The Shroud of Turin

[lori4dogs]

Just a quick note to all. I will be away for a while as I'm finally having some surgery I've put off for a while. I'll miss the BB. Bless you all.

 

[BillySunday1935]

Just a quick note to all. I will be away for a while as I'm finally having some surgery I've put off for a while. I'll miss the BB. Bless you all.

We will be praying for you. I hope that you have a speedy recovery.

‡ Peace ‡

 

[BillySunday1935]

Yes I believe in God. I believe in God by faith. It doesn't take science to believe in God. And that is the argument against evolution. There are limitations to science. One of them is that science cannot enter into the realm of the supernatural or it ceases to be science. It cannot deal with the origin of the universe. If it does it ceases to be science and has entered into the field of faith. It takes more faith to believe this world was created via a big bang than it was through a loving caring Almighty God.

I don't have to prove that God exists.
However the atheist must prove that God doesn't exist. To do so he cannot. One cannot prove a universal negative.

I can believe what ever I want. I can assert my belief.

Clearly. However, if you are going to make statements as "fact" then you should be able to provide something other than opinion when challenged. I didn't ask you to prove that God exists. I simply made the comparison that, from a purely scientific investigative position (one that YOU were asking me for) you cannot prove that God exists. Yet, you believe in him as do I.

If you want to disprove my believe then the onus is on you to prove me wrong. Therefore to prove Calvin wrong you must come up with the proof. However ridiculous Calvin's statement may seem to you, if you can't prove him wrong his statement stands.

What? Disproving Calvin isn’t even relevant to the topic at hand. However, I can see why you are attempting to take the discussion in this direction.

Look - you made the claim that there exists enough wood in all of the supposed relics of the cross to build an entire mansion.

I showed you a study that contradicts that claim. You then stated that study to be unscientific and bragged about your own sci-creds.

You can't prove that, neither can he. It is impossible. It is impossible to prove a universal negative.
1. How many fragments are there? Do you know? How does he know?
2. How many Catholics world-wide (out of one billion) claim to have one? How could he find that out. Did he knock on every door of every Catholic in the world and search to see if each and every Catholic have a fragment of the cross or claim to have a fragment of a cross. Not unless this research is done can his work be proven true.
3. Are there are other fragments that are either held by others that are not Catholic, or that are (as archeological finds), not yet found yet? Has he accounted for that? In other words has he searched every square inch of this world, in the oceans, seas, islands, and all continents to make sure that he has found all the fragments of the cross?
4. How does he recognize a fragment of the cross of Jesus when he comes across one?

I know a little bit about scientific investigation Billy. A science teacher is part of my resume.

Now I am asking you again - provide the scientific data to buttress your claim, or restate it as opinion. I'm simply applying your standards to your own statements.

‡ Peace ‡

 

[annsni]

Just a quick note to all. I will be away for a while as I'm finally having some surgery I've put off for a while. I'll miss the BB. Bless you all.

Lori - I will be praying for skill and wisdom for the doctors, quick healing and a great outcome for you and must rest as well. Take care of yourself!

 

[Alive in Christ]

Lori...

"Just a quick note to all. I will be away for a while as I'm finally having some surgery I've put off for a while. I'll miss the BB. Bless you all.

I hope and pray that all goes well for you, and that you will be back to 100% very soon. :wavey:

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Just a quick note to all. I will be away for a while as I'm finally having some surgery I've put off for a while. I'll miss the BB. Bless you all.

My prayers are with you as well. Don't forget to take extreme unction for healing But really may the Lord keep you safe and healthy and to make his face shine upon you.

 

[annsni]

The last time I looked the canon of the New Testament was NOT in scripture. So from whence did it come? Who told you which books where inspired and should be included in the canon? It sure wasn't scripture.

So the New Testament isn't considered Scripture? What do you do with 2 Peter 4:14-18

Therefore, beloved, since you are waiting for these, be diligent to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace. And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability. But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be the glory both now and to the day of eternity. Amen.

Paul's writings were already considered Scripture at this time.

I'm asking you where God is telling us that we cannot do this IF it is not idol worship? How is the pledge of allegiance different? Are you not showing our founding fathers and those who have died in defense of liberty veneration and honor?

