Is Veneration of the Saints something that is allowed by God?

Nope!!!!! Again, Rev. 5:8 proves you are in error. You have no idea what or who I worship and as a Catholic I am forbidden to worship saints. Educate yourself!

 

Oh please, the heresies that are taught in the Baptist faith tradition are numerous. How you can follow one man as against following the wisdom and teachings of the Universal Christian Church that has been around since the beginning of Christendom is beyond me.

 

We hold with and teach the true Gospel of Jesus, while Rome does not!

 

There were saved Catholics in RCC, as God still kept Hos own with true Gospel, but RCC officially went Apostate at Council of Trent!

 

We can show them why what they practice is in fact idolatrous without misrepresenting their views. It is not misrepresenting their views to say that what they are do is idolatry and giving worship to creatures, but it would be misrepresenting their views to say they consider what they do to be worship.

John Calvin wrote, “But it is necessary to attend to the observation with which I set out—viz. that unless everything peculiar to divinity is confined to God alone, he is robbed of his honour and his worship is violated. It may be proper here more particularly to attend to the subtleties which superstition employs. In revolting to strange gods, it avoids the appearance of abandoning the Supreme God, or reducing him to the same rank with others. It gives him the highest place, but at the same time surrounds him with a tribe of minor deities, among whom it portions out his peculiar offices. In this way, though in a dissembling and crafty manner, the glory of the Godhead is dissected, and not allowed to remain entire. In the same way the people of old, both Jews and Gentiles, placed an immense crowd in subordination to the father and ruler of the gods, and gave them, according to their rank, to share with the supreme God in the government of heaven and earth. In the same way, too, for some ages past, departed saints have been exalted to partnership with God, to be worshipped, invoked, and lauded in his stead. And yet we do not even think that the majesty of God is obscured by this abomination, whereas it is in a great measure suppressed and extinguished—all that we retain being a frigid opinion of his supreme power. At the same time, being deluded by these entanglements, we go astray after divers gods. 2. The distinction of what is called δυλια and λατρια was invented for the very purpose of permitting divine honours to be paid to angels and dead men with apparent impunity. For it is plain that the worship which Papists pay to saints differs in no respect from the worship of God: for this worship is paid without distinction; only when they are pressed they have recourse to the evasion, that what belongs to God is kept unimpaired, because they leave him λατρια. But since the question relates not to the word, but the thing, how can they be allowed to sport at will with a matter of the highest moment? But not to insist on this, the utmost they will obtain by their distinction is, that they give worship to God, and service to the others. For λατρεὶα in Greek has the same meaning as worship in Latin; whereas δουλεὶα properly
means service, though the words are sometimes used in Scripture indiscriminately. But granting that the distinction is invariably preserved, the thing to be inquired into is the meaning of each. Δουλεὶα unquestionably means service, and λατρεὶα worship. But no man doubts that to serve is something higher than to worship. For it were often a hard thing to serve him whom you would not refuse to reverence. It is, therefore, an unjust division to assign the greater to the saints and leave the less to God. But several of the ancient fathers observed this distinction. What if they did, when all men see that it is not only improper, but utterly frivolous?
3. Laying aside subtleties, let us examine the thing. When Paul reminds the Galatians of what they were before they came to the knowledge of Gods he says that they “did service unto them which by nature are no gods,” (Gal. 4:8). Because he does not say λατρια, was their superstition excusable? This superstition, to which he gives the name of δυλια, he condemns as much as if he had given it the name of λατρια. When Christ repels Satan’s insulting proposal with the words, “It is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve,” (Mt. 4:10), there was no question of λατρια. For all that Satan asked was προσκὺνεσις (obeisance). In like manners when John is rebuked by the angel for falling on his knees before him (Rev. 19:10; 22:8, 9), we ought not to suppose that John had so far forgotten himself as to have intended to transfer the honour due to God alone to an angel. But because it was impossible that a worship connected with religion should not savour somewhat of divine worship, he could not προσκὺνει̑ν (do obeisance to) the angel without derogating from the glory of God. True, we often read that men were worshipped; but that was, if I may so speak, civil honour. The case is different with religious honour, which, the moment it is conjoined with worship, carries profanation of the divine honour along with it. The same thing may be seen in the case of Cornelius (Acts 10:25). He had not made so little progress in piety as not to confine supreme worship to God alone. Therefore, when he prostrates himself before Peter, he certainly does it not with the intention of adoring him instead of God. Yet Peter sternly forbids him. And why, but just because men never distinguish so accurately between the worship of God and the creatures as not to transfer promiscuously to the creature that which belongs only to God. Therefore, if we would have one God, let us remember that we can never appropriate the minutest portion of his glory without retaining what is his due. Accordingly, when Zechariah discourses concerning the repairing of the Church, he distinctly says not only that there would be one God, but also that he would have only one name—the reason being, that he might have nothing in common with idols...He has been pleased to prescribe in his Law what is lawful and right, and thus restrict men to a certain rule, lest any should allow themselves to devise a worship of their own. But as it is inexpedient to burden the reader by mixing up a variety of topics, I do not now dwell on this one. Let it suffice to remember, that whatever offices of piety are bestowed anywhere else than on God alone, are of the nature of sacrilege. First, superstition attached divine honours to the sun and stars, or to idols: afterwards ambition followed—ambition which, decking man in the spoils of God, dared to profane all that was sacred. And though the principle of worshipping a supreme Deity continued to be held, still the practice was to sacrifice promiscuously to genii and minor gods, or departed heroes: so prone is the descent to this vice of communicating to a crowd that which God strictly claims as his own peculiar right!” (Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book I, Chapter 12)

 

Many Catholics cross over from venerating to actually worshiping ping Mary!

