Churchianity has Hidden the REAL God and the REAL Christ for 2,000 years!

[metis]

If you SAY so, it MUST be true. I was once a Catholic- I KNOW!

One can simply attend any place of worship and then claim that they "know".

You have made errors on the CC before, such as your false claim that we worship the sun, so it's rather clear that you don't really "know". Matter of fact, "bearing false witness" is unethical under the Commandments.

 

[theQuestion]

One can simply attend any place of worship and then claim that they "know".

You have made errors on the CC before, such as your false claim that we worship the sun, so it's rather clear that you don't really "know". Matter of fact, "bearing false witness" is unethical under the Commandments.

Now you put words in my mouth?
Only Constantine worshiped the sun- to my knowledge.

 

[PearlSeeker]

Thru scripture.
Then, if you accept it, thru His Breath ("Spirit").

Are you saying: before first books of Bible were written God couldn't be known? That would be in contradiction with the Bible itself.

 

[metis]

Now you put words in my mouth?
Only Constantine worshiped the sun- to my knowledge.

Sorry for that, as I accidentally conflated you with another person who did say that on another thread.

However, I've seen a couple of JW's here cite this false claim, so do you have any idea where they were getting it from?

 

[Iymus]

No. I'm saying that it's an image that points us to Christ. Personally, I don't use images to validate the Incarnation. even if I did, that practice wouldn't be idolatry.

so an image that specifically points one towards God is not considered a graven image and therefore idolatry in the Abrahamic Faith?

For example

 

[sojourner]

so an image that specifically points one towards God is not considered a graven image and therefore idolatry in the Abrahamic Faith?

For example

I don’t know how Hindus regard their images for certain, but I believe this is an icon that points one to the god it depicts, and is not the god, itself. So yes, if 5he image is not the deity, itself, it isn’t idolatry. Is a crucifix idolatry? No, because the crucifix is not God. It’s not even Jesus. It’s an icon. Perhaps a better example might be the human being. We are the image of God, yet we are not God.

 

[Iymus]

I don’t know how Hindus regard their images for certain, but I believe this is an icon that points one to the god it depicts, and is not the god, itself. So yes, if 5he image is not the deity, itself, it isn’t idolatry.

so instead of the image being a representation of God or specifically the God of Abraham ; It has to be considered God itself for it to be considered a graven image?

 

[sojourner]

so instead of the image being a representation of God or specifically the God of Abraham ; It has to be considered God itself for it to be considered a graven image?

Bingo!!! Remember how the Israelites cast a bronze calf in Exodus? That statue had power of itself, because they thought they had been abandoned by God. That's idolatry. A statue of Jesus in a church isn't idolatry.

 

[Iymus]

A statue of Jesus in a church isn't idolatry.

seems as graven image, because used to represent and magnify a man declared to be Son of God, as God of Abraham himself but literally in the flesh; therefore idolatry. However if this is not the case I prefer being on the safe side.
-----------

Joh 8:40 But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham.

Joh 8:42 Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.
Joh 8:43 Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.
-----------

Rom 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Rom 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
Rom 1:23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

 

[sojourner]

seems as graven image, because used to represent and magnify a man declared to be Son of God, as God of Abraham himself but literally in the flesh; therefore idolatry. However if this is not the case I prefer being on the safe side.

No, because the statue would A) have to have power in and of itself as a god, and B) the statue would have actually be the god. We all know that Jesus isn't a statue, and we don't worship the statue as a god (or at all, for that matter).

But, as you wish. I just don't want to read an opinion condemning me for "idolatry."​

 

[metis]

seems as graven image, because used to represent and magnify a man declared to be Son of God, as God of Abraham himself but literally in the flesh; therefore idolatry.

Catholicism does not allow for the worship of any object, and the term "graven image" is never defined in the Tanakh, so there are myriads of speculations as to what that may entail.

 

[theQuestion]

Sorry for that, as I accidentally conflated you with another person who did say that on another thread.

However, I've seen a couple of JW's here cite this false claim, so do you have any idea where they were getting it from?

No, I don't- sorry!
Maybe it's X-Mas/Saturnalia....

 

[theQuestion]

Catholicism does not allow for the worship of any object, and the term "graven image" is never defined in the Tanakh, so there are myriads of speculations as to what that may entail.

 

[sooda]

View attachment 37030

Do you actually think anyone worships art?

 

[metis]

View attachment 37030

And your point is, ...?

Does a church selling Bibles also fall into that same genre? We don't worship statues nor consider them to be perfect, so is it the same with you and your Bibles?

 

[Iymus]

Catholicism does not allow for the worship of any object, and the term "graven image" is never defined in the Tanakh, so there are myriads of speculations as to what that may entail.

I was taught that this image represents God of Abraham. Since I was taught that this image represents God of Abraham; who essentially came in his own name being God in the flesh himself literally; If this doctrine is wrong shouldn't this image "which is used to represent that" be wrong and graven, with me worshiping an idol or god of this world?

Joh 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

Joh 5:43 I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.
Joh 5:44 How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?

Joh 5:37 And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.

1Jn 4:12 No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.

1Ti 1:17 Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.

 

[sooda]

I was taught that this image represents God of Abraham. Since I was taught that this image represents God of Abraham; who essentially came in his own name being God in the flesh himself literally; If this doctrine is wrong shouldn't this image "which is used to represent that" be wrong and graven, with me worshiping an idol or god of this world?

Joh 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

Joh 5:43 I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.
Joh 5:44 How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?

Joh 5:37 And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.

1Jn 4:12 No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.

1Ti 1:17 Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.

Pretty postcard.. Who taught you to worship that?

 

[theQuestion]

 

[sojourner]

I was taught that this image represents God of Abraham. Since I was taught that this image represents God of Abraham; who essentially came in his own name being God in the flesh himself literally; If this doctrine is wrong shouldn't this image "which is used to represent that" be wrong and graven, with me worshiping an idol or god of this world?

Joh 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

Joh 5:43 I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.
Joh 5:44 How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?

Joh 5:37 And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.

1Jn 4:12 No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.

1Ti 1:17 Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.

I thought we'd settled this.


John also says, "Those who have seen me have seen the Father."

 

[sojourner]

What do you think this is a picture of?