Question: Is there 'bible worship' concerns among some protestants?

Status
Not open for further replies.
The_Reginator

The_Reginator

Active member
Many Protestants often accuse Catholics of worshiping the Virgin Mary.
**
I am often struck by the ‘near worship’ I see in the way some protestants view the bible. I once heard it expressed this way:
  • (Some) Protestants believe in Jesus because they believe the bible. Catholics believe the bible because they believe in Jesus.*
My question: Is there a concern in (evangelical) protestant circles that some are elevating the bible (almost) to the level of “worship”?
 
The_Reginator said:
Many Protestants often accuse Catholics of worshiping the Virgin Mary.
**
I am often struck by the ‘near worship’ I see in the way some protestants view the bible. I once heard it expressed this way:
  • (Some) Protestants believe in Jesus because they believe the bible. Catholics believe the bible because they believe in Jesus.*
My question: Is there a concern in (evangelical) protestant circles that some are elevating the bible (almost) to the level of “worship”?

I don’t believe that Catholics worship Mary, but what happens to a regular ole Protestant who knows nothing about Catholicism when they see a picture of Mary dressed like a queen with beautiful flowers and decorations around her, and people kneel in front of the picture, holding beads in their hands which also helps them pray… Such can come across as idolatry to a Protestant who would do no such thing.

No Protestant believes a statue can help us pray better, or a picture, or a rosary. I love Catholicism and may be a Catholic one day but I can imagine the look on some of my friends faces when they see how highly exalted Mary is. No Protestant wants to ever focus on anyone but Jesus Christ, and I don’t think any Catholic should be able to criticize a Protestant for that.

I would assume that if any Christian would kneel down and pray facing their Bible, or pray to a painting of a Bible then any Protestant would object. Protestants are strict that it’s US----JESUS-------FATHER and nothing else. No object, no person.
Click to expand...
 
The_Reginator said:
Many Protestants often accuse Catholics of worshiping the Virgin Mary.
**
I am often struck by the ‘near worship’ I see in the way some protestants view the bible. I once heard it expressed this way:
  • (Some) Protestants believe in Jesus because they believe the bible. Catholics believe the bible because they believe in Jesus.*
My question: Is there a concern in (evangelical) protestant circles that some are elevating the bible (almost) to the level of “worship”?

It’s called Bibliolotry and yes, some of us are concerned. Though it seems unfortunately that not too many take us seriously. Generally it is thought that those who “worship” the Bible are people who elevate their own mistaken doctrines over what the “Word” actually says. So that they, like the Pharisees, annul the scriptures by keeping their own traditions.

My issue with Bible worship comes from the doctrine that “God will never ask you to do anything against the Bible.” In the Bible however, we see time and time again where God specifically instructed someone to do something for Him. Some of the prophets were even asked to do things contrary to the Law of Moses – the written Word at the time. (Like being seen nude in public.)

To say that God would never ask anybody to do anything contrary to the instructions of the Bible, is to assume that the God of the Bible no longer acts according to the nature that the Bible describes of Him.

(Or, we could say that it is scriptural to do things contrary to scripture if and when God asks. Thus proving that the Bible was right after all and that people who disagree simply are holding their traditions over the “Word”.) 🤷
Click to expand...
 
Well, in a literal sense, I don’t know of any Protestant who venerates the Bible as a deity.

Nowhere in Protestant worship is there a phrase “Oh Bible, save us!” or “Holy Bible, to thee do we offer honor and veneration!”

And what is wrong with reading an inspired message from God (The Bible), and with the counsel of the Holy Spirit, believing that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Savior of humanity?
 
