The Painfully Obvious Veneration of Saints Debate Part 2

Webcasting around the world from the desert metropolis of Phoenix, Arizona. This is the dividing line. The Apostle Peter commanded Christians to be ready to give a defense for the hope that is within us.

Yet to give that answer with gentleness and reverence. Our host is dr. James white director of Alpha Omega ministries and an elder at the Phoenix reformed Baptist Church. This is a live program and we invite your participation.

If you'd like to talk with dr. White call now. It's 602 nine seven three four six zero two or toll-free across the United States. It's one eight seven seven seven five. Three three three four one and now with today's topic.

Here is James white.

Team Apollo Guion, Blog Posts, and a Humor Video

And welcome to the dividing line on a Thursday just quickly very excited to point out if you hadn't already noticed that our Team Apollo Guion has expanded and I just a few moments ago got The next blog article posted the two new folks who have joined our team.

Actually write blogs in other words they use words. That's for the about three of you who whined and complained when I started doing video logs to one one two something. Hey, I can read faster and you can talk so you need to just you need to type out Everything you say in your video blogs just for me.

There was there was at least one person that literally Said I should be posting everything as well as what I say. It's like what talk about the fate and the purpose. Yes, there you go. But anyway turrets and fan and my daughter's summer have joined team Apollo Guion.

But both of the there's the student the studio audience is going crazy. Please please Wow I tell you that that audience out there. We just you have to sell tickets and we got a higher security and You're gonna get an email about that, too.

I can't believe you're wasting the large money to do that. No, it's it. That's why you're laughing. Is it someone would actually seriously think that that would happen. That's the scary part. Oh That's mmm.

Anyway Turreted fan and summer have both posted their first articles. I just got turrets of fans up, which is an excellent article by the way. I Know it inside and out because I had He wrote it in word.

Ah and word doesn't Blogger does not like it loses apostrophes random letters went random spaces. So I know this article like the back of my hand because I just got done Editing it to the nth degree not because he wrote it poorly.

It's just we haven't gotten him set up on the appropriate software is yet. To avoid that and believe me I've gone through the same thing with my own stuff so many times. All that stuff remember last year when I was doing the stuff on Mormonism.

Every time I dump because I wrote it in word every time I dump it in there I had to go through over every single word because Word is word and that's just that's just life. So that's how it happens, but anyhow.

Excellent article on once again demonstrating the Council of Nicaea did not decide the can of scripture and Then doing what I don't have time to do chasing down some fascinating leads as to where these ideas came from and so that's one of the reasons I asked her it's and fan to join up is I was very impressed with the depths of the gentleman's research and.

So I think it's going to make a number of you very very happy. That so you will have nice long 1 ,700 word blog entries to read keep you happy, and I think that's just that's awesome. And of course I couldn't be prouder of my own offspring as well.

And the article that she posted so hopefully that will be a great blessing to everyone we continue on the program today. As we did last program listening to the debate between myself and Patrick Madrid I noticed Algo told me this morning that Patrick had posted about.

He had posted an article on the envoy forums this morning. I went and looked believe it or not. Some of you this hasn't appeared on the blog yet, but it has appeared on my youtube page I put together a humorous video.

I don't think you've even seen it. Where I go over some of the weird stuff, you know calcium boy, and then Tom the box's Satire of calcium boy. Have you ever seen that? Oh, man. I it had only been seen a hundred and eighty four times.

So I put it on mine. That way it'll be seen many more than 184 times. But also there was this fellow true one true church a young Catholic fellow. Who was strung together a little portion of cross-examination with matitix and then Madrid's closing statement on solo scriptura?

See we so much for the false doctrine of solo scriptura. Ha ha ha stuff and I just put the end of his video on this because it was so I don't know. It's just like well so much for the false doctrine of solo scriptura type.

And believe it or not Madrid posts that video on the on the forum. He actually posted that video on the forum. I don't know if it's because somebody saw it on my youtube page and that's how they tracked it down or what?

He'll probably get more hits because I I put that there than than anything else, even though I didn't link to it, but. So anyway, I don't don't get any evidence from that that he's actually heard what we're doing here.

Opening Statement on the Communion of Saints and the Worship Due to God Alone

But we're we are playing the debate between myself and Patrick Madrid because as he said last time it Presented such a painfully obvious painfully obviously clear example of how unbiblical. And how bad the arguments are against the communion of saints the concept of veneration of saints and angels and so on and so forth and so we heard his opening statement and I have started my response and I've rolled it back about 30 seconds or so so we could pick up the context but We've we've heard the arguments from Patrick Madrid and now we're hearing my opening statement.

