Something About Mary

[Stryder06]

Wait, wait, wait...

Athletes don't get half the attention we might give to a Saint or Mary? How fast can you sell out a stadium when the next playoff matchup is announced? How many millions do advertisers pay to get 30 seconds in a Super Bowl? Yet, when a well-thought-of speaker comes to a city to hold a conference on the Blessed Virgin Mary, they struggle to get half-full rooms.

Idolatry is out there, in every shape and form. Loving Jesus' mother is not idolatry.

When I said that athletes don't get half of the attention that Mary get's I was saying from Catholics. I wasn't talking about people in general.

 

[motherprayer]

Wait, wait, wait...

Athletes don't get half the attention we might give to a Saint or Mary? How fast can you sell out a stadium when the next playoff matchup is announced? How many millions do advertisers pay to get 30 seconds in a Super Bowl? Yet, when a well-thought-of speaker comes to a city to hold a conference on the Blessed Virgin Mary, they struggle to get half-full rooms.

Idolatry is out there, in every shape and form. Loving Jesus' mother is not idolatry.

Amen. Amen. And Amen again. Oh my. I've seen it!

 

[steve_bakr]

But in truth, Mohammad had been taught about both Judaism and Christianity and patterned much of his new religion upon practices and beliefs derived from one or the other of them. As you know, he even comments on both of them in the Koran.

Mohammed was familiar with the forms of Judaism and Christianity that reached Arabia at the time, yes. And there were Jewish tribes in Arabia. But much of the Jewish, and especially Christian, teachings that reached Mohammed were apocryhal and legendary. We see that in his stories of the prophets and in his legendry story of the birth of Jesus.

I'm not sure whether Mohammed had a true understanding of Christian teaching. He did not understand the concept of the Trinity (but who really does?) and took it for polytheism. He also associated Mary with the Christian Trinity.

So, yes, there was a lot of information about Christianity and Judaism that Mohammed picked up in his quest. He seems to have accepted the Jewish prophets, the virgin birth, miracles by Jesus, etc. But many of his accounts of these contain apocryphal and legendary material in them. To this day, I still get the Quran's versions of the stories of prophets confused with the Bible's.

 

[steve_bakr]

Fortunately I'm not doing any such thing. What I am doing is testing the spirit, as we're admonished to do in the scriptures.

You see here, the problem is that I do believe there is a misapplication of the word "worship" here. The actions are essentially the same. You bow before God. You bow before Mary. You bow before the saints (in general, not you personally). However to distinguish "worship" from "verneration/honor" your church has simply instituted a word.

I personally believe that the actions done are just as important as the thoughts associated with it. Let us consider the following text for example:

That at what time ye hear the sound of the cornet, flute, harp, sackbut, psaltery, dulcimer, and all kinds of musick, ye fall down and worship the golden image that Nebuchadnezzar the king hath set up:

Let's look at another verse:
And when he was come out of the ship, immediately there met him out of the tombs a man with an unclean spirit...But when he saw Jesus afar off, he ran and worshipped him,

Now you say that latria is what you give to God, while hyperdulia is what is given to Mary, and dulia is what is given to the Saints. Now latria is defined as the adoration that is given to God alone. If we apply that definition to both of the scenarios in the texts here, I think you'd be hard pressed to say that the Jews who fell down before the golden image were ascribing to it the adoration that belongs to God alone. You might have a case with the demon possessed man, but even there, it would be hard to say that the demons were adoring Christ.

What we can see is that in both instances, worship required bowing.

Looking at more examples from the scripture,
And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet, and worshipped him.

And I John saw these things, and heard them. And when I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel which shewed me these things.

Now in each of these case I would think, again, that you'd be hard pressed to prove that Cornelius and John were offering latria to Peter and the angel. It would be most likely that they were offering what you call dulia. In either case, they were both told "Don't do that."

Point being that the intent isn't what I take exception with. The very act of bowing down seems to be tied to worship. Saying latria, dulia, or hyperdulia, doesn't matter if the action you take along with those is an inappropriate one.

