No graven images?

[tobias]

Understandable. But again, what difference does the numbering division make? So long as the meaning remains and so long as no commands are omitted? Not really. I think the two commandments certainly are closely related and perhaps #2 can fit w/in #1, but only if it didn’t exclude the part about graven images. I don’t think that passage should be excluded whether you view it as a seperate command or not. That is the main issue.

OK, but there is inconsistency in your take. For not once did you mention a problem with the abbreviated form of the commands to ‘remember the sabbath day and keep it holy’ and ‘Honor your mother and father’. Why? Because we all know the jist of the command is understood in the 1st line and whether it is all read or not needs to be expounded upon (especially to children).

Yes, I am aware of (and agree with) that understanding also, and of the outlines for a good examination of conscience. But I still don’t think omitting the the passages about making graven images etc… is wise - especially since that type of idolatry is still alive and well today. I think God had a purpose for it being there and it’s not up to us to omit it.

Yes, and God had a purp[ose for telling the Israelites how to treat their servants. That does not mean it is OK to have servants as long as you do it in accord with the OT, for having full knowledge and revelation of the dignity of the human person would make it sinful.

Right. I understand now what you mean. I can understand why the church would understand it that way in light of the teachings on submission and headship in the NT. I don’t have a problem with the division, or numbering - only the omittance.

I’m glad we got that out of the way.
So, just to be clear and consistent, Since the scriptures are to be read every day at mass and divded up into a 3 year cycle so that the whole Scripture is read, that would make the Catholic Church in error for omiting the levitical sacrificial system and the commands explicitly laid out for the Jewish people in order to stay His chosen people in the land He gave them?

Think about it though. A commandment against graven images on graven tablets of stone that was an established covevant with His people. Didn’t God just confuse His chosen people?

 

[WatchfulPilgrim]

This is odd, but true. Sure enough, God used simple man to write Scripture, protecting those men from writing error.
But your acceptance of what we today call the Bible is unfounded, based upon your questioning of authority.

Why? I said God could use anyone to preserve His word. Does that mean who He chooses will remain faithful? King David did not remain faithful to God. Neither did Judas.

You accept the authority of the Church to declare the canon of Scripture.

No - I accept that God can use anyone (whether or not they are authoritative later on) to declare the canon of Scripture.

You state everything teaching you believe must be found in Scripture.

All sacred teaching should be found in Scripture, yes.

You believe in the canon of Scripture.

Yes.

The canon of Scripture is not found in Scripture.

No, but the promise to preserve God’s word Was in Scripture.

Most of Scripture does not self-identify as Scripture.

Well, I’ve seen different opinions, but it doesn’t matter if it does or not. God made inspired Scripture recognizable to those who compiled it - an assumption based on God’s promise to preserve His word. It doesn’t matter how it was done.

Either you contradict your standard by accepting an extra-Biblical teaching (the canon of Scripture, or you start from scratch and make sure the canon was declared correctly.
Is that Biblical?

Yes, it is Biblical that Satan knows Scripture:

6And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.

 

[cfrancis]

Why? I said God could use anyone to preserve His word. Does that mean who He chooses will remain faithful? King David did not remain faithful to God. Neither did Judas.

You have quite a conundrum then. You appear to be saying you question the Catholic Church’s authority on some issues.
Yet you trust it’s authority to declare the canon, even though the books we recognize as Scripture do not, for the vast majority, identify themselves as Scripture.
OK.
We agree sinful man can be preserved from error when protected by the Holy Spirit; else, we would not have Scripture.
But Matthew, for example, doesn’t tell us he’s inspired and or protected, nor doe she identify what he writes as Scripture.

All sacred teaching should be found in Scripture, yes.

Except the canon of Scripture, which is the basis of your statement. So your reasoning sounds like:
All sacred teaching should be found in Scripture except that which tells us what is Scripture.

No, but the promise to preserve God’s word Was in Scripture.

How do you know that what tells us God will preserve His Word is Scripture? We’re back to an extra-Biblical teaching.

Well, I’ve seen different opinions, but it doesn’t matter if it does or not.

I’ve yet to see many of the books of Scripture self-identify.

God made inspired Scripture recognizable to those who compiled it - an assumption based on God’s promise to preserve His word. It doesn’t matter how it was done

That’s convenient and a cop-out.

Yes, it is Biblical that Satan knows Scripture:

You cited:

And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.

You and I know Satan is quoting Scripture, for the Church has told us what is Scripture. Yet Satan does not mention that what he is quoting is Scripture.

If you believe God preserved the Church from error when it declared the canon, why do you doubt that protection for other sacred teaching?

 

[Thing]

WatchfulPilgrim:

Heh, I trust God preserved His word like He promised He would

God did not promise to preserve His word, rather, He promised to preserve His Church - until the end of time.

 

[benedictus2]

God did not promise to preserve His word, rather, He promised to preserve His Church - until the end of time.

Good one!

 

[RNRobert]

The thing I question is the use of images like statues in particular when they are paraded around as if they were living people, and intentionally (not accidentally like in the case of your bed during nightly prayers) posturing oneself in front of them to pray, lighting candles before them and burning incense before them, talking to them as if they were real people… It happens - I have seen it - I know the church is aware of it - we’ve all seen the pilgrim statue of Fatima on TV and in newspapers… You can call these people crazy if you want to. I think it is the result of being encouraged to use them coupled with the mystical phenomenon we see and hear about pertaining to images. People hear about that and probably think that ALL Catholic statues are like that. And even if they WERE all miraculous, God doesn’t want us to worship them - that is clear from the example of the serpent.

The Jews paraded the Ark of the Covenant around Jericho. I don’t recall anyone bowing down to the angels carved on it.

God told them previously NOT to worship graven images. They disobeyed. The serpent was destroyed.You’ve lost me as to why you think I contradicted myself. I said I worry that some people fall into idolatry from what I have observed that looks like idolatry.

If I understand you correctly, you seem to thing we should do away with statues simply because some people (not most, or many, but SOME) may be prone to idolatry. Again, it has been said by me (and others here) that just because something is abused doesn’t detract from it’s usefulness.

 

[Tsuwano]

I didn’t say all statues are misused. I said I think it is unwise to encourage their use b/c of the commandment and b/c of the example we have for our benefit laid forth in the OT.

Yes, but by this reasoning we should never drive cars because there are automobile accidents. We should never have surgery because some people die on operating tables. We should never eat food because some people choke. I think it is better to educate people about their faith and how some items, such as statues or bibles, can be misused, in order to help them develope a mature faith. There are other graven images, such as watches or money, that are more dangerous to the faithful than a statue in a church. A person who is enslaved to time to the point that he never feels able to sit and pray or spend moments with his family is in more danger than a person who lights a candle in a church. A person who loves money more than the Lord is worshiping a more insiduous idol than a person who wears a cross around her neck.

 

[jesusasks]

Yes, but by this reasoning we should never drive cars because there are automobile accidents. We should never have surgery because some people die on operating tables. We should never eat food because some people choke. I think it is better to educate people about their faith and how some items, such as statues or bibles, can be misused, in order to help them develope a mature faith. There are other graven images, such as watches or money, that are more dangerous to the faithful than a statue in a church. A person who is enslaved to time to the point that he never feels able to sit and pray or spend moments with his family is in more danger than a person who lights a candle in a church. A person who loves money more than the Lord is worshiping a more insiduous idol than a person who wears a cross around her neck.

And furthermore, if someone idolizes food or water, we cannot eat or drink.

How about just a common sense straightforward interpretation - that we shall not make objects substitutes for God and worship them in his place? Some religions take that to mean more than others.

Rather than ban items by name, we should ban behavior that is sinful. The golden cow was an idol because people worshipped it. But a golden buffalo was money because it was exclusively used as currency by the US back during the gold standard.

God did not give commandments so they could be debated by sages and Pharisees for thousands of years, whereupon the people suddenly become enlightened by one sage and then rejoice at their new-found righteousness. The commandments are meant to be a simple set of rules any person can understand.

 

[jesusasks]

Ultimately, what is a graven image to one group is not to another. To believe otherwise is to hold the Taliban’s view that we should demolish thousand year old statues of Buddha in a country that is now 100% Muslim. Just because you gain possession of an item that was once an idol does not make it an idol.

Some religious groups ban items that are potential idols, items that frequently become idols. We can see that logic taken to its extreme in Islam. Portraits of Mohammad are forbidden and will even incite murder. In some sects, women are covered head toe to prevent the possibility of adultery. Rape victims are put to death to discourage adultery. And so on.

