Statues

[WestminsterMan]

I would suggest that it's no more oxymoronic than me saying, with regard to a journey by public transport, "I can travel to Island X by sea alone (because there is no public air service), by crossing the Atlantic Ocean alone (because that is where the island is), on Tuesdays alone (because the ship to Island X departs only on Tuesdays).

Similarly, saying that salvation is by grace alone means that we cannot be saved on any other basis than God's grace. Through faith alone means that to be saved, we must have faith; no one can say, "I don't have faith, but I'm saved because I recite Shakespeare's plays backwards every day (or whatevever! ); in Christ alone tells us that there is no salvation outside of Jesus Christ - He, and He alone is the Saviour.

Thinkingstuff stated way back that salvation is all one thing and that ultimately, it is by Christ alone. You can dress it up all you want, but that is the seminal issue.

Do you agree that salvation is ultimately, through and by Christ alone?

WM

 

[targus]

I worship everyday of the week, twenty-four hours a day.

Sounds like the sin of pride to me since everyone here knows that what you claim is not possible...

Unless you are claiming to be more than human?

Do you worship while you sin?

Or are you claiming that you never sin?

 

[The Biblicist]

Thinkingstuff stated way back that salvation is all one thing and that ultimately, it is by Christ alone. You can dress it up all you want, but that is the seminal issue.

Do you agree that salvation is ultimately, through and by Christ alone?

WM

We are not talking about "salvation" in general but justification in particular.

We are not talking about "BY" Christ alone but rather we are talking about the proper object of justifying faith which is "IN" Christ and His finished work alone WITHOUT WORKS.

 

[Walter]

We are not talking about "salvation" in general but justification in particular.

We are not talking about "BY" Christ alone but rather we are talking about the proper object of justifying faith which is "IN" Christ and His finished work alone WITHOUT WORKS.

Shouldn't this be the topic of another thread? Isn't this thread about statues?

 

[The Biblicist]

Wrong! Go back and look at my original posting - one example shows a person bowing before the alter of God. Try again...

WM

Wrong! You gave no example where it said that anyone was "bowing" to any article of furniture in God's house. Kneeling to pray unto God before the altar is not bowing and the altar is not a graven image. Try again.

 

[WestminsterMan]

I challenge our Catholic friends to find one single verse where the articles designed and built for the Tabernacle/Temple are ever called "images" or an "image."

Nonsequitor! Show me in scripture where God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit is called " the Trinity."

Now, here is where "images" are called for:

Exodus 25:17-22
King James Version (KJV)

17And thou shalt make a mercy seat of pure gold: two cubits and a half shall be the length thereof, and a cubit and a half the breadth thereof.

18And thou shalt make two cherubims of gold, of beaten work shalt thou make them, in the two ends of the mercy seat.

19And make one cherub on the one end, and the other cherub on the other end: even of the mercy seat shall ye make the cherubims on the two ends thereof.

20And the cherubims shall stretch forth their wings on high, covering the mercy seat with their wings, and their faces shall look one to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubims be.

21And thou shalt put the mercy seat above upon the ark; and in the ark thou shalt put the testimony that I shall give thee.

22And there I will meet with thee, and I will commune with thee from above the mercy seat, from between the two cherubims which are upon the ark of the testimony, of all things which I will give thee in commandment unto the children of Israel...

Well there is your answer. These cherubims are golden images of creatures in heaven used on the Ark of the COvenant within the Temple.

Ka-ching!

I challenge our Catholic friends to find one single verse where anything ever identified as a "graven" IMAGE is ever approved by God anywhere in Scripture!

Well, I'm not a Catholic but I just busted you in the above.

WM

 

[WestminsterMan]

Wrong! You gave no example where it said that anyone was "bowing" to any article of furniture in God's house. Kneeling to pray unto God before the altar is not bowing and the altar is not a graven image. Try again.

Ok... so you don't believe that the alter is a peice of furniture, Fine. And that's exactly what the Catholics believe when they bow before the alter in their Church. Further, Catholics don't call their alter a "graven image" - you do which makes this nothing more than your bigoted opinion. So now that you've made the charge, it is incumbent upon you to prove that when Catholics bow before their alter, they are NOT bowing to God.

You guys just keep digging that hole deeper and deeper.

WM

 

[The Biblicist]

Nonsequitor! Show me in scripture where God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit is called " the Trinity."

Now, here is where "images" are called for:

Exodus 25:17-22
King James Version (KJV)

Wrong again!

