholic, and even if I had said he was (which I didn’t) it would have been my opinion which you obviously don’t agree with. You would do well to just assume that I don’t have any orthodox Catholics with which to discuss this and charitably try to contribute something useful to the dialogue to try to convince me why I ought to come home to Rome.
She isn’t likely to all of a sudden agree with everyone.
Then you have no faith. Do you even believe in prayer for people? Why would you? You’ve already decided nothing can change!
I’m trying to understand why people who don’t agree with the site post here at all. What is it you are trying to accomplish Joy?
Already answered…

Mercy…
 
Bowing is an expression of adoration lest that be your specific problem with the wording.
This is quite simply wrong. Bowing can be an expression of many things. Look in the bible at all the times people bowed without intending to worship or adore. The very first example in a quick search is this: *“Then Abraham bowed down before the people of the land.” *Was Abraham adoring the people of the land?! Your very own bible contradicts your claim.
The angel in revelations and Peter both viewed it as such and rebuked it.
This too is quite simply wrong. It was not the bowing that they rebuked, but the worship.

“When Peter entered, Cornelius met him and fell down at his feet and worshiped him.”

“Then I fell down at his feet to worship him, but he said to me, “You must not do that!””


The bible is very clear to point out (for the benefit of iconoclasts, perhaps) that there was an attempt to worship. There is no attempt by Catholics to worship saints or statues. Again your very own bible contradicts your claim. But still you refuse to see.
 
I am sorry for your loss.:gopray:
Thank you.
No, I did not say that. True **Scripture says that, but **I clearly explained why I do not believe it means all images and likeness using the example of Jesus, the coin and the question of the tax.
So you are going *against *Scripture with this belief? Why not adhere to what Scripture *actually *says? I don’t understand how you can, in one post, lecture Catholics for behaving unScripturally and then in the next post say, “Scripture says that, BUT I believe…”

So Scripture says in one place not to make any likeness of anything, and Scripture says in another place that Jesus took a coin with a likeness on it and used it to teach, etc. Isn’t this an instance of the Bible contradicting itself? If so, how can anything in it (the Bible) be true? If not, how do you explain the contradiction?
I actually did try doing that but I can’t seem to get a new username. It said only 1 username per email addy (I think - it was a while ago)
Your best bet is to PM the admins and ask for a name change. 🙂
 
Welcome to the journey! It is important for this subject (alleged idolatry) to emphasize that essentially no Christian obeys the letter of this law. While they are accusing Catholics of idolatry, at the same time they will have likenesses of things in heaven or on earth or in the sea. At the same time that they will easily (even dismissively) explain away their exceptions to the letter of the law, based on their private interpretations of the scriptures,
Already answered, and not based on a “private interpretation”. Please tell me:

Did Jesus rebuke them for using money? Did He not have the perfect opportunity to do so? He even remarked about the image on the money but did not reprimand anyone for using it. Like with the Trinity and other concepts which are implicitly in Scripture and therefore eliminate a literal interpretation. However, the Bible is FULL of examples of idolatry - many of which are parallel to the use of religious statues in Catholic churches.

No hypocrisy here. And no “private interpretation” either. There is nothing private about the Bible. It is there clear as day for all to see.

Peace,
 
Already answered, and not based on a “private interpretation”. Please tell me:

Did Jesus rebuke them for using money? Did He not have the perfect opportunity to do so? He even remarked about the image on the money but did not reprimand anyone for using it. Like with the Trinity and other concepts which are implicitly in Scripture and therefore eliminate a literal interpretation. However, the Bible is FULL of examples of idolatry - many of which are parallel to the use of religious statues in Catholic churches.
See how you find reasons to ignore the plain text while accusing Catholics using that very same text. And we’re not just talking about money here, but about any image. And unless you are one in a million, you have plenty of images around, and yet you pronounce yourself innocent of violating the word of God.
No hypocrisy here. And no “private interpretation” either. There is nothing private about the Bible. It is there clear as day for all to see.
If it were that clear then there wouldn’t be disunity and disagreement in the Christian world about nearly every single important point of Christian doctrine. No, the bible is by no means clear until it is read in the light of the Church - something you are not doing.
 
So are people in Asian countries idolators because they bow when they greet each other? Is it idolatry to bow to the Queen of England? Are actors committing idolatry when they bow to their audience at the conclusion of a play?
This is quite simply wrong. Bowing can be an expression of many things. Look in the bible at all the times people bowed without intending to worship or adore. The very first example in a quick search is this: *“Then Abraham bowed down before the people of the land.” *Was Abraham adoring the people of the land?! Your very own bible contradicts your claim.
JTBC, are you going to answer my question about bowing?
 
