Posted on 06/18/2017 2:20:09 PM PDT by narses
I believe it was National Geographic, many years ago, said, with the fall of Constantinople in the 4th Crusade, 1204 AD, among of the relic loot were THREE heads of John the Baptist.
So someone in a rush chucked a body on top of Elisha, he came to life, and this is "veneration" of relics? LOL, OK. Keep reaching!
Jesus said to him, “Because you have seen Me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen, and yet have believed.” (John 20:29)
We walk by faith and not by sight.
Or the handkerchief given by Elijah to Elisha to resurrect the widow's child?
Or even the bones of Elijah, which resurrected a man killed by thieves?
Or the garment's Peter's shadow had fallen upon, which had to power to heal people?
(Strokes chin)
There are analogous instances in Evangelical circles as well; the British Pentecostal preacher Smith Wigglesworth (comical name, but really his name), once boarded a train without speaking to other passengers, only to have a number of them come up to him of their own volition and ask him, "Sir, who *are* you? You convict us of sin."
For a more generalizable analogy, consider the brisk business in autographed sports jerseys. We "venerate" athletic stars, even those with (ahem, wince) "venereal" diseases (e.g. sports writers covering for Babe Ruth's absence from the lineup one day by saying he had a tummy ache from eating too many hot dogs).
And yet nobody considers wrong, the far greater adulation given to sports figures than to those who (according to Christian doctrine) have chosen to forsake the world for eternal glory.
But, the act of faith in God to believe that the divine healing or act would occur is the key- obedience to God’s command not worshipping an object.
The serpent- “looking upon it ( in faith)” believing that God would forgive and heal, not loving an object. Pretty certain that those who refused to look upon the bronze serpent in faith , even though they were in proximity, didn’t survive their snake bites. Faith, not the object.
Namaan the leprous Syrian general, was upset that the prophet would not perform some miraculous deed, but rather was told to dip himself in the Jordan seven times. Did the water hold any power or was it obedience to the command of the LORD? If you think it was the water- you missed the Living God a ways back!
All of your examples are based on acts of faith- I would tend to think that if Namaan and all the others in these ( and your) examples did not believe that God could and would heal them, they would have gone on in sickness and handicap.
Did not the scriptures say that Jesus could not perform miracles in his own town because of their unbelief? Wow, if the Son of the Living God was prevented from direct action because of unbelief, then how would a mere object of created material have any power (sic)?
Aaron's rod that budded was not said to perform any miracles. The dead man who revived upon contact with Elijah's bones, by definition, did not have faith.
My point was, God chooses sometimes, even within Scripture, to work through methods other than those approved by 20th century middle class evangelical churchians.
The relics (I'm talking about the true ones, not those made by frauds) and prayers for the aid/intercession of saints, fall in the same category; if He chooses to employ certain channels (in the marketing term) to extend His grace, and mercy, that's His business. We ought to be grateful for whenever and however He makes Himself available to us.
“Huh. Like the jar of manna, and Aaron’s rod that budded?
Or the handkerchief given by Elijah to Elisha to resurrect the widow’s child?
Or even the bones of Elijah, which resurrected a man killed by thieves?”
Never worshipped, idolized, kissed, prayed to, fondled, etc.
Those are good points. They tie in with the handkerchiefs and aprons which were taken from Paul’s body to the sick. Unfortunately there is no equivalent today of those handkerchiefs and aprons. Once in a great while someone says that contact with a certain item healed them. But the for the next hundred—or however many—people who touch that same item, nothing happens.
Jesus spoke to this issue. Here is the same pronouncement, recorded in two different Gospels:
Matthew 8:22
But Jesus *said to him, “Follow Me, and allow the dead to bury their own dead.”
Luke 9:60
But He said to him, “Allow the dead to bury their own dead; but as for you, go and proclaim everywhere the kingdom of God.”
Let the dead be buried, without hanging onto their brain or some other item, and as for those who are alive in Christ, proclaim the Good News everywhere.
1) Your gospel quotes are out of context, as the young man had just declined Jesus' invitation to follow him: "Let me first go and bury my father." The "let the dead bury their own dead" was not a general proscription as "do not commit adultery" but to *him*; the principle involved is, follow God *first*.
(Incidentally, you know, if you wanted to engage in sophistry, your line could argue FOR the veneration of relics: "Let the dead _bury_ *their* own dead, but as for you, follow me" (hence, rather than bury the dead, venerate them.) <-- just yanking your chain, I don't really think this is what it meant. :-P
2) Luke 13:4-5
4Or those eighteen who were killed when the tower of Siloam collapsed on them: Do you think that they were more sinful than all the others living in Jerusalem? 5No, I tell you. But unless you repent, you too will all perish.”
Jesus is cautioning not to draw too immediate a conclusion from individual instances. (cf His instructions to Peter, "if it is My will if that man remain alive until I come [again], what is that to you? Follow Me.")
