The Jehovah's witnesses and the rest. What's the stumper?

firedragon said:

Your post was about you catching me with my knickers down. Respond to that dream mate? I already did. Its a pervy dream.

You expect intellectual responses to that? No way.

Click to expand...

Correct. It’s an expression and you know it. I called out your error, I caught you in a misapprehension or misrepresentation of facts, I disagree with your take, which I find in error. Yes, I expect some kind of adult response. Otherwise I wouldn’t have posted what I posted.

lostwanderingsoul said:

Some people touch and kiss statues and pictures. They act like the object has some power.

Click to expand...

Your perception is mistaken. They are ascribing power to what the image represents.

sojourner said:

Your perception is mistaken. They are ascribing power to what the image represents.

Click to expand...

So you can speak for every single person who does this? I have seen some almost making love to statues. I feel sure there are Some, NOT ALL who believe the statue has power. And why do they even need an image? I can ascribe power to God without any image. So maybe your perception is not fully correct.

lostwanderingsoul said:

So you can speak for every single person who does this? I have seen some almost making love to statues. I feel sure there are Some, NOT ALL who believe the statue has power. And why do they even need an image? I can ascribe power to God without any image. So maybe your perception is not fully correct.

Click to expand...

We could make movies without sets, remember our relatives without pictures, and memorize which restrooms are which Without stick figures on the doors, too. But many times symbols are helpful.

We need to be careful in judging the intentions of others when we don’t know them.

sojourner said:

“You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.”

Do you know what an “idol” is? It’s an image that is believed to have power in and of itself. A “representation” is not an “idol.” The picture above shows a representation of Mary. The statue doesn’t have deific power in and of itself. It’s rather like a photograph in that regard. These people are showing respect for the person the image represents — not the image itself. Therefore, idolatry is not taking place.

Click to expand...

i could not help but notice you left out a few words when you quoted my post .you left out ''You must not bow down to them nor be enticed to serve them.'' is that what the people in the picture are doing ??

sojourner said:

1) The entirety of the Faith is not encompassed by the Bible.

Click to expand...

And yet, it is only the contents of the Bible that are inspired by God (2 Timothy 3:16-17).....where does that leave the rest? Like science promoting evolution...it’s a succession of best guesses and “I think” suggestions. God knows what should be contained in his word.....that’s because it is HIS, not the product of any church. Where did you get a different impression?

The Faith is an organic, growing changing community — not a museum piece.

Click to expand...

Oh, so much of the Bible can be shelved to make way for things that are new and more acceptable? Acceptable to whom I wonder? If God doesn’t change, why would his word need to do so? (Malachi 3:6)

2) Ever read the Bible stories about the apostles electing replacements, such as Matthias?

Click to expand...

Yep, there were 12 apostles. When Judas defected, he was replaced, not succeeded. Do you know the difference? How many foundation stones are there in the heavenly kingdom? (Revelation 21:14)
There is no such thing as apostolic succession except in the Catholic Church....a church plagued by apostasy, not a succession of “Popes”.

3) what do you suppose the Church did before there was a Bible? Before there were Gospels?

Click to expand...

They relied on the Hebrew Scriptures and the teachings of the apostles in written form that made their way into Christian scripture. God’s word is HIS, so he determines what it contains...not any man or any church.

To extend your “logic,” where in the Bible is the Internet spoken of? Yet JWs make use of it. When one keeps a family member under wraps and controlled, it’s called Munchausen Syndrome. Keeping the Faith from change and growth isn’t healthy.

Click to expand...

Well then, I cannot understand why it was practiced as a form of discipline in the first century church. Isn’t “excommunication” also practiced by the Catholic church? (1 Corinthians 5:9-13; 2 John 10, 11)
Did you forget that?
BTW. I think you need to read up on Munchausen’s Syndrome. LOL.....You are not even close.

sojourner said:

And yet, many of the OT stories were lifted from Babylonian mythic stories...

Click to expand...

I love the way to rubbish others for stating things with conviction but are not true.....and here you are doing exactly that. Who said?

Did it ever occur to you that the Babylonian myths were lifted from the events and oral histories that were known but happened before that history was committed to writing by Moses at a later time? What time period does Genesis cover? It was part of the scripture that was “inspired of God”, remember? How else could Moses have known about creation......or what the situation was that preceded the deluge? How could it become part of inspired scripture if it was borrowed from myths.

Are you saying that these OT stories are false religion? Once again, a statement that runs completely off the rails.

Click to expand...

