Announcement

Collapse

Ecclesiology 201 Guidelines

Discussion on matters of general mainstream Christian churches. What are the differences between Catholics and protestants? How has the charismatic movement affected the church? Are Southern baptists different from fundamentalist baptists? It is also for discussions about the nature of the church.

This forum is primarily for Christians to discuss matters of Christian doctrine, and is not the area for debate between atheists (or those opposing orthodox Christianity) and theists. Inquiring atheists (or sincere seekers/doubters/unorthodox) seeking only Christian participation and having demonstrated a manner that does not seek to undermine the orthodox Christian faith of others are also welcome, but must seek Moderator permission first. When defining “Christian” for purposes of this section, we mean persons holding to the core essentials of the historic Christian faith such as the Trinity, the Creatorship of God, the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the atonement, the future bodily return of Christ, the future bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust, and the final judgment. Persons not holding to these core doctrines are welcome to participate in the Comparative Religions section without restriction, in Theology 201 as regards to the nature of God and salvation with limited restrictions, and in Christology for issues surrounding the person of Christ and the Trinity. Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions. Additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream orthodox doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Praying to Mary is worshiping Mary

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Foudroyant, do you really need an official Catholic source that says that we don't pray to the saints the way we pray to God? That's something so obvious that a source beyond the universal assent of Catholic apologists is unnecessary.

    If you're looking for a dogmatic proclamation about a specific Greek word, you're asking for something absurd: we're in the business of preaching Christ, not writing dictionaries, and the answer is so obvious in the first place that such a document shouldn't even be necessary. If using this one Greek word instead of another undermines the practice, why would we go out of our way to use that one Greek word instead of a more innocuous and accurate one?

    At best, you're demanding that Tab prove a negative about something extraordinarily obscure. He's absolutely right that the burden of proof is on you. Produce your evidence, accuser.
    Don't call it a comeback. It's a riposte.

    Comment


    • No it isn't obvious because they don't have any. The role of a deity is to be the recipient of prayer.

      The RC teaches there are three degrees of worship (latria, hyperdulia and dulia).

      Answer this: Can you give an example of how each is unique with citing a passage from the Bible?

      The RC is in the business of preaching Christ and not writing dictionaries? What a cop-out. They write about so many things but they can't be specific about something so important as this? Get real.

      Produce my evidence? Despite referring to it several times I'm still waiting for a response from Post #212.
      Last edited by foudroyant; 07-31-2014, 04:48 PM.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by foudroyant View Post
        No it isn't obvious because they don't have any. The role of a deity is to be the recipient of prayer.

        The RC teaches there are three degrees of worship (latria, hyperdulia and dulia).

        Answer this: Can you give an example of how each is unique with citing a passage from the Bible?

        The RC is in the business of preaching Christ and not writing dictionaries? What a cop-out. They write about so many things but they can't be specific about something so important as this? Get real.

        Produce my evidence? Despite referring to it several times I'm still waiting for a response from Post #212.
        You've elsewhere demanded biblical passages specifically condemning public "christian nudity" under the apparent pretense that what is not explicitly forbidden is implicitly allowed. Now you demand that Catholics produce Scriptural evidence specifically supporting prayer to the saints as distinct from praying to God, under the apparent pretense that anything not explicitly allowed is implicitly forbidden. Heads, you win, tails, we lose.
        Don't call it a comeback. It's a riposte.

        Comment


        • There is no command against public nudity but there is a command against worshiping anyone and anything else but God.

          Total dodge on your part.

          Great job not answering the question asked.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by foudroyant View Post
            There is no command against public nudity but there is a command against worshiping anyone and anything else but God.

            Total dodge on your part.
            And we do not understand prayer to the saints as worship. You're equivocating.
            Don't call it a comeback. It's a riposte.

            Comment


            • The RC teaches there are three degrees of worship (latria, hyperdulia and dulia).

              Can you give an example of how each is unique with citing a passage from the Bible?

              Comment


              • Why is this necessary? Why can you not take Catholics' word for it that veneration of the saints is qualitatively different from worshiping God?
                Don't call it a comeback. It's a riposte.

                Comment


                • Proof please - not just a say-so assertion.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by foudroyant View Post
                    Proof please - not just a say-so assertion.
                    Why?
                    Don't call it a comeback. It's a riposte.

                    Comment


                    • Because people sometimes can just assert anything while the facts run contrary to what they are asserting.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by foudroyant View Post
                        Because people sometimes can just assert anything while the facts run contrary to what they are asserting
                        Which facts run contrary to which assertions?
                        Don't call it a comeback. It's a riposte.

                        Comment


                        • I'll wait for your answer to see if this is true.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by foudroyant View Post
                            I'll wait for your answer to see if this is true.
                            Again, which facts run contrary to which assertions?
                            Don't call it a comeback. It's a riposte.

                            Comment


                            • Sometimes people do this. I'm waiting for your answer to see if the same thing is happening.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by foudroyant View Post
                                Sometimes people do this. I'm waiting for your answer to see if the same thing is happening.
                                My answer on specific scriptural passages? That's what this is about-- I don't understand why I should need passages to support my position, and am asking you to explain why you think it's necessary.
                                Don't call it a comeback. It's a riposte.

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X