So we will press on obviously, I don't have quite as many comments to make about myself as I do Patrick Madrid, but who knows once while I might jump in anyways. So let's continue the opening statement 2002 the great debate number seven Long Island myself versus Patrick Madrid.

I the Greek Septuagint doesn't translate it by one particular word because the Hebrew word is richer than that and what God Said in the Ten Commandments you shall not do this is the whole concept of adoring and serving for Samuel 7 3 then Samuel spoke to all the house of Israel saying if returned to Lord with all your heart remove the foreign gods and the ashtaroth from among you and direct your hearts to the Lord and serve him alone.

Julia. Serve him alone. Well, how does that fit when the Roman Catholic praise those prayers? To Mary and gives her hyper duly a hyper veneration says into your hands. I commit my spirit deliver me. From my sins the devil's and from the wrath of Jesus.

You know which prayer I'm referring to. How is that consistent with what is found here? First Kings 9 6. But if you or your sons indeed turn away from following me and do not keep my commandments and my statutes.

Which I have set before you and go and serve other gods and worship them. Folks when we get into the historical section, we're going to discover that there were writers Half a millennium after the time of Jesus Christ five hundred years removed from the Apostles who said it's okay to worship Saints and they use the term prosecute net.

Oh Prosecute no, which means to bow down before and their arguments. Became the foundation of the second Nicene Council considered the seventh ecumenical council that dogmatically defined that it's okay to have statues and images and to venerate them and that council Based its decision very clearly on what it called unwritten traditions.

Well folks what someone said five hundred years after Christ who probably couldn't read either Hebrew or Greek. Did not deal with the biblical text and in fact violates biblical text if that becomes the foundation of a dogmatic decree.

Then we are left with the choice of choosing between what God has said in his word and what men say in their decrees. That term Latrua's use of a vaad just to give you a few more passages and like an exodus 423.

Exodus 1231 just listen to some of these how they're put together exodus 23 24. You shall not worship their gods nor serve them. See how they're they're together. They are put together to explain to us That you cannot make the very distinction.

That is at the heart of the Roman Catholic dogmatic definition of these issues. Dear on me 419 and beware not to lift up your eyes to heaven and see the Sun and the moon the stars all the hosts of heaven and be drawn away and worship them and serve them.

Is Anyone going to suggest as long as you don't do the first it's okay to do the second. Of course not. These are not two separate things. They refer to two separate concepts. They go together to express one attitude.

Now There is simply no way to say that any of these passages Hold to or teach the Latria Julia distinction. And of course from my perspective, I Want to believe what God's Word tells me and if the God's Word does not teach it then I'm not going to believe it and it Does not present this distinction.

But some might say well, that's just your solo scriptura. Part speaking and and but where does the Bible contradict it? Well, I think we've seen that as well. Because by putting these two terms together and then using them interchangeably.

These passages obliterate any such anachronistic distinction. The New Testament likewise shows no hint of the Latria Julia distinction that is created by Rome. Let me look at a few passages in the New Testament.

Romans 14 18. For he who in this way serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men. Would anyone suggest that service to Christ does not involve worship? It's somehow a lesser thing that you can also give to Mary or give to Saints.

That's the term Julia in the verbal form. Listen, this is especially important because John Calvin was brought up. John Calvin hammered in the Institutes upon this very issue of The lack of distinction between Latria and Julia and here's one of the passages he used.

Galatians 4 8. However at that time when you did not know God you were slaves to those which by nature are no gods. That phrase you were slaves translates do you oh you served them you were enslaved to them.

That was anyone gonna suggest that what Paul was saying here is that these People in the churches in Galatia were not involved in idolatrous worship. That it was somehow better that they at least just served idols rather than worship them.

Of course not. What he's saying is you were engaged in idolatry and he uses. Do you Oh Colossians 324 knowing that from the Lord you will receive the reward of the inheritance? It is the Lord Christ whom you serve.

Is that less than Latria? It is not. Finally first Thessalonians 1 9 for they themselves report about us. What kind of reception we had with you and how you turn to God from idols to serve a living and true God.

You turned to God from idols to do what? To give Julia. To a living and true God. Is he not saying you turn from idolatry to true and proper worship of course and. So the first point that I would like to make is that it's very heart the concept of praying to Saints venerating Saints honoring Saints.

