Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

unanimous consensus among the early church fathers that icon veneration was forbidden.
This post of yours is an ALL OUT LIE.

The early church fathers overwhelmingly opposed using any image or statue - anything made by man's hands - in prayer, worship, and liturgy. This is just an incontrovertible fact. And this is exactly what icon veneration involves.

---

You exact quote was "unanimous consensus". That is NOT true! I called you out and had to qualify your statement. Sts. Cyril of Alexander, Basil the Great, Gregory the Great, and John of Damascus all agreed with icon veneration.

Your original quote was a LIE.

---

Proof?
(Waiting for the usual non sequitur eisegesis....)

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

You: "nothing in the bible says you can't make images". This isn't about just making images, it's about using them in worship, prayer, and liturgy. You've dishonestly mischaracterized the issue to attempt to justify your practice.

---

There is nothing wrong with using images in prayer. Do protestants not have crosses or a picture of Jesus in their churches? I'm pretty sure I've seen them in most of protestant churches I've been to.

---

Yet another CokeBear straw man.

Icon veneration isn't "having pictures in church". It's using those pictures as a "window" to the object being worshiped. It's bowing to, praying to, and kissing the image as if the real object is receiving those acts through the image.

Your repetitive and continual misconception and mischaracterization of concepts really is really annoying and tiring to deal with.

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

You are trying to use an example of objects God commanded the Israelis to make, but NOT BOW TO, PRAY "THROUGH", KISS, AND GIVE OFFERINGS to, as a tacit approval to make objects and then BOW, PRAY THROUGH, KISS, and GIVE OFFERINGS to them. Complete foolishness. You do realize what happened to that bronze serpent in 2 Kings 18, don't you?:

---

First, Catholics are forbidden to GIVE OFFERINGS to an object.

Second, there is nothing wrong with bowing to, praying through, and/or kissing an object. That's not worship. That's honor for the person it represents. It's the same as cultures that bow to one another or taking a knee to a girlfriend in proposal, asking a friend to pray for you, and/or kissing a picture of your family.

It's truly amazing that you can't understand this. In order to worship, one has to believe that object is God. No Catholic does that. I really feel sorry for your lack of desire to understand.

---

God specifically forbids making objects of any kind and bowing to them. It's in the TEN COMMANDMENTS, in case you forgot. God considers it worship. He never said it's okay as long as you don't believe the thing you're bowing to is God. He punished Israel severely for bowing to their idols, which the Israelites did not view as being God. An example is Ishtar (the "queen of heaven", uh oh!)

In Revelation 22:8-9, John bows to the angel, and the angel IMMEDIATELY corrects him, saying to only worship God. Clearly, the angel is saying that bowing IS worship.

The fact that you will deny what is right in front of your face in Scripture tells us all we need to know about the spirit behind your beliefs. A true believer won't even have to know it's in Scripture - the act of bowing to a heavenly being that isn't God is so OBVIOUSLY wrong to even the most ignorant, most baby of Christians. The fact that this discernment eludes you can only be explained if you really aren't a Christian.

If you really are a believer in Jesus, then something is seriously, seriously wrong, and you need to WAKE UP.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

I actually think you can solve this issue by contrasting Judas and Peter.

Both knew Jesus was Lord. Both followed Him. Both betrayed Him. It wasn't like Judas didn't see miracles and didn't understand who He was. Judas wasn't stupid. Peter was saying he would never betray Jesus before he did, that's the level of faith he thought he had.

The difference between them wasn't belief, it was repentance.

Judas felt remorse and shame and in part because he knew Jesus was Lord, but he turned inward and despaired. Peter wept, but he returned. One resisted grace, the other cooperated with it. This difference in behavior was after they had faith. That's dead faith vs real faith. One doesn't have works (repentance) the other does.

Peter's return required the will, choosing repentance, enduring shame, and allowing grace to restore him. Anyone who's gone through this knows that's a tremendous amount of effort and work.

Judas turned inward and despaired. One cooperated with grace, the other resisted it. So salvation doesn't hinge on merely knowing or even sincerely believing that Jesus is Lord. Judas had that. It hinges on whether, after failure, a person turns back in repentance and perseveres.

---

Judas never truly believed. Jesus knew this, as seen in John 6:63-64 "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. But there are some of you who do not believe." (For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.)

Jesus also said that Judas was the "son of perdition" who was "doomed to destruction" (John 17:12) This is not how you would describe someone who was a true believer.

Peter did truly believe, but made mistakes. But being true believer, it was inevitable that he would repent.

---

Ah so you are a Calvinist aren't you?

You're defining a "true believer" as someone who inevitably perseveres, and then using Judas's failure to prove he was never a true believer. This is exactly the move I'm pushing back on, it's your go to and you just did it in the post prior to this one. This is the core logic of Calvinism's perseverance of the saints. "If someone doesn't persevere, they were never truly saved".

Then you argue that scripture is saying Judas was "doomed to destruction" in the sense of a divine decision made apart from his own response and willpower, that would also fall neatly into a Calvinist framework where God picks and chooses who he saves. It's an argument that God doesn't merely foreknow who will fall, He chooses who will be saved and who will not. So Judas wasn't tragically lost, but excluded from salvation by design.

---

I'm not necessarily a Calvinist. But I do believe we have to take Scripture at its word and take it seriously. These words about Judas are from Jesus himself - are you saying he's wrong? I believe there is a way where we retain our free will, but our choice is still under God's sovereign will. Like the Trinity, this is too difficult a concept for us to wrap our minds around, and one which perhaps we will understand only when we are in heaven. It's also a deeply philosphical issue that needs its own thread, honestly. But what I can say here is that God KNOWING who will be lost is not necessarily the same thing as God CHOOSING or forcing who will be lost. Or that someone DOOMED to destruction is someone who is CHOSEN or forced for destruction rather than it being their own choice destroying them. Judas was doomed to destruction because God knew his free will would lead him to not believe. In the same way when we see someone who by their own choice is walking a path that is leading them off a cliff, and who won't heed warnings. We can say they are "doomed to destruction" because by their own free will they refuse to listen, and we can see the inevitable outcome.

You should look into Molinism, which is an alternative view to Calvinism, which preserves man's free will and God's sovereignty at the same time.

---

I'm saying your interpretation is wrong, not Jesus. Jesus words about Judas are from free will choices by having faith and then later rejecting it.

---

Where do you get from Jesus' words that Judas had true faith and then later rejected it, as opposed to never having true faith to begin with? There is nothing there that suggests Judas ever truly believed. You are injecting your assumption into it. Jesus clearly says of Judas that he didn't believe and that he would betray him.

