Jump to content
IGNORED

Images: Idols or Visual Aides?


Fidei Defensor

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  18
  • Topic Count:  165
  • Topics Per Day:  0.07
  • Content Count:  3,997
  • Content Per Day:  1.58
  • Reputation:   2,607
  • Days Won:  15
  • Joined:  04/29/2017
  • Status:  Offline

7 minutes ago, Yowm said:

There is also his pro-semitic/anti-semitic phases.(early/late)

If one is Sola Scriptura you won't look to Luther period, for guidance.

 

Haha, well I once was told by a man who despised Luther, “God could have used someone else to bring the Reformation!” To which I said “Yes, but Gid used Luther.” 

I agree, stick principally to Scripture, but we must remember Luther’s hand in getting Scripture and the Gospel to us. I am thankful for the good he did, and what he wrote that aided Ad Fontes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  18
  • Topic Count:  165
  • Topics Per Day:  0.07
  • Content Count:  3,997
  • Content Per Day:  1.58
  • Reputation:   2,607
  • Days Won:  15
  • Joined:  04/29/2017
  • Status:  Offline

Just now, Yowm said:

Yes, back to the sources and all that. Luther was an instrument in God's hands and God could have used anyone. Remember Soli Deo Gloria?

Indeed, but Luther, Wycliffe, and Tyndale all rose to the occasion to get the Scriptures and the Gospel to the masses. God could have used others but it is who does the work in the field that He esteems: 

“28 “But what do you think about this? A man with two sons told the older boy, ‘Son, go out and work in the vineyard today.’29 The son answered, ‘No, I won’t go,’ but later he changed his mind and went anyway. 30 Then the father told the other son, ‘You go,’ and he said, ‘Yes, sir, I will.’ But he didn’t go.

31 “Which of the two obeyed his father?”

They replied, “The first.”

Then Jesus explained his meaning: “I tell you the truth, corrupt tax collectors and prostitutes will get into the Kingdom of God before you do. 32 For John the Baptist came and showed you the right way to live, but you didn’t believe him, while tax collectors and prostitutes did. And even when you saw this happening, you refused to believe him and repent of your sins.” (Matthew 21:28-31). 

Martin Luther, John Wycliffe, and William Tyndale are the older brother who obeyed the Father. And I for one am grateful and admire them and the good they did for the Gospel of Jesus Christ. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  18
  • Topic Count:  165
  • Topics Per Day:  0.07
  • Content Count:  3,997
  • Content Per Day:  1.58
  • Reputation:   2,607
  • Days Won:  15
  • Joined:  04/29/2017
  • Status:  Offline

50 minutes ago, Fidei Defensor said:

Indeed, but Luther, Wycliffe, and Tyndale all rose to the occasion to get the Scriptures and the Gospel to the masses. God could have used others but it is who does the work in the field that He esteems: 

“28 “But what do you think about this? A man with two sons told the older boy, ‘Son, go out and work in the vineyard today.’29 The son answered, ‘No, I won’t go,’ but later he changed his mind and went anyway. 30 Then the father told the other son, ‘You go,’ and he said, ‘Yes, sir, I will.’ But he didn’t go.

31 “Which of the two obeyed his father?”

They replied, “The first.”

Then Jesus explained his meaning: “I tell you the truth, corrupt tax collectors and prostitutes will get into the Kingdom of God before you do. 32 For John the Baptist came and showed you the right way to live, but you didn’t believe him, while tax collectors and prostitutes did. And even when you saw this happening, you refused to believe him and repent of your sins.” (Matthew 21:28-31). 

Martin Luther, John Wycliffe, and William Tyndale are the older brother who obeyed the Father. And I for one am grateful and admire them and the good they did for the Gospel of Jesus Christ. 

 

43 minutes ago, Yowm said:

LOL,

Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do? Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me.
(Joh 21:21-22)
 

I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the growth. So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God who gives the growth.
(1Co 3:6-7)
 

My point was that Luther and the Reformers and Translators obeyed God (Matthew 21:31) and that is required on our end. God may call a man, but he must respond. It is a partnership, Soli del Gloria belongs to God but He chooses to work with us, “So we are Christ's ambassadors; God is making his appeal through us. We speak for Christ when we plead, "Come back to God!" (2 Corinthians 5:20). 

Addendum:

If it weren’t for Luther, Wycliffe, and Tyndale, we could still be speaking Latin and the Gospel would still be behind that veil for another hundred to thousand years. Luther and co. gave already dissenting reformers the courage to rise up and let loose the words of God. 

Edited by Fidei Defensor
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Senior Member
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  21
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  649
  • Content Per Day:  0.25
  • Reputation:   170
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  03/26/2017
  • Status:  Offline

7 hours ago, Neighbor said:

Ha, Well maybe, but if I remember correctly the first time this ancient one heard that particular lament it was made against Gutenberg.

None have been destroyed by that .  But thousands have been destroyed yielding themselves unto images in a computer  screen today .

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  18
  • Topic Count:  165
  • Topics Per Day:  0.07
  • Content Count:  3,997
  • Content Per Day:  1.58
  • Reputation:   2,607
  • Days Won:  15
  • Joined:  04/29/2017
  • Status:  Offline

Sacred images are not sinful. It is what we do with them. Idol means an image you worship. Someone can worship a Twinkie picture if they wanted. Cows are worshipped by Hindus and Norse, but a painting of cows on the prairie with cowboys is not worship of cows. 

Idols have intent, they are made or chosen by an idolater. 

Edited by Fidei Defensor
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  18
  • Topic Count:  165
  • Topics Per Day:  0.07
  • Content Count:  3,997
  • Content Per Day:  1.58
  • Reputation:   2,607
  • Days Won:  15
  • Joined:  04/29/2017
  • Status:  Offline

4 minutes ago, Yowm said:

In the spirit of the five solas of the Reformation...'The glory only goes to God', was my point. Soli Deo Gloria.