No, but once again it appears that your imagination is running amok in demanding that you know what everyone else doesn’t....even among your own brethren. I am amazed at your audacity at times, assertions never backed up by anything other than your say so. Who do you think you are?

Did I see you even condoning Catholic idolatry? Oops.

cataway said:

i could not help but notice you left out a few words when you quoted my post .you left out ''You must not bow down to them nor be enticed to serve them.'' is that what the people in the picture are doing ??

Click to expand...

Didn’t need to quote it; we’ve established that it’s not an idol.

sojourner said:

Didn’t need to quote it; we’ve established that it’s not an idol.

Click to expand...

idol
noun

\ ˈī-dᵊl \
Definition of idol


1: an object of extreme devotion
2: a representation or symbol of an object of worship broadly : a false god
3a: a likeness of something
4: a false conception :
5: a form or appearance visible but without substance an enchanted phantom, a lifeless idol—

cataway said:

idol
noun

\ ˈī-dᵊl \
Definition of idol


1: an object of extreme devotion
2: a representation or symbol of an object of worship broadly : a false god
3a: a likeness of something
4: a false conception :
5: a form or appearance visible but without substance an enchanted phantom, a lifeless idol—

Click to expand...

Nope. That may be a dictionary definition, but, as we see all the time, generic definitions often fail to capture the precision as understood by the faith-tradition. An idol is understood to have power in and of itself, according to biblical and religious anthropologists. In this case, their authority trumps a generic definition.

sojourner said:

Correct. It’s an expression and you know it. I called out your error, I caught you in a misapprehension or misrepresentation of facts, I disagree with your take, which I find in error. Yes, I expect some kind of adult response. Otherwise I wouldn’t have posted what I posted.

Click to expand...

Lot of concepts but nothing objective. I did this, I did that. In school-kids long ago we used to call people like that "I specialists".

Brother. I dont know what you are looking for. Definitely not some decent conversation.

Have a great day.

sojourner said:

We could make movies without sets, remember our relatives without pictures, and memorize which restrooms are which Without stick figures on the doors, too. But many times symbols are helpful.

We need to be careful in judging the intentions of others when we don’t know them.

Click to expand...

I am not judging and I am not saying everyone does this. But I feel sure there are some people who give images a lot more power than they deserve.

sojourner said:

Nope. That may be a dictionary definition, but, as we see all the time, generic definitions often fail to capture the precision as understood by the faith-tradition. An idol is understood to have power in and of itself, according to biblical and religious anthropologists. In this case, their authority trumps a generic definition.

Click to expand...

An idol is ''assumed'' to have power in and of itself . that ,BTW ,comes from the people , the people that bow to it .

cataway said:

An idol is ''assumed'' to have power in and of itself . that ,BTW ,comes from the people , the people that bow to it .

Click to expand...

Thats not all correct. An idol can be anything people tend to worship or value more than or as much as God. It doesn't necessarily have to be a physical idol. It could just be an idea without an image. I am no expert in Hebrew but I do know that there are verses that address both an Idol, and a made up or a moulded image in the same sentence. As in Deuteronomy 27:15. The question should be, does the word Pasil mean a moulded image alone or does it mean an idol also which is idolising something else other than YHWH?

Cheers.

firedragon said:

Thats not all correct. An idol can be anything people tend to worship or value more than or as much as God. It doesn't necessarily have to be a physical idol. It could just be an idea without an image. I am no expert in Hebrew but I do know that there are verses that address both an Idol, and a made up or a moulded image in the same sentence. As in Deuteronomy 27:15. The question should be, does the word Pasil mean a moulded image alone or does it mean an idol also which is idolising something else other than YHWH?

Cheers.

Click to expand...

yes it is an open forum yet the quote was for sojourner

firedragon said:

Thats not all correct. An idol can be anything people tend to worship or value more than or as much as God. It doesn't necessarily have to be a physical idol. It could just be an idea without an image. I am no expert in Hebrew but I do know that there are verses that address both an Idol, and a made up or a moulded image in the same sentence. As in Deuteronomy 27:15. The question should be, does the word Pasil mean a moulded image alone or does it mean an idol also which is idolising something else other than YHWH?

Cheers.

Click to expand...

Most religious Jews won't be participating here because it is Yom Kippur until tomorrow evening.
FYI the Hebrew says פֶ֨סֶל וּמַסֵּכָ֜ה (pesel umasecha) which means 'statue or mask'. I suppose a mask is a moulded image and pesel is a craven image.
I suppose pesel could be used figuratively for non-physical idols, but I don't that in this case.