---

Doc, I'd like an answer to this. You keep running away from points that show your view is weakly based. And you're not allowing yourself to challenge our own view because of it.

---

My view isn't weakly based. My view is based.

I already told you he had dead faith and made a distinction between dead faith and real faith, just as scripture does. He didn't deny that Jesus was Lord. He knew that, he casted out demons. His belief was real, but he didn't have works (failed to repent), aka dead faith.

"In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead," James 2:17. He's saying if your faith doesn't produce works then its not legit faith, not that faith is nonexistent. Faith can either be alive or dead.

Quote:

---

Second, there is nothing wrong with bowing to, praying through, and/or kissing an object. That's not worship. That's honor for the person it represents. It's the same as cultures that bow to one another or taking a knee to a girlfriend in proposal, asking a friend to pray for you, and/or kissing a picture of your family.

---

Let me help you out here.

The argument that bowing to, intercession, or kissing an object is worship requires the arguer to claim these actions must be criteria for worship. They don't practice any of those, therefore they've indicted themselves of not worshiping.

People don't realize they've made category errors like this and they get themselves into a pickle.
They'll move to special pleading next.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

You are trying to use an example of objects God commanded the Israelis to make, but NOT BOW TO, PRAY "THROUGH", KISS, AND GIVE OFFERINGS to, as a tacit approval to make objects and then BOW, PRAY THROUGH, KISS, and GIVE OFFERINGS to them. Complete foolishness. You do realize what happened to that bronze serpent in 2 Kings 18, don't you?:

---

First, Catholics are forbidden to GIVE OFFERINGS to an object.

Second, there is nothing wrong with bowing to, praying through, and/or kissing an object. That's not worship. That's honor for the person it represents. It's the same as cultures that bow to one another or taking a knee to a girlfriend in proposal, asking a friend to pray for you, and/or kissing a picture of your family.

It's truly amazing that you can't understand this. In order to worship, one has to believe that object is God. No Catholic does that. I really feel sorry for your lack of desire to understand.

---

God specifically forbids making objects of any kind and bowing to them. It's in the TEN COMMANDMENTS, in case you forgot. God considers it worship. He never said it's okay as long as you don't believe the thing you're bowing to is God. He punished Israel severely for bowing to their idols, which the Israelites did not view as being God. An example is Ishtar (the "queen of heaven", uh oh!)

In Revelation 22:8-9, John bows to the angel, and the angel IMMEDIATELY corrects him, saying to only worship God. Clearly, the angel is saying that bowing IS worship.

The fact that you will deny what is right in front of your face in Scripture tells us all we need to know about the spirit behind your beliefs. A true believer won't even have to know it's in Scripture - the act of bowing to a heavenly being that isn't God is so OBVIOUSLY wrong to even the most ignorant, most baby of Christians. The fact that this discernment eludes you can only be explained if you really aren't a Christian.

If you really are a believer in Jesus, then something is seriously, seriously wrong, and you need to WAKE UP.

---

Revelation 22:8 doesn't imply that bowing down is automatically worship. It explicitly says "I fell down to worship". Also the angel never said bowing is worship.

8: I, John, am the one who heard and saw these things. And when I had heard and seen them, I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who had been showing them to me. 9: But he said to me, "Don't do that! I am a fellow servant with you and with your fellow prophets and with all who keep the words of this scroll. Worship God!"

In Genesis 33:6-7, we read that Jacob's wives and children bowed before Esau during the family reconciliation. In 1 Kings 1:16 and 23, we read that King David's wife, Bathsheba, and the Prophet Nathan bowed down before the king. Verse 16 says that Bathsheba "bowed and did obeisance to the king." In the book of Acts, the Philippian jailer fell down before the Apostle Paul asking "What must I do to be saved?" Paul did not rebuke the jailer because the jailer was attempting to show respect to the man he earlier treated as a lowlife criminal.

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

I actually think you can solve this issue by contrasting Judas and Peter.

Both knew Jesus was Lord. Both followed Him. Both betrayed Him. It wasn't like Judas didn't see miracles and didn't understand who He was. Judas wasn't stupid. Peter was saying he would never betray Jesus before he did, that's the level of faith he thought he had.

The difference between them wasn't belief, it was repentance.

Judas felt remorse and shame and in part because he knew Jesus was Lord, but he turned inward and despaired. Peter wept, but he returned. One resisted grace, the other cooperated with it. This difference in behavior was after they had faith. That's dead faith vs real faith. One doesn't have works (repentance) the other does.

Peter's return required the will, choosing repentance, enduring shame, and allowing grace to restore him. Anyone who's gone through this knows that's a tremendous amount of effort and work.

Judas turned inward and despaired. One cooperated with grace, the other resisted it. So salvation doesn't hinge on merely knowing or even sincerely believing that Jesus is Lord. Judas had that. It hinges on whether, after failure, a person turns back in repentance and perseveres.

---

Judas never truly believed. Jesus knew this, as seen in John 6:63-64 "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. But there are some of you who do not believe." (For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.)

Jesus also said that Judas was the "son of perdition" who was "doomed to destruction" (John 17:12) This is not how you would describe someone who was a true believer.

Peter did truly believe, but made mistakes. But being true believer, it was inevitable that he would repent.

---

Ah so you are a Calvinist aren't you?

You're defining a "true believer" as someone who inevitably perseveres, and then using Judas's failure to prove he was never a true believer. This is exactly the move I'm pushing back on, it's your go to and you just did it in the post prior to this one. This is the core logic of Calvinism's perseverance of the saints. "If someone doesn't persevere, they were never truly saved".

Then you argue that scripture is saying Judas was "doomed to destruction" in the sense of a divine decision made apart from his own response and willpower, that would also fall neatly into a Calvinist framework where God picks and chooses who he saves. It's an argument that God doesn't merely foreknow who will fall, He chooses who will be saved and who will not. So Judas wasn't tragically lost, but excluded from salvation by design.

---

I'm not necessarily a Calvinist. But I do believe we have to take Scripture at its word and take it seriously. These words about Judas are from Jesus himself - are you saying he's wrong? I believe there is a way where we retain our free will, but our choice is still under God's sovereign will. Like the Trinity, this is too difficult a concept for us to wrap our minds around, and one which perhaps we will understand only when we are in heaven. It's also a deeply philosphical issue that needs its own thread, honestly. But what I can say here is that God KNOWING who will be lost is not necessarily the same thing as God CHOOSING or forcing who will be lost. Or that someone DOOMED to destruction is someone who is CHOSEN or forced for destruction rather than it being their own choice destroying them. Judas was doomed to destruction because God knew his free will would lead him to not believe. In the same way when we see someone who by their own choice is walking a path that is leading them off a cliff, and who won't heed warnings. We can say they are "doomed to destruction" because by their own free will they refuse to listen, and we can see the inevitable outcome.

