Why the bible is most assuredly not a Catholic book,

[canne]

Everyone of its books (with the possible exception of one) was written by a Jew.

At first I thought this was a joke, seriously.

It was the Church that put the New Testament together. The fact that you choose to disbelieve it, does not make it less so.

The Sacred writings of the New testament were written by the early Christians…the early Christian Church was known as the Universal( Catholic Church) as early as 50 AD.What Churches do you think Paul is refering too in his many letters? It was this Church that collected and gathered its writings and was responsible for determing the contents of the Holy Bible guided by the Holy Spirit.

You really should read
Where we got the Bible written by by The Right Rev. HENRY G. GRAHAM You can purchase it at Amazon oe elsewhere but it is available to read online as well
angelfire.com/ms/seanie/deuteros/graham_contents.html

 

[TriuneUnity]

So, you think it’s acceptable to honor another person as long as it isn’t “religous honor.” Pretty subjective stuff. What differentiates “religious honor” from any other honor? Where can I find a list of criteria which tells me which honor is “religious honor” and which isn’t?

The Old Testament for one. We are to prohibit what God prohibits and do that which God says to do. It isn’t subjective. No one of a rational mind would confuse honoring a judge or saluting a flag with street processions of the local saint’s statue with prayers being offered. God commands us to honor civil authorities. He doesn’t command us to invoke the names of the departed for intercession or to offer veneration to imagery. Ask Nadab and Abihu what happens when we go against what God has commanded in worship.

“Instructed?” I’m not sure when God “instructed” us to ask members of the Church Militant to pray for us. He certainly permits it, just as He also permits us to ask members of the Church Triumphant to pray for us.

Scripture. Are you saying you missed St. Paul’s exhortation to pray for one another? You will not find a similar commandment to ask the saints in heaven to pray for us. And much to go against the idea.

You’re using the vague phrase “religious service” to gloss over a crucial distinction. The Hebrews offered “religious service” to the Ark of the Lord. That doesn’t mean they were worshipping the Ark. A Sunday School teacher offers “religious service” to children by educating them in the faith, but that doesn’t mean he worships the children.

Again, no one would confuse worship in the Temple or Sunday school with venerating the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe.

A graven image is an image which is thought to be alive. I don’t think my religious pictures are alive. Therefore, they are not “graven images.”

I have no problem with images. It’s the abuse of them that is against my conscience. When it comes to things like relics, while no one thinks they are alive, they are also attributed with “supernatural” powers.

Wouldn’t my showing respect for a photograph of my wife violate the First Commandment under your definition? After all, it has a “religious context” (marriage is a sacrament) and I treat my pictures of my wife with honor out of respect for the person depicted therein. Why isn’t that wrong, under your definition?

If you stood her picture on your table, lit incense around it and prayed fervently for her assistance in receiving mercy, I would consider it wrong.

 

[Gamera]

The Old Testament for one.

I’ve read the Bible cover to cover. Nothing in there prohibits veneration of saints. Nor does anything in there prohibit asking for intercession of saints. Which, although you continually mingle them, are two different things.

We are to prohibit what God prohibits and do that which God says to do. It isn’t subjective.

Yet you insist that I follow your personal interpretation of Scripture, and I decline, because I find your view utterly un-Scriptural. So how is the issue resolved? I suggest the issue is resolved by consulting the Church which Christ founded.

Ask Nadab and Abihu what happens when we go against what God has commanded in worship.

I haven’t gone against what God commands in worship, so this is irrelevant.

Scripture. Are you saying you missed St. Paul’s exhortation to pray for one another?

No. I didn’t “miss” it. And it wasn’t St Paul, it was St James (James 5:16). But that isn’t what you asked for. You said God instructs us to ask members of the Church Militant to pray for us. That isn’t what St James wrote. He told us to “pray for one another,” not to request others to pray for us. Please don’t blame me for confining my answer to your own terms.

You will not find a similar commandment to ask the saints in heaven to pray for us. And much to go against the idea.

Wrong, I found it. Hebrews 12:23, which says I have access to the “'spirits of the righteous made perfect”. And I’ve found nothing in the Bible against the idea. So where do we go from here?

Again, no one would confuse worship in the Temple or Sunday school with venerating the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe.

Yet both are perfectly fine.

I have no problem with images. It’s the abuse of them that is against my conscience. When it comes to things like relics, while no one thinks they are alive, they are also attributed with “supernatural” powers.

