Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
So, since I'm not worshiping another god, and am not bowing down to my avatar it is therefore permitted?
So, since I'm not worshiping another god, and am not bowing down to my avatar it is therefore permitted?
Thanks. I was unsure of how the verses quoted by the poster applied. Did he intend to say that the avatar was permitted? Hence, I asked for clarification. I didn't mean permitted by CF or its posters though.Permitted by who?
The moderators of this forum? Probably, or you'd be asked to remove it.
Other forum users? Seems that most of those who've posted here say 'yes'.
The people who complained you were breaking the commandments? Almost certainly not.
Yourself? ?????
It's between you and God. Like I say, maybe the only reason to remove it is if someone is so offended it disturbs their faith - although even then, they could opt to put you on ignore.
We know God. God knows us. He knows who we are praying to.
Good response, @hedrick. Thanks. I'm still officially a member of the PC(USA), but I've left to attend an Evangelical Presbyterian Church (EPC). I plan to join there at some point.The OP appears to be a member of a conservative Presbyterian Church. As such, he has agreed to abide by the Westminster Confession, except for exceptions that he raises and which his church's Session have accepted. Hence it is relevant to him to know how Westminster is understood.
I was unable to find a treatment of this issue in his church. Here is a discussion of an issue for someone who knows actual practice in the Presbyterian Church of America. That's the largest of the conservative Presbyterian denominations, i.e. those the adhere strictly to the Westminster standards: The Second Commandment, Westminster and Images of Jesus
In summary, he says that Westminster did intend to prohibit images of Jesus, and gives their rationale. Nevertheless, many PCA pastors think it's OK. When being examined for ordination they are asked whether there are any parts of the Westminster Confession with which they disagree. He says an increasing number disagree with this provision, and that most presbyteries allow such disagreement.
Bottom line: If he were a member of the PCA, technically he would need permission from his Session to use that avatar, unless he has raised the issue before. He would probably get such permission. His pastor or clerk of Session can tell him whether this is true of his own denomination.
The EPC is confessional, but differs slightly from the PCA in how that works. Members don't have to subscribe to Westminster. But officers do. As with the PCA, an officer can dissent, as long as the Session accepts their disagreement. There's a separate document, essentials of the faith, that gives the basics from which an officer can't dissent.The EPC is theologically conservative but would not be strictly confessional, or at least that's my perception. Our church has a stained glass window depicting Christ for example. So, I don't think my avatar would raise an objections.
Good advice, @hedrick. The essentials linked to sound fine. Beyond that, I'm probably a 3-point Calvinist. I would acknowledge total depravity, unconditional election, and perseverance of the saints. But I wouldn't see the atonement as limited or grace as irresistible. The Lutheran understand on these seems more solid.The EPC is confessional, but differs slightly from the PCA in how that works. Members don't have to subscribe to Westminster. But officers do. As with the PCA, an officer can dissent, as long as the Session accepts their disagreement. There's a separate document, essentials of the faith, that gives the basics from which an officer can't dissent.
The following page ends with the vows expected of members. It's possible that they are for this particular congregation, but at least it indicates that the denomination doesn't require subscription to Westminster: Second Presbyterian Church | Becoming A Member
However I would not recommend joining a church if your beliefs wouldn't qualify you to be a deacon or elder, so you should agree with Westminster in most respects, and certainly agree with the essentials. The Essentials of Our Faith.
That's true. The image is probably a take on the standard Sunday school image of Christ.i'd say it's more inaccurate then a violation of the 2nd commandment. we don't know what Jesus looked like and there shouldn't be any pictures of Him simply because we have no information to go on.
I can't say I agree with WCF on this one. I think they indeed took the application too far.
Good advice, @hedrick. The essentials linked to sound fine. Beyond that, I'm probably a 3-point Calvinist. I would acknowledge total depravity, unconditional election, and perseverance of the saints. But I wouldn't see the atonement as limited or grace as irresistible. The Lutheran understand on these seems more solid.
Having been an elder at a PC(USA) and LCMS Lutheran church, I'm unsure that I would want to serve again in an officer capacity. Maybe it's me, but I found the meetings to require a good deal of faith.
It has been pointed out to me that my avatar is a violation of the second commandment...
Thank for the extensive reply @Jason0047.
With regard to points #1 to #5, the poster is intended to depict an easily identifiable, artistic imagination of what Jesus looked like. He may not have looked white, and may not have looked black. Since we don't know exactly, there should be no issue with depicting him as white, black, or somewhere in between.
Point #6 is a fair point. It is possible to make a likeness of God into an idol. The intent of this poster is show that although we don't know what Christ looked like, we know that he existed as God and man in history. He lived a real life. And because of his life, death, and resurrection for us, our lives are forever changed.
With regard to the remaining points, the poster is from the Jesus People movement of the 1970s. It was intended to be proactive in order to counter the secular counter-culture which advocated drugs, sex, and revolutionary activism.
The Jesus People offered a Christian alternative on college campuses and elsewhere to this secular counter-culture. Christian coffee houses became a popular feature across the country based on this movement. For more information on the Jesus people and their history, see the book God's Forever Family. Below is my Amazon review of the book.
God's Forever Family is a well organized history of the Jesus People movement in America. Larry Eskridge provides a readable account from the movements' inception in San Francisco to its outgrowth nationwide. Nearly any city of any size would come to have a Jesus People inspired coffee house.
The movement began as a hippie-Christian counter to the secular counter-culture, from which many of the hippie-Christians were recent converts. As the movement grew and the secular counter-culture declined, the Jesus People turned inward and became a ministry to evangelical youth. Eskridge is especially good in showing the interaction (and friction in some cases) between the hippie-Christians and their "straight" counterparts within the evangelical church.
Eskridge also shows how the movement declined due to economic hardship in the mid-1970s, leadership struggles, and due to the participants in the movement getting older and moving into married life. Despite its decline, the movement would have long-term consequences on evangelical church life and secular culture in the form of contemporary worship and the social conservatism of the pro-life movement.
The energy and enthusiasm of the Jesus People, especially their zeal for in-person evangelism, is something the church needs today. This book shows us why.
I'm afraid that we're going to have to agree to disagree. I've explained the rationale behind the use of the poster. Your are free to see things your own way.The problem is that pictures are an alternative to the communication of words. Pictures are a form of communication. So basically when we translate your picture, it is saying.... Jesus is a hippie and Jesus is white (Which of course is a lie). So whether you use pictorial artwork to communicate that idea or words, it is still a lie. Promoting such a lie is not good.
Jesus was concerned by about truth. To say that we can make him to appear in any image we like, whether white, black, or any other race is not only an insult to the reality of Jesus, but it is flat out a lie. If you don't care, then that is your right. But that does not mean it is morally right for you to promote such a false image of the Lord Jesus Christ.
I mean, what's next? Should we make Jesus look like a dinosaur? How about if we make Jesus into having one arm and two heads? Who cares about truth, right?
#4. Early images of Christ are tied with pagan roots. They put sun images behind his head and he used certain pagan hand signs. Sun worship was very popular amongst pagans. They depicted him as white, and by your use of a white Jesus, it is paying homage to ancient pagan artwork.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?