You should look into Molinism, which is an alternative view to Calvinism, which preserves man's free will and God's sovereignty at the same time.

---

I'm saying your interpretation is wrong, not Jesus. Jesus words about Judas are from free will choices by having faith and then later rejecting it.

---

Where do you get from Jesus' words that Judas had true faith and then later rejected it, as opposed to never having true faith to begin with? There is nothing there that suggests Judas ever truly believed. You are injecting your assumption into it. Jesus clearly says of Judas that he didn't believe and that he would betray him.

---

Doc, I'd like an answer to this. You keep running away from points that show your view is weakly based. And you're not allowing yourself to challenge our own view because of it.

---

My view isn't weakly based. My view is based.

I already told you he had dead faith and made a distinction between dead faith and real faith, just as scripture does. He didn't deny that Jesus was Lord. He knew that, he casted out demons. His belief was real, but he didn't have works (failed to repent), aka dead faith.

"In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead," James 2:17. He's saying if your faith doesn't produce works then its not legit faith, not that faith is nonexistent. Faith can either be alive or dead.

---

Yes, your view is weakly based. You're still not showing us where in Scripture it says Judas was ever a believer. You have Jesus' own words telling us the opposite.

You DO realize that casting out demons is not a sign of true believer, don't you?:

"On that day many will say to me, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?' And then will I declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.'" - Matthew 7:22-23

Doc Holliday said:

---

Quote:

---

Second, there is nothing wrong with bowing to, praying through, and/or kissing an object. That's not worship. That's honor for the person it represents. It's the same as cultures that bow to one another or taking a knee to a girlfriend in proposal, asking a friend to pray for you, and/or kissing a picture of your family.

---

Let me help you out here.

The argument that bowing to, intercession, or kissing an object is worship requires the arguer to claim these actions must be criteria for worship. They don't practice any of those, therefore they've indicted themselves of not worshiping.

People don't realize they've made category errors like this and they get themselves into a pickle.
They'll move to special pleading next.

---

You ever heard of bowing to pray? Jesus as the intercessor?

And your logic here is terrible. Something can be an act of worship, but the absence of it doesn't mean it isn't worship.

Doc Holliday said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

You are trying to use an example of objects God commanded the Israelis to make, but NOT BOW TO, PRAY "THROUGH", KISS, AND GIVE OFFERINGS to, as a tacit approval to make objects and then BOW, PRAY THROUGH, KISS, and GIVE OFFERINGS to them. Complete foolishness. You do realize what happened to that bronze serpent in 2 Kings 18, don't you?:

---

First, Catholics are forbidden to GIVE OFFERINGS to an object.

Second, there is nothing wrong with bowing to, praying through, and/or kissing an object. That's not worship. That's honor for the person it represents. It's the same as cultures that bow to one another or taking a knee to a girlfriend in proposal, asking a friend to pray for you, and/or kissing a picture of your family.

It's truly amazing that you can't understand this. In order to worship, one has to believe that object is God. No Catholic does that. I really feel sorry for your lack of desire to understand.

---

God specifically forbids making objects of any kind and bowing to them. It's in the TEN COMMANDMENTS, in case you forgot. God considers it worship. He never said it's okay as long as you don't believe the thing you're bowing to is God. He punished Israel severely for bowing to their idols, which the Israelites did not view as being God. An example is Ishtar (the "queen of heaven", uh oh!)

In Revelation 22:8-9, John bows to the angel, and the angel IMMEDIATELY corrects him, saying to only worship God. Clearly, the angel is saying that bowing IS worship.

The fact that you will deny what is right in front of your face in Scripture tells us all we need to know about the spirit behind your beliefs. A true believer won't even have to know it's in Scripture - the act of bowing to a heavenly being that isn't God is so OBVIOUSLY wrong to even the most ignorant, most baby of Christians. The fact that this discernment eludes you can only be explained if you really aren't a Christian.

If you really are a believer in Jesus, then something is seriously, seriously wrong, and you need to WAKE UP.

---

Revelation 22:8 doesn't imply that bowing down is automatically worship. It explicitly says "I fell down to worship". Also the angel never said bowing is worship.

8: I, John, am the one who heard and saw these things. And when I had heard and seen them, I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who had been showing them to me. 9: But he said to me, "Don't do that! I am a fellow servant with you and with your fellow prophets and with all who keep the words of this scroll. Worship God!"

In Genesis 33:6-7, we read that Jacob's wives and children bowed before Esau during the family reconciliation. In 1 Kings 1:16 and 23, we read that King David's wife, Bathsheba, and the Prophet Nathan bowed down before the king. Verse 16 says that Bathsheba "bowed and did obeisance to the king." In the book of Acts, the Philippian jailer fell down before the Apostle Paul asking "What must I do to be saved?" Paul did not rebuke the jailer because the jailer was attempting to show respect to the man he earlier treated as a lowlife criminal.

---

Are you also so spiritually dull that you completely forgot about God's Ten Commandments?

Falling down at the feet in reverence is the same as bowing in reverence. You're trying to make a distinction without a real difference. God isn't going to buy that excuse. It's what RC's and Orthodox do to their images. It's what Cornelius did to Peter, and Peter rejected it, just as the angel in Revelation did. Clearly, to any God-loving, honest person, it's obvious that we are not to bow to anyone or anything, especially man-made images, in religious reverence. The bowing to Esau and King David were not done in religious reverence. Social and customary bowing is not bowing in religious reverence. Paul did not rebuke the jailer, because the jailer only fell at his feet - he didn't fall at his feet to give him homage.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

451 AD. Four hundred years after Jesus. Thank you for finally admitting that Mary's bodily assumption is not from Scripture, and thus not apostolic.

And can someone believe that Jesus is really Satan from "typology", because Satan fell to earth "like lightning", and Jesus is also coming to earth "like lightning" as well? Typology is a way to find what you want in the bible by creating it yourself. I can do this with MANY other examples. It's a dangerous and completely foolish way to develop doctrine, especially doctrine that you make necessary for salvation. Mary's bodily assumption was a total invention that crept into Christianity over hundreds of years, as a way to elevate her to the same level as Jesus. Roman Catholicism's Mary is the re-emergence of the pagan mother goddess in a Christian disguise. Your heart inclines towards this kind of wicked corruption of Christianity, and that is a bad, bad sign.

