Holy Cross
-
Prayer before a Crucifix
Look down upon me, good and gentle Jesus, while before Thy face I humbly kneel, and with burning soul I pray and beseech Thee to fix deep in my heart lively sentiments of faith, hope and charity, true contrition for my sins, and a firm purpose of amendment; while I contemplate with great love and tender pity Thy five wounds, pondering over them within me, having in mind the words which David Thy prophet said of Thee, my Jesus: "They have pierced my hands and my feet; they have numbered all my bones."
Our Father, Hail Mary, Glory Be for the Holy Father's intentions
-
Originally posted by SingaporeMacross:
To date you have not proven that we cannot have religious images or statues. Use the Scripture that you love so much. We want to see.
Do you hate the Cross? Jesus did not hate His Cross, so why are you hating it? Yes, the fact that Jesus did die matters. But it does matter why Jesus had to die on a Cross and not get thrown off the cliffs by madmen. Why must God die die choose to let Jesus die on a cross? All these has happened in real-time, not merely in books. God uses history and current events in the world to work. To make an example out of Him, the most excruciating and shameful form of execution existing at that time, in that locality, was used. Hanging would not suffice. Beheading would not suffice. Poison would not suffice. If Jesus is here making the ultimate sacrifice, surely there must also be the ultimate way of execution. This is the ultimate example, in that context. That makes wearing a 16 foot truck or a knife around my neck irrelevant.
I already said, Jesus is able to turn bad things into good things. The Cross is no longer a symbol of paganism, but a symbol of faith. It is no longer a symbol of suffering, but a symbol of hope. Jesus is even able to make suffering, a good thing. The Crucifxion is supposed to be a unique event which has changed the history of Man. His destiny is supposed to be changed. Even the way we see things must be changed.
I said, Apostle TO the Pagans, not Apostle OF the Pagans. I actually meant to praise you for fighting paganism, but since I was taken the wrong way.. Oh well.
Well neither did St Paul choose to become a Apostle. But I believe you have potential to be God's instrument.
since u clarify the matter on apostle thing,i must apologize to you den..im sorry..
back to the point on cross...besides countless scriptures on the ban of making images used for or during worship,eg ex 20:4,5, lev26:1,2cor 6:16,1john: 5:21..
even with the argument used by christians that cross n stautes of saints n mary were mere objects to remind themselves of them,it cannot be valid with
john 4:23,24, true worshippers will worship the father in spirit n truth.tats wat God wants too aint it?God is a spirit and those who rely on images so they depend with their physical eyes to remind themselves cannot be worshipping God in spirit...
-
Jesus did not die on the cross. He died on the tree.The symbol of crucifixion should be seven candlelium.The cross is the mark of beast.
-
Originally posted by Soosiangong:
Jesus did not die on the cross. He died on the tree.The symbol of crucifixion should be seven candlelium.The cross is the mark of beast.
*lost*anyone can clarify that the cross is the mark of beast? please justify your findings. thank you.
-
Originally posted by Soosiangong:
Jesus did not die on the cross. He died on the tree.The symbol of crucifixion should be seven candlelium.The cross is the mark of beast.
the cross aint the mark of the beast..rev does not state what the mark of the beast is other den 666..the cross is also a sign of the dick in a more ancient pagan belief..tink of the m/f symbol nowadays..
the only other argument was jesus was nailed on a stake...
the tree thing i would guess its from judaism,the 10 sephiroths...
-
Originally posted by domonkassyu:
since u clarify the matter on apostle thing,i must apologize to you den..im sorry..
back to the point on cross...besides countless scriptures on the ban of making images used for or during worship,eg ex 20:4,5, lev26:1,2cor 6:16,1john: 5:21..
Yes, God forbade the worship of statues, but he did not forbid the religious use of statues. In fact, he even commanded the making of statues
- that of two GOLD cherubims (angels) for the ark of the covenant. David's plan for the temple given by God also included statues of angels.One would realise immediately that God does not have an issue with statues per se. It is only when we treat statues as God himself and start worshipping statues that problems begin.
Originally posted by domonkassyu:... even with the argument used by christians that cross n stautes of saints n mary were mere objects to remind themselves of them,it cannot be valid with
john 4:23,24, true worshippers will worship the father in spirit n truth.tats wat God wants too aint it?God is a spirit and those who rely on images so they depend with their physical eyes to remind themselves cannot be worshipping God in spirit...
