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 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 this 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 black talk about defeating the purpose

Yes, there you go. But anyway Turretin 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.

We've got a higher security and You're gonna get an email about that too. I can't believe you're wasting large money to do that You know it too, that's why you're laughing is that someone would actually seriously think that that would happen that's the scary part.

Oh That's mmm. Anyway Turretin fan and summer have both posted their first articles.

I just got turrets and fans up which is an excellent article by the way. I Know it inside and out cuz

I had He wrote it in word. Ah and word doesn't oh

The 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 Messiah did not decide the canon 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 depth 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 1700 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 didn't 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? Oh, 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

I 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 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 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 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 proskune.

Oh Proskune Oh, 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 in Exodus 4 23

Exodus 12 31 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 Deuteronomy 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 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 that 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

Now is anyone going to 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 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 it 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 Miravalle 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 on 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 that's used there.

It doesn't necessarily mean unique It just means first or primary That's actually found in 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 hints 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.

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 to us to 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

But that's what he's gonna say keep keep 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 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 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 get this 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 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 sound 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.

It's like oh Man 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 women 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 worship being 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 worshiping 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 doing 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 decided 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 me

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 Julia 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 Julia and Latria are used in Scripture Sometimes to refer to human beings other times to refer in the case of Latria to God Okay, now here.

It 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? Julia 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 find out and of course

Julia 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 an 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 Julia 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 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's 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 Dullia being referenced to their Egyptian overlords to human beings

Do you catch that? They were in bondage to the

Egyptians and That is being presented as evidence that Dullia 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 is good 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 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

Dullia 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 the Before we go to Augustine 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 translating 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 the 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 the device translated by multiple

Greek words that these Greek words are relevant to Eventually the Latin words lottery and Dulia 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 The offering is made to God who gave them the crown of martyrdom

While it is in memory of those thus crowned the emotion is increased by the associations of the place

Love is excited both toward those who are our examples Referring to the Saints and the martyrs with the same affection infant intimacy that we feel towards holy men of God in this life

So what he's saying there is we revere great Christians in this world So much more so do we revere the great

Christians when they are finally in heaven perfected in righteousness He says what is properly called divine worship

Which the Greeks call Latria and for which there is no word in Latin both in doctrine and in practice we give only to God To this worship belongs the offering of sacrifices as we see the word idolatry, which means the giving of the worship to idols

Accordingly, we never offer or require anyone to offer sacrifice to a martyr or to a holy soul or to any angel

Anyone falling into this error is instructed by doctrine either in the way of correction or caution

For holy beings themselves whether saints or angels refuse to accept what they know to be due to God alone

Now he goes on and on and on. I want you to to listen to a couple of points here with regard to this issue of honoring the

Saints If we If we take a look at the writings of the early church,

I know that a minute ago Jim was he was Disparaging the writings of the the church fathers in let's say the 5th century, but we can go much earlier than that But more what was

I actually saying? Was I just disparaging all writings of all church fathers? What I was saying is someone in the 5th century who does not know

Hebrew or Greek their opinions must be subjugated to the correction of the inspired

Word of God and I would repeat that again now And if mr. Madrid wants to say, oh, no, no, no Someone who didn't know

Hebrew Greek in the 5th century is a greater religious authority than the scriptures themselves

Please say so importantly I want you to listen to what Jim has also said himself on the subject on his website in now

Here we go. I love when someone I don't know when they're gonna learn not to do this

But when you you want to try to do the hey, he's inconsistent quote him thing

My suggestion to any future debate opponents is everyone who's tried this in the past. They forgot one little thing.

