Images

  • Thread starter Thread starter JoeyWarren
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JoeyWarren

Guest
Kevan! Do you actually have an issue with IMAGES instead? That is what I am seeing, you keep stressing the issue of IMAGES.

Do you belong to a church that is plain and dull and void of anything that looks religious? Meaning that if Christians were to be highly persecuted and convicted on evidence of belief in Christianity would you be indictable?

You walk into my Church, you will find sufficient evidence to convict our group of Christianity. We have the 14 Stations of the Cross, We have kneelers, we have crosses hung everywhere. We have a tabernacle that houses the “Real Presence of Christ” We have the Crucifix hanging front and center in the Sanctuary. We have a statue of Jesus. Yes and we have a statue of Mary as well.

Now if you walk in my brother’s church where he is the Pentecostal Pastor, it is dull, plain, void of anything. The only thing that is evidence of Christianity is the Hymnals.

When I have sat in his church alone, I feel nothing. It just might as well be a convention room or a civic center. There is nothing there to inspire me with Godly and pious thoughts.

Now when I sit in my church, I feel the presence of the Trinity, my senses are activated by our imagery of all that is present. I am moved to pray to God when I am alone in this church.

Now lets take a look at each others home. Could the contents of your home present enough evidence to convict you of Christianity? Having a Bible is not sufficient since the vast majority of non-christians have a bible stashed somewhere in their house. So is there any thing else that would convict you of being a christian?

In my brother’s house, there is only the bible. nothing else.

In my house, we have a sideboard that acts as our prayer station. Here we have votive candles, Crucifixes, pictures of Christ, a couple statues of Christ to help ponder his being, one statue of Mary, and on the wall, we have about a dozen or so Crosses of differing designs. Every room has a cross in it if not a crucifix. Everyroom has a hand woven cross made from the Palm leaves given out on Palm Sunday that I have made myself. And last but not least, several Bibles. I have enough in my house to condemn me to death!

I also have enough stuff in my cubicle at work to convict me of christianity as well.

OUR IMAGES ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO US. WE DON’T WORSHIIP THEM, THEY ARE THERE AS A VISUAGE REMINDER OF WHAT OUR FAITH OF CHRISTIANITY IS ABOUT AND A LASTING TRIBUTE TO THAT PERSON.

If images are a problem, then think about the people that have “I love myself walls”. These walls that have their awards, plagues, ribbons, pictures of them shaking hands of someone of notoriety, etc, etc, etc. You know what I mean.

Also think about this. Think about the homage paid to monuments where people are seen leaving candles burning at the Lincoln Memorial, Vietnam War Memorial,etc, etc, etc. If somebody came forward in time to the Lincoln Monument, they were probably believe that to be a temple to the God Lincoln…

Just think about every town that has a statue of some famous person!

Images are very important to nearly everyone. Why do we have photo’s and paintings of our loved ones? THE NEED FOR REMEMBRANCE IN WHAT THEY DID FOR US!

Just because we place burning candle with some offered prayers does not mean we are worshiping or offering those prayers to those portrayed in the Image.
 
40.png
JoeyWarren:
Kevan! Do you actually have an issue with IMAGES instead? That is what I am seeing, you keep stressing the issue of IMAGES.

Do you belong to a church that is plain and dull and void of anything that looks religious? Meaning that if Christians were to be highly persecuted and convicted on evidence of belief in Christianity would you be indictable?

You walk into my Church, you will find sufficient evidence to convict our group of Christianity. We have the 14 Stations of the Cross, We have kneelers, we have crosses hung everywhere. We have a tabernacle that houses the “Real Presence of Christ” We have the Crucifix hanging front and center in the Sanctuary. We have a statue of Jesus. Yes and we have a statue of Mary as well.

Now if you walk in my brother’s church where he is the Pentecostal Pastor, it is dull, plain, void of anything. The only thing that is evidence of Christianity is the Hymnals.

When I have sat in his church alone, I feel nothing. It just might as well be a convention room or a civic center. There is nothing there to inspire me with Godly and pious thoughts.

Now when I sit in my church, I feel the presence of the Trinity, my senses are activated by our imagery of all that is present. I am moved to pray to God when I am alone in this church.

Now lets take a look at each others home. Could the contents of your home present enough evidence to convict you of Christianity? Having a Bible is not sufficient since the vast majority of non-christians have a bible stashed somewhere in their house. So is there any thing else that would convict you of being a christian?

