>>17538384
>I am not a Roman Catholic. I could just as easily claim you are doggedly adhering to your particular denomination's interpretations.
I don't have a denomination, guess you can call me a prottie because I agree with them generally. What are you then? Probably Eastern Orthodox because you are defending idolatry
>It's not in any way arbitrary to claim that idolatry must involve some recognition of the object of worship as a deity
It's very simple. If you make and use idols to "represent" another being in your worship sessions you are an idolater.
>No. They are quite literally viewed as divine.
"Ravana Dashagriva was a king[1][2] of the island of Lanka, and the chief antagonist in the Hindu epic Ramayana in which he was considered as a Rakshasa (demon).[3][2]" Even if you want to cope that they are related, then guess what demons are also related to angels.
>this is treated as a positive example of obedience and humility rather than idolatry?
Okay so since you didn't even contest what I was saying you seem to be agreeing to this. Do you believe it's okay to "worship" Pharaoh who is a human being? Remember you can't actually worship him because he is a man.
>She is the recipient of many graces; she is not the originator of them.
No matter what you say salvation was entrusted entirely to her. Doesn't matter if you believe God turned her into a demigod to do it.
>If you didn't know how to drive a car, and someone then pointed you to a manual, would you scream that they were being arbitrary?
Car manuals are not supposedly divinely guided principles so this analogy does not even work in your own paradigm. First you have to demonstrate that the Holy Spirit was acting through them