It's called context and Generally, I remember what the context of what

I've written is and that's why this ain't gonna work very well The section dealing with the pre -existence of Christ He says the body of writing of the

Nicene and post -Nicene fathers is large indeed The series edited by Schaaf takes up 28 large volumes alone

Hence to overview all the literature would be far beyond the scope of this paper

Therefore the three main the three main exegetes of the century after Nicaea Chrysostom Athanasius and Augustine will be examined briefly to determine how they understood the focal passages listed above now, this is in his section dealing with Scripture and he's appealing to These men

Chrysostom Athanasius and Augustine to support his contention that his understanding of Scripture is consistent with theirs

You see what's going on here now. Look at what some of these men say St. John Chrysostom and he lived around the year three.

He was writing between the year 347 and 407 He says calling to remembrance all our

Holy Immaculate and most blessed and glorious Lady Theotokos and ever Virgin Mary With all the

Saints let us commend ourselves in each other and all our life under Christ our God We give thanks unto thee

O Lord who lovest mankind Benefactor of our souls and bodies for that thou has vouchsafed this day to feed us with thy heavenly and immortal mysteries

Make straight our path establish all in thy fear Guard our life make firm our footsteps through the prayers and intercessions of the glorious Theotokos and ever

Virgin Mary and of all thy Saints we read in Athanasius homily on the papyrus of Turin he says

O noble Virgin truly You are greater than any other greatness For who is your equal in greatness so dwelling place of God the word to whom among all the creatures shall

I compare you O Virgin You are greater than them all O covenant clothed with purity instead of gold

You are the ark in which is found the golden vessels containing the true manna that is the flesh in which divinity resides

So Athanasius is honoring Mary not improperly, but he's honoring her and the

Saints by extension are nobious He writes we by no means adore the martyrs, but we honor them as the true adorers of God He also says in a in an earlier statement

He says we keep through every age their bodies decently enshrined as most precious pledges vessels and benedictions of Benediction the martyrs defend the church as soldiers guard a citadel the people flock in crowds from all quarters and keep great festivals to honor their tombs

He goes on and on Describing how the early church understood the scriptures best that that Jim was referring to later st.

Cyril of Alexandria st. Ambrose st. Gregory of Nyssa all of these different Saints say these things to us and We see st.

Augustine saying in by the way just very quickly notice He just said how they understand the text that I cited earlier

None of these are exegeting the actual text that I cited and if he's gonna say they are then he needs to demonstrate that Just to throw it out and say well, this is how they understood it assumes that they are even aware of The for example of odd Latria Dullia connections and the

Greek Septuagint in the Old Testament If you're gonna throw that out there prove it document it his in his letter a sermon 313 referring to the martyr

Cyprian What after all other praises of such a great martyr? But the praises of God or to whose credit is it that Cyprian was converted to God with his whole heart?

But the one whom it was said God of powers convert us so st Augustine is telling us that the early

Christians did in fact praise the martyrs He says the justice of the martyrs is perfect because they have been perfected by their sufferings

That's why they aren't prayed for in the church The other faithful departed are prayed for not the martyrs.

They have left the world so you see they have perfected themselves that they are not our dependents, but our advocates and this is then this to Not in themselves, but in the one to the one whom as their head

They have stuck as close as his members you see indeed He is the one advocate who intercedes for us seated at the right hand of the father

We go on and we read many different passages from Augustine, but keep in mind What what

Jim has written? He's saying that these men chrysostom Athanasius and Augustine should be examined to see how they understood

Scripture and if you go through and read chrysostom Athanasius Augustine not to mention the host of other early church fathers

You'll find that universally the early Christian Church understood scripture universally a prohibition against idolatry

Which is the worship of any false God and yet it included the fact that we are able to honor

Venerate and seek the intercession of those blessed in heaven who are members of the one body of Christ Now earlier

Jim said that the members of the body of Christ are separated from us That is not true

Romans 8 says that nothing can separate us from the love of Christ and that includes all the members of the body of Christ We're not separated by death

Jim Yes, and everyone's catching this and yes, I was offended by the constant familiarity

Using a name that only my wife uses of me that that was purposeful as part that's part of his debating style is to It's a constant put -down type thing

But that that that aside Romans 8 as I've pointed out has

Nothing to do with the application being made. It does not say nothing shall separate us from one another

It says nothing to separate us from the love of Christ to extend that to this application is simply without merit

We're not separated by the fact that we can't see them They are in heaven united with Christ.

