Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
JarJo said:
No you are missing the point. God cannot sin and if God declairs something is a sin then commands men to do that very thing he is fickle and contradictory. It makes God the Author of sin.
Its not spin. I will follow your post and see if you can instruct on this seemingly in compatable behavior of God with his words.
This is how you understand that passage. I personally see it as a prohibition of worshiping other gods especially those made with the Hand. But I'm trying to see your reasoning. So according to you this is how you understand that passage. God prohibits religious images. Ok.
So lets see if I get this straight God tells man that it is a sin to make religeous images and he would damage the man who does it up to his third generation off spring. But God can do the very same thing because he's bigger, better, stronger, more intelligent, and more wise than men. Which means you believe sin is only relative to God. No matter what God does its not a sin because he's bigger than all of us even if he tell us it is a sin. God does not restrict himself from sin not because of his nature but because whatever he wants to do is ok because no one can tell him any different. However, You ignore the fact that in Exodus 27 God doesn't build the ark of the covenant he commands men to do it whom he just told it is a sin to do. So the logic doesn't follow. Which means God character is maliable or pliable. How is your God any different than Zeus? Zeus often told people to be moral but he committed adultry, raped people, killed people on a whim just because he felt like it. Your logic makes the One true God look like this.
You are basically saying humans are stupid and cannot understand religious significance of anything they do.
Hence, God can command men to sin and it be ok because he is bigger and better than men and thus is aloud to provide instruction against the 10 commandments. Why the need for Jesus to fufill the law. God can go against his law in this view.
in other words God can do what he wants because no one is able to tell him otherwise.
IN otherwords God is permitted to contradict what he tells men to do?
So you've come up with a long complicated explanation of why this isn't really a case of God commanding sin. But that does not make it true. There is no biblical basis to favor the far-fetched explanation that you present here. It is merely speculation.
Your explanation has no more biblical basis than the other possible explanation, which is that the commandment was only meant to condemn idols to false gods, that it was never intended to condemn religious art that helps people to worship the true God. This explanation is better in my opinion because a rule that needs an exception right off the bat, from day one, isn't usually a very good rule.
It also creates the really strange notion that there are exactly two permitted religious statues on earth that do not violate the ten commandments. It's like God saw a use for religious art in one specific instance, then changed his mind and never came up with a second exception to his rule. Why? What need did the high priests who went into the tent with the ark have for these angels that later generations didn't have? If angel statues were a good idea in the temple, why not in our churches? If it's because God has to make them himself, why wouldn't he then provide a way for us to make more with his guidance. I guess it's all a mystery and we'll find out when we get to heaven?