It’s worth noting that the OT also instructs you to put a woman to death, if she claims she was raped but she was not heard crying out for help in the city.

 

[savedsinner]

In the time that the Old Testament was written there was a serioud widespread problem with idolatry.
The people actually though the idols were gods, and they would worship them as a god.
I can’t remember the exact book chapter and verse, but remember to when they put the ark of the covenant in the same room with the idols, and they would find the idols knocked down and broken each morning. God was showing them that He is the only God, that those idols were not gods at all but mere pieces of wood silver and gold.

Catholics do not think the statues are gods.

This (idolatry) is a very serious sin, and the Catholic church is very clear that it is a sin.

If there is any Catholic who thinks that any statue is a god, then he or she is in idolatry, and is going against the teachings of the bible and the church.

Here is what the Catechism says:

Idolatry

2112 The first commandment condemns polytheism. It requires man neither to believe in, nor to venerate, other divinities than the one true God. Scripture constantly recalls this rejection of “idols, [of] silver and gold, the work of men’s hands. They have mouths, but do not speak; eyes, but do not see.” These empty idols make their worshippers empty: “Those who make them are like them; so are all who trust in them.” God, however, is the “living God” who gives life and intervenes in history.

2113 Idolatry not only refers to false pagan worship. It remains a constant temptation to faith. Idolatry consists in divinizing what is not God. Man commits idolatry whenever he honors and reveres a creature in place of God, whether this be gods or demons (for example, satanism), power, pleasure, race, ancestors, the state, money, etc. Jesus says, “You cannot serve God and mammon.” Many martyrs died for not adoring “the Beast” refusing even to simulate such worship. Idolatry rejects the unique Lordship of God; it is therefore incompatible with communion with God.

2114 Human life finds its unity in the adoration of the one God. The commandment to worship the Lord alone integrates man and saves him from an endless disintegration. Idolatry is a perversion of man’s innate religious sense. An idolater is someone who “transfers his indestructible notion of God to anything other than God.”

WatchfulPilgrim, if you are afraid that praying to Mary or the Saints in front of a statue is idolatry, then I would recommend you don’t do it.
Remember what St. Paul had to say about people with a weak faith -

Romans 14:1-23 (New International Version)

1Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters. 2One man’s faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. 3The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him. 4Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.

5One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7For none of us lives to himself alone and none of us dies to himself alone. 8If we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord.

9For this very reason, Christ died and returned to life so that he might be the Lord of both the dead and the living. 10You, then, why do you judge your brother? Or why do you look down on your brother? For we will all stand before God’s judgment seat. 11It is written:
" ‘As surely as I live,’ says the Lord,
‘every knee will bow before me;
every tongue will confess to God.’ "[a] 12So then, each of us will give an account of himself to God.

13Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother’s way. 14As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food** is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean. 15If your brother is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died. 16Do not allow what you consider good to be spoken of as evil. 17For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, 18because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by men.

19Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification. 20Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. 21It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother to fall.

22So whatever you believe about these things keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the man who does not condemn himself by what he approves. 23But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin.**

 

[Tsuwano]

Savedsinner, thank you for this very useful post, especially the verses from Paul. It has helped clarify some things for me.

 

[benedictus2]

Nope. I never owned a Bible until after my confirmation. 8 years of Catholic school and we did not use Bibles at all. This was immediately proceeding VII - is it any wonder?

I am a cradle Catholic and owned only a children’s Bible until I was at University and did some units in Theology.

But you know what, from day one, when I could attend Mass, I knew what the Bible contained. And where did I learn all that?

At Mass. At Mass we have one reading from the Old testament followed by the Psalms, then another reading from the Letters (Paul, John, James, etc) then the highlight of the Liturgy of the Word is a reading from the Gospels and an exposition of the readings in the Homily.

And I was listening to them from even before my confirmation. Even before I was confirmed Iknew about the flood, Abraham and Isaac, the Prodigal Son, the Last Supper, the Passion of Christ, etc. and all these only from going to Sunday Mass.

So when a former Catholic says to me they did not know the Bible, the problem lies squarely with them.

What did they do at Mass? Sleep?

