Duggar family values??

Debating issues regarding sexuality

Moderator: Moderators

DanieltheDragon
Savant
Posts: 6224
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 1:37 pm
Location: Charlotte
Been thanked: 1 time

Duggar family values??

Post #1

Post by DanieltheDragon »

http://gawker.com/five-women-sue-duggar ... 1738185507

yet another link to sex abuse and the Quiverfull movement.

Question for debate is there systemic sexual abuse in the Quiverfull movement?
Post 1: Wed Apr 01, 2015 10:48 am Otseng has been banned
Otseng has been banned for having multiple accounts and impersonating a moderator.

User avatar
tam
Savant
Posts: 5567
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Has thanked: 244 times
Been thanked: 205 times
Contact:

Post #61

Post by tam »

Peace to you RR,
RightReason wrote: [Replying to tam]
No. I posted this bible passage to counter your claim that one apostle (such as Peter) was appointed leader by Christ, over the other apostles.
Then you would still be wrong and still completely missing the meaning of that passage. If that passage means what you think it means, then God would be contradicting Himself, because throughout Scripture we see God appointing individual men as leaders, whom He gave authority, and whom we were expected to listen to.


Is God contradicting Himself because He no longer requires sacrifices according to the law? Is God contradicting Himself because He no longer expects us to worship in Jerusalem, at a physical temple?

Just because something changed does not mean that God is contradicting Himself.

There used to be a high priest who would once a year make a sacrifice for all the people. This was leading to Christ. CHRIST is the high priest. There used to be a physical temple where the spirit of God is said to dwell. But this also was a shadow; a reflection of things to come. Because CHRIST is the Temple in whom God dwells (and God dwells within us as well if we are part of the Body of Christ, making us part of the Temple as well).
This didn’t mean these men were perfect, but He still used them.


The point under discussion is about your claim that Christ made Peter leader over the other apostles. The verse I supplied states otherwise. That all twelve apostles had ONE leader, the Messiah.

Speaking to all twelve apostles, Christ said: you are all brothers and you have one Leader, the Messiah.

He did not then say... oh, wait, scratch that... eleven of you also have Peter as your leader.

Why can you not just take Him at His word?

Quote:
“But you shall not be called “Rabbi�, for One is your Rabbi, but you are all brothers. And you should not call yourselves “Father�, in the earth, for one is your Father who is in Heaven. And you will not be called Leaders, because one is your Leader, The Messiah.�


He is speaking to His apostles, and He is telling them, point-blank, that they have ONE leader. Christ, Himself.
Exactly! There is one Messiah – Jesus Christ Himself -- and He is emphasizing that appointing others and expecting us to listen to them does not negate that fact – it does not undermine His authority.
No.

First, please note what you did. He said that they have one Leader... and then tells them point blank who that leader is: the Messiah.

You alter His words ever so slightly to suggest that He is only saying that there is one Messiah, and they don't have authority over Him. Well, obviously!

They all point back to Him. Jesus’ commands, “He who hears you, hears me . . . “, “Whatever you bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven� would make no sense if those they were spoken to were not authoritative leaders, teachers, our fathers. You don’t get to cherry pick one passage and apply it as you like. A comprehensive understanding of Scripture as a whole must be applied.
Stay on point, please. This is about your claim that Peter was granted to be leader of the twelve apostles. But according to Christ, the twelve apostles have only ONE leader: the Messiah.
Scripture goes on to show seeing Peter as the leader was exactly what the first Christians did.


Post 707 on this page at this link deals with your many links and claims about Peter:

viewtopic.php?t=31377&postdays=0&postor ... &start=700
Nope. You did not. You posted a link, a distraction from the truth; and you did not respond to that or to the questions I asked you in post 55.
You clearly must not even have a rudimentary understanding of the time period or the origin of inquisitions so it was necessary to explain it to you, but you simply keep repeating this:

That the popes and bishops and so-called 'teaching authority' did not teach the truth.
This is simply not true.



This is absolutely 100% true. As you are yourself revealing, considering the fact that you keep posting links to explain or excuse or justify their lack of truthful teaching during this time period (which lasted centuries).


Did the popes and teaching authority stand up and teach the truth during this time period? Did they stand up and say to the people that persecuting, imprisoning, and executing those who teach a different message... that this is NOT what Christ taught or did?

Did they stand up and teach the truth about what Christ DID say we are to do with those who teach a different message? Did they even stand up and teach what the apostles taught and did? When some men taught a different message (saying that gentiles needed to be circumcised) claiming to have come from the apostles... what did the apostles do? They wrote a letter confirming that such men did not come from them, and that neither they nor the holy spirit required such a thing.

They did not persecute, round up, prosecute, punish or execute those false teachers. They did what Christ said to do with such ones, and did not listen to them. The popes and the "teaching authority" did not. They did not teach the truth. Why? Did they not know the truth?


So the words that I wrote are indeed true:

That the popes and bishops and so-called 'teaching authority' did not teach the truth.
What you mean to say is
I said exactly what I meant to say.