From the preface of the 1975 “The Open Bible” (Thomas Nelson, Inc. Publishers)

According to Dr. Wilber M. Smith (underlining mine),
  1. The Bible discovers and convicts us of sin.
  2. The Bible helps cleanse us from the pollutions of sin.
  3. The Bible imparts strength.
  4. The Bible instructs us in what we are to do.
  5. The Bible provides us with a sword for victory over sin.
  6. The Bible makes our lives fruitful.
  7. The Bible gives us power to pray.
To a non-fundamentalist Christian, this appears to be awfully close to idolatry, as each of the underlined is a divine trait. Very odd indeed that such persons deny that God’s grace flows through the Sacraments, which are administered by a Priest or Bishop, but believe that God’s grace flows through the simple possession of a bible.
 
po18guy said:
From the preface of the 1975 “The Open Bible” (Thomas Nelson, Inc. Publishers)

According to Dr. Wilber M. Smith (underlining mine),
  1. The Bible discovers and convicts us of sin.
  2. The Bible helps cleanse us from the pollutions of sin.
  3. The Bible imparts strength.
  4. The Bible instructs us in what we are to do.
  5. The Bible provides us with a sword for victory over sin.
  6. The Bible makes our lives fruitful.
  7. The Bible gives us power to pray.
To a non-fundamentalist Christian, this appears to be awfully close to idolatry, as each of the underlined is a divine trait. Very odd indeed that such persons deny that God’s grace flows through the Sacraments, which are administered by a Priest or Bishop, but believe that God’s grace flows through the simple possession of a bible.
Click to expand...
I seriously doubt he thought the literal printed pages of the Bible do that. It’s our reading of and guidance by the Holy Spirit that draws us to God and His Son.

Added: Not the only way, but a way.
 
EIF5A said:
I seriously doubt he thought the literal printed pages of the Bible do that. It’s our reading of and guidance by the Holy Spirit that draws us to God and His Son.

Added: Not the only way, but a way.
Click to expand...
Would he not have used other words then? Dr. Smith was a very well educated man and a prolific writer who chose his words very carefully.

Look at it this way: Catholics and Orthodox Christians have the true presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist (not the point of this thread). What is the point of this thread is that post-reformation, Christ’s presence in the Eucharist was discarded. The only thing left to fill this unfillable void was the bible. The bible has become the de facto true presence of Christ for many. Some hyper-venerate it, which appears as worship to Catholic, Orthodox and some protestants alike.

As to being lead by the Holy Spirit, how do you know? We are surrounded 24/7 by innumerable deceiving spirits that lead even the elect astray, if that were possible (Matthew 24:24, Mark 13:22).
 
po18guy said:
Would he not have used other words then? Dr. Smith was a very well educated man and a prolific writer who chose his words very carefully.

Look at it this way: Catholics and Orthodox Christians have the true presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist (not the point of this thread). What is the point of this thread is that post-reformation, Christ’s presence in the Eucharist was discarded. The only thing left to fill this unfillable void was the bible. The bible has become the de facto true presence of Christ for many. Some hyper-venerate it, which appears as worship to Catholic, Orthodox and some protestants alike.

As to being lead by the Holy Spirit, how do you know? We are surrounded 24/7 by innumerable deceiving spirits that lead even the elect astray, if that were possible (Matthew 24:24, Mark 13:22).
Click to expand...
Lots of things are misconstrued because the intended meaning isn’t obvious. (e.g., “Most holy Theotokos, save us!” — that doesn’t mean the Virgin Mary is the one who actually saves.)

No one believes the Bible is Jesus. But Protestants believe the Bible to be a written revelation where we can learn about God and His Son.

The Bible is venerated because they contain the inspired message from God. It is the message, not the paper, that’s sacred.
 
EIF5A said:
Lots of things are misconstrued because the intended meaning isn’t obvious. (e.g., “Most holy Theotokos, save us!” — that doesn’t mean the Virgin Mary is the one who actually saves.)

No one believes the Bible is Jesus. But Protestants believe the Bible to be a written revelation where we can learn about God and His Son.

The Bible is venerated because they contain the inspired message from God. It is the message, not the paper, that’s sacred.
Click to expand...
All very true, but it is not the only source of revelation. Actually it was the last to arrive on the scene, from a Catholic and Orthodox perspective.

Still, there is no such thing as a “Eucharist thumper”… :rolleyes:
 
I am personally aware of Protestant fundamentalists who do actually worship the bible as God.

I was raised in one such denomination a huge denomination in the south and southwest. The preacher would actually call the bible God, as in “God said in such and such book, chapter, and verse”.

Every thing done in that church had to have a “thus saith the Lord” to be permissible. Even very trivial things like candles, flowers and musical instruments were forbidden since they were not specifically ordered or “authorized” in the bible.