People used to bow down to their superiors as part of their manners and culture.

 

[Thekla]

I was more curious why LLoJ was specifically referring to Judaism was an apostate religion, whereas in the same paragraph he did not say the same about Islam.
The better case would have been made for Islam, I think, for clearly Islam sees itself as the fulfillment of Judaism and Christianity, while at the same time utterly rejecting the central Christian tenets of the resurrection and the Divine nature of Christ.

To say that neither religion is apostate from Christianity would seem to me to be more consistent though. The Christianity contained within Islam is more within the realm of the Christian heresies that Mohammed was exposed to in Arabia by the Nestorian and gnostics and their apocryphal works.

You are onto something; in the east, Islam was originally thought of as a "Christian heresy".
Saint Silouan Orthodox Church: Islam: a Christian heresy
There are iirc (though I do not recall the authors) discussions/apology extant discussing this, or describing dialogues between Christian and Islamic apologists.
From memory, Mohammed -in travels with his uncle, a merchant- boarded/received hospitality at Christian Monasteries and was thus exposed to Christianity as a child. A young man I spoke with (Ethiopian Orthodox mother, Muslim father) claimed that one of Mohammed's wives was the daughter of an Orthodox cleric - another exposure to Christianity.
The monastery of St. Catherine the Great (Mt. Sinai) was granted protection in perpetuity by Mohammed.

 

[Thekla]

Fortunately I'm not doing any such thing. What I am doing is testing the spirit, as we're admonished to do in the scriptures.

You see here, the problem is that I do believe there is a misapplication of the word "worship" here. The actions are essentially the same. You bow before God. You bow before Mary. You bow before the saints (in general, not you personally). However to distinguish "worship" from "verneration/honor" your church has simply instituted a word.

I personally believe that the actions done are just as important as the thoughts associated with it. Let us consider the following text for example:

That at what time ye hear the sound of the cornet, flute, harp, sackbut, psaltery, dulcimer, and all kinds of musick, ye fall down and worship the golden image that Nebuchadnezzar the king hath set up:


Let's look at another verse:
And when he was come out of the ship, immediately there met him out of the tombs a man with an unclean spirit...But when he saw Jesus afar off, he ran and worshipped him,

Now you say that latria is what you give to God, while hyperdulia is what is given to Mary, and dulia is what is given to the Saints. Now latria is defined as the adoration that is given to God alone. If we apply that definition to both of the scenarios in the texts here, I think you'd be hard pressed to say that the Jews who fell down before the golden image were ascribing to it the adoration that belongs to God alone. You might have a case with the demon possessed man, but even there, it would be hard to say that the demons were adoring Christ.

What we can see is that in both instances, worship required bowing.

Looking at more examples from the scripture,
And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet, and worshipped him.

And I John saw these things, and heard them. And when I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel which shewed me these things.

Now in each of these case I would think, again, that you'd be hard pressed to prove that Cornelius and John were offering latria to Peter and the angel. It would be most likely that they were offering what you call dulia. In either case, they were both told "Don't do that."

Point being that the intent isn't what I take exception with. The very act of bowing down seems to be tied to worship. Saying latria, dulia, or hyperdulia, doesn't matter if the action you take along with those is an inappropriate one.

The Scriptures state (in the translation you give) that they were offering worship, not respect/honor/veneration.

 

[Albion]

Mohammed was familiar with the forms of Judaism and Christianity that reached Arabia at the time, yes. And there were Jewish tribes in Arabia.

Mohammad didn't spend his whole life in Arabia, you know.

But much of the Jewish, and especially Christian, teachings that reached Mohammed were apocryhal and legendary. We see that in his stories of the prophets and in his legendry story of the birth of Jesus.

That wouldn't make much difference, would it? I mean, he's still working off from what he knows of both of those religions. And it's clear that some portion at least of his new faith was copied from bona fide elements in Judaism or Christianity.

