Only Images God Commands

  • Thread starter Thread starter Christbearer98
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Christbearer98

Guest
So, there’s a battery of Biblical examples of God commanding graven images in the Bible, but what would you say to a Protestant who says “those are Ok because God commanded them”? Of course, God couldn’t command something intrinsically evil, but could the commandment against graven images amount to something like “Don’t make any graven images I don’t explicitly command” ???

Would love to hear your thoughts.
 
Many Protestants, of which I am still one, make the mistake of taking everything scriptural absolutely literally, instead of understanding that maybe it’s a much broader concept that’s being taught or suggested. Most of this sort of individual will not be convinced of anything we have to say to the contrary.
 
Solomon had carved images of angels on the walls of the temple, did he not? I do not believe he was commanded to do so by God.
 
The wording of the bible is that we are not to MAKE graven images. That is the stickler. The interpretation is that we are not to make images for the purpose of worship. Now, I have heard it explained once, a long time ago, that we have a misunderstanding of the word graven, which is the word commonly used in English translations. Many see graven as related to “engrave”, indeed they seem to have the same root. But a correct understanding of the word graven and how it would have been interpreted by the jews is “serious”, as in images intended to be worshipped. (This is by memory, I might have a couple of details wrong)
 
So like, you shouldn’t make something in order to worship that item, but a crucifix is ok as you are directing your adoration to Jesus which t depicts ?
 
That is exactly right. We do not worship a cruxifix, we use it to help us focus on Jesus’s suffering, His suffering is not then just some words we have read in the Bible, but it is represented to us in art and immediately in our mind.

ETA: I really like your example. Although protestants read the Bible all the time, I do not believe they have as strong of mental image of Christ’s death as we do, for the simple fact that they do not see it depicted as often. I have had this discussion with a good friend who is a fundamentalist protestant and he concurred, somewhat.
 
Last edited:
You shall not make for yourself an idolc or a likeness of anything* in the heavens above or on the earth below or in the waters beneath the earth;5you shall not bow down before them or serve them.d

Exodus chapter 20. It is about making idols, not artwork.
 
YEs, that was my point, the words “graven image” in Deuteronomy can exactly be interpreted as the word idol (ie object to be worshiped).
 
Last edited:
Actually, God gave the plan to David who gave the plan to Samuel. I was just wondering if anyone had a 100% knock down argument against it
 
But I do not recall the God’s plan giving the details of the carved images on the walls. I will look that up this evening.
 
Last edited:
tafan2 said:
Solomon had carved images of angels on the walls of the temple, did he not? I do not believe he was commanded to do so by God.
Click to expand...
Solomon received the plans for the Temple from his father David. 1 Chronicles 28:19 seems to suggest that at least some of its images in the Temple, such as the two large cherubim statues, were commanded by God:
All this he made clear by the writing from the hand of the Lord concerning it, all the work to be done according to the plan.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
So, rereading it in further detail, it seems like the instructions to Samuel from David from (at least partially) God in 1 Chronicles 28:11-19 are pretty detailed but they do not mention oxen, lions, palm trees, or pomegranates, but they do mention cherubim. I’m unsure as to whether to author intended it to be an entirely comprehensive list, or just wanted to indicate that Solomon was instructed on every detail of the Temple without naming them all.

If it is a complete list, then it would be 100% certain that Solomon made it by his own volition. But, if it is (or at least could be) that the author wanted to imply that the entirety of the Temple’s design came from David, then it is possible to squeeze this interpretation out of the text.

My goal is to have a fully demonstrative argument against the “graven images” objection.
  1. God told Solomon He would abide in Israel if he did not break a commandment.
  2. If Solomon, in making images of cherubim, palm trees, etc, without explicit command to do so is breaking a commandment, then God would not abide in Israel.
  3. God abides in the Temple in Israel after Solomon makes such imagery.
    C. Therefore, making images (even when not explicitly commanded by God) is not breaking a commandment.
I emphasize God’s commandment here because, when shown the instructions for the Ark included Cherubim, a fundamentalist could argue that images are only evil when God doesn’t command it.
 
tafan2 said:
…
Click to expand...
Literally, it is not just graven image but any likeness, which would literally include little molded plastic dinosaur toys sold at the grocery store for children to play with.

Exodus 20:4 (KJV):
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
Click to expand...
 
Exactly, its ridiculous, but some people would sooner throw out all their toys and accept that their government is full of sin for demanding photo-ID than change their biblical interpretation.
 
As interesting is to bring up the bronze serpent. Numbers chapter 21

So Moses prayed for the people,8 and the LORD said to Moses: Make a seraph and mount it on a pole, and everyone who has been bitten will look at it and recover.*9 Accordingly Moses made a bronze serpent* and mounted it on a pole, and whenever the serpent bit someone, the person looked at the bronze serpent and recovered.f
 
Christbearer98 said:
Exactly, its ridiculous, but some people would sooner throw out all their toys and accept that their government is full of sin for demanding photo-ID than change their biblical interpretation.
Click to expand...
It would mean every hewn or carved image ( peh’-sel) or likeness ( tem-oo-naw’) – but is only makes sense in reference to the rest of the statement, as a representation of some god competing with the one true God.
 
CelticWarlord said:
Many Protestants, of which I am still one, make the mistake of taking everything scriptural absolutely literally, instead of understanding that maybe it’s a much broader concept that’s being taught or suggested. Most of this sort of individual will not be convinced of anything we have to say to the contrary.
Click to expand...
And yet most of their churches have a cross. I’ve never asked a Protestant to explain that.
 
What troubles me is the bowing part since that’s usually how people venerate.
 
Bowing also how gentlemen in polite society ask a woman to dance, give honor to their monarch, how a performer thanks the audience for their applause.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top