First, no man was allowed to look upon them but one man and once a year and he did not bow down to them. Hence, no man ever bowed down to them - none, zilch, nada!

Second, they are never called a "graven image" but when they were built they were distinctly defined as a "instruments"

Ex. 25:9 According to all that I shew thee, after the pattern of the tabernacle, and the pattern of all the instruments thereof, even so shall ye make it.

Graven images are anything you BOW down before in worship activities. All the furniture of the temple are called "instruments" and never images because they were not made to be BOWED DOWN before but rather SYMBOLS and TYPES of salvational truths.

All such "instruments" were commanded by God to be fashioned NOT FOR THE PURPOSE OF BOWING BEFORE but after a prescribed "PATTERN" for instructive purposes.

Finally, God gave no such commandment for any kind of "instruments" to be fashoned or used in the New Covenant House of God and "graven images" or objects that one bows down before were never permitted in God's House at any time.

 

[WestminsterMan]

Wrong again!

First, no man was allowed to look upon them but one man and once a year and he did not bow down to them. Hence, no man ever bowed down to them - none, zilch, nada!

If one man was allowed to enter therein, then you just refuted your own statement of " Hence, no man ever bowed down to them - none, zilch, nada!"

Oh right... I don't think you know that because scripture doesn't say that he did or didn't bow down or kneel before it. You are making that inference, then damanding proof to the contrary. Sweet...

Second, they are never called a "graven image" but when they were built they were distinctly defined as a "instruments"

If you don't believe that those two cherubim were images of angels that exist in heaven, then by necessity you must believe that they were actual angles. Oh Lordy... Have you ever thought that they might be instruments used in worship? If I wear a cross, then that is an instrument used to remind me of Christ's sacrifice on the cross. That's a very broad brush with which you paint.

Ex. 25:9 According to all that I shew thee, after the pattern of the tabernacle, and the pattern of all the instruments thereof, even so shall ye make it.

OK... well Catholics believe that they use "...intruments" of the saints when they honor them (not WORSHIP which is reserved for God alone) in Heaven. Saints are creatures - cherubim are creatures. If you don't want to call those two carved cherubim graven images, fine. Yet both are indeed graven images and God commanded that the cherubim be placed on the Ark in the Tabernacle.

Uh ohhhh...

Graven images are anything you BOW down before in worship activities. All the furniture of the temple are called "instruments" and never images because they were not made to be BOWED DOWN before but rather SYMBOLS and TYPES of salvational truths.

If the worship were directed toward "a graven image" then you might have a point. However, you are again basing your entire position on a false premise and one that I showed you is clearly governed by ones intent. By redefining someone's intent, one can make just about any activity idolatry. Thankfully... only God knows the heart - you only know YOUR heart.

All such "instruments" were commanded by God to be fashioned NOT FOR THE PURPOSE OF BOWING BEFORE but after a prescribed "PATTERN" for instructive purposes.

More speculation. And how do you know that the preist did not bow down before the ark? Where you there? No and neither was anyone here. Remember that everything in scripture is true BUT not everything is IN scripture.

Finally, God gave no such commandment for any kind of "instruments" to be fashoned or used in the New Covenant House of God and "graven images" or objects that one bows down before were never permitted in God's House at any time.

Oh my - you don't even know what a graven image is do you. It's an image representing something or someone made by man. DO you think that those cherubim were not made by man? Idolatry only comes into the picture if one worships that image as if it were a god. Again INETENT!

Let us consider what God says and break it down:

“You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth;

Wow - a litreral interpretation (I.e. yours) demands that we not make ANY carved image or likeness - period! Do you have any likeness of your family (photos) - for if you do, then by your own stinted view of scripture you stand against scripture's clear admonishion against it.

"...you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. "

Think about what was going on with the Jews after they left Egypt... They were doing that very thing. God wasn't happy with them either.

"For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My Commandments."

Ultimately, The Ten Commandments appear twice in the Hebrew Bible, in the books of Exodus and Deuteronomy. SO... which ones do you use?

WM

 

[The Biblicist]

If one man was allowed to enter therein, then you just refuted your own statement of " Hence, no man ever bowed down to them - none, zilch, nada!"

No contradiction at all. In fact, I will give you three Biblical reasons why no High Priest ever bowed to it:

1. The Bible expressly prohibits bowing to any graven image - He would have to violate God's command right in God's presence.

2. Leviticus details what he should do when entering once a year and if bowing to the angels had been necessary it would have been clearly stated. No such statement can be found. Indeed, a rope was tied to him in case he did anything contrary to precise instructions to drag his dead body outside. Hence, the High Preist out of fear of death would not have done anything other than what was precisely prescribed. No bowing prescribed.