So, yes, there was a lot of information about Christianity and Judaism that Mohammed picked up in his quest. He seems to have accepted the Jewish prophets, the virgin birth, miracles by Jesus, etc. But many of his accounts of these contain apocryphal and legendary material in them. To this day, I still get the Quran's versions of the stories of prophets confused with the Bible's.

In addition to beliefs, consider the practices that were woven into Islam, too. A season of fasting, monastic-style prayer at intervals during the day, etc.

 

[Stryder06]

People used to bow down to their superiors as part of their manners and culture.

Yeah, they also used to have multiple wives and a harem on the side. Doesn't make it right.

 

[Stryder06]

The Scriptures state (in the translation you give) that they were offering worship, not respect/honor/veneration.

Like I said, it could very well be that bowing down, in and of itself, is an act of worship. That's the point I was trying to make.

If I'm not mistaken, you can bow down before a statue of Mary or an icon of a Saint, but so long as it's "dulia" or "hyperdulia" it's ok. My point is that scripture makes no such distinction or exception.

 

[Thekla]

Like I said, it could very well be that bowing down, in and of itself, is an act of worship. That's the point I was trying to make.

Only this is not said in Scripture; instead, we are instructed not to judge by appearances, but by the righteous judgement Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment. John 7:24

It is the heart, the disposition, that determines what "is" not the appearance:
This people draws near to me with their mouth, and honors me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. Matt. 15:8 (citing Isaiah)

If I'm not mistaken, you can bow down before a statue of Mary or an icon of a Saint, but so long as it's "dulia" or "hyperdulia" it's ok. My point is that scripture makes no such distinction or exception.

Scripture, Christ, makes the distinction, and the distinction is in the heart - not the appearance ...

Likewise, one can worship an idol without bowing to it or even speaking of this (as in the previous example of sports, also money, and especially the idolatrous worship of one's self).

 

[Stryder06]

Only this is not said in Scripture; instead, we are instructed not to judge by appearances, but by the righteous judgement Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment. John 7:24

It is the heart, the disposition, that determines what "is" not the appearance:
This people draws near to me with their mouth, and honors me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. Matt. 15:8 (citing Isaiah)

We are also told to avoid the very appearance of evil (1 Thess 5:22).
So apply the verse in context. No I cannot judge ones intentions, nor do I know their heart, but, for example, if I see a friend of mines that's married, walking down the street with a woman who isn't his wife, and he has his hands around her waste, I could very well advise him that he ought not do that. Even if there is nothing going on between them, and that's just a way that they've walked since they were kids, it still conveys the wrong message.

Scripture, Christ, makes the distinction, and the distinction is in the heart - not the appearance ...

The appearance here was a correct appearance with a wrong attitude. So for example, If I profess to love God, and I show up to church, that will avail me nothing if my heart is far from him. And one's heart being far from God isn't gagued by the emotions. It doesn't matter what your feelings say to you, if you are doing something wrong, even with the best of intentions, it's still wrong, and if you refuse to correct said action, your heart is far from God.

Likewise, one can worship an idol without bowing to it or even speaking of this (as in the previous example of sports, also money, and especially the idolatrous worship of one's self).

Very true. In in all those cases, your actions or appearance, will tell on you, but since the issue at hand is bowing, we ought to stay focused. Scripture never uses the words latria, or dulia. But if we wanted to compare, one could easily say that John, for example, was attempting to give dulia to the angel. That was quickly forbidden. That seems to indicate that the act of bowing down, even to show respect, ought not be done.

 

[Fireinfolding]

Like I said, it could very well be that bowing down, in and of itself, is an act of worship. That's the point I was trying to make.

If I'm not mistaken, you can bow down before a statue of Mary or an icon of a Saint, but so long as it's "dulia" or "hyperdulia" it's ok. My point is that scripture makes no such distinction or exception.

