Pictures of Christ

Discussion in 'The Law of God' started by BertMulder, Dec 24, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Rogerant

    Rogerant Puritan Board Freshman

    Your church has an altar?

    Your church has an altar? :oops:

    Is it of hewn stone? :think:

    What does it represent? :detective:

    Your altar has candles on it? What do they represent? Profane fire? (Lev 10:1-30 :eek:

    Are they scented and create smoke like incense? :cool:

    Is this altar elevated and do you have steps UP to the altar? (Exodus 20:22-26) :rolleyes:
    Last edited by a moderator: May 12, 2009
  2. LawrenceU

    LawrenceU Puritan Board Doctor

    And, the use of the fish as a symbol has deep roots going back to the second and perhaps even the first century.
  3. LadyFlynt

    LadyFlynt Puritan Board Doctor

    I see much sentiment in this post, but would like to hear if you have any reasoning from scripture (?)
  4. reformedminister

    reformedminister Puritan Board Sophomore

    :offtopic: Yes, my church has what is called an "altar", like many other Presbyterian, as well as Methodist churches. We have do not have a lecture hall floor plan with the pulpit (more properly called an ambo) central. We have the pulpit on one side and a lecturn on the other. The "altar" is between and behind the two. It is not really an altar, but some call it that. It has a brass cross on it, and three battery operated candles (scented) on it. They smell like real candles! Our communion table is placed central on the floor, between the pulpit and the lecturn. We are in the middle of a building plan, and our new sanctuary may have a lecture hall floor plan. We are not sure yet. :judge:
  5. LadyFlynt

    LadyFlynt Puritan Board Doctor

  6. reformedminister

    reformedminister Puritan Board Sophomore

    I don't see that the Scriptures condemn such things. I agree with Sproul and Piper! :lol:
    Last edited by a moderator: May 12, 2009
  7. LadyFlynt

    LadyFlynt Puritan Board Doctor

    As mentioned in the thread...Exodus...the Golden Calf was representative of God and what He was doing for them. They were punished for it.
    Last edited by a moderator: May 12, 2009
  8. Rogerant

    Rogerant Puritan Board Freshman

    The scriptures don't directly condemn substituting bread and wine with peanut butter and jelly sandwiches with Coca-Cola either. :think:

    How have these things crept into you sanctuary and what reasoning was there for them to be added?
    Last edited by a moderator: May 12, 2009
  9. charliejunfan

    charliejunfan Puritan Board Senior

    No to the imagery of Christ, but what about like....creating a statue of a fish or something? (an honnest question)

    Christ chose baptism and the Lord's supper as pictures of himself, we should need no other.
  10. VictorBravo

    VictorBravo Administrator Staff Member


    This thread is derailing. The original topic was pictures of Christ. Altars and crosses are a different topic. If you want to discuss the Regulative Principle on those issues, please start a different thread. Otherwise it becomes too hard to follow who is responding to whom.

    Note on Tone and Advocating Unconfessional Views

    The Puritan Board standards on images of Christ are consistent with the historic confessions: for centuries the Reformed Presbyterians, Reformed Congregationalists, and the Confessional Baptists have understood Scripture to forbid images of Christ, plain and simple. There is no problem discussing why we have this understanding or even pointing out that many churches do not follow it in our day, but advocacy of a contrary view is not allowed here. Again, plain and simple, this is a private board devoted to understanding and promoting historic Confessional Orthodoxy.

    Similarly, rudeness and mocking of that position is not tolerated either.

    If this view is new to you, or you simply don't understand the issues involved, ask thoughtful and respectful questions.
  11. DMcFadden

    DMcFadden Puritan Board Doctor

    Emerging from the morass of broad evangelicalism, my sensitivities are being reoriented and educated by the confessions and the history of the church. Several issues such as the specific ways to rightly observe the Lord's Day/Sabbath, celebration of Christmas, pictures of Jesus, use of psalmody (whether exclusive or not), baptism (paedo vs. credo), and the like are . . . quite honestly . . . still in process for me. My reading in both biblical and theological (and church historical) literature is on-going.