You still have not shown me that we are allowed to bow down to objects and honor them. I see all through Scripture the admonition against this but you say it's OK as long as we're not "worshipping" the item?

I do not venerate our founding fathers. At all. Jeepers - even Lori says that veneration is only for God yet you say we're to venerate the founding fathers? Wow.

 

[BillySunday1935]

snip…

So you believe that as long as your heart is in the right place that you can do anything you wish? Because that is what you are saying. As long as your heart is in the right place you can venerate splinters of wood as if they are holy?

Nope. Sorry.

Straw man alert! No - that is not what I am saying. Here is what I wrote:

Well, I've gotton down on my knees while praying with my Bible open in front of me. Was I worshiping my Bible as an idol? No - God knows my heart as he knows the heart of everyone.

The point that I am trying to make here is that it is God who will judge us. Unfortunately, many of you here seem to make judging others a regular part of your supposedly Christian lives. That's rather presumptuous don't you think?

I adore my saintly dead grandmother. By that logic if I kiss her picture I'm an idolater. What about my wife - I adore her - if I kiss her hand I am an idolater. So, intent matters not, hmmm.?

You are just being silly here. I hope you don't consider your wife an object. And I know that you are not going to bring your departed grandmother's picture to the altar at church and start kissing it during the worship service as a sign of devotion to God.

I simply took your position to its final logical conclusion. The result is silly – which should indicate to you the state of your position on this to begin with.

That's what we are talking about. Kissing objects, focus on objects, adoring and venerating objects in place of worshipping God.

You know that.

Oh Lordy - please give me strength. I will say this again.

1. Those who are in favor of these practices are not claiming that veneration of a relic, the saints, etc. is happening in place of worshipping God - in fact they are stating the opposite.

2. There is an enormous difference between VENERATION and ADORATION.

‡ Peace ‡

 

[billwald]

During apostolic times "scriptures" referred to the Tanakh.

 

[BillySunday1935]

So the New Testament isn't considered Scripture?

I never said that. That is what you want/need me to say. Here is what I said in response to your question.

So there is inspiration and additional insight from God elsewhere other than Scripture?

Yes - the Canon of the New Testament!

There were many – many – writings out there at the time and different Churches had various collections of them. How did we end up with the New Testament canon that we read today? Why the 4th Century councils of course. How did they know which books, letters, etc. were to be included and which ones excluded? Well, they were guided by the Holy Spirit. And, by your acceptance of that New Testament canon , you tacitly accept the authority of those councils to establish that canon. There were no table of contents or index or list in scripture telling us which books were to be part of the New Testament. There is your inspiration and additional insight from God elsewhere other than Scripture.

I do not venerate our founding fathers. At all. Jeepers - even Lori says that veneration is only for God yet you say we're to venerate the founding fathers? Wow.

I think Lori knows the difference between veneration [honor] and adoration [worship.]

Do you not honor our founding fathers? What about those who have given their lives for this country – do you not honor them? Wow indeed!

The words have different meanings and usages based upon - guess what - intent.

From Merriam Webster Online:

Main Entry: ven·er·ate
Pronunciation: \ˈve-nə-ˌrāt\
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): ven·er·at·ed; ven·er·at·ing
Etymology: Latin veneratus, past participle of venerari, from vener-, venus love, charm — more at win
Date: circa 1623
1 : to regard with reverential respect or with admiring deference
2 : to honor (as an icon or a relic) with a ritual act of devotion

Main Entry: adore
Pronunciation: \ə-ˈdȯr\
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): adored; ador·ing
Etymology: Middle English adouren, from Anglo-French aurer, adourer, from Latin adorare, from ad- + orare to speak, pray — more at oration
Date: 14th century
1 : to worship or honor as a deity or as divine
2 : to regard with loving admiration and devotion <adored his wife>
3 : to be very fond of <adores pecan pie>

You still have not shown me that we are allowed to bow down to objects and honor them. I see all through Scripture the admonition against this but you say it's OK as long as we're not "worshipping" the item?