In my brother’s house, there is only the bible. nothing else.

well, should we be indictable in case of persecution ???
we don’t have any images in our churches either and I don’t mind …
If somebody uses an image as a reminder of something, if it helps him or her to feel closer to God why not, as long as he / she doesn’t worship the image or the statue itself, but when I visit a Catholic church and I see how people behave in front of the statues it is not very clear to me… I mean, it’s difficult to see if the statue just helps them to pray God ( for example if it is a crucifix ) or if they worship the statue itself ; some people who have crucifixes at home say “it brings them luck”, which sounds quite supertitious to me, or that it “protects their house” : God protects their house, not the crucifix !!! that is why I prefer not to have anything at home, because of this ambiguity…Of course not all Catholics think like that but I don’t want anything that could be interpreted in an ambiguous way in my home…
in our churches, I suppose there aren’t any images for the same reasons ; I am Protestant and since we pray only to God, anyway there couldn’t be statues representing Mary or other saints, but very often we don’t have crucifixes either, sometimes not even a Cross…we don’t feel the need too.
Since we represent a very small proportion of my country’s inhabitants ( I’m French–by the way, I apologize for any possible language mistakes–and if I seem to say something rude or aggressive, take into consideration the fact that it can be the result of a mistake before jumping at me 👍 ) : we represent about 2% of the population ( the Catholics between 80 and 84% ), and since we are scattered, in some parts of the country there are nearly no Protestants, there aren’t enough of us to have a proper regular place of worship, so we hire a room …in a restaurant, in a school, anywhere, and we meet there in a more or less informal way, or, if there are only two or three Protestant families, in each other’s homes…one group meets in a room in the basement of …a Catholic church, you have all sorts of situations Protestants from other countries can’t even imagine …so anyway we couldn’t “decorate” our places of worship anyway …( the only exception is : Alsace, that belonged to Germany at the time of the Reformation : there, Protestants make up about 20 % of the population, and another region of France called : Cévennes, but I don’t know the exact proportion of Protestants there … )
Click to expand...
 
Kevan, some Catholic churches don’t even have Images in front of their candle station.

Does the absence or presence of the Image really make a difference?

Would you be more confortable if the Image was a Cross, or a Crucifix, or a statue of Christ instead?

Or do you have more of an issue with Mary?

Please articulate your objections.

Otherwise, the candle is my representation of the Light Of Christ within me. That candle is an extension of me and the prayer request I have offered to God in heaven. I personally believe that the candle while it continues to burn continues to offer my prayer to God in my absence since I don’t have the liberty to pray constantly on an a request.

The candle means different things to different people. It also is the subsitute for the oil lamps.

my suggestion is to go to bible.crosswalk.com/
and do a search for these terms in the old testament: Oil, Light, Incense and discover your meaning to this phenomenom. Remember during this that Jesus came to fulfill the law and the prophets, and the belief that the New Testament is the fulfillment and perfection of the Old Testament, so when you start question practices and commands keep that in mind.

What is the Catholic Churches official teaching? I don’t know nor care. Does there need to be an official teaching? I don’t know or care about that either.

I am content…
 
Hugenot, your situation is an exception to the rule, but your exception i would estimate at 1% if 1% of the whole world.

But you have to realize that I am speaking from the United States and within that instutiton I am speaking from the Alabama, the heart and soul of Anti-Catholicism(or so I believe). So please bear that in mind when reading my comments. We Catholics here make up about 5% if not less than that of the Triinity believeing population.

Yes there are some people that appear to be worship toward the Image of Mary when they kneel down before her likeness. But if in fact they are worshiping her, that is not a Catholic Church problem that is a personal problem, just as the protestant scandals of Jim Jones, David Koresh, Jerry Falwell, Jimmy Swaggert, and James Baker, just to mention a few, does not make it a Protestant Church problem but a just a personal problem. You are falling into the trap of judging a whole faith based on the actions of a few.

Just like the few who were shown on CNN after the Pope died when statements like: “My savior has died” or “My Lord has died” These are just the overzealous types that have misinterpreted the Catholic position of the Pope, just as the Radical Islamist have misunderstood parts of the Koran, as well as “Snake Handlers” in northern Alabama have taken scripture out of context, do i need to go on further?

Hugenot, please go buy the book “Surprised By Truth 2” by Patrick Madrid and give it a try.

