The Independent Catholic Movement

DHK,

You are beaten at your own game.

By your rules, you do worship your ancestors.

It is obvious from the dictionary that respect means venerate which means worship.

Be a man and admit that you have played word games in an attempt to discredit Catholics unjustly, or accept that you worship your ancestors. Only one can stand honestly.

BTW, I'm still waiting for your evidence of a twenty minute Mass. What year was it that you attended such a Mass? What city?

 

And respect is associated with veneration. So what's your point?

That you want to dictate to others what they mean by their words (as when a Catholic says, "I venerate Mary.") while denying others the same right?

BTW, what's with insisting upon only your particular dictionary? Is it inspired? Is it infallible?

DHK, at this late point in the game, I am sure that very few here take your anti-Catholic rants seriously.

BTW, why do you keep dodging my question about your "twenty minute Mass". I can only assume that you made it up in yet another attempt to unjustly discredit Catholics.

I'm also waiting for an answer to another question that I keep asking you.

Are a love for Scripture and a general lack of respect for truth compatible?

 

DHK,

You are so funny!

I noticed how you skipped right over Deacon's Son and my arguments, and attacked the one that didn't provide evidence; how clever of you.

Fact remains, because one of many definitions fits your need, the fact that the Catholic Church explicitly states that it holds to the other meaning of veneration (the one NOT associated with worship) shows that you are extremely malicious, deceiving, and wholly wrong.

Who really cares about Confucious? What does that have to do with Catholicism? Confucious worshipped his ancestors. Catholics honor saints. Deacon's Son shows how worship of anyone but God is strictly forbidden. WHAT PART DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?

No, the fact is that you understand completely, but you've built up in yourself this indestructable belief that all Catholics are liars, and that they teach one thing, but every Catholic deviates from this into some form of idol worship. It's like, we just can't help ourselves, you know? We see a statue, so we worship it. Even though our Church (and of course, the Word of God) forbids this of us.

DHK, you have sunk really low.

[ April 08, 2002, 11:35 AM: Message edited by: GraceSaves ]

 

Trying2Understand,

DHK will methodically avoid your questions...unless he does it now just to prove me wrong.

Fact is, even if I was a Protestant (and I have worn those shoes for 18 years, so I know all about anti-Catholicism), the arguments being made in this thread are so contrite and unbased, that I'm actually embarrassed.

DHK,

You are too full of pride. Pride hurts you. I make mistakes on this board, and while no one likes admitting a mistake, if I'm proven wrong, I'm going to own up to it. You, on the other hand, are perpetuating lies over and over again because you simply cannot let the Catholics have "a victory," even when it's something as silly as this thread, even when your entire argument is unbased. Because Catholics are inherantly evil, right?

Yes, please answer me how, because your dictionary talks of Confucious, that this is something set in stone. My dictionary doesn't make any mention of such thing. Venerate can be in worship; Catholics forbid adoring veneration.

Get used to it.

 

I wanted to respond to some of your questions and statements. I hope this post finds you doing well and enjoying God's blessings.

quote: Please explain the Ten Commandments in the light of Roman Catholic practice of bowing down to images such as the stations of the cross:
Thou shalt not make unto me any graven image...Thou shalt not bow down unto them Gladly. First of all, lets look at some Scripture (I'll even be nice and use the KJV that you love so much).

"Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them nor serve them..." (Exodus 20:4-5).

"Lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the simultude of any figure, the likness of male or female, the likeness of any beast that is on the earth, the likeness of any winged fowl that flieth in the air, the likeness of any thing that creepeth on the ground...Take heed unto yourselves, lest ye forget the covenant of the Lord your God...and make you a graven image, or the likeness of any thing, which the Lord thy God hath forbidden thee." (Deuteronomy 4:16-18; 23).

""And the Lord said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole...And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole..." (Numbers 21:8-9)." (DS)
---This was an instructive picture of faith, a prophetic picture that Jesus himself speaks of in John 3:14. It referred to Christ dying on the cross. As they looked in faith upon that serpent, believing in the hand of God to heal them; so we must look in faith to the one on the cross, believing on Him to forgive us from all our transgressions. It was an object lesson. They were to look upon it in faith, not bow down and worship it.