**So the problem was with you. **As they say, you can bring a horse to water, but you cannot make it drink.

In your current church on a Sunday, how many books of the Bible do you go through.

In the the Catholic Church, even if you do not own a Bible, if you attend daily Mass, you would have heard the entire Bible proclaimed in 3 years.

And that was how the Word of God was originally passed on to the people. By proclamation, because hundreds of years ago, the printing press was not even invented so people cannot have their own copy of the Bible.

But even then, people were being evangelized with the Word of God through the celebration of the Mass.

And one last thing, the Bible is a Catholic Book. The Catholic Church came first then Scripture was written, and it was written within the bossom of the Catholic Church.

 

[runandsew]

Nope. I never owned a Bible until after my confirmation. 8 years of Catholic school and we did not use Bibles at all. This was immediately proceeding VII - is it any wonder? .

Didn’t you pay attention at Mass, or were you coloring in the children’s bulletin, or looking for gum stuck under the pews?
You know that the readings that are found in the Missal are actually taken from the bible.

Exodus 20:1-17 is read every third Sunday of Lent on cycle B.
The next time it will be read is Sunday March 15, 2009.

 

[Subrosa]

I never owned a Bible until after my confirmation. 8 years of Catholic school and we did not use Bibles at all. This was immediately proceeding VII - is it any wonder? I don’t think I was ever taught the Real Presence in the Eucharist either. I was SHOCKED to learn of this teaching from EWTN in my 20s.

Hi WP -

I’ve been reading these posts with sincere interest. It seems as though you were let astray by the Catholic system of training, as many were, including myself. Indeed this was a problem addressed by the Council.

Consider, though: Is the fact that you had no Bible or a complete understanding of the Eucharist the responsibility of the Church, catechists, or your parents? Is it all of the above? A question a poster asked earlier is also relevent - did you not pay attention in church on Sundays? Did you squirm in your seat, anxious to get out? If you say yes, feel free to join the club which includes many a protestant.

I would advocate that the responsibility lies with all mentioned. The responsibility does not sit wholey with the church. We all certainly are as accountable as they are.

Scripture is read daily in the Catholic Church. The Council also addressed this issue by making MORE scripture available to the faithful on a cyclical basis. Indeed, there isn’t a church in existence that has more scripture available to it’s people.

The construction of the serpent was mandated by God for a specific purpose. Once its usefulness was over the Israelites starting worshipping it. And then it was destroyed. You all keep saying it: “The serpent was destroyed” but you aren’t getting it. The construction of Catholic graven images is not mandated by God. It has no purpose except for the ones the CC says it has (as an aid to worship). There are some who are worshipping them. They are not being removed. THIS is the difference.

Something that you have missed - to use your words - you are not getting it. What you are overlooking is the authority that Christ gave to the Church, and not just the Roman Catholic Church, but to all that existed then. For instance the Orthodox and the Anthochians also venerate images. The issue of graven images was addressed in the year A.D 787 at the 7th Ecumenical Council in exersize of it’s authority (Acts chapter 15) . This controversy was heated even then. Hot to the point that groups would enter into church buildings and destroy all the images that where within.

Here is an Orthodox website that summerizes what the council said…goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article8071.asp

Here is a more comprehensive set of documents…ewtn.com/library/PATRISTC/PII14-10.TXT

The holy bishops who attended the council in A.D. 787 had a very good understanding of the images in churches.

That they were simple representations is profoundly addressed. That they were to be addressed as such is also profound. That they were to be venerated is decreed and that such veneration is NOT to be directed toward the image itself, but to the person which the image represents. explicitly, the council says that the images ARE NOT TO BE WORSHIPPED.

Indeed, if we have a look at history we see that it was none other than Luke who is credited as being the first iconographer. (Gospel of Luke, Acts of the Apostles).

The church at the time of the 7th Ecumenical Council held that to reject the holy icons was tantamount to rejecting the humanity of Christ, a form of monophysitism, a known heresy.

Iconography was given to us by Christ Himself when He gave His image to the lady we know as Veronica. According to Tradition, this woman met Christ on the Via Delarosa as He carried the cross, took off her veil and wiped His face. As a reward for her compassion, He left an image of His face on her veil.