Jedster said:

Most religious Jews won't be participating here because it is Yom Kippur until tomorrow evening.
FYI the Hebrew says פֶ֨סֶל וּמַסֵּכָ֜ה (pesel umasecha) which means 'statue or mask'. I suppose a mask is a moulded image and pesel is a craven image.
I suppose pesel could be used figuratively for non-physical idols, but I don't that in this case.

Click to expand...

In order to answer you properly I need to have some expertise in Hebrew. And I dont.

Yet I can vouch to the fact that Idol is not necessarily a graven image. It can also be idolising something other than God.

Lets say I worship another concept of God which is not the concept of YHWH in Judaism, the monotheistic God, I am committing idol worship.

Yet, I could stand corrected and I do welcome your scholarship because you know Hebrew.

Cheers.

firedragon said:

In order to answer you properly I need to have some expertise in Hebrew. And I dont.

Yet I can vouch to the fact that Idol is not necessarily a graven image. It can also be idolising something other than God.

Lets say I worship another concept of God which is not the concept of YHWH in Judaism, the monotheistic God, I am committing idol worship.
no longer religoius for many years now
Yet, I could stand corrected and I do welcome your scholarship because you know Hebrew.

Cheers.

Click to expand...

I agree.
Maybe that is why two words were used , pesel umasecha, to signify different types of idolatry.
I an no scholar in Hebrew, but Grew up in a Jewish community and learnt Classical Hebrew at the schools I went to.
I am no longer religious but do occasionally delve back into Torah.

Going back to the question , I am sure some observant Jew(s) will give you a more detailed answer.

Jedster said:

I agree.
Maybe that is why two words were used , pesel umasecha, to signify different types of idolatry.
I an no scholar in Hebrew, but Grew up in a Jewish community and learnt Classical Hebrew at the schools I went to.
I am no longer religious but do occasionally delve back into Torah.

Going back to the question , I am sure some observant Jew(s) will give you a more detailed answer.

Click to expand...

Well, my knowledge of the Hebrew text is very specific. I dont know Hebrew so I will only know some very specific areas in the Tanakh and meanings of specific citations. So you are my friend far ahead of me.

In this particular matter I have been told that Jews did believe others who worship any other concept of God is idol worship. It doesnt necessarily have to be a graven idol as in like exactly what you said "Pesel Umsecha". If someone worships another God with different attributes to Hashem, even if he doesnt have an image, it is still idol worship.

I remember vividly about a tree called Ashera which as Rashi has said "is adored as an idol". You see the sentence shows that you idolise the tree as an idol where in idol here means you adore something so much you are making an idol of it. So the "idol" is not because it is a graven image of something or because it is an image of anything, it is because of the act of idolising.

This was a long time ago so maybe I am mixing Rashis commentary to an actual passage in the Mishnah. If I find the exact reference I will make it here.

Thanks for engaging.

firedragon said:

Well, my knowledge of the Hebrew text is very specific. I dont know Hebrew so I will only know some very specific areas in the Tanakh and meanings of specific citations. So you are my friend far ahead of me.

In this particular matter I have been told that Jews did believe others who worship any other concept of God is idol worship. It doesnt necessarily have to be a graven idol as in like exactly what you said "Pesel Umsecha". If someone worships another God with different attributes to Hashem, even if he doesnt have an image, it is still idol worship.

I remember vividly about a tree called Ashera which as Rashi has said "is adored as an idol". You see the sentence shows that you idolise the tree as an idol where in idol here means you adore something so much you are making an idol of it. So the "idol" is not because it is a graven image of something or because it is an image of anything, it is because of the act of idolising.

This was a long time ago so maybe I am mixing Rashis commentary to an actual passage in the Mishnah. If I find the exact reference I will make it here.

Thanks for engaging.

Click to expand...

You are well ahead of me if you are reading Rashi & Mishna. It has been several decades for me. However I do remember learning to read Rashi's script and found it only a small step from Hebrew, yet looks different.
I still have a complete translation of the Mishna that my father gave me in 1961.

Wait till you get to the Gemara......

Jedster said:

You are well ahead of me if you are reading Rashi & Mishna. It has been several decades for me. However I do remember learning to read Rashi's script and found it only a small step from Hebrew, yet looks different.
I still have a complete translation of the Mishna that my father gave me in 1961.

Wait till you get to the Gemara......

Click to expand...

lol. Bro. I read translations. I cant read any script. I know some other languages, but not Hebrew script. One day maybe.