Statues

[JarJo]

This "interpretation" reminds me of Faustina Kowalska, the Polish nun who had a vision of Jesus in which he told her to paint a picture of him called the "divine mercy" image. I guess this would be permissible under the rules we're using here, since it was specifically authorized by God and painted according to a vision from heaven. Except I'm sure that a further rule will be forthcoming giving further restrictions on how and when God permits these images. After all we already have 2 special-permission angel statues hidden somewhere in ethiopia on the ark, we don't need a third authorized religious artwork.

 

[The Biblicist]

There's your contradiction right there in your own words.

No contradiction at all when you read it in the context I placed it. The difference is between God generated images versus man generated images. The difference is the SOURCE of origin. If the image has its source in God then it does not have its SOURCE in man. My statements have to do with the source of origin. If the source is God then man can make the image. If the source is man that is forbidden by Exodus 20:4-5.

I gave you the BIBLICAL reasons why one source is condemned but not the other.

The commandment forbids making images.

No, it does not! If only forbids MEN from making images but says NOTHING about God designing them and commanding them to be made by men.

Then what you say would make sense.

Not one word of Exodus 20:4-5 needs to be changed to prohibit image making by men. The SOURCE identified here is man not God. The SOURCE prohibited here is man not God.

 

[The Biblicist]

I'm just repeating what you said.

Yes, but out of the context I placed it and and have been repeating it in.

So we're not smart nor big enough to design religious images? Well if our images are designed on the stories in the bible then its not our design is it? you are saying God still can go against his word because he's bigger than men. What kind of theology is that? God cannot go against his word. Because its contradictory to his nature. Even if he tells men its a sin to do something. He himself is bound by that principle. God cannot sin because sin is contradictory to God's perfections, nature, and attributes.

You simply like to pick and choose don't you? It is not merely a matter of wisdeom but of authority and a matter of access to "heavenly" patterns.

1. God explicitly commanded, Moses, David and Solomon to make specific images after a specific pattern God did not explicitly command Rome to make any image.

2. God alone has access to HEAVENLY patterns and all heavenly patterns that God purposed to be visibly represented have been provided by explicit and direct command of God. Rome has no access to heavenly patterns.

3. God alone has AUTHORITY to determine not only the design of the image but its use. Exodus 20:4-5 prohibits this right to men

 

[The Biblicist]

The issue here is very simple. God prohibits men the right to make images but there is no prohibition placed upon God - Ex. 20:4-5.

The prohibition is easy to understand why. God alone has the right to design and then to define the purpose of a religious image - man has no right to do either.

God alone has access to "heavenly" patterns -man has no access to any.

God alone has the authority to command to make a religious image. God has not given that authority to any man as Exodus 20:4-5 clearly shows.

In addition to denying any RIGHT to make images of any kind in heaven and earth they are in addition forbidden to bow down and worship any image whatsoever regardless of its source simply because that expression is reserved for God alone.

Don't need to be rocket science to see these things! Only idolaters cannot see these things and Rome is an idoltrous denomination.

 

[The Biblicist]

This "interpretation" reminds me of Faustina Kowalska, the Polish nun who had a vision of Jesus in which he told her to paint a picture of him called the "divine mercy" image. I guess this would be permissible under the rules we're using here, since it was specifically authorized by God and painted according to a vision from heaven. Except I'm sure that a further rule will be forthcoming giving further restrictions on how and when God permits these images. After all we already have 2 special-permission angel statues hidden somewhere in ethiopia on the ark, we don't need a third authorized religious artwork.

Holy hogwash! She is no prophet of God as Moses, David and Solomon were all prophets. Moses, David and Solomon were OPENLY and SUPERNATURALLY confirmed by God before all Israel by supernatural fire and a cloud but this woman has nothing but her own subjective far out claim. The Jesus of the prophets was a ugly man with short hair (not a Nazerine like John). Did she paint an ugly man with short hair that looked like a Jew rather than a caucasion featured man??????

Isa. 53:2 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.

 

[DHK]

I often pray before my bible...thus by this strict legalistic interpretation, that makes me an idolitor. Go figure...

WM

To whatever ridiculous extreme you want to take it. Yes, I am down on my knees before my Bible, before my chair, before my window, before my yard, before other houses, before the rest of the city, before the rest of the province/state, before the nation/, before the nation, before the sun. I am before many things. Geographically on this earth we stand (or sit) somewhere, don't we?