In other words, holy imagry is an Apostolic Tradition and comes to us directly from the Apostles, indeed Christ. Coming from Christ, we MUST understand iconography to be decreed by God Himself.

Subrosa

 

[Mintaka]

If you want to do an in-depth study of images and the Christian use of them, you really can’t do better than read St. John of Damascus (aka St. John Damascene). He was a Christian living in Muslim-occupied Syria. Meanwhile, the Christian Byzantine emperors at that time were “iconoclasts” (image-breakers), following many of the same cultural influences that had led to Islam. In the face of all this cultural pressure, he defended images of God and the saints as vital parts of Christian faith. Why? Because if it was wrong to make an image of God, God never should have made man in His image, the Son never should have been the image of the Father, and Jesus REALLY never should become man.

Oh, and the Word of God should never have been written down, of course, because writing is an image of sound. (I majored in linguistics, so that’s my absolute favorite argument.)

There’s a lot more than that, of course, and I think you’ll find the whole thing interestingly written and thought-provoking. Read and enjoy, whether or not you agree!

balamand.edu.lb/theology/Joicons1.htm

Or you can listen to it as a free audiobook:

archive.org/details/DamasceneHolyImages

Hope this helps!

 

[WatchfulPilgrim]

Hi all,

We had a baby boy this past Saturday (Oct 4th) and things have been a little crazy around here. The baby had moderate jaundice and had to be treated with phototheraphy after just a day back from the hospital and it’s been one doctor appintment and lab visit after the next since. Anyway, otherwise baby and mom are doing well

I was giving some of this (and the other thread I’m involved in) some more thought throughout the week and admit some things may have “gotten through”. Sometimes a little time off to let things soak in helps. I’ll see if I can’t respond more to some of these as things settle down around here.

Thanks~

 

[FCEGM]

Hi all,

We had a baby boy this past Saturday (Oct 4th) and things have been a little crazy around here. The baby had moderate jaundice and had to be treated with phototheraphy after just a day back from the hospital and it’s been one doctor appintment and lab visit after the next since. Anyway, otherwise baby and mom are doing well

I was giving some of this (and the other thread I’m involved in) some more thought throughout the week and admit some things may have “gotten through”. Sometimes a little time off to let things soak in helps. I’ll see if I can’t respond more to some of these as things settle down around here.

Thanks~

What happy news! God bless your baby boy. :angel1:

 

[cfrancis]

Hi all,

We had a baby boy this past Saturday (Oct 4th) and things have been a little crazy around here. The baby had moderate jaundice and had to be treated with phototheraphy after just a day back from the hospital and it’s been one doctor appintment and lab visit after the next since. Anyway, otherwise baby and mom are doing well

I was giving some of this (and the other thread I’m involved in) some more thought throughout the week and admit some things may have “gotten through”. Sometimes a little time off to let things soak in helps. I’ll see if I can’t respond more to some of these as things settle down around here.

Thanks~

God bless your baby, your wife and you! What joy on heaven and earth when a new soul is created and brought into this world!!!

 

[Tsuwano]

Hi all,

We had a baby boy this past Saturday (Oct 4th) and things have been a little crazy around here. The baby had moderate jaundice and had to be treated with phototheraphy after just a day back from the hospital and it’s been one doctor appintment and lab visit after the next since. Anyway, otherwise baby and mom are doing well

I was giving some of this (and the other thread I’m involved in) some more thought throughout the week and admit some things may have “gotten through”. Sometimes a little time off to let things soak in helps. I’ll see if I can’t respond more to some of these as things settle down around here.

Thanks~

Blessings to you and your family!

 

[RNRobert]

Hi all,

We had a baby boy this past Saturday (Oct 4th) and things have been a little crazy around here. The baby had moderate jaundice and had to be treated with phototheraphy after just a day back from the hospital and it’s been one doctor appintment and lab visit after the next since. Anyway, otherwise baby and mom are doing well

I was giving some of this (and the other thread I’m involved in) some more thought throughout the week and admit some things may have “gotten through”. Sometimes a little time off to let things soak in helps. I’ll see if I can’t respond more to some of these as things settle down around here.

Thanks~

Yes, congratulations on your baby boy!
:clapping::dancing::extrahappy::tiphat::bounce:

I guess you’ll be looking forward to some sleepless nights…
:coffeeread: