Jump to content
The World News Media

Should God Be Worshipped Through Images? ~ ? ??


Bible Speaks

Recommended Posts

  • Member

Should God Be Worshipped Through Images? ~ ???

God’s View of Religious Images

Religious icons and idols are representations, or symbols, of anything that serves as an object of devotion or veneration. They include crosses, statues, pictures, or any other likeness of things in heaven or on the earth.* Flags can also be objects of veneration.

The use of such objects in worship goes back thousands of years. Hence, in 1513 B.C.E., when giving the fledgling nation of Israel the Ten Commandments, God clearly stated his view of religious images. He said: “You must not make for yourself a carved image or a form like anything that is in the heavens above or that is on the earth underneath or that is in the waters under the earth. You must not bow down to them nor be induced to serve them, because I Jehovah your God am a God exacting exclusive devotion.”—Exodus 20:4, 5.

Note God’s twofold prohibition: First, his people were not to make images for worship, and second, they were not to “bow down to them” or serve them. Why does our Creator forbid the making of images? One reason for not making images of God is that “no man has seen God at any time.” Jehovah is not made of physical matter but is a spirit and lives in the spirit realm. (John 1:18; 4:24) A reason for not making images of anything is that God insists on “exclusive devotion.” “To no one else shall I give my own glory, neither my praise to graven images,” he says. (Isaiah 42:8) For this reason, it is also wrong to make an image as an aid to worship. When an Israelite leader named Aaron did so, Jehovah was deeply offended.—Exodus 32:4-10.
Why Not Bow Down to Them?

Regarding idols, the Bible says: “A mouth they have, but they cannot speak; eyes they have, but they cannot see; ears they have, but they cannot hear.” Then it adds this sobering warning: “Those making them will become just like them”—lifeless!—Psalm 115:4-8.

Idol worship is also an act of injustice. Ask yourself, ‘How would I feel if I gave my child an expensive gift and he walked away and thanked a total stranger or even a lifeless object?’ That may help you to appreciate how our Creator and Life-Giver feels when others—including lifeless idols—receive the credit and worship that are due him.—Revelation 4:11.

Think, too, how degrading it is for a human—made in God’s own image—to venerate an inanimate object! (Genesis 1:27) Concerning some who did just that, the prophet Isaiah wrote: “To the work of one’s hands they bow down, to that which one’s fingers have made. And earthling man bows down and man becomes low, and you [Jehovah God] cannot possibly pardon them.”—Isaiah 2:8, 9.

???

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102008287?q=ps+115%3A4&p=par

C58FDFC4-BBA3-4D21-B204-05EDED7503F9.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 537
  • Replies 0
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Should God Be Worshipped Through Images? ~ ??? God’s View of Religious Images Religious icons and idols are representations, or symbols, of anything that serves as an object of devotion or v

Posted Images





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • … and donchew forget now … the GB now allows Sisters to come to meetings and go out in field service in slacks or Mumus.  Or slacks AND Mumus, if poundage appropriate. Did I ever mention I once dated a Sister that made Mumus out of parachutes? She was an Opera singer, and had a UN diplomatic passport. She was on “speed”, couldn’t blink, and typed 600 words a minute with 100% errors. Occasionally she would get lipstick in her eyebrows.  
    • In my perspective, when the Smithsonian Magazine covers a topic, I am inclined to trust their expertise. As for the shadows here, I see no benefit in entertaining irrational ideas from others. Let them hold onto their own beliefs. We shouldn't further enable their self-deception and misleading of the public.  
    • Hey Self! 🤣I came across this interesting conspiracy theory. There are scholars who firmly believe in the authenticity of those artifacts. I value having conversations with myself. The suggestion of a mentally ill person has led to the most obscure manifestation of a group of sorrowful individuals. 😁
    • I have considered all of their arguments. Some even apply VAT 4956 to their scenarios, which is acceptable. Anyone can use secular evidence if they genuinely seek understanding. Nonetheless, whether drawing from scripture or secular history, 607 is a plausible timeframe to believe in. People often misuse words like "destruction", "devastation", and "desolation" in an inconsistent manner, similar to words like "besiege", "destroy", and "sack". When these terms are misapplied to man-made events, they lose their true meaning. This is why with past historians, the have labeled it as follows: First Capture of Jerusalem 606 BC Second Capture of Jerusalem 598 BC Third Capture of Jerusalem 587 BC Without taking into account anything else.  Regarding the second account, if we solely rely on secular chronology, the ancient scribes made military adaptations to align with the events recorded in the Babylonian Chronicles. However, the question arises: Can we consider this adaptation as accurate?  Scribes sought to include military components in their stories rather than focusing solely on biblical aspects. Similarly, astronomers, who were also scholars, made their observations at the king's request to divine omens, rather than to understand the plight of the Jewish people. Regarding the third capture, we can only speculate because there are no definitive tablets like the Babylonian chronicles that state 598. It is possible that before the great tribulation, Satan will have influenced someone to forge more Babylonian chronicles in order to discredit the truth and present false evidence from the British Museum, claiming that the secular view was right all along. This could include documents supposedly translated after being found in 1935, while others were found in the 1800s. The Jewish antiquities authorities have acknowledged the discovery of forged items, while the British Museum has not made similar acknowledgments. It is evident that the British Museum has been compelled to confess to having looted or stolen artifacts which they are unwilling to return. Consequently, I find it difficult to place my trust in the hands of those who engage in such activities. One of the most notable instances of deception concerning Jewish antiquities was the widely known case of the ossuary belonging to James, the brother of Jesus. I was astonished by the judge's inexplicable justification for acquittal, as it was evident that his primary concern was preserving the reputation of the Jewish nation, rather than unearthing the truth behind the fraudulent artifact. The judge before even acknowledged it. "In his decision, the judge was careful to say his acquittal of Golan did not mean the artifacts were necessarily genuine, only that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Golan had faked them." The burden of proof is essential. This individual not only forged the "Jehoash Tablet," but also cannot be retried for his deceit. Why are they so insistent on its authenticity? To support their narrative about the first temple of Jerusalem. Anything to appease the public, and deceive God. But then again, after the Exodus, when did they truly please God? So, when it comes to secular history, it's like a game of cat and mouse.  
  • Members

  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      159.4k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,680
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Techredirector
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.