Building statues of Saints icons of Saints bowing before them lighting candles. To say well, I'm not. I'm not violating The command of Scripture because I'm only giving Julia not Latria. That distinction does not stand up to biblical examination and in Mark chapter 7 in Matthew chapter 15 the Lord Jesus gave every one of his followers and Hence everyone here this evening who claims to be his follower needs to hear this.

Gave every one of his followers a clear and abiding example of How we determine the difference? Between what is true and false in matters of tradition because in that passage He's dealing with individuals who claim to have a tradition that comes directly from Moses.

God gave it to Moses and it was passed down orally in an unwritten form outside the new the writings of the Old Testament called the Corban rule. They these Pharisees and first come to Jesus and say you're disciples.

They don't they don't wash their hands properly and Jesus says well look at you. You've got this Corban rule and You nullify you make void the very Word of God for the sake of your Traditions through your Corban rule now they claim that came from Moses.

They claimed it was divine in origin and Jesus rebuked them. Because they made the Word of God of no effect for the sake of their Traditions passed down to them and Jesus said many other things like this you do.

We need to test whatever is handed on to us no matter what it is the way Jesus taught us to and when we test the very heart of the Distinction that is offered by Rome in regards to what the difference between worship and veneration is we find that it is Unbiblical.

Isaiah 820 tells us to the law and to the testimony if they do not speak in harmony with this word. There is no light in them. So I unashamedly direct you To what the Word of God says on these issues.

First Timothy 2:5 and the Unique Mediation of Christ

Now before moving to the issue of the concept of Christian tradition, and maybe it'll work out best this way. Because it will sort of stay on the same topic as we're going back and forth. It's probably a bit easier for the audience.

Before moving to that issue allow me a moment to address a common fallacy regarding First Timothy 2 5 which did come up, but I was going to address that anyways. Jesus' work of mediation the Roman Catholic Church tells us that having Mary as an Mediatrix as Vatican to referred to her the movements in The world today centered at the University of Steubenville Franciscan University of Steubenville dr. Mark Miravalli and those people who are pushing to have the fifth Marian dogma defined for example Mary is co-redemptrix and mediatrix and so on so forth.

That this in no way violates the teaching of first Timothy 2 5 that Jesus Christ is The only mediator between God and men. Very frequently the idea as well Jesus is sharing his mediation with us. He asks us to intercede and pray for one another.

That obviously is not a violation in fact in this very context He's saying prayers to be offered for for Kings and those in authority. What that should tell us is that the work of Jesus Christ in mediation is significantly different Than our privilege of by prayer interceding for our brothers and sisters because you see when the Sun as Mediator intercedes as high priest before the father and behalf of his people he does so on the basis of his finished work in their behalf on the cross of Calvary.

No one else has That foundation. His is a unique work of mediation. Because of his unique character his unique work upon the cross and his unique role as high priest. That is why Paul says there is one Mediator and he's just said there is one God.

He uses the exact same Greek term. Many Roman Catholic apologists they will say actually the term heist is used there. It doesn't necessarily mean unique. It just means first or primary. That's actually found and by such Mariologist as O 'Carroll and and Miravalli uses the same argumentation.

Think of what that results in. There is one God that means first or primary God and one mediator first or primary mediator. I'm sure I know a bunch of folks up in Salt Lake City that would like it if that were the case.

But that's not what it means. Does it? Context defines meanings of words and just that there is only one unique God. There is only one unique mediator and that is Jesus Christ. The New Testament does not present to us any examples of The Apostles would be Paul or Peter anyone else.

Saying to us Pray to the Saints that there were already individuals who had gone on at the time. They're writing a New Testament where they're not Stephen gone on. No one ever prays to Stephen. No one ever seeks Stephen's intercession.

Of course the very distinction between the idea of Saints who have excess merit and Who end up directly in the presence of God and others who go into purgatory is unknown in the New Testament? It's an unbiblical concept.

That was our debate topic last year. But there is nothing in the New Testament That would begin to suggest to us that the Apostles as they taught the church what it means to sojourn here upon the earth.

That they taught believers. That the communion of Saints meant that when Saints die You can still communicate with them. How would they know if it's the Holy Spirit who searches the hearts of men and communicates?

The intents of our heart to God the Father is the Holy Spirit also involved in communicating the intentions of our heart to Saints. You say well first Corinthians 12 says that that no one could say I have no need of you or I have no need of you.

That's quite true. But notice Paul does not apply that to those who have left this world. He never makes an application to saying now that means that we believe in the community of Saints that includes those who've gone into heaven.

