"Symbol of Christianity?"

[francisdesales]

fran,

If you are looking for me to produce scripture that 'states' "worship your neighbor as you worship yourself" you're certainly not going to get 'that'. Define the 'means' of worship and what it STANDS for, and THEN one is CLEARLY able to SEE.

You will also not find scripture that 'states' "Satan IS the owner of this planet". But I 'believe' that ANYONE that has 'understanding' KNOWS this without the DIRECT statement.

But both these are able to BE discerned through The Word.

You state that Jesus Christ IS The Word. And His words DO offer what I have stated.

Of all the 'law', Jesus PLAINLY offers what I have stated. You just refuse to 'see' it.

It is not a case of "refusing" to see. The problem is with your explanation that equates love with worship. It is nonsense and lacks simple common sense.

In the future, could you just get to the point, rather than talking about how little I am able to understand and talking about Satan and the world. It bores me...

Now, perhaps I can explain this another way, since the large print and colors didn't help you any...

Are you familiar with math and subsets? Think of worship as a subset of love. Love is a big circle, and worship is a small circle inside of the "love" circle.

All that consists of love is not worship. Thus, they are not equal, as one can love and NOT worship. Yet, to properly worship, one must love.

If love and worship had the same meanings in both directions, God would contradict Himself. There is no way around that, even with your "TRUTH" revealed to you by the "spirit of light". Sorry, none of your scripture citations even address this fact. Just more of the same smoke and mirrors...

Regards

 

[Imagican]

fran,

I will offer further that which IS understanding to those ABLE to comprehend:

Romans 13:8

Owe no man anything, but to OVE one another; for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.

If this IS a 'true' statement, then it would also be fair to STATE:

for he that LOVETH God hath fulfilled the law as well.

This statement offers NOT The word 'worship', but it DOES offer LOVE in it's place.

Call it ranting, call it what you will, but the TRUTH is that God has desired NOTHING other than our love for HIM, and our love for EACH OTHER. And we have been given this in instruction through the LAW and through the words of Christ.

You insist that worship is 'different' than offering the love and honor that we have been given example of. To worship is to 'serve' fran, and we have been commanded to not only serve God, but our neighbors as well. Christ even dropped to His knees and washed the feet of those that were with Him. SHOWING and stating PLAINLY that he that would be 'greatest' among us would be HIM THAT SERVED his brothers and sisters THE MOST.

Fran,

Are we ABLE to worship MONEY? Are we able to worship POWER? Are we able to worship PEOPLE? How about drugs, sex, or even EVIL? Are we able to worship these things?

Now in 'what manner' would YOU say that we are ABLE to WITNESS the evidence of one that worships such things?

Hmmm. Let me answer............

Placing THESE THINGS in higher 'esteem' that ANYTHING ELSE, (in other words, we would witness that one that loves MONEY placing MONEY above all other things; God, people, family, etc......).

Now HOW would we be able to define this 'placement' of ANYTHING in 'higher esteem'?

By SEEING that this person places MONEY above all things would it NOT be appropriate to 'say' that this person WORSHIPS money? Or even that this person LOVES Money?

What we DO for that which we LOVE IS WORSHIP. The act of sacrificing ONE thing for ANOTHER is WORSHIP. And if you 'think' about if for only a second it becomes apparent that SACRIFICE IS THE ULTIMATE sign of LOVE. For if one were to GIVE HIS LIFE for another, this WOULD be the ULTIMATE sacrifice. And the ONLY WAY that this would be of ANY consequence would be to perform such an act our of LOVE.

Laying one's life down for a brother or sister WOULD be an 'act of worship'.

I know how difficult it must BE for those that have been 'raised' in 'rituralistic' understanding to SEE what is being offered here. Sorry.

About the ONLY difference in the worship of each other and the worship that we would offer God is that it is difficult to communicate with EACH OTHER by prayer. Therefore we MUST offer prayer to God as worship. But He does NOT desire for us to simply SPEAK to Him, but to offer our communication through LOVE. IF God IS love, then it IS through THIS medium that we are to OFFER communication TO Him. You would call it 'worship', I still contend that these two are the 'same'.