Catholics believe that only God has supernatural powers. Objects themselves don’t contain power (that would be magic).

If you stood her picture on your table, lit incense around it and prayed fervently for her assistance in receiving mercy, I would consider it wrong.

Which is it that is wrong? Is it putting my wife’s picture on my table? Is it burning incense? (and don’t think that couples don’t use incense; ever been to Spencer Gifts?) Or is it talking to my wife (which is all that prayer is?). Be specific. Which of these three would be a sin? None by itself, right – it’s actually the intent which matters, isn’t it?

 

[mercygate]

There isn’t any argument that God can do just about whatever He wants, using the means He chooses.

Quite so.

There is, however, no evidence outside specific miracles recorded in Scripture that this has continued and every indication that it stopped with the death of the last apostle.

Did I ever tell you about a physician on the faculty of my medical school – an internatiionally known cardiologist – who was tapped to verify the clinching miracle required for the canonization of Faustina Kowalska? He submitted the medical records to 8 colleagues – not Catholics – around the world without telling them about the others or why he was asking them to review the case. He asked if they could explain the results. Every one of them responded that there was no known explanation for the complete reversal of severe, irreversible, cardiomyopathy.

But miracles being wrought by objects is not an argument from my end.

I certainly hope it isn’t. “Objects” do not work miracles. For whatever reason, God, by his merciful providence, has chosen to exercise His grace through the intercession of his holy ones: Sometimes via the sanctity of their very remains. I see this as a foretaste of the Resurrection when the body that has been sown in corruption will rise in incorruption. The very SAME body we now inhabit. For me, the efficacy of relics points to the beginning of a “new heaven and a new earth” through the supernatural life in Christ lived in the flesh by those who love Him.

 

[allhers]

That’s the problem. “Venerating” anything but God is a violation of the first commandment.

I understand that Catholics do not believe they are in an act of worship when venerating an image. Whether it’s a crucifix or a statue of Christ or Mary. The Israelites did not think so either with that whole golden calf affair.

From your reply, you understand nothing of what us Catholics have told you, did you read our replies at all or just pick and choose certain parts of what we say to refute? We are NOT idol worshippers no matter how many times you say it, anymore than you are an idol worshipper by displaying a picture of the crusifixion on here. Get over it please.
We worship GOD in His angels and in His saints, not the angels, not the saints, but God only.
If you would sincerely read what all these good Catholics are telling you, you could come to understand what you don’t know, about relics, veneration, etc…please use an open mind to understand instead of following an agenda that is getting you nowhere with us who do understand.

 

[mercygate]

From your reply, you understand nothing of what us Catholics have told you, did you read our replies at all or just pick and choose certain parts of what we say to refute? We are NOT idol worshippers no matter how many times you say it, anymore than you are an idol worshipper by displaying a picture of the crusifixion on here. Get over it please.
We worship GOD in His angels and in His saints, not the angels, not the saints, but God only.
If you would sincerely read what all these good Catholics are telling you, you could come to understand what you don’t know, about relics, veneration, etc…please use an open mind to understand instead of following an agenda that is getting you nowhere with us who do understand.

This tone is so unlike you, allhers. TriuneUnity seems to be revisiting a relic (LOL) of his earlier iconoclastic phase. TU has been a “citizen.”

 

[allhers]

This tone is so unlike you, allhers. TriuneUnity seems to be revisiting a relic (LOL) of his earlier iconoclastic phase. TU has been a “citizen.”

Well, I guess its hard to tell on here, but I said it with all sincerity and with much love.
I only emphasized certain points so that TU could perhaps understand. After re-reading it, it does look a tad harsh, but, then again, if I were in person with TU I would still say the same thing over and over as the truth doesn’t change no matter how it is misunderstood.
I find it amazing, that I, a life-long cradle Catholic, recognize in you, in po18guy, Gamera, and so many others on here, Christ’s truth, it just shines through. (Let your light shine before all…)
It certainly does!! I don’t understand why others, who proclaim to be fellow believers don’t see it also.
Even the Lutherans I know in real life see Christ’s actions in others. Why doesn’t TU??

 

[TriuneUnity]

Did I ever tell you about a physician on the faculty of my medical school – an internatiionally known cardiologist – who was tapped to verify the clinching miracle required for the canonization of Faustina Kowalska? He submitted the medical records to 8 colleagues – not Catholics – around the world without telling them about the others or why he was asking them to review the case. He asked if they could explain the results. Every one of them responded that there was no known explanation for the complete reversal of severe, irreversible, cardiomyopathy.