Solae Gratia, Solae Fide, Solus Christus, Solae Scriptura and finish with yours. 

I really wish that I could celebrate the Reformation Day this year. Have you seen the fantastic film, “Storm: Luther’s Forbidden Letter”? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  18
  • Topic Count:  165
  • Topics Per Day:  0.07
  • Content Count:  3,997
  • Content Per Day:  1.58
  • Reputation:   2,607
  • Days Won:  15
  • Joined:  04/29/2017
  • Status:  Offline

2 minutes ago, Yowm said:

No, maybe I  should look it up?

It’s a great movie. They made it for 500th anniversary of the Reformation. 

————————

Back to topic. The Crucifix is an intriguing paradox for many believers. On one hand it is simply the glorious depiction of Jesus our Lord and God dying  for our sins (1 Peter 3:18, John 19) and serves as reminder of God’s love (John 3:16) and that “It is Finished.” (John 19:30). 

However, for former Catholics it is more complicated because of its association with the RCC and the fact it serves a secondary purpose for the doctrine of Transubstantiation, that Jesus is always dying for sin and must fill the cup with His blood at mass for sin. This contradicts Scripture which says Jesus died once for all sin for all time, “10 And by that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.11 And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins.12 But when Christ[b] had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, 13 waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet. 14 For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.” (Hebrews 10:10-14, cross ref Romans 6:20, Hebrews 7:27) and, “For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us; nor was it that He would offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood that is not his own. Otherwise, He would have needed to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.” (Hebrews 9:24-28). Other former Catholics so associate the Crucifix with the Papacy and RCC that they refuse to have one: 

For Protestants the preference is a plain cross without the corpus (corpse of Christ) to signify the Ressurection. Protestants struggle with Crucifix because they feel it lacks the Ressurectjoj, although Lutherans, Anglicans, and some others Protestant Churches have crucifixes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  18
  • Topic Count:  165
  • Topics Per Day:  0.07
  • Content Count:  3,997
  • Content Per Day:  1.58
  • Reputation:   2,607
  • Days Won:  15
  • Joined:  04/29/2017
  • Status:  Offline

I am often puzzled by the reluctance to have a Crucifix in a Reformed Church. Martin Luther was in favor of the Crucifix saying that it fixates a person on Christ more than the cross alone (without corpus). Perhaps it is Puritan, Hugenot, and Pietist influence that has made the Crucifix rare in Reformed Churches? I know Karlstadt, an inconoclast, was against crucifixes because of their association with the RCC. To me that is absurd, that would be like never using a cross because some cult used it and did something horrible. 

The Crucifix is the depiction of our Lord Jesus Christ making propitiation for our sins on the cross (1 Peter 3:18). The real question of why the Crucifix unnerves people might have less to do with Papist and Romanite association and more to do with they can’t handle that “It is finshed,” and want to do works of merit, which is refuted by Scripture (Phillipians 3:9, Ephensians 2:8-9, Galatians 2:21, Galatians 5:4). 

Edited by Fidei Defensor
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  18
  • Topic Count:  200
  • Topics Per Day:  0.05
  • Content Count:  2,795
  • Content Per Day:  0.65
  • Reputation:   1,502
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  06/25/2012
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  07/26/1952

In the OT God really hates statues/idols and by studying the OT I realized it was because many of those idols had a very real devil that it represented. So when the people made a sacrifice to an idol they were actually sacrificing to a devil, these are all enemies of God. In ancient Israel Asherah was one of the main idols God hated. I can only conclude that a real devil was Asherah.

Today this issue is mostly in Catholic churches. If the people would keep it in their mind that the statue is just a representation of Jesus, or some saint that wouldn't be so bad. I'm pretty sure if you ask someone, "is that Mary or a representation of her?" that person would say it's a representation. Nevertheless, I've been to Catholic feasts and at some point the statue is taken out of the church and paraded around. I once heard someone remark, "I'm glad the rain stopped so she didn't have to get wet". I wish that parishioner would have said "it" instead of "she". Again, I'm sure that parishioner knew the statue wasn't Mary but only a representation of her. The same with all the statues of Jesus, they are not Him they only represent Him. It's a good thing that God sees our hearts because it's the only way to know if a parishioner is praying to Jesus or the statue that represents Him. God will have to sort all this out on the day He chooses.

But IMO we are better off without statues, that way there can be no confusion. For a man like me who was raised Catholic but then left, it took several years to feel like a church without statues is a real church. Back then the absence of any statues bothered me. But now, many years later the presence of any statues bothers me. I often think God must think me a foolish man for this. I hope He finds it humorous. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  18
  • Topic Count:  200
  • Topics Per Day:  0.05
  • Content Count:  2,795
  • Content Per Day:  0.65
  • Reputation:   1,502
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  06/25/2012
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  07/26/1952

15 hours ago, Fidei Defensor said:

I am often puzzled by the reluctance to have a Crucifix in a Reformed Church.

I don't know why the Reformed Church is against the crucifix, but I can share why some Christians I used to know were. This was 35 yrs ago. A Christian woman I knew wore a cross but not a crucifix and I asked why. This was her answer. Jesus doesn't look like that anymore, the description of Him in Revelation is probably closer to His current appearance. Furthermore, Jesus allowed Himself to be beaten, made bloody, and He hung on a cross to save us. He shouldn't be remembered as how He looked when He did that. We just have to remember that He did it, and He did it for us. I had to agree with this lady. I doubt Jesus wants to be thought of as bloody and beaten.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...