statuettes.... Error?!?

[Oblio]

The lds church says the same thing. And I choose not to believe either assertion.

Except history shows that the Mormons are a modern offshoot of the Protestants. They have no Apostolic history.

 

[thereselittleflower]

The lds church says the same thing. And I choose not to believe either assertion.

I would reject the LDS' claim too . . they have no way to show any connection between them and the apostolic faith . . there is no direct line of succession of Apostle to Bishop to Bishop to Bishop to Bishop and so forth through the centuries to allow for such a transmision of faith to occur for almost 2000 years.. . . They just popped up out of nowhere less than 200 years ago.

Without anything to base such a claim on, why should you or I believe them?

Just because they try to immitate the Catholic Church with their claim, that doesn't mean that the Catholic Church's claim is false . . .that is called guilt by association which doesn't prove anything.

Just because something has a superficial similarity to something else doesn't mean that the error in one transfers to the other . . . .

Each have to be judged on their own merits . . . We are not the LDS HD . . . . No more than you are the JW's . . . .


.

 

[thereselittleflower]

Finally you have explained it broken down simpler for me to understand...Now i see where your coming from and why you choose to believe that way...pax...kim

Sometimes I have to make myself remember that there can be issues in the way we use the same words and terms, and that not recognizing that a phrase or term is being used in two different ways can result in great misunderstanding.

I am sorry it took so long to realize this was an issue here.

Thank you for your post.


.

 

[Uphill Battle]

That doesn't answer my question UB . . you say you aren't trying to silence us .. .. but when we tell you our concerns, you say basically to stay out of your threads, if we don't like it, tough cookies . . . . .

That, in my book, is an attempt to silence us on these matters. . . . .


.

This is a complete misrepresentation of what I said. I said if you feel the thread will be a harrowing experience, then you are free to ignore it. What you are suggesting seems awfully paranoid, seeing as I opened the discussion to everyone. If I didn't want the RCC opinion, wouldn't I post somewhere where they could not disagree?

UB, come now . . not a single Catholic has made that claim!

Who is complaining about disagreement?
NO ONE!
What is being brought to your attention are accusations of idolatry, etc . . . .
That is much different than simply disagreeing . . .

yes, and that is wrong.

However, like I said, my personal experience with debating with RCC is the assertion that we are Catholic haters, only on the attack. Not everyone does this, but we get lumped in with them.

 

[Benedicta00]

Except history shows that the Mormons are a modern offshoot of the Protestants. They have no Apostolic history.

that's right.

 

[Benedicta00]

no, you SHOULD stand up for what you believe in....

And I do and I take it on the chin much of the time for doing it.

 

[Benedicta00]

Church won't disappear as long as the "spiritual Church" is around which of course believers (or Christians). Local Churches may disappear due to lack of joy and commitment to the Lord. Or, they are not real believers.

But yet the Catholic Church hasn't and it's been lasting since 33 AD. Odd isn't it? what other organization/monarchy/institution of any kind has ever lasted for 2000 consecutive years? I tell you, none but the Catholic Church, why? because it's a divine institution established by God himself.

Protestants denomination however have been splinted off in every possible way and direction. If the Catholic Church ever ceased, you bet protestantism will too.

 

[Benedicta00]

I completely agree . . .



HD . . . . I was just thinking . . .

There are phrases both Catholics and Protestants use . . but because of differences in perspective, they don't have the same meaning. And because of this, when one uses the term they way they use it, it can be misunderstood by the other and it can even seem offensive.

You have the Fulness of Truth HD . . .

The Fulness of Truth is a PERSON . . and His name is Jesus.

When we use the term 'fulness of truth" we are not talking about a person, but rather the full deposit of faith given by the apostles, the doctrines of the Christian faith.

That does not mean that Catholics personally have more of Jesus than Protestants do . . . That is a personal issue between each of us and God . . . Whether one is Catholic or Protestant makes no difference.

When we say we have the fullness of truth, all we are saying is that we believe that we have kept to the full deposit of faith given by the Apostles and that protestants have let some of those teachings go . . .