"And thou shalt make two cherubims of gold, of beaten work shalt thou make them...And the cherubim shall stretch forth their wings on high...and their faces shall look one to another..." (Exodus 25:18; 20). (DS)
--These were adornments of the tabernacle, of the holy place in fact. They were not images of God, and no one bowed down in front of them.

"Do I have to point out the fact that what is prohibitted by God in Exodus and Deuteronomy is idolatry, or worship of false gods (such as images). God was evidently not outlawing any and all images for religious purposes seeing as how he commanded the building of the Arc of the Covenant (complete with golden Cherubim) and the serpant of brass." (DS)
---God was commanding people like Solomon to build a Temple for Him to replace the tabernacle, in which he had dwelt (symbolically). Everything in the Temple had a symbolic meaning and most things a practical purpose, like the altar, the candlestick, etc. No one bowed down to anything. Nothing was worshiped in anyway; nor venerated which is the same thing.

"I won't even attempt to get into a ridiculous argument about whether or not "bowing" equates "worship" as I think common sense and experience scream that it does not." (DS)
Common sense and experience does not scream that both are not equated, for they are in God's sight. I will point you to the Scriptures again:
1. Mordecai in the Book of Esther, would not bow down to Haman (out of respect), though everyone else in the palace did, because he was a Jew, and was commanded not to by the law. He knew he was to WORSHIP God alone. He would bow down to none other. This infuriated Haman, who had gallows made for Mordecai with the intent not only to kill him but the entire Jewish nation.

2. When Cornelius, in Acts 10, fell down, (that is bowed down) before Peter, Peter immediately rebuked and told him to rise up, "for I also am a man." He was to WORSHIP God alone. His act of bowing down to Peter was an act of worship.

3. When John, in Rev.22, bowed down before the angel, he was met with sharp rebuke: "See thou do it not!" For I am thy fellow servant, he continued. John was to worship or bow down before God alone.
Bow down before God alone. Not the pope, before God alone.

"As for what the Catholic Church actually teaches about the use of sacred images, here it is "from the horse's mouth," as it were:
"The Christian veneration of images is not contrary to the first commandment which proscibes idols...The honor paid to sacred images is a 'respectful veneration,' not the adoration due to God alone." (CCC 2132)." (DS)
---The veneration of images is clearly worship, for that is what the word means. It is a deep respect, an honor that is due only to God. The Catholic church changes this meaning to fit their own theology. They transgress the clear teaching of the Ten Commandments by human rationalization to believe that it is alright to bow down in front of graven images, which God has expressly forbidden. You aptly quoted those verses which forbid us to do so at the beginning of your post.

"The clear teaching of the Church is that one's respect for sacred images is not "the adoration due to God alone," or latria. That is the official teaching of the Church."
---You may call a duck a goose, or a chicken, or a sparrow, or whatever you like. But if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, then....your "respect" for sacred images is the same as your "latria." Your "veneration" is the same as your "worship."

"If one wants to argue that some individual Catholics nonetheless do worship images (or people), than that is idolatry and for that they are outside of the Church. Period.
The view that one should have no venerable religious images is a heresy called "iconoclasm" which was condemned as unfaithful to the Christian tradition at the Second Ecumenical Council of Nicaea in the year 787." (DS)
---Perhaps that was not a heresy after all.
DHK

 

