tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29128991.post7545311561914041536..comments2023-10-10T09:50:34.565-07:00Comments on Find and Ye Shall Seek: IdolatryMystical Seekerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10828225180668865911noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29128991.post-69656639281256613922008-05-15T13:56:00.000-07:002008-05-15T13:56:00.000-07:00**. For some, using the terms Lord, Savior, Christ...**. For some, using the terms Lord, Savior, Christ, Son of God, etc. is not enough. He must be God.**<BR/><BR/>I think ANdrew is also mentioning a good point here. In the NT, I find all those terms applied to Jesus without heistation. Non-trinitarian religions all affirm those terms, as well. But the sticking point always comes down to the vaguest idea of all, and the one that requires the most inference: Jesus as God. It's just odd that the foggy one is the sticking point. <BR/><BR/>Matthew,<BR/><BR/>**Thus Mary, giving birth to Jesus without Joseph's sinful seed implanted in her, wouldn't make Jesus 'created' and sinful. **<BR/><BR/>How would this tie into the Son of Man element? Wouldn't Jesus still have to be considered "created" since he had a physical body?OneSmallStephttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08189124855157679020noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29128991.post-81870670523408805362008-05-14T22:51:00.000-07:002008-05-14T22:51:00.000-07:00Onesmallstep and Matthew,I was just reading a book...Onesmallstep and Matthew,<BR/><BR/>I was just reading a book about David and Solomon that talked about King David's accomplishments and also his failings as a person. After listing those failings, the author concluded that David was clearly "deeply human". Which is to say that his failings were a direct consequence of his humanity. This is pretty common language when we talk about humanity. I remember that song by Level 42 from back in the 1980s, "There's Something About You", that had the line "I'm only human after all." <BR/><BR/>Societyvs,<BR/><BR/>I hear what you are saying about idolatry referring to worshiping a manufactured object as a deity, and that this is not the same thing as reverence. That being said, my own take on this is this. I think that some forms of reverence can take on characteristics that resemble in some way "idol worship" even if it is not, strictly speaking, idolatry in the sense of the Second Commandment. Ultimately, as far as I am concerned, a book is just a book, and a national flag is just a national flag. <BR/><BR/>I do not wish to take away from you or Yael the importance of revering sacred teachings that mean a lot to you, however. I think that great words and teachings should indeed be revered and respected.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for your comments.Mystical Seekerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10828225180668865911noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29128991.post-80181491271598132022008-05-14T22:40:00.000-07:002008-05-14T22:40:00.000-07:00Andrew,I struggle with enough idolatry as it is.On...Andrew,<BR/><BR/><I>I struggle with enough idolatry as it is.</I><BR/><BR/>One of the reason I brought up the example of the American flag is that I think that there are many forms of idolatry, and they manifest themselves in the secular world as well as the religious world.Mystical Seekerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10828225180668865911noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29128991.post-21931614213545896082008-05-14T10:12:00.000-07:002008-05-14T10:12:00.000-07:00Idolatry is literally the worship of an object - w...Idolatry is literally the worship of an object - which might entail more than just a high respect/reverence for the object - in my opinion. <BR/><BR/>Idols were created things concerning making God as an image - now I think the bible or a Torah Scroll does not really fall under that definition per se - unless we see that as idolatry by our definition of what idolatry means. <BR/><BR/>I can respect Yael's belief about the Torah scroll - those are God's words to the Judaic community - and need to be respected (I would say even revered). But they would never reach a point of actual worship per se - like offeringgs to the the scroll or what not (or the bible for that matter). <BR/><BR/>I think there is some confusion over what idolatry really is in most Christian circles. Is not idolatry connected to 'making a graven image' and then worshipping it? Isn't that the original definition of this idea in commandment 2?