You have nothing to lose but 15 dollars by reading it, but you may or maybe not have a whole lot to gain. NO! I am not trying to convert, just to show you the intellectual and reasoning side of our faith.

<><
 
I find this very…interesting. On the one hand I often see Catholics here being suspect of Protestants for having too much emotion in their services and focusing too much on feeling. An oft posted phrase is “Mass is not about how I feel” and etc. about how Protestant services are about being entertained, amused, and emotionally roused. People post as if that were a bad thing, and somehow inferior to a more austere service.

Now, I see that the other side can also be played. Now Catholicism is superior because it is sensual and offers such a rich experience, and so many things to look at to remind one of holy people who have gone before, things that arouse…feelings?

I am neither Catholic nor Protestant, though I have passed through both, and this is what I have observed…People worship in their hearts, reguardless of their surroundings. Pretty windows, lots of candles can be very inspiring, but so can a well lit clean room, free of distractions. The heart matters more than the surroundings.

Putting down some one elses style of worship doesn’t make one’s own any more worshipful.

Isn’t it nice that each find their own surroundings an inspiring place to spend time with the divine! God can speak to His people in many ways…if they aren’t too busy muttering about their neighbor to hear Him.

cheddar
 
Actually, I was just trying to find out what’s on your mind when you put candles in front of images.

First you said that the candles represented Christ, the light of the world. Now you’ve said, as did ComradeAndrei, that it represents your prayer intentions. And then you’ve gone on to say that it offers your prayers up as long as it continues to burn.

And you’ve said that you neither know nor care what the Catholic Church’s official position on candles is, if they have an official position.

So I guess I got my answer. Thanks.
 
In the Incarnation of God as the Man Jesus, the Living Image of God became visible. Representations of Him and His deeds (including His Mother and all who are His handiwork of Grace) and His Mysteries, therefore, are not only allowed but desirable. The Church is only imitating what God Himself has done. It is the Incarnation of God that is the key factor in determining if sacred images may be used.
 
40.png
Kevan:
Actually, I was just trying to find out what’s on your mind when you put candles in front of images.

First you said that the candles represented Christ, the light of the world. Now you’ve said, as did ComradeAndrei, that it represents your prayer intentions. And then you’ve gone on to say that it offers your prayers up as long as it continues to burn.

And you’ve said that you neither know nor care what the Catholic Church’s official position on candles is, if they have an official position.

So I guess I got my answer. Thanks.
Click to expand...
Please explain how Protestantism is different from Judaism. This is something I have never understood. If we reject the living Presence of Christ, and refuse any mediation through the saints or the Holy Mother, and pray only to God, how is Protestantism different from the religion of Abraham?
 
40.png
JoeyWarren:
Hugenot, your situation is an exception to the rule, but your exception i would estimate at 1% if 1% of the whole world.

But you have to realize that I am speaking from the United States and within that instutiton I am speaking from the Alabama, the heart and soul of Anti-Catholicism(or so I believe). So please bear that in mind when reading my comments. We Catholics here make up about 5% if not less than that of the Triinity believeing population.

Yes there are some people that appear to be worship toward the Image of Mary when they kneel down before her likeness. But if in fact they are worshiping her, that is not a Catholic Church problem that is a personal problem, just as the protestant scandals of Jim Jones, David Koresh, Jerry Falwell, Jimmy Swaggert, and James Baker, just to mention a few, does not make it a Protestant Church problem but a just a personal problem. You are falling into the trap of judging a whole faith based on the actions of a few.

Just like the few who were shown on CNN after the Pope died when statements like: “My savior has died” or “My Lord has died” These are just the overzealous types that have misinterpreted the Catholic position of the Pope, just as the Radical Islamist have misunderstood parts of the Koran, as well as “Snake Handlers” in northern Alabama have taken scripture out of context, do i need to go on further?

Hugenot, please go buy the book “Surprised By Truth 2” by Patrick Madrid and give it a try.

You have nothing to lose but 15 dollars by reading it, but you may or maybe not have a whole lot to gain. NO! I am not trying to convert, just to show you the intellectual and reasoning side of our faith.

