Graven Images

[biblecatholic]

biblecatholic, why can I see everyone's avatar but your's? It shows a blank rectangle with a "x" in it.

A, I was in the process of changing it a week or two ago and the pic was to big and I haven't found a small one... I guess I need to shrink one huh?

 

[A-Christian]

biblecatholic, this free software will let you resize any picture into avatar suitable size. I use it all the time when I do webdesign work.

http://www.fookes.com/ezthumbs/

 

[Vic C.]

This is not even a Catholic issue really...

Thanks D. Despite repeated attempts to remind people to not steer threads into a RC discussion, it's still happening. Add to that a few requests to stop the personal attacks that seem to fall upon deaf ears, er, blind eyes. 8-)

If it continues, the staff will most likely hand out warnings. :-?

I'll clean out all the irrelevant posts.

 

[Imagican]

And it's NOT a 'Catholic thing'. It may have it's beginnings with the CC but it has been carried over into MOST of the modern Protestant denoms too.

'trinity charts', crosses, logos, even the 'names' of the denoms themselves offer the 'design' of 'graven images'.

We are SUPPOSE to ALL be 'brothers and sisters'. Yet the symbolism of denominationalism does little other than 'separate' for the sake of US vs THEM.

EVERYONE that is a 'part' of The Body IS a member of The Church.

And EVERYONE that 'claims' to be a 'part' of The Body is SUPPOSE to forsake 'the world' in favor of that which is 'righteous'. Yet SO MANY insist upon being able to 'live FOR the world', partake in it's sensuality, be like EVERYBODY ELSE and 'think' that it's OK because 'everyone else' is living this way.

And the churches who's job it SHOULD BE to KEEP it's sheep on the CORRECT path have done NOTHING but bend their knees to the will of the people forsaking God's will for that of 'self'. SCARED of offending anyone and for this cause ALLOWING this 'false sense' of it's OK. And WHY is the church AFRAID to offend? For the sake of numbers and MONEY.

Do you really think that Jesus would stand around and discuss the composition of a painting? And just IMAGINE what He MUST think of pictures made in the likeness of strangers with HIS NAME placed upon them. And the 'cross'........... Hmmmmm............... I just wonder how I would feel seeing those that profess a love for me yet wearing the symbol of my atrociously painful death around their necks and adorning the highest parts of their meeting places? Perhaps you folks have a 'better understanding' than I. But I don't 'get it'. I personally believe that I would find it offensive. The 'cross' was a 'Gentile form' of torture. The symbol of the cross used thousands of years BEFORE Christ in MANY different pagan religions. And JUST BECAUSE some 'like it' it's OK? Like it SO MUCH that they take offense when it's validity is questioned. Hmmmmmm........Enough to make one 'wonder' if it's the 'cross' that they love or 'Christ'?

MEC

 

[Catholic Crusader]

...Do you really think that Jesus would stand around and discuss the composition of a painting? And just IMAGINE what He MUST think of pictures made in the likeness of strangers with HIS NAME placed upon them. And the 'cross'...........

I see no love in these posts. My Jesus is love. My God is not a wrathful judge, but rather He is a loving Father. Father's love everything their children do to please them.

Would Jesus stand around and discuss a painting? Maybe He would. Maybe He would say, "bless you my son, for using the gift I gave you to do me honor". Yes, I believe Jesus would say something like that.

 

[JayR]

I see no love in these posts. My Jesus is love. My God is not a wrathful judge, but rather He is a loving Father.

If your god isn't a wrathful judge, then your god isn't the God of the Bible, because the God of the Bible is full of wrath and He is angry with the wicked every day.

Father's love everything their children do to please them.

If your kid takes permanent marker and tries to please his father by coloring on his expensive white tuxedo is the father going to be pleased? No, he is going to be angry, because the foolish thing his child just did ruined something good. So making idols that fall short of the glory of God is an offense against His person.

 

[Devekut]

So Jay,

When you read the gospel do you imagine the events visually in your head? By your understanding I imagine that would be idolatry of the mind.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

So Jay, When you read the gospel do you imagine the events visually in your head? By your understanding I imagine that would be idolatry of the mind.

Excellent point. The images in our heads, by those standards, are corrupt and the very imagining of them is idolatry.

And what about calling Jesus "Jesus"? His name was not Jesus, it was Yeshua. Calling Him Jesus is a corruption of His name, Yes?

What about calling God "God" His name is not God. That is a corruption.

This is what is wrong with such poor logic: It can be carried out ad infinitum ad absurdum.

 

[Imagican]

So Jay, When you read the gospel do you imagine the events visually in your head? By your understanding I imagine that would be idolatry of the mind.

Excellent point. The images in our heads, by those standards, are corrupt and the very imagining of them is idolatry.

And what about calling Jesus "Jesus"? His name was not Jesus, it was Yeshua. Calling Him Jesus is a corruption of His name, Yes?

What about calling God "God" His name is not God. That is a corruption.

This is what is wrong with such poor logic: It can be carried out ad infinitum ad absurdum.