The admonitions are against IDOL WORSHIP – I.e. you shall have no other gods before me. The scripture is full of examples of people bowing down in worship of God. I take Lori and the rest at their word – they are not worshiping some inanimate object (which, by the way, is precisely what idol worship is – to deify some object as if that object were itself a God). Using sacrementals, icons, statues, etc. in the WORSHIP OF GOD, however, is not precluded in scripture. It is, in fact, commanded!

In Exodus 20:4 God condemned the carving of statues for the sake of worshipping them as idols. However, in Exodus 25:18-20, God commands Moses to carve statues for a religious purpose: two cherubim which would sit atop the Ark of the Covenant.

These images were so important that God gave Moses exacting instructions as to the materials to be used and the posture in which they were to be carved. You can find other commands from God to carve statues and embroider images of various religious objects in Exodus 21:6-9, Numbers 21:6-9, 1 Kings 6:23-28, and 1 Kings 7:23- 39. In each case, the statue or embroidered image was intended by God for a religious use.

Here is a link that should help clarify things. At least I found it useful.

http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/prostration_heb.aspx


‡ Peace ‡

"To ignore the facts is to let bias overcome reason." Author unknown.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

During apostolic times "scriptures" referred to the Tanakh.

Tanakh is an acronym that means Torah, Neviim, and Ketuvim. This system of separating the text of scripture into these catagories came much later than the time of the Apostles. Josephus breaks down the catagories of books this way

We do not possess myriads of inconsistent books, conflicting with each other. Our books, those which are justly accredited, are but two and twenty, and contain the record of all time. Of these, five are the books of Moses, comprising the laws and the traditional history from the birth of man down to the death of the lawgiver. This period falls only a little short of three thousand years. From the death of Moses until Artaxerxes, who succeeded Xerxes as king of Persia, the prophets of their own times in thirteen books. The remaining four books contain hymns to God and the precepts for the conduct of human life.[11]

1) Torah
2) Neviim or prophets
3) Small book of Hyms not Ketuvim or the writings.
Though Josephus regards the OT as being closed from his view his books do not perfectly match our OT. It is supposed that a jewish council of Jamniah actually closed out OT Canon After the establishment of Christianity. What is clear is that NT writers uses Apocryphal sources as well as the rest of the Early Church. So You are somewhat mistaken.

 

[webdog]

Just a quick note to all. I will be away for a while as I'm finally having some surgery I've put off for a while. I'll miss the BB. Bless you all.

Praying the rosary now as I type this...oh no...the secret's out

In all seriousness, I pray for a speedy recovery and for God's hand in the surgeon's work.

 

[luke1616]

The History Channel is playing a documentary on the Shroud as I am posting.

Of course we all know that the classic evidence of a crucified man has been documented, as has the age of the shroud. The really interesting things are the things that they say they cant really explain...yet its on the shroud.

We who are born again of course need no *evidence*, as we have the witness of the Holy Spirit alive in us, testifying as to our new birth...the life of Christ in us.

But how do you view the Shroud of Turin? Do you think the Shroud of Turin is what Christ was wrapped in?

Do you think the shroud is an "end time" witness to the unbelieving world as to the truth of Christ?

Any other comments are welcome as well.

What say you concerning the Shroud?

"Blessed are those who believe without seeing." If you look at the image of the shroud, it seems to me that this man's joints are not out of place. The bible says all His joints where out of place. So if the shroud is real, the image was taken at the moment He rose, thus putting His bones back in place. I think the shroud creates more questions and confusion than anything else. If it is real, was does it do? Not much for me, He put His word above His name.

 

[annsni]

I never said that. That is what you want/need me to say. Here is what I said in response to your question.

When I say:

So there is inspiration and additional insight from God elsewhere other than Scripture?

and you say

Yes - the Canon of the New Testament!

That tells me that you do not believe that the canon of the New Testament is Scripture.