Fran, one last point;

Do you 'believe' that there IS a 'deeper underderstanding' that WE ARE able to 'come to'? That the superficial attempts of man to understand HAVE been able to be hampered BY the 'flesh'? That IF one is able to OVERCOME the 'flesh' that they are THEN able to 'come to this deeper understanding'?

If you answer YES to these questions, then I am SIMPLY attempting to OFFER this 'deeper' understanding.

Perfection? Hardly so far as ability to COMPLETELY overcome temptation. But in an 'understanding' of that which matters EVEN more than the detriment that I cause to MYSELF, I have COME to the PERFECT understanding offered through the words of Our Savior. He came to comminicate through EXAMPLE. And that example WAS LOVE. And NO amount of 'man-made' ritual that you would call WORSHIP means ANYTHING compared to that which is offered THROUGH Love. For LOVE is the answer that has been misunderstood from the beginning even to this very moment. LOVE IS the REASON that Christ was sent to SHOW us HOW we are to 'worship'. Not ONLY God, but our brothers and sisters as well.

MEC

 

[francisdesales]

fran,

I will offer further that which IS understanding to those ABLE to comprehend:

Romans 13:8

Owe no man anything, but to OVE one another; for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.

If this IS a 'true' statement, then it would also be fair to STATE:

for he that LOVETH God hath fulfilled the law as well.

This statement offers NOT The word 'worship', but it DOES offer LOVE in it's place.

HOW in the world does that make love = worship? Why are you so obstinate about this? If I love my brother, how does this necessarily mean that I worship him? How do these verses prove your point? Please. I beg you. Get to the point and provide me with verses that show that love = worship in every case. Remember, you said they were the same thing... You have verified this over and over. I have given you many opportunities to recant - but you keep telling me I am wrong. Please prove it by displaying Scriptures that tells us that loving our neighbor is akin to worshiping God...

Call it ranting, call it what you will, but the TRUTH is that God has desired NOTHING other than our love for HIM, and our love for EACH OTHER. And we have been given this in instruction through the LAW and through the words of Christ.

Yes, God desires our love of Him and of our neighbor. But they are not on the same level, because God ALONE is worshiped. We are NOWHERE commanded to worship our neighbors. Isn't this common sense?

You insist that worship is 'different' than offering the love and honor that we have been given example of. To worship is to 'serve' fran, and we have been commanded to not only serve God, but our neighbors as well.

Worship is NOT ONLY to serve. I can serve my wife, does that mean I worship her? Worship is given to God alone. The 1st commandment makes that perfectly clear. Why do you insist on saying God contradicts Himself? Why would God command us to worship only Him, and worship our neighbors as well? Nonsense.

Christ even dropped to His knees and washed the feet of those that were with Him. SHOWING and stating PLAINLY that he that would be 'greatest' among us would be HIM THAT SERVED his brothers and sisters THE MOST

That is not worship. You are clearly confused about what worship is.

Are we ABLE to worship MONEY? Are we able to worship POWER? Are we able to worship PEOPLE? How about drugs, sex, or even EVIL? Are we able to worship these things?

When we place them as "gods" in our life over and above God Himself.

Do you 'believe' that there IS a 'deeper underderstanding' that WE ARE able to 'come to'? That the superficial attempts of man to understand HAVE been able to be hampered BY the 'flesh'? That IF one is able to OVERCOME the 'flesh' that they are THEN able to 'come to this deeper understanding'?

If you answer YES to these questions, then I am SIMPLY attempting to OFFER this 'deeper' understanding.

The "deeper" understanding is subject to the laws of logic. The one where God does not contradict Himself. Thus, rather than provide a "deeper" understanding, you are providing a more thorough confusion to those who happen to be reading your posts...

