Featured The Biblical Basis of 10 Catholic Distinctives

I am not sure of your post as you created a huge misquote of me. But looking through the amalgamation of my words and yours I'll simply respond with rhis:

It is by faith that we experience the healing of God. We repeatedly read this in Scripture.

The woman touches the fabric of Jesus' clothing and is healed. Jesus tells her that it was her faith - not His clothes - that healed.

Many Catholics are Christians. Their dependence on holy water and relics does not negate their faith.

I do find it interesting that the issue is not what is experienced but how.


Let me ask you- if I have experienced the same miracle of healing by prayer and faith then exactly why do I need to use holy water?

The use of holy water and relics seems to serve as objects to act as crutches for those who lack faith. Kinda like a child feels safe with a stuffed animal.


There are no instances in Scripture where Jesus actually healed by the use of holy water. But those weak in the Chriatian faith cannot believe Jesus could possibly heal without it....faith can't be enough because faith cannot be adequately controlled.

So they read their already held errors into the Bible.


The fact that you do not recognize that you have done this (we all do to a degree) is evidence against your proficiency in your claimed profession.

 

Ultimately there are a couple of problems with the Catholic use of holy water and relics -

1. As the OP has proven, there is no Biblical reference that corresponds with the Catholic use of holy water.

But there is an abundance of evidence that the Catholic use of "holy water" mirrors Roman (and prior to that Greek) paganism.

The only way to relate the Catholic use of holy water to Scripture is to start with the presupposed Catholic belief.

Even with relics, the OT example of the man touching Elisha's bones testified to the prophet (a verification of God's Word through the prophet). His bones were not removed in order to keep Isralites alive. The significance is fulfilled in Christ.

2. Christians do not deny the power of God. We know God still heals.

But where Christians attribute healing to God by faith, where we pray to make our requests known, Catholics take a different approach.

I attribute healings I have observed to God as answered prayer. Scripture states we have not because we ask not. Scripture simply tells us to pray and have faith.

Catholics, however, attribute healings to visiting statues, touching relics, and using holy water.

One can probably rightly argue that in both instances healing is by faith and by God. The best case is that Catholics need "crutches" because without them they lack faith.




I had looked forward to @Deadworm being here as a former Catholic and academic. I thought he would have studied the early church writings and therefore could help explain to Catholics the differences between Catholic practices and the Early Church (most often Catholics extract comments to "prove" their case). For example, he would have understood the difference between the early church practice and the Catholic Eucharist.

I no longer hold that expectation as the member appears to hold too many Catholic presuppositions. Rather than being a former Catholic the member appears to be a Catholic regardless of the denomination now attended.



I appreciate trying to readon across denominational lines. But I do not believe that blending the lines themselves are helpful. We can't adopt error (here Catholic paganism) in order to encourage conversation.

 

This is fakse.

arguing from absence IS the only argument when the issue is whether something has a Biblical origin.

If it is not in the Bible then one needs to seek a different source for the practice.


The woman touched Jesus' robe. Paul's cloth was touched. Both resulted in healing.

Here we have two choices. In both God healed. In one healing was by faith. In the other it was the material being touched.

Of course, Jesus constantly attributed God's healing to faith rather than the item touched. Catholics have a different view.


Blessings were never, Biblically, given through Apostolic successon. Even the Cathoilc view of priests (something foreign to the NT Scripture and Apostalic Church) harken to paganism.

That said, I don't doubt that people were healed. I just do not agree that it was by touching relics (I agree with Jesus).

Relics are aids, or crutches, for those of little faith.


Consider the Roman Catholic explanation for the veneration of icons. Priests defend their use by saying Catholics don't worship these objects but these are used, like a window, to see spiritual truths.

Now imagine Chriatians who can see these truths, experience God's blessings, know the healing of God....all without these "aids". It is a case of the less faithful defending their aids to those whose faith is complete.

 

The Godhead is actually mentioned several times in the Bible.

That you were unaware is a bit alarming.

You are correct that Protestants are not devoted to angles (as Scripture warns against such) but to say we do not believe in angles is asinine.

That said, I do agree that many Protestants are legalistic. And that is no better than the paganism of the Catholic Church.

That said, most faithful Christians understand the spiritual realm and warfare on a deeper level than Catholics will allow. We do not need the aids you cherish because we have a stringer faith and access to the Source you gaze at your crutches to catch a glimpse.


Consider that many of us have experienced the miracles, the wonder, and the healings that you Catholics transverse the globe to glimpse, that you Catholics gaze at pieces of wood, metal and stone to get a peak. Yet we donthis mot by trying to see into a spiritual realm but actually stepping into that realm.

You have a choice - paganistic Catholic glimpses or enter this realm. You choose the former when you should embrace the latter.

 

My understanding is exactly Jesus' words.

Why do you think that healing grace would be transferred to fabric (especially since Jesus Himself negated this type of paganism when the woman touched His garment)?

How do you explain that non-Catholics experience the same healing grace without seeking out trinkets, without holy water?

Logic dictates that relics and holy water are meaningless simply because Chriatians recieve the sane graces without them.

 

Protestants live that spiritually as well.

But we do not devote ourselves to angles because Scripture condemns this practice.

I guess the main difference here is that Protestants do not look for subordinates as we have full and complete access to the Source.


My family did not seek out a relic or holy water, yet we experienced God's healing grace.

The difference is that Catholics seek subordinate aids to glimpse a spiritual realm while others walk in that spiritual realm.


Next time you gaze at a relic and catch a glimpse of this realm look around. If I see you I'll wave at ya.

 

Another example is the Catholic priesthood and Confession.

A Catholic confesses to a priest and seeks absolution of sins. Often this is accompanied by penance.

But when we sin we go directly to our Mediator. We confess before the congregation (the Body). But we are forgiven by our Mediator Himself. No penance required (but repentance is required).

 

I disagree that it is Biblical (based on Jesus' words). But I don't hold those of a weak faith in contempt either.

It just seems to me that the Catholic Churvh is set on keeping its members weak and dependent on the organization.

I think it woukd be better for a Catholic to grow past those things and into maturity.


Imagine going directly to Christ as Mediator to confess and be forgiven. Imagine what He would tell you that a priest couldn't.

Imagine going directly to Christ as a Healer instead of seeking out a piece of cloth or wood.

 

It doesn't say that piece of cloth rarger than the act of faith was the mode through which God healed. The mode was, of course, an affirmation (testimony) of the Aposles words (Scripture)

I believe Jesus was correct on that part. You don't. No biggie.


That said, it is not uniquely Catholic to seek relics. Many Protestants do as well.

But at the same time many Protestants know God's grace and miracles directly through the Source.

Why should I seek a piece of cloth when I can touch that same grace through faith in the Source.


If I can go directly to God and be healed then what need do I have of a piece of cloth, or a stick of wood, or piece of stone?

That is my question. You have not answered it yet.