---

St. Epiphanius' classic Panarion ("bread box") or Refutation of All Heresies, written about AD 350, this early Church Father affirms belief in the Assumption:

Like the bodies of the saints, however, she has been held in honor for her character and understanding. And if I should say anything more in her praise, she is like Elijah, who was virgin from his mother's womb, always remained so, and was taken up, but has not seen death (Panarion 79).

Please note that the was decades BEFORE the Catholic Church established the canon in councils like Rome (382), Hippo (393), and Carthage (397/419).

So technically, the belief predates the establishment of the canon of the NT (established by the Catholic Church.)

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

unanimous consensus among the early church fathers that icon veneration was forbidden.
This post of yours is an ALL OUT LIE.

The early church fathers overwhelmingly opposed using any image or statue - anything made by man's hands - in prayer, worship, and liturgy. This is just an incontrovertible fact. And this is exactly what icon veneration involves.

---

You exact quote was "unanimous consensus". That is NOT true! I called you out and had to qualify your statement. Sts. Cyril of Alexander, Basil the Great, Gregory the Great, and John of Damascus all agreed with icon veneration.

Your original quote was a LIE.

---

Proof?
(Waiting for the usual non sequitur eisegesis....)

---

I'm confused by this post. I posted 4 Church fathers that had no issue with Icon veneration - Sts. Cyril of Alexander, Basil the Great, Gregory the Great, and John of Damascus

This shows that there was not "unanimous consensus among the early church fathers."
Many Church fathers never weigh in on the topic.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Yet another CokeBear straw man.

Icon veneration isn't "having pictures in church". It's using those pictures as a "window" to the object being worshiped. It's bowing to, praying to, and kissing the image as if the real object is receiving those acts through the image.

Your repetitive and continual misconception and mischaracterization of concepts really is really annoying and tiring to deal with.

---

That's ironic. Most of us Catholics feel that your "]misconception and mischaracterization" of the Catholic faith is really "annoying and tiring to deal with."

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

God specifically forbids making objects of any kind and bowing to them. It's in the TEN COMMANDMENTS, in case you forgot. God considers it worship. He never said it's okay as long as you don't believe the thing you're bowing to is God. He punished Israel severely for bowing to their idols, which the Israelites did not view as being God. An example is Ishtar (the "queen of heaven", uh oh!)

---

God doesn't consider bowing worship. God considers worship, worship.

Oh no! The "queen of heaven"!!! Sam, FreedomBear, Doc!! Please help me! The protestants have figured us out! What will we Catholics do??

Good gosh! No Catholic believes that Mary is the same as the pagan goddess mentioned in Jerimiah. I know that this has been explained to you many times.

Queen is a Hebraic title given to the mother of the King. I'm sure you would agree that Jesus is the King of Heaven and Earth. Which makes Mary the Queen of Heaven and Earth. No Catholic is worshipping her.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

In Revelation 22:8-9, John bows to the angel, and the angel IMMEDIATELY corrects him, saying to only worship God. Clearly, the angel is saying that bowing IS worship.

---

Talk about post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. John was bowing in worship, not honor, as the bible says. It doesn't mean that ALL bowing is bad:

• David bowing to Saul in 1 Samuel
• Bathsheba bowing to David in 1 Kings
• Solomon bowing to Bathsheba also in 1 Kings

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

The fact that you will deny what is right in front of your face in Scripture tells us all we need to know about the spirit behind your beliefs. A true believer won't even have to know it's in Scripture - the act of bowing to a heavenly being that isn't God is so OBVIOUSLY wrong to even the most ignorant, most baby of Christians. The fact that this discernment eludes you can only be explained if you really aren't a Christian.

---

I, and others, have presented this to you so many times, but you still hang you hat on this. It is sad. It's like watching those ABC After-School specials in the 80's when the racist kid never would accept people of color because he didn't want to understand. Everyone else change but him.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

If you really are a believer in Jesus, then something is seriously, seriously wrong, and you need to WAKE UP.

---

I would suggest that you check your heart. You have so much animosity for what you THINK that Christ's Church teaches, that you can't and won't see the truth.

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

451 AD. Four hundred years after Jesus. Thank you for finally admitting that Mary's bodily assumption is not from Scripture, and thus not apostolic.

And can someone believe that Jesus is really Satan from "typology", because Satan fell to earth "like lightning", and Jesus is also coming to earth "like lightning" as well? Typology is a way to find what you want in the bible by creating it yourself. I can do this with MANY other examples. It's a dangerous and completely foolish way to develop doctrine, especially doctrine that you make necessary for salvation. Mary's bodily assumption was a total invention that crept into Christianity over hundreds of years, as a way to elevate her to the same level as Jesus. Roman Catholicism's Mary is the re-emergence of the pagan mother goddess in a Christian disguise. Your heart inclines towards this kind of wicked corruption of Christianity, and that is a bad, bad sign.

---

St. Epiphanius' classic Panarion ("bread box") or Refutation of All Heresies, written about AD 350, this early Church Father affirms belief in the Assumption:

Like the bodies of the saints, however, she has been held in honor for her character and understanding. And if I should say anything more in her praise, she is like Elijah, who was virgin from his mother's womb, always remained so, and was taken up, but has not seen death (Panarion 79).

Please note that the was decades BEFORE the Catholic Church established the canon in councils like Rome (382), Hippo (393), and Carthage (397/419).

So technically, the belief predates the establishment of the canon of the NT (established by the Catholic Church.)T

---

THREE HUNDRED YEARS after Jesus.

The books that your church accepted as New Testament canon were all written within 70 years of Jesus.

And you think three hundred years after Jesus "predates" your canon. This is the type of ridiculous thinking that your church's views stem from. Do we really need to say more?

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

unanimous consensus among the early church fathers that icon veneration was forbidden.
This post of yours is an ALL OUT LIE.

The early church fathers overwhelmingly opposed using any image or statue - anything made by man's hands - in prayer, worship, and liturgy. This is just an incontrovertible fact. And this is exactly what icon veneration involves.

---

You exact quote was "unanimous consensus". That is NOT true! I called you out and had to qualify your statement. Sts. Cyril of Alexander, Basil the Great, Gregory the Great, and John of Damascus all agreed with icon veneration.

Your original quote was a LIE.

---

Proof?
(Waiting for the usual non sequitur eisegesis....)

---

I'm confused by this post. I posted 4 Church fathers that had no issue with Icon veneration - Sts. Cyril of Alexander, Basil the Great, Gregory the Great, and John of Damascus

This shows that there was not "unanimous consensus among the early church fathers."
Many Church fathers never weigh in on the topic.