It seems you have an attitude problem Grace, judging from that last statement of yours. "Who cares about Confucius?" Most of China does, that's who cares. Please take care of your attitude. It is one of world's leading religions. So is the national religion of Japan, Shintoism, which also believes in ancestor worship. Try to focus yourself here. You need to look at what you do, not from your eyes, but from the eyes of others around you, and from the eyes of the Word of God. That is really what counts. You can go on harping all you want that you honor saints and do not worship saints, but if in the eyes of the world they see no difference, then there is no difference. Itis only a redefined difference made withing the Catholic church to make the Catholic feel better that he is not committing sin. I can give you example after example how the Catholic religion does not differ in this respect from Hinduism. They both bow down and worship their gods. It is idolatry. They both refuse to believe it is idolatry. They both claim that the god they are worshipping is the real god. Ram to the Hindu is just as much the one and true god as is Mary to the Roman Catholic. Both bow down and pray to each just as much. Both have idols of each. So what is the difference? Paganism has infected the Catholic church, and you will deny it. In Quebec they make a pilgrimmage to the statue of St. Anne, the "grand-mother of God" (blasphemy), and bow down before her. In Pakistan, they make a pilgrimmage to a statue of Mary once a year, and offer sacrifices like sheep and chickens before her statue, just as the Hindus would. This is Catholicism, done under the direction of the Roman Catholic priests and bishops of the area. It is pure idolatry.
Bowing down before a graven image is idolatry.
Venerating a graven image or an ancestor is worship in the eyes of the world. Only in the eyes of the Catholc it is different because they say it is. Do we change the meaning of words because of Catholics? No! Idolatry is idolatry. The Bible says to flee from idolatry.
DHK

 

So if it's in the Bible, it's okay. But the seconds Catholics do this, it's worship. Who is using double speak?

But if they did bow out of respect, it becomes worship. Makes total sense. Your equations are mind-boggling.

I see, so in the Catholic Church nothing has symbolic meaning or have a practical purpose. We just put them there to bow down to and worship. Do you realize how you sound?

And you're the only person on this thread who believes that "venerate" means "worship."

Mordecai was commanded to bow down AND WORSHIP. You may think you're a master of words, but you fail here. No where does the Bible equate bowing with worship. Bowing IN CONJUNCTION WITH WORSHIP is forbidden. Bowing by itself is not forbidden.

This is such an uneducated stance. Try reading Acts 14:11-15:

"When the crowds saw what Paul had done, they cried out in Lycaonian, "The gods have come down to us in human form . . . The apostles Barnabas and Paul tore their garments when they heard this and rushed into the crowd shouting, "Men, why are you doing this? We are of the same nature as you, human beings.""

People believed that the apostles were gods themselves. This is in direct correlation with Cornelius and Peter, who also fell down IN WORSHIP of Peter, and Peter, just like Paul and Barnabas, told him to get up, for they were only men.

This is not the same thing as bowing in honor of someone. Bowing does not equate with worship. Worship which contains bowing is worship.

There's no other way to look at this logically, DHK.

DHK, you can't fool us with your lack of text evidence. John was WORSHIPPING THE ANGEL, and THAT is what he was rebuked for. Bowing out of honor is not bowing out of worship.

No, it doesn't. It never has.

No, that's called adoration or worship. Why would we have a seperate word, veneration, if we have the word, adoration?

No, you changed the meaning of the word to slander the Catholic Church.

This would be a problem if we worshipped graven images. Did you worship graven images when you were in the Catholic Church? If you did, you were wrong. If you didn't, thank God.

That's because the Catholic Church is in perfect unity with the Scriptures, and you are determined to make up new ways to interpret them.

DHK,

You have no possible earthly way to know the innermost thoughts of someone looking at a picture. You claim to be able to determine that Catholics look at an image and worship it. How do you do this? Are you psychic? Did God grant you special powers to read the hearts of men? I thought that was God's job?

Look at your words. You said that our respect is worship. How do you know this? You can't. You can not. It's not possible for you to know how I feel or what I think when I look at the cross.

These attacks of yours are baseless.

Based on your arguments, and total lack of supporting evidence, I doubt this is the case.

[ April 08, 2002, 02:04 PM: Message edited by: GraceSaves ]

 

Then it's a good thing I abide by the Bible, like other devout Catholics, and do not commit idolatry through our veneration of the saints and sacred images.

 

DHK,

I can be a hot head, yes. This is something that I'm working on, as I try and strengthen my worth as an apologist!