If the so-called "Church" refused to speak and teach the truth just as Christ taught us, what good was it? What good IS it to anyone SEEKING to KNOW the truth? To anyone seeking to know Christ?
Gee, if the scribes and Pharisees were often hypocrites and didn’t even understand many of the teachings themselves, did that mean God’s Church was unimportant and unnecessary?



So your answer to the question is to compare the RCC to the scribes and the Pharisees? I have no problem with that comparison.

And um... if you recall, the Pharisees and the scribes had their authority taken from them. The heir had come; the high priest; the King and Lord and Teacher and Master... and we are to listen to Him.

So are you sure that is the comparison you wish to make?

So, the question you ask is pointed more toward your own beliefs – What good IS it to anyone SEEKING to KNOW the truth to have a non authoritative “body of believers� without a centralized, united, authoritative, infallible, visible, earthly organization?
Asked and answered a few posts back:

By speaking truth as they are given to speak to whomever they are sent to speak that truth TO. By doing as Christ - their leader - commands. By teaching others to obey all that Christ has commanded. By pointing to Christ so the people seeking Him can know who it is they are supposed to be emulating and obeying and hearing and following. So that people may come to HIM to have life. By bearing witness to HIM. By asking forgiveness for those who sin against them; for those who fall short?


By listening to Christ and teaching others to do the same. Is that not what we are supposed to do?



Those seeking to know God – to know truth would have been expected to get their information from where God designated.


You mean like the One God designated here:

"This is my Son, whom I love. Listen to Him."
As Jesus said, “Do as they say, not as they do�
Except for when He said, 'you have heard it said, but I tell you now...'

He did not say, “Don’t listen to those guys.� He did not say. “My Church is corrupt and you can take it or leave it.� No instead what He expected was to inform us this was the way He set things up. It is for our own good. He doesn’t really care if there are personalities we don’t like. He didn’t care if we liked those He chose, or if we would rather belong to a group that had a beautiful choir, or if we felt more comfortable hiding behind our own rationalization that we believe in Him but are anti-religion. He knew that would simply become a very convenient way to NOT follow Him rather to follow whatever it is we justified.


As you are justifying the heinous acts and the lack of truth in the teachings of the RCC?

Why in the world do you think that He came to set up the exact same system that was meant only as a tutor to lead us to Christ? He was now the high priest, to whom we must listen. He was now the Temple, into whom we enter, in whom the spirit of God dwells. He is now the mediator (the ONE mediator) between man and God.

He rebuked such notions. We were still expected to obey His Church, as they have been put in charge to safeguard Sacred Scripture.


Please cite the command that states, "You must obey my church (even though you are my church so that makes no sense), since they are in charge of safeguarding sacred scripture."

What do you suppose would have happened if the Popes and the Bishops had stood up and spoken the truth instead of participating in those un-christ-like tribunals and persecutions
I’m sure some of them did.
Not the pope or anyone in charge, obviously.
In fact, like was explained, but you ignored, was the original purpose of the inquisitions were to give people a say/a fair trial and not just allow the state to chop their heads off like the state would have preferred.


Who taught that they should be put on trial to begin with? Is that what Christ taught? If not, then why did they not stand up and teach the truth, as Christ taught? What would have happened if they did?


(giving approval to them, albeit a 'less unfair' version of them)? What do you suppose would have happened if they announced that Christians (the Body of Christ) do NOT persecute or punish or judge and condemn anyone? What if they, in no uncertain terms, taught what Christ taught instead? Did as Christ did instead?
Uuummmm . . . have you read Deuteronomy?
Indeed, but so?

You do realize that your justifications mean that the Church started out knowing what to do with 'heretics' (do not listen to them)... but somehow they later allowed themselves to become barbaric and uncivilized, completely ignoring the examples they were 'safeguarding' in sacred scripture. What makes you think these barbaric and uncivilized people who had so fallen away from Christ and His teachings - fallen so far away from the teachings that the apostles knew, that the early disciples knew, that 'sacred scripture' recorded - what makes you think they could have taught anything true during this time period from Christ with regard to doctrine?



And if a heretic is someone teaching a different message from the RCC, what do you call someone who teaches a different message than Christ?


Quote:

Quote:
Did Christ ever do those things or instruct His apostles to do those things?



Quote:
Can you explain this?
Did God ever tell the Israelites to have slaves and stone people to death? Yet in Scripture we see . . .


Once again you conveniently sidestep the question. You do this because the answer is no, and because the answer is no, it clearly shows that the RCC did not teach the truth on these matters.

these so-called representatives of God and of Christ did not teach the truth; and disobeyed the very command that Christ gave them "Go and make disciples of all nations... teaching them to obey all that I have commanded you."
Actually, they did not.


Yes, they did. This is black and white. They did not teach disciples to obey all that Christ had commanded. They did not even teach WHAT Christ commanded.