They love us still as they always have they're praying for us still as they were on earth Another section here in In on James's Website, he has an article referring to what he calls whitewash

And he says it does not seem that any discussion of ancient theology can be pursued without invoking the great name of Augustine But surely by now

Roman controversialists should be aware that Augustine is no friend of their cause Well a moment ago We were told that we should look to Augustine and Chrysostom and Athanasius to see how they understood scripture

And we see repeatedly that they invoke the intercession. They honor the Saints That is how they interpreted scripture

We see some other passages from st. Augustine that tell us the same thing But the key to all of this is to remember that the early

Christians made a distinction between Dullia and Latria In scripture

Dullia and Latria appear Latria appears only with regard to worship of God never to human beings

Dullia repair appears all over the place in its verbal forms and in its noun forms over 200 times in fact by my count and Some of those instances refer to service to human beings

Some refer to service to God, but now have you noticed if he had an argument against my position?

This is where he would demonstrate that in Religious context not being a servant to someone not being a slave to the

Egyptians, but in a religious context you can give service To human beings has he given us one example just one no he has not why can you not do so?

Why can you not address a VOD? Why can I go back there because he has no counter argument now of course five six years later

Now it's painfully obviously That I'm the one with the incoherent biblical argument the early church understood

That we should never Cross the line into idolatry by giving worship and honor to a saint a mere creature

That we would be rendering only to God our creator And so all of the emphasis upon those two words as interesting as it is it really doesn't

Solve the problem for Jim tonight because he has to explain to us how the thesis statement in the debate tonight

Goes against me and for him. How is it that the early Christians? Believed in and taught universally the veneration of universe

Saints if in fact They were the true followers of Christ. Thank you

All right keep that in mind universally Now my opportunity to talk about Church history

I Would like to correct very quickly the misapprehension that anywhere on Alpha Omega Ministries website did

I in any way shape or form set up Augustine Athanasius and John Chrysostom as extra biblical authorities

If you'll actually read the reference that is given what I was saying is let's look at what they taught about Scripture and see if it's consistent with what

Rome teaches that is a very different thing to saying oh We should look at them and then Give them a special status to where we should believe what they have to say.

I don't do that with anyone today I don't do that with reformers in fact. I don't do that with any uninspired person

It doesn't matter who's writing about Christian truth I hold them to the standard of God's Word, and that's what all of us should in fact be doing now mr.

Madrid Speaks about the early church Let me give you just a couple quotations while I'm at it because we were just told there is this universal perspective

Well, why did? Why did these words appear as early as the middle of the fourth century

Here we have someone traveling Epiphanius he's the bishop of Salamis in Cyprus And he says asking what place it was and learning it to be a church

I went in to pray and found there a certain Hanging on the doors of the said church died and embroidered it bore an image either of Christ or of one of the

Saints They do not rightly remember whose the image was Seeing this and being loathed that an image of a man should be hung up in Christ Church contrary to the teaching of the scriptures

I tore it asunder and advised the custodians the place to use it as a winding sheet for some poor person

I Don't think he appreciated its presence there But Tantius said these the demons are they who taught men to make images and statues

Who in order that they might turn away the minds of men from the worship of the true

God? caused the countenances of dead Kings fashioned and adorned with exquisite beauty to be erected and consecrated and Assumed themselves their names as though they were assuming some characters.

Why aren't these? the containers of the alleged Christian tradition Indeed let me point out that the

Council of Elvira in the year 300 in Spain Specifically for bad the use of pictures and churches

Saying so that that which is worshipped and adored shall not be painted on the walls and quote

That's before the Council of Nicaea. That's almost five centuries prior to the second

Nicene Council Where the veneration of images was defined as being proper?

