For what purpose do denominations build icons and statues

NewCreation435 · Mar 9, 2018

Josiah said:
... until one is shown that it is true, it remains unknown (technically gossip) and IMO should not be spread as dogmatic fact to flame unnamed denominations - especially not with the support of websites and their staff.

... and even if that is shown to be true, that would only mean that there are Catholics among the 1.2 billion that do that; it would be entirely unrelated to the point that the RC Denomination dogmatically teaches that all are to pray TO the DEAD.

Do we agree on this?

Understood; but I find it impossible to make as the apologetic that while Jesus DID converse with one who had died, it nonetheless is a sin. Where ever it happened or how often it happened. Understand my perspective?

I hope your feeling offended as been resolved.

- Josiah

Technically it is not unknowable because we could research it and contact some Catholic priests and find out for sure. That would for sure be an interesting conversation.

Jesus also talked to demons before he cast them out of people, but didn't sin. That doesn't mean i go around talking to demons and it is okay. I guess we are going to have to disagree on that one

Josiah · Mar 9, 2018

Tango said:
Albion said:

But I believe, as does my church, that it is wrong to PRAY to anyone but God. I guess I thought that the mainly traditional Christians here who seem to predominate in the postings belong to churches that hold the same view. Right now, I do not actually know if Confessional Lutherans, for example, think that praying to the dead is a proper practice. I never did before.

Click to expand...

I'm not aware of anyone, in this thread at least, even attempting to justify praying to the dead, just the distinction between praying to those who have died and asking those who have died to pray for us. For what it's worth, my view is that if my late mother can see and hear me then she can figure out for herself how best to pray for me, and if she can neither see nor hear me then there's little point asking her to pray because she won't know about it.

I know of NO denomination or individual who thinks it is good to pray TO the DEAD. But of course, one of the issues we are discussing is the premise of this thread that there are at least two denominations that domgatically teach that. It's just the opening poster won't name them. I KNOW its not the RCC or the LCMS beyond that, I don't know what denominations he is flaming here because he refuses to say.

I have now 7 times in this thread and twice in another stated that I regard praying to the dead as wrong and heretical. So did all my Catholic teachers. I don't know how I can possibly state that more firmly, but obviously 7 times isn't enough. I'm puzzled by how it is even possible for people to think I've promoting it when I've stated my condemnation of it - seven times in one thread. But this has been a weird discussion.

I agree.... there doesn't seem to be ANYONE who teaches or practices this, thus I simply fail to see the substantiation for the flame - that there are denominations that dogmatically teach this.

Tango has done a great job dealing with the worship and idol issue.... I've tried to focus on the other, the 2 reasons given for why we are forbidden to ask Christians living in heaven to pray to God with us, namely, A) Christians in heaven are DEAD just like those in hell... so the prohibitions concerning praying to DEAD DEMONS applies to our Chrsitian brothers and sisters in Christ. I reject this apologetic since it seems to deny the work and promise of Jesus. B) It is a sin to converse with those who's heart stopped. I know of no such prohibition but that brings into question Jesus Himself who did exactly that in Luke 9:28-36. Now, one has added that Jesus DID do this and Jesus never sinned but nonetheless it is a sin. I've not yet been able to wrap my brain around that.... this whole thread seems to just get weirder and weirder.

In another thread, I repeat all I've said here - plus some things - but somehow rather than getting BLASTED for it, I'm so far getting a bunch of "AMENS!" Go figure, lol

.

Josiah · Mar 9, 2018

jsimms435 said:
Technically it is not unknowable because we could research it and contact some Catholic priests and find out for sure. That would for sure be an interesting conversation.

... then should it be spread around as dogmatic fact? Should ecumenical websites and their staff support the spreading of enormous accusations and flames toward whole denominations that give NOTHING AT ALL to support the flame as having even an ounce of truth to it?

No. Actually, asking a priest (or number of them) would not indicate what the RCC teaches (anymore than asking 5 LCMS pastors would show what the LCMS teaches). But I have posted here in this thread EXACTLY what our Catholic pastors, deacon and teachers taught us Catholics. And yes, it is a SIN (the word they used) to pray to anything or anyone other than God (Jesus counts, lol) and that it is a SIN (the word they used) to pray to the dead.

