Does The Orthodox Presbyterian Church use the Crucifix?

The Orthodox Presbyterian Church ^

[Gamecock]

Question:

Does the OPC use the crucifix in the church? If not, are they opposed to it?

Answer:

Thank you for your question. The answer is, so far as I know, the crucifix is not used in OPC churches, and here is why:

1.The Second Commandment (Ex. 20:4-6 and Deut. 5:8-10) forbids any picture or image of God, and that would include the Son of God, even as man. At any rate we do not know what Jesus looked like as there is no physical description of him.

2.The crucifix will always end up being an object of worship—regarded as holy. History teaches as much. The bronze serpent Moses made became an object of worship and was not destroyed till King Hezekiah did it (Numbers 21:9; 2 Kings 18:1-5). Roman Catholics have worshipped it, kissed it and held it to have mystical powers.

3.Christ did not remain on the Cross. In the Roman Church Christ is said to be resacrificed each time the Mass is celebrated. This is heresy; he died once for all—Hebrews 9:25-28.

We in the OPC have learned not to trust our idolatry prone hearts not to do the same as others have in the past. Hence, no crucifixes are used. So, yes, we are opposed to it.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Yes... if I understand you correctly. Since we are, as God intended when He created us, embodied souls, or ensouled bodies, the body and soul absolutely go together. Together, they constitute “you.”

[imardmd1]

You make a humongous error in assuming that "wine" in the Holy Scriptures means "alcoholic" -- this a gross interpretive blunder (but a common one amongst those having little Scriptural understanding), because the state of the beverage is context-dependent. Here, where Paul is addressing Timothy's (perhaps) myasthenia (infirmities = ασθενειας), at least he is only recommending wine as a medication, which would contain the same beneficial resveratrol whether alcoholic or not. In fact, no doubt the antioxidants will be greatly reduced by fermentation, which is an oxidative process. The ability to produce non-alcoholic wine was well-known in those days when there was no Mountain Dew and you did not want your family to be drunk all the time with social beverages.

I am sure that Paul and Timothy, as godly people listening to His advice about their diet, would no doubt have heeded the proverb:

" Look not thou upon the wine when it is red, when it giveth his colour in the cup, when it moveth itself aright" (Prov. 23:31)

Without getting into color center chemistry or effects of alcohol on surface tension effects (which my educational discipline permis, and which effects on wine I've studied) let me tell you that unfermented grape juice (wine) of purple grapes (wine in Hebrew yayin, and in Greek oinos) is purple in the glass; but the oxidation process of fermentation changes the coordination of the color centers such that the blue component is removed, and the color in the glass of its alcoholic form (also wine, no differentiation in Hebrew or Greek) is red instead of purple. When God says "Don't even look on it in this form, let alone imbibe it!" I think He really means business. How I found out was by ruining my marriage and my family partly through being a documented heavy habitual drinker, particularly of beer (= Biblical strong drink, there were no distilled spirits until about AD 800, invented by Mohammedan chemists). And a son whose Escort was run over by a Greyhound bus when his blood alcohol was extremely high, 0.25%, so don't toy with me about the effects of alcohol, including wine, in the life of a dedicated follower of The Christ.

Keep your mocking to yourself.

[imardmd1]

Just to put it real simply, ...

Just to put it real simply, and saying it as kindly as I can, it is not my observation that your opinion on this can be taken as one from an expert.

But to bring up something mentioned before, many people are now being cremated, with their ashes spread who knows where. Having no personal experience of being resurrected, I think I'll just trust in God to give me an incorruptible spiritual body from which the soul and spirit can never again be dissociated.

When the Holy Ghost says "It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body" I believe it. He says the two kinds of body are different, and I'm not going to stand here and argue about it. He is going to have his own will, way, works, and the last word. So far He has also said, "Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption" and "Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption" and also "So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory."

I think I'm going to go with that. I want to be like Jesus, go through walls, flit from heaven to earth whenever He does, leap tall buildings with a single bound, enter the True Holiest of All, and kneel in His Presence with gratitude and joy, and be received and loved by the master of the Universe. It will not be in a flesh-and-blood body. Absolute life is not in the carnal blood, it is in the Spirit.

[imardmd1]

Yes... if I understand you correctly. Since we are, as God intended when He created us, embodied souls, or ensouled bodies, the body and soul absolutely go together. Together, they constitute “you.”

Nope. My soul and spirit constitute "me". Body is just equipment. Ask Stephen Hawking, spiritually dead to God, but alive in the body. When his soul and (hu)man's spirit depart from his body, he will be physically dead, but his soul will be alive. Does he want that body back again? Maybe not, but that's what he will get if he doesn't heed the call.

Do you not know that Jesus came to save souls, not bodies?

Jesus is able to give the "me" component a new body, minus any remnant of the "old man" in it. That's what I want. (He will have the only damaged body in Heaven. AFIK.)

[imardmd1]

Not sure what your point us. A criticism? Ad hominem" If so, are three fingers pointed backward?

Illuminate me.

[Iscool]

He also possessed a fully human nature. His human nature allowed Him to walk among us as a man. To exist this nature required the intake of food and drink. It also required air for him to breathe and for him to expel waste products. All of this was required for him to be fully human.