I don’t think you have read my message very attentively : you say I’ve fallen into the trap of believing all Catholics do this or that ; I’ve read my own message again, if you read it with more attention you will notice that I’ve been very “prudent” : when I speak about how people behave in front of statues in Catholic churches, I write something like "it’s not clear to me " “it’s not easy to see” …if they worship the statues, I don’t say they actually do !!!
And when I spoke about the attitude of some people with their crucifixes at home, precisely I wrote “SOME people” and I even added “not all Catholics think like that” …
I think I was clear enough !!!
But as I said, for me, the fact that SOME people consider their crucifixes as “magic objects” that can protect them is enough for me not to have one at home because I don’t want anything that could be interpreted in an ambiguous way by visitors : that was my train of thoughts…
You say that where you live people are anti-Catholics, how do you think I feel when I read the end of each of your messages ??? “I was LOST in Protestantism”… You really mean that as long as you were a Protestant you were on the way to eternal damnation ??? since you write a lot of messages, and since another person signs with a message that says something like being modern means to abandon Protestantism, it means that on this forum every second or third ( or maybe fourth ) message tells me either that I’m archaic , or eternally lost …
When I registered, I got a friendly e-mail starting with “welcome Huguenot” which, if I translate my username into English, means “Welcome French Protestant”, but the signatures of some of you make me feel very unwelcome.
Do you really intend to talk with Protestants on this forum ??? Putting us off right from the start doesn’t seem the right way to encourage us to do so …
I’ll try to find another English-speaking forum …
In France we don’t have this religious tension even if sometimes we understand wrongly each other’s faith …sounds like Northern Ireland to me …
I once was lost IN MY SINS, now I’m found IN CHRIST MY SAVIOUR !!!
Click to expand...
 
40.png
katewithak:
Please explain how Protestantism is different from Judaism. This is something I have never understood. If we reject the living Presence of Christ, and refuse any mediation through the saints or the Holy Mother, and pray only to God, how is Protestantism different from the religion of Abraham?
Click to expand...
As Protestants we don’t “reject the living presence of Christ.” We know him personally and fellowship with him daily; but we don’t believe that he is bodily present in the Eucharist.

In the religion of Israel, there was a curtain in the temple that separated God from the whole nation, except for one man: the high priest, who could only go behind that curtain once a year, and only if he had the blood of the sacrifice. When the Lord died on Calvary, that curtain was torn in two, top to bottom, signifying that we now have access to God through one high priest, Jesus Christ. We no longer use the symbolic trappings of Israelite religion because we have come into possession of what they symbolized.

This, to answer your question, is the difference between the Old Testament religion and Protestantism.
 
I would like to congratulate all of you for your comments and concerns. I hope I am not interrupting anything. I just want to mention something related to this thrade: The Face of Jesus in Art is a dvd that I just bought from ebay. In this dvd they mention how a Syrian Emperor named Hagar was cured of his illness when he received the image of the face of Christ. The image, according to this DVD, was commanded by Jesus himself when he put a piece of cloth over his face and gave to the messanger for his master to be cured with it. Sounds strange? Please if any body knows something about it let me know. I am currently conducting a research on the subject, but I have no idea where to start.
 
40.png
Kevan:
As Protestants we don’t “reject the living presence of Christ.” We know him personally and fellowship with him daily; but we don’t believe that he is bodily present in the Eucharist.

In the religion of Israel, there was a curtain in the temple that separated God from the whole nation, except for one man: the high priest, who could only go behind that curtain once a year, and only if he had the blood of the sacrifice. When the Lord died on Calvary, that curtain was torn in two, top to bottom, signifying that we now have access to God through one high priest, Jesus Christ. We no longer use the symbolic trappings of Israelite religion because we have come into possession of what they symbolized.

This, to answer your question, is the difference between the Old Testament religion and Protestantism.
Click to expand...
Again I am stumped when it comes to a difference between Protestantism and Judaism. Protestants claim the scripture literally and yet when Jesus says This is my body, this is my blood… Do this… Protestants reject the literal interpretation.As you say, you do not believe He is bodily present in the Eucharist. Please explain.
 
40.png
katewithak:
Again I am stumped when it comes to a difference between Protestantism and Judaism. Protestants claim the scripture literally and yet when Jesus says This is my body, this is my blood… Do this… Protestants reject the literal interpretation.As you say, you do not believe He is bodily present in the Eucharist. Please explain.
Click to expand...
You seem to imply that the bodily presence of Christ in the Eucharist is necessary for Christianity to differ from Judaism. Am I understanding you correctly?