---

Yes, you are confused. As I recall, you merely gave their names, but did not provide ANY proof as to what they said that shows they supported icon veneration.

Go ahead, let's see what you think constitutes as "proof" of their support. That's what I was talking about regarding the eisegesis and complete miscomprehension of the concept by you that I was expecting.

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Yet another CokeBear straw man.

Icon veneration isn't "having pictures in church". It's using those pictures as a "window" to the object being worshiped. It's bowing to, praying to, and kissing the image as if the real object is receiving those acts through the image.

Your repetitive and continual misconception and mischaracterization of concepts really is really annoying and tiring to deal with.

---

That's ironic. Most of us Catholics feel that your "]misconception and mischaracterization" of the Catholic faith is really "annoying and tiring to deal with."

---

Except that my "misconception and mischaracterization" are direct citations from your own catechisms, popes, patriarchs, and Doctors of your church.

Everyone knows this. Everyone knows you can't BS your way around them. In fact, any further denying it only makes you guys look even more dishonest and devoid of the spirt of truth.

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

God specifically forbids making objects of any kind and bowing to them. It's in the TEN COMMANDMENTS, in case you forgot. God considers it worship. He never said it's okay as long as you don't believe the thing you're bowing to is God. He punished Israel severely for bowing to their idols, which the Israelites did not view as being God. An example is Ishtar (the "queen of heaven", uh oh!)

---

God doesn't consider bowing worship. God considers worship, worship.

Oh no! The "queen of heaven"!!! Sam, FreedomBear, Doc!! Please help me! The protestants have figured us out! What will we Catholics do??

Good gosh! No Catholic believes that Mary is the same as the pagan goddess mentioned in Jerimiah. I know that this has been explained to you many times.

Queen is a Hebraic title given to the mother of the King. I'm sure you would agree that Jesus is the King of Heaven and Earth. Which makes Mary the Queen of Heaven and Earth. No Catholic is worshipping her.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

In Revelation 22:8-9, John bows to the angel, and the angel IMMEDIATELY corrects him, saying to only worship God. Clearly, the angel is saying that bowing IS worship.

---

Talk about post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. John was bowing in worship, not honor, as the bible says. It doesn't mean that ALL bowing is bad:

• David bowing to Saul in 1 Samuel
• Bathsheba bowing to David in 1 Kings
• Solomon bowing to Bathsheba also in 1 Kings

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

The fact that you will deny what is right in front of your face in Scripture tells us all we need to know about the spirit behind your beliefs. A true believer won't even have to know it's in Scripture - the act of bowing to a heavenly being that isn't God is so OBVIOUSLY wrong to even the most ignorant, most baby of Christians. The fact that this discernment eludes you can only be explained if you really aren't a Christian.

---

I, and others, have presented this to you so many times, but you still hang you hat on this. It is sad. It's like watching those ABC After-School specials in the 80's when the racist kid never would accept people of color because he didn't want to understand. Everyone else change but him.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

If you really are a believer in Jesus, then something is seriously, seriously wrong, and you need to WAKE UP.

---

I would suggest that you check your heart. You have so much animosity for what you THINK that Christ's Church teaches, that you can't and won't see the truth.

---

You can try this dishonest argumentation and lie to yourself all you want. Bowing in social or cultural reverance is completely different than bowing in religious reverence. You're seeing it right in front of your face with the angel in Revelation and Peter, who rejected this sort of reverence, as they rightfully should. God isn't buying your BS, I'm sure. And how desperate you are to continually avoid like the plague God's Ten Commandments that strictly forbid bowing to man-made images. It's like you have this HUGE, intentional blind spot. God considers religious bowing worship. This is plainly obvious to even the dumbest of Christians.

You guys are either really, really dishonest with yourselves and others, or really, really stupid. Honestly, I've NEVER seen people either this spiritually DENSE or people who have gaslit themselves this severely.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

God specifically forbids making objects of any kind and bowing to them. It's in the TEN COMMANDMENTS, in case you forgot. God considers it worship. He never said it's okay as long as you don't believe the thing you're bowing to is God. He punished Israel severely for bowing to their idols, which the Israelites did not view as being God. An example is Ishtar (the "queen of heaven", uh oh!)

---

God doesn't consider bowing worship. God considers worship, worship.

Oh no! The "queen of heaven"!!! Sam, FreedomBear, Doc!! Please help me! The protestants have figured us out! What will we Catholics do??

Good gosh! No Catholic believes that Mary is the same as the pagan goddess mentioned in Jerimiah. I know that this has been explained to you many times.

Queen is a Hebraic title given to the mother of the King. I'm sure you would agree that Jesus is the King of Heaven and Earth. Which makes Mary the Queen of Heaven and Earth. No Catholic is worshipping her.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

In Revelation 22:8-9, John bows to the angel, and the angel IMMEDIATELY corrects him, saying to only worship God. Clearly, the angel is saying that bowing IS worship.

---

Talk about post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. John was bowing in worship, not honor, as the bible says. It doesn't mean that ALL bowing is bad:

• David bowing to Saul in 1 Samuel
• Bathsheba bowing to David in 1 Kings
• Solomon bowing to Bathsheba also in 1 Kings

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

The fact that you will deny what is right in front of your face in Scripture tells us all we need to know about the spirit behind your beliefs. A true believer won't even have to know it's in Scripture - the act of bowing to a heavenly being that isn't God is so OBVIOUSLY wrong to even the most ignorant, most baby of Christians. The fact that this discernment eludes you can only be explained if you really aren't a Christian.

---

I, and others, have presented this to you so many times, but you still hang you hat on this. It is sad. It's like watching those ABC After-School specials in the 80's when the racist kid never would accept people of color because he didn't want to understand. Everyone else change but him.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

If you really are a believer in Jesus, then something is seriously, seriously wrong, and you need to WAKE UP.

---

I would suggest that you check your heart. You have so much animosity for what you THINK that Christ's Church teaches, that you can't and won't see the truth.

---

You can try this dishonest argumentation and lie to yourself all you want. Bowing in social or cultural reverance is completely different than bowing in religious reverence. You're seeing it right in front of your face with the angel in Revelation and Peter, who rejected this sort of reverence, as they rightfully should. God isn't buying your BS, I'm sure. And how desperate you are to continually avoid like the plague God's Ten Commandments that strictly forbid bowing to man-made images. It's like you have this HUGE, intentional blind spot. God considers religious bowing worship. This is plainly obvious to even the dumbest of Christians.

You guys are either really, really dishonest with yourselves and others, or really, really stupid. Honestly, I've NEVER seen people either this spiritually DENSE or people who have gaslit themselves this severely.