Why not ? I don't see how worshipping God in spirit and in truth is impeded in any way by having a statue of say Mary with the infant Jesus in her arms which obviously we can see with our physical eyes.
-
it was based on an earlier claim by another forummer that such idolatry was used not as obects of worship but just as a reminder..it was an answer to him/her. the only thing that jesus wanted us to remember him was the evening meal shared by him and his disciples b4 his death.nth was mentioned to the effect of wearing the thing he died on(with or without him on it). the building of the cherubims given as an instruction by Jehovah God was not repeated again. also of interest is that his own throne was described as having covered by wings of cherubs.so it looked like the case of the cherubs were nth more then parts of a furniture.
even if the cross can be regarded as legal. what about idols of jesus,mary,saints to be venerated???there is but one intercessor jesus. for he himself said so..does not the other idols count in idolatry??
-
Originally posted by domonkassyu:
... like what u say, a man praying in front of a statue of JC is just needing a focus in his mind..it is exactly the same act as the guy in the next street praying in front of a buddha statue isnt it??
Yes, both have statues but there is a big difference. One is praying to the one true God, the other is praying to something else which Christians would deem to be a 'false god', thereby violating God's commandment of not worshipping another as God.* Whether or not a statue is involved is irrelevant.
* I'm assuming the other person is praying to Buddha as god for the sake of argument. No insults intended towards any Buddhists.
-
Originally posted by domonkassyu:
1stly,the priests knows shit about what hes saying..consider the origin of FLS idols..it stems from taoist tradition not God.if based on tat priest, its ok to keep idols of guan yin,buddha,siva, all the other countless idols so long as i dun worship it...does tat make sense?
I have a figurine of Boba Fett (StarWars character) in my house, and quite a big one of Mr M&M. If I go to Greece for a holiday, I might buy a statue of Zeus (chief Greek god) as a souvenir and possibly a Buddha head as a souvenir when I visit Cambodia. Do having all these make me an idol worshipper if I do not attach any religious significance to them ?
The only downside I can think of having them (other than spending $ buying them) is that I might 'cause scandal' to some 'ultra-sensitive' (and might I add illogical) folks who think a Catholic like myself also worships Boba Fett, Mr M&M, Zeus and Buddha when they see those figurines/statues in my home
. It would then be necessary to explain to them that no, a Catholic only worships the one true God (including Jesus who is the 2nd person of that one God). Of course if I start believing that my Boba Fett figurine somehow has divine properties to bring me wealth, then that would not be right. -
Originally posted by Omnia:
Yes, both have statues but there is a big difference. One is praying to the one true God, the other is praying to something else which Christians would deem to be a 'false god', thereby violating God's commandment of not worshipping another as God.* Whether or not a statue is involved is irrelevant.
* I'm assuming the other person is praying to Buddha as god for the sake of argument. No insults intended towards any Buddhists.
Buddha is not a god, and isn't worshipped. But Buddhists pay respect and reverence to him and treat him as our greatest teacher.
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Buddha is not a god, and isn't worshipped. But Buddhists pay respect and reverence to him and treat him as our greatest teacher.
Thanks for the clarification. I suspected as much hence the footnote in my previous post.
-
Originally posted by domonkassyu:
... the only thing that jesus wanted us to remember him was the evening meal shared by him and his disciples b4 his death.nth was mentioned to the effect of wearing the thing he died on(with or without him on it). ...
Yes, at the last supper, Jesus asked his disciples to "do this in memory of me". But no where did Jesus say that the last supper was to be the only way that we should remember him by ! Did Jesus say "do only this in memory of me and nothing else" ? No. So I don't know how anyone can conclude that we are not to remember Jesus in other ways
.Originally posted by domonkassyu:... the building of the cherubims given as an instruction by Jehovah God was not repeated again. also of interest is that his own throne was described as having covered by wings of cherubs.so it looked like the case of the cherubs were nth more then parts of a furniture....
Does it matter whether the building of the gold cherubim statues was repeated ? Are you implying that Almighty God made a mistake in commanding the casting of the first set of cherubims ? The bottomline is that God does not have an issue with statues per se.