Someday, I pray that you will realize that you are not the Wisdom of God. That you are capable of being mistaken. Until that point, I might as well talk to the wall, as a person who refuses to listen to common sense, thinking that God speaks to them, will not be convinced by any opinion that opposes their own HUMAN understanding.

Regards

 

[Imagican]

Ah,

So you DO see what I offer. For you offer that that our love for God and our love for our brother are on 'different LEVELS'.

That is eXACTLY what I have been offering. That what we love IS that which we worship. And the LOVE or WORSHIP that we offer to God is HIS ALONE. ONLY distinguishable by THAT IT IS OFFERED TO GOD AS God.

Let us get 'back' to the point of this thread.

We can start another thread on the subject of 'worship' if you wish, but this was 'supposed' to be about the 'cross'. I simply attempted to point out that the 'cross' IS a symbol of worship. i didn't mean to side track the discussion INTO what IS worship.

Are there ANY out there that SUPPORT the use of the 'cross' that have ANY understanding of it's significance PREVIOUS to it's introduction into Christianity?

Most LIKELY NOT.

The cross is NOT exclusive to Christianity. The cross is one of the OLDEST known symbols of 'religion' PERIOD. The Babylonians, Egyptians, EVERY religion that I have encountered has used ONE sort of cross or another. Satanism even uses crosses in it's 'worship' of symbolism.

And the cross was NOT introduced into Christianity as fran has 'indicated'. It was NOT taught by the apostles. Christ 'crucified' has NO BEARING on the USE of a 'cross' as a 'symbol'. NOT so far as the apostles were concerned. These would NOT have used such a sybol that connotates the MURDER or KILLING of those by the Romans to REPRESENT their Savior. That there is NO mention of them USING such is NOT a valid reason to even DREAM UP the 'idea' that they MIGHT HAVE. For IF the 'cross' had ANY positive power for the FOLLOWERS of Christ, then the apostles WOULD have mentioned USING the cross. They DIDN'T so that is ENOUGH indication that there is NO valiidity to 'guessing' that they 'may have'.

I have already pointed out that words and sybols have POWER. Now it's just a matter of determining what KIND of power. Where the POWER COMES FROM?

I have also offered that the cross was a ROMAN symbol of their MEANS of execution. Having NOTHING to do with Christ other than the MEANS by WHICH He was EXECUTED. The cross has relatively NO significance in it's PHYSICAL sense EXCEPT THIS. Spiritually, the 'cross' was used to connotate the death and ressurection of Christ. But the 'PHYSICAL' symbol of the Cross was NOT used by those that ORIGINALLY followed Christ. It was introduced 'centuries' after Christ's death so far as an 'actual physical symbol'. And then by an 'organization' that I have attempted to point out created MUCH 'man-made' pagentry and force fed this to the masses.

The protestants simply carried this 'same baggage' right along with them when they 'splintered off' from the CC.

So, the SIMPLE FACT that there are SO MANY that would defend the USE of the cross simply points out the degree to which it is HELD IN ESTEEM. If we are NOT to hold MEN in esteem, how much LESS those 'things' made by the hands of men?

MEC

 

[francisdesales]

Ah,

So you DO see what I offer. For you offer that that our love for God and our love for our brother are on 'different LEVELS'.

That is eXACTLY what I have been offering. That what we love IS that which we worship. And the LOVE or WORSHIP that we offer to God is HIS ALONE. ONLY distinguishable by THAT IT IS OFFERED TO GOD AS God.

The first paragraph contradicts the second paragraph. Thus, you again are confusing the reader. Love and worship are not the same thing. One loves what they worship, but they do not necessarily worship what they love. Thus, they are not the same thing.

Let us get 'back' to the point of this thread.

We can start another thread on the subject of 'worship' if you wish, but this was 'supposed' to be about the 'cross'. I simply attempted to point out that the 'cross' IS a symbol of worship. i didn't mean to side track the discussion INTO what IS worship.

