Idols, Statues, Paintings, Photos - How far?

[Abd_Yesua_alMasih]

Leviticus 26:1
[quote:41b69c1588]" 'Do not make idols or set up an image or a sacred stone for yourselves, and do not place a carved stone in your land to bow down before it. I am the LORD your God. [/quote:41b69c1588]

Deuteronomy 4:16
[quote:41b69c1588]so that you do not become corrupt and make for yourselves an idol, an image of any shape, whether formed like a man or a woman, [/quote:41b69c1588]

One of the major complaints about the Catholic Church is its idols - its highly decorated statues and paintings of saints etc...

The Protestants base such problems on verses like the ones above and others like them.

How are do we take this? I was watching a program last night about the Orthodox Church revival in Russia and I saw a big room with paintings of Saints and Church leaders all around its walls. I was wondering how is this different from a family hanging photos of relatives on their walls or keeping photos of their children in their wallets... or even having paintings of the early puritans etc...

Am I missing something here in the language or have we fallen in respects to this commandment also?

 

[cupotea]

It depends on whether you believe that the very making of images is proscribed (in which case it would be well to remember that the Commandment seems to prohibit the making of ANY image of ANY thing) or whether the issue is the use of these images in worship either as immediate recipients of worship or as 'aids to worship'.

I hold to the position implied by the latter submission; i.e. that pictures and representations which are just decorative or instructive are licit, but that the use of them in worship even as a so-called 'aid' is prohibited.

We should recall that the Israelites were instructed to decorate the Ark of the Covenant with images of Cherubim, etc. But, again, these were purely decorative and not really liturgical.

The problem with Romish and Greek iconography is that it is really [i:0ad3872118]iconolatry[/i:0ad3872118]; the worship of these images, not merely the having of them.

I have problems with depictions of Christ because we don't know what He looked like...but I really don't have [i:0ad3872118]much[/i:0ad3872118] of a problem with it...I certainly don't need it...and neither really does anyone else...that's the point, I think...

I'd be interested to see what people have to say on this, especially wrt Gibson's "Passion"...many people were in high dudgeon because they considered the film an iconic representation...

But we need to remember Paul's words: "we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one." 1 Cor 8:4

So it's not so much the image itself as what one does with it...

I know I will probably catch heck for this, for being notoriously unruly on the RPW, etc. etc. etc.

Not much of a Puritan, I guess...

:sniff:

 

[Abd_Yesua_alMasih]

I would go more along your lines of thinking but i do not see the difference laid out in scripture.

 

[soladogg5]

idolatry

In relation to idols and Mel Gibson's passion....


I happen to be of the opinion that any sort of depiction of Christ is not only wrong, but idolatrous. An idol can be one of two things: an accurate image of a false god or a false image of the true God. The major problem with the idea of idolatry is that people consider an idol to be something that is worshipped. If one were to look at the text more closely, one would find that the idea of worshipping an idol only comes secondary to the actual production of an idol. The command is not to even make a likeness of that which is in heaven.

I dont believe there is any good reason for a Christian to have seen that movie. The most common reasons I have heard to defend the viewing of that movie are as follows:

1. To learn from it. "It will better help me to be able to understand what my Savior went through."

2. To better relate to peers who saw it. "I want to be able to witness better to those who might have questions about it" or for the rare one who might be in partial agreement with me, "I want to be able to defend myself and point out what was wrong with it."

3. Just to see what it is about. "I know I cant learn from it, but I want to see what the big deal is about."

The first one is incorrect because if we could learn some truth about our Savior from one man's imagination, that would mean that there is something that was not included in Scripture. The ramifications of Scripture being incomplete could be multiple things; first and foremost would be that God is a liar...saying his word was complete.

The second excuse for seeing the movie is easily countered by II Tim. 3:16-17, which says that "All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work." If what Paul writes is true, then we can rely on God's word to prepare us for a gentle and respectful response to those who put us to question. If we cannot take that as adequate, then, once again, God becomes a liar.

Finally, the final reason for seeing the movie isnt a reason at all. There are some who acknowledge the error in claiming educational purposes in watching the movie. However, if one would go to the movie, and say that it is what happened to Christ, but does not learn from it, is it not the equivalent of taking the Lord's name in vain? It would mean that one is going to see it purely for "entertainment" purposes. Entertainment does not necessarily mean funny. It simply means a way to occupy one's time.

I dont believe that anyone went to the movie and began worship of the actor protraying the person of Christ. I do believe however, that when in prayer to the Almighty God or in a worship service of Him, these images might come to mind. If one equates a man's imaginative idea of Christ to what the true Savior was like, that my friends, is idolatry.

 

[ReformedWretch]

Wow, what a first post.

 

[openairboy]

From the PCA

Here is a link discussing the PCA's views:

http://www.pcanet.org/history/findingaids/rpces/docsynod/332.html

And here is my pastor's take:

http://www.prpc-stl.org/auto_images/1077769417Vere_Homo.pdf

openairboy

 

[twogunfighter]

The movie was debated on this forum vociferously and extensively. Without question in my mind at least those against seeing the movie clearly had the weight of scripture on their side. What was not discussed as much was where do we draw the line. Should we be like the Amish and not have any pics of anything? That idea seems clearly ludicrous, yet we do not want to go as far as Mel the Papist either. Should I make my decorative cross that adorns my foyer into kindling? Should I bring my kids sunday school teacher to task for idolatry because of a "Jesus" pic in the sunday school literature?

WCF
[quote:a8b937886d] I. The light of nature shows that there is a God, who has lordship and sovereignty over all, is good, and does good unto all, and is therefore to be feared, loved, praised, called upon, trusted in, and served, with all the heart, and with all the soul, and with all the might.[1] But the acceptable way of worshipping the true God is instituted by Himself, and so limited by His own revealed will, [u:a8b937886d]that He may not be worshipped according to the imaginations and devices of men, or the suggestions of Satan, under any visible representation,[/u:a8b937886d] or any other way not prescribed in the holy Scripture.[2][/quote:a8b937886d]

It looks like the confession is talking about worship only. I may have a historical representation that I know full well does not represent the "real" Jesus and as long as I don't use it in worship I'm OK. I think that the prob with the film was that it was proven to me anyway that there was no way to watch the film and not worship the "Jesus" in the film. That was borne out by those that I know that saw the film and discussed it with me. I really don't think that my kids worship the images on their SS pamphlet however.

An interesting side note to this discussion...I was in Cairo about 3 years ago and brought back some trinkets for my kids. One was a carved rock cat that I am sure probably represented some Egyptian god and another was a carved minature presentation mummy. The cat being a girl thing I gave to my daughter (5) and the mummy I gave to my son (2). My daughter thought the cat was cute and has it until this day. However, much to my horror, after my son had the mummy for about a month in his room, I casually asked him who he thought the mummy represented (I was going to pontificate on the dead pharoahs after he answered) and he replied that the mummy was God. So I had to remove the mummy and explain to the little guy that God could not be represented. I bring this up to say that it does not take a "typical" longhaired somewhat swarthy Germanic representation of Christ to cause problems. We are always ready to make a golden calf.

Chuck