<BR/><BR/>I mean, we are looking deeper into the idea - as in idolatry of the heart - and the way some people revere some object (like a cross or a bible). I kinda agree - I am like Mystical in this regards also - a bible is a bible to me - even if someone burnt it in front of me - I know the teahcings are alive in me (and not only on the page). <BR/><BR/>Does anyone in any faith put their images and things ahead of God? I know it seems like some do - but this is not the common notion. Most people gain a reverence for something religious based on their faith in God - so they take some high esteem for certain rituals or a scroll. God enfuses the object with some meaning to the person of faith - the scroll is God's words or the cross is a symbol of an act of Jesus for humanity (which means a lot to us). <BR/><BR/>That to me is not idolatry - unless one starts worshipping the actual object and removes God from the equation altogether (this thing becomes a replacement). The object would lose it's meaning if removed from the connection with God one feels - so I am not sure of idolatry. <BR/><BR/>As for Jesus, I raised this issue a while ago and how a human is getting God status - and seems to break commandement #1 and #2 (of number 2 I am not sure). But Jesus does become a human image of the Creator - which is quite convenient for a human. <BR/><BR/>But I am also similar to Yael - the teachings mean a lot to me - they are my guidance and I first read them on pages and heard them spoke upon before I acted upon them. There is a sense for me of the sacredness of the teachings - but also in the sacredness of doing them (there is a weird combination there that can look idolatorous but is in fact not).SocietyVshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10892870801259282254noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29128991.post-75625889535806790652008-05-14T00:51:00.000-07:002008-05-14T00:51:00.000-07:00Onesmallstep said; "So if one worships the same Je...Onesmallstep said; <BR/><BR/>"So if one worships the same Jesus that walked around 2,000 years ago ... isn't one worshipping something that was created?"<BR/><BR/>What many people forget is that the Postmodern view of the world is different from the Modern view...is different from from Early Modern...is different from Middle Ages...etc. Taking only one period step back can make you wonder why you believe what you believe!<BR/><BR/>If memory serves conception around Jesus' time held that a person originated from the man's 'seed'. The woman wasn't thought to add any physical quality, or sinful nature to her offspring. Thus Mary, giving birth to Jesus without Joseph's sinful seed implanted in her, wouldn't make Jesus 'created' and sinful. <BR/><BR/>If this was the understanding of human used as the basis for the stories about Jesus, how will you translate this 'meaning' for Postmodern man...and not create your own version, which probably has less to do with with who Jesus was, and more about what you favor to believe in this Postmodern Western world?!<BR/><BR/>MatthewCharacter Animatorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09080229016284449658noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29128991.post-55639614159333975062008-05-13T18:17:00.000-07:002008-05-13T18:17:00.000-07:00**then isn't it also idolatry to worship a human b...**then isn't it also idolatry to worship a human being? This raises the question of whether Trinitarian Christianity is really a form of idolatry, since it makes a human being out to be God.**<BR/><BR/>I've wondered this as well. Is it even possible to worship Jesus without worshipping a human? After all, as soon as the word "Jesus" is brought into the conversation, it does seem to involve the man who walked around 2,000 years ago. <BR/><BR/>The other reason why I mull over this is Paul's reference in Romans 1 about people worshipping created things. Jesus was created, in a way. If he was given a human body, or born, that means there was a point in time in which that human element did not exist. So if one worships the same Jesus that walked around 2,000 years ago ... isn't one worshipping something that was created? How can you even make the division between man/God like that?OneSmallStephttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08189124855157679020noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29128991.post-8091912719183907892008-05-13T15:05:00.000-07:002008-05-13T15:05:00.000-07:00It is that question of "worshipping" Jesus as a fo...It is that question of "worshipping" Jesus as a form of idolatry that has really been hitting me lately. I grew up Trinitarian, and it is something that is just assumed. I am finding that it is bad form to even question it from a scriptural basis. For some, using the terms Lord, Savior, Christ, Son of God, etc. is not enough. He must be God.<BR/><BR/>Not that I could not make an argument for it scripturally, I just feel like I can make a stronger argument scripturally that he is not (though I would contend that he is more than man, but that is just me). The fact that I can argue it both ways makes me feel uncomfortable committing too strongly to any position.<BR/><BR/>I struggle with enough idolatry as it is. :)Andrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12494823779999456396noreply@blogger.com