The cross CAN be a symbol of worship. As we have noted, some people wear a cross with absolutely no intention on evangelizing the Gospel. And this discussion has not been what worship is, but whether love = worship. Have you just joined this conversation or what?

Are there ANY out there that SUPPORT the use of the 'cross' that have ANY understanding of it's significance PREVIOUS to it's introduction into Christianity?

Most LIKELY NOT.

The cross is NOT exclusive to Christianity. The cross is one of the OLDEST known symbols of 'religion' PERIOD. The Babylonians, Egyptians, EVERY religion that I have encountered has used ONE sort of cross or another. And the cross was NOT introduced into Christianity as fran has 'indicated'.

Where have I said that the cross was first introduced by Christianity???

The MEANING of the cross as a sign of our salvation is strictly from Christianity. But people were being crucified long before Christ was crucified.

It was NOT taught by the apostles.

Yes it has. Paul said we preach Christ crucified. I have already posted the pertinent Scriptures from 1 Corinthians. Are you, like the Jews, scandalized by Christ and the cross? Are you going to follow man's wisdom, or the "foolishness" of the cross? Don't try to change what the Apostles taught. They taught that Jesus had died and was risen. Thus, the cross became a symbol of our salvation, since salvation = the redemption of sins, and that occured AT THE CROSS, not from Jesus rising from the grave.

Why do you insist on misleading people here? You are even trying to mislead people on what our conversation has been about...

 

[Imagican]

No fran,

No confusion if you follow what is written.

Firstly this thread is about the cross. Yes, we were discussing worship. But this was OFF topic and I indicated that I still had plenty to offer on the 'subject' of the thread.

I guess it doesn't really matter since it's just the two of us.

You completely ignored all that I asked and chose to simply offer ridicule of my statements.

I will ask again WHAT is worship? And I don't mean simply bowing to a deity. What IS it?

And, when you discern THIS, then explain what it is FOR.

Preaching Christ crucified offers NO evidence what so ever that the they TAUGHT 'wearing' a cross or ANYTHING about the cross other than WORDS concerning it's significance to their SALVATION. It's YOU that chooses once again to mislead while accusing me of doing so. I have attempted to mislead ANYONE. Other than a disagreement over semantics here, I believe that EVERYTHING that I have offered concerning the cross is EASILY proven or disproven by a LITTLE bit of research.

The cross, as a 'graven image', (produced for worship or jewelry), wasn't introduced INTO Christianity until hundreds of years AFTER the apostles. This was a 'ROMAN' symbol and NOT of Jewish origin, (or the original Christians for that matter). And it is HIGHLY unlikely that the ORIGINAL Christians would have found ANYTHING but 'distaste' for such a 'symbol'. For the cross was a means of torture and death. Not likely those that taught LIFE would have had any great love for an instrument of torture such as this.

I am NOT here attempting to discuss issues such as this with those that have NO ability to discern the TRUTH. If it's OPINION that you seek then I guess ANYTHING goes. But the TRUTH of the matter here is that the cross that one WEARS or adorns the top of their 'church' or the sticker on their bumper, or WHATEVER. If it is made by the hands of men, IT IS A GRAVEN IMAGE. It doesn't take a 'rocket scientist' to figure that one out.

I have offered a NUMBER of REASONS that even IF it were OK to use symbols, (and you can call it what you like, the NAME doesn't CHANGE or alter what it is; I could call cocaine 'my medication' but that would NOT take away from the TRUTH of it simply being a DRUG. And in the same respect, you could call it an 'icon', an emblem, a statement of faith, WHATEVER you 'choose' to call it, but the SIMPLE fact is that ANYTHING made by the hands of men that resembles ANYTHING in heaven or on earth, whether it be animal, plant, bug, water, sky, star, angel, saint, God, savior, picture, statue, or the CROSS), the cross would NOT be a 'reasonable' symbol of ANYTHING other than an instrument of DEATH. ESPECIALLY the grim and gruesome personification of SOMEONE hanging on it.

