@fredsbend what's the point? Remember C.SE stated explicitly that this site can't handle the truth. As a Catholic I do make truth claim that the Catholic Church is the true Church historically Christ established. But that doesn't make my statement suddenly true. Because historicity doesn't necessarily true.
Judaism claim historicity and accuse Christianity as novelty foreign to pre Christianity.
Historicity validates nothing but it gives warrant.
Warrant that its existence is not novelty at least up to that point.
So let's go back to prayer to saints as an example
@AdithiaKusno There are two ways that 'addressing an issue' can be interpreted: 1) talking about the issue, referring to it; 2) providing a satisfactory explanation regarding the issue. From what I can see, your claims only fit in the former category, not the latter. I've reviewed many of the links you've provided and they do not match your claims of them - they simply don't say what you claim they say. Your methods in general are those of a propagandist - obfuscation, misdirection, ...
beating your own drum, mischaracterizing (charicaturing) the position of opponents, generalizing about opponents, generalizing about your own side, ignoring objections etc.
I do represent Catholic, read my statement, "As a Catholic I do make truth claim that the Catholic Church is the true Church historically established by Christ."
I'm here putting forth the best arguments from either sides and compare them
Do we or do we not agree that the Fathers weren't Protestants?
@AdithiaKusno that statement is meaningless. Either you use Protestant as a term rooted in historical context, or you have to painstakingly redefine it in order to attempt using it in another context - you haven't done the latter, so your statement is nonsensical
I was myself Protestants, I used to caricature Catholic's faith. How could now after becoming Catholic I spit unto myself and caricaturing Protestantism?
Answer my question with yes or no on those two questions
@AdithiaKusno we've been told on a number of occasions that Catholics don't do that either - requesting intercession from is not the same as praying to. Do you disagree with that distinction from your co-religionists?
No I'm not misdirecting anyone. I'm taking your comment.
I remember reading that question and laughing.
Did you read darkwanderer comment on that question, it's not correct to distinguish through vs to, both are identical. I agree with him. We Catholic and Orthodox pray to saints.
To say that we pray through is simply watering down the reality of theosis
Those saints are already exalted in glorious state.
They already partake the divine energies.
It's ridiculous to equate our prayer to them with asking our living saints on earth to pray with us.
Saints in heaven have been given portion to rule the world together with Christ.
They're already co-heir with Christ. We're on our way via theosis.
@AdithiaKusno it's other Catholics that are attempting to make that distinction not I. The reason they do so, is to obscure what is in fact mariolatry and hagiolatry as something the Protestants can relate to - asking the living to pray for you. I find the distinction not to be meaningless at all - I never pray to my living friends.
I know. That's why darkwanderer rebuke that Catholic person
your argument is exactly correct
to equate our prayer to saints as merely asking our living saints among us to pray with us is ridiculous at best.
we pray to not through
for somewhat unknown reason i can't find comment made by darkwanderer
but i completely agree with him that that person misrepresent catholic faith.
saints who are now in heaven living in direct encounter with the fulness of God. they're in glorious state. we pray to them because they rule the world as co-heir with Christ.
we sing hymns to them (hagiography)
because they've partake the divine energies
we catholic and orthodox believe in deification = theosis
not that by nature we become God but we become deified by partaking His divine energies.
St. Athanasius, God became man so that men might become gods.
@AdithiaKusno "your argument is exactly correct" - I think you only said this because you didn't understand what I was saying. I did use a double negative in the sentence "I find the distinction not to be meaningless at all" - this contradicts your position and agrees with the position of the other Catholics. Where we do agree, is that 'asking intercession from' and 'praying to' while radically different applied to (living) people around us are fundamentally inextricalbe if those whom we are...
...requesting intercession from/praying to are glorified, separated and 'god-like'- our asking in this case, very much takes the form of prayer itself.
@fredsbend I don't know whether you feel like getting back up the dead horse we were flogging before, but I'm interested in hearing more about what you consider to be the "significant difference" between counting and measuring - I'm not really seeing it. I mean in mathematics, I'm aware of the difference between discrete and continuous mathematics (in many ways, discrete objects seem more defined and knowable - surely that's not what you're getting at),...
but I'm not sure what significance applies in terms of classifying data that is being gathered.
regarding 'value' - I don't think that is off-track. We started this track of the conversation flowing from your use of the word 'vague' if I rightly remember. This seems to be an inherently subjective and value-related term. My point summed up in a different way, is that if there there remains a lot of data (from extant artificacts), and the data is consequential (it can be validly interpreted to mean something important to us), then the significance of an event is not actually 'vague'.
(no matter how far in the past it is - eg. The Big Bang)
The Upper Room
The Upper Room