Jun 18, 2012 -- 8:51AM, bigbear6161 wrote:

Images such as paintings and sculptures allow us to contact God and the sacred realm through our senses.  The sacraments do this too.  These things, especially the sacraments notably the Holy Eucharist, are our access point to God.The commandment against graven images seems to me to be of the same ilk, similar to how some Jews do not pronounce the word "God", and that is because although signifiers like words and images are the access point, they only point us there.  They are signifiers not signified. Even our notions that there is a self underlying something, whether a person, or God, or a tree, or a chair, are only conceptual representations, attempts to reify the All. So the whole thing really deconstructs.  A zen saying fits rather well here, "the moon is fictitious."

An idol is something that is not living and as such can not save.  When we look to sacred things, it isn't the things/"images" that we are looking to...we are looking to GOD and through these things, they should hold nothing for us...and some babies may need these things...but are they worshipping the thing... or is their heart and mind on GOD?

All temporal earthly things are passing with time and use and will pass...

But we also can not and should not look upon what a man is doing externally and make a judgment...it is GOD who looks upon the inward heart and mind of the man to see if he is worshipping in spirit and truth...GOD sees what our eyes can not see...and HE knows who belongs to HIM.

I don't know anyone who is worshipping the wooden structure of the cross and yet men are accused of worshipping the wooden structure of the cross...more should contemplate the cross for it is at the cross that we are once again reminded of what we learned of from the beginning...that CHRIST died, so that what was dead, might be made alive in HIM...it is at the cross that we remember what GOD has done for us IN CHRIST.

But as to the bible and to things constructed by our hands, including the wooden cross and even as you suggested the moon, which is a created thing...the ONE over and before and above all things is the ONE whom we should be looking to and directing our prayers, supplications, praise and worship to.

Not things that are simply things...

Things do not allow us to make contact with GOD...and it is not with things that we should try to make contact with GOD...but with prayer and a contrite and pure heart...and keep praying...

and...if today you hear HIS VOICE...harden not your heart...

Jun 16, 2012 -- 7:34PM, koolpoi wrote:

In another thread mainecaptain raised this idea.I've encountered it before and wonder just what constitutes idolatry?When does referring to or citing the Bible become something excessive,something worthy of the term idolatry?

www.newreformation.org/
www.newreformation.org/heresy3.htm

Jun 18, 2012 -- 12:45PM, jlb32168 wrote:

Jun 18, 2012 -- 8:03AM, koolpoi wrote:

How does your church reconcile these commandments?Or is it just a mystery?

That’s easy.  Images aren’t bad in and above themselves.  Believing they are deities is.  The Decalogue was meant to be an apodictic foundation upon which to base life.  If given an unbending standard, people would be less reticent to bend the rules and enter into greater error.  A prohibition against killing would teach the gravity of killing and people would refrain from hacking their neighbors into bits should the neighbor steal a goat.  

God later expounded upon this teaching – mitigating the severity.  Doing good on the Sabbath was okay.  Taking your animals to water on the Sabbath was okay.  Taking care of someone who is sick was okay on the Sabbath.  Killing to protect a greater evil from occurring was permissible.  

Images, if they edify man and turn his eyes towards God, are permissible if not good.

Interesting, jlb.  Never saw the full argument (and as it progresses/progressed) before.

Thanks.

(btw, I jumped on the thread on Cat D. regarding this issue (seemingly unrelated to the thread title by Les) re the 7th Ecumenical Council.)

Not sure what he's arguing there (I read the last 2 pages) but we'll see, I'm sure, as I asked for some clarification. 

Jun 19, 2012 -- 9:16PM, jonny42 wrote:

Jun 19, 2012 -- 7:07AM, koolpoi wrote:

Jun 17, 2012 -- 7:43AM, jonny42 wrote:

Jun 17, 2012 -- 1:59AM, koolpoi wrote:

Is everything in the Bible the inspired word of God (no exceptions)?

Yes.

What about passages Bible scholars consider later additions?

It they weren't a part of the original, then I wouldn't consider them the inspired word of God.

 The Gospel of Thomas wasn't added to the original text because they had believed that it was promoting homosexuality, but which it wasn't. The woman is consider the one that has a weak spirit, for she had branched out from the man, but not God. So it was saying that a woman should strengthen her spirit also.

  The Gospel of Thomas

114. Simon Peter said to them, "Make Mary leave us, for females don't deserve life."

Jesus said, "Look, I will guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of Heaven."

 www.gnosis.org/naghamm/gosthom.html

 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Thomas