- Jul 22, 2014
- 41,511
- 7,861
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
I'm not too horribly concerned with what race people might portray Jesus as, and I'm not too worried about whether or not the artist portrays Him with long hair and a beard, either. All I'm concerned with, for the purpose of the thread, is whether it's right to make an image of Him at all. So let's not bother discussing how Jesus should (or shouldn't) be portrayed unless we've come to agreement on the legitimacy of portraying Him in the first place.
Now, you're quoting from Exodus. Are you suggesting that bowing down to an image is the same as serving the image, rather than what the image represents? If I kneel in front of a crucifix, am I serving the wood and plaster rather than the Lord whose image it bears? I would have no reason to serve the crucifix before realizing Who it represents, but now that I know Who it is being represented, you suspect that I am turning around and serving the wood and plaster that I earlier refused?
Or do you instead recognize that God isn't jealous of mere images made by the hands of men? but rather, His jealousy is sparked when we make of that image more than what it really is? In other words, it's what we make of an image that makes it bad. I doubt that God would be upset at the mere presence of the golden calf. Again, it's what the Israelites made of it that sparked His jealousy. Those of us who recognize the rightful place of religious imagery don't make the mistake that they made. We neither treat the combination of wood, plaster and paint as something divine of its own, nor (unless we're referring to an image of Jesus, the Holy Spirit or the Father) do we recognize the person the image is of to be divine, either.
God made use of images Himself, as you mentioned. For example, the bronze serpent. He both ordered its creation, and instructed the Israelites to look at it to be saved from the serpents that had been afflicting them (side note- curious how God desired to use an image of a creature to save the Israelites from the actual creatures). All that looked at it were saved. Though this thing, which once had a very righteous purpose- later became an idol to them. And so, King Hezekiah had it destroyed. This seems to prove my theory, that God doesn't hate the images in themselves, but what we make of them.
You fall into idolatry when you attribute more worth to an object than it- or the thing it represents- deserves. Merely creating or owning the image isn't enough to fall into this sin, as Scripture shows. Why do you suggest otherwise?
Crosses are not actual depictions of God. The command to make the brass serpent was not a depiction of God (Although later, it was regarded as an idol and King Hezekiah destroyed it). Why did he destroy it if it was not the object that was the problem? See, idols are not just images of anything. Idols are images of God. That is what Exodus 20:4-5 is saying. It is saying not to create images so as to bow down to them. We bow down to God. So this is saying we do not create images that represent God. For how can we capture God with a chisel or a brush with paint? It is impossible.
Anyways, in Deuteronomy 7:25, God tells His people to destroy their idols. Why would God tell them to destroy such idols if they could merely keep the idols around and just not regard them as idols anymore? In other words, this lets us know that just having the idols is wrong.
When I say idol: I am saying any image or object that a group of men revere as being like a god or deity or any object or image that men use to contact their god or a being that they give god like powers to. Men did not have a problem with worshiping statues of serpents at the time in honor of a false god when God told Moses to make one. Men did not make statues of angels in honor of a false god at the time God told Moses to build the Ark with two Cherubim on it.
Upvote
0