And YOU can state that it is about 'rememberance', or whatever, but I can assure you that Christ HANGING on a cross IS NOT how He would desire for us to REMEMBER Him. He did NOT die for us to 'feel sorry for Him', or to "make us feel guilty", He died for us so that we don't HAVE TO. If there IS a message that Christ desires for us to know IT IS LOVE. The SAME love that He offered over and over in His words and ministry and the REASON that He died for us.

And something else came to me earlier. Someone stated that their mothers husband had died and they they use to say a prayer together when that person was alive. So their mother continued to repeat the prayer and kiss a picture of her dead husband each day. I would ask, (not to be silly or anything else, but to offer a 'different' understanding than that which they offered: Did the mother kiss a picture of her husband that was taken while he still lived, or was it picture taken after his death?

For Christ's message was about HIS LIFE folks. He offered an EXAMPLE through HIS ministry that IS able to TEACH us. And I would contend that so long as there is NOT a ONE Of us that is PERFECT, that wearing a 'cross' would be NO different than taking communion WITHOUT one's heart being PURE. That wearing the cross would be 'to crucify Christ over and over again'.

Too bad that the apostles HADN'T encountered this debate in their time. But the apostles, BEING Jews, were WELL aware of the commandments concerning 'graven images'.

MEC

 

[francisdesales]

No fran,

No confusion if you follow what is written.

Firstly this thread is about the cross. Yes, we were discussing worship. But this was OFF topic and I indicated that I still had plenty to offer on the 'subject' of the thread.

I guess it doesn't really matter since it's just the two of us.

You completely ignored all that I asked and chose to simply offer ridicule of my statements.

MEC,

I sincerely have tried to show you your contradictions. If you refuse to see them, what is the point of further discussion? I would love to talk to people who are open to hearing other opinions. Thus, I listen to Protestants and their viewpoints. I think people who know me here will agree, for the most part, that I am fair and try not to belittle them. I do not speak for God. I offer what the Catholic Church teaches. If people disagree with that, that is their perogative. I do not condemn anyone for this. While I certainly scratch my head at some explanations, that is certainly their/your decision.

Earlier, I had said that I have "said enough on the subject". I continued, against my better judgment, in hopes that you would explain yourself better, recant, stay on topic, or perhaps, to some degree, step off the soap box that you seem to preach from to me, a lowly Catholic. Unfortunately, I do not feel that this conversation is being advanced further by continuing. I throw myself on the mercy of the lurker who may still have the patience to continue to read this thread...

I have no clue as to why someone, a Christian, would have a problem with wearing the sign of our salvation around their collar. Even the most ardent "anti-image" person would at least understand, I think, that we do not worship that thing around our necks. I am not aware of ANY person who takes off their jewelry and offers sacrfice to IT, or prays to IT, or somehow thinks THAT hunk of metal is GOD HIMSELF. Thus, the chastizement of Christians who wear such things is pointless, because no one worships it. The commandment is against worshiping graven images, not HAVING them. Or have you forgotten the "graven images" on the Ark of the Covenant ITSELF?!

Now, by your definition, love = worship, I suppose I understand why you would be opposed to the concept. I have tried and tried, but I have not been able to show you that love does NOT equal worship, as per the biblical definition. Sure, we love what we worship, but can you honestly say that in every case, we worship what we love as if it was God?

Your continued answer in the positive makes this conversation an exercise in futility for me, and thus, I will bow out. I try not to make it a habit with arguing with obstinate people who think God speaks directly to them, and as such, it is foolish for me to continue.

Regards

 

[Imagican]

Just wanted to offer a tid bit of understanding concerning worship, (I think it pertains to the OP).

Durring the time of the apostles, (Paul especially), ask that we USE his example and follow IT. Are there any out ther that are unaware that Paul spent almost EVERY moment of his time in prayer, witting, or spreading The Word? If NOT, then the indication offered by him is untrue.

