It has always struck me as odd that, on the one hand, we condemn images for being incapable of comprehending God, but we affirm many other representations (like preaching) that are similarly incapable. Equally applied, the same principles that supposedly condemn images would also condemn preaching and evangelizing, thinking about God, writing about God, talking about God, etc.
| Author | Comment | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
 ramclaughlin |
Right. | #1 | ||
|
Posts: 1455 02/24/04 13:39:20 |
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
Daron Lawing |
Re: Right - wrong | #2 | ||
|
Posts: 74 02/24/04 13:48:36 |
God forbade images (at least of Himself) not preaching of the Word.
You're saying they are the same. That communicating via images and communicating via spoken or written word is the same and that's just not true. As a result to condemn one while approving the other is by no means inconsistent. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
ramclaughlin |
That wasn't the question | #3 | ||
|
Posts: 1455 02/24/04 14:27:37 |
The question pertained to the basis on which God condemned images. God did condemn at least some images. The question is, as you pointed out in another post, "Why?" It was then suggested that the answer cannot be "because they are not full revelations." One reason the traditional answer does not seem sufficient is that it would tend to condemn preaching along with images. In light of this apparent problem, the question became "Must images meet a different standard of revelation than words must meet?"
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
Daron Lawing |
Re: That wasn't the question | #4 | ||
|
Posts: 74 02/25/04 18:07:39 |
Quote: in Ra-like fashion I will answer this question - yes. (apmly illustrated whenever I use one of the emotive icons. They often require explanation with words lest the message be misinterpreted.) |
|||
|
|
||||
 Goldberry of Withywindle |
I am not saying they are the same. | #5 | ||
|
Posts: 435 02/24/04 14:27:43 |
I am saying they both communicate truth about God inadequately, yet one of the objections against images is that communicating truth about God inadequately is a lie.
So if "communicating truth inadequately is a lie" is held up as a reason why images are forbidden, why does it not hold true in the case of preaching? Simply saying "because preaching is commanded" doesn't explain it, because then you are in effect saying "God commanded something that is a lie on the one hand, and forbade something else because it is a lie." ~Jane, a Bonsai Ent
Words couldn't express it. They wouldn't express it; they'd mutiny first and become babble. -- James Blaylock, The Last Coin |
|||
|
|
||||