These sorts of things cannot really be debated, however. Outside of a direct revelation that such events are from the Lord, we have no reason to think they are. My point is, prophets and apostles were given these things as a testimony to their ministry and mission in redemptive history. This has ceased to continue. We are left to proclaim the word of reconciliation and to administer the sacraments, not work miracles.

I certainly hope it isn’t. “Objects” do not work miracles. For whatever reason, God, by his merciful providence, has chosen to exercise His grace through the intercession of his holy ones: Sometimes via the sanctity of their very remains. I see this as a foretaste of the Resurrection when the body that has been sown in corruption will rise in incorruption. The very SAME body we now inhabit. For me, the efficacy of relics points to the beginning of a “new heaven and a new earth” through the supernatural life in Christ lived in the flesh by those who love Him.

What I meant by objects was that God chose visible representations to work His miracles through; Moses’ staff, the Ark, etc. All of these were prefigurements of the incarnate Word and have ceased to be. I understand your point about the beginnings of the new heaven and earth. But God’s Word does not point to relics or incorruptible saints to demonstrate that. He points us to the risen, glorified Christ as the first fruits of our redemption.

 

[mercygate]

Well, I guess its hard to tell on here, but I said it with all sincerity and with much love.
I only emphasized certain points so that TU could perhaps understand. After re-reading it, it does look a tad harsh, but, then again, if I were in person with TU I would still say the same thing over and over as the truth doesn’t change no matter how it is misunderstood.
I find it amazing, that I, a life-long cradle Catholic, recognize in you, in po18guy, Gamera, and so many others on here, Christ’s truth, it just shines through. (Let your light shine before all…)
It certainly does!! I don’t understand why others, who proclaim to be fellow believers don’t see it also.
Even the Lutherans I know in real life see Christ’s actions in others. Why doesn’t TU??

It seems that BOTH you and TU stepped out of character for a minute.

OK. Now that THAT’s over, let’s go on in our usual friendly mode.

 

[TriuneUnity]

From your reply, you understand nothing of what us Catholics have told you, did you read our replies at all or just pick and choose certain parts of what we say to refute? We are NOT idol worshippers no matter how many times you say it, anymore than you are an idol worshipper by displaying a picture of the crusifixion on here. Get over it please.
We worship GOD in His angels and in His saints, not the angels, not the saints, but God only.
If you would sincerely read what all these good Catholics are telling you, you could come to understand what you don’t know, about relics, veneration, etc…please use an open mind to understand instead of following an agenda that is getting you nowhere with us who do understand.

I do not sincerely doubt that you believe that the veneration of images and the intercession of saints is not idolatry. I would not accuse you of knowingly doing such a thing. But from my perspective, in a similar way to how you may feel you’re beating against a wall with trying to show that it isn’t, we feel the same in trying to show you that it is. We may hear repeated sophistry that veneration is not worship, latria is not dulia, etc, but to our reading of God’s word to show affection, seek intercession, or bow to any but the Lamb of God, Jesus, is idolatry, whether Catholics believe it is or not.

Ultimately, it only matters what God Himself thinks.

 

[TriuneUnity]

Well, I guess its hard to tell on here, but I said it with all sincerity and with much love.
I only emphasized certain points so that TU could perhaps understand. After re-reading it, it does look a tad harsh, but, then again, if I were in person with TU I would still say the same thing over and over as the truth doesn’t change no matter how it is misunderstood.
I find it amazing, that I, a life-long cradle Catholic, recognize in you, in po18guy, Gamera, and so many others on here, Christ’s truth, it just shines through. (Let your light shine before all…)
It certainly does!! I don’t understand why others, who proclaim to be fellow believers don’t see it also.
Even the Lutherans I know in real life see Christ’s actions in others. Why doesn’t TU??

No need to backstep on your statement, allhers. I am sure frustration over these topics cuts both ways and I know that Catholics often have to deal with idiotic accusations and stereotypes. That isn’t my intention here. My intention here is to defend what I believe and confess and show it from the pages of Scripture. As for seeing Christ’s actions in others, I certainly do. Catholics as well as Protestants. But I don’t see what that has to do with veneration.