He never says that he's talking about the people have different gifts within the functioning of the local body of the church. That's the context first Corinthians chapter 12, but isn't it fascinating?

We all recognize that something's changed when someone passes away. Do we pray if you if I pray for someone? I if I pray for for brother Aronson and boy, so I need to pray for brother Aronson if I pray for brother Aronson.

That God would help him to to strive against sin. Let me ask you something. Once Chris is in the presence of Christ. Do I keep praying that for him? Of course not. Why? Because his status has changed death does not Divide the body of Christ up, but it does divide us from those who are described as being asleep in Christ.

I wonder why they use that term asleep in Christ. Maybe it's because they're resting. The New Testament does not give us any hint. Even Revelation 5 8 the 24 elders have the bowls of the prayers the Saints.

There's nothing there. It says they were the objects of those prayers. There is nothing in the New Testament That leads us to believe this and there's much to lead us away from it. And that is of course the fact that prayer is an act of worship.

When I pray I am acknowledging God's sovereignty over me as A creature. I'm acknowledging. He's my creator. I Cannot do that with anyone but the one who gave me life and breath. Thank you very much. Okay, so there's the end of my opening statement.

Patrick Madrid’s Reply on Prayer, Tradition, and the Early Church

So now we've had the two opening statements and Let me let me go back here. Let's.

Let's remember what Patrick said and I recommend it primarily because it shows so painfully obviously how Really unbiblical the arguments were that were raised against the Catholic Church's teaching. I mean there were many Bible verses cited but they were in no way coherent or cohesive in terms of any type of a.

Meaningful argument against the community of Saints, so there's there's the assertion. We've we've just heard this last week on Catholic answers live from Patrick Madrid painfully obviously an Incoherent, so you've now heard the first two opening statements.

Leave it up to you to determine who was focused on biblical material who provide a wider range of biblical material who argued more. Effectively, but clearly now that the arguments have been presented in the next.

You know over this next as we go back and forth it will become painfully obviously clear that these arguments are just completely bogus, so that means you're gonna hear a devastatingly strong clear rebuttal of the passages I presented.

That plainly show that Latria and Dulia come from the one Hebrew term that they they had they are connected together. You're gonna. That's what that's what's coming up is. What must be what's coming up that has to be the next section?

And and so that must be what we're gonna hear next from Patrick Madrid actually the next gonna be the historical section. So maybe not immediately. But as we go into the historical section listen very carefully.

Listen very very carefully to how many times Patrick Madrid talks about the universal. Always Listen those two universal always he's gonna make the claim over and over again that from the very start. Everybody's always had the same view of this.

Keep that in mind, that's that's pretty big claim when it comes to the early church I've said many times about the only thing I could possibly think that you could actually Seriously said about might be monotheism and even then yeah.

But that's what he's gonna say keep keep it in mind listen as we listen to Patrick Madrid now.

There is far too much ground to cover even though we have all this time tonight. It's it's frustrating I think for all of us that we can't get deeper if we had more time. We would but let me try to cover a few points that were left undone in my last remarks, and then also try to Talk about a few of the things that Jim mentioned a few minutes ago.

First of all we have to set the record straight on the question of equivocation. Jim is equivocating on the term prey and I realized that as a Protestant He is has he is entitled to using terms that apply to Protestant theology in that vein.

But the Catholic Church has always distinguished between prayer Which is the the worship and glory and honor that's due to God alone and the word prayer with a small P. If we can say it that way that refers to communication.

Now now catch that folks. I Do briefly refute this later on but now we have capital P prayer and small P prayer. So. So yeah when you're when when you really really pray or when you really don't have time to pray.

You know you just sort of yeah, just just communicating. You know. What does this illustrate. The vast chasm that separates biblical theology that has a? Biblical foundation and says what is prayer in the Bible and an unbiblical theology that says well.

You know yeah, you know what the Bible says about prayer, but then the Catholic Church has all. Did you catch that all? Ways distinguished between capital P prayer and Just plain old communication. See.

So I'm the one equivocating here. Not him. I'm the one equivocating here when I use prayer in its biblical form and. And then well, but but we've we make a distinction. That's the whole point. Is the distinction biblical or is the distinction unbiblical?

That's the point all the way along not worship now.

You can accept that or not accept it. But that is the official way in which the Catholic Church has always used the word pray now.