3. There is no example anywhere in Scripture of any High priest ever coming into the holiest and bowing at all. He was carrying incense in one hand and the blood in another hand. The incense filled the room with smoke and the blood was placed on the lid.

4. It is never identified as a "graven image" but an "instrument" for instructive purpose. Prayer and bowing were never directed toward any of these "instruments" although it would not be improper to pray to God while doing the ministry. However, Catholics bow and pray TOWARD their graven images regardless of their intent.

If you don't believe that those two cherubim were images of angels that exist in heaven,.....

Anything other than God unto which prayer and worship was directed towards is specfically identified as a "graven image." God never designed the Ark lid to be an object for worship (bowing, prayer toward) and so it is never once called a "graven image" but an "instrument." The choice of terminology is by purpose because they were not designed by God as objects before which men bowed or prayed towards. They were designed after a heavenly "pattern" for instructive purposes alone and that fact is repeated over and over again in Exodus and in Hebrews 8-9.

In contrast Roman Catholics do not make "instruments" but "graven images" that by their very design are objects toward which bowing and prayer is specifically directed regardless of "intent." The two golden calves were "images" that received acts of worship (bowing, prayer) when the "intent" was toward the TRUE GOD that brought them out of Egypt. This is the eptiomy of Roman Catholic image worship.

If the worship were directed toward "a graven image" then you might have a point. However, you are again basing your entire position on a false premise and one that I showed you is clearly governed by ones intent. By redefining someone's intent, one can make just about any activity idolatry. Thankfully... only God knows the heart - you only know YOUR heart.

The "intent" is proven by the acts of worship directed toward something. When acts of worship are directed toward ANYTHING but God it is IMAGE WORSHIP regardless of "intent."

Even the Bible can be a "graven image" if worship and prayer are directed toward it. Idoltry is bowing and directing any acts of worship toward ANYTHING standing between the worshipper and God.

However, we do not live under the Old Covenant and the Temple system do we? We have direct commandments by God to build the "instruments" within the Old Covenant House of God and according to a specific pattern!

Where is ROME's command from God to build "instruments" within the New Covenant House of God? Where is the heavenly "pattern" provided to them??

The Old Testament People of God would not dare build or make ANYTHING and place it in God's house that God did not explicitly command to build and make and place in His house! Where is Rome's commandment by God to build such things??????

 

[Walter]

Biblicist, again, YOU are the one saying it is 'an act of worship' directed TO something. Catholics deny this. Are you saying that they don't know what and who they worship?

It has been established on this thread that 'bowing' while not worshipping is not idolatry. The Japanese are not worshipping each other when they bow in greeting. The problem is that some on this board insist that what Catholics are doing is worshipping a statue. Bowing around, near, or in front of a statue means TO the statue according to some on this board. That is YOUR interpretations of what is going on. Not established fact. DHK has claimed over and over that Catholics bow TO images of the Stations of the Cross even though it has been proven over and over that Catholics bow duriing the Stations of the Cross EVEN IF NO IMAGES OR PRESNT. DHK never has responded to this fact. It seem to me that there are some on this board who have such a desire to convict Cathollcs of idolatry that they ignore hard evidence to the contrary. Seems like an excessive hatred of Catholicism is blinding them.

 

[The Biblicist]

Biblicist, again, YOU are the one saying it is 'an act of worship' directed TO something. Catholics deny this. Are you saying that they don't know what and who they worship?

Bowing toward or before a RELIGIOUS GRAVEN IMAGE is an act of worship regardless of "intent" and that is precisely why the third commandment prohibts bowing to/toward/before such graven images.

Human beings are not "graven images." Here is the area where "intent" determines whether or not you are committing idolatry. Since human beings are not "graven images" bowing to them does not necessarily convey worship. However, if bowing to them is a prescribed RELIGIOUS ACT then it is idolatry even though they are not "graven images."

In Contrast Rome fills its buildings with graven image where prayer and bowing are continously performed toward/before that image which is a direct violation of the second and third commandments. In addition God did not instruct Rome to make any of these graven images.

 

[DHK]

Biblicist, again, YOU are the one saying it is 'an act of worship' directed TO something. Catholics deny this. Are you saying that they don't know what and who they worship?