There were many – many – writings out there at the time and different Churches had various collections of them. How did we end up with the New Testament canon that we read today? Why the 4th Century councils of course. How did they know which books, letters, etc. were to be included and which ones excluded? Well, they were guided by the Holy Spirit. And, by your acceptance of that New Testament canon , you tacitly accept the authority of those councils to establish that canon. There were no table of contents or index or list in scripture telling us which books were to be part of the New Testament. There is your inspiration and additional insight from God elsewhere other than Scripture.[/quote]

The counsels did not decide what was God's Word but confirmed already what was greatly accepted as Scripture. If you feel that the canon was decided by the Counsil of Carthage in 397, then you are missing the 367 letter of Athanasius which contained the same 27 books we today call the New Testament. There is even mention of New Testament writings within the New Testament and labeled as Scripture: "Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching; for the scripture says, 'You shall not muzzle an ox when it is treading out the grain,' and 'The laborer deserves his wages.' " The first scripture is from Deuteronomy 25:4 but the second quote about the laborer? Luke 10:7. It is labeled "scripture". The book of Luke. So the New Testament is not Scripture? I disagree.



I think Lori knows the difference between veneration [honor] and adoration [worship.]

Do you not honor our founding fathers? What about those who have given their lives for this country – do you not honor them? Wow indeed!

The words have different meanings and usages based upon - guess what - intent.

From Merriam Webster Online:

Main Entry: ven·er·ate
Pronunciation: \ˈve-nə-ˌrāt\
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): ven·er·at·ed; ven·er·at·ing
Etymology: Latin veneratus, past participle of venerari, from vener-, venus love, charm — more at win
Date: circa 1623
1 : to regard with reverential respect or with admiring deference
2 : to honor (as an icon or a relic) with a ritual act of devotion

Main Entry: adore
Pronunciation: \ə-ˈdȯr\
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): adored; ador·ing
Etymology: Middle English adouren, from Anglo-French aurer, adourer, from Latin adorare, from ad- + orare to speak, pray — more at oration
Date: 14th century
1 : to worship or honor as a deity or as divine
2 : to regard with loving admiration and devotion <adored his wife>
3 : to be very fond of <adores pecan pie>[/quote]

I'm sorry, I got my terms mixed up. She agrees with "veneration" and not with "adoration".

That said, I do not venerate anyone but Jesus Christ. He is worthy of my veneration. Others are due my respect and honor but not veneration. I am not devoted to them. I do not do rituals to them. I am ever grateful for their service but they are but men.

The admonitions are against IDOL WORSHIP – I.e. you shall have no other gods before me. The scripture is full of examples of people bowing down in worship of God. I take Lori and the rest at their word – they are not worshiping some inanimate object (which, by the way, is precisely what idol worship is – to deify some object as if that object were itself a God). Using sacrementals, icons, statues, etc. in the WORSHIP OF GOD, however, is not precluded in scripture. It is, in fact, commanded!

In Exodus 20:4 God condemned the carving of statues for the sake of worshipping them as idols. However, in Exodus 25:18-20, God commands Moses to carve statues for a religious purpose: two cherubim which would sit atop the Ark of the Covenant.

These images were so important that God gave Moses exacting instructions as to the materials to be used and the posture in which they were to be carved. You can find other commands from God to carve statues and embroider images of various religious objects in Exodus 21:6-9, Numbers 21:6-9, 1 Kings 6:23-28, and 1 Kings 7:23- 39. In each case, the statue or embroidered image was intended by God for a religious use.

Here is a link that should help clarify things. At least I found it useful.

http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/prostration_heb.aspx


‡ Peace ‡

"To ignore the facts is to let bias overcome reason." Author unknown.

Can you show me one instance in Scripture where God commands, condones or rewards a man bowing to ANY object. Yes, God was clear in His instruction about the cherebum and the ark but are we to bow to these items?

Once again BillySunday, I seriously am doubting that you are Baptist at heart. You seem to know and support a lot of Catholic doctrine which is not in agreement with the Baptist beliefs. Why is that?

 

[Thinkingstuff]

When I say:



and you say



That tells me that you do not believe that the canon of the New Testament is Scripture.


There were many – many – writings out there at the time and different Churches had various collections of them. How did we end up with the New Testament canon that we read today? Why the 4th Century councils of course. How did they know which books, letters, etc. were to be included and which ones excluded? Well, they were guided by the Holy Spirit. And, by your acceptance of that New Testament canon , you tacitly accept the authority of those councils to establish that canon. There were no table of contents or index or list in scripture telling us which books were to be part of the New Testament. There is your inspiration and additional insight from God elsewhere other than Scripture.