Why isn't that? definitional of Christian tradition The historical picture is clear in History as we look at the surviving writings first comes prayer to martyrs then saints in general

Then angels and finally veneration of images there is of course no Universally agreed -upon belief in the first centuries the church many

Fathers passed without ever making mention of such things it is just assumed that the day believed such things scholarly

Catholic sources clearly Recognize that various early fathers spoke against for example the use of images in worship

That is not something that is denied in fact at the second Nicene Council Where the veneration of images was defined on the basis of tradition in the fourth session?

the bishops read passages that allegedly promoted from the Bible the

Veneration of images and then quotations from early fathers that supported this

They then presented the dogmatic decree two sessions later No reading of the

Bible a list of early church fathers who opposed this Began to be read, but they didn't even finish reading the list

They just rejected it and then placed an anathema upon anyone Who would write against the veneration of images which

I guess would include the early church fathers whose list they didn't finish reading Now that is the the thinking and the activity that went into the providing of the dogmatic teaching in an allegedly infallible council

I'd like to point out that I'm not aware of anyone. I'd like to ask Patrick if he knows Was there anyone?

at the second Nicene Council 787 years after the birth of Christ eight centuries removed from the

Apostles Who could even read the Hebrew language? who could even read the

New Testament Greek with proficiency and Compare it with the Greek Septuagint or the

Old Testament So that they could know whether this was consistent with what the Bible said which we've already seen in so many passages

What about that now we have been told well

Augustine Who by the way knew no Hebrew Could not read the

Hebrew language Would have been completely unaware of the fact That avad the very word used in the

Ten Commandments is translated by both Lottery and Julia He quotes

Augustine Whose Greek wasn't very good either Interesting he had an argument with Jerome on the subject of the canon of Scripture Jerome who was cited earlier

Who if he is a container of tradition? Why wasn't his rejection of the

Apocrypha tradition? I mean once we start asking this issue of tradition Going to the early church fathers like going to the

Christian bookstore today Are you gonna find one single thing one single teaching?

At your Christian bookstore today. I sure hope none of you walk in there and think these are all equally good books

There's a few good books in there But there's a whole lot of bad books in there And there's books written by people who are very ignorant in there

And if you actually read the father's not just selections But actually read the father's you'll find all sorts of statements that quite simply are very ignorant

Are we supposed to just simply bow down to that as if that's somehow a binding authority upon us?

Even in the citation quoted from Augustine Augustine was wrong in regards to Galatians 4 8

Where there Paul clearly utilizes the term Julia in regards to what can only be understood as A word that would have been translated

Latria in the Septuagint. It's clearly worship Augustine or Athanasius or anyone else me

Reformers It's Meyer Brown. It doesn't matter who they are Men stand corrected by the

Word of God Now as I said, I did not Establish Athanasius Augustine and Chrysostom as some sort of standard in the citation that was provided.

I Do cite from them to demonstrate that the assertion of a universal tradition on the part of Roman Catholics is fallacious

There are the three volumes that were shown to you earlier 1100 plus pages by Bill Webster and David King demonstrating without any question

That a fair and full reading and those books are fully documented frequently giving you both the

Greek and Latin The references where you can look them up for yourself a full reading of those patristic sources will not give you

The universal perspective of the Roman Catholic Church in regards to the authority of Scripture and its sufficiency

Instead when I cite from the early church fathers, I can see them just like I see men whose writings

I respect today You accept what is in harmony with the Word of God and that which is not simply comes from the heart of man

That is the nature of What we experience in this life as believers

So when we look at what Christian tradition is why is

Why are the citations? Mr. Madrid has read? Tradition and the citations that I read are not tradition

Fundamentally because Rome says so Fundamentally because Rome says so sola ecclesia

Rome defines what the Bible is Rome defines what the Bible says Rome defines what tradition is

