Does Jesus qualify as an idol?
Does Jesus qualify as an idol?
In reading the various definitions of idol, I think Christians have turned Jesus into the type of idol that he railed against.
We all idol worship in some sense. If you can think analogically you will agree. Here is a poet that might help you do that. He has a good message but he himself ends in being an idol worshiper.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkZg1ZflpJs&list=PL-y1um9fkZCacsUPHZpHsjqdcC4JzZyeT&index=5
Commandment #3 “You shall have no other gods before[a] me.”
Christians put Jesus before Yahweh.
Commandment #4 “You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above,
Christian churches are full of carved images.
Gnostic Christians also have an ideal, but we do not let ourselves be subsumed by our own creations and remain perpetual seekers of the best god/rules and laws to live by, as Jesus taught.
I see Christians and Muslims as idol worshipers.
Is Jesus a Christian and Muslim idol and are they idol worshipers as most theologians say?
Regards
DL
In reading the various definitions of idol, I think Christians have turned Jesus into the type of idol that he railed against.
We all idol worship in some sense. If you can think analogically you will agree. Here is a poet that might help you do that. He has a good message but he himself ends in being an idol worshiper.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkZg1ZflpJs&list=PL-y1um9fkZCacsUPHZpHsjqdcC4JzZyeT&index=5
Commandment #3 “You shall have no other gods before[a] me.”
Christians put Jesus before Yahweh.
Commandment #4 “You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above,
Christian churches are full of carved images.
Gnostic Christians also have an ideal, but we do not let ourselves be subsumed by our own creations and remain perpetual seekers of the best god/rules and laws to live by, as Jesus taught.
I see Christians and Muslims as idol worshipers.
Is Jesus a Christian and Muslim idol and are they idol worshipers as most theologians say?
Regards
DL
Comments (61)
I know the "believers" say life is a test... I'd hope for their sake it is not. I find even many atheists naturally follow the ten commandments more closely because they intuitively know not to go around killing people. Idol worshipers seem to have problems in this department - spilling blood over books and idols.
It seems to me any male central figure that serves as a model for humanity is an idol. It takes "belief" to have idol worshipers "believe" that what they are doing by imitating a model man is somehow *not* idol worship. If they are willing to spill blood over it, they are worshiping it, and this relates to fascism and military protection of "belief"-based 'states' (ie. forcibe suppression).
Now to this , the issue of the rosary and other supposedly holy statuary is one that still Sparks debate in Christian gatherings.
As much as I agree with your assessment of this act as idolatory. Your overly generalistic view of Christianity is not very realistic
Doing what their lying preachers have done before them. I think of all those who swear to supernatural 7th hand garbage are lying. They just never admit to their hypocrisy.
Quoting A Gnostic Agnostic
Those who have used inquisitions and jihads to kill freedom of religion and thought are the ones who today cry and scream of injustice when their ideology is question or tried to be denied them. Hypocrisy at it's max in this.
Quoting A Gnostic Agnostic
Indeed. People forget how Catholicism helped Hitler, also a fascist, as his banker and helper.
Your overall view is bang on buddy.
Regards
DL
I see more than one Jesus in scriptures, a Gnostic Christian Jesus and a Rome created one.
If you see only the Constantine/Rome created Jesus, then you are correct that he cannot be taken out of the Trinity and that makes Jesus/Yahweh a genocidal prick who kills instead of curing, while that same Jesus said he came to cure and not kill. It seem that your Jesus has a split personality.
The Gnostic Christian Jesus that I know in scriptures would be closer to an Eastern mystic Jesus and would be closer to an apostate than a Christian.
Here is how the Jesus I follow spoke and you will never see the Christian preachers quote him.
I have it in an old O.P showing why I call my god I am.
Modern Gnostic Christians name our god "I am", and yes, we do mean ourselves.
You are your controller. I am mine. You represent and present whatever mind picture you have of your God or ideal human, and so do I.
The name "I Am" you might see as meaning something like, --- I think I have grown up thanks to having forced my apotheosis through Gnosis and meditation.
In Gnostic Christianity, we follow the Christian tradition that Christians have forgotten that they are to do. That is, become brethren to Jesus.
That is why some say that the only good Christian is a Gnostic Christian.
Here is the real way to salvation that Jesus taught.
Matthew 6:22 The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.
John 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.
Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.
Allan Watts explain those quotes in detail.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alRNbesfXXw&feature=player_embedded
Regards
DL
Nice that you agree.
What have I put that is not realistic? All Christian fly the cross and there is little difference in their immoral scapegoating ideology.