The counsels did not decide what was God's Word but confirmed already what was greatly accepted as Scripture. If you feel that the canon was decided by the Counsil of Carthage in 397, then you are missing the 367 letter of Athanasius which contained the same 27 books we today call the New Testament. There is even mention of New Testament writings within the New Testament and labeled as Scripture: "Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching; for the scripture says, 'You shall not muzzle an ox when it is treading out the grain,' and 'The laborer deserves his wages.' " The first scripture is from Deuteronomy 25:4 but the second quote about the laborer? Luke 10:7. It is labeled "scripture". The book of Luke. So the New Testament is not Scripture? I disagree.



I think Lori knows the difference between veneration [honor] and adoration [worship.]

Do you not honor our founding fathers? What about those who have given their lives for this country – do you not honor them? Wow indeed!

The words have different meanings and usages based upon - guess what - intent.

From Merriam Webster Online:

Main Entry: ven·er·ate
Pronunciation: \ˈve-nə-ˌrāt\
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): ven·er·at·ed; ven·er·at·ing
Etymology: Latin veneratus, past participle of venerari, from vener-, venus love, charm — more at win
Date: circa 1623
1 : to regard with reverential respect or with admiring deference
2 : to honor (as an icon or a relic) with a ritual act of devotion

Main Entry: adore
Pronunciation: \ə-ˈdȯr\
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): adored; ador·ing
Etymology: Middle English adouren, from Anglo-French aurer, adourer, from Latin adorare, from ad- + orare to speak, pray — more at oration
Date: 14th century
1 : to worship or honor as a deity or as divine
2 : to regard with loving admiration and devotion <adored his wife>
3 : to be very fond of <adores pecan pie>[/quote]

I'm sorry, I got my terms mixed up. She agrees with "veneration" and not with "adoration".

That said, I do not venerate anyone but Jesus Christ. He is worthy of my veneration. Others are due my respect and honor but not veneration. I am not devoted to them. I do not do rituals to them. I am ever grateful for their service but they are but men.



Can you show me one instance in Scripture where God commands, condones or rewards a man bowing to ANY object. Yes, God was clear in His instruction about the cherebum and the ark but are we to bow to these items?

Once again BillySunday, I seriously am doubting that you are Baptist at heart. You seem to know and support a lot of Catholic doctrine which is not in agreement with the Baptist beliefs. Why is that?[/QUOTE]

I think you missed what I said here.

His argument will be that the Canon of the NT is based on Apostolic Tradition. That in the exception of 2 verses all references to scripture in the NT refers to the Old testiment and specifically the LXX. So the NT is scripture in that it is Apostolic tradition. However, it is reliant on tradition already in placed. Though Canon wasn't defined until the 400 we can determine a tradition of "canonisity" based on the accepted practice of all churches to be inclusive what books were considered authoritative for the NT. That is my guess anyway.

 

[BillySunday1935]

That tells me that you do not believe that the canon of the New Testament is Scripture.

Nope – never said that. Here's what I said...

There were many – many – writings out there at the time and different Churches had various collections of them. How did we end up with the New Testament canon that we read today? Why the 4th Century councils of course. How did they know which books, letters, etc. were to be included and which ones excluded? Well, they were guided by the Holy Spirit. And, by your acceptance of that New Testament canon , you tacitly accept the authority of those councils to establish that canon. There were no table of contents or index or list in scripture telling us which books were to be part of the New Testament. There is your inspiration and additional insight from God elsewhere other than Scripture.

You are equating the word "canon" (a list or measure of which books were to be included), with the actual content of the New Testament books themselves. Words have meanings...

The counsels did not decide what was God's Word but confirmed already what was greatly accepted as Scripture. If you feel that the canon was decided by the Counsil of Carthage in 397, then you are missing the 367 letter of Athanasius which contained the same 27 books we today call the New Testament. There is even mention of New Testament writings within the New Testament and labeled as Scripture: "Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching; for the scripture says, 'You shall not muzzle an ox when it is treading out the grain,' and 'The laborer deserves his wages.' " The first scripture is from Deuteronomy 25:4 but the second quote about the laborer? Luke 10:7. It is labeled "scripture". The book of Luke.

