Churches told to ditch 'Jesus on a cross' image

Ananova ^ | 14 August 2003 | staff writers

[ThomasMore]

I don't think that many others actually use images and icons of Christ on the cross.

They should! In light of the war on Christianity and our symbiotic relationship to Christ on the cross, they should. Oh Yes! They should display the crucified Christ and remember exactly what he did to save our sorry souls. Too many have forgotten. They've sterilized the cross of its whole message.

[ahadams2]

probably not Catholic yet - they wouldn't dare publicize it like this, whereas we Anglicans have to deal with heresy in high places...heresiarchs, I believe is the correct term...

[ahadams2]

uh, OpusFR, the issue has to do with less uniformity in theological education over here on the Protestant side of the spectrum... I'd bet half my students think I'm a closet RC myself! :-)

[If I ever find a Christus Rex crucifix with Christ dressed as he's described in Revelation, I'll buy it and put it up in my office, and then the real fun will begin! :-)

[GirlShortstop]

Instead, advertisers say churches should...

Did anyone besides me stop reading here?

Uggghh!

[jam137]

She cringes every time she sees a necklace of the crucified Christ.

Unfortunately, that sounds more like what a vampire might do.

A crucifix is a symbol which depicts Jesus dying for the sins of the world. No one who believes the Gospel needs to be afraid of it. It's not just a Roman Catholic (or Anglican, Lutheran, etc.) symbol. It's a universal Christian symbol, because it depicts universal Christian doctrine.

[JWinNC]

Did'nt bother to read the article, but I'll say this, the best churches are seeker friendly AND preach the message of the Cross.

After all, there is nothing more friendly and loving than someone (more so with God) giving up his life for you.

JWinNC