The Shroud of Turin

[quantumfaith]

Don't you see, Ann...we can invent new words, and as long as the person that creates the doctrine is far enough up the spiritual totem pole...it's all good!

You might not be able to worship a piece of wood, but you can genuflect, or is it venerate/adorate/gesticulate//germinate/pontificate/rastafarianate/nothanksIjustate -- and that's just fine. As long as Pops says its fine...


Ridiculous assertion, assuming facts not in evidence.

 

[BillySunday1935]

1. Sola Scriptura state that scripture is the SOLE authority regarding faith and morals for the Christian.

2. Nowhere in scripture does scripture say that about itself.

3. Hence, Sola Scriptura is false.

Not very objective.

Isaiah 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

This verse is as applicable in the NT as it is in the OT.
If applied correctly we would conclude there is no light in you for you believe not in sola scriptura, that you do not speak according to "this word."

Well, neither that verse nor any other in scripture states that scripture is the SOLE authority regarding faith and morals for the Christian. One would think that if scripture were that authority it would certainly say that it is. It does not.

 

[BillySunday1935]

"Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary, 1859 edition"

Yeah, real good source material there...

Well, I liked it. Much better than Strongs.

 

[BillySunday1935]

Your opinion may say "it is garbage," but that is simply opinion.
To prove it wrong, you would have to state it as a universal negative, and it would be impossible to prove it wrong. That is my point which I have made three times (at least now), but you don't seem to get that. If you can prove it wrong using scientific data then please do so. I would like to see your evidence.

Oh help me Father...raying:

I don't have to prove it wrong. I didn't posit it - you did. I am not required to defend a position to which I do not hold. You however, if you wish to maintain even a shred of credibility, should be able to. And stop with the un-known quantity pap. These relics are a known quantity.

Did you know that if you could gather all the pieces of wood in the world that have been blessed by various priests and bishops [well if they have been blessed, then we know how many there are – the Catholic Church is very good at keeping track of their relics], and have been claimed to be a part of the cross that Christ was crucified on, you could build a mansion?

a.We have a known quantity of relics
b.Thus, they can and have already been counted, measured, and catalogued
c.We have a premise that there exists so many pieces of wood from the cross of Christ, that a mansion can be built from them
d.That premise requires proof if it is to be believed.
e.There exists an investigation into this premise
f.That investigation has shown the premise to be false

There exists no ambiguity in the problem statement – it’s not some nebulous issue beyond the reach of the mind of man.

Please give me a break from this pseudo-intellectual metaphysical pablum. I understand philosophical logic as-well-as symbolic logic and your arguments are patently absurd.

‡ Peace ‡

 

[annsni]

Don't you see, Ann...we can invent new words, and as long as the person that creates the doctrine is far enough up the spiritual totem pole...it's all good!

You might not be able to worship a piece of wood, but you can genuflect, or is it venerate/adorate/gesticulate//germinate/pontificate/rastafarianate/nothanksIjustate -- and that's just fine. As long as Pops says its fine...



Hence the gist of the problems. When one adds to the book that God said not to add to...one encounters lots of problems...not the least of which is that you just can't nail down an objective standard of truth.

Thanks rbell. I can always count on you. :tongue3: :wavey:

 

[annsni]

[1. Sola Scriptura state that scripture is the SOLE authority regarding faith and morals for the Christian.

2. Nowhere in scripture does scripture say that about itself.

3. Hence, Sola Scriptura is false.

There's my objective standard of truth...

The Catholic church claims to be the one and only church.

The Scriptures never mention the Catholic church.

Therefore the Catholic church is not a true church.

 

[annsni]

Well, at least we/they know what those words mean. And if I were Ann, I would find out what they mean before building a completely nonsensical argument based upon ignorance, arrogance, and a complete lack of intellectual rigor.

Billy - Can I ask you what your experience with the Catholic church is? I'll tell you mine:

Age newborn to 7.5 - Catholic - baptized and at church every Sunday - parents are Irish Catholic so we're talking generations of Catholic.

Age 12-18 - Catholic school education - St. Patrick's RC School for 7-8th grades and Holy Family Diocesan High School for 9-12 grades

Age 14 to the present - a very close and dear friend who became a cantor in the Catholic church who's father is a deacon and who's ex-husband is a deacon and now on the road to becoming a priest. We also are close to her father and her ex-husband.

SOOOO - how about you? Internet searches or personal experience?

 

[rbell]

Well, at least we/they know what those words mean. And if I were Ann, I would find out what they mean before building a completely nonsensical argument based upon ignorance, arrogance, and a complete lack of intellectual rigor.

Might I quote the great Alive in Christ here...

Catholics and Catholic sympathisers (even Catholics posing as Southern Baptists )...have consistently advocated adoration directed towards others than God Almighty.

Mary. Dead christians. Supposed *super duper* specially *holy* dead christians.

And dont come back with some sort of absurd and ridiculous *word games*, such as...

"Why, its not "Worship"...its "Veneration"!