Regards
DL
Yes - I link it to the general idea that "Canaanites" (ie. mark of Kain) attempt to scapegoat the iniquities of their own tribe/house and accuse their political adversaries of the same while whipping up dumbed-down emotionalist "believers" into attacking their own state "believing" the problem is coming from their own state rather than another. That is precisely how Islam fights their jihad - project and scapegoat.
Now is it obvious why I am undermining "belief" entirely? It takes "believers" to "believe" the problem is the solution and the solution is the problem. Islam is just this and is a humanitarian crisis which is going to wipe women off the face of the planet. It's already got people confused over what a woman is (ie. if one merely "believes" they are a woman, they are one and must be treated as one) because the House of Islam does not want anyone noticing where the "real" women are going... to the Mullahs of the House of Islam. It's all very sick but most people don't understand what is actually going on and the gravity of it. Anyways....
I had journalist Benjamin Fulford tell me that he has two sources which indicate the historical Muhammad was actually handled by the Vatican. If this is true (I don't know if it is - I keep pushing him to pursue those sources but he seems reluctant) it obviously would implicate the Vatican as complicit in... pretty much everything humanity has been suffering for a long time, including Islam. I personally know and understand the Qur'an is not what is being claimed... like, at all. It is actually almost absurdly the opposite it is embarrassing, and this is exactly why I feel that the House of Islam is hiding behind the Vatican as much as they can and turning them into a scapegoat as they did/do the Jews.
This scapegoating is really at the root of evil, and "belief" seems to be the fuel that keeps it going. There needs to be a global political 'state' that rejects "belief" as a basis for existence. Rather than authority over/as truth, we need truth over/as authority. I find "belief" necessarily inverts this, and should be discarded.
I can only respond to the arguments regarding Christianity because I lack the knowledge regarding the teachings of the Qur’an.
To break down your argument into two sub-arguments (with additions from the original post you say you agree with):
Christians worship an idol.
The Bible says “You shall have no other gods before me” and “You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above.”
Christians worship Jesus before YHWH.
Jesus is a likeness of something that is in heaven above.
Christians violate two of God’s commandments (inferred from a-c).
Chrisitains bear false testimony.
God commands Christians to not bear false witness.
Christians did not witness the death or resurrection of Jesus.
When Christians profess faith and testify to the resurrection of Jesus, they are bearing witness to an event they did not see themselves.
Christians are bearing false testimony. (inferred from a-c)
To address the idol argument:
I have to object to both premise B and premise C. Christianity commonly teaches the Trinity, or the concept of God as Three in One comprised of God the Father, God the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Jesus is God the Son, one part in the Trinity. It is impossible for Christians to worship or put Jesus before YHWH because Jesus is a part of YHWY in the same way that YHWY is a part of Jesus. The are One. Jesus is not even a likeness of what is in heaven above. He IS what is in heaven above. There are much more thorough and clear explanations of this concept out there are on the Internet if one is interested in exploring this further.
To address the false testimony argument:
While it was in a short paragraph, this really gave me food for thought. I had not previously considered this concept of “false witness” as it relates to modern professions of faith. My initial intuition is to object to premise C by appealing to tradition. The Bible is the written record of those who did witness the events of Jesus’ life. We don’t tell a history teacher that they are bearing false witness regarding the Civil War when they teach from a textbook. Rather than attacking Christians at the physical experience level, this argument might be better directed at the validity of their text or the traditions that have been passed through church teaching. Saying that someone cannot believe something that they have not witness appears to also rule out a lot of beliefs regarding history, stories friends tell us about their lives, and so on.
No I don't agree. I've watched your soapbox preacher video and I can see why you are attracted to it.
IThis is just another attempt to troll with your parasitic thesis by baiting believers with a facile assertion.
Therefore you may worship god, or you may worship an idol, depending on your random fortune whether the god image you envision is coincidental with the true image of god. This is an unsolvable problem.
For sure Pantheists are idol worshippers, as they can't possibly imagine precisely what the universe looks like.
The 'ideal' you mention is your idol. This ideal/idol is having-no-idols (except the idol/ideal of having-no-idols of course.) I like that idol. It's an old idea/ideal/idol.
Quoting Gnostic Christian Bishop
Unlike fresco, I agree with you on this one. If we bother to shoot our mouths off on a philosophy forum, then I think that we are in general embodying some ideal, projecting it for others, evangelizing.
That seems uncontroversial. If there is insight in your analogy, I think it lies in seeing that religion is continuous with politics and literature. Sure there are ghosts involved, but they should be understood in terms of their function, of what they do for people (bind them together, comfort them, etc.) There are ghosts in politics and literature too. [s]In literature[/s] On TV people know that their ghosts are made up, sometimes. But a charismatic ghost matters in the real world, made up or not.