If so, I just have to differ. Very little of a person is physical. Apart from marital relations, one doesn’t know or fellowship with the physical nature of another person; we interact with personalities, souls, spirits, whatever one might call it, which are non-physical. I would not be in any closer relationship to another person if I ate his earlobe.

Christ is present. I know him and he knows me. Through his blood and his name I have access into the very throne room of Heaven, something no layperson or lower priest had under the Old Testament.

This seems to me to be a big difference between the two covenants, and it is just what the letter to the Hebrews speaks about.
 
You mention that nothing but marital relations depends on what is physical, but remember we the Church are called to be married to Christ. He is the bridegroom we are the bride.
Secondly, Christ tells us that his body and blood are spiritual food, not just physical. It is physically in the bread and wine, just as our souls physicaly reside in our bodies though they are spiritual. We are souls. And we are humans. The bread is Jesus, and it is bread. Which aspect of the bread holds the meaning of life, being able to discern what is Jesus? The Jesus part of the bread. The Eucharist. We eat it and it resides in us. It is literal, and once you realise this you must become Catholic to fulfill what he calls us to do: eat of His body and blood.
Do you need to do this to get to heaven? Well, I wouldn’t risk not doing it. Also, there are degrees of heaven even once we get there, and there is Purgatory for many before we do. So it is not always a question of “I can get to heaven as a Protestant without fulfilling what Jesus said about believing in him and eating His flesh and drinking His blood!” There are degrees between 1 and 360, and many more between the deepest pits of Hell and the highest regions of Heaven. So let us not be minimalists, whereas many times discussions like this tend to be.
Minimalists would claim I am condeming a believer for not accepting one doctrine. No, I am proclaiming the Gospel, and leaving the condeming to God. I have faith in His mercy, and think Protestants can make it to Heaven. But God calls everyone to the Church. To whom is given more, more is expected. Youve been given a calling. By me and by others more close to you in your life. You are expected to answer.
To whom more is given more is expected. So why would anyone want to be given more? That is a question you must answer before you join the Church because EVERYTHING holy you are hungry to be given, can be given within the Church. Catholics must be warned that more is expected of them.
Your free will is now, and it might end tommorow with a heart attack. Now is when you have choices to make.
The Bible tells us that even once we are forgiven, we must pay for sins before we enter heaven. Unless you are perfect, you can not enter heaven. Purgatory makes you perfect, and I doubt it is fun since Jesus tells us to avoid it.
I consider it a sin to be given the gift of the gospel, and even be told by believing Catholics that what the Gospel repeats over and over is true (the Body and Blood of Christ in the bread and wine) and still reject it. It is an incomplete belief in Jesus if you openly reject his Body and Blood. He said it over and over for a reason. He doesn’t repeat Himself often.
Patrick
 
Remember that I was responding to Kate’s idea (as I understand it) that Protestantism seems to present no advancement over Old Testament religion.

In fact, I would say that Catholicism retains more continuity with the pre-Christian forms and rituals than does Protestantism.

Patrick, your last paragraph pretty much equates the gospel and the Eucharist: to receive the Eucharist is to receive the gospel. As a Fundamentalist, I would say that the gospel (“gud spiel” or “good news”) is the message that Christ died for sins and rose again and “whosoever believeth is justified of all things.” The gospel cannot be received in a sacrament, but is received in a spiritual transaction between the soul and God. Those who complete this transaction are born again with a new heart and a new life.

On the other hand, the Christian world is littered with folks who go through the sacraments (Catholic and Protestant), but are still lost in their sins.
 
40.png
Kevan:
You seem to imply that the bodily presence of Christ in the Eucharist is necessary for Christianity to differ from Judaism. Am I understanding you correctly?

If so, I just have to differ. Very little of a person is physical. Apart from marital relations, one doesn’t know or fellowship with the physical nature of another person; we interact with personalities, souls, spirits, whatever one might call it, which are non-physical. I would not be in any closer relationship to another person if I ate his earlobe.

Christ is present. I know him and he knows me. Through his blood and his name I have access into the very throne room of Heaven, something no layperson or lower priest had under the Old Testament.

This seems to me to be a big difference between the two covenants, and it is just what the letter to the Hebrews speaks about.
Click to expand...
Actually, I wasn’t going into anything so esoteric. I was discussing literal vs. literal translations. My claim is that the Catholic Church takes the words of Jesus absolutely literally when it comes to the Body and Blood, while protestant/fundamentalist groups who claim literal interpretations reject the wine and bread as a literal statement and claim it only to be symbolic. Why should literalists take all else in the Gospel literally and then reject the Last Supper in a literal form? I know why the first disciples did: many ran off for they viewed this as cannibalism, but why literalists of today?
 