It has been established on this thread that 'bowing' while not worshipping is not idolatry. The Japanese are not worshipping each other when they bow in greeting. The problem is that some on this board insist that what Catholics are doing is worshipping a statue. Bowing around, near, or in front of a statue means TO the statue according to some on this board. That is YOUR interpretations of what is going on. Not established fact. DHK has claimed over and over that Catholics bow TO images of the Stations of the Cross even though it has been proven over and over that Catholics bow duriing the Stations of the Cross EVEN IF NO IMAGES OR PRESNT. DHK never has responded to this fact. It seem to me that there are some on this board who have such a desire to convict Cathollcs of idolatry that they ignore hard evidence to the contrary. Seems like an excessive hatred of Catholicism is blinding them.

I have responded many times. Maybe my English is above your understanding. I will try again. First I know by experience what I did. I was RCC for 20 years. We would go around to each station of the cross and there pray. At the time I would deny (like the RCC today that I was praying to an image). But now, looking back, I must look at what I was doing in light of the Scripture, not at what I thought I was doing. I was praying before an image that represented: Jesus, Mary, and other "saints." According to the first three of the Ten Commandments that is wrong. I saw that after I left the RCC, not when I was a Catholic. The Holy Spirit opened my eyes that that was indeed idolatry.

What is the difference between that practice and Hinduism. Ganesh is the elephant god of Hinduism. Hindus pray before their statue. Ask any Hindu if they are praying to the statue itself. No they are not. They pray before the statue, but they are praying to the god which the statue represents--not that thing that is made out of wood and stone. So it is in Catholicism. The RCC prays before the statue of Mary. The statue of Mary represents Mary. They may not be worshiping that which is made out of wood and stone, but the god that it represents (just as it is in Hinduism). There is no difference. It is idolatry. But the RCC fails to see this.

 

[Walter]

But they are NOT worshipping Mary. Prayer does not equivicate worship. That is your accusation and not substantiated. When I first brought up the fact that Catholics bow during the Stations of the Cross and that they are bowing at the words 'we adore you, Christ, and we bless you, for by your Cross you have redeemed the world you did NOT respond other than to ask the question, 'then why are they bowing?' The answer is: in adoration of Christ. Not such a bad thing, huh?

As far as what Hindus do and why. Apples and Oranges.

 

[DHK]

But they are NOT worshipping Mary. Prayer does not equivicate worship. That is your accusation and not substantiated. When I first brought up the fact that Catholics bow during the Stations of the Cross and that they are bowing at the words 'we adore you, Christ, and we bless you, for by your Cross you have redeemed the world you did NOT respond other than to ask the question, 'then why are they bowing?' The answer is: in adoration of Christ. Not such a bad thing, huh?

As far as what Hindus do and why. Apples and Oranges.

Many of those prayers are directed to Mary. Prayer is worship. It is one of the purest forms or worship that there is. When you take away worship from God and give it to another it is idolatry. This is what God condemns.

 

[Walter]

Many of those prayers are directed to Mary. Prayer is worship. It is one of the purest forms or worship that there is. When you take away worship from God and give it to another it is idolatry. This is what God condemns.

So, prayer is ALWAYS worship? I don't think so. Is it possible to distinquish between prayer as worship and prayer as mere communication? Absolutely. Worship, we all agree with, is of course, for God alone. But when a Catholic asks a saint to petition God on his behalf, he is hardly worshipping that saint - he is merely making a request, which, in fact, is identical to what Baptists do when they ask friends and family to pray for them.

"Then I saw standing in the midst of the throne and the four living creatures and the elders, a Lamb that seemed to have been slain. He had seven horns and seven eyes; these are the (seven) spirits of God sent out into the whole world. He came and received the scroll from the right hand of the one who sat on the throne. When he took it, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb. Each of the elders held a harp and gold bowls filled with incense, which are the prayers of the holy ones." (Rev 5:6-8).

Who are these holy ones?

 

[The Biblicist]

So, prayer is ALWAYS worship? I don't think so. Is it possible to distinquish between prayer as worship and prayer as mere communication? Absolutely. Worship, we all agree with, is of course, for God alone. But when a Catholic asks a saint to petition God on his behalf, he is hardly worshipping that saint - he is merely making a request, which, in fact, is identical to what Baptists do when they ask friends and family to pray for them.

"Then I saw standing in the midst of the throne and the four living creatures and the elders, a Lamb that seemed to have been slain. He had seven horns and seven eyes; these are the (seven) spirits of God sent out into the whole world. He came and received the scroll from the right hand of the one who sat on the throne. When he took it, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb. Each of the elders held a harp and gold bowls filled with incense, which are the prayers of the holy ones." (Rev 5:6-8).

Who are these holy ones?