This would 'DEPEND' upon the 'corruptness of one's heart'. IF one IS IN The Spirit upon their 'IMAGININGS', then they would be HOLY. If one's heart is CORRUPT by the 'carnal nature of man', then the imaginings would be 'perverted' as are all of man's carnal imaginings.

To "IMAGINE" what God LOOKS like is an IMPOSSIBILITY, for the Word specifically states that NO MAN has EVER 'seen' God. And that His glory is BEYOND our ability to SEE. So, what is your 'take' on pictures portraying 'God figures'? Creations that have NO PLACE in REALITY?

Oh, and do you reacon someone paying millions of dollars for a piece of 'art' IS offering 'worship' to such an item? Isn't it OBVIOUS that someone MUST 'worship' an item to be WILLING to spend SO MUCH WEALTH on it? And then going to EXTREME measures to insure it being placed in THE place of honor worthy of such an investment. In this respect; are not museums nothing more than 'places of worship'? Some would say that it's admiration, some would claim that it's LOVE, some would claim that it's curiosity. But the PURPOSE of a museum is OFFER ONE'S affections to that which has been created by the hands of MEN.

Look folks, JUST because 'times' have changed and the world has changed DOESN'T alter the TRUTH. Material 'things' are NOTHING other than 'things OF this WORLD'. It's very SIMPLE really. And those that profess Christ AS their Savior have been WARNED AGAINST living FOR 'this world'. Like it or NOT, these ARE the words of Christ and of His apostles. And you CAN NOT have it BOTH ways. You CANNOT live FOR Christ and FOR this world. Can't HAVE 'two masters' remember?

And I can NOT believe the defense of 'the world' that I am encountering here. It's ONE THING to understand and ignore. But it's an entirely DIFFERENT 'thing' to NOT UNDERSTAND AT ALL. How do you suppose that you are POSSIBLY able to please God when you can't even understand His Will?

MEC

 

[Catholic Crusader]

...This would 'DEPEND' upon the 'corruptness of one's heart'....

Then apply the same standard to Michaelangelo and his artwork. You can't have it both ways.

 

[Devekut]

Imagican,

You have some strange notions of worship. Despite the fact that the vast majority of Christian artwork owned by a given person does not cost millions of dollars, and those that do are likely in an art gallery, paying millions for artwork is not equivalent to worshiping the piece!!

If you you buy a million dollar home, are you worshipping the house? It's nonsense.

And I can NOT believe the defense of 'the world'

Look folks, JUST because 'times' have changed and the world has changed DOESN'T alter the TRUTH. Material 'things' are NOTHING other than 'things OF this WORLD'

MEC, I sometimes wonder why you're not wearing a loin cloth and living in the desert under animal skin tents. Isn't a computer and the internet a "creation of the world"?

Actually, this is a good point. You ranted about how artwork spreads the powers of the devil, in Christian art work at that! Yet you have no qualms using the internet, the medium which earns business men millions in profits off of pornography? From which little children are lured into sex? A hot spot for some of the most immoral activities we can imagine?

Why do you use the internet, but decry artwork as an ungodly medium!?

 

[Imagican]

Mostly for research and information. I do read the news as well. And YES, it IS a tool that CAN be used for MANY evil things.

Recognition of the truth DOES make it difficult doesn't it? We become SO enamored with the 'trappings of the world' that it is practically IMPOSSIBLE to live IN IT without living FOR IT. But we HAVE been TOLD that we are NOT to 'love it'. Yet that is EXACTLY what 'most' seem to desire MORE than what they have been TOLD.

Dave, do you 'believe' that it's POSSIBLE to BE a 'follower of Christ' and OWN a 'four million dollar home'?

MEC

 

[Imagican]

...This would 'DEPEND' upon the 'corruptness of one's heart'....

Then apply the same standard to Michaelangelo and his artwork. You can't have it both ways.

So, you offer that you KNOW the 'heart' of this artist? I have veiwed pieces of this man's art that are QUITE 'alluring'. Instigating possible thoughts that are ANYTHING BUT 'righteous'. And THAT"S what makes it potentially 'so dangerous'. Very difficult for most men to view naked women WITHOUT being aroused. Therefore we have been warned that it's BETTER to 'lose an eye than to allow it to destroy one's soul'. It would be 'the same' concerning 'art'. It would be BETTER to 'live without it' than to allow it to damage one's soul.

MEC

 

[Catholic Crusader]

So, you offer that you KNOW the 'heart' of this artist....

No: I offer that YOU DON'T. And it is YOU that are judging his works.

..And THAT"S what makes it potentially 'so dangerous'..

Good gravey! There's nothing dangerous about a painting, for Pete's sake. Man, I'll bet your loads of laughs to hang out with. <<<rolls eyes>>>

 

[Devekut]

MEC,

If a Christian were to have enough wealth to own a 4 million dollar home I would hope that he was doing some very Christian things with the rest of his money. However, I would never judge a person to be a non-Christian solely by their assets. I think the question is more complex than that.

We can not serve God and money, but we can serve God with money.

Remember, if Joseph of Ariamethia did not have wealth, there would never have been a tomb (a very expensive thing in those days) to lay the Body of our Lord.