And for your info, if you have seen a picture of the ark of the covenant, the two gold cherubims stood on top of the ark in full prominent view of everyone. They were certainly not hidden as 'parts of a furniture'.
Originally posted by domonkassyu:... even if the cross can be regarded as legal. what about idols of jesus,mary,saints to be venerated???there is but one intercessor jesus. for he himself said so..does not the other idols count in idolatry??
I would rather that we settle on the issue of statues and idols first before we move on to other issues you have with Catholic Christian teachings and practices. For now, I would just say that yes, there is but one mediator between God and the human race who is Jesus Christ. But the bible also encourages us to pray for one another, ie: act as intercessors for one another (1 Tim 2:1-6; James 5:16), for the "prayer of a righteous person is very powerful". That's what Catholics do when they speak to Mary and the Saints.
-
Originally posted by novelltie:
... I do have to agree that sometimes as we are Chinese, there are lot of Chinese customs that may conflict our religion... for one, fortune tellers that do not invoke the power of spirits or the supernatural. There is one i know that always station at Riverside Point. he only read your fortune based on your chinese name. the characters to be precise and he knows your fortune... is that really a sin?
Regarding fortune telling, my view is that there are four possibilities. Either 1) the fortune teller is a hoax, 2) the fortune teller does indeed have powers but these are not from the one true God (you may not want to know where the powers come from), 3) the powers are indeed given by the one true God, or 4) the fortune teller has discovered a scientific truth that one's future is somehow correlated with one's chinese name.
Unless we can be certain of (3) and/or (4), it is best that we avoid fortune telling. Trust in the Lord and you need not have fear of the future.
-
The fact that one can differentiate between a Church and a temple says volumes of the differences.
God never says we cannot have statues and in fact, ordered to build them as in Nm 21:9 "Moses then made a serpent out of bronze and raised it as a standard, and anyone who was bitten by a serpent and looked at the bronze serpent survived." Is God ordering idolatry then? This is after Moses interceded for the people. But it was not the statue of bronze serpent that saved the people - it was God!
To conclude that the presence of statues equal to idolatry is too simplistic.
For statues of Saints, these are people that are very important to the Church. Where else do we honour them but in the Church? In the past Churches are build to honour Saints and thus named after them. But what made these people Saint in the first place? Are there values that we can learn from these Saints? If you go to the Church and see a statue of St Paul, will you mistaken him as God or would that remind you of the work that he has done for God?
Looking at the Crucifix today, it seems like a replacment for the serpent made out of bronze....or sort of. Depending on which side you are on, looking at the Crucifix does give different meanings.
For domonkassyu, it is a warning against idolatry and that idolatry is wrong (we all agreed). For others, it is reminder of Christ's love and sacrifices to save us. Looking the Crucifix alone help comfort many as they feel the presence of God and His love.
Either way, the Crucifix is there and served the purpose. But certainly did not and will not contribute to idolatry.
-
LOL so how to decide which position is true? There isn't an infallible teaching body here to determine who speaks the truth...
-
Originally posted by grandmaster89:
LOL so how to decide which position is true? There isn't an infallible teaching body here to determine who speaks the truth...
Actually, everybody is speaking the truth - idolatry is not allowed. The only question is - does it means that having a statue = idolatry? Does God even allow us to have statues? Some try to prove God does not allow while other says He does. You read and decide.
Regardless if you have statues or not, it is God that we worshipped and as long as that is done, no problem.
Problem only arise if you think that the statue is God and bigger problem when you insist that the practice of idolatry is committed even when it is not.
-
Originally posted by Smarty Boy:
Actually, everybody is speaking the truth - idolatry is not allowed. The only question is - does it means that having a statue = idolatry? Does God even allow us to have statues? Some try to prove God does not allow while other says He does. You read and decide.
Regardless if you have statues or not, it is God that we worshipped and as long as that is done, no problem.
Problem only arise if you think that the statue is God and bigger problem when you insist that the practice of idolatry is committed even when it is not.
Precisely. So there is now 2 conflicting intepretation of Scripture. So who then is correct? How can I discern which intepretation is true?
And if the conflicting intepretation deals directly with our salvation eg christology, wouldn't that affect our salvation?
