Are Shrines a Form of Idolatry?

[Ancient Soul]

I didn't state nor imply Jesus is literally God, but the early and later Church believed and believes that Jesus was of the "essence" of God the Father, which is what the Catholic application of the Trinitarian concept states. Remember that Jesus said "the Father and I are One", but obviously meant in a figurative sense.

Everyone's soul is "one/connected" with God.

 

[thomas t]

the fact that the ONLY place the Christian "god" exists is in the bible.

You don't have anything but declaration to offer here.
For instance, if I say But an opinion does nothing to change the fact that there is no elephant in the room where I am typing now, I could take a photo of it and voilá: the photo is the proof that my assertion is right.
But you didn't back your declaration up by anything. It's presumtion what you say.

I stay with my opinion that God incarnated.

Actually, I read the whole Bible.
To me, there is nothing crazy about the almighty God performing miracles. Other people find that crazy, though.

Earth on pillars is poetry as I see it. It's from a song from the Bible.

 

[Kenny]

"us" and "our", so you worship many bible "gods"?

And BTW - That quote from the bible incorrect.

The true God is purely spiritual in nature, so it's our SOULS that were made in his SPIRITUAL image.

If you knew anything about your soul, you would know better than quote from a spiritually void book.

No, worship just one God.

And I believe the quote is correct, the word soul is one word and the word spirit is a different word.

Certainly I can't begrudge you having a different perspective but certainly you having an opinion doesn't mean you are right. I find the scriptures quite spiritually fulfilling.

 

[Ancient Soul]

In your opinion.

I prefer to see it as "And God said, let us make man in our image and in our likeness".

"us" and "our", so you worship many bible "gods"?

And BTW - That quote from the bible incorrect.

The true God is purely spiritual in nature, so it's our SOULS that were made in his SPIRITUAL image.

If you knew anything about your soul, you would know better than quote from a spiritually void book.

No, worship just one God.

And I believe the quote is correct, the word soul is one word and the word spirit is a different word.

Certainly I can't begrudge you having a different perspective but certainly you having an opinion doesn't mean you are right. I find the scriptures quite spiritually fulfilling.

A common straw man reply that does not directly address the issues I stated, but gives an out in left field comment to make it appear like you did. A way of deflection from the verse's use of plural "gods" and the miss-interpretation of what "image" means in that verse.

I re-posted the entire "conversation" so everyone can see this.

 

[Ancient Soul]

But an opinion does nothing to change the fact that the ONLY place the Christian "god" exists is in the bible.

Nor does an opinion change the fact that God never was, and never will be, a puny little man. Anyone who thinks God was, is, or even could be a man, knows nothing about God.



I take it you've never even read the WHOLE bible.

So there's nothing "crazy" about turning staffs into snakes, talking bushes, talking donkeys, iron chariots can defeat "god", "god" can go around impregnating physical women, the earth sits on pillars, etc?

You don't have anything but declaration to offer here.
For instance, if I say But an opinion does nothing to change the fact that there is no elephant in the room where I am typing now, I could take a photo of it and voilá: the photo is the proof that my assertion is right.
But you didn't back your declaration up by anything. It's presumtion what you say.

I stay with my opinion that God incarnated.

This is one of those pot/kettle things. As you have nothing "but declaration to offer here".

In some 200,000 years there have been many thousands of people searching for the slightest bit of conclusive proof that this Jesus ever really existed on earth, and they have still found NOTHING. So that stands as a fact that he did not exist until you can prove otherwise. I mean, you're talking an alleged GOD here. While everywhere there are thousands of statues and stone inscriptions made to honor all kinds of important leaders, and even not so important people, but of this alleged Jesus, NOTHING. Not a trace outside of the Jesus myth found in the bible.

So it's up to you to come up with some proof of his existence.

Actually, I read the whole Bible.
To me, there is nothing crazy about the almighty God performing miracles. Other people find that crazy, though.

Earth on pillars is poetry as I see it. It's from a song from the Bible.

Since you avoided directly answering my question of:

"So there's nothing "crazy" about turning staffs into snakes, talking bushes, talking donkeys, iron chariots can defeat "god", "god" can go around impregnating physical women, the earth sits on pillars, etc?"

Wanna try answering those crazy issues directly?

Or are you saying that you find all that perfectly "normal"?

And the use of "pillars" to hold up the earth has nothing to do with poetry. It was not used in a poem.

And what about this crazy image of the Christian Jesus:

Revelation 7. - And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes,.

Some crazy looking "god".





· ·

 

[Kenny]

A common straw man reply that does not directly address the issues I stated, but gives an out in left field comment to make it appear like you did. A way of deflection from the verse's use of plural "gods" and the miss-interpretation of what "image" means in that verse.

I re-posted the entire "conversation" so everyone can see this.

I'm sorry, but did you ask a question? It seemed like you were just offering your viewpoint.

You said it was incorrectly quoted but offered no substantive reason. You asked me if I worship gods and I answered.

So... what is your question? If you would care to be a little clearer in your posts, I could happily address it better

 

[Ancient Soul]

I'm sorry, but did you ask a question? It seemed like you were just offering your viewpoint.

You said it was incorrectly quoted but offered no substantive reason. You asked me if I worship gods and I answered.

So... what is your question? If you would care to be a little clearer in your posts, I could happily address it better

Sigh...

It was plain enough.

I should have known I'd just get the usual tactics of avoidance.