 

[The Biblicist]

WRONG! That is what YOU say that it is. Idolatry is the act of worshiping a thing/creature that the object is or represents in lieu of the Living God. To worship such is to make a conscious decision to commit an act of rebellion against Him. That is not what Catholics will tell you they are doing. That is NOT what the RCC teaches. That is NOT what is in the Catechism. This is what YOU wish/hope/yearn that they do so as to justify hating others who disagree with your particular (and fallible) skewed interpretations. How utterly sad for you.

WM

Exodus 20:4-5 denies that men can fabricate, make, create religious images of any kind and cannot do acts of worship toward them of any kind.

Exodus 20:4-5 does not prohibit religous images being made by God's direct command. Moses, David and Solomon were given direct command by God to fashion religous images after a specific heavenly pattern for specific designed purposes.

Rome has not been given direct command by God to make ANY RELIGIOUS IMAGE nor has God supplied Rome with any heavenly Pattern nor gave any explicit directions for the use of such. Hence, Rome has violated Exodus 20:4-5.

 

[Moriah]

JarJo,
In the other post, I demonstrated to you how to find the truth by searching the Bible. Why are you now rejecting what God says in the Bible? You probably love the Catholic religion a lot, but if you want the Truth, you will have to leave the Catholic religion. You will be blessed greatly if you give it all up for God’s Truth.

 

[JarJo]

JarJo,
In the other post, I demonstrated to you how to find the truth by searching the Bible. Why are you now rejecting what God says in the Bible? You probably love the Catholic religion a lot, but if you want the Truth, you will have to leave the Catholic religion. You will be blessed greatly if you give it all up for God’s Truth.

Hi Moriah,

I honestly, in good faith, find the line of reasoning here to be really faulty. Regardless of your arguments, I think the angels on the ark are not an exception to the commandment. Instead they show that the commandment was concerned with false gods, not religious art of the TRUE religion.

So why don't I just avoid statues anyway, just in case you are right? After all, I can be wrong sometimes. It's because I prayed for years to be given understanding of the bible and I felt God led me, against my own rebellious notions, full circle back to the Catholic churches teachings. So it would be really arrogant of me to throw that all away just because someone on the internet presents a rather weak argument against the use of statues. Instead, I watch myself to make sure I don't allow religious art to become an idol for me.

 

[WestminsterMan]

To whatever ridiculous extreme you want to take it. Yes, I am down on my knees before my Bible, before my chair, before my window, before my yard, before other houses, before the rest of the city, before the rest of the province/state, before the nation/, before the nation, before the sun. I am before many things. Geographically on this earth we stand (or sit) somewhere, don't we?

You took this to its ridiculous extreme with your own comments:

Originally Posted by DHK View Post
According to their own definition that is exactly what they do with Mary. They have a statue of her, pray before it, though it represent her.
They do the same with a crucifix of Jesus. It is a representation of God. They pray before it.

It is no different than a Hindu praying before his statue of Ram. The statue is not the god, it only represents the god. The god, Ram, is a spirit. It is the same concept in Catholicism as it is in Hinduism. The two religions have much in common.

And you are a moderator?

WM

 

[WestminsterMan]

Exodus 20:4-5 denies that men can fabricate, make, create religious images of any kind and cannot do acts of worship toward them of any kind.

Exodus 20:4-5 does not prohibit religous images being made by God's direct command. Moses, David and Solomon were given direct command by God to fashion religous images after a specific heavenly pattern for specific designed purposes.

Rome has not been given direct command by God to make ANY RELIGIOUS IMAGE nor has God supplied Rome with any heavenly Pattern nor gave any explicit directions for the use of such. Hence, Rome has violated Exodus 20:4-5.

It think it has been well demonstrated here that you are incorrect in your interpretations - either out of ignorance or by design.

WM

 

[JarJo]

Exodus 20:4-5 denies that men can fabricate, make, create religious images of any kind and cannot do acts of worship toward them of any kind.

Exodus 20:4-5 does not prohibit religous images being made by God's direct command. Moses, David and Solomon were given direct command by God to fashion religous images after a specific heavenly pattern for specific designed purposes.

Have you tried extending this logic to the other commandments?

For example, the commandment against adultery. As you understand it, God might, according to this reasoning, in a special circumstance, require someone to commit adultery. For example he might have told the king of Israel that it was permissible in a certain situation to commit adultery, as long as it was with a certain person in a certain place because God with his omniscience could see that this adultery would produce a suitable heir to the throne. Since this was an action ordained and orchestrated by God, it would not violate the commandment.

Is that the kind of God you believe in?

 

[Moriah]

I honestly, in good faith, find the line of reasoning here to be really faulty.

All I do is what God says to do, and I do not do what He says not to do. I do not lean to the left or to the right of God’s word, and I do not add or take away. God says do not make an image; do not bow to those images. Even a young child can understand.

