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?"
| Author | Comment | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
 ramclaughlin |
That wasn't the question | #1 | ||
|
Posts: 1455 02/24/04 14:27:37 |
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
Daron Lawing |
Re: That wasn't the question | #2 | ||
|
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.) |
|||
|
|
||||
Quick Reply
Replies
|
|