 

[Always_For_Him]

Revelation 12:1, “And a great portent appeared in heaven, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars…” Who is the woman being referred to here? Woman, crown, in heaven… Of course this verse is referring to the true Queen of Heaven, Mary. Who else could it be? There is nothing wrong with honoring her just as Jesus honors her. We do not worship her. We do not worship the saints. We only worship God. Honor and respect is entirely different from worship. To honor and respect is scriptural. Contrary to what you believe, intercessory prayer is scriptural. It always has been.

Jesus gave us His mom. Why can’t you show Mary the respect He wanted her to have? He showed her respect. The angels showed her respect.

So, now that you have been taught how the Catholic Church defines veneration/honor/respect, please don’t ever again suggest that veneration/honor/respect is us worshiping idols.

 

[TriuneUnity]

I’ve read the Bible cover to cover. Nothing in there prohibits veneration of saints. Nor does anything in there prohibit asking for intercession of saints. Which, although you continually mingle them, are two different things.

They are two different things via Catholic argumentation. I see nothing in Scripture that defines such a distinction. Nothing in Scripture commands or prescribes the veneration of saints, therefore, we are not to do it.

Yet you insist that I follow your personal interpretation of Scripture, and I decline, because I find your view utterly un-Scriptural. So how is the issue resolved? I suggest the issue is resolved by consulting the Church which Christ founded.

It has nothing to do with my personal interpretation of Scripture. Plain words do not require detailed exegesis.

No. I didn’t “miss” it. And it wasn’t St Paul, it was St James (James 5:16). But that isn’t what you asked for. You said God instructs us to ask members of the Church Militant to pray for us. That isn’t what St James wrote. He told us to “pray for one another,” not to request others to pray for us. Please don’t blame me for confining my answer to your own terms.

It was both Paul and James, and most of the other disciples Paul demonstrates on numerous ocassions in his letters that the saints request prayer of each other, aside from the commands to offer prayer freely (1 Thess. 5:25).

Wrong, I found it. Hebrews 12:23, which says I have access to the “'spirits of the righteous made perfect”. And I’ve found nothing in the Bible against the idea. So where do we go from here?

And this has nothing to do with intercessory prayer. The writer to the Hebrews is showing the distinction between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant.

Which is it that is wrong? Is it putting my wife’s picture on my table? Is it burning incense? (and don’t think that couples don’t use incense; ever been to Spencer Gifts?) Or is it talking to my wife (which is all that prayer is?). Be specific. Which of these three would be a sin? None by itself, right – it’s actually the intent which matters, isn’t it?

You are using sophistry now and know quite well what I mean.

 

[cazayoux]

… it also adds the graven image prohibition.

have we not fully vetted this issue?
It is the difference between not *allowing *graven images or not *worshiping *graven images.
Obviously God does not prohibit graven images as he himself has directed use of them.
Does God prohibit photographs?
If I take a photograph of a bee or a night sky, do you automatically assume I’m worshiping the created … or can it be a way for me to worship the creator?

michel

 

[mercygate]

have we not fully vetted this issue?
It is the difference between not *allowing *graven images or not *worshiping *graven images.
Obviously God does not prohibit graven images as he himself has directed use of them.
Does God prohibit photographs?
If I take a photograph of a bee or a night sky, do you automatically assume I’m worshiping the created … or can it be a way for me to worship the creator?

michel

I think somewhere about a mile up thread somebody may have mentioned how the Incarnation changed the contract on images because it changed the entire meaning of the created universe.

Also, we don’t have images of “things” or “creatures” – the images of the saints are images of the “Christ-hood” of these people as manifested in their holy lives. Imagery in Christian devotion goes directly to the Incarnation.

 

[allhers]

No need to backstep on your statement, allhers. I am sure frustration over these topics cuts both ways and I know that Catholics often have to deal with idiotic accusations and stereotypes. That isn’t my intention here. My intention here is to defend what I believe and confess and show it from the pages of Scripture. As for seeing Christ’s actions in others, I certainly do. Catholics as well as Protestants. But I don’t see what that has to do with veneration.

Because the veneration shows forth in God’s glory, don’t you think of how amazing God is when a sinner turns to Him and changes their ways? Don’t you just Praise God and think of how all the angels and saints are celebrating that another Prodigal son has come home?
How much more so when a person who has always followed the will of God, always let Him work through them, is so open to His grace that they let Him perform His miracles through them for the glory of God.
That is exactly why the CCC says…“But while in the most Blessed Virgin the Church has already reached that perfection whereby she exists without spot or wrinkle, the faithful still strive to conquer sin and increase in holiness. And so they turn their eyes to Mary”, in her, the Church is already the “all holy.”
Keep in mind that God did this, not her. God choose her, not us.
You can even read in your Bible what Mary said about it all in Luke…“my soul doth magnify the Lord”…“my spirit has rejoiced in God my Saviour”…"henceforth all generations shall call me blessed. Because he that is mighty, hath done great things to me; and holy is his name.