Regardless of your arguments, I think the angels on the ark are not an exception to the commandment.

God did not say to bow to the statues of the angels! The first covenant had an earthly sanctuary. A tabernacle was set up. Everything had to be arranged in detail to the command of God. EVERYTHING HAD TO BE ARRANGED IN DETAIL TO THE COMMAND OF GOD. Do you really believe the Catholics have designed a sanctuary and tabernacle designed and commanded by God! NOWHERE in the Bible does it say for Catholics to do what they do.
In the old covenant, the high priest entered the inner room, once a year, and never without blood, which he offered for himself and for the sins the people had committed.
Jesus went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not man-made, that is to say, not a part of this creation. Did you read that? JESUS WENT THROUGH THE GREATER AND MORE PERFECT TABERNACLE THAT IS NOT MAN-MADE. He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, having obtained eternal redemption. Did you not just read that? That is from the word of God in the Bible. Christ went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is NOT MAN-MADE.

Christ did not enter a man-made sanctuary that was only a copy of the true one. The Catholic Church does not even have a copy of the true one, they invented their own!
Christ entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God's presence. Jesus did not enter heaven to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own. Jesus has appeared once for all at the end of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself. Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people. The Catholic Church has Jesus' sacrifice of his body and blood at every mass, at every Catholic Church all over the whole world! What falseness! The Catholics have a false sanctuary and a false tabernacle.

The Catholic Church makes images and commands their priests and parishioners to bow to the images. God says do not make images. Does that mean anything to you? God says do not bow to the works of your hands. Does that mean anything to you? How is that weak and faulty to tell you this? The Israelites burned incense to the bronze snake that Moses made; therefore, the bronze snake was destroyed! Catholic priests burn incense to the crucifix and statues of Mary, and other statues. How do you not understand that? Lean not on your own understand, in all your ways do what God says to do.

Instead they show that the commandment was concerned with false gods, not religious art of the TRUE religion.

True worshipers worship in spirit and in truth. Those statues are not spirit, they are material objects, and God’s word is the truth; yet you discount God’s word. As for you believing that the Catholic religion is the true religion, I will continue to show you that it is a false religion. We have already discussed the disobedience of the Catholic brothers calling each other ‘father.’ We have already discussed the blasphemous error of the Catholic religion calling their Pope “Holy Father.” There is even more to show you, but you are fighting the truth.

So why don't I just avoid statues anyway, just in case you are right? After all, I can be wrong sometimes. It's because I prayed for years to be given understanding of the bible and I felt God led me, against my own rebellious notions, full circle back to the Catholic churches teachings. So it would be really arrogant of me to throw that all away just because someone on the internet presents a rather weak argument against the use of statues. Instead, I watch myself to make sure I don't allow religious art to become an idol for me.

The truth is in the Holy Bible. Why would God lead you to a religion? Think about that. I am not trying to get you to join any religion or denomination. I am directing you to the word of God.

 

[JarJo]

All I do is what God says to do, and I do not do what He says not to do. I do not lean to the left or to the right of God’s word, and I do not add or take away. God says do not make an image; do not bow to those images. Even a young child can understand.

Are you saying that your interpretation is child-like? You have a verse that you want to interpret in a strict way, so you call on us to be childlike. But I could post a dozen verses that you would refuse to just accept at face value - you would start making explanations and quoting other bible verses etc. If the bible was as easy to understand as you say, there would be no need for preachers and theologians. And there would have been no need for Jesus to tell the Pharisees that they took the commandments too literally and strictly while ignoring the spirit of the law.

A few of us posted well thought-out analyses of the question and I haven't seen a better analysis put forward. The one you favor makes God look like He doesn't follow his own laws.

The truth is in the Holy Bible. Why would God lead you to a religion? Think about that. I am not trying to get you to join any religion or denomination. I am directing you to the word of God.

Jesus didn't spend his time on earth writing a book, he spent it founding a church. Of course He wants us to join it. The first Christians didn't even have a New Testament, but they had a community with apostles to tell them what to do and what to believe.

 

[The Biblicist]

:tongue3:

It think it has been well demonstrated here that you are incorrect in your interpretations - either out of ignorance or by design.

WM

Oh really, I guess I failed to read that one! Just who has demonstrated that? Which post was that?

 

[The Biblicist]

Have you tried extending this logic to the other commandments?