We're using to catch. I I wish I I wish the sounds still worked in in IRC for some reason if I had a little ding-ding Sound I would be playing it each time. He says always always Catholic Church always Catholic Church always because and when we get into the The historical material here, that's just not true.

I mean it's so common. They repeat it so often we even had a young 19 year old Catholic guy coming into channel past few days. And he repeats this stuff because he's heard it over and over again, and even when we show him.

Oh Always how about this quote oh? Well that just can't be right because we've always believed like that's it's like oh.

Man, it is so sad to hear in English of course. But the fact is that when a Catholic prays to a saint for example Mary or one of the Saints we met Jim mentioned Stephen earlier. We'll talk a little bit about what st. Augustine had to say about praying to st. Stephen in particular.

St. Augustine was not referring to worshipping or adoring st. Stephen. When the early church celebrated the feast day of st Stephen it was invoking the prayers from st. Stephen who reigns in glory with God.

So for a Protestant okay sure. I agree Jim that when you pray you're worshipping God. But for a Catholic there is prayer that is worship, but we also use the word pray in a different way. The second thing we have to remember too is that this is not about sola scriptura tonight.

This is not a debate on whether or not the Bible is sufficient to teach us these things Jim. And I had that debate nine years ago.

And I never want to do it again is what it was. He didn't say there, but yeah, we had had that that debate and Had that debate with a number of different people, but once again. And this is what I'm going to emphasize when I have my opportunity.

Where does God get to define his own worship? in Scripture. Or is God's worship left up to Men to determine in councils or something along those lines. Has God really left himself without a clear witness as to what is pleasing worship before him.

Well I Could go off on the tangent there.

I think I'll avoid and if anybody would like to see just how Definitively we settled the issue that the Bible does not teach sola scriptura. I refer you to the debate tapes that are out on the table. We're not talking about whether or not the debate is sufficient tonight or the whether scripture is sufficient.

We're talking about whether or not the early Christians understood scripture. To mean that we can venerate and ask the intercession of the saints in heaven that.

Actually, that wasn't the thesis topic the thesis. Specifically said is it biblical and so it's not a matter of well. It's not really that it's what the dealer Church understand that to mean that. That's Obviously not why we decide to get together and do a debate on long.

I was going to be the key tonight because James can stand here all night and tell us his interpretation of scripture. And he will I of course can tell you mine. But I think it's very beneficial if we consider what the original Christians themselves had to say on the subject.

Notice how all Interpretations of the Bible are equal with one another in that that thought that he's very good at throwing these little things in there that again. If you listen carefully, and you examine it carefully this stuff doesn't hold up.

Well. He can give his to read I can give mine. Oh, you mean the original text is so unclear that there is no way of knowing which one Was intended. That's what's behind all this. But it's not stated clearly.

And that's why people who don't listen carefully can be carried away by that kind of stuff.

And I want to watch my time so I don't have I don't leave them out. Another thing that we have to remember is that the the question of a distinction between D 'Elia and Latria, this is certainly a very interesting point.

But one of the things that we have to keep in mind is that the words D 'Elia and Latria are used in Scripture. Sometimes to refer to human beings other times to refer in the case of Latria to God.

Acts 7 and the Claim That Dulia Can Be Given to Human Beings

Okay, now here comes. I mean this is where you know if we're gonna get. We haven't gotten to the painfully obviously stuff yet. Have we. I certainly sort of haven't heard it so He just said Here's where it's gonna.

Be we're gonna demonstrate that you can give. Do you oh? D 'Elia to humans here if you're if you sort of gotten lost it's at least zoom in here. Let's see what examples he gives to us. Does he go back to and look at the Hebrew.

Does he look at a vaad?

Does he does he do that. What I presented. Let's let's find out. And of course D 'Elia is used with regard to God as well. And I picked out a couple of. Actually I picked out quite a few passages to look at this.

But we see for example that in in Acts chapter 7 verse 7. Which is the only passage in Scripture in the New Testament at least that I'm aware of. We see that the verbal forms of Latria and D 'Elia are used here in the same.

Phrase in the same sentence, okay, this is really good. You've got again if the idea is That my arguments were biblically incoherent then. When you come to the issue of doing exegesis when you come to Accurately handling the Word of God.

What did I present. I went to the Old Testament? I looked at the Hebrew then. I looked at the translation of the Hebrew into the Greek Septuagint. I followed that through the Old Testament to the New Testament because the New Testament quotes in the Greek Septuagint.

This is how you do scholarly exegesis now. Where is mr.. Madrid starting at? Acts. Does it go back to the Old Testament to the Hebrew and well and then listen. Listen to the text he uses here we see.

