Albion
Facilitator
- Dec 8, 2004
- 111,127
- 33,263
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
What alarms you about the word? Is it that it suggests veneration of the Virgin? Or is it as I thought you were saying before, i.e. if the Bible doesn't mention it, it cannot be used?Could it not be both, the word and the use?
Are we agreed, then, that such arguments (which would include "rosary" too) are unpersuasive?Many if not most Catholic believers will argue that the "Implication of anything" is not proof that the thing exists and will insist that the literal WORD be found.
It is the same old argument of....the word Rapture is not in the Bible so then there is no such thing.
Same with the Trinity. No literal words, then it does not exist.
Yes, they are anxious to say that, but it's ridiculous. If Faith alone gets a mention as accomplishing something, then for us to say we agree with "Faith alone" makes perfect sense and is not improper.I just had a long discussion on another thread with a Catholic believer who insists that because the literal words..."Faith Alone" are not found in the Bible then there can be no doctrine based on the "Implication" of that said doctrine.
Ah, you mean it as a response to them doing the same thing as they accuse us of. Yes, I agree with that.That is why I was saying the word "Rosary" is not found in the Bible but all Catholics pray it, but then turn around and denounce that we are saved by "Faith Alone" and not works least you brag about it.
Upvote
0