And you don't have to ask a Catholic. The RCC (like most denominations) speaks CLEARLY and EXTENSIVELY and OFFICIALLY for itself. In the RCC, the "to go" source for laity to find out what - EXACTLY - the RCC teaches is its official Catholic Catechism. It's about 800 pages long and contains 2,865 different points. I've read and studied it extensively - every word in it and all the footnotes. And I can assure you, NEVER does it REMOTELY teach all to "pray to the dead" (dogmatically or in ANY other manner). To say the RCC teaches this is.... I hate to be blunt.... a lie. I've also studied the Handbook; it's over 500 pages long - studied every single page. I've already stated what it teaches on this.

IMO, staffer, we have enough problems discussing things in sites like CH as it is. We should not defend, support and encourage what it seems is technically gossip and bold flaming of whole (unnamed) denominations. In fact, I think we should discourage that.

And IMO, it is to be discouraged to boldly, dogmatically state that a whole denomination dogmatically teaches its members to do things just because one believes that it is stated on the internet that someone in that denomination did something bad (even if they could prove someone did it). I don't think our site and its staff should encourage that. There's probably an Lutheran somewhere that killed his wife (I can't prove it however) but does that mean it is good and right and to be supported that ERGO the LCMS dogmatically teaches its members to kill their wives? There's not only the wholesale, dogmatic flaming of whole unnamed denominations in this thread - but it seems based on what one FEELS they might have HEARD on the internet that someone(s) who belong to that denomination DID. I don't think we should support and defend that practice. I didn't expect official staff actions to end it (this is a tolerant site), but I didn't expect so much defense of it. We have enough problems having meaningful, constructive discussions without supporting that. I guess we disagree.

Honestly, I'm more than surprised by the rush to defend MennoSota's flames and accusations and apologetics. In another thread, I state all I have here (and more) and boldly condemn his flames and apologetics - but all I get there is 'amen!'

I hope the offensive you felt has been removed....

- Josiah

NewCreation435 · Mar 9, 2018

Josiah said:
... then should it be spread around as dogmatic fact? Should ecumenical websites and their staff support the spreading of enormous accusations and flames toward whole denominations that give NOTHING AT ALL to support the flame as having even an ounce of truth to it?

No. Actually, asking a priest (or number of them) would not indicate what the RCC teaches (anymore than asking 5 LCMS pastors would show what the LCMS teaches). But I have posted here in this thread EXACTLY what our Catholic pastors, deacon and teachers taught us Catholics. And yes, it is a SIN (the word they used) to pray to anything or anyone other than God (Jesus counts, lol) and that it is a SIN (the word they used) to pray to the dead.

And you don't have to ask a Catholic. The RCC (like most denominations) speaks CLEARLY and EXTENSIVELY and OFFICIALLY for itself. In the RCC, the "to go" source for laity to find out what - EXACTLY - the RCC teaches is its official Catholic Catechism. It's about 800 pages long and contains 2,865 different points. I've read and studied it extensively - every word in it and all the footnotes. And I can assure you, NEVER does it REMOTELY teach all to "pray to the dead" (dogmatically or in ANY other manner). To say the RCC teaches this is.... I hate to be blunt.... a lie. I've also studied the Handbook; it's over 500 pages long - studied every single page. I've already stated what it teaches on this.

IMO, staffer, we have enough problems discussing things in sites like CH as it is. We should not defend, support and encourage what it seems is technically gossip and bold flaming of whole (unnamed) denominations. In fact, I think we should discourage that.

And IMO, it is to be discouraged to boldly, dogmatically state that a whole denomination dogmatically teaches its members to do things just because one believes that it is stated on the internet that someone in that denomination did something bad (even if they could prove someone did it). I don't think our site and its staff should encourage that. There's probably an Lutheran somewhere that killed his wife (I can't prove it however) but does that mean it is good and right and to be supported that ERGO the LCMS dogmatically teaches its members to kill their wives? There's not only the wholesale, dogmatic flaming of whole unnamed denominations in this thread - but it seems based on what one FEELS they might have HEARD on the internet that someone(s) who belong to that denomination DID. I don't think we should support and defend that practice. I didn't expect official staff actions to end it (this is a tolerant site), but I didn't expect so much defense of it. We have enough problems having meaningful, constructive discussions without supporting that. I guess we disagree.

Honestly, I'm more than surprised by the rush to defend MennoSota's flames and accusations and apologetics. In another thread, I state all I have here (and more) and boldly condemn his flames and apologetics - but all I get there is 'amen!'

I hope the offensive you felt has been removed....