The response and subsequent behaviour will sometimes provide enough evidence to know if it (the belief of the candidate) qualifies as idolatry.
PS
The "figure" part was added after reading the post immediately following this one.
Thus, they wanted to protect uniqueness and indivisibility of God.
Quoting Gnostic Christian Bishop
Since most of us don't worship graven images but instead serve concepts these days, it's only the analogical extension of 'idol' that's interesting. And this analogical extension is itself an old thought. It's a good thought, too, since it allows (potentially) for a kind of intellectual distance from our current investments.
I'd say 'deep' critical thinking is on this level. It's exciting and dangerous, and I think it's where the big revolutions in personality come from. And then even our ideals are perhaps more image-based than we would like to admit. We'd probably see certain faces in a album of pictures as fitting or not fitting our image of a 'deep thinker.' We imagine a certain lifestyle or way of being as the real thing. Maybe the genuine thinker is an activist. Or maybe the genuine thinker lives on a mountain away from everyone. Or maybe the true thinker just lives like a normal person, to get a great view of reality or as a manifestation of humility. Or perhaps is a full professor at a prestigious university. Or gets summoned by the government as an expert when there's an emergency. TV rules because it's close to the animated idols in our imaginations.
I agree. And even which books are included in this or that official bible of this or that religion are the results of politics.
As far as disobedience and contrarianism go, I agree there too. But the bible is library of books that even individually contradict themselves. A person could spend decades trying to focus on the 'true' personality of Jesus, and this would be like trying to make sense of prince Hamlet. Really strong literary creations force us to keep reconsidering them and ourselves.
My current opinion is that the character Jesus from the gospels is glued together from incompatible fragments. That's an aesthetic claim, an opinion. If I was a director handed the gospels as a script, I would have to make decisions about what to cut out. I'd have to choose one of the fragments. Personally I'd go in for a more mystical, philosophical Jesus. He'd only sound crazy to those who didn't decode his metaphors.
I agree. But he's already banned, I think.
The ideals/idols relationship is still fascinating, tho.
Why 'fascinating'? Its a truism that much of humanity tends to be herd-like in terms of following popular trends, fashions and seeking 'leaders' with simplified worldviews. It could all be merely expression of our innate tribalism and social tendencies we have in common with other primates.
Is it a truism? I agree it's an old thought. But few of us are eager to apply that thinking to ourselves.
Indeed, but I venture that all of us are caught up in some kind of 'magical' identification. What varies is the complexity of the game.
As you say, simplified worldviews. But at some point we all lean on such a narrative, or so it seems to me. To be sure, clever people are good at hiding it.
Or good at making their own narrative the least worst.
I take you for one who knows the pleasures of the cynic.
I've never thought of it as 'pleasurable'...more like the Camus character in 'The Outsider'.
I didn't read that one. But I really liked The Fall.
As far as pleasure goes, it's also the fires of hell.
What is to see the species as a bunch of haunted monkeys? To enjoy/suffer the alienation that comes with that? It's a strange loop. And it's also the old goal of seeing the game from the outside. So of course it's just one more way to be haunted. Since ghosts are not optional, it's about the quality of one's ghosts, which one is never done determining.
Maybe this can be compressed: how seriously shall one take seriousness and the faces it makes ? Is the highest mental life necessarily entangled in the burning issues of the day? Or is this just a more complicated version of taking out the trash, so that we can get back to dreaming? I think of Archimedes and his circles. The burning issues of the day are also just raw material for pattern finding.
What are the general structures of intellectual types bashing it out? What ideals/idols must they appeal to in order to threaten/seduce the opponent into submission? Then there are all the handshakes and salutes and pats on the back. Humans like to hunt in packs, go to war together. The cause is secondary to the warmth of fighting for something Ideal with others in the know, who see It.
Mostly we are on this side or that by chance, shaped by circumstances we didn't shape. 'Others are determined by their source, but not me. I decided. I am a spark of pure freedom. ' In theory we're too hip for that fantasy, but in practice we depend on it (incarnating God in his self-sufficing apartness, minimizing how embedded we are.) The 'I' (gaseous entity) continues to emit self-descriptions which it could not predict and did not decide. It rides the horse backwards.
If Christians want to worship statues of Micky Mouse, the First Amendment guarantees their right to do so.
How is it a problem for you?
Good points.
Christianity and all religions started as pagan.
Orthodoxy just says that the pagan religion got bigger and became the mainstream.
