Another anti-Catholic web site

  • Thread starter Thread starter kellie
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
K

kellie

Guest
Here is the link

Here is the quote that I am querying.
“What is wrong with the crucifix? God condemned it as a graven image (Ex 20:4). Jesus and Paul knew nothing of it (Matt 28:20; I Tim 3:15; II Tim 3:16-17). It leaves Jesus in the most defeated, humiliated, and shamed position possible, which was only momentary, and only 2000 years ago. It leaves Jesus cursed, for the true God declared, “Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree” (Gal 3:13; Deut 21:23). Satan knows Scripture better than Catholic popes, and he rejoices to see Jesus still cursed on a tree!”

I came across this web site from another thread.

I clicked on the link to Gal 3:13 and this is what it says
"Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: "

Now, this is so wrong isnt it?

Isn’t it meaning that Jesus died on the cross to make a new covenant with us, to end the covenant of the Old Testament.
And isnt the cursing of every one who hangs from a tree referring to Judas.
Judas betrayed Jesus and hanged on a tree.
So basically it is saying do not betray Jesus and you will not hang.

So this web site is saying Catholics are wrong to have a crucifix as Satan delights in still seeing Jesus hanging on a tree.

But that is not how I would interpret the Scripture.

Why are there these people around that interpret Scripture like that?

Love Kellie
 
We need to all post defenses on sites such as these. Together we are an army. SOund the alarms, rally the troops!!! Let us do battle!!! 😃
 
It seems that I’ve heard this argument before somewhere. It just shows what happens whenever you have everybody twisting what the bible says to suit their own agenda. I get so sick of it.
 
Jesus crucified is the ultimate act of loving self-donation. That does not mean that he also wasn’t in a sense cursed, as he took our curse upon himself, that we might be given his righteousness and made righteous.

The arguments against use of the crucifix are silly. Such people may have a problem with a nativity scene, but I doubt it. Why not? What’s the difference. Just because Jesus rose from the dead doesn’t mean that human beings who have not yet risen from the dead don’t find some comfort in the fact that their older brother was “perfected through suffering”, as we hope to be.
 
Before joining this forum I knew that there is a lot of anti-Catholic stuff out there. I went to this web site and this is the first time that I have actually read anything that was anti-Catholic. Wow, I think I am still in shock. After reading this I want to learn more about our faith than ever before.
 
It’s so ridiculuous you can’t even get mad. How can they say that the crucifix is an idolotrous (don’t know if that’s a word) graven image? Satan screams at the sight of the crucifix because it is an everlasting image of his defeat. It’s good to remember what Christ went through for our sake when we think things are tough!
 
the verse is interpreted correctly in that Jesus was “cursed”. he had the sin of the world put upon him, that i would call a curse. the flip side is that this is a stupid argument against the crucifix. a “graven” image or an “idolatrous” image is one that is worshiped not one that is used in worship. the difference is that if the crucifix is the focus of worship it is idolatrous, but if it points to or reminds us of the one who is to be the focus of worship it is a tool to be used in worship. the only problem i see with the crucifix is that it does focus on Christ’s suffering while the protestant empty cross neglects His sufferings but focuses on His victory over death. i think we need a healthy dose of both, not just one or the other.
 
40.png
kellie:
Here is the quote that I am querying.
"What is wrong with the crucifix? God condemned it as a graven image (Ex 20:4). Jesus and Paul knew nothing of it (Matt 28:20; I Tim 3:15; II Tim 3:16-17). It leaves Jesus in the most defeated, humiliated, and shamed position possible, which was only momentary, and only 2000 years ago.
Click to expand...
Sites like that are comical and to be laughed at (remembering, of course, to pray for the souls of those who post such dribble).

As pointed out above, God did not condemn graven images or idols. He condemned the worship of them. And Jesus crucifixion - which alone was responsible for our being able to be saved - was an absolutely glorius thing. Jesus is not ‘defeated, humiliated, shamed’ - he is victorius, glorified, exonerrated.

Without Jesus crucifixion, we have not way to get back to God. How wonderful those who keep a crucifix nearby to remind them of the victory Christ brought us and the suffering He endured for love of us.
 
Unfortunately there are may out there who will attack us this way, I get enough of the anti-Catholic ‘stuff’ from my own husband. Be patient, look in your Bible for the passages where God tells Moses to make the Ark of the Convenant, and the Bronze serpant. Those that wish to throw the baby out with the bath water are often looking and searching for something deeper themselves. The best way to counter those who believe this way is to better get to know God’s own word. Since becoming Catholic I have done a lot of studying. I still feel inadequate, but feel better about telling others about my own faith. Ask for patience and wisdom for dealing with people like this in person and pray for those making these anti-Catholic web sites. It may not seem like a lot, but prayer is powerful!
 