Oh my – clearly you have an incomplete understanding of how the canon developed. Further, you are incorrect if you believe there was consensus on all of the books used by ALL of the early churches in ALL locations in the first 300 years of the Church – many where similar, a few were identical, but many were different containing different books. That was the very purpose of the councils. Some even had Gnostic books in their collections.

So the New Testament is not Scripture? I disagree.

OK – try to inculcate this into your noodle. I DID NOT WRITE THAT. Now, show me the quote word for word where I wrote that “…the New Testament is not Scripture”. You cannot because I did not.

I'm sorry, I got my terms mixed up. She agrees with "veneration" and not with "adoration".

That said, I do not venerate anyone but Jesus Christ. He is worthy of my veneration. Others are due my respect and honor but not veneration. I am not devoted to them. I do not do rituals to them. I am ever grateful for their service but they are but men.

And you still have a misunderstanding of the definitions. VENERATION = HONOR = RESPECT (depending on one's usage or intent).

To be accurate here, Catholics and Orthodox do not even venerate these objects – they honor/venerate the person represented by said object. This is a huge difference and one which you either cannot grasp or simply refuse to accept.

Can you show me one instance in Scripture where God commands, condones or rewards a man bowing to ANY object. Yes, God was clear in His instruction about the cherebum and the ark but are we to bow to these items?

They are not bowing TO the object – they are bowing in respect of the person represented by the object – NOT TO THE OBJECT ITSELF. Now – write that 1000 times.

For thousands of years, bowing has been and continues to be a sign of respect. Regarding using those objects as Catholics describe their usage... can you show me scripture precluding that Catholic usage? Further, can you show me scripture that condones alter calls? How about sunday school? Or Wednesday night prayer meetings? What about about dinner-on-the-ground or Easter sunrise service? No – because not everything was written IN scripture. That is why there exists Apostolic Tradition.

Once again BillySunday, I seriously am doubting that you are Baptist at heart.

Will you stop with the schoolmarm attitude please? Ultimately, you are free to believe whatever you choose – which is as it should be, because many Christians do this every time they open their Bible.

You seem to know and support a lot of Catholic doctrine which is not in agreement with the Baptist beliefs. Why is that?

Well, which Baptist beliefs would that be? Provide me a complete list incorporating ALL Baptist doctrine from ALL Baptist denominations and I’ll tell you why.

‡ Peace ‡

 

[Revmitchell]

They are not bowing TO the object – they are bowing in respect of the person represented by the object – NOT TO THE OBJECT ITSELF. Now – write that 1000 times.

For thousands of years, bowing has been and continues to be a sign of respect. Regarding using those objects as Catholics describe their usage... can you show me scripture precluding that Catholic usage? Further, can you show me scripture that condones alter calls? How about sunday school? Or Wednesday night prayer meetings? What about about dinner-on-the-ground or Easter sunrise service? No – because not everything was written IN scripture. That is why there exists Apostolic Tradition.

Exo 20:4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:
Exo 20:5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;


It matters not why or who their honor is to. It is ungodly and it is sin, Aaron and Israel learned this the hard way.

 

[rbell]

Once again BillySunday, I seriously am doubting that you are Baptist at heart.

I more than doubt it. No way this guy is Baptist.

You seem to know and support a lot of Catholic doctrine which is not in agreement with the Baptist beliefs. Why is that?

Because he's a Catholic, who seemingly has no problem taking "creative license" in filling out his profile.

(But hey, what do I know...fibbing's probably not a mortal sin, is it?)

 

[BillySunday1935]

Exo 20:4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:
Exo 20:5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;

Taking this out of context is a mistake. You apparently interpret Exodus 20:4 as a forbiddance of the making of statues for religious purposes. If you were to read a little further in that book, you would find that the Lord later commands the making of statues for religious purposes. In Exodus 25:18 he orders that the Ark of the Covenant be adorned with two statues of cherubim. Later still, Solomon, following the will of the Lord, installs giant statues of cherubim in the sanctuary of the Temple in Jerusalem (1 Kgs. 6:23-35). Clearly, you have missed the point of Exodus 20:4. God isn't saying that we shouldn't make statues. He's saying that we shouldn't worship them or the false gods they may represent. He is forbidding idolatry. He is not forbidding artwork that draws our hearts and minds closer to him.