You keep making excuses for them, but this is not a statement of judgment, this is just a fact.
Quote:
It is the Church who speaks out against oppression throughout the world. It is the Church who has always fought for those who do not have a voice. It is the Church who protects the most vulnerable among us


You cannot be serious.
I am serious. You once again think Christ’s Church can’t be Christ’s Church because sometimes human beings get it wrong. Now it’s my turn – you can’t be serious.
You conveniently left out the many examples of the RCC doing this oppressing, silencing those who do not have a voice, and harming the most vulnerable among us. And you wave that all away with a 'sometimes human beings get it wrong'.


I am sorry, RR, but the RCC is not from Christ.
Yes, she is. This would be like saying, “I’m sorry Moses, you are not God’s leader and messenger. Those 10 commandments you are holding do not come from God. How do we know? Because you are an ordinary man who has sinned� Even though the fact that God intended to speak thru Moses can be confirmed from history, the miracles God did thru Moses, and the fruits we see that came from Moses’ leadership all prove Moses was sent by God for His people to hear.
We can see who the RCC is from by her fruits as well.

Your position is illogical and unscriptural.
I have used scripture to support all that I have shared; and faith. Looking to men and thinking it impossible that Christ could Himself lead His church is lacking in faith.
To simply claim the church is the Body of Believers who “follow� Christ is a generic useless convenient ideology.
The Church is the Body of Christ, with Christ as her Head, Leader, Master, Teacher, King and Lord.

This is exactly what scripture records as well.
Tina from Detroit uses Scripture to show we have to wash each others feet every day if we want to be saved as Jesus instructed the Apostles.


He did not instruct His followers to wash others feet every day, but we ARE to do all that He commanded the apostles, so yes, we are indeed supposed to wash each others feet.

As He said,

"If anyone loves me, they will obey my commands. My father will love them, and we will come and make our home with him."

Ben from Atlanta uses Scripture to support polygamy and justify his having multiple wives.


Scripture might support that.. but are we supposed to be listening to scripture, or to Christ?

"This is my Son, whom I love. Listen to Him."

Ken from Chicago swears he has read Scripture and has been inspired by the Holy Spirit and believes baptism is only valid if we use pure Spring water from the alps.
Did Christ teach this? Did Christ and everyone else get baptized in pure spring water from the alps? If Ken from Chicago believes baptism is only valid with pure spring water from the alps, then by all means, Ken from Chicago can get baptized with pure spring water from the alps. What does this have to do with anyone else? Or are you suggesting that people should be listening to Ken from Chicago?
Madge from Texas believes the Trinity is a falsehood. Tim from Rhode Island believes the Trinity is true. Julie believes in hell. Shawn believes hell does not exist. They ALL claim to be followers of Christ. They all have tested what they believe. They all are sincere truth seekers. And THAT is what your notion of the church gives us – NOTHING.
Using your same example, multiple religions claim to be the true religion; multiple religions claim to have the sign of the true church and use scripture to support their claim; these multiple religions all teach and believe different things, while claiming to be based upon scripture and/or holy spirit.


How can we know which is true and which is not?


By testing such things against Christ, the Light, and listening to Him. Putting HIM first, loving Him most.

Same as with individual people who are claiming this or that from Him.





Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

RightReason
Under Probation
Posts: 1510
Joined: Sat May 20, 2017 6:26 pm
Been thanked: 12 times

Post #62

Post by RightReason »

[Replying to tam]

Wow! This is getting old. ONE MORE TIME: The passage you cite, “But you shall not be called “Rabbi�, for One is your Rabbi, but you are all brothers. And you should not call yourselves “Father�, in the earth, for one is your Father who is in Heaven. And you will not be called Leaders, because one is your Leader, The Messiah.� Is NOT Jesus telling the Apostles that Peter is not their leader. LOL! You completely miss the meaning. You attempt to cherry pick one verse and misapply it to suggest the verse means Christ did not appoint Peter as the leader. Once again just because Christ says He alone is our leader does NOT mean when He appoints others to represent Him and be our leaders (which He does) He is a liar. It would be utterly illogical to think that. He was making a point – like I already, using plenty of Scripture, explained – None of God’s appointed leaders should ever think they are better than Him or abuse the power given them – that is what the passage means!!!

It is pretty obvious as Christ is ok with appointing others to be His leaders (He who hears you, hears me. . . . Whatever you bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven). Christ doesn’t have a problem with the word leader or the role of leader – you however, apparently do. It is impossible to argue this passage means other than what I have explained. You would also have to be willing to accuse all of Christendom of getting it wrong – as the first Christians recognized Christ’s Church AND it’s leadership and authority and took their matters to the Church. Just because you want to rationalize your actions today of not doing this, does not mean everyone who actually heard the words of Jesus Christ spoken didn’t know that that is exactly what Christ expected them to do.

You keep asking, did the teaching authority always stand up and act perfectly? To which I continue to answer NO – and neither has anyone God has ever appointed done so perfectly. AND yet God was still always able to adequately insure we get enough – that we get what He wanted us to get, when He wanted us to get it, despite the fallible human beings He uses to spread His word.

Please cite the command that states, "You must obey my church (even though you are my church so that makes no sense), since they are in charge of safeguarding sacred scripture."
Asked an answered, but here it is again . . .

16 He who hears you hears Me, he who rejects you rejects Me, and he who rejects Me rejects Him who sent Me.� –Like 10:16

"Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. –Matthew 18:18

“If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.� –Matthew 18:17

“And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it.� -Matthew 16:18

“I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.�…

“teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. And lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.� Amen. –Matthew 28:20

“if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God's household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth� -1 Timothy 3:15

Not sure how or why you would think the above Scripture is not in fact a ringing endorsement from God that He will protect His Church and we are to listen to her.
We can see who the RCC is from by her fruits as well.
Yep.






That Christ established a visible organized Church is a truth clearly set forth in the New Testament, completely vindicated by the Church's history and absolutely reasonable. We cannot be true followers of Christ unless we accept his Church. It is through that Church that he lives on in the world today. It is through that Church that his ministry continues. It lies at the very heart of his revelation to men. He said in his Sermon on the Mount, "He that shall break one of these least commandments and shall so teach men shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven" (Matt. 5:19).


What shall we say of those who, through culpable ignorance, intellectual indolence, or moral cowardice, reject the Church God came to earth to found?


I hope that now you know what sort of a Church Christ's is; therefore, what sort of Church you must look for. It is the constitution of the Church that matters. Too much time is spent in bandying texts and arguing about scandals in history. God's Church is human as well as divine; Christ told us in advance that scandals would come. He chose Peter, who had denied him, to be the first pope in preference to John, the beloved, to emphasize that we must always distinguish between the man and the office or, in other words, between the constitution of the Church and the men who make up the Church.


The short cut to the true following of Christ is to find out what kind of Church his is. We have described it in these pages. In the world today only one Church, the Catholic Church, with its center in Rome, fills the bill. The crucial question is that of authority. We have seen it at every stage of the Church's history--in the councils, in the Fathers, in the Acts and the epistles, in the Gospels, where it was conferred by Christ himself.


https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print ... st-founded
By testing such things against Christ, the Light, and listening to Him. Putting HIM first, loving Him most.

Yes, by testing against Christ, putting Him first, loving Him, and doing what He commanded us to do – the most important being to obey the Church He established. And why would that be so important? And why would He have established a Church in the first place? So that we can test all things. The notion of testing against what we “feel� Christ is trying to tell us isn’t exactly fool proof, which is why Christ felt we needed an audible, authoritative, earthly Church. Otherwise, we are basically testing against our own personal understanding of Christ.

You even use Scripture to come to this conclusion of testing and rightly so, because it is in Scripture and yet you the turn around and chastise that we shouldn’t test against Scripture rather what Christ Himself says. Are you saying you only listen to the parts of scripture that are direct quotes from Christ? All other Scripture is irrelevant? Are you suggesting we are to listen to Christ alone? I will ask again, does He audibly speak to you? When you are testing things are you listening to His audible voice? If not, how can you be sure you are following Him? How do you dismiss Him telling us to hear His Church? Your notion of ‘church’ is impractical, illogical, unscriptural, and contrary to the teachings of Jesus Christ. Think about it.

User avatar
tam
Savant
Posts: 5567
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Has thanked: 244 times
Been thanked: 205 times
Contact:

Post #63

Post by tam »

Peace to you RR,
RightReason wrote: [Replying to tam]

Wow! This is getting old.
Agreed, but it is what it is.

What is also getting old is that I continue to address the questions you ask, and you ignore most of mine. Or you change the question I do ask to something that you find easier to answer.
ONE MORE TIME: The passage you cite, “But you shall not be called “Rabbi�, for One is your Rabbi, but you are all brothers. And you should not call yourselves “Father�, in the earth, for one is your Father who is in Heaven. And you will not be called Leaders, because one is your Leader, The Messiah.� Is NOT Jesus telling the Apostles that Peter is not their leader.
Of course. Why would He tell the other apostles that Peter is not their leader, when He never told them that Peter WAS their leader to begin with?

What you continue to fail to recognize is that Christ told the twelve apostles that they - all TWELVE of them - had ONLY ONE leader: the Messiah. This contradicts your claim that eleven of the apostles also had Peter as their leader.

I cannot make you see this, however, and I think this is the last time I will repeat it (at least on this thread).


You keep asking, did the teaching authority always stand up and act perfectly?


Not once have I asked this. This is you attempting to re-frame the question to suit your parameters.


I stated that the popes and 'teaching authority' did not teach the truth. This is a fact. I asked you what would have happened if they HAD taught the truth. You have yet to answer this question.

Please cite the command that states, "You must obey my church (even though you are my church so that makes no sense), since they are in charge of safeguarding sacred scripture."
Asked an answered, but here it is again . . .
You misunderstood the question. I emphasized the part you missed by bolding and underlining what I was currently questioning.


Too much time is spent in bandying texts and arguing about scandals in history.
Yes... please don't look too closely at such things; they might reveal her (the RCC) for what she is...