I actually consulted several different Bible versions before posting that one b/c they all said the same thing. Do you consider these butchered as well?:

They all say the same thing. Bowing is an expression of adoration lest that be your specific problem with the wording. The angel in revelations and Peter both viewed it as such and rebuked it. Going beyond what is written is pure speculation (that God told them it was worship and so they rebuked them) and an excuse not worthy of my consideration.

I did not. I gave the entire passage and even said: No offense, CM, but, IMO, you are notorious for twisting words and meanings (not just mine). I pray it is unintentional. I clearly brought vs 5 into light as to the reason it is forbidden. Not true at all. Have you never seen a church with kneelers in front of its statues? When you say “no faithful Catholic ever does” you are probably meaning that they never intent to, and that is probably true in most cases, but again, intention does not excuse error unless it is due to ignorance. But those who have considered the Scripture which clearly condemns it and continue to defend the practice cannot make such a claim of ignorance. And, btw: Why do you continue to take part in apologetics discussion? You KNOW you are going to be dealing with non-Catholic thought - all of which you label: “anti-Catholic”. I am NOT anti-Catholic simply b/c I question the Catholic church’s teachings and don’t appreciate being uncharitably labelled as such! Do you need to mis-label people to justify yourself? Does it somehow make you feel more righteous? God help you… Save it for a thread on s.s… Derrogatory comments like these are also numerous in your posts, and I had promised myself the last time I conversed with you that I would bring it to your attention. Your posts wreak with anti-“protestantism” & self-righteousness and lack the charity worth giving them consideration. The only reason I am responding to them is for the sake of those who do. I don’t care to follow error - even if it is 2000 years old. It doesn’t make it any more appealing. Again, prove that the images were 1) adored/“served”/bowed to, etc… and furthermore, 2) prove that those who made those images were faithful in all aspects to the original faith.

Praying God will inspire you with a more respectful and charitable response…

Peace~
Joshua 5:13-15:
13 Now when Joshua was near Jericho, he looked up and saw a man standing in front of him with a drawn sword in his hand. Joshua went up to him and asked, “Are you for us or for our enemies?”

14 “Neither,” he replied, “but as commander of the army of the LORD I have now come.” Then Joshua fell facedown to the ground in reverence, and asked him, “What message does my Lord [d] have for his servant?”

15 The commander of the LORD’s army replied, “Take off your sandals, for the place where you are standing is holy.” And Joshua did so.
That’s the NIV translation btw.
So here we’ve got what’s clearly implied to be an angel appear before Joshua and what does Joshua do? He bows down (or actually prostrates) himself before the angel in reverence. If bowing is a form of worship are you saying that Joshua was idolizing the angel?

The KJV actually does say that he worships
14And he said, Nay; but as captain of the host of the LORD am I now come. And Joshua fell on his face to the earth, and did worship, and said unto him, What saith my Lord unto his servant?
But in the older days, “worship” did not always mean the type of homage given to a deity and could simply mean profound reverence or respect (the title “your worshipness” is still used in British English) so it still means the same as the NIV
 
My point, I don’t know how to make it more clear, is that you insist on taking some of the prohibition against idols literally, but other parts of that same prohibition you do not take literally. You are selective in what you take literally and what you do not take literally, so that you can find fault with Catholics while exonerating yourself and other Christians.
I’ve already answered your “point” several times now, but for the record b/c you want to make it personal: I am not selective and actually do take it more literally than you think. I do not have photos around and do not even take them anymore. I do not use media - mostly b/c of its content - but I don’t see a connection with that and images one makes for the use of worship. TV is real life events going on that are recorded and transmitted and not used for worship… I am perfectly fine with the Amish practice of simply avoiding it all altogether. That is what I love about faiths that are seperate from the questionable muck out there. If one is serious about his faith he should not play with matches - nevermind with fire. Jesus said to avoid sin at all costs. That is what my goal is - albeit I’m lousy at it, but I do try by the grace of God. Cut off the hand, gouge out the eye…
So are people in Asian countries idolators because they bow when they greet each other? Is it idolatry to bow to the Queen of England? Are actors committing idolatry when they bow to their audience at the conclusion of a play?
I would never bow to the Queen of England. I don’t watch plays and I doubt the serious Christian would take part in such an ungodly occupation.
*Then Abraham bowed down before the people of the land." *Was Abraham adoring the people of the land?! Your very own bible contradicts your claim.
No, it doesn’t. When I make a heart-felt appeal to my little children I might bow down before them too - not in adoration/veneration/etc. but as in a posture of appeal. You are taking this Scripture out of context. There are different kinds of bowing. Bowing in front of a statue is clearly for worship whether intended toward the statue or not.
It was not the bowing that they rebuked, but the worship.
"When Peter entered, Cornelius met him and fell down at his feet and worshiped him.""Then I fell down at his feet to worship him, but he said to me, “You must not do that!”"
The bible is very clear to point out (for the benefit of iconoclasts, perhaps) that there was an attempt to worship. There is no attempt by Catholics to worship saints or statues. Again your very own bible contradicts your claim. But still you refuse to see.
Romans 11:4
But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.
Exodus 23:24
Thou shalt not bow down to their gods, nor serve them
Leviticus 26:1
Ye shall make you no idols nor graven image, neither rear you up a standing image, neither shall ye set up any image of stone in your land, to bow down unto it:

