T
Teflon93
Guest
Care to elaborate on which pagans do and do not use idols as symbols versus actual repositories for gods?
- Status
C
cascherman
Guest
It’s ok, I hope you aren’t bothered anymore, I have gotten a couple of very insightful answers that really clear things up for me. I have never heard anyone ask the question I wanted to know, so I knew it would be a little different, thats all.No it doesn’t bother me. I think it is your loss not mine to decline to retrieve the answer to your question when it has been freely offered to you.
What bothers me is that you call 5 pages what is actually less than 2 pages and that a few posts on those less than 2 pages answer your question; yet, rather than taking a few minutes to read a variety of answers to your question, you have decided to declare that your question is not answered!
T
Teflon93
Guest
It’s always difficult to ask these types of questions, because they come up very often and some level of frustration is reached when we encounter them: “Oh, not THAT again!”
Sometimes this comes out in the form of responses that should have been a lot more patient and to the point, and quite often much more charitable.
I know that I am prone to swift responses and so have to force myself to wait to respond, hopefully in a more reflective and measured fashion. It is very much a work in progress.
C
Church_Militant
Guest
question is asked before (do some people not like the statues and images) but that is not my question, mine is why is it necessary to cut it so close, inasmuch that it needs to be exhaustively explained to everyone at some point and even keeps some people away from the Church?I understand what you mean I think. I like to think of it this way.
Colossians 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat or in drink, or in respect of a festival day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbaths, 17 Which are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ.
It’s the same idea. Since we are not dumb enough to confuse the God of the universe with a chunk of rock, wood, plastic, plaster, or metal, and the images and icons simply help us focus on who we are talking to, (ever call up a loved one and have their picture out while you do? Lovers seem to do that a lot, I think.), then no one should be judging us on it.
Yeah, I agree with you about this. Maybe they weren’t clear enough, or something, but I’ve never heard that idea taught in the faith.
Good for you! That’s the way to go about learning the answer to questions like these.
C
cheddarsox
Guest
not on this thread (don’t care to hijack or go off on tangents) but that could be an interesting thread for the Non-Cath forums here.
T
Teflon93
Guest
I agree—I’ve recently completed a Teaching Company lecture series on ancient Mediterranean religions and find this stuff fascinating. If you get the chance, please do post something on this; I’d love to know more.
M
Mintaka
Guest
Without images of sounds (ie, our writing system), you’d have a hard time reading the Bible.
Ah, St. John Damascene… He thought of all the best arguments.
Ah, St. John Damascene… He thought of all the best arguments.
J
Joero
Guest
The truth is that there is now, at present, the choosing of adjectives, particularly between “graven” and “carven” by the n-Cs.
Why? If they use “graven” to ask question such as “why you, catholics, have plenty of graven images in the church and at home? There are catholics who could answer that immediately by jumping at Ezekiel 41: 18-19 (although the word used there is carven images) they would insist the using of the word “carven” than the word “graven” because the meaning of the word “statuette” is “a small carved or moulded figure” which would really fit to the holy statuettes on the altars at home by the catholics. If you use Ezekiel 41: 18- 19 to answer their question they would simply say " Oh, that’s graven images not carven images!” Then a catholic would begin scratching his head and would only focus on Exo.25: 18-20 or Heb. 9:5 as the alternative resources. Then the n-Cs would immediately say "I admit that some of your images, catholics, are right like the images of the angels, it’s okay according to the scripture but why do you have carven images of females and males human beings it’s forbidden according to Deut.4: 16. Here, a catholic would begin to wonder and scratch his head again or blush to the point of embarrassment.
Let us remember that Jesus said “no one has ever gone up to heaven except the Son of Man, who came down from heaven” (John 3:13). The almighty Father was right in saying to Moses to make images of winged creatures (angels) (Exo. 25: 18-20) because among His creatures, the angels are His companions in heaven standing beside Him as He sat on His throne (2 Chron.18:18). But as Jesus ascended to heaven He took many captives with Him (Ephesians 4: 8) and there is a large crowd of people in heaven ( Rev. 19:1). And the most important of all is that only human beings are allowed by Jesus to sit beside Him (not the angels) (Rev.3: 21)
Now the question may arise. Are Catholics wrong for having holy statuettes representing the saints in heaven ? Logically, we are the only christians on earth who are more rationale compared to others!!! And remember this, catholics, the use of holy statuettes has been a dogma and never doubt it that you’ve committed a sin if you pray to the Lord facing the holy images.
Why? If they use “graven” to ask question such as “why you, catholics, have plenty of graven images in the church and at home? There are catholics who could answer that immediately by jumping at Ezekiel 41: 18-19 (although the word used there is carven images) they would insist the using of the word “carven” than the word “graven” because the meaning of the word “statuette” is “a small carved or moulded figure” which would really fit to the holy statuettes on the altars at home by the catholics. If you use Ezekiel 41: 18- 19 to answer their question they would simply say " Oh, that’s graven images not carven images!” Then a catholic would begin scratching his head and would only focus on Exo.25: 18-20 or Heb. 9:5 as the alternative resources. Then the n-Cs would immediately say "I admit that some of your images, catholics, are right like the images of the angels, it’s okay according to the scripture but why do you have carven images of females and males human beings it’s forbidden according to Deut.4: 16. Here, a catholic would begin to wonder and scratch his head again or blush to the point of embarrassment.
Let us remember that Jesus said “no one has ever gone up to heaven except the Son of Man, who came down from heaven” (John 3:13). The almighty Father was right in saying to Moses to make images of winged creatures (angels) (Exo. 25: 18-20) because among His creatures, the angels are His companions in heaven standing beside Him as He sat on His throne (2 Chron.18:18). But as Jesus ascended to heaven He took many captives with Him (Ephesians 4: 8) and there is a large crowd of people in heaven ( Rev. 19:1). And the most important of all is that only human beings are allowed by Jesus to sit beside Him (not the angels) (Rev.3: 21)
Now the question may arise. Are Catholics wrong for having holy statuettes representing the saints in heaven ? Logically, we are the only christians on earth who are more rationale compared to others!!! And remember this, catholics, the use of holy statuettes has been a dogma and never doubt it that you’ve committed a sin if you pray to the Lord facing the holy images.
A
Ani_Ibi
Guest
So for the over 90% of the Church who could not read, we should have just shut them out of the Gospel. Right? The Gospel should only be for those who can read, for those who can afford to buy Bibles, or for those who can afford the leisure time to go the Library – if one exists nearby – to read or listen to someone else read the Bible.
I thought Jesus came so that ALL people could be saved. Not just those who can read. Not just those who can afford Bibles. Not just those who can afford the leisure time to read or listen to the Bible. I guess I ‘misinterpreted’ the word ALL and it really only means SOME. Right?
- Status