Christ told us in advance that scandals would come.
Scandals? Or false prophets and false christs?
He chose Peter, who had denied him, to be the first pope in preference to John, the beloved, to emphasize that we must always distinguish between the man and the office or, in other words, between the constitution of the Church and the men who make up the Church.
He did no such thing.

The short cut to the true following of Christ is to find out what kind of Church his is. We have described it in these pages. In the world today only one Church, the Catholic Church, with its center in Rome, fills the bill.

I was recently in Rome (in November). We went to the Vatican and also St. Peter's Basilica. Inside there is a statue of Peter on a throne with keys dangling from his fingers. Catholics (and others) are known to build icons and statues, etc, so this did not shock me. What shocked me was this:

People lined up to come before this statue (a dead thing), caress and kiss the feet of this statue (a dead thing), then pray to it.


I was floored. I could not believe what I was seeing. Caressing and kissing the feet of a statue? Praying to a statue? I mean, it's not even a statue of Christ. (Not that this would matter; a statue is a dead thing, not a living thing, and so it cannot accurately represent a living being. This is why the living God has a living image: His Son).


You think Christ taught that? You think the apostles taught that?


By testing such things against Christ, the Light, and listening to Him. Putting HIM first, loving Him most.

Yes, by testing against Christ, putting Him first, loving Him, and doing what He commanded us to do – the most important being to obey the Church



So... not love God with your whole heart; not love your neighbor as yourself; not love one another as I have loved you; not love even your enemies; not "I am the Truth, the Way and the Life"; not 'Come to ME!', or anything similar.

The most important commandment is to obey "the Church" (aka the RCC)?


I can see how this would be the most important commandment of any religion claiming to BE the Church. It is the only one you would need your adherents to accept. After that - no matter what heinous acts you commit and no matter how many false teaching and contradictions you have with Christ - most will remain in you.

You even use Scripture to come to this conclusion of testing and rightly so, because it is in Scripture and yet you the turn around and chastise that we shouldn’t test against Scripture rather what Christ Himself says.


When did I chastise that you should not test against scripture?
Are you saying you only listen to the parts of scripture that are direct quotes from Christ?


No. But He and His words come first.
All other Scripture is irrelevant?


No. But He and His words come first.

Everything else should be tested and understood in light of Him and His words.
Are you suggesting we are to listen to Christ alone?


First and foremost, certainly.

Is He not our Leader, Teacher, Master, King, Lord... the One God told us to listen to?




Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

RightReason
Under Probation
Posts: 1510
Joined: Sat May 20, 2017 6:26 pm
Been thanked: 12 times

Post #64

Post by RightReason »

[Replying to tam]

I’m only going to comment on the following remarks of yours because they perfectly represent your distorted and erroneous views and helps one understand why you are unable to properly understand Scripture and Christ’s words . . .
I was recently in Rome (in November). We went to the Vatican and also St. Peter's Basilica. Inside there is a statue of Peter on a throne with keys dangling from his fingers. Catholics (and others) are known to build icons and statues, etc, so this did not shock me. What shocked me was this:

People lined up to come before this statue (a dead thing), caress and kiss the feet of this statue (a dead thing), then pray to it.


I was floored. I could not believe what I was seeing. Caressing and kissing the feet of a statue? Praying to a statue? I mean, it's not even a statue of Christ. (Not that this would matter; a statue is a dead thing, not a living thing, and so it cannot accurately represent a living being. This is why the living God has a living image: His Son).


You think Christ taught that? You think the apostles taught that?

This^ right here. This^ is the problem. Your comments prove you haven’t a clue about what Christ’s Church actually teaches or does. Your comments prove you see the world through your anti-Catholic goggles. Your comments demonstrate you are unaware of what Scripture and God actually say. You think you know better. I’m sorry but you are completely wrong on your understanding of statues . Perhaps no one has ever explained it to you before, or perhaps you never bothered to ask, or perhaps you never read Scripture . . .

"Catholics worship statues!" People still make this ridiculous claim. Because Catholics have statues in their churches, goes the accusation, they are violating God’s commandment.


It is right to warn people against the sin of idolatry when they are committing it. But calling Catholics idolaters because they have images of Christ and the saints is based on misunderstanding or ignorance of what the Bible says about the purpose and uses (both good and bad) of statues.


Anti-Catholic writer Loraine Boettner, in his book Roman Catholicism, makes the blanket statement, "God has forbidden the use of images in worship" (281). Yet if people were to "search the scriptures" (cf. John 5:39), they would find the opposite is true. God forbade the worship of statues, but he did not forbid the religious use of statues. Instead, he actually commanded their use in religious contexts!


People who oppose religious statuary forget about the many passages where the Lord commands the making of statues. For example: "And you shall make two cherubim of gold [i.e., two gold statues of angels]; of hammered work shall you make them, on the two ends of the mercy seat. Make one cherub on the one end, and one cherub on the other end; of one piece of the mercy seat shall you make the cherubim on its two ends. The cherubim shall spread out their wings above, overshadowing the mercy seat with their wings, their faces one to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubim be" (Ex. 25:18–20).


