D
Deleted member 12865
Guest
I'm sorry I assumed you would be familiar with the Bamiyan Buddhas and the Taliban. That wasn't an act of terrorism. The Taliban controlled Bamiyan and Mullah Omar issued a lawful governmental order to his military to shell those public idols, under your same theory. "Muslims should be proud of smashing idols. It has given praise to Allah that we have destroyed them."Then I suppose comparing standard Westminster views of the second commandment to a Muslim bomber and Wahabbi terrorism isn’t serious, either.
My point is to take a step away from this disingenuity in defending the standard. You did agree that it is "odd why so many people are so into images of Christ and God" and that "Nobody loses anything by dispensing with images." You aren't blind; you can see the objective beauty and significance of art including "sacred art," and the history and utility of their use outside of the Reformed context. It is disingenuous to find this incomprehensible, and it is unworkable and unserious to advocate for the actual destruction and erasure of all historic art, not to mention divisive, nor do I find this to be required by the Westminster Standards. That's a far step removed from making or using images of God, approving of or worshipping them.