Rome defines what tradition says that Makes the Roman Catholic Church the ultimate authority in all things and so fundamentally the second assertion in this particular thesis

For the Roman Catholic is a given It must be believed by definition because if Rome has said this is the tradition then it is the problem is a person who wants to believe truth and Understand truth would have to come to the conclusion that the only way to do that is first and foremost as your first act to accept the ultimate authority of the

Roman Catholic Church And there's all sorts of reasons not to do that first and foremost being that the

Lord Jesus and the Apostles Never told us to do it When Paul told

Timothy you turn to that which is they are new stars as your source He did not in the next breath say oh

And once the Bishop of Rome has been established then you can go there to determine what is right? And what is wrong that is not a biblical teaching and so when we ask well

Rome has said this is tradition Well, why why aren't these other citations tradition? Why isn't the Council of Elvira 500 years earlier?

Why doesn't that represent? apostolic tradition There is only one answer for the

Roman Catholic and that is because Rome says so very similar to the debate

That I had with the fellow by name of Jerry Matatix at Boston College In 1993 same year that the

Patrick and I last debated in San Diego and at least is cooler in here than it was then a Lot cooler

That Was on the Apocrypha and the fundamental argument there was the Old Testament can the Roman Catholic Church is right because the

Catholic Church says so Well, that's an argument from authority and that's a circular argument once you start diagramming it out.

It really does not hold any rational weight The same thing is true here when we talk about The use for example the word prayer

Mr.. Madrid got up, and he said You're equivocating on the word prayer. I would actually say the equivocation is going the other direction.

I'm very consistent my use the word prayer My use the word prayer is the biblical use Prayer is communication

Cunic be its communication between the creature and his creator It is communication that is brought about Because God's Spirit communicates to the father

The thoughts and intentions of my heart I can simply bow my head right here. I don't have to say a word and I can pray How does a saint know what we're praying here on earth, and if I pray to a saint?

See if I walk up to a person say I'd like you to pray for me I'm using normal human communication

But you see to pray to a saint Who's going to communicate that to them today somehow? Gain some special ability to be able to read the hearts of my and minds of men which by the way is only a divine capacity or does the

Holy Spirit somehow not only become the comforter who intercedes for us with groanings that cannot be uttered in his in his work of Communicating that deepest desires of our heart does that somehow he now somehow becomes the one who communicates these two saints as well

You see saints in the New Testament described as those who ventured into rest in Jesus Christ.

Oh What a tragedy it would be if any of those saints

Had any idea of the woes? That are constantly laid upon their doorstep by so many people today.

How could they be at rest? How could they be at peace? When Constantly the diseases and sicknesses of the life from which they have been

Delivered are laid upon their doorstep I'm very thankful. My lord.

Jesus hears those prayers we have seen

The assertion that we are equivocating when we talk about prayer. No, I'm being very consistent It's the Roman Catholic that equivocates by saying when

I pray to pray to God. That's one thing, but I pray to a saint It's something else. I'm just communicating to the Saint, but I'm communicating adoring

God if you are acknowledging that that Saint has some means of In some way aiding you and you well know the prayers that are out there.

I even mentioned them To you I commit my spirit prayed to Mary That is not just communication.

That is worship and Biblically as we have seen that is wrong.

Thank you We will continue with the debate between myself and Patrick Madrid on the subject of veneration

Remember painfully obviously clear that there are no coherent biblical arguments against the

Roman Catholic position That's a Patrick Madrid claimed last week. We're letting you find out for yourself

We'll do it again on dividing line next week. See you then. God bless The Dividing line has been brought to you by Alpha and Omega Ministries If you'd like to contact us call us at 602 -973 -4602 or write us at p .o

Box 3 7 1 0 6 Phoenix, Arizona 8 5 0 6 9. You can also find us on the world wide web at a omen org

That's a o m i n dot o RG where you'll find a complete listing of James White's books tapes debates and tracks