David gave Solomon the plan "for the altar of incense made of refined gold, and its weight; also his plan for the golden chariot of the cherubim that spread their wings and covered the ark of the covenant of the Lord. All this he made clear by the writing of the hand of the Lord concerning it all, all the work to be done according to the plan" (1 Chr. 28:18–19). David’s plan for the temple, which the biblical author tells us was "by the writing of the hand of the Lord concerning it all," included statues of angels.


Similarly Ezekiel 41:17–18 describes graven (carved) images in the idealized temple he was shown in a vision, for he writes, "On the walls round about in the inner room and [on] the nave were carved likenesses of cherubim."


During a plague of serpents sent to punish the Israelites during the exodus, God told Moses to "make [a statue of] a fiery serpent, and set it on a pole; and every one who is bitten, when he sees it shall live. So Moses made a bronze serpent, and set it on a pole; and if a serpent bit any man, he would look at the bronze serpent and live" (Num. 21:8–9).


One had to look at the bronze statue of the serpent to be healed, which shows that statues could be used ritually, not merely as religious decorations.


Catholics use statues, paintings, and other artistic devices to recall the person or thing depicted. Just as it helps to remember one’s mother by looking at her photograph, so it helps to recall the example of the saints by looking at pictures of them. Catholics also use statues as teaching tools. In the early Church they were especially useful for the instruction of the illiterate.

God forbids the worship of images as gods, but he doesn’t ban the making of images. If he had, religious movies, videos, photographs, paintings, and all similar things would be banned. But, as the case of the bronze serpent shows, God does not even forbid the ritual use of religious images.

Sometimes anti-Catholics cite Deuteronomy 5:9, where God said concerning idols, "You shall not bow down to them." Since many Catholics sometimes bow or kneel in front of statues of Jesus and the saints, anti-Catholics confuse the legitimate veneration of a sacred image with the sin of idolatry.


Though bowing can be used as a posture in worship, not all bowing is worship. In Japan, people show respect by bowing in greeting (the equivalent of the Western handshake). Similarly, a person can kneel before a king without worshipping him as a god. In the same way, a Catholic who may kneel in front of a statue while praying isn’t worshipping the statue or even praying to it, any more than the Protestant who kneels with a Bible in his hands when praying is worshipping the Bible or praying to it.

Common sense tells us that, since God has revealed himself in various images, most especially in the incarnate Jesus Christ, it’s not wrong for us to use images of these forms to deepen our knowledge and love of God. That’s why God revealed himself in these visible forms, and that’s why statues and pictures are made of them.

Since the days of the apostles, the Catholic Church has consistently condemned the sin of idolatry. The early Church Fathers warn against this sin, and Church councils also dealt with the issue.

"Idolatry is a perversion of man’s innate religious sense. An idolater is someone who ‘transfers his indestructible notion of God to anything other than God’" (CCC 2114).


The Church absolutely recognizes and condemns the sin of idolatry. What anti-Catholics fail to recognize is the distinction between thinking a piece of stone or plaster is a god and desiring to visually remember Christ and the saints in heaven by making statues in their honor. The making and use of religious statues is a thoroughly biblical practice. Anyone who says otherwise doesn’t know his Bible.

https://www.catholic.com/tract/do-catho ... ip-statues

User avatar
tam
Savant
Posts: 5567
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Has thanked: 244 times
Been thanked: 205 times
Contact:

Post #65

Post by tam »

Peace to you,
RightReason wrote: [Replying to tam]

I’m only going to comment on the following remarks of yours because they perfectly represent your distorted and erroneous views and helps one understand why you are unable to properly understand Scripture and Christ’s words . . .

A convenient way for you to avoid responding to the specific questions I asked.

But okay... lets see where you go with this...
I was recently in Rome (in November). We went to the Vatican and also St. Peter's Basilica. Inside there is a statue of Peter on a throne with keys dangling from his fingers. Catholics (and others) are known to build icons and statues, etc, so this did not shock me. What shocked me was this:

People lined up to come before this statue (a dead thing), caress and kiss the feet of this statue (a dead thing), then pray to it.


I was floored. I could not believe what I was seeing. Caressing and kissing the feet of a statue? Praying to a statue? I mean, it's not even a statue of Christ. (Not that this would matter; a statue is a dead thing, not a living thing, and so it cannot accurately represent a living being. This is why the living God has a living image: His Son).


You think Christ taught that? You think the apostles taught that?

This^ right here. This^ is the problem.


Is it? I wonder...

I wonder also if you are going to get around to answering these two questions I asked.
Your comments prove you haven’t a clue about what Christ’s Church actually teaches or does. Your comments prove you see the world through your anti-Catholic goggles. Your comments demonstrate you are unaware of what Scripture and God actually say. You think you know better. I’m sorry but you are completely wrong on your understanding of statues . Perhaps no one has ever explained it to you before, or perhaps you never bothered to ask, or perhaps you never read Scripture . . .