Theres kamptō as well as others too


Romans 11:4 But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.

bowed kamptō

1) to bend, bow, the knee (the knees) a) to one1) in honour of one 2) in religious veneration b) used of worshippers 2) to bow one's self

Paul making reference to 1Kings 19:18

Which in Hebrew word "bowed" is kara`

1) to bend, kneel, bow, bow down, sink down to one's knees, kneel down to rest (of animals), kneel in reverence a) (Qal) 1) to bow 2) to bow down, crouch 3) to bow down over 4) to tilt, lean b) (Hiphil) to cause to bow


In such respects they in Kings likewise were called worshippers of Baal as spoken of here


2Kings 10:23 And Jehu went, and Jehonadab the son of Rechab, into the house of Baal, and said unto the worshippers of Baal, Search, and look that there be here with you none of the servants of the LORD, but the worshippers of Baal only.


And again from here showing to the knees (which bow) and to the mouth (which hath kissed)

1Kings 19:18 Yet I have left me seven thousand in Israel, all the knees which have not bowed unto Baal, and every mouth which hath not kissed him.

At least within the definition of kamptō is shown both honour and veneration in it which corresponds to the hebrew word kara` which is inclusive of reverance too. There are various other words used for worship, I posted awhile back on, I'll see if I can find it.

Though kamptō itself is used 4 times in the NT. Once (negatively) in relationship to that done unto the image of Baal in Romans 11:4 (above) but shown belonging to the Lord the three other times its used. As shown in Romans 14:11, unto the Father of our Lord Jesus in Ephes 3:14 and at the name of Jesus Christ as shown in Phil 2:10

 

[Fireinfolding]

Okay found the other words so used also. If they would be helpful or not I dont know. Figured I would post them here.

Heres two words for worship in the OT one in hebrew shachah # 7812 and the other in aramaic cĕgid # 5457 both are used interchangebly even in respects to what not to do with images. Examples of this are found in both Exodus 32:8 where shachah is used and in Dan 3:10 where cĕgid is used

The word Paul uses in respects to the bowing of the knee to the image of Baal and includes in its definition "religious veneration" in Rom 11:4 is the word kamptō # 2578 Outside of Rom 11:4 which is used in respects to the image of Baal is used only 3 other times and shown in truth belonging only to God as shown in Rom 14:11, Ephes 3:14 and Phil 2:10.

Here are some NT the Greek words for worship, one is proskyneō # 4352 an example of which is shown in Rev 22:8 in respects to a man falling down before an angel and also a man falling down before the apostle Peter in Acts 10:35-36 Its also used in respects to figures they made in Acts 7:43. In the previous verse Acts 7:42 its used interchangably with the word latreuō # 3000 in Acts 7:42 and is the same word used in respects to serving the creature" more then the Creator (unto which He gave them up to) as shown in Rom 1:25 . In Acts 7:42 it shows another word for worship which is sebazomai # 4573 (which is to to fear, be afraid honour religiously, or to worship) the host of heaven in this example. That which they gave to the host of heaven and the creature also belongs to God only as Jesus himself confirms in Mat 4:10. And yet another word for worship is found in respects to visible devotions Paul tells them to repent of this shown in Acts 17:23 whereas here is the word eusebeō # 2151 which means to dutifully regard (which they were doing) in respect to visible devotions, its really used twice and shown (in truth) as belonging to ones family in respects to showing piety at home in 1Ti 5:4 So its a displaced form of regarding one thing (as in "visible devotions" falsely so) over another (where such regarding should truely be placed) between the two. The other I found is called "will worship" ethelothrēskia # 1479 and is used only once in Col 2:23

 

[Thekla]

We are also told to avoid the very appearance of evil (1 Thess 5:22).

Yes, and depending on the culture, what "appears" evil will vary in this particular case. We live in a 'salad culture' (it does not look like the melting pot to me) - so we see a variety of cultural expressions.
The temptation to be judgmental is also something we should avoid; it can be a great way to rationalize not focusing on one's own disposition and walk.