The important thing to remember is that He never stopped being fully human. It would have meant nothing for His divine nature to be resurrected with out His human nature/body to be as well. That would not have been conquering death.

Now that is interesting...Thru the years I have on occassion heard it said by some while on their way to the bathroom that they were going to 'sit on the throne' for a while...

Little did I know that this phrase had a Catholic origin...

Now I hafta wonder what happens when they 'flush' up there...Rain???

[Mrs. Don-o]

"Do you not know that Jesus came to save souls, not bodies?"

I think this is the root of our disagreement. I believe Jesus came to save persons: and the human person is a composite being, with a body, and a soul which is spiritual. (That is, the human soul is a spirit.)

Angels are bodiless spirits. Animals are nonspiritual bodies. Humans are embodied spirits (or you could say "enspirited bodies") --- the point is, we are both conjoined, because God made us composite.

This explains the significance of the empty tomb. The angels didn't say "Here's His corpse, yeah, that's still dead; but don't worry, He got another body."

Some nonbelievers say that Jesus' disciples came and stole His body, or that wild dogs came and ate it. According to your view, would that be an acceptable explanation, since you think His body did not rise, but it was replaced?

I hope I'm not misconstruing you--- you did say we get replacement bodies, right?

It is perfectly plausible that I could be hit by an atom bomb and be blasted up to the stratosphere with my ashes distributed through the wind worldwide and ending up in bodies of whales, lettuces, bacteria, and other people; and the Lord will still resurrect MY body --- THIS body --- on the last day.

Why couldn't He? He said He would.

Resurrection" means to be brought back to life, to rise (again) from the dead. "Again" - the "re" part of resurrection, means the same body died, and is raised again.

"Reincarnation" means the transmigration of the soul into another body.

As you know, although reincarnation is taught in Hinduism and Buddhism, it is not part of Christian revelation. Isn't the "resurrection of the body" part of your creed? (Just curious: I actually had never before run into a Christian who didn't believe in the "resurrection of the body.")

[Gamecock]

This is one reason that some Evangelical leaders (Al Mohler comes to mind) are opposed to cremation. Dr. Mohler is of the opinion that burying an intact body gives testimony to all present to our hope of the bodily resurrection.

[Elsie]

(no date in the chronology of Jesus' ministry)(no credits)(no context explaining the application)

(no date in the chronology of ELSIE's replies)(no credits)(no context explaining the application)

[Elsie]

You make a humongous error in assuming that "wine" in the Holy Scriptures means "alcoholic"

Are you assuming that I'm assuming?

[Elsie]

How I found out was by ruining my marriage and my family partly through being a documented heavy habitual drinker...

I had wondered just WHY you were being so adamant about NOT drinking alcohol now.

[Elsie]

I ruined one myself, and NO liquor was involved at all.

I hope you are doing better now.

You sound like you are.

[Elsie]

Illuminate me.

YOU said YOU were going to show me the biblical 'woodshed'; but it never appeared; so I decided to show one myself.

[Elsie]

1/2 Nana... 1/2

[Gamecock]

the effects of alcohol, including wine, in the life of a dedicated follower of The Christ.

So Jesus didn't turn water into wine at a wedding?

We are given drink as a gift. Like other gifts it is up to us to use it responsibly. Abuse of any gift is a sin.

[imardmd1]

... you did say we get replacement bodies, right?

Absolutely. Flesh and bone, not flesh and blood.

Enoch and Elijah have yet to die. Moses showed up at the Transfiguration--a very interesting event, as was that of Lazarus of Bethany. Samuel seen by Saul. The little lad raised up by Elisha.

[Tennessee Nana]

OK Dearie...

:)

[Tennessee Nana]

When I was a youngun the local Presbyterian Church had at least one Crucifix..

What happened since then..

This was in New Zealand, a British Commonwealth country so maybe the US is different ???

[Gamecock]

Was that a cross or a crucifix.

And what flavor Presbyterian? Cumberland? They are Presbyterian in polity only. PC(USA)? Or one of their predecessors?

[Mrs. Don-o]

"This is one reason that some Evangelical leaders (Al Mohler comes to mind) are opposed to cremation. Dr. Mohler is of the opinion that burying an intact body gives testimony to all present to our hope of the bodily resurrection."

Thanks for that info--- I hadn't known that about Dr. Mohler and am glad to hear of it.

I've been in FR since 1997, first under my husband's name, and then my own, and I had never before run into Christians who explicitly denied the resurrection of the body. It threw me for a loop when some FReepers on this thread started taking that POV.

There are a couple of FReepers, not on this thread, who do take a reincarnation view (the soul is granted a new body to live in) - they are dualists and self-described non-Christians or post-Christians.

Since you are undoubtedly more familiar with the range of non-Catholic Christianity than I am, I have a question for you: is the denial/reintepretation of "the resurrection of the body" a very widespread thing out there amongst Evangelicals or Reformed or Pentecostals or what-have-you? (I wouldn't think so, but I assume you would know more than I do.)

Incidentally, I always read Dr. Mohler's stuff when it gets posted on FR. Deeply educated, very smart, a good guy:I respect him highly.