D
Derrickdcosta
Guest
There is an Statue of Marble very similar to the attachment in the main Cathedral in Goa of which I have a replica in my own home. The image is very touching but I have little knowledge of its history.
- Status
O
OneForTruth
Guest
That is a stretch and does not address my posting…
Where did the CC get the “command” to create the countless images that people kneel in front of when praying? That is the question! It was when they created images that were not commanded when they got in trouble.
These can bring a stumbling block to the weak who begin to get comfort from these images/statues - as if they can offer protection by being hung from a rear view mirror, stuck to their dash board, hung on the refrigerator, put on a wall…etc. And although they may never bow to such things, they may be doing so in their hearts.
H
Hellisreal
Guest
Thanks for the post of this.
I have never seen this before.
E
exiled
Guest
“These can bring a stumbling block to the weak who begin to get comfort from these images/statues - as if they can offer protection by being hung from a rear view mirror, stuck to their dash board, hung on the refrigerator, put on a wall…etc. And although they may never bow to such things, they may be doing so in their hearts.”
“Where did the CC get the “command” to create the countless images that people kneel in front of when praying? That is the question! It was when they created images that were not commanded when they got in trouble.”
You have determined that for some the images can be stumbling blocks to Truth. The same must therefore be said of the Bible itself, if people bow to it “in their hearts”. The book itself is not a deity, and if you would kindly point out the passage recorded in Scripture where Christ “commanded” that a book ever be written, I would be grateful.
So I think you are now able to connect the dots. It is “commanded” in the same place the “command” to write the Bible can be found.
And, as has been addressed on countless threads, how do you suppose the illiterate of antiquity learned the Gospel?
“Where did the CC get the “command” to create the countless images that people kneel in front of when praying? That is the question! It was when they created images that were not commanded when they got in trouble.”
You have determined that for some the images can be stumbling blocks to Truth. The same must therefore be said of the Bible itself, if people bow to it “in their hearts”. The book itself is not a deity, and if you would kindly point out the passage recorded in Scripture where Christ “commanded” that a book ever be written, I would be grateful.
So I think you are now able to connect the dots. It is “commanded” in the same place the “command” to write the Bible can be found.
And, as has been addressed on countless threads, how do you suppose the illiterate of antiquity learned the Gospel?
D
drforjc
Guest
Here is a Byzantine one
catholicfreeshipping.com/Products/cfs_holtrinic.html
scroll down on this site for a couple of Western depictions (at the bottom under “other”
scborromeo.org/gallery.htm
O
OneForTruth
Guest
Interesting how you compare the Bible (the word of God) with images. God’s word existed before the world was and God spoke through those prophets and writers…
2Pe 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
2Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God (God-breathed), and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
Faith also comes by hearing…
Romans 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
It is by hearing and not necessarily by reading (which is hearing in a way).
Your posts are a desperate attempt to escape the reality that the CC was never commanded to make the millions of images that it has made…
V
VociMike
Guest
To add a bit to this, I’m not even sure that the Jews understood God to be a Person (much less three Persons, of course). But we now know that God the Father is indeed a Person, and thus there is no error committed in portraying him as a person, even if such a portrayal (as in any portrayal) does not communicate the fullness of God.
E
exiled
Guest
And you have not pointed out where Christ commanded a book be written.
The word of God came by holy men, yet the Word of God came through…?
Jesus Christ is** the **Word of God that existed before the world. The Bible is a holy book, no doubt, but incomparable to Christ Himself.
Back to the point of images, though. Do you, or do you not, bow your head while holding the Sacred Scriptures? Do you, or do you not, take better care of that book than you do others? If you do then you risk being accused of worshiping a graven image as you have accused us of doing.
You’ve been given ample evidence by many posts here that show that the images themselves are not the error, it is the worship of those images, which Catholic do not do.
E
exiled
Guest
And you have not pointed out where Christ commanded a book be written.
The word of God came by holy men, yet the Word of God came through…?
Jesus Christ is** the **Word of God that existed before the world. The Bible is a holy book, no doubt, but incomparable to Christ Himself.