Here are a few examples that are pertinent to the discussion:
From http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/prostration_heb.aspx

"The second commandment forbids the worship of any graven images or other gods (Ex 20:5; 34-14; Deut 5:9). The Israelites were warned not to worship the gods of the Amorites, Hittites, etc. (Ex 23:24; Ps 81:9 [H 10]).

Nevertheless Israel repeatedly worshiped other gods (Deut 29:26 [H 25]; Jud 2:12, 17; Jer 13:10; 16:11; 22:9). These gods included those of the Moabites (Num 25:2), those of the Edomites (II Chr 25:14). Ashtoreth of the Sidonians, Chemosh of Moab, Milcom of the Ammonites (I Kgs 11:33), and Baal of Sidon (I Kgs 16:31; 22:53 [H 54]).

In an interesting passage the verb is used both of "worship" and of "bowing" without an attitude of worship. After Naaman’s healing and his conversion to the monotheistic worship of the Lord (II Kgs 5:17), the Syrian officer asked Elisha, "In this matter may the Lord pardon your servant: when my master (i.e. the king) goes into the house of Rimmon to worship there, leaning on my arm, and I bow myself in the house of Rimmon, when I bow myself in the house of Rimmon, the Lord pardon your servant in this matter" (II Kgs 5:18, RSV). Elisha did not object and said, "Go in peace."

A problem passage is Gen 47:31 where Jacob before dying "bowed himself upon the head of the bed (mitta)." The LXX, however, reads, "And Israel worshiped, leaning on the top of his staff"’ rendering the consonants as matteh "staff." The Syriac and Itala agree; Heb 11:21 cites the LXX. In this context Speiser suggests, "The term ‘to bow low’ need not signify here anything more than a gesture of mute appreciation...." Cf. also I Kgs 1:47 where the dying David bows down in bed."

And now kissing an object Again from http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/prostration_heb.aspx:

"Kissing is a universal sign of affection. It is an act of love, an expression of endearment, not only between man and woman, parents and children, but is also the expression of one's feelings for the ritual objects and the religious duties associated with them.

There are no religious laws that require us to kiss a ritual or holy object. There is only the force of custom as it develops through the ages. In varying degrees kissing has become an optional commonplace among the Jews as an expression of religious devotion at the following times:

The tallit [prayer shawl] is kissed just before putting it on.

The tefillin [phylacteries] are kissed when taken them out of their bag and before replacing them in the bag.

The mezuzah on the doorpost is sometimes kissed upon entering or leaving a house. It is done by touching the mezuzah with one's hand and kissing the fingers that made contact with the mezuzah.

The Torah is kissed when it passes by in the synagogue. Here, too, it is often done by extending a hand to touch the Torah mantle and then kissing the hand. Some touch the Torah with the edge of a tallit and then kiss the tallit.

The Torah is also kissed before one recites the blessings over it. Here it is done by taking the edge of one's tallit or the sash that is used to tie the scroll together, touching the outside of the scroll with it, and then kissing the tallit or the sash. Many people place the tallit or sash to the very words where the reading is about to begin. The sages advised against doing this as it may hasten a wearing away or erasure of the letters. At best, they recommend touching only the margin area near the line where the reading is about to begin. In all instances, one should not touch the Torah parchment with one's bare hand. The custom of not doing so derives from a special edict issued by the sages prohibiting such contact (Shabbat 14a: OH 147:1).

The curtain on the Ark (paokhet) is kissed before one opens it, or after closing it when the Torah is put away.

A siddur [prayer book] and [C]Humash [Jewish Bible] are kissed before putting them away. These holy books are also kissed if they are accidentally dropped on the floor."

It matters not why or who their honor is to. It is ungodly and it is sin.

Nope - idolatry is the sin. That is not what is being discussed here.

 

[BillySunday1935]

I more than doubt it. No way this guy is Baptist.



Because he's a Catholic, who seemingly has no problem taking "creative license" in filling out his profile.

(But hey, what do I know...fibbing's probably not a mortal sin, is it?)

Nice post - it really contributed to the discussion.