Obviously God sees bowing to an image as worship - or at least an expression of it - something which is forbidden. And that was with a very quick search and by no means an exhaustive example. Lest you say it is a “botched translation”, my Hebrew dictionary defines the word used in these passages as: “bending”. I see the Douay-Rheims translates the word as “adore”, but every single translation I have seen says “bow” - and unless my dictionary is wrong…

Even if you say it is just reverencing the image or venerating it or showing it honor… These are things God alone is deserving of. To intentionally do such things in front of an image is, AT THE VERY LEAST, scandalous.
So you are going *against *Scripture with this belief? Why not adhere to what Scripture *actually *says?
I’ve alrealdy answered this numerous times here. I don’t have to adhere to the text LITERALLY b/c JESUS SHOWS WHY we don’t have to! Is that going against Scripture? I gave you an example FROM SCRIPTURE to show that Jesus is not opposed to their being images on things we must use in every day life. So please stop saying I am going against Scripture or making up my own interpretation!
So Scripture says in one place not to make any likeness of anything, and Scripture says in another place that Jesus took a coin with a likeness on it and used it to teach, etc. Isn’t this an instance of the Bible contradicting itself? If so, how can anything in it (the Bible) be true? If not, how do you explain the contradiction?
You may start a new thread if you feel the need to pursue an answer to those questions. I’m sorry you believe the Scriptures contradict themselves. Many atheists make the same charge. The quick answer is: It doesn’t contradict itself at all. The answers are all right there without a church’s infallible interpretation. In fact, even the Catholic answer to those supposed contradictions uses Scripture to show why it does not in fact contradict itself.
Your best bet is to PM the admins and ask for a name change. 🙂
I think at this point most people are familiar with my old username and it would only cause unecessary confusion to change. If, however, I do leave for a time and then come back to enter into entirely new conversations, I will ask for a change.
 
JTBC, are you going to answer my question about bowing?
Yes, I finally did. Btw, I have a real life here and I’m not going to be able to fire away a post in reply to everyone as quickly as you’d like ;). In fact - I think I’m just about done for the day unfortunately!
 
See how you find reasons to ignore the plain text while accusing Catholics using that very same text. And we’re not just talking about money here, but about any image. And unless you are one in a million, you have plenty of images around, and yet you pronounce yourself innocent of violating the word of God.
:banghead: I don’t know what more to say. But I’m not here to convince you anyway. I know I didn’t just make up a reason. I quoted you Scriptural evidence. You may as well throw away your belief in the Trinity as well… Do you not see a Scriptural basis for that either???
If it were that clear then there wouldn’t be disunity and disagreement in the Christian world about nearly every single important point of Christian doctrine. No, the bible is by no means clear until it is read in the light of the Church - something you are not doing.
See the Circular Argument thread. The disunity in non-Catholicism is just as much a problem as it is in the CC. The problem isn’t b/c there is a need for an interpreter. The Holy Spirit is an interpreter. The problem is with the people. People failed to embrace the truths of Jesus’ teachings as they fell from His own lips - and not b/c they didn’t have an interpreter.
 
I’ve alrealdy answered this numerous times here. I don’t have to adhere to the text LITERALLY b/c JESUS SHOWS WHY we don’t have to! Is that going against Scripture? I gave you an example FROM SCRIPTURE to show that Jesus is not opposed to their being images on things we must use in every day life. So please stop saying I am going against Scripture or making up my own interpretation!
Okay, then… why do you accuse Catholics of being idolatrous or unBiblical if images are something we can use in everyday life?
The quick answer is: It doesn’t contradict itself at all. The answers are all right there without a church’s infallible interpretation. In fact, even the Catholic answer to those supposed contradictions uses Scripture to show why it does not in fact contradict itself.
Is your interpretation infallible?
 