However, I wouldn't be taking a bad attitude with you if you didn't first make such insulting, baseless remarks about my faith.

If you've noticed, no one is jumping in here to help you, because your arguments can't be helped. I don't worship idols or people. Neither does Carson. Neither does Uncle Ray. Neither does Deacon's Son. Neither do the other regular Catholic posters on here.

But you insist that we do.

Don't you think, as much as we love God, that if we were seeing something even slightly wrong with our practices, that we would seek to reform them? Do you honestly believe we're puppets?

You have to stop basing your personal experiences as the norm of faith in the Catholic Church. This is not fair to anyone, not even yourself.

 

Then it's a good thing I abide by the Bible, like other devout Catholics, and do not commit idolatry through our veneration of the saints and sacred images.</font>[/QUOTE]Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God only.
Establish Biblical proof for your practice.
DHK

 

Then it's a good thing I abide by the Bible, like other devout Catholics, and do not commit idolatry through our veneration of the saints and sacred images.</font>[/QUOTE]Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God only.
Establish Biblical proof for your practice.
DHK</font>[/QUOTE]Biblical proof for which practice? Showing honor that is not worshipful? Because I don't worship anyone or anything but our Triune God, so I'm not sure what you would have me prove to you.

Catholics condemn worship of graven images, people, or anything but God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.

We are in line with your beliefs, except you believe that showing honor to some one or some thing equates to worship. You have yet to show Biblical text that condemns the showing of honor. Everything you've provided thus far was condemning worship.

 

DHK, are you saved?

I ask not to judge, but merely wonder if you feel that your participation on this forum in regards to Catholics and the Church honestly show the fruits of someone who is saved?

 

DHK, it sounds like you are saved by your work of not bowing when a statue is present.

Works don't save, don't you know that?

 

DHK,

You just equivicated a sin of action and a sin of thought. We worship God in our hearts, so it is most definitely what we are saying or feeling in our hearts that determine what we are doing in regards to an image or person.

Let's say you run over someone with a car, and it is a complete accident. They ran in front of your car and you could do nothing but hit them. Did you murder?

No, the next day, you run over someone again, but this time you had time to turn, and you didn't. You had the intention of killing them, and thus, you murdered.

You say that intention doesn't matter, but only the act. I say intention matters greatly. If that was the case, a lot of innocent people would be in prison right now.

My intention is not to worship, but to honor. Someone else's intention might be to worship, rather than honor.

You ARE judging my heart by saying these actions ARE WITHOUT A DOUBT worship.

My intention means everything.

 

Yes I am saved. If I were not saved I would still be a Catholic. The Bible says "You must be born again." "Except a man be born again he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." Have you been born again? The Catholic Church teaches that this means baptism. "You must be born of water and of the spirit." Any Catholic on this forum will tell you that the water there refers to baptism. Born again therefore refers to baptism. I was born again when I was 20, not by baptism, but when I trusted Christ as my Saviour, when I put my faith in His precious blood as the atoning sacrifice for my sins. He at that time forgave my sins (all of them). He gave me the gift of eternal life (which I possess right now).

The fact that you say, according to your own catechism and belief system, that you are born again according to baptism, means that you are not saved, cannot be saved. You are trusting in your works to save you. Baptism is a work and cannot save. Only Christ can save. The church cannot save. Sacraments cannot save. Only faith in Christ, and His shed blood can save. You must be born again.
DHK

 

DHK,

Thanks for the insight, but you need not be so narrow. You also forgot to condemn Anglicans and Lutherans. I'll wait while you do that, and then we can continue discussion.

 

Mat.7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

Mat.7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

John 3:3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

Eph.2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

No matter what denomination or background a person may be, if he is trusting in his baptism, or works, or church, or sacraments, or any other thing, other than Christ alone, he CANNOT be saved.
DHK

 

DHK,

So, basically, unless they believe exactly how you believe, they aren't saved?

I mean, my parents are deeply concerned about my union with the Catholic Church. But I guess it doesn't matter, them being Lutherans, because they aren't saved either.

Thanks again.