"Catholics worship statues!" People still make this ridiculous claim. Because Catholics have statues in their churches, goes the accusation, they are violating God’s commandment.
Funny, but could you point out where I mentioned the word worship in what I wrote?

Or is it simply that you recognize the acts of worship in caressing and kissing the feet of a statue, and praying to it?
It is right to warn people against the sin of idolatry when they are committing it. But calling Catholics idolaters because they have images of Christ and the saints is based on misunderstanding or ignorance of what the Bible says about the purpose and uses (both good and bad) of statues.
Note that my comments had nothing to do with merely having images... but of caressing and kissing the feet of a statue, and praying to it.

I am clipping all comments from your cut and paste that refer to merely having statues or images; drawings; etc.

I will mention,, however, that every image in the temple or of the ark had very specific meaning and very specific directions from God on the details. Because each represented a corresponding thing in the spiritual realm. It was given to help us grasp the spiritual reality. Even the temple itself - with the Holy Place and the Most Holy Place - were given as examples of the spiritual reality; to help us see the relationship between the Most Holy One and the Holy One.


The Holy Place representing the Holy One of God (Christ), the Most Holy Place representing the Most Holy One (God). No one could enter the Most Holy Place without coming through the Holy Place. Just as no one can come to the Father except through the Son.

During a plague of serpents sent to punish the Israelites during the exodus, God told Moses to "make [a statue of] a fiery serpent, and set it on a pole; and every one who is bitten, when he sees it shall live. So Moses made a bronze serpent, and set it on a pole; and if a serpent bit any man, he would look at the bronze serpent and live" (Num. 21:8–9).


One had to look at the bronze statue of the serpent to be healed, which shows that statues could be used ritually, not merely as religious decorations.
It was not mere ritual; and it was God who decreed the building of this serpent. The copper serpent of course is an example of Christ and how we are supposed to keep our eyes UPON HIM.

To build a copper serpent now would be unnecessary and might require us to take our eyes OFF Him in order to place our eyes onto something (or someone) else. Which is exactly what religion requires of its people. That they have their eyes and our ears on them. But you will note (as the Spirit has reminded me) that no one could look to Moses and be healed.

One must look to the copper serpent: Christ Himself.

(Allow me to add that if your eyes are on a statue or an icon or upon Peter or Paul or upon the Pope or upon a religion... then your eyes are not upon Christ, showing that you have entirely missed the lesson of the copper serpent.)

Sometimes anti-Catholics cite Deuteronomy 5:9, where God said concerning idols, "You shall not bow down to them." Since many Catholics sometimes bow or kneel in front of statues of Jesus and the saints, anti-Catholics confuse the legitimate veneration of a sacred image with the sin of idolatry.


Though bowing can be used as a posture in worship, not all bowing is worship. In Japan, people show respect by bowing in greeting (the equivalent of the Western handshake). Similarly, a person can kneel before a king without worshipping him as a god. In the same way, a Catholic who may kneel in front of a statue while praying isn’t worshipping the statue or even praying to it, any more than the Protestant who kneels with a Bible in his hands when praying is worshipping the Bible or praying to it.
So you are just respecting the statue when you kneel before it? Why? What has it done that is worthy of respect?

What about caressing and kissing the feet of a statue or praying to the statue? Because those are the things I mentioned.


This was also a statue of Peter. Perhaps you will recall that we have an actual example of what Peter would have thought about people doing this in person, much less to a statue built of him.

As Peter entered the house, Cornelius met him and fell at his feet in reverence. But Peter made him get up. "Stand up," he said, "I am only a man myself."



Doesn't sound like Peter taught or would have been okay with what the 'church' that is supposedly built upon him, does with a statue that they made of him.

You have asked me to think. I ask you to do the same. Better yet would be to take these things to Christ and ask Him about these things.



Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

RightReason
Under Probation
Posts: 1510
Joined: Sat May 20, 2017 6:26 pm
Been thanked: 12 times

Post #66

Post by RightReason »

[Replying to tam]
Allow me to add that if your eyes are on a statue or an icon or upon Peter or Paul or upon the Pope or upon a religion... then your eyes are not upon Christ, showing that you have entirely missed the lesson of the copper serpent.


Absolutely false. THAT is what you think. That is what you have falsely projected. Can you read the hearts of men? Exactly as explained, kneeling before a statue of St. Peter, even kissing a statue of St. Peter IS paying homage to God, who gave us Peter and His Church! When I see a statue of a Saint, I am reminded about how they lived their life entirely for God. The Saints always point us to God. If you knew anything about them, you would know that. I can picture a mother who lost her child, clutching some piece of art her child made, or maybe even a picture of her child, kissing the picture and giving glory to God for bringing the child into her life. I know that that picture would bring me closer to God. That picture would remind me of my beautiful little girl that Our Lord blessed me with. The picture would help direct my thoughts to God, who would always get all of my love and respect and adoration. To accuse that mother of worshiping her little girl as if she were a god, to accuse that mother of idolatry because she kisses the photograph of her daughter, and to tell her she is offending God and misses the point is the biggest load of self righteous cr@p I have ever heard. You saw what you wanted to see in those sojourners in Rome. It’s sad really. You were right there and you missed it. You were too busy judging and being full of your own preconceived notions – you couldn’t imagine a faith that brings people to their knees in love and thanksgiving.
Better take these things to Christ and ask Him about these things.
Right back at you dear.

RightReason
Under Probation
Posts: 1510
Joined: Sat May 20, 2017 6:26 pm
Been thanked: 12 times

Post #67

Post by RightReason »

[Replying to post 65 by tam]

One of my favorite priests. Thought you might like this . . .


User avatar
tam
Savant
Posts: 5567
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Has thanked: 244 times
Been thanked: 205 times
Contact:

Post #68

Post by tam »

Peace again to you,
RightReason wrote: [Replying to tam]
Allow me to add that if your eyes are on a statue or an icon or upon Peter or Paul or upon the Pope or upon a religion... then your eyes are not upon Christ, showing that you have entirely missed the lesson of the copper serpent.


Absolutely false. THAT is what you think. That is what you have falsely projected. Can you read the hearts of men? Exactly as explained, kneeling before a statue of St. Peter, even kissing a statue of St. Peter IS paying homage to God, who gave us Peter and His Church! When I see a statue of a Saint, I am reminded about how they lived their life entirely for God.


As I said, your eyes are upon them. Their lives. Rather than upon Christ.
The Saints always point us to God.


So why are you looking at them (or the RCC) instead of at the One they have pointed you toward (Christ, the copper serpent)?

If you knew anything about them, you would know that.
That they point to Christ? Each time you have asked me what the Body of Christ (the Church) does, have I not said that we are to point to Christ, to bear witness to Christ?

You saw what you wanted to see in those sojourners in Rome.


I had no expectations on that score. I did not expect to see anything like that. As I said, I was genuinely floored.
It’s sad really. You were right there and you missed it. You were too busy judging


Missed what?

(and being shocked that people would do that is not judging; acknowledging that neither Christ nor Peter nor the other apostles did or taught or wanted such a thing done is not judging; I was sad; I was sad for my Lord especially, and I was sad for the people who are misled.)
...you couldn’t imagine a faith that brings people to their knees in love and thanksgiving.
Of course I can imagine such a faith.

Better take these things to Christ and ask Him about these things.
Right back at you dear.
Edited, having realized that you changed my quote.

Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

RightReason
Under Probation
Posts: 1510
Joined: Sat May 20, 2017 6:26 pm
Been thanked: 12 times

Post #69

Post by RightReason »

[Replying to tam]
As I said, your eyes are upon them. Their lives. Rather than upon Christ.
Ha, ha, ha . . . I know you said that – it’s wrong and kind of mean. My center is Christ. Everything I do and say revolves around Him. He is the first person I acknowledge from the minute I wake up and throughout my day. Anything I read or learn about the Saints brings me even closer to Him. If God didn’t want that, we wouldn’t be here, all together, cheering each other on – we’d all live on islands. You sooooooo don’t get it. Your “Me and Jesus� religion is crumbling as it isn’t Scriptural. God established His Church because He loves us. As has already been explained now, which you never can answer, is the impractical, illogical, and unscriptural understanding of your notion of Christ's Church.
So why are you looking at them
Because they are the tangible, earthly, visible examples God gave us to help us see and get to know Him even better. We have eyes and ears and bodies and we put on this earth. You are sounding like a Gnostic -- Gnostics assert that matter is inherently evil and spirit is good.
That they point to Christ? Each time you have asked me what the Body of Christ (the Church) does, have I not said that we are to point to Christ, to bear witness to Christ?
Who does that better than the Saints? “The prayer of a righteous person is powerful and effective.� –James 5:16

I had no expectations on that score.
Riiiiiiiiiiiiight . . . your erroneous pre conceived notions were confirmed because you incorrectly understand the teachings of Christ regarding idolatry.
It’s sad really. You were right there and you missed it. You were too busy judging


Missed what?
Missed being moved by the humility of those who love Jesus to prostrate themselves in His house, to take the time out of their days to be with Him in His home. You missed recognizing these people were thanking those who have gone before them, those who have fought the good fight, and continue to pray and help us every day get closer to Our Lord.

“Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles. And let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us� –Hebrew 12:1

We’re all in this together. The Saints knew this. Catholics know this. It is what is meant by the Communion of Saints. Thanks be to God.

User avatar
tam
Savant
Posts: 5567
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Has thanked: 244 times
Been thanked: 205 times
Contact:

Post #70

Post by tam »

RightReason wrote: [Replying to post 65 by tam]

One of my favorite priests. Thought you might like this . . .


You know that I do not follow Luther any more than I follow the Pope, right?

To the rest, the man did not say anything new than what you have been posting, so there is not much to respond to. I did find it interesting that he stated Luther had founded his religion mainly upon Paul (even if in error). So the protestants build upon Paul (and I don't really disagree), while the Catholics build upon Peter (and claim this openly).


Who is building upon Christ?



Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

Post Reply