The MAIN reason that we have been warned against focusing our time, energy, (effort), and resources, on OBJECTS is that such focus IS worship. We have ONE example of a 'character' that spent his efforts on trinkets of worship. Paul encountered this man. WHY do you THINK that this is 'situation' is offered in The Word. Do you THINK that ANYTHING offered in The Word is a mere 'fluke'? That the writters offered ANYTHING that had NO significance?

And what would one gain in understanding from reading this account? Insignificant? Or IS there a 'meaning' behind that which was offered?

I will leave it to those following this to decide the anwer to these questions.

MEC

 

[MarkT]

Ex 20:4
"You shall not make for yourself a graven 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;

Ex 32:16
And the tables were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God, graven upon the tables.

Le 26:1
"You shall make for yourselves no idols and erect no graven image or pillar, and you shall not set up a figured stone in your land, to bow down to them; for I am the LORD your God.

De 4:16
beware lest you act corruptly by making a graven image for yourselves, in the form of any figure, the likeness of male or female,

I think worship does involve service and prayer. But I would not say 'love' is synonymous with 'worship'. It also has to be to a god or gods. I'm not sure we can say that the men who worshipped idols in the past even loved their gods, but we can say that they served them and prayed to them. I don't think we can call the cross an idol then, as long as the one who wears it is not praying to it or serving it. However, kissing the cross, and making it out of gold, etc. is not necessary to remind us of the suffering of our Lord. I tend to agree with Imagican to some extent. Then again, as long as they are not reducing God to a cross or giving the cross any ability to answer prayer, I would hestitate to call it an idol. It's a different story when it comes to statues of Mary and the saints, to serve Mary or in giving them the godlike ability to answer prayer and images of God and Jesus. That is reducing God to a human being, and I don't think Jesus was sent simply to become human. In other words, it wasn't because God suddenly had a desire to be human. An image of Jesus would be to regard Christ from a human point of view, but, as Paul said, 'We regard him thus no longer.' 2 Cor. 5 :16 I think Jesus was sent to give us the words of God in the flesh and the Word of God is the power and the glory of God. Anyways, the way to worship God is in spirit and truth. That means we should seek the knowledge of God as the Proverbs say and grow in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, as Peter said. 2 Peter 3:18 As far as love goes, even the wicked love their own. That's not to say the love of God is in them. But, perhaps God does mix some love in them. As far as the wearing of a cross goes, I don't think it's a major issue, though I suppose it could be if it leads people to think it has some magical power.

 

[Imagican]

One point that the forums may benefit from concerning a point offerd in MarkT's post:

He is absolutlely correct in that there have been and are many that did and do NOT love that which they worshiped. For the Jews 'missed' this POINT in that they became followers of the LAW for 'obediences sake'. Failing to learn the lesson that the Law was given to TEACH. Choosing instead to remain 'hard-headed' by a simple adherance to The Law without LEARNING that it was offered in an attempt to TEACH ONE THING; LOVE.

I don't really have the time or inclination to offer ALL the scripture that lead UP to the understanding that worship = Love. But it is there and all one need do is READ. Does the Word EVER directly state that worship = Love. NO. But neither does The Word offer a statement of 'trinity'. Just as the 'trinitarians' would state that it is a 'concept' that is offered in the TOTALITLY of The Word, so too does The Word offer that to 'worship', (true worship that matters), IS to LOVE when one is ABLE to accept the understanding offered in The Word in it's TOTALITY.

And perhaps this is the REASON that Moses was punished SO harshly for his ONE act of disobedience himself; For a FAILURE to 'recognize' that which the teacher, (The Law), was MEANT to teach. For He OBVIOUSLY failed in his offering of love to both God and HIS PEOPLE when he disobeyed God through ANGER, (hate AGAINST HIS PEOPLE and perhaps toward God Himself brought about through frustration).