 

[thomas t]

Finally you left out the insults. Now we can talk.

In some 200,000 years there have been many thousands of people searching for the slightest bit of conclusive proof that this Jesus ever really existed on earth, and they have still found NOTHING. So that stands as a fact that he did not exist until you can prove otherwise. I mean, you're talking an alleged GOD here. While everywhere there are thousands of statues and stone inscriptions made to honor all kinds of important leaders, and even not so important people, but of this alleged Jesus, NOTHING. Not a trace outside of the Jesus myth found in the bible.

Yours is a common myth. There is historical evidence for Jesus. See What is the historical evidence that Jesus Christ lived and died?.
Evidence outside of the Bible.

Since you avoided directly answering my question of:

"So there's nothing "crazy" about turning staffs into snakes, talking bushes, talking donkeys, iron chariots can defeat "god", "god" can go around impregnating physical women, the earth sits on pillars, etc?"

Wanna try answering those crazy issues directly?

Or are you saying that you find all that perfectly "normal"?

I answered it. I wrote: To me, there is nothing crazy about the almighty God performing miracles. Other people find that crazy, though.
See last post please.

The "earth on pillars" was mentioned in a song, a song of Asaph's, see Psalms 75:4. It was poetry, I think. Songs can include poetry. That's the nature of songs. Even today you find poetry in songs.

The Book of Revelation includes prophecy. It IS prophecy. Prophecy in turn has imagery. Metaphors such as the "Lamb".
Jesus also was called "the door", "the way", and so on. All of which is prophecy, I think.

 

[Kenny]

Sigh...

It was plain enough.

I should have known I'd just get the usual tactics of avoidance.

I figured you were just trolling and didn't have a real point. Get back to me when you have a real question where you give a supportive counter-point.

 

[Starlight]

If you believe in God you are fine. To pray to a icon who symbolices the divine it is no problem. God don't like idolatry in the mind either. If you worshiping money or status.

This I believe. But i'm not sure.

 

[Starlight]

I didn't state nor imply Jesus is literally God, but the early and later Church believed and believes that Jesus was of the "essence" of God the Father, which is what the Catholic application of the Trinitarian concept states. Remember that Jesus said "the Father and I are One", but obviously meant in a figurative sense.

I thought catholics believe Jesus is literaly one of the three persons of God. Have you sources about your claim that modern day catholics think Jesus is only God figurately?

 

[metis]

I thought catholics believe Jesus is literaly one of the three persons of God. Have you sources about your claim that modern day catholics think Jesus is only God figurately?

No, it's not "figuratively", but that Jesus and the Holy Spirit are of the essence* of God. IOW, it was not symbolic, but real.


*essence: "the intrinsic nature or indispensable quality of something, especially something abstract, that determines its character."

 

[Starlight]

No, it's not "figuratively", but that Jesus and the Holy Spirit are of the essence* of God. IOW, it was not symbolic, but real.


*essence: "the intrinsic nature or indispensable quality of something, especially something abstract, that determines its character."

Ok, so you believe in the offical trinity? It seems like you believe in social trinity theory. What do you think about psychological model of the Trinity ( by Augustine)?

What are the different models of the Trinity in the Christian tradition? - Greg Boyd - ReKnew

 

[metis]

Ok, so you believe in the offical trinity? It seems like you believe in social trinity theory. What do you think about psychological model of the Trinity ( by Augustine)?

What are the different models of the Trinity in the Christian tradition? - Greg Boyd - ReKnew

Why are you assuming I believe in it?

Secondly, in Catholicism, it's frequently referred to as the "mystery of the Trinity",

Thirdly, different denominations have had different interpretations as to what that actually is, which should be of no surprise.

 

[John D. Brey]

When you think it has intrinsic power to affect something and you make requests to it or intend your prayer to it.

. . . Like when Israel looked up at the shrine Moses erected and were healed either by its intrinsic power, or else by the power of God, which, by the councils of his will, he appears to have entangled in, or with, the shrine?

In Israel some brilliant scientists recently proved that not only can two particles be entangled such that communication between the two appears to transgress classical physics (the law against faster than light communication), leading to the concept of non-locality (since communication occurs between the two particles as though no space is being traversed to slow down the communication), but beyond that, at least according to these brilliant scientists, they've now discovered non-locality's twin sister: non-temporality; they've shown that particles can be entangled in a manner that transgresses the arrow of time.

So what?

Well, my point is that in the same way God's power was entangled with the serpent-rod although the laws of physics, and the laws of Jewish monotheism, poo poo such a thing (which is to say that it appears the power of God was indeed entangled in a non-local way -----as though heaven and earth came together in a branch lifted in the desert), likewise, that non-local entanglement of heaven and earth seems to have doubly entangled, atemporally, with the latter-day lifting of what Jews consider a serpent-tongue on a branch in the desert?

For the slow-witted, or those who just don't see what I've knitted together (shatnez), heaven and earth aren't local places when Moses lifts the serpent-rod since they come together (against the law of shatnez, monotheism, and physics) in one place that destroys the allegedly separate localities known and heaven and earth. . . Furthermore, if a branch lifted up on a skull-looking rock outside Jerusalem can be looked at, prayers for healing be offered up, as though heaven and earth once again became non-local (i.e., the same place), then it appears that Moses' healing-rod and the crucifix are in a quantum-entanglement affected by both non-locality and atemporality?



John

 

[Starlight]

.

 

[John D. Brey]

.

... --- ...



John