No...we wont fall for that. We are "people of the Book". The scriptures. We know better.

A pile of *you know what* stinks no matter what one calls that pile.

50,000 comedians out of work and you gotta try your hand at stand-up.

Actually, I was seated at the time. But I'll be here all week. Be sure and tip your waitress.

I think the above statement was meant for Martin Luther...

Still steamed over that "council of trent," I see...

1. Sola Scriptura state that scripture is the SOLE authority regarding faith and morals for the Christian.
2. Nowhere in scripture does scripture say that about itself.
3. Hence, Sola Scriptura is false.

There's my objective standard of truth...

Your "objective standard," by its own admission, makes the claim that God's word is an incomplete standard of truth. If it were complete, why would you choose to add to it?

Oh...I'm sorry, I forgot to ask: Were you speaking ex Cathedra?

Fear not rbell.

Never do...I've got God's word to sustain me. It's pretty cool...'cause I don't even have to add the church fathers, mothers, or crazy uncles to it...all by itself, it stands...

 

[DHK]

a.We have a known quantity of relics

How many are there?
Does that include all the ones blessed by St. Thomas when he went to India and millions of superstitious have to this day. Did you count them too? How many are there, and how do you know? Did you go to every single Catholic in the world and ask each one if they have one?

b.Thus, they can and have already been counted, measured, and catalogued.

Prove it. Where is your evidence.

c.We have a premise that there exists so many pieces of wood from the cross of Christ, that a mansion can be built from them

That is correct.

d.That premise requires proof if it is to be believed.

It requires proof if it is to be denied. I can make any statement I want. If you don't like it then prove me wrong. Otherwise my statement stands.

e.There exists an investigation into this premise

Good. How far has your investigation gotten? Have you even started?

f.That investigation has shown the premise to be false

You haven't shown any investigation that hasn't demonstrated anything yet. You haven't proved a thing.

There exists no ambiguity in the problem statement – it’s not some nebulous issue beyond the reach of the mind of man.

An authoritative statement was made: first by Calvin, and then altered by myself. It is not nebulous. But you are frustrated because you have no way of proving it false.

Please give me a break from this pseudo-intellectual metaphysical pablum. I understand philosophical logic as-well-as symbolic logic and your arguments are patently absurd.

Nothing I said is false. Your arguments are absurd because you can't continue a logical conversation or win a logical debate. That is also proven in your conversation with any Baptist and lame Catholic arguments.

 

[BillySunday1935]

The Catholic church claims to be the one and only church.

The Scriptures never mention the Catholic church.

Therefore the Catholic church is not a true church.

No - and scipture never mentions the word Trinity, the books that should be included in the New Testament, or a host of other items that you most likely believe. Which is precisely my point. Everything in the bible is true, but not everything is in the bible.

 

[annsni]

No - and scipture never mentions the word Trinity, the books that should be included in the New Testament, or a host of other items that you most likely believe. Which is precisely my point. Everything in the bible is true, but not everything is in the bible.

Yet worship is a large part of Scripture and you yet can show me where God approves, directs or commends bending your knee to an object.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Yet worship is a large part of Scripture and you yet can show me where God approves, directs or commends bending your knee to an object.

didn't people bow before the ark of the covenant. And isnt that an object? And doesn't it have engraving of Seraphim on the lid? And wasn't it made by the hands of a specific Hebrew in Moses' camp? Just curious.

 

[BillySunday1935]

How many are there?
Does that include all the ones blessed by St. Thomas when he went to India and millions of superstitious have to this day. Did you count them too? How many are there, and how do you know? Did you go to every single Catholic in the world and ask each one if they have one?

Prove it. Where is your evidence.

I provided you with the study - get off of your tuccus and look at it if you wish to know. I'm not going to do your homework for you.

It requires proof if it is to be denied. I can make any statement I want. If you don't like it then prove me wrong. Otherwise my statement stands.

Oh yes - in the DHK universe perhaps.

Good. How far has your investigation gotten? Have you even started?

You haven't shown any investigation that hasn't demonstrated anything yet. You haven't proved a thing.

See the above...

An authoritative statement was made: first by Calvin, and then altered by myself. It is not nebulous. But you are frustrated because you have no way of proving it false.

I'm not frustrated on that account. However, my tollerance for twaddle gets lower as I grow older.

Nothing I said is false. Your arguments are absurd because you can't continue a logical conversation or win a logical debate. That is also proven in your conversation with any Baptist and lame Catholic arguments.

Logical conversation is the operative phrase here. If you provide some, then I'll converse with you. As far as debate goes... your MO here and everywhere that I've seen, is always the same...claim something as authoritative and absolute truth, and then jump up and down screaming prove me wrong else I am correct. Good luck with that...

"Who are you going to believe - me, or your own eyes?" Chico Marx

‡ Peace ‡

 

[BillySunday1935]

Yet worship is a large part of Scripture and you yet can show me where God approves, directs or commends bending your knee to an object.