“Shall call me blessed”… These words are a prediction of that honour which the church in all ages should pay to the Blessed Virgin. Let Protestants examine whether they are any way concerned in this prophecy.
drbo.org/chapter/49001.htm

 

[jmcrae]

I think somewhere about a mile up thread somebody may have mentioned how the Incarnation changed the contract on images because it changed the entire meaning of the created universe.

Exactly. The prohibition on images of God was revoked at the moment that Mary and Joseph looked on the face of the newborn infant Jesus.

Also, we don’t have images of “things” or “creatures” – the images of the saints are images of the “Christ-hood” of these people as manifested in their holy lives. Imagery in Christian devotion goes directly to the Incarnation.

Precisely.

 

[cazayoux]

I think somewhere about a mile up thread somebody may have mentioned how the Incarnation changed the contract on images because it changed the entire meaning of the created universe.

I don’t follow this thought process because graven images were okay before Jesus came.
(The ark, the veil, the staff, the temple)

michel

 

[mercygate]

I don’t follow this thought process because graven images were okay before Jesus came.
(The ark, the veil, the staff, the temple)

michel

Check out the Seventh Council of Nicea. The relationship of images to the Incarnation is beautifully laid out there.

 

[Always_For_Him]

TriuneUnity,
You don’t understand our feelings for veneration because you/your church/don’t think that way or utilize the Communion of Saints, or believe in intercessory prayer. Because the Catholic Church always has, the apostles did, (as we have tried to show you) we are already in a deep, respecting, thankful relationship with Mary, the saints, the marytrs. We are thankful for thier contributions, thier gifts to us, their help. We worship God, honoring His mother only gives Him more glory.

It is what we are trying to explain to you and everyone else that doesn’t understand. What you have to do, is try to find a way to completely understand what we are saying. Whether you agree with it or not is up to you, but you have to believe that we are telling you the Truth and quit stating it wrong.

We understand your desire to defend your faith and to show us what you believe Scripture to say. I don’t understand how you think that your interpretation of Scripture is correct and the Catholics are wrong. You got your Scripture from us. How could you possibly think that we don’t have the correct understanding of it? We were interpreting, teaching, understanding, practicing, that VERY Scripture for over 1500 years before men came along and created new interpreptation. If anyone doesn’t understand the meaning/interpretation of Scripture it is those in Churches founded by man who separated themselves from Christ’s Church to teach their own ideology, interpretation, doctrine. Scripture was changed in the Reformation, to be in denial of that is to deny Christ’s very Church and Christ’s very Words. I guess you don’t believe that, but it doesn’t make it any less true because you don’t believe it.

I do not mean any disrespect with what I am saying. I just don’t know how to say it without sounding blunt. The historical proof and writings are ALL there for you to review. You can’t ignore the Early Church teachings and the Early Church Fathers beliefs and writings because they spell out and support everything we are discussing! To ignore those, is just turning a blind eye to the Truth out there because you already believe something else, another Church’s teachings and tradition. Your Church probably does teach the Word of Christ, just not in it’s fullness. The Churches formed during the Reformation and thereafter did take Christ’s teachings with them, just not all of them. They also didn’t take the tradition that taught the teachings and made them complete with them. Men changed teachings and dropped others. They formed their new Churches in their own tradition and beliefs. They did not found thier Churches on the same teachings, interpretations and beliefs that had always been taught, understood and believed by Christians for centuries up until then. The changes that they made were not commanded by Jesus. Only the teachings and the tradition that He taught them in are what He commaned to be taught. I am saying all of this to say that you can explain to us what you believe Scripture to mean, but you are not going to be able to teach us that Scripture means anything that what it has always meant, how it has always been understood by all Christians to mean for over 1500 years before your Churches interpretation came along. The Catholic Church has maintained the same teachings and interpretation of Scripture for 2,000 years now because it was given the fullness of Christ’s Deposit of Faith and has always understood it. No other Church has it. parts of it maybe, but not in it’s complete fullness as Jesus gave it to His Church. He has guided and protected His Church from error. He said He would and we believe Him. He has kept the Catholic Church teachings His Pure Word without error.