That doesn't mean that Protestants don't have Jesus who is the Fulness of Truth Himself.. . . it only has to do with understanding . . . . not with possession of Christ.


Never should the Catholic statement that we have the fulness of truth be construed in such a way to mean that no one but Catholics have Christ who is the Fulness of Truth Himself. . ...


Does that make sense?

HD . . you have Christ, who is the Fulness of Truth Himself.


.

I know there are good, holy, Protestants out there who put me to shame. In the end, what will my fullness of truth get me if I have not love?

We are talking about two different things, fullness of divine revelation and fullness of God in your heart.

 

[Uphill Battle]

And I do and I take it on the chin much of the time for doing it.

as do we all.

 

[thereselittleflower]

I know there are good, holy, Protestants out there who put me to shame. In the end, what will my fullness of truth get me if I have not love?

We are talking about two different things, fullness of divine revelation and fullness of God in your heart.

There are holier women and men of God than I within the ranks of Protestant believers and they put me to shame. . . . . . .


.

 

[Rhamiel]

Uphill battle, back to the start of this thread, you ever check out a real Catholic bookstore or something of that nature, I would hate for you to think that shop in the mall was the norm when it came to this kind of thing

 

[FrauleinElsa]

Why?

 

[Uphill Battle]

Uphill battle, back to the start of this thread, you ever check out a real Catholic bookstore or something of that nature, I would hate for you to think that shop in the mall was the norm when it came to this kind of thing

no, I don't. And for 99% of the Marian statuettes I see, I don't see anything wrong with them. (despite the fact that I doubt I'd ever own one.)

I was merely questioning the theological difficulties I saw in a few pieces.

This is the quagmire we get, though.

 

[Rhamiel]

LOL, right you are, a quagmire indeed, oh well, I do not think I will be back to this thread,52 pages is enough for me. I am sure in a few weeks anther thread will be ground zero

 

[thereselittleflower]

I'm not ignoring those who say things about us, or what we believe that isn't true, uphill.

I'm not gong to ignore posts that basically say we're lying when we correct the misrepresentations. I do however try my best to ignore the personal jabs taken at me but I'm not always successful. I am human after all. Cut me and I do bleed.

But there is something called passive agressive too, where threads are opened all sweet and nice with a disclaimer that they are not here to debate etc... knowing all the while what kind of attention their thread is going to receive. You aren't the only one who opens threads like that. Catholic do it to Protestants also.

I know you keep saying why you don't want to post in OBOB and I can not disagree with you, I don't go in there hardly ever myself because they can be unreasonable but if all you wanted was a answer to what you asked, then you should have asked in OBOB. I'm sorry but that was a train wreck waiting to happen.

If you wanted to be able to disagree with the answer given and debate about it, then I have to ask, why were you anticipating that you were going to be disagreeing with us?

You could have asked in OBOB, like you said, got our answer with a pat on the head and then, if you really disagreed that badly, you could have then opened the thread here but in a different way.

The way you opened just looks like a set up to us. I'm sorry if that's not the case but you should have known...

I have to agree . . . ..


.

 

[thereselittleflower]

no, I don't. And for 99% of the Marian statuettes I see, I don't see anything wrong with them. (despite the fact that I doubt I'd ever own one.)

I was merely questioning the theological difficulties I saw in a few pieces.

This is the quagmire we get, though.

Oh come now UB . . . Do you take us to be blind or something?

First, when you are asked point blank of you were asking quesitons of a theological nature in regards to Catholic doctrine and these statues you said this:

Today 03:15 AM
Uphill Battle Quote:

Originally Posted by GorrionGris
Excuse me but... are you trying to make a theological analysys of the RCC doctrine out of the selection of items (maybe made in Hong Kong) of some shop somewhere in the US?​

no, not in the slightest. I was refering only to the statuettes that I've seen. I never claimed that RCC theology was based off those statuettes.
​

You denied that this is a theological issue regarding Catholic doctrine.


Then, above, you say this:

I was merely questioning the theological difficulties I saw in a few pieces.​

You admit it is a theological issue .. and since these are Catholic statues, the theological issues are Catholic ones.


And so you contradict yourself.


.