 

I know that you would not say you worship the saints. But it is not what we say we are doing that counts, but the reality of what we actually do. God is He who gets to define what counts as a form of worship and doesn’t. One does not have to call what they do worship in order for it to be worship. I know that Rome distinguishes between veneration and adoration. I know Rome says adoration is the worship due to God alone. I know they say they do not pay adoration to the saints, but only venerate and invoke them. But what I am arguing is that veneration and invocation according to Scripture are forms of worship. I also consider a lot of what many Protestants do nowadays as legitimate idolatry, though they would not call it that.

 

Many Catholics actually do worship Mary!

 

And even if what do not admit it they do. They may say, “We do not worship Mary,” not considering what they do to be idolatry or worship, but it is. Who are we to invoke and call upon? Is it not God alone? Is not invocation a form of worship?

 

And if anybody worships ANYBODY or ANYTHING other than God - they are idolators.
The Catholic Church condemns this practice and always has.

there are bad apples in every Protestant sect as well - and I'm sure you would condemn their actions . . .

 

Praying to her to intercede and to intervene is idol worship!

 

Do you pray to Mary to intercede for you, to forgive you then?

 

Show me where the Bible states that asking a fellow member of the Body of Christ to pray for you is "idol worship".

Chapter and Verse, please . . .

 

To intercede, absolutely - just as I would ask ANY member of the Body of Christ to pray for me.

Why would I ask her to forgive me?
She doesn't have that power.

 

Trying to speak to the dead is necromancy.

 

WRONG.
Seeking information FROM the dead is necromancy.

Besides - those in Heaven in the presence of Almighty God are not "dead".
They are MORE alive that YOU are.

Heb. 12:1 says that they are "... so great a cloud of witnesses."
A witness sees and hears things.

A dead witness is just a paperweight . . .

 

Ergo you just made Jesus and Peter necromancers...

John 11:32-44 ---> Now when Mary came to where Jesus was and saw him, she fell at his feet, saying to him, “Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died.” When Jesus saw her weeping, and the Jews who had come with her also weeping, he was deeply moved in his spirit and greatly troubled. And he said, “Where have you laid him?” They said to him, “Lord, come and see.” Jesus wept. So the Jews said, “See how he loved him!” But some of them said, “Could not he who opened the eyes of the blind man also have kept this man from dying?” Then Jesus, deeply moved again, came to the tomb. It was a cave, and a stone lay against it. Jesus said, “Take away the stone.” Martha, the sister of the dead man, said to him, “Lord, by this time there will be an odor, for he has been dead four days.” Jesus said to her, "Did I not tell you that if you believed you would see the glory of God?” So they took away the stone. And Jesus lifted up his eyes and said, “Father, I thank you that you have heard me. I knew that you always hear me, but I said this on account of the people standing around, that they may believe that you sent me.” When he had said these things, he cried out with a loud voice, “Lazarus, come out.” The man who had died came out, his hands and feet bound with linen strips, and his face wrapped with a cloth. Jesus said to them, “Unbind him, and let him go.”


Acts 9:36-43 ---> Now there was at Joppa a certain disciple named Tabitha, which by interpretation is called Dorcas: this woman was full of good works and alms deeds which she did. And it came to pass in those days, that she was sick, and died: whom when they had washed, they laid her in a"Now there was at Joppa a certain disciple named Tabitha, which by interpretation is called Dorcas: this woman was full of good works and alms deeds which she did. And it came to pass in those days, that she was sick, and died: whom when they had washed, they laid her in an upper chamber. And forasmuch as Lydda was nigh to Joppa, and the disciples had heard that Peter was there, they sent unto him two men, desiring him that he would not delay to come to them. Then Peter arose and went with them. When he was come, they brought him into the upper chamber: and all the widows stood by him weeping, and shewing the coats and garments which Dorcas made, while she was with them. But Peter put them all forth, and kneeled down, and prayed; and turning him to the body said, 'Tabitha, arise.' And she opened her eyes: and when she saw Peter, she sat up. And he gave her his hand, and lifted her up, and when he had called the saints and widows, presented her alive. And it was known throughout all Joppa; and many believed in the Lord. And it came to pass, that he tarried many days in Joppa with one Simon a tanner.

 

In order to make this assertion, you would need to demonstrate that these people believe, ontologically, that Mary is a God.

 

Usually they will argue what they are doing is not prayer, but in reality as to the sense of what they do it is form. They say they invoke Mary, not pray to her. But as to the nature and essence of prayer is not invoking (calling upon) Mary really praying to her?

“Will he delight himself in the Almighty, And call upon God at all times?” (Job 27:10 ASV)

What is it that the Psalmist does in Psalm 5:2? Is it not invoke or call upon God?

“Hearken unto the voice of my cry, my King, and my God; For unto thee do I pray.” (Psalm 5:2 ASV)

What is this crying to God, but calling upon Him, calling upon His name?