 

[Vic C.]

... Remember, if Joseph of Ariamethia did not have wealth, there would never have been a tomb (a very expensive thing in those days) to lay the Body of our Lord.

Joseph wasn't a Christian and... God will always find a way. :D

Francis of Assisi would disagree with this sort of wealth. ;-) Why does anyone need a 4 million $ home? :-?

 

[GraceBwithU]

I'm not sure where I read it or who said it but..."when I die i would like to be buried in a suit with no pockets...because I will not need them."

 

[Devekut]

Yes, of course the great Francis of Assisi would not live in a 4 million dollar house. Yet we can not all be St. Francis, nor are we all expected to. In many ways he lived now the world that is to come. This is a high calling, yet not for all.

I am simply saying we can not say someone is not a true Christian for being rich.

 

[Imagican]

So, you offer that you KNOW the 'heart' of this artist....

No: I offer that YOU DON'T. And it is YOU that are judging his works.

..And THAT"S what makes it potentially 'so dangerous'..

Good gravey! There's nothing dangerous about a painting, for Pete's sake. Man, I'll bet your loads of laughs to hang out with. <<<rolls eyes>>>

I am NOT the 'judge of his or anyone elses works'. I have simply offered that we were warned AGAINST the 'creation' of such works. And I have also attempted to offer explanation as to WHY we were thus warned.

No, most of the people that I was once 'close to' no longer are able to STAND being around me. For EVERY conversation ends up being one concerning God or His Son. It's NOT about 'fun' any more, my friend. It's about TRUTH.

And I offer that you understanding is tainted with the trappings of this world. There is PLENTY dangerous about a painting that elicits EVIL thoughts or desires. That you are unable to recognize this is indication that you are MORE intent on the flesh than The Spirit. The Kama Sutra is LITTLE other than a book of PAINTINGS. And you would offer that there is NOTHING inherently WRONG with this 'work'? I beg to differ.

The MOST dangerous items are OFTEN those that SEEM to be MOST harmless. Wine is relatively harmless by the sip. But drink a gallon and then see what happens. And you could claim that a 'naked painting of Venus' is harmless. But I offer that it was upon David spying Bathsheba naked that conceived of the lust that brought about his sin. It is NO different with a 'painting' of a 'naked woman'.

And YES. There IS the possibility of one become STRONG ENOUGH in The Spirit that IT is able to overcome the lust that MAY be elicited through art. But so far, I have YET to meet the individual that has this 'strength'. As Paul stated, "All things were legal to him". But also note that he finishes this statement with the FACT that 'all things were NOT PROFITABLE'. So THERE is your answer.

You seem to be so enamored with the trappings that you are unable to see the TRUTH. Is ALL art evil. I cannot say. But I CAN say that we were warned AGAINST such persuits that are of LITTLE Spiritual value and potentially DESTRUCTIVE. Whether you accept this or not is to your own benefit or trouble. I can only offer the 'message'. What you do with it is UP TO YOU.

As Christ stated, "If you KNEW my Father, you would KNOW ME". And I offer that if you KNOW the Father, then my message is clear. If you are unable to perceive of the message, then your father is most likely a 'different father' than the Father that I know. And don't feel like the 'lone ranger'. For you are NOT left alone. You are in the company of the 'majority' remember?

MEC

 

[Imagican]

MEC,

If a Christian were to have enough wealth to own a 4 million dollar home I would hope that he was doing some very Christian things with the rest of his money. However, I would never judge a person to be a non-Christian solely by their assets. I think the question is more complex than that.

We can not serve God and money, but we can serve God with money.

Remember, if Joseph of Ariamethia did not have wealth, there would never have been a tomb (a very expensive thing in those days) to lay the Body of our Lord.

And Dave, WHAT about the example that was set by the apostles and their followers? This means NOTHING to you? Show me a 'rich apostle'. And what about the words of Christ that offer: "It is harder for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven than a camel to squeeze through the eye of a needle". You believe that there is NO VALIDITY to this statement. We have been told over and over that Christ came NOT for the rich that do not NEED Him, (for they have NEED of nothing in their minds and hearts), but for the poor.

If a man could afford a multi million dollar home and he was TRULY a follower of Christ, the LAST thing he would do is BUY the house. He would USE the money that he had been BLESSED with to HELP those that NEEDED it. Hording it in the form of a mansion would do LITTLE to please ANYONE but HIMSELF.

But Dave, don't be dismayed. For the world that you live in TEACHES the ideas that you have 'bought into'. As Mike has offered; God FINDS a way and often uses EVIL people to do that which He wills.

If you have money, (more than you NEED), and DON'T use it to the benefit of those around you, you are NOT following the example that was offered by Christ and His apostles. Regardless of how much of 'the world' you have 'bought into', the example was offered and we have it in Word. Either you accept it or you don't. But PLEASE don't try and offer that it is NOT literal in it's interpretation. Those that are RICH and use it for their OWN personal benefit are NOT rich through the 'blessings of God'. They are rich through the worship and following of a 'different God' and that God BEING the God of this 'World'.

MEC