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.
If I may say..Gxg (G²);64740949 said:For anyone interested...
Was recently doing comic style-art currently (after prayer/feeling inspired by the Lord to do a piece after having not drawn for years and getting back into it) - and although I'm almost done with what I felt inspired to draw for Christ and Christmas, I came across this ..and all things considered, truly one of the most epic "What If?" battles when thinking on Christ the King being born to die......and how NO other gods can punk him if they wanted to.
For the image really spoke to me on how no other beings labeled "gods" in other cultures could ever dare to challenge Christ - and it reminded me of what was noted in scripture where St. Paul said "having stripped the principalities and the powers, he made a show of them.."(Colossians 2:15 ).
On the cross Christ demonstrated His Superiority to all other religions/their respective "heroes" or beings they worship - and as He was willing to die for the world, only HE has the power and right to rule it.
There were others besides this which I was able to find on Jesus in Comic Style art - but as seen here
not a fan of images of Christ punching and throwing side kicks to pagan gods. that imagery is about as antichrist as you can get, with Christ coming off the Cross to lay some smack down. that basically has Him failing the test in the wilderness by the devil.
None of that has anything to do with Him making a spectacle of the enemies of the Cross
To assume the Lord restraining or blasting an enemy is a matter of humanly speaking is like assuming that Christ crushing the enemy under His feet (as well as death) is not a literal event - or that all enemies of Christ won't physically acknowledge Him, (every knee will bow and tongue confess Christ is Lord in Philippians, etc.)Him coming down from the Cross to lay waste to the enemies humanly speaking , which He does in that comic, is failing the test in the wilderness, which was to make an earthly Messiah hat comic shows Him as one. a Messiah who kicks butt, which is Antichrist.
As said before:you can say anything you want to try to justify it, the image of Christ hitting Apollo with a lariat, or a flying elbow from the top rope, or whatever is not right. maybe a Transfiguration comic should show Him going all Super Sayian.
it is a vain attempt to make something that should never be hip or contemporary, hip and contemporary.
That (as said before) in and of itself no more shows a theological issue than the Early Church Fathers noting the Devil being humiliated at being deceived at having killed Christ and demons trembling before the Lord. Eternity has no sense of time whatsoever - and Christ being immediately in the Afterlife/Hades addressing all the Spiritual principalities as well as preaching to the Spirits in Prison (I Peter 3:18-22) is not something one can conceptualiz 100%....no one knows fully all that entailed the moment he said "Into Your Hands I commit My Spirit" nor is there any room assuming Christ didn't address the principalities after defeat via the Cross was complete. It's the dynamic of how others see it when they envision it.if those comics show Christ coming down from the Cross and kicking tail, that is just theologically wrong..
That I can more than understand.even if it was obviously Satan that Christ was jumping down from the Cross and nailing with the Stone Cold Stunner, it's would not be right. I cannot imagine any holy elder of our Church approving of that kind of imagery.
As Christ in His glory is beyond comprehension and no one was there absolute in the spiritual, nothing says Christ did not engage His enemies as part of his shaming the powers at the Cross...or that it was somehow wrong to have him defeat others Bruce Lee style - just as others have noted there's nothing saying Christ in speaking to the Enemy looks akin to how many icons already depict him when it comes to his demeanor or gait. One would have to assume before going into it that how it appeared post-Death on the Cross could not have involved Christ beating the demons in an epic manner...the defeat of the spiritual powers happened at the Cross, none of which involved Jesus looking like Bruce Lee.
Saying what is or isn't the right one goes back to the issue of why some like comics - and why others don't like it at all. I'm not against Christ being used in comics as a medium - but when it shows Christ being defeated, I do have to pause/consider. Of course, there are a lot of people who have issue with Christ shown at all existing alongside all other heroes instead of how he's in with Icons - and even others who have issue with any artistic depiction of Christ, be it in comics or books or anything else (outside of icons). And that's something when it comes to others responding differently....and I am not against Christ being used in comics as a medium, but just like with any kind of art, it better be the right one
That's actually NOT what the entire comic was remotely about, seeing that Christ had already died in the comic and it noted such plainly (for anyone going through it fully in what was linked from beginning to end). One not actually reading the comic would be quick to assume it was about Christ NOT coming down from the cross - the context was Christ defeating the enemies of the Cross as a demonstration of his making a spectacle of enemies after He died and experienced life in the Spiritual realm (even though it seemed to others that He had perished).and it was Christ NOT coming down from the Cross that defeated the pagan gods. it's poor imagery at best, and wrong at worst..
Actually, they already did that with physical dominating when it came to Christ having his foot on demons - similar to what Eve was told when the Lord prophesied that the enemy would bruise his heel while Christ would crush His head and what St. Paul noted in I Corinthians 15 that Christ would have his enemies brought/subdued under his feet fully.if it was okay to depict Christ sidekicking pagan gods, I am sure the early Church would have done it. there is no depiction I have seen that is historic that shows that kind of imagery.
Saying there's a difference doesn't show objectively where such is the case anymore than it'd be with saying there's a difference between kicking someone and having your foot on their back when it comes to the concept of dominating an enemy. A beat-down is a beat-down however you slice it..there is a difference between an image of Christ standing on the bound devil, and Him sidekicking Zeus in the gut.
Claiming Christ destroys the Devil or the demonic powers isn't separate from love (as God is Love) - and to assume that Love is separate from physical restraint of enemies isn't what Love is defined as within scripture when it comes to how enemies are often treated by the Lord. For God was still operating in Love when it came to His wrath or defeat of his enemies physically. Of course, the aspect of love can only go so far - as some took it to mean the Lord never had any aggression toward demonic powers and intended for them to repent as well...although in the Early Church, it was accepted by some when it came to concept such as universal reconciliation... (as seen in how even Elder Paisios would pray that the devil would repent). The Mercy of God is a complicated and nuanced matter - as said best on Ancient Faith Radio on salvation (similar to conversations from before here, here, here and here/ here ).yeah, but Christ did not beat the demonic powers by throwing fists. as for Macrina, she did. one is making a false image, one is not. Christ destroys the evil by truly loving them
One of the most intensive parts of the Holy Week chant.."The gatekeepers of Hades tremble when they behold me, clothed in the bloodstained garment of vengeance..."
One cannot say of the Devil "Christ's feet on his back is good in victory" and then say "Christ subduing him with his fists is bad."
That - as said before - no more verifies anything than claiming "Blue is better than Red because Blue makes you sad and Red makes you happy" - it is subjective, without real evidence and based on one's own preference. There are numerous instances in comics where standing on the backs of others was done to be slick - but one doesn't read that back into examples where the enemies of Christ are under his feet. The same goes for when the scriptures note (as St. Paul and others point out ) that Christ came to destroy the Devil's Work and humiliated/made a spectacle of the principalities on the Cross.yes you can. one is Biblical and makes a theological point of who Christ is. the other is just trying to be slick. .
Christological imagery should invoke prayer and repentence, not vainly attempt to look cool.
so yes, you can
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?