-
Originally posted by grandmaster89:
Precisely. So there is now 2 conflicting intepretation of Scripture. So who then is correct? How can I discern which intepretation is true?
And if the conflicting intepretation deals directly with our salvation eg christology, wouldn't that affect our salvation?
1 Corinthians 10:23 (Chapter 10 Verse 23)Everything is permissible, but not everything is helpful. Everything is permissible, but not everything builds up. 24No one should seek his own welfare, but rather his neighbor's.10
25Eat anything that is sold in the meat market without raising any question about it on the grounds of conscience, 26for “the earth and everything in it belong to the Lord.”[f] 27If an unbeliever invites you to his house and you wish to go, eat whatever is set before you, raising no question on the grounds of conscience. 28However, if someone says to you, “This was offered as a sacrifice,” don't eat it, both out of consideration for the one who told you and also for the sake of conscience. 29I mean, of course, his conscience, not yours. For why should my freedom be determined by someone else's conscience? 30If I eat with thankfulness, why should I be denounced because of what I am thankful for?10
31Therefore, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do everything for the glory of God. 32Don’t become a stumbling block to Jews or Greeks or to the church of God, 33just as I myself try to please everybody in every way. I don’t look out for my own benefit, but rather for the benefit of many people, so that they might be saved.
_________________________________________________________________
there are many different interpretations, many different meanings based on solely words from the bible but who are we to ponder on His wisdom? Scholars are today still debating on many interpretations, why let it hinder you and your relationship with God?
As Paul said in his letter to the Corinthians, "Therefore, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do everything for the glory of God" and no one can fault you. if your conscious is clear, what can we fault you on?
The True Follower of Jesus
(Luke 9:49-50)
38John said to Jesus,[cc] “Teacher, we saw someone driving out demons in your name. We tried to stop him, because he wasn't a follower like us.”
39But Jesus said, “Don't stop him, because no one who works a miracle in my name can slander me soon afterwards. 40Whoever is not against us is for us. 41I tell you with certainty, whoever gives you a cup of water to drink because you belong to the Messiah will never lose his reward.”
_________________________________________________________________so the next time if Christians debate on different practices and idealogy, remember that whoever is not against God, is for God.
Amen
-
Huh, so there shouldn't be a teaching body to decide what is right and what is wrong? If like that, then why did the Popes of old combat the ancient heresies of gnosticism, arianism, montanism etc. LOL shouldn't they just tolerate each other since they belong to the same 'church'.
-
Originally posted by grandmaster89:
Huh, so there shouldn't be a teaching body to decide what is right and what is wrong? If like that, then why did the Popes of old combat the ancient heresies of gnosticism, arianism, montanism etc. LOL shouldn't they just tolerate each other since they belong to the same 'church'.
Yes, they had wars, disputes, arguments, killing each other like no tomorrow... but we have learnt that violence doesn't solve the issues. we have moved on and today, the church has frequent dialogues with other religious leaders like with the Muslims, Buddhists and others to foster ties to push for world peace.if you wish to dwell on the past, i do not say you are wrong but will it help the present?
-
Originally posted by novelltie:
Yes, they had wars, disputes, arguments, killing each other like no tomorrow... but we have learnt that violence doesn't solve the issues. we have moved on and today, the church has frequent dialogues with other religious leaders like with the Muslims, Buddhists and others to foster ties to push for world peace.if you wish to dwell on the past, i do not say you are wrong but will it help the present?
What I meant is that they made a point to repudiate teachings which they considered to be untrue. During the Reformation, the Reformers of Old eg Luther, Calvin etc attacked the Catholic dogmas and even each other theologies especially the Eucharist. Even today, the Catholic Church highlights what teachings it considers false and what is true. The CC attacks the SSPX and Traditionalist Catholics positions while holding firm to Nulla Salus Extra Eccelsiam as a basis for Ecumenism. Ergo, the Catholic/EO system allows for a 'infallible' teaching body.So my question is when 2 Christian contradict each other, who do they seek recourse to?