Against the sin of idolatry (less likely) there is the added feature of humility. It rubs our nose in our helplessness, and interdependence, and all under Christ...
Peace be with you.
2) Luke 13:4-5
4Or those eighteen who were killed when the tower of Siloam collapsed on them: Do you think that they were more sinful than all the others living in Jerusalem? 5No, I tell you. But unless you repent, you too will all perish.”
Jesus is cautioning not to draw too immediate a conclusion from individual instances.
In this passage, as the context makes clear, Jesus is very specifically warning against observing a disaster and playing the Holier Than Thou game. I.e.: if Pilot killed some Galileans, or a tower collapsed and killed 18 men, the lesson is NOT that these were particularly vile sinners who deserved it. The lesson is that we’re all in the same boat, sin-wise, and no one is in a position to judge the victims of calamity.
While the passage I cited does have a specific context, it is also revealing of Jesus’ attitude toward the dead. I.e.: let the dead be buried, while the living prioritize following Jesus and living for Him.
I have a question for you. Here’s the setup. There’s been some discussion of an incident recorded in 2 Kings. The body of a man about to be interred was thrown into the grave of Elisha. Upon touching the prophet’s bones, the man revived.
An amazing story! Yet in context there is no further comment on it. The Scripture records that the man (who was about to be buried) “stood on his feet.” Yet the very next verse speaks not of this astonishing event, but of the oppression to which Israel had been subjected by Hazael, king of Aram.
Reading this event in context, here’s what is remarkable. God reveals to us circumstances that appear almost to demand some recognition of the effect these bones had on the dead man. Yet the Holy Spirit, directing the Scriptural writer, ***deliberately*** omits any reference to subsequent veneration of these bones. Rather, the amazing ‘revival,’ happened, and the bones were forgotten (so far as the Holy, inspired Word of God is concerned).
My question is this: how is this not an ***anti*** veneration passage? A man about to be interred revived after touching the prophet’s bones...and nothing. Zero mention of collecting and honoring the bones. Zero mention of veneration. It appears the incident was only included to demonstrate that even following a miracle, no special consideration is to be given to bones.
How can you argue otherwise?
IMHO, there’s something creepy about this reliquary business, and especially on the fixation of body and blood. Seems akin to cannibalism.
OT believer. Again, IMHO.
Aaron’s rod budding WAS the miracle, no?
The guy who was revived by Elijah’s bones- well, I’ll have to look at it a bit more. Good point though.
FYI- I am not of the label you seem to paint me with. Middle Class Evangelical churchians? Hmmm.
Veneration=Worship
Same difference. Check the dictionary.
As far as your biblical examples, one could also point to the serpent on the stick that was destroyed because the people were worshiping (venerating) it, the ephod of Gideon which became a snare to him and his family, Peter refusal to have Cornelius adore him (Acts 14:15), Paul and Barnabas adamant that the people of Lystra not venerate them (Acts 14:15), or the angel’s admonishment to John not to worship him (19:10; 20:7).
But one can always justify one’s action just as the Jews undoubtedly justify having Asherah poles inside the temple. (2 Kings 23)
If the relic of the Ark of the covenant is found these same Protestants will be venerating/ honoring it as a Catholic would do it. And it has statues of Angels with wings no less. Watch if it happens in our lifetime. It will be very interesting. It has everything to do with the end times in their scenario theories.
I’m an evangelical, not a protestant. That said, I venerate/worship nothing but the Triune God. This would include the Ark of the Covenant if it were found. There is nothing about any historical object that inclines me in the slightest to venerate/worship it. God is a jealous God; His glory is His alone.
Btw, did you see my post 32? It appears the story of Elisha’s bones was included in Scripture precisely to illustrate that bones are not to be venerated—even if they are the catalyst of a miracle.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/veneration
Definition of veneration
1
: respect or awe inspired by the dignity, wisdom, dedication, or talent of a person
2
: the act of venerating
3
: the condition of one that is venerated
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/worship
Definition of worship
1
chiefly British : a person of importance —used as a title for various officials (such as magistrates and some mayors)
2
: reverence offered a divine being or supernatural power; also : an act of expressing such reverence
3
: a form of religious practice with its creed and ritual
4
: extravagant respect or admiration for or devotion to an object of esteem worship of the dollar
“Veneration=Worship
Same difference. Check the dictionary.”
Well, no, not really. Good try, but not honest. No cigar.
How many poor, benighted southern European peasants have been hoodwinked by fake relics over the centuries, I wonder? Did they attribute miracles to priestly PT Barnum showmanship?
For shame, duping the faithful.
They will still claim that when a Catholic does it it is idolatry, when a prod does it - if they believe, well then it is OK.
Catholic = evil is about the ONLY dogmatic truth that unites the “non denominational” haters. They never reveal a creed or denomination, as then they have to accept those definitions - so they are all a “church of one” and their ONE dogma is: Catholic = evil.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.