40.png
Student:
Sites like that are comical and to be laughed at (remembering, of course, to pray for the souls of those who post such dribble).
Click to expand...
It’s hard to believe that these people can possibly believe this stuff. There are many sincere protestant writers who make arguments that at least make me pause and think, but this stuff goes deep into the ridiculous such as: “They believe Mary hears prayers better than God”. Really? Does he really believe that of us?
 
40.png
Poisson:
It’s hard to believe that these people can possibly believe this stuff. There are many sincere protestant writers who make arguments that at least make me pause and think, but this stuff goes deep into the ridiculous such as: “They believe Mary hears prayers better than God”. Really? Does he really believe that of us?
Click to expand...
I, too, have found that what protestants say is wrong about the Catholic Church isn’t actually what the Catholic Church does in the first place. If they understood what the Catholic Church ACTUALLY teaches (rather than what they THINK it teaches), all would flock back to the Church.
 
40.png
Student:
Sites like that are comical and to be laughed at (remembering, of course, to pray for the souls of those who post such dribble).

As pointed out above, God did not condemn graven images or idols. He condemned the worship of them. And Jesus crucifixion - which alone was responsible for our being able to be saved - was an absolutely glorius thing. Jesus is not ‘defeated, humiliated, shamed’ - he is victorius, glorified, exonerrated.

Without Jesus crucifixion, we have not way to get back to God. How wonderful those who keep a crucifix nearby to remind them of the victory Christ brought us and the suffering He endured for love of us.
Click to expand...
Actually, they’re not so funny. A lot of people take this kind of anti-Catholic material seriously, but I get your point.
You’re right about the graven images, too. God condemned worship of them. If he had completely comdemned them altogether, there wouldn’t have been a depiction of 2 golden angels hovering atop the Ark of the Covenant.
Funny - most of my family has left the church over the years and they condemn the display of crucifixes. They say that we should dwell on the risen Lord only. Gee, I always thought that he had to suffer and die BEFORE he could be risen. They need to dwell a little more on the price our Lord had to pay for the salvation of their souls.
 
40.png
bengal_fan:
the verse is interpreted correctly in that Jesus was “cursed”. he had the sin of the world put upon him, that i would call a curse. the flip side is that this is a stupid argument against the crucifix. a “graven” image or an “idolatrous” image is one that is worshiped not one that is used in worship.
Click to expand...
I think you hit the nail on the head here, BF. What the subject website illustrates to me is that whoever wrote it is operating under the false assumption that Catholics worship images rather than use images in worship. AND it seems to illustrate that he himself believes the images to be more than just images in an absolute sense.

Examine the website’s language for a moment:
It leaves Jesus in the most defeated, humiliated, and shamed position possible, which was only momentary, and only 2000 years ago. It leaves Jesus cursed, for the true God declared, “Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree”
Click to expand...
One might conclude that the author himself believes that the crucifix actually is Jesus Himself. He doesn’t say that the crucifix depicts Jesus or symbolizes Jesus as cursed or defeated. It actually leaves Him defeated, humiliated and shamed. If the crucifix is seen as what it really is and what Catholics believe that it is, none of the accusation holds water. The only way I can see someone being that fired up against the use of a crucifix is if they actually believed the crucifix to be more than just a representation.

Anti-Catholics who seemingly believe what they condemn Catholics for believing really baffle me. I’ve had anti-Catholics who see the Eucharist as only a symbol angrily tell me that Catholics are literally killing Jesus again in every Mass. I’ve had them tell me that Baptism is only a symbol but they angrily condemn Catholics for not using full immersion or for baptizing infants. If these things are merely symbolic then there cannot be an absolute right or wrong way to do them. Symbolism is in the eye of the beholder so how can someone say that another is symbolizing something incorrectly?

It almost seems to me that some of them are very drawn to Catholicism, sacraments, and sacramentals, but since they’ve been indoctrinated into thinking everything Catholic is evil, the only mode of expression remaining to them is angry denunciation. They fear Catholicism too much to get close enough to find out what it really is, but they are sufficiently attracted to it to keep them lashing out at it.

I wonder if they fear Catholicism because they wholeheartedly believe what they’ve been taught or because deep down they think that what they’ve been taught might not be true?
 
If you think THAT’S bad, click on the link, then go to “The Animated Crucifix.” Did you know that you might lose your soul if you see “The Passion of the Christ?”
I was actually in an e-mail diologue with one of these folks, keeping everything polite and respectful, but eventually he cut me off.
What surprised me was that most of his arguments were from the Council of Trent rather than the Bible.
Needless to say, it was VERY interesting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top