They call this concept CENI, that means every single thing must have a Command, Example, or Neccesary Inference.
 
andrewstx said:
I am personally aware of Protestant fundamentalists who do actually worship the bible as God.

I was raised in one such denomination a huge denomination in the south and southwest. The preacher would actually call the bible God, as in “God said in such and such book, chapter, and verse”.

Every thing done in that church had to have a “thus saith the Lord” to be permissible. Even very trivial things like candles, flowers and musical instruments were forbidden since they were not specifically ordered or “authorized” in the bible.

They call this concept CENI, that means every single thing must have a Command, Example, or Neccesary Inference.
Click to expand...
That doesn’t sound like worshipping the Bible as God. It seems they take to the extreme what is and is not permissible, but if Scripture records what God has said, and Scripture is true, then God indeed has spoken (e.g., through prophets, Jesus Christ Himself).

Or do you mean everything in the Bible is taken as God speaking (e.g., the letters of Paul)?

Again, what is held sacred is the revelation from God, not the book.
 
I was raised in a fundamentalist protestant tradition and I have personally witnessed some, well-meaning, individuals who came precariously close to worshipping the Bible, whether or not they crossed the line, I’m not sure. In the same way as a protestant and now, as a new Catholic, I have witnessed some, well-meaning, individuals who came close to adoring Mary in an intolerable way; and from what I’ve read and heard and seen the Church has taken tremendous efforts to curb this kind of behavior.
Regarding the Sacred Scriptures, I think the gravest offenses arise when the written Word of God is separated from its rightful moorings, the universal, Holy and Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ. Once the tradition and the magisterium of the Church are removed, the teaching and wisdom of the Church Fathers and most importantly the guiding hand of the Holy Spirit which leads believers to the Father through the Way of the Son, verses can be taken out of context, verses and, for that matter, whole books are removed; and, even more scandalous, entire new “revelations” are written. Take for example Muhammad, who, influenced by heretical movements claims a new revelation, superseding that of the canon of Scriptures, placing himself above Christ as the final prophet of penultimate revelation. Joseph Smith, while grieving for his departed brother, takes a single verse out of context from the writings of St. Paul and justifies baptism for the dead, soon after the Book of Mormon follows. Add to this list Mary Baker Eddy, Charles Taze Russell and scores of other purveyors of heresy, apostasy and cultic doctrines.
It was the Spirit of Truth that guided the Bishops of the Church as they assembled and closed the canon. It is the Spirit of Truth that inspired the great saint to name the Church of the Living God the pillar and foundation of truth. Any man or woman who, with knowledge of their perversion, claims otherwise is, by definition, a false prophet and an antichrist.
 
Pilgrim_333 said:
I was raised in a fundamentalist protestant tradition and I have personally witnessed some, well-meaning, individuals who came precariously close to worshipping the Bible, whether or not they crossed the line, I’m not sure. In the same way as a protestant and now, as a new Catholic, I have witnessed some, well-meaning, individuals who came close to adoring Mary in an intolerable way; and from what I’ve read and heard and seen the Church has taken tremendous efforts to curb this kind of behavior.
Regarding the Sacred Scriptures, I think the gravest offenses arise when the written Word of God is separated from its rightful moorings, the universal, Holy and Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ. Once the tradition and the magisterium of the Church are removed, the teaching and wisdom of the Church Fathers and most importantly the guiding hand of the Holy Spirit which leads believers to the Father through the Way of the Son, verses can be taken out of context, verses and, for that matter, whole books are removed; and, even more scandalous, entire new “revelations” are written. Take for example Muhammad, who, influenced by heretical movements claims a new revelation, superseding that of the canon of Scriptures, placing himself above Christ as the final prophet of penultimate revelation. Joseph Smith, while grieving for his departed brother, takes a single verse out of context from the writings of St. Paul and justifies baptism for the dead, soon after the Book of Mormon follows. Add to this list Mary Baker Eddy, Charles Taze Russell and scores of other purveyors of heresy, apostasy and cultic doctrines.
It was the Spirit of Truth that guided the Bishops of the Church as they assembled and closed the canon. It is the Spirit of Truth that inspired the great saint to name the Church of the Living God the pillar and foundation of truth. Any man or woman who, with knowledge of their perversion, claims otherwise is, by definition, a false prophet and an antichrist.
Click to expand...
Very well said. 👍
 
Of course there is that concern.

