I guess it was just a matter of time, but I had two sets of parents ask me about this in one week – sending me supporting websites proclaiming this. It’s the natural consequence of the internet community’s preoccupation with potential paganism and probably the most devastating manifestation of it that I have seen thus far. A person with a blog, website, you-tube or vimeo account yet with no academic credentials whatsoever can put out a very convincing and passionate argument, on the surface, as to why this or that is pagan and people will assume that they are experts. Fear does that, and the internet preachers excel in injecting fear into an audience that is increasingly terrified of its own shadow – unable to live in the modern world or even to open their eyes for fear of contamination (Messiah and the Jerusalem Talmud Sota 22b describes such people as “blind” (blind guides in Messiah’s case Matt 23:16.24) – those men who were so concerned with their righteousness that they would injure themselves by walking into a wall with their eyes closed rather than risk seeing a beautiful woman).
As I have been, since August, increasingly transforming my ministry into equipping children and their families (so they can better teach their children and grandchildren whether in the home or in a classroom setting) into an understanding of scriptural context and character, this is something that I need to address before any more young lives are needlessly hurt.
If you want to know the counterfeit bill when you see one, you familiarize yourself with real money. In the same way, if you want to know what isn’t pagan, you familiarize yourself with what is actually pagan. I have been intensely studying ancient near eastern and first century religion for quite a while now. I wanted to understand all the references in the Bible to it, I wanted to know what was pagan (the worshiping of graven images) versus what was just cultural (i. e. anointing feet with perfumed oil), or decorative (i. e. palm trees, or ankhs), or organisational (i. e. dividing groups of priest’s workload into set times during the year), or legal (for example, a good law is a good law even when pagans have the same law). I also did this because I saw people who started out searching out pagan references in culture then getting upset over elements of the worship of YHVH because they were also used in pagan rites (i.e. sacrifice, incense, etc). Familiarizing myself with what the other cultures did and why they did it made it increasingly easy for me to spot the false forms of worship, and I was also able to rule out a lot of things that do not fall into that category. People obsessed with ‘paganism’ are walking away from the worship of the one true God because they do not understand what constitutes idolatry and they overreact and see the Temple service as simply another aspect of what was going on in the ancient world. However, an in depth study of what actually was going on, instead of a surface understanding, shows that there is absolutely nothing whatsoever ‘pagan’ about the worship of YHVH. I will prove the same about children’s toys, that they are in no way pagan.
For example, what if someone equated nuns with young girls because of their virginity and called all young girls nuns? Context tells us that this is a ridiculous train of thought. In the same way, we cannot equate wives with prostitutes simply because neither are virgins – we need the context of the nature of the sexual relationship in order to discern the difference between the good and the bad. If someone looks at me and my sister in law and says, “Oh look, they gave birth to twins,” because we both have sets of twins, they would also be incorrect. In context, my husband and I adopted our sons whereas my sister in law gave birth to her daughters. When I talk about my “Twin” you would imagine someone who looks just like me and grew up with the same experiences, not an African American RN from Chicago who I have never actually met in real life. Surface knowledge alone will give rise to our active imaginations, but rarely to an accurate assessment of the situation.
Think of a first semester med school student, diagnosing themselves to death. They have a certain amount of surface knowledge and to a certain extent they are limited to appearances – but they lack the overall context that enables them to rule out certain possibilities, and to filter out unimportant data. In a few years, they will no longer have that problem and because they have context, we go to them when we are ill. We see the same thing in computer or automobile repair. If I have limited experience and I hear a sound or get a fatal exception error then I figure it’s broken because I lack the context to know what is really going on.
People who want to shout the alarm are not always legitimate watchmen, usually they aren’t – they are people who got excited about something, felt like they had to warn everyone, mistook that excitement for the leading of the Spirit and stirred up fear. They are generally not experts, and generally they haven’t even checked their facts because they assumed that the people from whom they got the information did the hard verification work themselves and checked their facts using legitimate sources
So what are the facts on toys vs graven images? After being approached by a parent who was terrified that they were being commanded to bonfire their children’s toys (even their Legos, from the website they sent me), I knew that this had to be addressed. Are toys idols? What does the word idol even mean because Christianity has seriously redefined it so that it can be practically anything. If someone likes something too much, we don’t call it an obsession or a dangerous distraction or an addiction – nope, it’s an idol. We have watered down something with an actual meaning into an over-spiritualization – like the Pharisees did with Sabbath-breaking – it came to mean too much, and was not uniformly enforced, making a mockery out of the day. Sabbath breaking had the potential to become whatever a person wanted it to be – if they had an audience and had been given the authority. These days you don’t even need the authority, and social media provides everyone with an audience.
