What, you mean ALL the commandments?

You're more a Biblical scholar than I, but am I correct in that with the birth of Jesus, all of the previous commandments from God were fulfilled, and Jesus's teachings were a new covenant? Therfore, idol "worship" is okay so long as it's a Christian idol?

Well... if that's true it certainly doesn't bode well for the validity of that whole bit about God hating homosexuals.

Oh and tell that to the Protestants who destroyed the Catholic churches because they had "idols" in them. ;)

Here's the thing. Meeting at a specific location doesn't imply "worship" of anything at that location. Therefore, meeting AT the cross doesn't imply worship of the cross. Otherwise, meeting at church would mean worshipping the church building. Or the pew. Or the Honda that got you to church. (Did you know God drives a Honda? For Jesus said, "I come not in my own accord, but in my Father's.")

No, idol worship is about mistaking the form for the immaterial substance-- mistaking the kneeling for the prayer, as it were.

I'll see you at church Sunday... "Where we know that God gives a shit"

C.

That sounds a lot like "interpretation" to me. Everyone knows the Word of God can't be interpreted. It is written in stone and must always be taken literally.

"Where we know that God gives a shit" -- Wow! I think you've just created the first catch phrase of the new messiah's message.

Brian: "I'm not your messiah!"
Follower: "Well, I say you are. And I should know, I've followed a few!"

Brian: "Alright, fine. I am your messiah. NOW FUCK OFF!"

Sacred Images

Actually, we cover this a bit in religious ed, though not that deeply because the poor 4th graders aren't ready for the complexity of the "sacred images" -vs- "false idols" argument, so Moses and the mountain don't even enter the lesson. Sacred images (which, I may be using the wrong terminology since Sister Suzanne collects our manuals at the end of each year, so I don't have one with me)are images such as a crucifix or picture of God which reminds of God. Therefore, we're not worshiping the picture, statue, necklace, etc., we're worshiping the Lord represented by that image. I don't know that this clarifies the matter, but that's the Catholic way of trying to dance around it. I know there are Protestant denominations, though, which take the literal, hardline stance and do not abide by the use of any form of images. An added bit of meaningless trivia. I had a cultural diversity teacher who said that someone who never heard of Lewis University would be able to identify it as a Catholic university because there were crucifixes rather than crosses in each room. He claimed Catholicism is the only Christian religion which uses a crucifix, the others use only a cross. Dunno how true that is.

Re: Sacred Images

Yes. Catholics (and Orthodox actually) are the only ones left who use crucifixes. The rest just use a plain cross. Also they're not allowed to decorate churches with "sacred images". I've worked in Lutheran, Methodist, and Presbyterian churches. None of them had any images or statues inside the churches.

I believe Catholics (and Orthodox) are the only group worshiping the Hebrew God that allow images of holy figures (in the church at least). This can probably be tied not to some convoluted message of Jesus, but because of the Roman's penchant for statue worship. Can't convert the mighty Romans by telling them they have to give up pork, foreskins, and statues. :)

Your trivia of the day... The Passion of the Christ was not allowed to be shown in Tehran and Beirut. Not because of its Christian message, but because it displays the image of the prophet Jesus Christ. Muslims do not allow any images of the prophets to be made... ever see a picture of Mohammad? :)

Re: Sacred Images

Correction... Jesus is simply known as Issa in Islam and wouldn't be called Christ, because that means "the Son of God" or something in Greek, right?

Re: Sacred Images

Correction correction... I was just looking up passages in the Qur'an that mention Jesus and they are translated and use both Jesus and Christ. Very interesting. It's also interesting to read the quotes of Jesus according to the Qur'an, because obviously in there he doesn't mention being the Son of God or claim that through his death the door to Heaven is open.

So which version of Jesus's story was right? ~_^

I prefer the Mel Gibson one where Jesus is an action hero and the bad Jews are easy to spot by their big noses and heavy brows. :)

Re: Sacred Images

"Also they're not allowed to decorate churches with "sacred images". I've worked in Lutheran, Methodist, and Presbyterian churches. None of them had any images or statues inside the churches."

There's a Methodist church down the road with some absolutely Divine (literally) stained glass. The Baptists have some good stuff in theirs, too.

C.

Re: Sacred Images

One of the Methodist churches I worked in had some wonderful stained glass, but it was naught more than colored pieces of glass... they didn't resemble images. It was because of this that I hesitated to say that Protestant denominations don't allow images, but I'm quite certain there were no actual images in them.

I only mention this because when I first became aware there were many different factions of Christianity I questioned what the differences were. One that came up was the "idolatry" of the Catholics and how the "rest" don't allow for it.

And let's not forget per Jack Chick anything the Catholics do is wrong... they started the Holocaust afterall.

Re: Sacred Images

It's true. The Catholics are siphoning my gas too.

Re: Sacred Images

I can only speak for Lutherans, being one myself, but I believe that Lutherans are not the only protestants who do use the crucifix and do have images depicting the events of the Bible, and usually a painting as the altarpiece. Just that protestants, to my understanding, don't consider the images or statues sacred in themselves.

It is true, that at the time of the reformation, in the 1500s the insides of many churches were painted white to cover the images, but in the 1900s many were uncovered again.

It depends on the types of protestants. Some are hard-ass literal sons-of-bitches who belive in near literal traslations of the Bible and that everyone else is completely wrong. Others are bleeding heart liberals that belive in a great deal of intereperatation and individuality when it comes to faith and religion.

Some one once told me he thought of "religion" as man's way of trying to put God in a box, trying to put a finger on what God is, to create rules for God. And then went on to explain that he feels that's completely ridiculous because God made man and there is no way that man could begin to put rules on God when he is the one who made the very same principles and concepts we use to try and define him. This man then proceeded to wear a shirt that said "Religion Sucks" on it at the christian summer camp I was working on it. Along with quotes such as "They worship together, but their hearts are not with me" - Jesus. So, I suppose he would be considered one of the more liberal types.

Some time's I come to think along the lines of "who is right here?" and always think of what would happen if the homeless guy in Times Square is right. You know, the one screaming "God is a golf club! God is a golf club!" You'd get to heaven and be like "God, why didn't you give me a sign or something?" "I put a guy on the busiest intersection in the world and you complain to me about not giving you a sign?!" "Yeah, but did he have to smell like piss?" "That was his idea. He thought it would attract more attention."

((The last bit was borrowed from what I can remember of some comedy routine))

have you considered convert_me ?