True. However, scripture does not preclude the practice in the sense of this topic. (I.e. not idolatry) In addition to ThinkingStuff's examples, there are several places where scripture does show bowing/kneeling as an accepted practice.

"In an interesting passage the verb is used both of "worship" and of "bowing" without an attitude of worship. After Naaman’s healing and his conversion to the monotheistic worship of the Lord (II Kgs 5:17), the Syrian officer asked Elisha, "In this matter may the Lord pardon your servant: when my master (i.e. the king) goes into the house of Rimmon to worship there, leaning on my arm, and I bow myself in the house of Rimmon, when I bow myself in the house of Rimmon, the Lord pardon your servant in this matter" (II Kgs 5:18, RSV). Elisha did not object and said, "Go in peace."

A problem passage is Gen 47:31 where Jacob before dying "bowed himself upon the head of the bed (mitta)." The LXX, however, reads, "And Israel worshiped, leaning on the top of his staff"’ rendering the consonants as matteh "staff." The Syriac and Itala agree; Heb 11:21 cites the LXX. In this context Speiser suggests, "The term ‘to bow low’ need not signify here anything more than a gesture of mute appreciation...." Cf. also I Kgs 1:47 where the dying David bows down in bed."

(http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/prostration_heb.aspx)

‡ Peace ‡

 

[Revmitchell]

Repeating false comparisons does not add to credibility.

 

[DHK]

I provided you with the study - get off of your tuccus and look at it if you wish to know. I'm not going to do your homework for you.

A study that is flawed from the beginning. Have you read it yourself?

Logical conversation is the operative phrase here. If you provide some, then I'll converse with you. As far as debate goes... your MO here and everywhere that I've seen, is always the same...claim something as authoritative and absolute truth, and then jump up and down screaming prove me wrong else I am correct. Good luck with that...

If you can't prove a statement wrong, and then assert that it is true, you have a serious problem. Do you have a habit of disseminating false information?

 

[BillySunday1935]

Billy - Can I ask you what your experience with the Catholic church is? I'll tell you mine:

Age newborn to 7.5 - Catholic - baptized and at church every Sunday - parents are Irish Catholic so we're talking generations of Catholic.

Age 12-18 - Catholic school education - St. Patrick's RC School for 7-8th grades and Holy Family Diocesan High School for 9-12 grades

Age 14 to the present - a very close and dear friend who became a cantor in the Catholic church who's father is a deacon and who's ex-husband is a deacon and now on the road to becoming a priest. We also are close to her father and her ex-husband.

SOOOO - how about you? Internet searches or personal experience?

You have an interesting background. Here' mine.

Born into a Southern Baptist family (Scotch/Irish) – North Florida

Age 7 – forced into joining Faith Baptist Church – went to church every Wednesday night and Sunday. I did regular Sunday school, participated in the RA’s, vacation bible school, revivals, etc.

There I was taught that the Catholic Church was the Whore of Babylon, the Pope was the anti-Christ, yada-yada, and I believed all of it. (And why wouldn’t I?)

Personal experience - I have a few Catholic colleagues with whom I have had many discussions about their religious beliefs over the years. I've done my own research into the history of the Church. I no longer believe my Baptist indoctrination about the Catholic Church. (How can I?)

There you have it.

‡ Peace ‡

 

[BillySunday1935]

A study that is flawed from the beginning. Have you read it yourself?

If you can't prove a statement wrong, and then assert that it is true, you have a serious problem. Do you have a habit of disseminating false information?

________________

:sleep:

 

[DHK]

Don't you see, Ann...we can invent new words, and as long as the person that creates the doctrine is far enough up the spiritual totem pole...it's all good!

You might not be able to worship a piece of wood, but you can genuflect, or is it venerate/adorate/gesticulate//germinate/pontificate/rastafarianate/nothanksIjustate -- and that's just fine. As long as Pops says its fine...


Ridiculous assertion, assuming facts not in evidence.

The facts are in evidence.
The Bible commands that we are to worship God and him alone. All other worship is idolatry. That fact is clearly pointed out in the Ten Commandments. Any one with an understanding of the Ten Commandments would comprehend that one basic fact. Worship belongs to God alone.

2. The Catholic Church has invented words to circumvent that command.
The words are: latria, dulia, hyper-dulia.
These distinctions are not in the Bible. These are facts. They are not assumed. They are in evidence.
To pray before a statue of a dead saint is still worship.
To pray to a dead saint is still worship.
To pray to any image is still worship.
In fact all of the above is idolatry.

These are facts that are in existence as defined by the Bible, and denied by the RCC. They are defended by the RCC because they have taken the word "worship," and re-defined it. Worship is still worship, whether praying to God, or idolatry--praying to another, whether that person be alive or dead, or whether it be an image. Worship belongs only to God, and prayer is worship.

 

[BillySunday1935]

Repeating false comparisons does not add to credibility.

No. But an accusatory statement without substantiation most certainly diminishes yours.