Back to the point of images, though. Do you, or do you not, bow your head while holding the Sacred Scriptures? Do you, or do you not, take better care of that book than you do others? If you do then you risk being accused of worshiping a graven image as you have accused us of doing.
You’ve been given ample evidence by many posts here that show that the images themselves are not the error, it is the worship of those images, which Catholic do not do.
E
exiled
Guest
And you have not pointed out where Christ commanded a book be written.
The word of God came by holy men, yet the Word of God came through…?
Jesus Christ is** the **Word of God that existed before the world. The Bible is a holy book, no doubt, but incomparable to Christ Himself.
Back to the point of images, though. Do you, or do you not, bow your head while holding the Sacred Scriptures? Do you, or do you not, take better care of that book than you do others? If you do then you risk being accused of worshiping a graven image as you have accused us of doing.
You’ve been given ample evidence by many posts here that show that the images themselves are not the error, it is the worship of those images, which Catholic do not do.
A
aj830
Guest
So are you saying for example, the Crucifixion of Christ, cannot be depicted in artwork to further help people realize what Christ had done for them? Catholics are not stupid. We realize statues are just plaster and concrete but they can help us in depicting the life of Christ or a person who followed Christ.
V
VociMike
Guest
But you realize, it’s not only Catholics who are stupid, but the Eastern Orthodox too. Their churches are filled with icons. So the entire Christian Church was stupid until the sixteenth century when some Protestants opened up their bibles and said “hey look, no images!” No Christian had ever actually read the Old Testament before then, you see.
O
OneForTruth
Guest
Thank you for all your help.
J
Jaime
Guest
Thanks for the reply. But what about images of things in general that are not necessarily religious? For example, would all those works of art that depict landscapes, the human figure, etc. be considered breaking the commandment? What I noticed is that the NAB’s translation specifically refers to idolatry stating
“You shall not carve idols for yourselves in the shape of anything in the sky above or on the earth below or in the waters beneath the earth; you shall not bow down before them or worship them. For I, the LORD, your God, am a jealous God, inflicting punishment for their fathers’ wickedness on the children of those who hate me, down to the third and fourth generation; but bestowing mercy down to the thousandth generation, on the children of those who love me and keep my commandments.”
On the other hand the Catholic RSV states
“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; 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 upon the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate Me, but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love Me and keep My commandments.”
The Catholic RSV’s translation makes me wonder whether making any kind of art that is non-religious is indeed breaking the second commandment. It also makes me think about all those artists during the Renaissance, Baroque, as well as the Romantic periods of art who painted both Christian images as well as pagan images during their lifetimes. I can refer to William Adolphe Bouguereau, John William Waterhouse, Rembrandt, Botticelli, Velazquez, and Titian for examples. All painted pagan representations and Christian representations. I believe that Botticelli even eventually burned much of his work by the end of his life since he bore the guilt of making those pagan images.
I have come to conclude that artists have the responsibility of choosing whether to paint images that are sacreligious or images that serve towards means of worship to God and only God. As a painter myself (I do not like being called an artist) I believe that I must be careful about the subjects I am expressing in my work. Otherwise I would just be spreading a potentially sinful message to the viewers and this would ultimately be my fault. I have been associated with the world of art for many years and have come to realize that many artists spread messages that are useless or even contradictory to the Gospel. If the artists I previously referred to really cared about spreading the Word of God through their work, then they would have never painted pagan images. This to me is sinful since it is a representation of a false religion against God and can even be used (and was used) as means of worship for pagans. I am curious as to what people think about art that is non-religious. What is the second commandment’s stance regarding such work that represents things such as landscapes, the human figure, etc.?
Finally, if anybody can provide the most accurate translation of Exodus 20:4 directly from the Hebrew/Greek to English it would be very useful.
L
ltravis
Guest
No fears now Jaime, we have already gotten to the answer, I believe. I, and others, have demonstrated how the prohibition against images of Christ cannot be against the making or them for its own sake, and thus we can look further into the context to find the real purpose of the commandment. That real purpose was that we should not treat our creations as actual gods themselves in the place of the true God (idolatry). We are simply not to idolize holy pictures or secular creations and art. Now knowing that, we can be secure that any art for art’s sake is not a problem - unless of course the artwork itself is worshiped as a god.