Quoting Drazjan
I do not see it quite that way although that is certainly what they are today.
The literal reading of myths is what ruined Christianity. Before that, they made sense.
I hope you can see how intelligent the ancients were as compared to the mental trash that modern preachers and theists are using with the literal reading of myths.
https://bigthink.com/videos/what-is-god-2-2
Further.
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/03132009/watch.html
Rabbi Hillel, the older contemporary of Jesus, said that when asked to sum up the whole of Jewish teaching, while he stood on one leg, said, "The Golden Rule. That which is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor. That is the Torah. And everything else is only commentary. Now, go and study it."
Please listen as to what is said about the literal reading of myths.
"Origen, the great second or third century Greek commentator on the Bible said that it is absolutely impossible to take these texts literally. You simply cannot do so. And he said, "God has put these sort of conundrums and paradoxes in so that we are forced to seek a deeper meaning."
Matt 7;12 So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.
This is how early Gnostic Christians view the transition from reading myths properly to destructive literal reading and idol worship.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oR02ciandvg&feature=BFa&list=PLCBF574D
Regards
DL
ASAP.
I have stated that the governments should have a revues and critique of all the religions of our country so as to at least let the people know what the experts think of them in both their moral views as well as overall views. That might at least have the right wingers stop their homophobia and misogyny.
The Noble Lie of the positive value of religions must end eventually. Soonest is best as more and more garbage religions are popping up.
Regard
DL
You have nothing you hold above anything else?
Money, family, friends or ideology.
Ok.
Regards
DL
They try by making him a male who coveted Joseph's wife for reproduction and god is sure human like by showing that he is a deadbeat dad.
Regards
DL
Good post.
Jesus, especially, was aware of this intelligent thinking. That is why he urged us to elect a new god that seemed like him at the end times.
I am hoping that the world elects a new eco system Czar, be he charismatic or not, because without one, we could become one of the species heading for extinction in our present major extinction event.
We need a Czar with teeth for the planet as well as a moral person ruling all of it.
Regards
DL
I could not say what sheeple would do if they had to follow what scriptures say.
They never have. But yes, it would certainly be a thing to see.
Regards
DL
You do not see Christians as seeing god as an ideal. Ok.
If god is not their notion of what an ideal god is, what ideal do they put above god?
Regards
DL
Which is what is definitely forbidden.
Regards
DL
Mostly, yes, but they apply others showing depictions as idolatry or blasphemy so they must be recognizing the depictions as being of their idol. In fact, if apostates do not follow in just the prescribed idolatrous ways, you get killed, if you happen to live in a Muslim majority country running on Sharia law.
Regards
DL
Yes. Our all important egos are being spoon fed by our money motivated masters.
Regards
DL
That is the Gnostic Christian Jesus, while the one you do not favor is the Rome created Jesus.
Here is how Gnostic Jesus talked. Here is the real way to salvation that Jesus taught.
Matthew 6:22 The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.
John 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.
Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.
Allan Watts explain those quotes in detail.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alRNbesfXXw&feature=player_embedded
Joseph Campbell shows the same esoteric ecumenist idea in this link.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGx4IlppSgU
The bible just plainly says to put away the things of children. The supernatural and literal reading of myths.
Regards
DL
Why do you favor a homophobic and misogynous religion that has it's adherents thinking that a genocidal god is a good god.
Here is my motivation.
If you think you should live by the Golden Rule, change the labels in this quote to women, minorities, gays or children being brainwashed by religions and it shows what we should be thinking and doing for each other.
"First they came for the Jews, but I did nothing because I'm not a Jew. Then they came for the socialists, but I did nothing because I'm not a socialist. Then they came for the Catholics, but I did nothing because I'm not a Catholic. Finally, they came for me, but by then there was no one left to help me." – Pastor Father Niemoller (1946)”
If not, you show a corrupted moral sense.
Regards
DL
Seems not.
Regards
DL
I like what the Rabbi said, but I would probably have rejected his cosmology, just as I reject the Greek commentator's. No human being has ever possessed esoteric, secret, or individual revelations about the nature of reality. Those who have claimed such are either deluded or charlatans. In the perception cosmic truth, we are all equal. To believe otherwise is to insult one's own intelligence. However, there is very large swathe of humanity who easily persuaded by claims of the brand of knowledge that cannot be understood until it is already "believed." Its obvious, that people use the word "belief" very loosely.
I do not have a problem with Christians being idol worshipers, if they admit it.
Regards
DL
I mostly agree with your post but not this part.
For starters, you phrase it as a logical fallacy that you cannot prove and second, we are not sure of all the aspects of reality.
