Posted on 08/05/2013 10:31:02 AM PDT by 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.
"Was I not told ON this thread, that a small little child sat at the feet of a large wooden crucifix and had her heart full of pity, because the crucifix reminded her that there is a place for sorrow and sadness over the death of Jesus.
THAT is worship.
YOU stop spreading falsehood that it is something else."
I was that child, Truth2012, and my point, sure enough, is that it is worship, but (I will type this real slowly so you will hear every word) ---it is...
Worship of the Lord Jesus Christ. Not worship of the crucifix.Worship.
Of.
The.
Lord.
Jesus.
Christ.
Even as a child, I would not have been such a fool as to think that the wood was suffering, or that a carved figure died for me, or that a large art object was the Creator and Redeemer of the World, the Lord and Giver of Life, worthy of my adoration.
Since you have more than once either misquoted me, or quoted me in a sense exactly opposite to the one I was expressing. I now forbid you to refer to me even by paraphrase without a courtesy ping (which you failed to do in this instance) or to quote me hereafter without my explicit permission.
Please observe this courtesy.
Thank you.
THIS is what is getting us into trouble!
It is a mere tiptoe step any from, "If HE could, then ..." and a whole subset of theology gets created.
When we stop relying on EVIDENCE; then all kinds of things can be conjured up - all based on...
Who's to say He can't?
And we do know for a fact that where Christ is, at the right hand of the Father in heaven, is beyond time and space, because time and space are characteristics of the physical Universe. Therefore He is not limited by temporal and spatial constraints.p> I'll grant you that anything we say about the nature of the Resurrection body, beyond the evidence (as above), is speculative by definition, and therefore not dogma.) However it is not unreasonable: it is congruent with converging lines of evidence.
THAT is worship.
YOU stop spreading falsehood that it is something else.
Lets substitute a couple of words to make an analogy, and if you are intellectually honest you will see the errors of your understanding of practices of worship:
Was I not told ON this thread, that a small little child sat looking at a picture of her recently deceased dog and had her heart full of pity, because the picture reminded her that there is a place for sorrow and sadness over the death of her dog.
Further When a Catholic tells you that they don't engage in idol worship then that is the end of the debate. Catholics know what worship is.
HREF="http://www.ccel.org/">Christian Classics ethereal Library.
this is not a Catholic site and is accepted by every legitimate Christian religion and several that aren't.
Ok- you have now just compared the death of Jesus to the death of a DOG??
And you want me to believe you have a heavy reverence for the sacrifices of God and Jesus, on our behalf?
Umm.. ok, that is a stretch, but I will continue for a few moments in this discussion with you.
I don’t need a Catholic to define “worship”, because the Bible defines worship as obedience to God. See: 1 Sam. 15:2-23 for one example.
When you build your foundation on the Rock of Jesus, you do not need a human to explain anything to you, because you have the word of God.
The debate ends when God says it ends. The fact that a Catholic might look at the death of Jesus as the death of their dog blows my mind!
Huh?? My English translation of Bereshith in chapter 1 verse 5 it says "and the evening and the morning were the first day" (until the next sunset, that is). Then there are 5 more yoms=24-hour days until the last sundown of this cycle. The next sundown will begin the first day of the next week=heptad=shabua of days.
Did that not come across in what I said? I must not have communicated clearly, or else my text was not read with that obvious meaning in view. Sunday is not Shabbas=Sabbath, as some call it (wrongly). Therefore, Shabbas is the seventh yom (I did use "yom" before, didn't I) .
And ina secular Gentile's world, the 24-hour day does not begin at sunup, it begins at 12:00 AM midnight. Although sometimes it is said of sunup, "the day is come"; and that saying is the same for either system. And, not being nosy, but your knowledge of this comes from ... what?
With regard --
From my end it is over. If you can't understand an analogy then there is no sense in discussing anything with you.
I will offer my Rosary for you to night.
I am not sure what your point is, but the fact is that the Sabbath starts at sunset on Friday.
Sunset Friday to sunset Saturday is the first day of the week.
Saturday marks the first day of the week, not Sunday. Sunday is the second day of the week. That is what Jesus observed and how God planned things, so it is irrelevant what your English definition says.
And that is what I was posting about. Not sure what you are posting about. :shrug:
Sorry that you don’t what I write, but that is offensive to compare Jesus to a Dog! You had to know that.
Listen, I do not believe in superstitions like a Rosary. I appreciate the gesture, because I believe you mean it with kindness, but you might be better served to offer it for someone else who finds merit in those sort of things.
Had Mary not been the sinner that she was, Yeshua would not have really been the “second Adam.”
He would have had nothing in common with any of us, and would not have been of Adam’s real seed.
>> “ I did read through his autobiography and got some feeling of his deep commitment to the NIV.” <<
.
Certainly not a good thing!
Of the widely used ‘translations,’ The NIV group is the least reliable, and the most deeply and deliberately corrupted.
>> “I will offer my Rosary for you to night.” <<
What a cruel and hurtful curse to offer!
No, to Yeshua, the sabbath is the sabbath! (7th day of the week, keep it holy)
If Jesus the Second Adam is sinless,then He is the same as the First Adam was, in those blissful days in Eden before sin. In other words He has the same HumanNature 1.0 that First Adam had, before the Apple Incident.
How could he be a descendant of Adam if his mother lacked Adam’s sin nature?
Mary would have had to have been removed from Adam’s lineage somehow.
Fortunately, Mary was quite the sinner, as can be ascertained from each and every mention of her after his birth.
It’s a way of saying that the act of taking bread and cup as part of the ceremony of remembering Christ’s sacrifice is looked upon by God as the soul having shared Christ’s life as it was given for us...even if the bread remains bread and the wine remains wine as opposed to simply just having supper! Within the context of communion, to take such cup and wine and toss them back haphazardly, without proper reverence and examination of one’s own heart and soul is to bring damnation to one’s self as Paul taught. Taking bread and wine in the context of supper is simply that...supper!
Are you saying Jesus had to have a depraved nature in order to be the Messiah>
"Fortunately, Mary was quite the sinner, as can be ascertained from each and every mention of her after his birth."
"Fortunately"?? You think it's "fortunate" if Mary wasn't full of grace? But then the Archangel Gabriel lied.
Mary doesn't exhibit any sin in the Gospels. Perhaps you're thinking of the Quran?
Fixed it for you. I will be doing one for you tomorrow night.
What members of your church attended the Council of Nicea to fend off the gnostic and Arian heresies? Which of them put down the pelagius heresy.
The "members" of the church of Jesus Christ, His body, consists of ALL believers and followers of Jesus Christ from all time, so those who counted on Divinely-inspired Holy Scripture to dispute the heretics back then are as much members of the body of Christ as those of us who follow him today. Today's Roman Catholics like to claim they are members of the same church as the early Christians and that ONLY their current church is the same one as established in that first century. This can easily be shown to be in error as there are many doctrines and dogmas that they hold to today that were unheard of in the Apostles' time or that have CHANGED since then.
Where was your church during the Council of Constantinople that settled the matter of the filoque?
See above answer. As a side note, are you implying that the Orthodox Church, which disagrees with the "filique" of the Roman Catholic Church, is not equally as genuine as they are?
Can you identify the members that helped to define the doctrine of the hypostatic union? Which of them was present at both Hippo and Carthage ordering the canon of the New Testament?
See answer to first question. See how easy it is to settle false constructs once one has the actual truth revealed? Where were "our" church members back then? The same place as those who hold to the Biblically revealed Christian faith today.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.