The other day a member of a self-proclaimed Christian group approached me after Mass and tried to convince me that Our Lord Jesus was not God, dutifully quoting passages of Scripture by heart as he opened the Bible in front of me to allow me to read them.

I told him that I did not remember Scripture so thoroughly, but I did recall that the Lord said: “I and the Father are one”, and that Thomas did say to Him: “my Lord and my God”, without being rebuked, but rather, meriting a compliment and a blessing for all believers that would follow.

After some further discussion, I tried to explain to him that this doctrine he had learned was a modern doctrine brought forth by men, which terribly contradicted the apostolic tradition and the writings of the Church Fathers, to which he laughed at me saying that the Church Fathers were just men, and raising up his Bible, saying: this is what saves us, this is where the truth is!

And I told him, patiently: who wrote that?

He stopped and said: huh?

I said: who wrote that? Who put it together? When was the first Bible put together?

He realized he was on slippery ground and said: “oh, that doesn’t matter…” but I didn’t let him run away and I insisted: "it does matter! The Church put the Bible together. It took centuries. When you quote, say, the letter of Paul to the Thessalonians, do you think the Romans or the Colossians had any knowledge of its contents? And when there was a dispute amidst the faithful, do you think they went and read the Hebrew scrolls of the Scripture and tried to find the doctrine in there? Even after the Canon of the Bible was agreed upon, do you not know that the book had to be handwritten and that there were only few copies kept as true treasure? Did not the people rather pay close attention to the apostolic teaching of the twelve and of those elders whom they have appointed (ex Paul, Barnabas) and the other elders whom in turn they had appointed?

Not knowing what to reply (and kind of embarassed before his young apprentice, given that he must have been some twenty years older than me) he said: but the truth can be found here, in the Bible! And I replied: according to the Bible you claim Jesus Christ is not God. Others claim he is. Others claim there is no Holy Spirit. Others claim God is One in Three Persons. The truth is definitely there, but which interpretation is truthful? Who has the authority to say which is the biblical truth and which is an error?

But that didn’t help at all. He was too focused on the deification of those writings he was holding in his hands, forgetting that they were the mere word of God, not the Word of God who in the beginning was with God and was God, and who took flesh, and who did many more things than could ever be written down in books, and who said to his apostles that those who rejected them rejected Him, for to them was given to know the secrets of the Kingdom, to them the Holy Spirit of Truth was given to reveal many more things to them. It was very sad in the end for me, but such are the mysterious ways of the human heart.
 
R_C said:
Of course there is that concern.

The other day a member of a self-proclaimed Christian group approached me after Mass and tried to convince me that Our Lord Jesus was not God, dutifully quoting passages of Scripture by heart as he opened the Bible in front of me to allow me to read them.

I told him that I did not remember Scripture so thoroughly, but I did recall that the Lord said: “I and the Father are one”, and that Thomas did say to Him: “my Lord and my God”, without being rebuked, but rather, meriting a compliment and a blessing for all believers that would follow.

After some further discussion, I tried to explain to him that this doctrine he had learned was a modern doctrine brought forth by men, which terribly contradicted the apostolic tradition and the writings of the Church Fathers, to which he laughed at me saying that the Church Fathers were just men, and raising up his Bible, saying: this is what saves us, this is where the truth is!

And I told him, patiently: who wrote that?

He stopped and said: huh?

I said: who wrote that? Who put it together? When was the first Bible put together?

He realized he was on slippery ground and said: “oh, that doesn’t matter…” but I didn’t let him run away and I insisted: "it does matter! The Church put the Bible together. It took centuries. When you quote, say, the letter of Paul to the Thessalonians, do you think the Romans or the Colossians had any knowledge of its contents? And when there was a dispute amidst the faithful, do you think they went and read the Hebrew scrolls of the Scripture and tried to find the doctrine in there? Even after the Canon of the Bible was agreed upon, do you not know that the book had to be handwritten and that there were only few copies kept as true treasure? Did not the people rather pay close attention to the apostolic teaching of the twelve and of those elders whom they have appointed (ex Paul, Barnabas) and the other elders whom in turn they had appointed?