That’s the NIV translation btw.
So here we’ve got what’s clearly implied to be an angel appear before Joshua and what does Joshua do? He bows down (or actually prostrates) himself before the angel in reverence. If bowing is a form of worship are you saying that Joshua was idolizing the angel?

The KJV actually does say that he worships
Quote:
14And he said, Nay; but as captain of the host of the LORD am I now come. And Joshua fell on his face to the earth, and did worship, and said unto him, What saith my Lord unto his servant?
But in the older days, “worship” did not always mean the type of homage given to a deity and could simply mean profound reverence or respect (the title “your worshipness” is still used in British English) so it still means the same as the NIV
It doesn’t say he worshipped the angel. In fact, he immediately then acknowledges God in saying “what saith my Lord…”. His reverence is clearly directed toward God and not the angel.
 
It doesn’t say he worshipped the angel. In fact, he immediately then acknowledges God in saying “what saith my Lord…”. His reverence is clearly directed toward God and not the angel.
And in the EXACT SAME WAY, when Catholics kneel before statues, etc., our reverence is directed TOWARD GOD and NOT the images.
 
I’ve already answered your “point” several times now, but for the record b/c you want to make it personal: I am not selective and actually do take it more literally than you think. I do not have photos around and do not even take them anymore. I do not use media - mostly b/c of its content - but I don’t see a connection with that and images one makes for the use of worship.
But the text doesn’t say “don’t make any likeness of any thing for the use of worship”! You added that part. You added a qualification not found in the text!

Anyway, it is obvious that the Christian world in general does not avoid likenesses, despite the clear words of scripture. They have determined, I’m not sure how (I doubt they’re very sure themselves) that the literal meaning of the words is not the meaning that God intended. But when the Church determines that the literal meaning of a passage is not the meaning God intended, you make charges of idolatry.

BTW, have you literally gouged out an eye, or cut off a hand?

BTW2, are Christians still under OT Law? Which OT commands are we to obey, and which are we not to obey? And how do you know the answer to that question?

BTW3, since you appeal to Christ in defending your use of likenesses, is there any New Testament prohibition on statues (and icons)? Not idols, but statues and icons?
 
See the Circular Argument thread. The disunity in non-Catholicism is just as much a problem as it is in the CC.
Apples and oranges. So you’re saying that the Catholic Church teaches hundreds of different conflicting doctrines? That it produces hundreds of conflicting Catechisms, all teaching different things?
 
Joy>Every single post someone makes to the contrary, you refute, with your own twisting of the truth to suit your own needs. Have you spoken with your priest?

This thread could go on for 1000 pages and solve nothing.

You are acting like a troll…sorry but you are. I won’t be responding further to you in this thread. I know a troll when I see one.

Good day.

IHF
 
Okay, then… why do you accuse Catholics of being idolatrous or unBiblical if images are something we can use in everyday life?
Worship is quite different than using money, don’t you think? God was specific about what kind of images and why it was forbidden. The entire OT is filled with examples of the Israelites breaking the commandment so it is quite clear from those examples precisely what it is that God dislikes. People very well may have intended to be worshipping the OTG when they worshipped idols. Do you really think their intention was to worship an imagined god? For instance - the golden calf: certainly to the people the calf represented God or at least some of His attributes. They acknowledged God’s power and mercy in delivering them from bondage as they cried out in worship.
Is your interpretation infallible?
Ok, so you maybe see some validity to my reasoning and so now your defense is that I’m not infallible?
 
And in the EXACT SAME WAY, when Catholics kneel before statues, etc., our reverence is directed TOWARD GOD and NOT the images.
That may be the intention but the action is a clear violation of the command “you shall not bow to them”.

This is getting redundant.
 
But the text doesn’t say “don’t make any likeness of any thing for the use of worship”! You added that part. You added a qualification not found in the text!

Anyway, it is obvious that the Christian world in general does not avoid likenesses, despite the clear words of scripture. They have determined, I’m not sure how (I doubt they’re very sure themselves) that the literal meaning of the words is not the meaning that God intended. But when the Church determines that the literal meaning of a passage is not the meaning God intended, you make charges of idolatry.

BTW, have you literally gouged out an eye, or cut off a hand?

BTW2, are Christians still under OT Law? Which OT commands are we to obey, and which are we not to obey? And how do you know the answer to that question?

BTW3, since you appeal to Christ in defending your use of likenesses, is there any New Testament prohibition on statues (and icons)? Not idols, but statues and icons?
Maybe you and I would do best to agree to disagree. You aren’t contributing anything new at this point, are diverting the topic and being sarcastic.

Peace~
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top