What is a toy – a toy is a natural function of childhood, modified through form. A child without a ball will kick a rock or a can, one without a sword or toy gun will use a stick or their finger, a child without a doll will fuss over a rolled up blanket, or a family or neighborhood baby, one without a swimming pool will go to the river or lake to play. The toy is a functional item that serves a purpose, shaped by the culture a child was raised in – sword vs gun is a perfect example of that. Function, and not form, is what separates a toy from a graven image. Function, and not form, is also what separated idolatry from cultural expressions of respect, decorative motifs, organisational strategies, and laws. Function is what, for example, separated the Tabernacle in the wilderness and later, Solomon’s Temple, from the Parthenon – a temple is not bad because the form is used elsewhere – it is the actual function that determines whether or not it qualifies as ‘pagan.’
The same exact form can serve different functions and so we must be crystal clear on what the intended function is.
Graven images cannot simply be defined on the surface as an image that is engraved – as though the English language description conveys intention and function. The Commandments were engraved in stone – including the one telling people not to make graven images.
A graven image was, specifically, an object carved or molded out of clay, stone, metal or wood for the purpose of being embodied by the essence of a god, through a magical ceremony conducted by professional priests. The purpose for the embodiment with the god’s spirit was so that the god could be worshiped – which in pagan religions specifically meant to be cared for through washing, dressing, anointing, feeding it real food and drink, setting it into its throne, where it can be petitioned, adored, fed again, undressed and put to bed so that the god would not starve to death and their function in the universe would not fall into chaos. Modern day idol worshipers can tell you this – someone who was Hare Krishna just gave me an education on some things a few weeks back.
The above is an idol, an actual idol. Mishnah Tractate Sanhedrin Chapter 7 Mishnah 7 (some versions list it as Mishnah 6), which was written when people still did this all over the world, is a reflection of this. It will tell you exactly what constituted idolatry (I recommend the Kehati commentary otherwise it is confusing). They knew because they lived in an idolatrous world, they had the context. Legos don’t qualify as graven images, nor did the cherubim in the Temple, or the Menorah, or the bulls holding up the Molten Sea, or baby dolls, or any children’s toys. No one played with idols, they were set up in shrines and treated like the gods that they represented, but they themselves were not the gods, everyone knew that. They didn’t get set aside, ever. They were cared for not for fun, but by professional priests who were charged with keeping the god alive and healthy and hopefully, doing their job and mostly leaving the people alone (a bored god was a dangerous thing).
Toys serve a specific function that is completely at odds with idolatry. But more than this, I want you to think about the spiritual danger of taking that which is beloved and destroying it simply because someone on the internet tells you to and instills you with fear. We aren’t being careful enough about who we believe and listen to – we are assuming that people wouldn’t have a website unless they had legitimacy – but these days anyone can have a website. You need time and sometimes money, that’s it. A $30 little webcam will get you free access to the people on you-tube. Social media also gives you unfettered access to people – but you don’t need to have any expertise, you only need to sound convincing. The article I read on toys was full of manipulative fear tactics, but not full of any real information. The authors defined what a graven image, an idol, was, and then expanded their own definition so that it could include and exclude things at their own convenience. Idols, however, are real life constructs serving real life purposes, worshiped with real life intentions and we can’t just ignore that real life context and manipulate the words to suit our own agendas. I honestly pity the people who have put this stumbling block in front of children, who are knowingly subjecting them to the horror of watching their toys burned in the yard – and blaming God for it. It’s just cruelty under the illusion of zeal, but it is rooted in a lack of knowledge of the actual situation, and the resulting overreaction.
But frankly, it was inevitable, because we have created an online culture where everyone has a pulpit and people try to undermine the experts for this or that reason if the experts present facts that are in disagreement with agendas based on, in this case, theories. I ignore a lot of stuff on social media because it is outside the scope of my ministry, but this is where I draw the line and I am speaking up because my studies have given me a certain measure of expertise – at least compared to the people who came up with this devastating doctrine. This is hurting children, needlessly, but it is the logical consequence of listening to whoever is speaking the most persuasively and inducing the most fear and presuming that they must know what they are talking about.
Edit: 2/13/16 My brother Ryan White posted this blog explaining this same concept this morning.