---

Exactly.

Exodus 20:4-6 NIV
[4] "You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. [5] You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, [6] but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments."

There is no way to read this command from God, and also believe it's OK to bow down to a statue of Mary, to pay to her, and to ask her for God's blessings, Grace and salvation.

ShooterTX said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

God specifically forbids making objects of any kind and bowing to them. It's in the TEN COMMANDMENTS, in case you forgot. God considers it worship. He never said it's okay as long as you don't believe the thing you're bowing to is God. He punished Israel severely for bowing to their idols, which the Israelites did not view as being God. An example is Ishtar (the "queen of heaven", uh oh!)

---

God doesn't consider bowing worship. God considers worship, worship.

Oh no! The "queen of heaven"!!! Sam, FreedomBear, Doc!! Please help me! The protestants have figured us out! What will we Catholics do??

Good gosh! No Catholic believes that Mary is the same as the pagan goddess mentioned in Jerimiah. I know that this has been explained to you many times.

Queen is a Hebraic title given to the mother of the King. I'm sure you would agree that Jesus is the King of Heaven and Earth. Which makes Mary the Queen of Heaven and Earth. No Catholic is worshipping her.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

In Revelation 22:8-9, John bows to the angel, and the angel IMMEDIATELY corrects him, saying to only worship God. Clearly, the angel is saying that bowing IS worship.

---

Talk about post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. John was bowing in worship, not honor, as the bible says. It doesn't mean that ALL bowing is bad:

• David bowing to Saul in 1 Samuel
• Bathsheba bowing to David in 1 Kings
• Solomon bowing to Bathsheba also in 1 Kings

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

The fact that you will deny what is right in front of your face in Scripture tells us all we need to know about the spirit behind your beliefs. A true believer won't even have to know it's in Scripture - the act of bowing to a heavenly being that isn't God is so OBVIOUSLY wrong to even the most ignorant, most baby of Christians. The fact that this discernment eludes you can only be explained if you really aren't a Christian.

---

I, and others, have presented this to you so many times, but you still hang you hat on this. It is sad. It's like watching those ABC After-School specials in the 80's when the racist kid never would accept people of color because he didn't want to understand. Everyone else change but him.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

If you really are a believer in Jesus, then something is seriously, seriously wrong, and you need to WAKE UP.

---

I would suggest that you check your heart. You have so much animosity for what you THINK that Christ's Church teaches, that you can't and won't see the truth.

---

You can try this dishonest argumentation and lie to yourself all you want. Bowing in social or cultural reverance is completely different than bowing in religious reverence. You're seeing it right in front of your face with the angel in Revelation and Peter, who rejected this sort of reverence, as they rightfully should. God isn't buying your BS, I'm sure. And how desperate you are to continually avoid like the plague God's Ten Commandments that strictly forbid bowing to man-made images. It's like you have this HUGE, intentional blind spot. God considers religious bowing worship. This is plainly obvious to even the dumbest of Christians.

You guys are either really, really dishonest with yourselves and others, or really, really stupid. Honestly, I've NEVER seen people either this spiritually DENSE or people who have gaslit themselves this severely.

---

Exactly.

Exodus 20:4-6 NIV
[4] "You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. [5] You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, [6] but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments."

There is no way to read this command from God, and also believe it's OK to bow down to a statue of Mary, to pay to her, and to ask her for God's blessings, Grace and salvation.

---

There's a reason this commandment completely slips their mind. They've been trained since childhood or whenever they first became Catholic to forget about it. If you look at any Roman Catholic list of the Ten Commandments online, these are what they list:

[ol]

I am the LORD your God. You shall worship the Lord your God and Him only shall you serve.

You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.

Remember to keep holy the Sabbath day.

Honor your father and your mother.

You shall not kill.

You shall not commit adultery.

You shall not steal.

You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

You shall not covet your neighbor's wife.

You shall not covet your neighbor's goods.

[/ol]


Notice anything missing? It's no wonder at all, then, how the Roman Catholics here can boldly claim "but, bowing to images is not worship or idolatry!" It's literally been brainwashed out of them. They're been trained to not read the bible and think critically for themselves, but rather to submit their conscience wholly to a group of fallible men to tell them what to think, and to never question them. It's just like a cult, and their minds being trapped in it is just so, so sad to witness. May God open the eyes of those in this system who really do seek the truth.

Coke Bear said:

---

Good gosh! No Catholic believes that Mary is the same as the pagan goddess mentioned in Jerimiah.

---

Well, there was that whole Amazon synod business and the veneration of the pagan goddess Pachamama. But carry on.

How is it that two simple Orthodox icons can summarize the life of the Theotokos more accurately and completely than all these words?

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

I fully believe that if the real Mary knew what all you Roman Catholics were doing for her, she would feel it is doing her the greatest dishonor imaginable.

---

Your belief is incorrect.

She has appeared to thousands in apparitions that have been documented throughout history. Those apparitions all have approved healing miracles associated with them.

I know your default position on this is that it was a demon or the devil, himself, that is fooling believers; however, the devil cannot heal someone permanently.

Those apparitions have led to the conversions of millions of pagans to Christ. That's not the work of the devil.

Finally, Jesus doesn't get upset when we honor his mother. I believe it makes him happy!

---

Oh, the apparition converted millions, alright. To her, not to Jesus.

The real Mary, or any true messenger from God for that matter, would not have followers dedicate a church in her honor, make sacrifices for sin, offer devotion to her "immaculate heart", or make reparations in order to "console" her.

It is abundantly clear that anyone who can't see this for what it really is, an anti-Christ spirit, is completely lost.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Rooted in their argument about the infallible canon is their claim for an infallible authority to authenticate their unbiblical traditions. They need to establish that the same authority behind the canon is the same authority behind their traditions. You claim authority for the canon, you claim authority to add anything you want to what the original apostles taught. That's how you get from the gospel of grace.... to a gospel of works, an insufficient divine sacrifice requiring sacraments and purgatory to make man "right" with God, and even giving Mary credit for our salvation.

---

You are half correct here.

You are COMPETELY incorrect about the Church's traditions being unbiblical. They are ALL biblical, you just don't accept them.

The part that you are correct about is the fact that the Church does have the infallible authority to discern canon and that means that Scripture is NOT the ONLY sole infallible rule.

This frightens you so much. Because it shatters your false believe in sola scriptura. And if that is false (which it is), it destroys your whole made-up theology.

---

...And it needs to be asked: WHERE are we told that your church has this supposed infallibility to discern the canon? Where and when did God say this? In Scripture? If that's your claim, then your "authority" is mired in a circular argument fallacy.....