Too DEEP? Perhaps. And perhaps it is the CONTINUATION of misunderstanding of those that CONTINUE to 'believe' that they can PLEASE God through ordinances and LAW instead of offering HIm the ONE 'thing' that He desires MOST: Love, (worship). Love of God FIRST, and of each other and self SECOND. For Christ OFFERED the example when He bowed to the feet of His deciples and WASHED them. If that is not a PURE indication of that which any would call veneration, (or worship; hence LOVE), then I don't know how else to POINT OUT what The Word has offered. Service and honor ARE worship. And service and honor mean NOTHING other than obedience offered through ANYTHING other than LOVE.

The ONLY difference in worship offered to God and 'other things' is that the worship we offer God is RESERVED for God alone. We are NOT to worship the 'creature', (creation), MORE or even EQUAL to the Creator. Now insert the word LOVE and SEE what God has been attempting to TEACH mankind since it's inception.

Still struggling in an attempt at a 'perfect understanding' that we have been offered? I can not 'PLACE' this into the hearts or minds of ANYONE. But perhaps just the PLANTING of the 'seed' will be 'enough' for 'some'.

Now READ, READ, READ along with PRAYER, PRAYER, PRAYER.

MEC

 

[turnorburn]

If your Catholic then you already know that their Cathedrals are dripping of graven images.
And that's not bad enough if you worship God "the Pope" then there are serious issues that need to be dealt with. Do you worship the icons, the Pope, the Virgin Mary as well as all of the others?

Just asking,

In Christ,
turnorburn

 

[biblecatholic]

If your Catholic then you already know that their Cathedrals are dripping of graven images.

you might want to remove your avatar.....looks like a graven image

 

[turnorburn]

Any suggestions?

 

[biblecatholic]

we'll in reality it's not a graven image, it's the sign of salvation. so I wouldn't change it. but if you insist on believing catholics have graven images you might not want to look like one with your avatar

 

[Imagican]

I didn't know this was meant to be personal attacks against 'anyONE'. I have simply attempted to point out that ANYTHING 'graven', (carved, cast, blown, painted, sculpted, CREATED by the hand of man to imitate something on earth or in heaven), HAS been forbidden. That the CC or any other has chosen to DENY this does NOT change what was offered by God in the LEAST.

Just as 'some' churches have allowed female bishops and some encourage 'Superbowl Parties' and some ALLOW and elect GAY leaders does NOT alter what has been offered. It only goes to show that 'personal contentment' is MORE important than following the Word of God. That MANY will offer that 'they don't care' what others think and use this as an EXCUSE just further shows what state the 'churches' have allowed their members to VEER in abandonment of God's commandments and our PURPOSE.

Our PURPOSE is NOT 'self gratification', (although many would indicate through their actions and words that this is EXACTLY what they BELIEVE), but holiness as offered in example by Christ. A sacrificing of self for the Body.

The CC is a perfect example of mankind RAISING Himself ABOVE that offered by God and His Son. Worshiping the 'creature' ABOVE the Creator. And altering the teachings of Christ and His apostles in order to make it 'seem' as though what they have altered is 'OK'. Choosing to worship a 'man-made' church and INSIST that it is NOT SO.

We were NOT told that it was OK to make 'certain' graven images, we were told NOT TO DO IT AT ALL. And we were NOT told to worship ONLY 'certain' graven images, BUT NOT TO WORSHIP THEM AT ALL. It's really not that difficult to understand UNLESS one is of the persuasion to 'worship images'. In other words, there would be NO reason for one to defend such behavior UNLESS they were DOING IT. And there would be no reason to 'alter' the 'truth' about what has been offered by God UNLESS one felt some sort of GUILT associated with their behavior.

The CC is RIFE with idolotry. It is prevelant in almost EVERY aspect of their ritual and pagentry. And these 'rituals' were NOT offered in scripture but were 'FORBIDDEN'. Yet have become prevalent. Taking them from the PREVIOUS pagan religions found in Rome BEFORE the introduction of Christ. Symbolism today being of the EXACT same nature that exsited PRE-Christ is continued in the SAME spirit NOW. They would DENY IT, but the truth is PLAIN to SEE to any that have even the most BASIC understanding of this 'religion'.