For instance, I hold the knowledge that telepathy is real and that belies your views. Science has confirmed telepathy between twins as well.
Regards
DL
And if they don't, what are you going to do? Tickle them?
What you disagree with is fundamental equality. Like God, it cannot be proven. But God-freaks do not have a monopoly on belief. If you do not believe in our equality in the nature of reality, there is no further point communicating.
1. You set yourself up as a missionary for militant 'anti established religionism'.
2. You superciliously accuse any religionist or non militant atheist of supporting the 'social evils' that can lurk in any human organization (including the gnostic club!).
3. Like any troll who feeds on the oxygen of an audience, you are driven to repeat versions of the same simplistic rubbish again and again.
Isn't about time you grew up and realized that the majority of the population, including you, have a psychological need for some belief system which transcends their understanding of 'self' ?The fact that your understanding of both 'self' and 'belief' tends to be stuck in the domain of 'folk psychology', with no appreciation of the systemic dynamics which operates in social relationships, implies you need to get off your ridiculous pedestal and continue your education.
No. Enter their names in my, --- too stupid to bother with, --- file.
Regards
DL
Eh, no.
Gnostic Christians are unive4rsalists who have tied equality to the righteousness of god.
We believe in equality under the law and that is why we, unlike Christians and Muslims, are not homophobic and misogynous.
That is a pat of why some say the only good Christian is a Gnostic Christian.
http://gnosis.org/library/ephip.htm
On Righteousness --- The righteousness of God is a kind of sharing along with equality.
That aside, I refuse to bring women and children down to my level with equality and believe that the law of the sea that puts women and children first is the moral position for all of us men.
As a naturalist, I think that that is man's cross to bear.
Regards
DL
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt
Regards
DL
He's still at it? You know that guy is a fraud, right? You would be wise to pay zero attention to him.
How do you like your government using your tax $$ to pay the shortfall created by religious tax exemptions?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7y1xJAVZxXg
I, like you I hope, hate supporting the liars yet have no choice in this.
Regards
DL
What is it with the US and ridiculous preachers ?
I'm asking you because you are one of them whether or not you're earning from it.
It seems like you are giving an argument similar to the one as follows in your post:
1. It is wrong to worship idols other than Yahweh as a Christian.
2. If Jesus is an idol, then it is wrong to worship Jesus.
3. Jesus is an idol.
4. Thus, it is wrong to worship Jesus.
As apparent in this argument, I am putting aside the issue of graven or carved images that mentioned as well as what is right or wrong in the Muslim tradition which all can be addressed another time. In regards to Jesus being an idol though, I have some pushback. An idol, in biblical times, was something worshipped in place of God (Yahweh) as if it were actually God. In the case of Jesus, however, I do not think that it is the case that people who worship Jesus are worshipping an idol in this same sense, i.e. worshipping something in the place of God as if it were God instead. This is because Jesus IS God. Jesus is the manifestation of God in human flesh so that God could die for those he loved, as in us, and so that we may not take or deserved punishment for our sins. If this is denied by saying that Jesus was not the incarnation of God and was simply just a human then Jesus would be an idol, but if he is the incarnation of God then he is not a replacement of God like an idol would but is actually God himself. So, I would have to say that premise 3 of this argument is false; Jesus is not an idol but is the incarnate of God himself, so it would not be wrong to worship him as a Christian.
Hope this can be of some help!
The fact that we/you tolerate the perpetual lying preachers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7y1xJAVZxXg
Regards
DL
Yes. The link above, as well as the lies said about a god that no one can show exists.
Regards
DL
It is not as your ideas have Jesus being a moral monster just as Yahweh is.
Look at all the laws you want Jesus to break.
On Jesus dying for you.
It takes quite an ego to think a god would actually die for you, after condemning you unjustly in the first place.
You have swallowed a lie and don’t care how evil you make Jesus to keep your feel good get out of hell free card.
It is a lie, first and foremost because, like it or not, having another innocent person suffer or die for the wrongs you have done, --- so that you might escape responsibility for having done them, --- is immoral. To abdicate your personal responsibility for your actions or use a scapegoat is immoral.
You also have to ignore what Jesus, as a Jewish Rabbi, would have taught his people.
Ezekiel 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.
Deuteronomy 24:16 (ESV) "Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin.
Psa 49;7 None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him:
There is no way that you would teach your children to use a scapegoat to escape their just punishments and here you are doing just that.
Jesus is just a smidge less immoral than his demiurge genocidal father, and here you are trying to put him as low in moral fibre as Yahweh.
Regards
DL