---

Can I get an answer to this from any of you who are against sola scriptura? This is just one of the many questions I've asked that never gets answered, but which is vital, because it reveals the fatal flaw in your argument against sola scriptura. Probably why it never gets answered.

From where, and based on what divine revelation from God, does the infallible interpretive authority of the Roman Catholic church over Scripture come? It has to be divinely revealed in order to be infallibly true, does it not? And if you say "from Scripture", then you're making a circular argument, are you not?

So... where?

Doc Holliday said:

---

Quote:

---

Second, there is nothing wrong with bowing to, praying through, and/or kissing an object. That's not worship. That's honor for the person it represents. It's the same as cultures that bow to one another or taking a knee to a girlfriend in proposal, asking a friend to pray for you, and/or kissing a picture of your family.

---

Let me help you out here.

The argument that bowing to, intercession, or kissing an object is worship requires the arguer to claim these actions must be criteria for worship. They don't practice any of those, therefore they've indicted themselves of not worshiping.

People don't realize they've made category errors like this and they get themselves into a pickle.
They'll move to special pleading next.

---

Gotta say, you seem to be walking a fine line here. May not be idol worship but man is it pretty close.

Doc Holliday said:

---

Quote:

---

Second, there is nothing wrong with bowing to, praying through, and/or kissing an object. That's not worship. That's honor for the person it represents. It's the same as cultures that bow to one another or taking a knee to a girlfriend in proposal, asking a friend to pray for you, and/or kissing a picture of your family.

---

Let me help you out here.

The argument that bowing to, intercession, or kissing an object is worship requires the arguer to claim these actions must be criteria for worship. They don't practice any of those, therefore they've indicted themselves of not worshiping.

People don't realize they've made category errors like this and they get themselves into a pickle.
They'll move to special pleading next.

---

Directly from the mouth of God....

Exodus 20:4-5 NIV
[4] "You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. [5] You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,

Can you argue against the words of God? "You shall not bow down to them or worship them...", it seems very clear that God condemns the act of bowing down to a graven image. Strange that Catholics can't read this passage and obey it. They bow to images of Mary and the saints all the time.

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

451 AD. Four hundred years after Jesus. Thank you for finally admitting that Mary's bodily assumption is not from Scripture, and thus not apostolic.

And can someone believe that Jesus is really Satan from "typology", because Satan fell to earth "like lightning", and Jesus is also coming to earth "like lightning" as well? Typology is a way to find what you want in the bible by creating it yourself. I can do this with MANY other examples. It's a dangerous and completely foolish way to develop doctrine, especially doctrine that you make necessary for salvation. Mary's bodily assumption was a total invention that crept into Christianity over hundreds of years, as a way to elevate her to the same level as Jesus. Roman Catholicism's Mary is the re-emergence of the pagan mother goddess in a Christian disguise. Your heart inclines towards this kind of wicked corruption of Christianity, and that is a bad, bad sign.

---

St. Epiphanius' classic Panarion ("bread box") or Refutation of All Heresies, written about AD 350, this early Church Father affirms belief in the Assumption:

Like the bodies of the saints, however, she has been held in honor for her character and understanding. And if I should say anything more in her praise, she is like Elijah, who was virgin from his mother's womb, always remained so, and was taken up, but has not seen death (Panarion 79).

Please note that the was decades BEFORE the Catholic Church established the canon in councils like Rome (382), Hippo (393), and Carthage (397/419).

So technically, the belief predates the establishment of the canon of the NT (established by the Catholic Church.)

---

So someone wrote about it about 300 years after Mary died.
Can you explain how not even one of the authors of the NT ever mentioned her ascending into heaven? Or her virgin birth? Or that Mary was the first sinless person to ever exist? How could Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, Paul, James and the rest forget to mention any of these miraculous things about Mary?
How do Catholics explain the complete absence of Mary and her important roles in salvation, mediation, grace,etc.?? Did the Holy Spirit forget to inspire them to write about her? Did Jesus promise that the comforter would come and He would make them forget vitally important parts of salvation?

What is the catholic explanation for everyone forgetting about this amazingly miraculous woman?

ShooterTX said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Quote:

---

Second, there is nothing wrong with bowing to, praying through, and/or kissing an object. That's not worship. That's honor for the person it represents. It's the same as cultures that bow to one another or taking a knee to a girlfriend in proposal, asking a friend to pray for you, and/or kissing a picture of your family.

---

Let me help you out here.

The argument that bowing to, intercession, or kissing an object is worship requires the arguer to claim these actions must be criteria for worship. They don't practice any of those, therefore they've indicted themselves of not worshiping.

People don't realize they've made category errors like this and they get themselves into a pickle.
They'll move to special pleading next.

---

Directly from the mouth of God....

Exodus 20:4-5 NIV
[4] "You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. [5] You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,

Can you argue against the words of God? "You shall not bow down to them or worship them...", it seems very clear that God condemns the act of bowing down to a graven image. Strange that Catholics can't read this passage and obey it. They bow to images of Mary and the saints all the time.

---

This is where Christian Zionism falls short. The commandment not to make an image for yourself is from the obsolete Mosaic covenant. Muslims stole it from the Jews to the point that in Islam it is a violation to take a photograph of a human being. Christianity rests on Immanuel, God with us. God incarnate is about as direct an image in the form if something on earth that you can get. Christ is not a violation of Exodus 20:4. Icons are not a violation of Exodus 20:4. If this is your line of thinking, go through your house and take every family picture you have and burn it before casting the first stone.

Realitybites said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Quote:

---

Second, there is nothing wrong with bowing to, praying through, and/or kissing an object. That's not worship. That's honor for the person it represents. It's the same as cultures that bow to one another or taking a knee to a girlfriend in proposal, asking a friend to pray for you, and/or kissing a picture of your family.

---

Let me help you out here.

The argument that bowing to, intercession, or kissing an object is worship requires the arguer to claim these actions must be criteria for worship. They don't practice any of those, therefore they've indicted themselves of not worshiping.

People don't realize they've made category errors like this and they get themselves into a pickle.
They'll move to special pleading next.

---

Directly from the mouth of God....

Exodus 20:4-5 NIV
[4] "You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. [5] You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,

Can you argue against the words of God? "You shall not bow down to them or worship them...", it seems very clear that God condemns the act of bowing down to a graven image. Strange that Catholics can't read this passage and obey it. They bow to images of Mary and the saints all the time.