The cross, (carved, cast, molded WHATEVER), created as an 'image' is FORBIDDEN by the commandments. That the CC ignored what was offered and ingrained it into the psyche of their followers, (INCLUDING Martin Luther and the present day 'Protestants'), does NOT alter the TRUTH. whether you LIKE IT or NOT, the TRUTH is the TRUTH.

We were given FREEDOM from the LAW my friends. But, as offered by Paul, "Does this give us the RIGHT to SIN"? God forbid. It makes sin ALL the more answerable to. For NOW we have the LAWS written in our hearts, (or at least those that accept Christ INTO their hearts DO). So, what was once a thing that ignorance could be claimed of, NOW there is NO excuse WHATSOEVER. And I propose that if The Spirit is unable to convict those that DO NOT FOLLOW THE WILL OF GOD, then there is NO Spirit within them, (spirit MOST DEFINITELY).

For the Spirit is NOT ignorant. But it is UNABLE to affect those that DO NOT KNOW IT. For The Spirit was sent FOR those that ACCEPT Christ and His Father. And the ONLY way that one could CLAIM such a 'thing' as Their ACCEPTANCE into one's hearts would BE to abide by the WISHES of Christ and His Father. Otherwise, what is offered are JUST WORDS. Capable of FOOLING oneself but having little abilty to 'fool' anyone with ANY understanding of TRUTH.

And folks, there are MORE gods than ONE. That there is but ONE True God that IS our Creator is without controversy among those that KNOW HIM. But there are gods MANY that would lead those that follow them into behavior that is CONTRADICTORY to that which is able to PLEASE The Father of Christ.

MEC

 

[Free]

I have simply attempted to point out that ANYTHING 'graven', (carved, cast, blown, painted, sculpted, CREATED by the hand of man to imitate something on earth or in heaven), HAS been forbidden.

And where did you ever get such an idea?

 

[Imagican]

I have simply attempted to point out that ANYTHING 'graven', (carved, cast, blown, painted, sculpted, CREATED by the hand of man to imitate something on earth or in heaven), HAS been forbidden.

And where did you ever get such an idea?

Free,

I assume you HAVE read this:

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth

Now, what is it that you DON'T understand here? Is it the 'graven' part?

MEC

 

[turnorburn]

I'm no expert on that system but there "is that issue" need I say more. Told myself anyone I don't
care whom, when my brothers and sisters are savagely tortured then that group isn't for me. There is my two sense worth..

we'll in reality it's not a graven image, it's the sign of salvation. so I wouldn't change it. but if you insist on believing catholics have graven images you might not want to look like one with your avatar

 

[Free]

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth

Now, what is it that you DON'T understand here? Is it the 'graven' part?

Context is absolutely critical in biblical interpretation. The second commandment is three verses long:

Exo 20:4 "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.
Exo 20:5 You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the LORD your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me,
Exo 20:6 but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments.

I'm sure you would agree that the first four Commandments can be summed as: "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind" and the last six as "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." The context is that of worship. We are not to create images in the form of any created thing for the purpose of worshiping creation instead of the Creator. We see the consequences of this in Romans 1:

Rom 1:22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools,
Rom 1:23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.
Rom 1:24 Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves,
Rom 1:25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.

What these passages are not saying is that we can never create images in the form of something in creation. The very idea is absurd and goes against the fact that we, as created in the image of God, are creative beings. Indeed, God even has the Israelites created cherubim to sit on the Ark (Exodus 25:18-20).

The second commandment is not a prohibition against artistic expression or the use of images in worship; it is against the worship of the images.

 

[biblecatholic]

I'm no expert on that system but there "is that issue" need I say more. Told myself anyone I don't
care whom, when my brothers and sisters are savagely tortured then that group isn't for me. There is my two sense worth..

so are you going to remove your "graven image" or are you going to be hypocritical?