So apply the verse in context. No I cannot judge ones intentions, nor do I know their heart, but, for example, if I see a friend of mines that's married, walking down the street with a woman who isn't his wife, and he has his hands around her waste, I could very well advise him that he ought not do that. Even if there is nothing going on between them, and that's just a way that they've walked since they were kids, it still conveys the wrong message.

And if your friend explains this is his sister, or some other reasonable explanation, would you doubt him and/or persist ?

If every action we do must be measured against a secular standard in order to avoid the appearance of 'wrong', we can do nothing.

In a culture (ours) that has lost the sense of the sacred, and eschews respect and also is suspicious of physical expression, we can often mistake our secular view for our faith.

The appearance here was a correct appearance with a wrong attitude. So for example, If I profess to love God, and I show up to church, that will avail me nothing if my heart is far from him. And one's heart being far from God isn't gagued by the emotions. It doesn't matter what your feelings say to you, if you are doing something wrong, even with the best of intentions, it's still wrong, and if you refuse to correct said action, your heart is far from God.

Yes, but this matter of the heart is rarely visible to others unless it is given by God for them to see. And it is rare, as to have this gift is "dangerous", can lead to pride; to bear this one must have a truly God-given deep humility.

Best not to be a "busybody", else how is a truly humble heart cultivated ?

Very true. In in all those cases, your actions or appearance, will tell on you, but since the issue at hand is bowing, we ought to stay focused. Scripture never uses the words latria, or dulia. But if we wanted to compare, one could easily say that John, for example, was attempting to give dulia to the angel. That was quickly forbidden. That seems to indicate that the act of bowing down, even to show respect, ought not be done.

Why would you say John is giving doulia when Scripture does not say this ?

Speculation is spiritually dangerous ...

 

[sunlover1]

We are also told to avoid the very appearance of evil (1 Thess 5:22).
So apply the verse in context. No I cannot judge ones intentions, nor do I know their heart, but, for example, if I see a friend of mines that's married, walking down the street with a woman who isn't his wife, and he has his hands around her waste, I could very well advise him that he ought not do that. Even if there is nothing going on between them, and that's just a way that they've walked since they were kids, it still conveys the wrong message.

Yep, and if they're spirit filled you won't see that.

But if we wanted to compare, one could easily say that John, for example, was attempting to give dulia to the angel. That was quickly forbidden. That seems to indicate that the act of bowing down, even to show respect, ought not be done.

Good to know, thank you!

 

[Thekla]

Let me ask: for those posting here, what is the action of your body at prayer ?

 

[Thekla]

Yep, and if they're spirit filled you won't see that.

In all times, regions, circumstances, and cases ?

It is better not to judge; holding one around the waist may be a form of physical support when the body is weak.

The Scripture says John was giving worship (proskunusai), not that it was 'doulia'.
To equate them is only a speculation, and not founded in the Scriptures (where what is known of the heart is recorded).

 

[seeingeyes]

We are also told to avoid the very appearance of evil (1 Thess 5:22).

No. We are told to flee when evil appears.

If we were to avoid 'the very appearance of evil', then Jesus was not sinless at all. He got accused of 'appearing to do evil', like, every other day.

 

[Thekla]

No. We are told to flee when evil appears.

If we were to avoid 'the very appearance of evil', then Jesus was not sinless at all. He got accused of 'appearing to do evil', like, every other day.

Indeed, He did.

Our faith, Christianity, is not a religion of moral codes, but is relational (growing relationship with God, which involves the cultivation of the God-demonstrated virtues, and in this the cultivation of right-relationship with others and the self ).

Throughout the 2,000 years Christians have been accused of the evil/appearance of evil - this based on whatever the 'moral code' of the culture.

 

[Stryder06]

No. We are told to flee when evil appears.

If we were to avoid 'the very appearance of evil', then Jesus was not sinless at all. He got accused of 'appearing to do evil', like, every other day.

That's not what the text says. The text I quoted says to avoid the very apperance of evil. Christ did nothing that even remotely appeared to be actually evil/wrong. He was being accused of wrong doing by people who hated them. Their voice doesn't count.