Featured Images said to be Christ;Sacred or Sacrelege?

First, I never said these images "are revealing God"! I said they are PERVERTING what scripture reveals about God's true nature. The Scripture explicitly provide positive and negative attributes of God, that define what it is that makes God to be God. This revelation is designed and given to man in order to prevent a PERVERTED IMAGINATION of who and what God is.

Any and all visible images of God are evidence of a PERVERTED IMAGINATION of what is God and who is God. If the artist believed the Scriptural revelation of God they would have the CORRECT mental view of God, which would prevent them from making any kind of visible image to express God.

I never said any such thing! What I said is that they PERVERT rather than reveal God. No visible image can reveal God. EVERY visible image of God can only PERVERT God. Any kind of visible image of God NECESSARILY proves the artist has a FALSE VIEW of God that cannot be harmonized with what Scriptures reveal God to be.

You have no clue to what I said and it is apparent by your complete distortion of what I said.

 

Again, we have spelled these perversions out at least twice already.

1. In regard to God, he is INVISIBLE - Hence, any VISIBLE image is a perversion of what and who God is and Jesus is God.

2. In regard to Christ as a man, the Scriptures clearly state he was UGLY:

For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him. - Isa. 53:2

He is a Jew with semetic features not a man with Caucasian features (blue eyes, pointed nose, etc.).

He is a Nazarine NOT a Nazerite with long hair.

3. In regard to Christ as God man - all images of God are prohibited because all visible images pervert His Person as God and man.

4. The reason God reveals His true character and nature in the Scriptures to mankind is to prevent a PERVERTED MENTAL CONCEPT of who and what God is! Any artistic visible expression of God is proof of a PERVERTED MENTAL CONCEPT of who and what God is.

 

Why not read what I said completely? If you read my post completely you would not come back with such a ridiculous question and conclusion????? Unless you don't understand what you are reading?

For any artist to even make an attempt to visibly express God in visible form is proof that the mind of the artist does not accept or is ignorant of the revelation of who and what God is. Jesus is God and to merely provide a human expression is to LIMIT and thus PERVERT the true Biblical revelation of the true Jesus of the Bible.

If an artist accepted and believed the scriptural revelation of Jesus Christ or any other member of the Godhead, they would not dare make any visible expression of God or Christ. Hence, the visible expression is a declaration of either complete ignorance or rejection of the Biblical revelation of God, as any visible expression is a perversion of the God of the Bible.

 

Here is the difference. That is God's written revelation to man. If you took the description of Jesus given in Revelation chapter one, and to the best of your ability made an image, a drawing, or a statue of it, would it be correct according to the Ten Commandments? The answer is no.

I had a friend, a missionary to India that was given a beautifully framed picture of "Jesus". Not wanting to offend, he hung it on his wall. The next day a Hindu acquaintance came in, and upon seeing the picture promptly bowed down before it. Why? He believed it was our God, and he was willing to make it one of his gods too.
That is what an idol is. It is an image or representation of the real God. All the images, icons, statues made by hands, are simply representations of the gods that dwell behind those images. The image is not the god. It only pictures or represents the god. Thus the command not to make any image (unto the Lord), which is the context.

He took the picture down as soon as his guest was gone and trashed the picture.

 

How do you "think" about an INVISIBLE God sitting on a throne? The whole idea is anthropormorphic which simply means He reigns.

Do you make a distinction between the PERSON of God and his WORKS?

God is the one who uses this anthropormorphic expression and so inspired the writers to speak this way. However, the very concept of anthropormohicism is a denial that he does in fact have hands or else you don't understand the meaning and use of anthropomorhicism.

First, did God mean for this language to be understood LITERALLY or only anthropomorhically? If he meant for it to be understood literally then we have immense contradictions within the word of God and God is the author of confusion.

If he meant it only to be understood anthropomorhically than anyone who understands it and tries to portray it LITERALLY is misinterpreting scripture and PERVERTING the nature of God as Mormons do. Are you a Mormon supporter?

 

However, this is a straw man as no one has argued that this command absolutely prohibits images of any kind! No one!

I have argued this from its context in relationship to the first commandment which has to do with the Person of God. All of my arguments have been in relationship to God and making visible images that relate to his Person or position as God. Jesus is God.

 

But they are not His nature, as God can be distinguished from his creation. The image is of God not of His works.

You are the one confusing God with his works not I. His works reveal Him but are not Him.

Yes, I did take art classes. However, if it is a person who is being drawn, or a person that is being sculpted or a person who is being carved then it is at minimum an image of a person, whatever else it may or may not be in addition to that.

There is no difference UNLESS you are intentionally drawing a Person, and then it at minimum is inclusive of that Person in addition to what it may or may not represent beyond that.

Yes, in one sentence I included an "r" and in the others I excluded the "r". I know how to spell it, just typing to fast and without a spell check. I know how to spell a lot of words that are wrongly spelled due to speed and lack of spell check. I am glad you are around to point out those things though.

 

I have never understood this argument; it has never made sense to me.

"I am the Lord thy God...Thou shalt not make any graven images (of me) [CONTEXT].
It is not speaking of your grandma or your grandchildren. Where do you get that from? The Lord is speaking of Himself, or anyone or anything that takes away from Him such as the Hindu gods (Ganesh, Vishnu, etc.)
Romans chapter one makes that clear.

[FONT=&quot]Romans 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.[/FONT]

 

The sculpture of who? Billy the kid? If anyone asked who is the a sculpture of? Would they say Billy the Kid?

It does show who? Billy the kid?

Who do people recognize by those pictures? Billy the Kid? When asked who is this, does the child say, "Oh it is an artistic concept of a feeling or my Christian experience??????

The second command absolutely forbids to make an image of God for any reason, as the very image perverts the true nature of God.

 

Context includes the scriptures that immediately precede it also. Look at the first commandment. The second commandment is in relationship to the first. Indeed the first five all relate to God.

The first says NTHER GOD but the true God. The second one applies the first commandment to anything VISIBLE that would replace the POSITION of the PERSON of God before the eyes of men as God.

That is what an artistic visible expression of "GOD" by whatever name you call that God does. Call it Baal, or Horis, or Zeus, or Jesus, of The Father or the Holy Spirit, the fact is it (the image) is not the true God, but a visible image in the eyes of men that portrays God to them. That is forbidden because any kind of visible representation always PERVERTS the true nature of God as it either LIMITS or DISTORTS Him. It takes the mind away from the Biblical revelation of God and sets it upon the representative image of God.


Romans 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.


Whenever the artist attempts to create a visible image of God they change the glory of the uncorruptible God into an an image!