For example, the commandment against adultery. As you understand it, God might, according to this reasoning, in a special circumstance, require someone to commit adultery. For example he might have told the king of Israel that it was permissible in a certain situation to commit adultery, as long as it was with a certain person in a certain place because God with his omniscience could see that this adultery would produce a suitable heir to the throne. Since this was an action ordained and orchestrated by God, it would not violate the commandment.

Is that the kind of God you believe in?

Either you don't read or don't read too well or simply ignore everything you do read.

First, there is the matter of authority. There are many things that God alone has authority to do that no human or institution has authority to do. God alone has the right/authority to conceive, design and designate the proper use of religous furniture used in "HIS" house - no man has that right. Moses did not have that right. David did not have that right. Solomon does not have that right. Rome does not have that right. Rome has USURPED the right that belongs exclusively to God.

Second, there is the matter of restrictive design to a "heavenly pattern" that only God has determined. All furniture and religious objects that God commanded Moses, David and Solomon to make for HIS house were restricted to be designed after a heavenly pattern. Moses, David and Solomon could not have conceived, designed any of these things because ONLY God possessed the pattern for such things.

Exodus 20:4 prohibits any human being from conceiving, designing and thus making any graven image of anything in heaven or on earth but it does not prohibit God from designing and making things for His own house as that is His perogative alone because it is HIS house alone. Exodus 20:4 does no prohibit men from making such things for God's house IF God commands it, and IF God provides the pattern for it and IF they use it according to how God designates it to be used BECAUSE God never commands anything to be made or to be used that would be objects of worship as that would be contradictive to His very Being.

Exodus 20:4 prohibits men from conceiving such images as idolatry begins in the mind - conception. It prohibits men from designing and making such images for religious use because they have no RIGHT to do so, no pattern furnished to them to do so, no command by God to do so as WORSHIP is soley the perogative of God in how it is to be done not man.

Exodus 20:5 further prohibits man to do acts of worship unto, toward any graven objects whatsoever as that too belongs exclusively unto God.


APPLICATION: Rome has not been explicitly and directly commanded by God to make any of the graven images used in their religious worship. God has not explicitly revealed the pattern for such things. Hence, God never conceived, designed or commanded any of Rome's images - God has no part of it. It is Rome that has conceived, designed and made religous images used in their worship in their house of worship. Rome has no authority, no right to conceive, design and designate such articles for use in worship as that authority and right belongs EXCLUSIVELY to God alone and therefore they violated Exodus 20:4-5.

 

[JarJo]

Exodus 20:4 prohibits any human being from conceiving, designing and thus making any graven image of anything in heaven or on earth but it does not prohibit God from designing and making things for His own house as that is His perogative alone because it is HIS house alone. Exodus 20:4 does no prohibit men from making such things for God's house IF God commands it, and IF God provides the pattern for it and IF they use it according to how God designates it to be used BECAUSE God never commands anything to be made or to be used that would be objects of worship as that would be contradictive to His very Being.

Wow, Exodus 20:4 has grown so much longer and has so many new words in your version. If it really had those things in it, we wouldn't need you to tell us. We're all capable of reading what Exodus 20:4 says, so please stop telling us what it says. We can read for ourselves, and those things aren't in it.

Exodus 20:4 “You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below.

We could do the same thing you did with Exodus 20:15:

Real bible verse: Exodus 20:15 “You shall not steal.

Bible verse re-phrased according to the method you prescribe:
"Exodus 20:15 prohibits any human being from conceiving, planning and thus performing any act of theft but does not prohibit God from conceiving and planning heists and burglaries within the boundaries of Palestine because this is His land won from the Canaanites. Exodus 20:15 does no prohibit men from burglarizing within the boundaries of Palestine IF God commands it, and IF God provides the plan and vision for the operation and IF they use the stolen items according to how God designates them to be used BECAUSE God never commands anything to be stolen or burglarized in such a way that would be contradictive to His Will."

It gets even more ridiculous with other commandments like "thou shalt not commit adultery", or worse yet, Leviticus 18:23.

 

[DHK]

You took this to its ridiculous extreme with your own comments:

And you are a moderator?

WM

Yes, what I said is true. Are Ad Hominems the only answer or rebuttal that you have.

 

[WestminsterMan]

Yes, what I said is true. Are Ad Hominems the only answer or rebuttal that you have.

You do know what an Ad Hominem attack is don't you? Apparently not. So... give me something of substance to which I may rebutt and I'll be glad to do so.

WM

 

[WestminsterMan]

:tongue3:

Oh really, I guess I failed to read that one! Just who has demonstrated that? Which post was that?

It's not just one post. I guess you're right - you didn't read. Here... let me help you:

Posts #81,#83,#85,#86,#90,#91,#92,#94,#95,#99... and counting.

WM