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

Status
Not open for further replies.
please provide a source for your claim that literal veneration of the Blessed Virgin Mary could be confused with worship…Write down the words… :yukonjoe:
That was the entire premise of this thread…Catholics are accused of Mariolatry but what about Protestant Bibliolatry?

I never said “literal veneration” is worship. I said literal interpretation of veneration can be mistaken for worship if taken out of context and intent.
 
So what’s the intent if the bible?

Does it not contain written testimony of Christ and His teachings?
The bible is for the Apostolic Church to use it along with the God-given authority to correctly interpret it. Without this, the bible is extremely easy to twist as Peter declares infallibly in 2 Peter 3:15-16. Lacking interpretive authority, no one may know with certainty that they are hearing the truth.

The JWs and LDS were developed using the King James Version! The exact one in use today. How did that happen? Isn’t that text supposed to self-interoret?

No, it does not. Read Nehemiah 8:5-8 and Acts 8:25-35. Someone in authority must interpret.
 
Because the intent of the heart is kneeling before God in a house of worship.

The heart is always to God. The fact that there is a Bible (or a pastor) in the vicinity does not diminish the intent.
But we can’t do that with icons huh?
 
So what’s the intent if the bible?

Does it not contain written testimony of Christ and His teachings?
It does, but if you give the bible to someone who has never read it they will be absolutely confused and no attempt to read it over and over again will not give a proper reading of scirpture without some knowledge of history and original language and I would go further that a decent knowledge of the ante nicene fathers puts the bible in further in its place. The Point I am making the bible is not a catechism and the apostles never went around handing out bibles.
 
But we can’t do that with icons huh?
What our bible Christian friends do not realize is that they are criticizing not just the Catholic Church, but also the 2,000 year old tradition of the Orthodox Churches. As well, to those of much newer traditions, and who do not practice Catholicism or Orthodoxy, certain practices that are not understood may appear as something which they are not. I most certainly appreciate our Orthodox brothers chiming in and lending support.
 
What our bible Christian friends do not realize is that they are criticizing not just the Catholic Church, but also the 2,000 year old tradition of the Orthodox Churches. As well, to those of much newer traditions, and who do not practice Catholicism or Orthodoxy, certain practices that are not understood may appear as something which they are not. I most certainly appreciate our Orthodox brothers chiming in and lending support.
Pretty much, they think of Orthodoxy (not all protestants mind you, only the dishonest or polerizing ones) as Roman catholicism without a pope. Hence I’ve heard the same sort of rhetoric flung in my face as well, even heard Coptics been called mary worshippers. But Coptics are always a good appeal to as Christians whenever talking about the persecution of Christians by muslims, eh?
 
And…the longer you read and study the history of the Apostolic Church’s what becomes abundantly clear is that the Catholic Church takes no account of popularity and its own numbers in developing Doctrine. The Reformation and what today it has become only need research the Arian heresy. By the time of Emperor Valens the Church was maintained by only a handful of Bishops, literally. Had this not occurred as recorded we would be calling ourselves “Arians” today and not Christians.

Point being if you won’t believe what Basil, Athanasius, Hilary and Liberius stood for in this well documented period, how can you believe anything in Christianity? You wouldn’t and couldn’t know anything about your own Christian roots. We would “all” be other than what we are today as Christians.

If indeed this is true, which it most certainly is, then why wouldn’t todays reformers accept this truth? The mysteries remain intact as they always have, and for good reason. The Trinity was attacked, the conflicts with Arianism are synonymous with the dogma of the Trinity. Which also isn’t Biblical Doctrine, which you have no choice but to hopelessly defend while assuming you would know this without the Church.

There was no sinner’s prayers, no alter call, no once saved always saved and so forth. This isn’t part of the story of history. That unlike Mary and the Saints is a “new” non-historic invention, and not of the Apostolic Church.

The continued persecution such as that 6-minute You Tube video is indicative of the history of the Church. You have joined the persecution and somehow conclude your assumed truth will prevail. Yet what has prevailed is what has always been in this Church.

The Copts and others, well, you persecute them with your actions and don’t even realize this. Should be no surprise I suppose, I seen a You Tube protestant reformed video claiming the Blood of the Martyrs is also a non Biblical teaching contrary to the message of Jesus Christ.