- Josiah

I'm getting a little tired of you calling it a flame when it is not. Just because you disagree with something doesn't mean it is a flame. As far as what the Catholic church teaches I will have to take your word for it since I am not going to read a 800 page book. I hope you are right, but I have my doubts.
Maybe part of the confusion you are having have to do with how your defining "dead" and praying to the "dead". Your definition is the dead only include those who were lost and died and demons. While the more general sense of saying "dead" is those who have physically died at some point. I believe when it comes to the verses I posted earlier the sense that someone is dead is corrected interpreted as persons who have physically died and not the more narrow definition that you are using

Albion · Mar 9, 2018

Josiah said:
I know of NO denomination or individual who thinks it is good to pray TO the DEAD. .

I confess that I have no idea why you won't engage with us in the interest of mutual understanding. But if there is not going to be any movement or even an acknowledgment of what we've been saying, I think we can never reach any accord on this and might as well give up the discussion. You say that you've stated your position 7 times, but you have also stated its exact opposite a number of times, too, as I said earlier. That's one reason we don't understand you. Another problem is that because we agreed with one thing MennoSota wrote, you continue to insist that we agree with everything he has said on this thread--even when I have said specifically that I do not. Why would you do that?

Josiah · Mar 9, 2018

Albion said:
You say that you've stated your position 7 times, but you have also stated its exact opposite a number of times, too, as I said earlier.

No. I have not.

Another problem is that because we agreed with one thing MennoSota wrote, you continue to insist that we agree with everything he has said on this thread--even when I have said specifically that I do not. Why would you do that?

I did not. I'M speaking in that thread of the points and apologetics of MennoSota. see the title of the thread. Read the opening post. Read his posts. That's what I'm addressing in that thread. Yes, if one says "I think he's right" when I might conclude that one thinks he's right. But I'm disagreeing with the premises and points of the thread.

I purposely started a new thread for two reasons:

1. I think SOME in that other thread THOUGHT (wrongly) that the thread is about the soundness of requesting the prayers to God of our brothers and sisters alive in heaven. That's NOT what that thread is about, as any one knows by reading the opening post and title - and his several posts there. IF one wishes to share an opinion on the wisdom of requesting the prayers to God of those alive in heaven, a separate thread is suggested.

2. I wanted to discuss that DIFFERENT topic without the entanglement with the gross flame of unnamed denominations - the issue of that other thread. I wanted to focus on one practice rather than the point here - this wholesale flame of unnamed denominations.

But I have said NOTHING different here than I did there. Even my statements about the RCC are identical. My statements about what I believe and do are identical. We're jsut having a nicer discussion here - void of the whole issue of those baseless, gross flames - until they were brought over to here (I confess I'm not guiltless on that point).

I confess that I have no idea why you won't engage with us in the interest of mutual understanding.

Won't engage in WHAT? In the other thread, I engaged in the topic before us: the flames of unnamed denominations, the point about bowing before someone or something is automatically Idolatry and makes the object the Lord God, the point that those in heaven are DEAD just like those in hell... you know, the issues of the thread. I was MORE than willing to engage with anyone in the interest of mutual understanding.

Here, the flames have been eliminated. And while I identically condemn the same points I condemned in the other thread, and support the same points that I did in the other thread, the point and issue of the thread (the issue to discuss) is different.

There are LOTS of points in the opening post. I posted them BECAUSE I want to discuss them with any at CH in the interest of mutual understanding. What I seem to be getting is more blasting for not supporting MennoSota's flames and claims. Again, partly my fault for it coming over here...

.

Andrew · Mar 10, 2018

In those times it was the norm to erect a statue inscribed with "TO THE UNKNOWN GOD" because new gods were created after certain attributes or new thing, or just in case scenarios that they had left out a lost god, it was not odd to them to pre-practise prayers and rituals to the unknown god for hopes of a blessing and be the first in line when the god manifest...
This is why Paul said what he said on mars hill. Greek philosophers always wanted something new, they saw Christianity as creating another god and they wanted to idolize it and add on to it, Paul dusts of his feet and leaves them after telling them that God is not to be worshipped by anything made by mans hands, some ignored his message and some followed him.

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

For what purpose do denominations build icons and statues

NewCreation435

Well-known member

Josiah

simul justus et peccator

Josiah

simul justus et peccator

NewCreation435

Well-known member

Albion

Well-known member

Josiah

simul justus et peccator

Andrew

Matt 18:15