The Altar of incense at the door of the Holy of holies represents prayers of God's people:


Rev. 8:3 And another angel came and stood at the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given unto him much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar which was before the throne.

If you do not understand that prayer is an act of worship where you come before a holy God with a submission heart and are glorifying him with your mouth and offering up praise to him then your prayer is empty vain rhetoric.

 

[DHK]

So, prayer is ALWAYS worship? I don't think so.

I know so. Prayer is always worship.

Is it possible to distinquish between prayer as worship and prayer as mere communication? Absolutely. Worship, we all agree with, is of course, for God alone. But when a Catholic asks a saint to petition God on his behalf, he is hardly worshipping that saint - he is merely making a request, which, in fact, is identical to what Baptists do when they ask friends and family to pray for them.

Apples and oranges. Does a Baptist ever bow down to a friend and pray TO that friend to intercede for him? NEVER! He may make a request to ask him to pray FOR him, but he NEVER prays TO him to intercede on his behalf. That is idolatry and condemned in the Bible. Cannot you see the difference here.

Look at the difference here. The most common prayer of the RCC:
"Hail Mary full of grace, the Lord is with thee.
Blessed art thou among women. Blessed is the fruit of thy womb Jesus."
--The prayer is addressed to her. I would never address not even my wife that way.

"Holy Mary mother of God, Pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death, Amen"
--Mary cannot pray for us. This is an address, a prayer to Mary. It is blasphemous. It is directed TO Mary. It is a prayer that Mary cannot answer.
1. It assumes that Mary is omniscient--an attribute that only God has.
--Mary cannot answer or hear all prayers of all Catholics everywhere.
2. It assumes that Mary is omnipresent--an attribute that only God has.
--See same reason as above.
--Thus Mary is treated as a god. Mary is worshiped as a god. The RCC is polytheistic in this way; no better than Hinduism.

"Then I saw standing in the midst of the throne and the four living creatures and the elders, a Lamb that seemed to have been slain. He had seven horns and seven eyes; these are the (seven) spirits of God sent out into the whole world. He came and received the scroll from the right hand of the one who sat on the throne. When he took it, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb. Each of the elders held a harp and gold bowls filled with incense, which are the prayers of the holy ones." (Rev 5:6-8).

John 1:29 "Behold the Lamb of God which takes away the sin of the world."
Jesus is that Lamb. All MUST pray TO him. He is the only one to whom prayer is directed. The Lamb is Christ.

Who are these holy ones?

The holy ones are no doubt the saints, whose prayers are being offered up in a symbolic way to Christ, the Lamb of God.

All prayer is directed to God; if not it is idolatry.

 

[Zenas]

So, prayer is ALWAYS worship? I don't think so. Is it possible to distinquish between prayer as worship and prayer as mere communication? Absolutely. Worship, we all agree with, is of course, for God alone. But when a Catholic asks a saint to petition God on his behalf, he is hardly worshipping that saint - he is merely making a request, which, in fact, is identical to what Baptists do when they ask friends and family to pray for them.

Walter, you're wasting your time trying to convince DHK that prayer is not worship. I have had this debate with DHK several times before. I think I have also had it once with Biblicist in his former persona. It doesn't do any good. They don't want to believe it so they won't. It's like an uncle of mine who declared to his dying day that no man has ever gone to the moon. Or like a friend of mine who denies that there can be a tunnel under the English Channel. People with minds like this are devoid of reason and can't be convinced no matter how overwhelming the evidence or how convincing the argument.

 

[The Biblicist]

Walter, you're wasting your time trying to convince DHK that prayer is not worship. I have had this debate with DHK several times before. I think I have also had it once with Biblicist in his former persona. It doesn't do any good. They don't want to believe it so they won't. It's like an uncle of mine who declared to his dying day that no man has ever gone to the moon. Or like a friend of mine who denies that there can be a tunnel under the English Channel. People with minds like this are devoid of reason and can't be convinced no matter how overwhelming the evidence or how convincing the argument.

Your position is without any biblical support and it is contrary to common sense.

There is absolutely nothing more pure worship than prayer. Look at the model prayer. Notice that prayer directly addresses the Father and begins with adoration "hallowed be thy name." There is no other act whereby we come directly into the presence of God other than prayer. Prayer demands a submissive spirit whereby we pray "according to his will" - "thy will be done" and where we deal with the most intimate details of our life in his holy presence.

If you do not believe that prayer is the most sacred form of worship possible for mortal men on planet earth then you obviously have no spiritual relationship with God because there is nothing more spiritually initimate than prayer.