-
Originally posted by grandmaster89:
What I meant is that they made a point to repudiate teachings which they considered to be untrue. During the Reformation, the Reformers of Old eg Luther, Calvin etc attacked the Catholic dogmas and even each other theologies especially the Eucharist. Even today, the Catholic Church highlights what teachings it considers false and what is true. The CC attacks the SSPX and Traditionalist Catholics positions while holding firm to Nulla Salus Extra Eccelsiam as a basis for Ecumenism. Ergo, the Catholic/EO system allows for a 'infallible' teaching body.So my question is when 2 Christian contradict each other, who do they seek recourse to?
from what i know... no one to seek. there isn't a court of religious study.
-
Originally posted by grandmaster89:
What I meant is that they made a point to repudiate teachings which they considered to be untrue. During the Reformation, the Reformers of Old eg Luther, Calvin etc attacked the Catholic dogmas and even each other theologies especially the Eucharist. Even today, the Catholic Church highlights what teachings it considers false and what is true. The CC attacks the SSPX and Traditionalist Catholics positions while holding firm to Nulla Salus Extra Eccelsiam as a basis for Ecumenism. Ergo, the Catholic/EO system allows for a 'infallible' teaching body.So my question is when 2 Christian contradict each other, who do they seek recourse to?
So the difference arise because of separation and one claimed the other is wrong. God gave us the grace of wisdom and it is up to us to discern and decide which is more appropiate and sensible to us.
Take the example of this thread. If having a crucifix helps us "stay closer" to God in our prayers and constantly remind us of Jesus' sacrifice for us, then it is helping us isnt't it? But should we be afraid to wear, carry or have a crucifix in Church just because some said that this is idolatry (when it is not)? In fact, they still cannot proved it is and a visit to a Catholic Mass will solve "all mysteries".
So, you can decide which stand you want to take - having statues is idolatry OR it is not. And if God did allow statues (He ordered to build one too)?
Differences comes about due to the interpretations and some mis-guided ones...This lead to another problem as some highly paid pastors seems untrained at all. All priests and pastors should be properly trained before they are allowed to preach so that there are basis for their teachings.
It is a fact that on our own, we will not be able to completely understand the bible since they are written at different times and under different conditions. Moreover, there are translations issue etc... the Church is there to help us understand it. This is why there are so many differences from people of different churches (sometimes even within the same denominations or no demoninations).
Even though arguments will always be there....you can discern and decide which Church is teaching you to love your God and your neighbour (the 2 commandments that Jesus gave us). Not just by lips service but by leading the way and doing it by example. Just giving 10% of the taking to charity does not mean it is responsible and doing what they preach (though any giving to charity is noble) as money is not everything.
Being a true disciple of Christ is what matters.....which is why Jesus said not all who call me Lord....Lord will enter into the Kingdom of Heaven but only true disciple who listen and act on His words. The question we got to ask oursleves - do we?
-
Originally posted by grandmaster89:
... So my question is when 2 Christian contradict each other, who do they seek recourse to?Interestingly enough, Jesus speaks of something similar in the bible (Mat 18:15-18):
"If your brother sins (against you), go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have won over your brother. If he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, so that 'every fact may be established on the testimony of two or three witnesses.' If he refuses to listen to them, tell the church. If he refuses to listen even to the church, then treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector. Amen, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
So it appears that the church is to be the final arbiter of disputes at least in faith and morals, and that the church's judgement will be ratified in heaven. But to do so, the church would have had to be a visible, unified and infallible entity, in existence since the time of the apostles. Otherwise, we wouldn't be able to do what Jesus commanded. An 'invisible' body of all believers on earth just would not work at least for the purposes of what Jesus spoke about.
Is such an entity still around today ? Certainly. The Catholic Church continues to preach the good news to the faithful and has been in existence since the time of the apostles. (We could also sort of include the Eastern Orthodox Churches but that is another story).
-
Originally posted by domonkassyu:
going by my argument,u have misunderstood it. when we pray with a bible in hand. we dont use the bible as a reminder to God. with eyes closed,it is also not a reminder to God.same with the wall and pastor..but altars erected to house statues as reminders and "worshipping" god in front of such reminders is totally another matter.
If bible do not remind you of God, what does it remind you of?
Alters errected in houses or Churches remind one of God and what's wrong with that? Praying in front of them does not equal to praying to the statues as God. It is exactly the same as having a bible in front, or the pastor or the wall etc....
It is God that we worship and not the item in front.