LT
Oh, and not that I think you need it now, here is a hebrew>english and greek>english interlinear bible source:
scripture4all.org/
E
exiled
Guest
What a thrill!
You put forth a case against images, many responded, and we have an acceptance ( if not agreement) of the Catholic position!
It is a joy to come across a reasonable person who does not keep throwing nonsensical blather!
You have my admiration.
P
pprimeau1976
Guest
This could be a bad translation. To the original writer, this may have been all one idea. An alternate translation may beThou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness of any thing that is in Heaven above, or in the earth beneath, nor of those things that are in the waters under the earth. 5 Thou shalt not adore them, nor serve them
I am still wondering about the most accurate translation of this passage…
Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven thing…in order to adore them or serve them.
If the translation you gave were the law, then a duckhunter would be sinning when he uses a decoy.
Z
Zooey
Guest
You know, this reminds me of something that happened when I was a little girl growing up in the Free Methodist Church…
We were invited to the pastor’s home for Sunday dinner, and when we walked in, we were taking our coats off. I set down my Bible with the church bulletin on top of it…You could have heard the pastor’s mother-in-law
screeching from 6 counties away:“Get that off the Bible!! Get it off!! It’s sacrilege!!! It’s blasphemy!! Get it off, get it off!!! You monstrous child, you will go to** hell** for that!! Ohhhh… My medicine, I need my medicne!! My heart,my heart!! Make her take that off the precious Bible, how** dare** she do that in my house, ohhhh…ohhhhh…Is it a King James? It’s a King James, isn’t it?? We’ll all go to hell, for such a** blasphemy** against that King James Bible!!!”
We didn’t stay. My grandmother said, “I think that woman has completely lost her marbles. We can eat our own food at home”, and we left.
Don’t anybody ever try to tell me, that there aren’t people who worship their Bibles as an idol. Especially, if you could have seen her daughter , scurrying around, getting a little bitty piece of paper off of a Bible, muttering under her breath, about “no respect”.
Mind you, I think the whole bunch of them in that family were a little
squirrelly…
J
Jaime
Guest
Agreed.No fears now Jaime, we have already gotten to the answer, I believe. I, and others, have demonstrated how the prohibition against images of Christ cannot be against the making or them for its own sake, and thus we can look further into the context to find the real purpose of the commandment. That real purpose was that we should not treat our creations as actual gods themselves in the place of the true God (idolatry). We are simply not to idolize holy pictures or secular creations and art. Now knowing that, we can be secure that any art for art’s sake is not a problem - unless of course the artwork itself is worshiped as a god.
LT
Oh, and not that I think you need it now, here is a hebrew>english and greek>english interlinear bible source:
scripture4all.org/
I still stick to my conclusion, however, that the making of certain themes in art is indeed sinful such as those depicting pagan imagery due to its potential influence on the viewers. There are still people today that embrace pagan ideas or the pagan religion as a whole and such imagery will only work to the advantage of such confused minds by means of promotion, example, and worship for their false beliefs. Just look at so much of the youth today bearing pentagrams on their necks with anti-Christian pictures on their t-shirts. They are easily influenced by imagery as well as rebellion and the evil one knows how to deceive them by using paganism and satanism through means that are most accessible to them which are primarily imagery and music. This is a problem that must be addressed as so few take the time to look at it seriously. Imagery has a huge impact on society and more and more youth are recognizing pictures of Ronald McDonald before they are able to recognize a picture of Jesus Christ. Now that, my friends, is an abomination. Overall, yes, imagery is not necessarily sacriligious unless it is idolized, yet, at the same time, people must recognize just how big of an impact image has on modern society. It is a very complex issue, but I suppose that is a whole other subject.
L
ltravis
Guest
I agree 100% with all you said. Really, every talent we have is from God and I think should bear witness to (and certainly not detract from) his glory. This has been a great conversation; I hope it has helped you as much as it has helped meAgreed.
LT
- Status