Oh, but they are. See "graven images, proscriptions against." Mariology is also heresy.
Oh, but they are. See "graven images, proscriptions against." Mariology is also heresy.
Oh, but they are. See "graven images, proscriptions against." Mariology is also heresy.
lol,, I guess Moses was committing heresy by making the serpent.
lol,, I guess Moses was committing heresy by making the serpent. Or the jews for making the cherubim and the ark..
Technically by definition, heresy is when someone deviates or perverts the dogmas and doctrines of the Catholic faith. For instance, St Augustine would probably refer to you as a Antidicomarite based on your comment on Mary..
Heretics called Antidicomarites are those who contradict the perpetual virginity of Mary, and affirm that after Christ was born she was joined as one with her husband. (St. Augustine)
Oh snap, you didn't reference book, chapter and verse. Unlike somebody else who got to it first!
But to call icons of Christ and the cross Satanic is almost akin to blasphemy of the Holy Spirit..
God Himself seems to be disobeying His own commandments at times if we operate under your definition -- Numbers 21:8-9.
Also, the idea that the greatest of God's saints is dead and doesn't pray for us is heresy. I don't know what Gospel people are preaching when they turn around and declare their Christian brothers and sisters to be "dead."
There is what the Lord says, and there is what you say. I'll stick with what the Lord says.
Please. Neither of those equates to iconodulia. In fact, the Nehustan was destroyed because your 7th century BC equivalents were "venerating" it.
I don't care. Augustine engaged in heresy when he deviated from Scripture and the Early Church.
You didn't address what I said, at all.
Yes I did. People were not meant to "venerate" the objects you mentioned. When they "venerated" one it was destroyed. And Jesus Christ does not single out his mother for special "veneration." In fact, he does not encourage "veneration" of her at all.
There is what the Lord says, and there is what you say. I'll stick with what the Lord says.
mmhmm. And because you say that, then it is so! lol
scripture? you mean the canon that he helped put together in the NT in the Synod of Hippo and Carthage that you today read?? Too bad all those Mary venerating, 'idol worshipping' heretic priests and bishops had such a large say in what you consider scripture ...
Yes I did. People were not meant to "venerate" the objects you mentioned. When they "venerated" one it was destroyed. And Jesus Christ does not single out his mother for special "veneration." In fact, he does not encourage "veneration" of her at all.
Also, the idea that the greatest of God's saints is dead and doesn't pray for us is heresy. I don't know what Gospel people are preaching when they turn around and declare their Christian brothers and sisters to be "dead."
I am so tired of this toothless argument from adherents of the Roman Church. The various books of the Bible were considered inspired and authoritative long before your councils. Besides which, what makes you think I agree with your church's canon in all respects? (I do not, for example, believe 2 Peter was written by Peter.)
I am so tired of this toothless argument from adherents of the Roman Church. The various books of the Bible were considered inspired and authoritative long before your councils. Besides which, what makes you think I agree with your church's canon in all respects? (I do not, for example, believe 2 Peter was written by Peter.)
Your own words are biased. I'm Orthodox. I maintain that my church authorised the Bible. Your bias is western-centred.I am so tired of this toothless argument from adherents of the Roman Church.
The various books of the Bible were considered inspired and authoritative long before your councils. Besides which, what makes you think I agree with your church's canon in all respects? (I do not, for example, believe 2 Peter was written by Peter.)