St. Luke saying and the nation to whom they shall be in bondage I will judge says God and after that shall they they shall come forth and serve me in this place. So here we have referring to the Egyptians.

We have Dulia being referenced to their Egyptian overlords to human beings to catch that.

They were in bondage to the Egyptians and That is being presented as evidence that Dulia can be given to human beings because the term was used of the Israelites being slaves to the Egyptians. Can you believe it.

When I heard this again, and like I said, I you know I don't sit down listen to these things. I I'm not. I'll go listening to these things over and over and over again memorizing them. When I heard this I was going.

You've got to be kidding me. This is not in a religious context. Just think for a second of the chasm that separates. Being in bondage to the Egyptians and a Catholic bowing down in front of a statue and lighting candles and saying prayers my goodness talk about painfully obviously.

What's painfully obvious is the vast chasm that separates these two. But that's what is.

Presented to us and of course that was a very bad situation that they were in. But there they were referring to human beings and then of course God is saying you're going to serve me. Catholics agree.

As Jim pointed out Latria is always an only service that is due to God alone. It is never rendered to human beings. Dulia is also a service that we render to God. But at times it can be rendered to human beings.

Listen to what st.

Augustine said in this that not know before we go to Augusta a man who? Did not know the Hebrew language and whose Greek was not overly good. Did Patrick Madrid Even begin to address avad and how avad is translated the Greek septuagint answer.

No. Would Patrick Madrid have to have to provide an insightful? full Lexical discussion of that very term for his own description of the debate on Catholic answers live last week. To have any meaning at all.

Yes. Does he do so in this debate? No case. Closed. We could start taking calls and move on from there if we wanted to but there's so much more to listen of God.

He said for this is the worship which is due to the divinity or to speak more accurately to the deity and to express this worship in a single word as As there does not occur to me any Latin terms sufficiently exact I shall avail myself whenever necessary of a Greek word Latria Whenever it occurs in Scripture it is rendered the word service, but that service which is due to men and In reference to which the Apostle writes that the servants must be subject to their own masters is usually designated by another word He's referring to Julia in Greek whereas the service, which is paid to God alone by worship is always Latria in the usage of those who wrote from the divine oracle oracles,.

And then he goes now. I stopped right there. Did you catch that?

What's probably being represented here in Augustine's words is? The same controversy that existed between Augustine and Jerome. Augustine and others like him Viewed a They held that there was a special divine providential action in bringing about the Greek Septuagint and Jerome when he translated the Latin Vulgate Went to the original Hebrew.

Jerome was one of a very few of the early fathers who could actually read both of the biblical languages. Origin was another and There was a conflict between Augustine and Jerome on this very point and this led to the canonical differences between the two this led to Carthage and Hippo and their views of the apocryphal books.

And Augustine was simply in error on a number of these issues, but again Madrid doesn't have the excuse that Augustine had. That is there would be no reason why Madrid could not Take the time to deal with the Hebrew now.

I don't know that Patrick Madrid knows Hebrew. I've got no evidence. He does. I've certainly never heard him claim that he does. I've never heard him claim that he actually can read or translate the Greek on any functional level.

Maybe he does. I don't know but if he can then this would be the time why you go to a An early church writer who makes a distinction you're making yeah. But upon what basis I've already presented a Biblical case that's gone back to a vaad.

I've demonstrated that if I was translated by multiple Greek words that these Greek words are relevant to Eventually the Latin words Lottery and Julia. Isn't that where he needs to go? Now by the way, some of my say yeah, but come on.

How do you expect Patrick to do that? He's he's never heard this before. Untrue. I Made all these arguments in books that were written ten years before this debate. Go to answers to Catholic claims if you can find an old copy of it and You will find almost everything that I presented there in the book.

So there was unless you're saying a decade isn't long enough to get the argument straight. He had all the time in the world.

To be addressing these things and Didn't dawn a little bit further to describe how this this term is often misunderstood. But he really gets to the heart of the matter in his letter against fathers. Give me against Faustus the Manichaean.

He says it is true that Christians pay religious honor to the memory of the martyrs. Both to excite us to imitate them and to obtain a share in their merits and the assistance of their prayers. But we build altars not to any martyr but to the God of the martyrs.

Although it is to the memory of the martyrs is to the God of the martyrs. No one officiating at the altar of the Saints burying place ever says we bring an offering to thee Oh Peter or Oh Paul or Ocyprian.