40.png
katewithak:
Actually, I wasn’t going into anything so esoteric. I was discussing literal vs. literal translations.
Click to expand...
So when you asked “How is Protestantism different from the religion of Abraham?” and later wrote “Again I am stumped when it comes to a difference between Protestantism and Judaism,” you were actually wondering why a Fundamentalist doesn’t take the body & blood passage literally? To be honest, I’m stymied in the attempt to see any connection between the two ideas.

If you’re interested in debating the doctrine of transubstantiation, I’m not; so I’ll decline the offer. But if you’re truly wondering what’s on our minds, I’ll give you a simple answer:

All believers in literal interpretation admit that the Bible is replete with non-literal expressions. Whether or not a given expression is intended literally must be decided by the context: both the immediate context and the greater context (historical situation, entire Bible, etc.). If a literal interpretation runs into insurmountable difficulties, the non-literal interpretation prevails.

Weighing these factors, we believe that the Lord intended his words figuratively.

And, as I said, I’m not interested in the topic presently. Those who are might refer back to the fifty previous threads where it was repeatedly beaten to death.
 
40.png
Kevan:
So when you asked “How is Protestantism different from the religion of Abraham?” and later wrote “Again I am stumped when it comes to a difference between Protestantism and Judaism,” you were actually wondering why a Fundamentalist doesn’t take the body & blood passage literally? To be honest, I’m stymied in the attempt to see any connection between the two ideas.

If you’re interested in debating the doctrine of transubstantiation, I’m not; so I’ll decline the offer. But if you’re truly wondering what’s on our minds, I’ll give you a simple answer:

All believers in literal interpretation admit that the Bible is replete with non-literal expressions. Whether or not a given expression is intended literally must be decided by the context: both the immediate context and the greater context (historical situation, entire Bible, etc.). If a literal interpretation runs into insurmountable difficulties, the non-literal interpretation prevails.

Weighing these factors, we believe that the Lord intended his words figuratively.

And, as I said, I’m not interested in the topic presently. Those who are might refer back to the fifty previous threads where it was repeatedly beaten to death.
Click to expand...
Alright then- let’s leave the Eucharist out of it. Unfortunately, without an agreement on the literal meaning of the Body and Blood in the Eucharist, no agreement could be reached on the efficacy of mediation of the Virgin Mary, Saints. One objection to Catholicism is it’s view of the living reality of the Saints, which, I say again, is nonsense to anyone who rejects the realness of the Eucharist. This of course leaves one back in Abraham’s shoes- appealing only to God directly. A very Judaic concept. One God, no mediators.
 
I also fail to see the connection between believing in transubstantiation and believing in the intercession of saints.

But saying that “one God, no mediators” is a Judaic concept seems incorrect to me. There was an absolute system of priests under the old covenant; the layperson had little access to God compared to that of the priests. Under the new covenant the priesthood is done away and we have access into the Holy of Holies (the inner sanctum of the temple) through our high priest, Jesus Christ (Hebrews 10:19). He is the mediator between God and men (1 Tim 2:5). That is the Protestant belief, and it differs quite a bit from the Jewish belief.

But I’ll agree with you that the Catholic position departs from the Old Testament even farther than the Protestant does when it comes to the saints.

That brings up a question in my mind. In your interaction with departed saints, is it correct to say that you pray to them, or do you only ask them to pray for you? Or, stated another way, is it correct Catholic practice to ask the saints to do things for you and give things to you (or to others), or must you merely ask them to ask God to grant such favors and blessings?
 
Ricardo Gomez:
I would like to congratulate all of you for your comments and concerns. I hope I am not interrupting anything. I just want to mention something related to this thrade: The Face of Jesus in Art is a dvd that I just bought from ebay. In this dvd they mention how a Syrian Emperor named Hagar was cured of his illness when he received the image of the face of Christ. The image, according to this DVD, was commanded by Jesus himself when he put a piece of cloth over his face and gave to the messanger for his master to be cured with it. Sounds strange? Please if any body knows something about it let me know. I am currently conducting a research on the subject, but I have no idea where to start.
Click to expand...
ANY BODY?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top