If the artist was trying to create a visible image of God, then yes...I'd agree.
-
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!
Images said to be Christ;Sacred or Sacrelege?
- Thread starter T Alan
- Start date
- Status
If the artist was trying to create a visible image of God, then yes...I'd agree.
It doesn't matter because you have reverted to an ad hominem and provocative discussion.
HankD
I've not seen any personal attacks. He did well.
Look again. He didn't do too bad and he certainly could have done much worse, but there are several posts that inappropriately spoke to the person and not the issue.
Maybe Hank D will (quote) them below. seeing as how he brought the charges.
To offer an observation and example, at a glance, he did refer to people (me) as being clueless, lacking understanding, and confused on their own beliefs. This does speak to to the person (in this example, me) rather than the issues. If he had said that he did not believe I understood his comment correctly or that he didn't understand my position and I needed to elaborate, that would have been appropriate.
Last edited by a moderator:
No just go through the posts.
Biblicists is IMO usually correct in his analyses but then again he (again IMO) loses credibility with posts such as #162.
The brass serpent was an image made by Moses at the direction of God, it represented Christ who was to come.
I had thought the debate would lead to another question with a fruitful discussion to follow:
e.g. Why would Christ be represented by a brass serpent?
Because though He was God come in the flesh - He was made sin for us who knew no sin.
2 Corinthians 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.
HankD
The use of ridicule and contempt no matter how small or how oblique is not the way to persuade folks.
Even insults by innuendo are IMO a poor witness and fall by the wayside with whatever wisdom they may technically contain.
Been there, done that, I admit (and no doubt in the future as well).
2 Timothy 2
24 And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient,
25 In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;
26 And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.
People have objected that Christ Himself did not always follow this edict.
But then again this passage was not given to Christ.
HankD
Even insults by innuendo are IMO a poor witness and fall by the wayside with whatever wisdom they may technically contain.
Been there, done that, I admit (and no doubt in the future as well).
2 Timothy 2
24 And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient,
25 In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;
26 And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.
People have objected that Christ Himself did not always follow this edict.
But then again this passage was not given to Christ.
HankD
The brazen serpent was designed by God to serve as a TYPE. There are many such types of Christ in the ceremonial law which were anticipating His coming and abolished by His coming. However, it is never called "god" or "Christ". When it began to be used as a visible representation of God, it was ordered to be destroyed.
However, in context the second commandment refers to making any kind of image used to REPLACE the Person or take the POSITION of God before the eyes of men. Any visible image called "god" can only PERVERT the truth of the everlasting, invisible, omnipotent God.
Moreover, these types where made by God's explicit command. Who has given stone, wood and painting artists such a command????
How so? Because I provided a laughing face to your response which was no response at all, that being the laughable point???
Here is your response that I responded unto:
I did and it doesn't matter. - HD
Your response is as much ad hominem as my laugh icon is to that response. You dished it out but can't take it, and now want to blame me for exactly what you did.
Last edited by a moderator:
This is one I must work on. It's so satisfying!! It's not meant to be serious but playful of sorts. If I'm seriously wanting to attack someone personally I'll often just put them into the grave yard. We had a funeral just recently....SO any of you "sitting in the stands" and see me use sarcasm, it's just for fun, don't try it at home.:godisgood:
rivers1222
Member
But I'm learning. And it is such a nice view!
haha, put your glasses back on, they musta (fell,fallen) off.
Yes, that will do.
I think we are both confused, but yes you are correct as I certainly have been known to play the hypocrite.
If you look back through the archives over the years you will see I was a much more prolific poster than I am now and was much more apt to use ad hominems, insult and innuendo.
So whatever it might be that got lost in the translation, I am sorry.
Thanks
HankD
You are right, a lot of what goes on here at the BB is just jostling and pretty much harmless staying within the boundaries of debate arts and sciences.
However things here can get ugly very quickly as well.
HankD
Apology accepted. I too am trying to stay away from personal innuendo's and the like, but like you I struggle at times with that issue especially with some posters. I am sorry if I offended you, will try harder in the future to keep away from offensive reactions.
So overall it seems everyone is comfortable with their own view (if course).
Personally I have no images of Christ in my home apart from a bible or two, perhaps also in books in my library but nothing on the walls (we used to have scripture plaques around the house when we had the place in Maine where most of our kids grew up).
OTOH I don't feel like its a sacrilidge when I see pictures of Christ in other places.
HankD
Personally I have no images of Christ in my home apart from a bible or two, perhaps also in books in my library but nothing on the walls (we used to have scripture plaques around the house when we had the place in Maine where most of our kids grew up).
OTOH I don't feel like its a sacrilidge when I see pictures of Christ in other places.
HankD
Same here with the exception of some homes where they are hung (pictures and crosses) as a means of conveying blessings. What I objected to in the OP was not that these things could be idols, but the blanket statement that they were.
Images in general are not idols but may become an idol
Images in specific which are designed to portray a "god" or "God" are idols by their very existence, regardless of how you may or may not perceive them. That is what they are by design to portray a "god" or God and by that very portrayal they PERVERT and DENY the true God revealed in scripture.
Last edited by a moderator:
Now if only you can teach that concept to the Catholic Church.
- Status