Not knowing what to reply (and kind of embarassed before his young apprentice, given that he must have been some twenty years older than me) he said: but the truth can be found here, in the Bible! And I replied: according to the Bible you claim Jesus Christ is not God. Others claim he is. Others claim there is no Holy Spirit. Others claim God is One in Three Persons. The truth is definitely there, but which interpretation is truthful? Who has the authority to say which is the biblical truth and which is an error?

But that didn’t help at all. He was too focused on the deification of those writings he was holding in his hands, forgetting that they were the mere word of God, not the Word of God who in the beginning was with God and was God, and who took flesh, and who did many more things than could ever be written down in books, and who said to his apostles that those who rejected them rejected Him, for to them was given to know the secrets of the Kingdom, to them the Holy Spirit of Truth was given to reveal many more things to them. It was very sad in the end for me, but such are the mysterious ways of the human heart.
Click to expand...
This isn’t Bible worship, just poor use of the Bible from a Catholic perspective. You should have asked him if he worships the Bible, he would have probably said that’s nuts.
 
EIF5A said:
That doesn’t sound like worshipping the Bible as God. It seems they take to the extreme what is and is not permissible, but if Scripture records what God has said, and Scripture is true, then God indeed has spoken (e.g., through prophets, Jesus Christ Himself).

Or do you mean everything in the Bible is taken as God speaking (e.g., the letters of Paul)?

Again, what is held sacred is the revelation from God, not the book.
Click to expand...
We are very far apart on what we believe about Holy Scripture. I have the feeling that you believe that God wrote or dictated the scriptures word for word and prevented any mistakes at all. To me that idea comes very close to bibliolatry.

I believe the bible was written by human beings, inspired but still humans. I believe that inspiration means the God gave the human authors the ideas but allowed them to use their own words and did not prevent any mistakes and did not mean the scriptures to be read literally in every case. I believe that the bible is not and is not intended to be a text on science or history.

I know that being formed by the literalistic fundamentalism of the cult of Christ I have reacted perhaps in the opposite direction.

Being raised in a legalistic cult is very traumatic and I still hear their nonsense in my head and I can’t rid myself of it completely.

Perhaps that sect has changed over the years and has become more reasonable, but my relatives in the cult have not changed their opinions in the least. They still believe themselves to be the only Christians to exist and think everyone who is not a member of that sect will go to hell.
 
Even the mention of “Bible worship” really strikes a nerve, doesn’t it! It seems as if the bible has a guardian angel that automatically prevents it. But now, Mary worship, well “all Catholics do that…”!!
 
The_Reginator said:
Many Protestants often accuse Catholics of worshiping the Virgin Mary.
**
I am often struck by the ‘near worship’ I see in the way some protestants view the bible. I once heard it expressed this way:
  • (Some) Protestants believe in Jesus because they believe the bible. Catholics believe the bible because they believe in Jesus.*
My question: Is there a concern in (evangelical) protestant circles that some are elevating the bible (almost) to the level of “worship”?

you might find this interesting-- but when did the catholic church start praying to mary?

Sproul and MacArthur explain praying to Mary - Can you go to heaven if you pray to mary

youtu.be/RiKGHzBtl5o
Click to expand...
 
1thomas said:
you might find this interesting-- but when did the catholic church start praying to mary?

Sproul and MacArthur explain praying to Mary - Can you go to heaven if you pray to mary

youtu.be/RiKGHzBtl5o
Click to expand...
Who are “Sproule” and “MacArthur”?
Who gave them any authority to teach anything?
Why should anyone on earth believe them?
Read the forum rules.
 
EIF5A said:
That doesn’t sound like worshipping the Bible as God. It seems they take to the extreme what is and is not permissible, but if Scripture records what God has said, and Scripture is true, then God indeed has spoken (e.g., through prophets, Jesus Christ Himself).

Or do you mean everything in the Bible is taken as God speaking (e.g., the letters of Paul)?

Again, what is held sacred is the revelation from God, not the book.
Click to expand...
Well I have known fundamentilist who tell me:

You just do not believe in the Bible.

One can interpret it as several things:

The bible is God

or…

One does not have faith what the Bible teaches

or…

Both? 🤷
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top