CALVINISM IN HISTORY

"The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination." -- Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1932. ^ | 1932 | Loraine Boettner

[Gamecock]

That reads, IMHO, as the anti-Gospel.

[bornacatholic]

post #49...

The Libri Carolini was drawn up by Theodulf of Orléans (c.760-821)—one of the key theologians of the Carolingian church and the author of the well-known hymn “All glory, laud, and honour”—in 790-793 and then later revised by him with the help of, among others, Alcuin of York (c.732-804)—the private tutor to Charlemagne and the head of the palace school at Aachen. It was a well-argued response by the Latin-speaking Carolingian Church to the iconodulist decrees of theSecond Council of Nicaea (787). In essence, the Libri Carolini sought to refute this council’s advocacy of the use of icons as vehicles of worship and argument that such icons deserved the identical adoration as due to God.

*My post #53 PROVED, using quotes from that Council,that claim was a bald-faced lie

Response?

[xzins]

it resembles that given to the figure of the honoured and life-giving cross, and also to the holy books of the gospels and to other sacred cult objects. Further, people are drawn to honour these images with the offering of incense and lights, as was piously established by ancient custom. Indeed, the honour paid to an image traverses it, reaching the model, and he who venerates the image, venerates the person represented in that image.

such icons deserved the identical adoration as due to God.

In the first quote (underlined) They use "venerate" as a synonym for worship. If that's what they really meant, then I can see the point of the second comment(bold).

Therefore, I don't see this as a "bald-faced" lie.

[bornacatholic]

In essence, the Libri Carolini sought to refute this council’s advocacy of the use of icons as vehicles of worship and argument that such icons deserved the identical adoration as due to God.

*Is there ANY doubt as to what the guy is saying?

No. He is publishing a bald-faced lie

* here is what that Council taught

Certainly this is not the full adoration {latria} in accordance with our faith, which is properly paid only to the divine nature

*Brother,the author cited in post #49 publicly promotes the lie the Council taught that Icons are to be worshipped with the IDENTICAL ADORATION whereas the truth is the Council specifically and forcefuly taught JUST THE OPPOSITE and now you are going to say that is not what he wrote or meant?

Come on...

[wmfights]

"If anyone says that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in divine mercy, which remits sins for Christ's sake, or that it is this confidence alone that justifies us, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA"

Maybe it's my poor reading skills, but justifying faith is confidence in divine mercy. I am confident that because Jesus took my punishment the LORD will have mercy on my soul.

[Gamecock]

You read it right. Therefore, you are ANATHEMIA!

If it's any consolation, so am I.

[wmfights]

You read it right. Therefore, you are ANATHEMIA!

PRAISE THE LORD!

I was beginning to worry. I know my salvation rests with Jesus and anybody, or anything, that would stand between me and Jesus can't be from Jesus.

[xzins]

he who venerates the image, venerates the person represented in that image.

If you have posted the entire words of the council on this subject, then there's nothing more to look at. However, these particular words say that "the image = the person represented."

This idea, in and of itself, can form the basis of the the comment: "deserve the identical adoration as due to God."

You probably don't see it, because you don't believe the same as do those who oppose icons. If you did have their presuppositions, then you would be able to see that saying "the image equals the person" is simple idolatry from their perspective.

[bornacatholic]

I get it

Goodbye xzins