    In the meantime, I am personally LOATHE to make strong statements on these topics in any way that would seem to pit me against the confessions. We all signed on that we are in agreement with either the Westminster standards or the London Baptist Confession of Faith. If the detailed exposition of said confessions takes us into areas that are personally unfamiliar or uncertain to us, discretion would seem to lie in a studied reticence about advocacy of views that might be unconfessional, at least until we decide firmly whether we stand within or without the confessional boundaries.

    Is there room on the PB for people who are somewhat uncertain about some details of the confessions? Yes, provided that they adopt the role of the learner attempting to receive instruction rather than the adversarial posture of the pugilist looking to score a few extra points. I have found the PB to be a wonderful community of committed sisters and brothers united by a shared conviction regarding certain essentials of the faith. My own knowledge has grown immensely by listening to the wisdom and sage counsel of some of the VERY articulate and erudite members of this board. In areas where my broad evangelicalism has left gaping holes, the patient instruction by other brethren and the reading materials recommended have been tremendously helpful. I just received Danny Hyde's new book in the mail yesterday, for example. It looks outstanding and will doubtless be of great help to me in thinking through some of these issues.

    I commend to all of us the model of the humble learner in areas of controversy and question regarding the appropriate interpretation of the implications of the confessional standards.
  12. DMcFadden

    DMcFadden Puritan Board Doctor

    Oops! Thanks, Victor. We were cross posting. My comments were personal, not moderator based. However, there is some overlap of the sentiments.
  13. reformedminister

    reformedminister Puritan Board Sophomore

    Check the Scriptures carefully. They made the calf to worship, and claimed that it represented the gods who brought them out of Egypt. They were not worshipping the Lord. They were claiming deity and deliverance to false gods. :book2:

    -----Added 5/12/2009 at 04:52:07 EST-----

    :oops: Sorry, it will not happen again.:handshake:
    Last edited by a moderator: May 12, 2009
  14. fredtgreco

    fredtgreco Vanilla Westminsterian Staff Member

    Actually you are wrong. A cross reference in Nehemiah shows that they thought it was God:

    Even more significant is Exodus 32:5, which clarifies the statement in 32:4

    You will note that the Hebrew there is very specific: it is "Yahweh" the name of the God of Israel. It is simply a torture of the text to make it seem like the Israelites were worshipping Ra or some other deity.
  15. reformedminister

    reformedminister Puritan Board Sophomore

    I don't disagree with your exegesis here, but it does not prove your point. I agree that Aaron may have intended the idol to represent the LORD, and wanted to have a feast to Him. However, that does not mean the people thought it was the true God. You can read numerous Reformed scholars that will disagree with you here. Even the notes in the Reformation Study Bible conclude that the people were turning to a false God, not the true God. I am not going to say anymore about this because I respect this forum and don't want to stir things up. :banghead:
  16. Glenn Ferrell

    Glenn Ferrell Puritan Board Junior

    In how many PCA, OPC or other Reformed congregations, have you recently seen pictures of Jesus displayed during public worship, or in the place of public worship?

    I’m mindful of this as I prepare to go on vacation. Last November, while at my parents in Ohio, I visited a PCA congregation, and found a purported picture of Jesus displayed on the overhead screen during the sermon. Though this is probably the nearest “Reformed” congregation to where I’ll be staying this next Lord’s Day, I doubt I’ll return. I’ll drive 30 minutes further to visit the nearest OP congregation. Just wondering if such displays are becoming more common in “Reformed” worship?
  17. Spinningplates2

    Spinningplates2 Puritan Board Freshman

    So now if a Church differs on the issue of images the have to the word Reformed in quotes? Or does that not qualify as the type of post that Joshua was talking about earlier?
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page