Behold the glorious images of God

by Lekore 10 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Lekore

  As a kid I would often be repremanded by my parents for putting a poster of a popstar or other contemporary celebrity which I lended my appreciation to. But what confused me is the much disaproval of my popstars when every time we sat down for dinner we would be watched by a framed illustration of Jesus that was produced by the society.

  Now that I'm older and I visited my parent's house I saw the same photograph, sat proudly on the dining wall demonstrating the 'strong faith' they still have. Reminded of my childhood concerns I sneakly did some research on the watchtower CD and discovered this passage in reference to idols:

  “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.

  But as the orginisation clearly points out is, "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." Now does this mean making images of any kind, earth or heaven are forbidden? They seem to recognise a difference between the image itself, and then worship...

  My question is, has anyone else been concerned over this? What line is drawn by the society at the production of earthly or godly images? Have you seen assembly halls like the ones I used to visit which had bible scenes in every direction? Does this passage only apply to pictures on walls, or do images in watchtowers and other publications count?

  Just incase you needed some imagery, here's some I thought demonstrated my point:

  
• 

  BurnTheShips

  “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.”

  This is not a stricture against image-making, but against image-worship.

  Here are artist's renditions of the Ark of the Covenant, of the inside of the Tabernacle used in the time of Moses, and the Temple built by Solomon, based on the descriptions in the Bible:

  

  

  As you can see, there are images here.

  BTS
• 

  Broken Promises

  I’m surprised your parents had an image of Jesus on the wall. From what I recall, that kind of thing was forbidden because it imitated the Catholic’s use of images and icons.
• 

  Lekore

  It seems that I'm not the only one, a couple of friends mentioned similar circumstances. Not to mention one particular kingdom hall and assembly hall which had many illustrations hanging on the wall.

  Burntheships, I see perhaps what your saying especially since the organisation makes it an interpretation of images based on worship, but surely the connotations of hanging these illustrations on the wall alone is a form of worship? The first sentence from the scripture seems to ban all Godly interpretations, but then again also earthly ones.
• 

  Nephilim

  Forget for a second any spin that you can put on that scripture. This is EXACTLY the type of bullshit spin that the WTBS puts on the scriptures that they favor.

  On the one side you could be right, on the other hand it may come down to symantics. That is the problem with scripture interpretation you can almost make any scripture mean something completely different than it was originally intended.

  If you are a believer in the bible you have to be extremely well educated on the time period, what was happening during that time, symbolism, etc...

  Unlike what the WTBS says the book IS outdated and cannot be fully interpreted by your below IQ joe schmoe.

  I suppose this is why the WTBS feels they have a right to put out supplimentary materials. However, they have never and will never have the exclusive right to be the sole interpreter of scriptual meaning.

  That having been said, the red revelation book is a complete joke. There are so many scriptual spins and confusing logic put out in it (and even updated to more confusing convuluted meanings through new light) that I'd go as far to say it is the most pompous book ever written. The fact that they are depicted images of god in it are dangerously close to violating the scripture you mentioned - with little or no reason to their presence in the book. It makes no sense.

  Can anybody name another supposedly "non-fiction" book put out "worldwide" that is so full of bullshit and so obviously written to say "hey we were chosen by god! Check us out!"

  If people were allowed to ask questions during the bookstudy this book would've been destroyed years ago.

  Sorry to go off on the red revelation book but I know that's where you got the images and the book makes me sick. OPEN YOUR EYES SHEEPLE.
• 

  designs

  When you put the picture of Jesus on the wall did the eyes follow you around, I always liked the one's where the eyes followed you around.
• 

  Lekore

  Haha you made some great points Nephilim, there really is no point in 'reasoning' with the JW beliefs not least because they are 'reasoning' on the scriptures rather than what we consider to be 'reason' in the modern enlightenment sense. Considering that the scriptures are completely open for debate everyone could go back and forth with the argument on this one, especially since it probably comes down to one of the many many mysterious 'grey areas' that JWs stand behind.

  Nevertheless, what IS interesting is the comparisons made by the WTBS with contemporary images of popstars in that they are held up in the form of posters etc. to be immitated, to become just like that celebrity and in effect, worshiping them. Somehow it reminds me of a certain male icon the witnesses are trying to become just like... Surely by having a picture of the very man your attempting to 'walk in the footsteps' of would be considered a form of idolatry?
• 

  cyberjesus

  I think if people would stop interpreting the bible and just read it for what it says it would be a less mysterious religion.

  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.

  I think that was clear. Drawing pictures and sculptures carved. from things from heavens earth and water..... They didnt miss anything I dont thing.

  You must not bow down to them nor be induced to serve them, because I Jehovah your God am a God exacting exclusive devotion.

  So not bowing down and not serving the images........ cuz Jehovah is jealous!

  I m so glad I dont believe on all that crap!
• 

  Lekore

  Do you think Jehovah is jealous that Jesus has all the portraits in the WTBS illustrations and that Jehovah is just a blank outline of an old man?

  Also, why is it that they find it perfectly acceptable to interpret what Jesus looks like (mostly white?) when they say we can't imagine what God would like, else we'd DIE! Except again, he is shown as a white old man.
• 

  BurnTheShips

  I think if people would stop interpreting the bible and just read it for what it says it would be a less mysterious religion.

  Unless done in something akin to machine language, information processing is always interpretive.

  BTS