While mainline protestants are not the issue, much past that we have something “new” which is not part of our Christian history. This is what happens when we teach our agenda and not the historic truth, the knowledge isn’t transmitted and “we” become persecuted. We means YOU too. Your fueling your own demise and can’t see it, and basically by “relevance.” which in the USA that is what the Truth has been enabled to become.
 
I wasn’t suggesting that Catholics do…I was drawing a comparison to the Holy Theotokos/Blessed Virgin Mary “saving” people. It’s often misconstrued.
It is indeed misconstrued.

But for some reason Protestants who misconstrue this have no problems understanding the correct context when St. Paul says that he saves us. Yep. St. Paul actually says that he (Paul) saves us.

I have never heard a single Protestant state: how dare Paul claim to save us! Only Jesus saves!

:hmmm:
 
Because the intent of the heart is kneeling before God in a house of worship.

The heart is always to God. The fact that there is a Bible (or a pastor) in the vicinity does not diminish the intent.
'zactly.

So it’s the intent that matters.

If a person is kneeling before a statue of Mary and intends to worship God while venerate Mary, why would anyone oppose this?
 
'zactly.

So it’s the intent that matters.

If a person is kneeling before a statue of Mary and intends to worship God while venerate Mary, why would anyone oppose this?
I think its because Protestants don’t want to venerate their Bible while worshiping God. We just want to worship God, that’s it that’s all.

If bowing to a statue helps you focus on God then that’s fine I suppose, it certainly doesn’t help me. Just like how some people believe praying naked helps because Adam and Eve would. I don’t think praying naked helps me, but if it helps you then all the best to you.
 
I think its because Protestants don’t want to venerate their Bible while worshiping God. We just want to worship God, that’s it that’s all.

If bowing to a statue helps you focus on God then that’s fine I suppose, it certainly doesn’t help me. Just like how some people believe praying naked helps because Adam and Eve would. I don’t think praying naked helps me, but if it helps you then all the best to you.
You’ve tried praying naked?
:eek:
 
I echo this sentiment. I’ve never heard of such a practice…
I don’t know, but it certainly would have increased attendance at the Wednesday Night Prayer Service at the Baptist church I used to attend.
😃
 
You’ve tried praying naked?
:eek:
Can’t say I have, but if it helps according to Catholics it should be okay. Just like praying in froint of a statue or praying with beads. I don’t find any of these increase my faith or prayers. So on good conscience I do no such thing.
 
It is indeed misconstrued.

But for some reason Protestants who misconstrue this have no problems understanding the correct context when St. Paul says that he saves us. Yep. St. Paul actually says that he (Paul) saves us.

I have never heard a single Protestant state: how dare Paul claim to save us! Only Jesus saves!

:hmmm:
I’ll tell you why my friend:

Because it is the classic case of picking and choosing depending on one’s taste buds. 👍
 
I think its because Protestants don’t want to venerate their Bible while worshiping God. We just want to worship God, that’s it that’s all.
You say so. Funnily enough, it seems that you also want to criticize those who do not believe or practice exactly like you do. :confused:
If bowing to a statue helps you focus on God then that’s fine I suppose, it certainly doesn’t help me.
Again, you say so. Since you do not understand the ancient, apostolic Catholic and Orthodox Churches, why do you hurl ad hominen attacks at them? :confused:

Faith is not the Ravens versus the 49ers. It is not team sports or tribal warfare. It is a quest for the entirety of God’s revealed truth. Isn’t it?
 
Can’t say I have, but if it helps according to Catholics it should be okay. Just like praying in froint of a statue or praying with beads. I don’t find any of these increase my faith or prayers. So on good conscience I do no such thing.
We were just pulling your chain dude.
Grow a funny bone.
:cool:
 
My question: Is there a concern in (evangelical) protestant circles that some are elevating the bible (almost) to the level of “worship”?
No. We’re good.

Source: Someone who dwells in Evangelical Protestant circles. Me.
 
I am chiefly concerned about it in the case of KJVO fanatics. With them, it does seem like there’s some bibliolatry going on. :eek:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top