Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Colofornian
Now that's a silly argument. "Trinity" comes from a Latin root, too. So does "Incarnation". Are those not "New Testament traditions," either?

What is dulia then, which is the formal term for what's going on? That's Greek. That makes it okay, I suppose.

The linguistic origins of a name don't make the thing denoted by the name right or wrong. Obviously.

108 posted on 12/06/2006 8:36:21 AM PST by Campion ("I am so tired of you, liberal church in America" -- Mother Angelica, 1993)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies ]


To: Campion
Now that's a silly argument. "Trinity" comes from a Latin root, too. So does "Incarnation". Are those not "New Testament traditions," either?

Talk about "silly." "Easter" is not in the Bible, either--nor is "Christmas." But the birth, death and resurrection is clearly there, as is the incarnation (Phil 2, etc.) and Trinity (multiple passages) you reference. The actualies of the incarnation and Trinity are testamental realities--not merely terms slapped on after the fact.

In other words, the key here is not simply to make word distinctions only...note I used the phrase "word & practice" in previous posting. Show me the "practice" of any Biblical character praying to or being devoted to someone who was dead besides the use of a medium in Saul & Samuel's day.

"Veneration" is not simply a contextual-less word. It has a use and practice today. The question is: As it is applied today, are there precedents for it that exist in Biblical times?

125 posted on 12/06/2006 8:53:22 AM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson