what defines idolatry?

[~Anastasia~]

ETA - I was missing some posts, and saw only the past couple, but not the ones where you explained this earlier. I'll leave it though instead of deleting. But glad to see you did address it.

Jesus was the Son of God, but he was a crappy biologist.

Surprised to see this.

Of course, you also surely did not actually mean to say this? How can the God who created Life itself (in organic forms) be a "crappy biologist"?

Forgive me, but couldn't quite let that go. But surely, that isn't what you actually meant.

 

[VanillaSunflowers]

I came across an interesting thread where the concept of idolatry was compared to the standing up and reciting of the national anthem. It was agreed that standing and reciting the anthem was just outside the border of idolatry but it got me thinking about what exactly idolatry is. So what is it, what are its boundries, how do we define it and how do we recognize it.

My personal definition was that for something to be considered idolatry, it must involve involve the:

• Divine
• Ecclesiastical
• Supernatural

...I also said that it would possibly have to be extraterrestrial in origin. So that's 3 but possibly 4 attributes of TRUE idolatry.

Any thoughts?

Idolatry? As forbidden in scripture are graven images. See, Exodus 20:3-5.

 

[Wordkeeper]

No, I'm not saying anything like that.

What I am saying is this:

If you sow dead seeds, nothing will come to life. But in the sense that Jesus and Paul used the world, "die" means to change state. So of course the seed has to stop being a seed in order to become a plant.

Earthly bodies can be sinless. After baptism, an earthly body is sinless. After confession and absolution, an earthly body is sinless (assuming the confession has been truthful). Little children who have been baptized and have not yet done any moral wrong are sinless (it's why we need to become like little children to enter the Reign of God). But while we CAN be, we're generally not most of the time.

The body is just a vessel of dirt. The thing that bears the sin forward is the spirit. The only consequence of sin to the body is that it turns back into dirt, but the spirit has the opportunity for immortality, or damnation and utter destruction.

Everybody doesn't become sinless after death. People bear their sins INTO death, and, unless those sins are forgiven, they pay for them there.

Actually what makes a seed alive is burial. In other words a seed is useless, dead, unless it is buried:

John 12:24I tell you the solemn truth, unless a kernel of wheat falls into the ground and dies, it remains by itself alone. But if it dies, it produces much grain. 25The one who loves his life destroys it, and the one who hates his life in this world guards it for eternal life. 26If anyone wants to serve me, he must follow me, and where I am, my servant will be too. If anyone serves me, the Father will honor him.

It seems that burial is what happens when a person converts. Leaving Egypt's mindset and being buried into Moses' mindset:

Hrbrews 11:24By faith, when he grew up, Moses refused to be called the son of Pharaoh’s daughter, 25choosing rather to be ill-treated with the people of God than to enjoy sin’s fleeting pleasure.

1 Corinthians 10:do not want you to be unaware, brothers and sisters, that our fathers were all under the cloud and all passed through the sea, 2and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea,3and all ate the same spiritual food,4and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they were all drinking from the spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ.

Would you agree that making the seed alive requires it to die, turn it from serving the world, bury itself in Christ, serve Christ?

 

[Vicomte13]

Firsly, please and kindly be respectful and curtious as a good Catholic and answer my questions, then in turn I will endevour to answer yours.

I worship God the Father by doing what he said, which was to follow his son. His son said to follow him meant to do what he said, so I have earnestly sought out what he said. Mary was Jesus' mother, and as far as I can tell God has used her both to carry the baby Jesus, to raise Jesus up to manhood, to be with him at the end of his life, and since then, as one of the messengers he sends to men. So, I think Mary is one of God's most important human servants. Mary isn't God. And I do what Jesus said, which is to worship Jesus' God, and I follow Jesus' God's instruction, which is to listen to Jesus and follow him. Do I love Mary more than Jesus? Love is a funny word. Christians seem to use that word differently than I do. I don't FOLLOW Mary. I FOLLOW Jesus. That's as nearly complete an answer to what you asked as I can give you.

 

[Vicomte13]

Would you agree that making the seed alive requires it to die, turn it from serving the world, bury itself in Christ, serve Christ?

I'm hung up on that word "die". In modern English, a seed does not "die" when it is buried in the ground and germinates. That Jesus and the ancients spoke of its change of form as "dying" shows you the distance in mindset between his era and ours, and the difficulty of understanding what those people are saying.

 

[Vicomte13]

Surprised to see this.

Of course, you also surely did not actually mean to say this? How can the God who created Life itself (in organic forms) be a "crappy biologist"?

Forgive me, but couldn't quite let that go. But surely, that isn't what you actually meant.

I said it tongue in cheek, to be controversial, and thereby to focus attention on it and make the point that the way that Jesus used language was not the way that we do today. People wield Scripture with this punctilious literalness, as a hammer to force their ideas. I find it disagreeable. So I went ahead and grabbed a piece of Scripture where what is said, by Jesus no less, is not factually defensible in modern English, using the terms as we use them. A seed does not "die" in our conception. The seed is alive, and becomes the plant.

Jesus, being Lord, and divine, probably knew well enough how things were, but he used that word, "die", in that time, because that's the way THEY thought of things. The fact that the word doesn't work today demonstrates that one cannot simply pick up any sort of words out of Scripture and wield them like a hammer.

 

[Wordkeeper]

I'm hung up on that word "die". In modern English, a seed does not "die" when it is buried in the ground and germinates. That Jesus and the ancients spoke of its change of form as "dying" shows you the distance in mindset between his era and ours, and the difficulty of understanding what those people are saying.

What's important is to understand the principle.

Is Jesus teaching turning away from serving self and serving Him?

 

[Neogaia777]

I'm hung up on that word "die". In modern English, a seed does not "die" when it is buried in the ground and germinates. That Jesus and the ancients spoke of its change of form as "dying" shows you the distance in mindset between his era and ours, and the difficulty of understanding what those people are saying.

Just like a believer in Christ does not really "die" but, that's the way we currently understand it, like they did at that time with seeds...

God Bless!

 

[Berean777]

I worship God the Father by doing what he said, which was to follow his son. His son said to follow him meant to do what he said, so I have earnestly sought out what he said. Mary was Jesus' mother, and as far as I can tell God has used her both to carry the baby Jesus, to raise Jesus up to manhood, to be with him at the end of his life, and since then, as one of the messengers he sends to men. So, I think Mary is one of God's most important human servants. Mary isn't God. And I do what Jesus said, which is to worship Jesus' God, and I follow Jesus' God's instruction, which is to listen to Jesus and follow him. Do I love Mary more than Jesus? Love is a funny word. Christians seem to use that word differently than I do. I don't FOLLOW Mary. I FOLLOW Jesus. That's as nearly complete an answer to what you asked as I can give you.

Thanks for your reply. You follow what you love most. That object that you love most is your most precious.

 

[Wordkeeper]

Thanks for your reply. You follow what you love most. That object that you love most is your most precious.

Actually it's more ordinary than that.

The teaching is that if you abandon self, food, house etc and believe God is more important, then those ordinary things will be added as well.

That's what drinking from the Rock means. Here is a disbelieving group:

1 Corinthians 10: 1For I do not want you to be unaware, brothers and sisters, that our fathers were all under the cloud and all passed through the sea, 2and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, 3and all ate the same spiritual food,4and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they were all drinking from the spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ.5But God was not pleased with most of them, for they were cut down in the wilderness.

 

[~Anastasia~]

I said it tongue in cheek, to be controversial, and thereby to focus attention on it and make the point that the way that Jesus used language was not the way that we do today. People wield Scripture with this punctilious literalness, as a hammer to force their ideas. I find it disagreeable. So I went ahead and grabbed a piece of Scripture where what is said, by Jesus no less, is not factually defensible in modern English, using the terms as we use them. A seed does not "die" in our conception. The seed is alive, and becomes the plant.

Jesus, being Lord, and divine, probably knew well enough how things were, but he used that word, "die", in that time, because that's the way THEY thought of things. The fact that the word doesn't work today demonstrates that one cannot simply pick up any sort of words out of Scripture and wield them like a hammer.

I realized your intent when I saw the intervening posts that I had missed to that point, and edited my post to note that.

I hadn't thought, surely, that you REALLY meant that Christ was a crappy biologist. It was a rather shocking thing thing to say though, but I suppose you accomplished your purpose with your statement.

I just couldn't let it go without having seen your reasoning after that point.

 

[Vicomte13]

Thanks for your reply. You follow what you love most. That object that you love most is your most precious.

Well, this brings me to the issue of what I love the most. I've thought about the demand YHWH made of Abraham. I would have refused that request, and accused the voice that sounded like YHWH of being Satan in disguise for making it. But of course I don't live in a society where child sacrifice is the norm, like Abraham did. Abraham was not a Canaanite, but he lived in Canaan, and the Canaanites routinely sacrificed their children to their gods, so Abraham was not being asked to do something that was not a norm in the society in which he had lived for decades. God asked a hard thing of him, but had Abraham been permitted to carry it out, he would not have been condemned by the society in which he lived - they were all doing that.

Were God to ask that of me, I would tell him no. Because I love my child more than I love obedience to God if God makes unreasonable demands.

That's the truth.

 

[Wordkeeper]

Well, this brings me to the issue of what I love the most. I've thought about the demand YHWH made of Abraham. I would have refused that request, and accused the voice that sounded like YHWH of being Satan in disguise for making it. But of course I don't live in a society where child sacrifice is the norm, like Abraham did. Abraham was not a Canaanite, but he lived in Canaan, and the Canaanites routinely sacrificed their children to their gods, so Abraham was not being asked to do something that was not a norm in the society in which he had lived for decades. God asked a hard thing of him, but had Abraham been permitted to carry it out, he would not have been condemned by the society in which he lived - they were all doing that.

Were God to ask that of me, I would tell him no. Because I love my child more than I love obedience to God if God makes unreasonable demands.

That's the truth.

This is the proposal

Change your mindset. Meta noia. Mistranslated as repent.

I believe food, water, to be essential.

God is asking me to believe He is essential.

Luke 12:22Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat, or about your body, what you will wear. 23For there is more to life than food, and more to the body than clothing. 24Consider the ravens: They do not sow or reap, they have no storeroom or barn, yet God feeds them. How much more valuable are you than the birds! 25And which of you by worrying can add an hour to his life? 26So if you cannot do such a very little thing as this, why do you worry about the rest? 27Consider how the flowers grow; they do not work or spin. Yet I tell you, not even Solomon in all his glory was clothed like one of these!28And if this is how God clothes the wild grass, which is here today and tomorrow is tossed into the fire to heat the oven, how much more will he clothe you, you people of little faith! 29So do not be overly concerned about what you will eat and what you will drink, and do not worry about such things. 30For all the nations of the world pursue these things, and your Father knows that you need them. 31Instead, pursue his kingdom, and these things will be given to you as well.

 

[Vicomte13]

This is the proposal

Change your mindset. Meta noia. Mistranslated as repent.

I believe food, water, to be essential.

God is asking me to believe He is essential.

I already know God is essential to my life. When I was about 10 years old, I dove into a shallow lake, alone, and broke my neck. Paralyzed, I sank to the bottom and was drowning there, unable to move. God healed me and let me live on, on the condition that I tell nobody at the time. Only decades later, in the context of discussions such as this. I don't believe in God - I have known for certain God exists since I was boy. I exist because of God, and I know that.

 

[com7fy8]

Sculley, thanks for the effort to explain

Let me say this very frankly, again, literally anyone can replace the things of God with overemphasis of ANY part of worship. If all you do is read Scripture, but never enact that Scripture in your life and never take part in the songs and hymns and communal worship of the Church, then the reading of Scripture becomes an idol to you.

Yes, and my explanations, then, can be icons for my ego.

What really works is if Jesus is being formed in our hearts as our new inner Person > Galatians 4:19. This is how God's word is the most clear, I would say. Jesus is the Word of God; and in us, I now understand, He is the living meaning of all which God's word and any outward demonstration really needs to mean.

Isaiah 55:11 says God's word will do all He pleases . . . all He Himself means . . . not limited to how any literate or not literate person can understand and try to do. And Jesus in us more and more has us doing all God means . . . the love meaning.

Plus, our "examples to the flock" (1 Peter 5:3) are included in God's provision to show how He means His word to succeed in our lives, I would say.

 

[All4Christ]

In regards to icons, often they provide another way to learn theology. This was particularly important during the time of illiteracy, when people could understand visual depiction of theology, but could not read the text of Scripture themselves. It still is a source of visually depicting theology, as we all learn in many ways, beyond just hearing or reading scripture. Just another thought about the reasons for having icons.

“Images are used in churches so that the illiterate could at least look at the walls to read what they are unable to read in books”, St. Gregory the Great, Pope of Rome.

“The image is a memorial, just what words are to a listening ear. What a book is to the literate, an image is to the illiterate. The image speaks to sight as words to hearing; through the mind we enter into union with it”. St. John of Damascus

“What a word communicates through hearing is what art shows silently through an image”. Act 6 of the Seventh Ecumenical Council (787)

An example:

Note all the elements of the Nativity in this single icon. The core theology is represented - even down to our Lord being cradled in a manger that resembles a coffin, and the cloth he is wrapped in resembling a burial shroud, to demonstrate his future crucifixion and resurrection.

Compare this icon to the myrrh bearing women - and everyone including the illiterate could make the connection from Christ' birth to His death and resurrection.

Icons are more than just images. They are visual theology.

 

[Berean777]

In regards to icons, often they provide another way to learn theology. This was particularly important during the time of illiteracy, when people could understand visual depiction of theology, but could not read the text of Scripture themselves. It still is a source of visually depicting theology, as we all learn in many ways, beyond just hearing or reading scripture. Just another thought about the reasons for having icons.



An example:

View attachment 183083

Note all the elements of the Nativity in this single icon. The core theology is represented - even down to our Lord being cradled in a manger that resembles a coffin, and the cloth he is wrapped in resembling a burial shroud, to demonstrate his future crucifixion and resurrection.

Compare this icon to the myrrh bearing women - and everyone including the illiterate could make the connection from Christ' birth to His death and resurrection.

View attachment 183084

Icons are more than just images. They are visual theology.

That is totally fine, as long as the object/icon is not internalised and considered as an extension to one's being and life purpose.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Admin Hat...

I just cleaned up a ship-load of posts which were either;

1. Off topic.
2. At odds with our Statement of purpose.
3. Quoiting and replying to type 1 and 2.

This is a good topic, but since we are not here to bash each other, but to learn from each other; the direction in which this thread is an insult to traditional Christians; and it is a sad comment on the general disregard and self centered nature of society of late.

For those who might disagree with my assessment; prove me wrong by posting in a civil and humane way, and sticking to the topic at hand without insulting others.

If you decide to prove me right; I will report your posts, and at the very least, a cool down ban will accompany the report. Staff will have the discretion to extend this restriction to access that results from a renewal of this blatant disregard for our rules here at CF.

I take no pleasure in banning members, but I also don't lose sleep over doing so.

Got it???

If not, then do not post in this thread; and likely none of the others in this forum either.

BTW, if you see a post by one of our Ambassadors directing caution; pay attention to their posts. I have their back as do all of the Admins here.

This is a good forum with good topics with good members; I'm getting a bit fed out with threads being closed here.

The line has been drawn.

Defy this directive, and I can guarantee that you will find the results... Stressful.

Got it?

Reopening this thread for the very last time!!!

Mark

CF Admin

 

[mikeirvan]

Honestly, how is the national anthem or pledging allegiance to the flag idolatry? Idolotry is worshipping something that's not God. Honoring the flag or our country is not idol worship. it's just honoring what those who fought for our country stood for.

 

[Landon Caeli]

In regards to icons, often they provide another way to learn theology. This was particularly important during the time of illiteracy, when people could understand visual depiction of theology, but could not read the text of Scripture themselves. It still is a source of visually depicting theology, as we all learn in many ways, beyond just hearing or reading scripture. Just another thought about the reasons for having icons.



An example:

View attachment 183083

Note all the elements of the Nativity in this single icon. The core theology is represented - even down to our Lord being cradled in a manger that resembles a coffin, and the cloth he is wrapped in resembling a burial shroud, to demonstrate his future crucifixion and resurrection.

Compare this icon to the myrrh bearing women - and everyone including the illiterate could make the connection from Christ' birth to His death and resurrection.

View attachment 183084

Icons are more than just images. They are visual theology.

Visual theology... That's a really good way of looking at it.