---

This is where Christian Zionism falls short. The commandment not to make an image for yourself is from the obsolete Mosaic covenant. Muslims stole it from the Jews to the point that in Islam it is a violation to take a photograph of a human being. Christianity rests on Immanuel, God with us. God incarnate is about as direct an image in the form if something on earth that you can get. Christ is not a violation of Exodus 20:4. Icons are not a violation of Exodus 20:4. If this is your line of thinking, go through your house and take every family picture you have and burn it before casting the first stone.

---

This is one of the ten commandments.... are you saying that murder, stealing, adultery, are all acceptable now?
Idolatry is not something that is no longer a sin. That is a very stupid argument to make.
Idolatry, sexual immorality, theft, murder... these were all parts of the Mosiaic law. Only a fool would say that these are now acceptable under the new covenant.

ShooterTX said:

---

This is one of the ten commandments.... are you saying that murder, stealing, adultery, are all acceptable now?
Idolatry is not something that is no longer a sin. That is a very stupid argument to make.
Idolatry, sexual immorality, theft, murder... these were all parts of the Mosiaic law. Only a fool would say that these are now acceptable under the new covenant.

---

The fourth commandment is also part of the ten commandments.

Do you observe it from sundown Friday through sundown Saturday?

If not, what is your biblical basis not to do so? Chapter and verse please, all of you who aren't Seventh Day Adventists.

God's moral law does not change. It predated its codification in the ten commandments. It predated the Mosaic Covenant. It post dates both.

I'm saying that the form of Christianity that you are familiar with is incapable of understanding these basic things.

Idolatry is still forbidden. That idolatry is forbidden whether it takes the form of a statue of Baal, College Football, or an iPhone. Christian worship and veneration is not idolatry.

Realitybites said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

This is one of the ten commandments.... are you saying that murder, stealing, adultery, are all acceptable now?
Idolatry is not something that is no longer a sin. That is a very stupid argument to make.
Idolatry, sexual immorality, theft, murder... these were all parts of the Mosiaic law. Only a fool would say that these are now acceptable under the new covenant.

---

The fourth commandment is also part of the ten commandments.

Do you observe it from sundown Friday through sundown Saturday?

If not, what is your biblical basis not to do so? Chapter and verse please, all of you who aren't Seventh Day Adventists.

God's moral law does not change. It predated its codification in the ten commandments. It predated the Mosaic Covenant. It post dates both.

I'm saying that the form of Christianity that you are familiar with is incapable of understanding these basic things.

Idolatry is still forbidden. That idolatry is forbidden whether it takes the form of a statue of Baal, College Football, or an iPhone. Christian worship and veneration is not idolatry.

---

So a statue of Baal is wrong, but a statue of Mary is good??

Explain that one.

Realitybites said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

This is one of the ten commandments.... are you saying that murder, stealing, adultery, are all acceptable now?
Idolatry is not something that is no longer a sin. That is a very stupid argument to make.
Idolatry, sexual immorality, theft, murder... these were all parts of the Mosiaic law. Only a fool would say that these are now acceptable under the new covenant.

---

The fourth commandment is also part of the ten commandments.

Do you observe it from sundown Friday through sundown Saturday?

If not, what is your biblical basis not to do so? Chapter and verse please, all of you who aren't Seventh Day Adventists.

God's moral law does not change. It predated its codification in the ten commandments. It predated the Mosaic Covenant. It post dates both.

I'm saying that the form of Christianity that you are familiar with is incapable of understanding these basic things.

Idolatry is still forbidden. That idolatry is forbidden whether it takes the form of a statue of Baal, College Football, or an iPhone. Christian worship and veneration is not idolatry.

---

There is moral law and then there is ceremonial law and sacrificial law.
The new covenant replaced the ceremonial & sacrificial laws, but not the moral laws.
Idolatry is a moral law.
Observing the sabbath from Friday night to Saturday night is ceremonial law.

Do you understand it now?

The problem is that you have chosen to hold a Jewish and Muslim view of idolatry. A pre-God With Us view of idolatry. Not surprising, I guess. Yes, having a statue of Mary is OK and one of Baal is not. Furthermore, peeling off one of the ten commandments and voiding it as ceremonial is incorrect

Doc Holliday said:

---

I actually think you can solve this issue by contrasting Judas and Peter.

Both knew Jesus was Lord. Both followed Him. Both betrayed Him. It wasn't like Judas didn't see miracles and didn't understand who He was. Judas wasn't stupid. Peter was saying he would never betray Jesus before he did, that's the level of faith he thought he had.

The difference between them wasn't belief, it was repentance.

Judas felt remorse and shame and in part because he knew Jesus was Lord, but he turned inward and despaired. Peter wept, but he returned. One resisted grace, the other cooperated with it. This difference in behavior was after they had faith. That's dead faith vs real faith. One doesn't have works (repentance) the other does.

Peter's return required the will, choosing repentance, enduring shame, and allowing grace to restore him. Anyone who's gone through this knows that's a tremendous amount of effort and work.

Judas turned inward and despaired. One cooperated with grace, the other resisted it. So salvation doesn't hinge on merely knowing or even sincerely believing that Jesus is Lord. Judas had that. It hinges on whether, after failure, a person turns back in repentance and perseveres.

---

Well said

Realitybites said:

---

ShooterTX said:

---

This is one of the ten commandments.... are you saying that murder, stealing, adultery, are all acceptable now?
Idolatry is not something that is no longer a sin. That is a very stupid argument to make.
Idolatry, sexual immorality, theft, murder... these were all parts of the Mosiaic law. Only a fool would say that these are now acceptable under the new covenant.

---

The fourth commandment is also part of the ten commandments.

Do you observe it from sundown Friday through sundown Saturday?

If not, what is your biblical basis not to do so? Chapter and verse please, all of you who aren't Seventh Day Adventists.

God's moral law does not change. It predated its codification in the ten commandments. It predated the Mosaic Covenant. It post dates both.

I'm saying that the form of Christianity that you are familiar with is incapable of understanding these basic things.

Idolatry is still forbidden. That idolatry is forbidden whether it takes the form of a statue of Baal, College Football, or an iPhone. Christian worship and veneration is not idolatry.

---

Welll said

Realitybites said:

---

The problem is that you have chosen to hold a Jewish and Muslim view of idolatry. A pre-God With Us view of idolatry. Not surprising, I guess. Yes, having a statue of Mary is OK and one of Baal is not. Furthermore, peeling off one of the ten commandments and voiding it as ceremonial is incorrect

---

This has nothing to do with Islam. That is a stupid and inaccurate comment.

So you think that Jesus changed the rules on idolatry? Show me that scripture. Show me where Jesus taught that idolatry is now OK.