I think I read the same article about idols that you are speaking of. I’ve recently been wrestling with the fear that all these years I am offended guard by collecting dolls and having dolls that remind me of my childhood. I’ve seen many comments on different things being idols and I have thrown out quite a few things in the garbage. I still have this collection of small fashion dolls that I am thinking of throwing out for fear that I have idols in my house. I even bought and restored a Raggedy Ann doll that is similar to a doll I had when I had my tonsils out at six years old. And it brought me comfort at a time that was very scary to me and I guess I should have been relying on God instead of the doll to bring me comfort but at 6 years old i knew even then that Jesus died for me and that God was the one to comfort me in all my troubles. However at six you’re just beginning to learn about the Lord and a doll that my parents gave me the morning of surgery certainly made a child feel a lil better on her way to the hospital. No I’m wondering if I should destroy these dolls and forego restoring them as a hobby. This other site that talked about dolls and three dimensional things as being idols, attracter of demons states that the Bible says we are not even to have them in our homes even if we are not “worshiping” them. Perhaps you can shed some of your knowledge of studying the word with me is it’s not that I don’t want to get rid of them because if that’s what God requires I will do it and I’ve prayed about it and I’m still not sure. It is a hobby of mine to make a clothing and restore some of these dolls is they are from the 1970’s my childhood years.
Sorry that was a typo in the first couple lines. Should have said ” offended God”
There is absolutely nothing wrong with your hobby. Now, if you set them up in a Barbie dream House and bathe them, dress them, actually feed them and petition them with your requests and give them thanks when something good happens to you, then congratulations, you are an idolater – that’s what was literally done with idols in ancient times. These weren’t decorative objects, every morning the priest would come along with a dagger or other cultic object, speak an incantation, and draw the essence of the god into the figurine so that they could provide for the needs of their god. Gods who didn’t get taken care of got hungry, and started slacking in their divine duties – like bringing rain and the crops and preventing famine and all that. That was the mindset. That being said, not all graven images were obviously forbidden – in I Chron 28 we see that God commanded the production of two huge gold cherubim to stand within the Holy of Holies. What happens when people come to Torah is that they read in a vaccuum and often do not take the rest of Scripture into account. Moses was commanded to make a bronze serpent – it was only destroyed years later when the Israelites set it up as an idol, but obviously when it was fashioned it was not considered an idol. An idol is not about form, but about function. No matter how much anyone loves Raggedy Ann – and I had one too in the 1970’s – no one is caring for her as a goddess, and if they are, they aren’t so much idolatrous as in need of medication 😉 Hope that helps – I don’t see your hobby as any more idolatrous than mine – coloring! We all need a creative outlet and no matter what you choose, there is some person out there with a narrow view of scripture who will call it pagan.
Thank you so much! I also have read this articles in the recent and have been struggling with this as well. I have a 2 year old who is very attached to here stuffed animals and I would hate to have to take them from her needlessly. I will need to research this subject further for myself as God calls all true believers to test and diligently study for themselves his word. But your point of view has offered me some temporary relief on this subject. I can’t thank you enough. Any further insight on the subject would be much appreciated! Have a blessed day. And again Thank You!!!!!
What does YHVH stand for?
Sorry, that is the English version of the tetragrammaton, God’s formal name. Yod Hey Vav Hey in Hebrew – you see it replaced with LORD in caps in the Hebrew Scriptures.
So what do you say about the Baby Alive types of dolls? Kids feed it with toy foods and sometimes real foods and sometimes they talk to it to the extent that they are real persons. They are cared for. Fed. Even the name is weird. A doll (short for idol) is called Baby Alive while we know that idols are not alive but lifeless yet cared for as if they are real people.??.
I get your functions and it is a clear understanding. There’s no priest involved with baby alive dolls. If Jesus did away with priesthood. Wouldn’t this be across the globe as well? No need for a pagan priest but the individual can access their made up gods themselves. There would be more more need for pagan sacrifices just a relationship with the false deity.
The lineage of Seth after the flood carried over the purpose of the altar and sacrifices. The first mentioned are Abel and Cain. Cain has his own group. Yet, scriptural speaking after the flood none of them made it. But Nimrod and his followers born from the lineage of Noah started to alter the sacrifices and made it pagan. The function of sacrifices came from the first human family is what I am saying. Pagans just took it and made it their own. It was originally offered with a circumcised heart e.g. Abel.
Since there are no more sacrifices, is relationship to an idol all that is needed? Since they used to sacrifices to G-d and he accepted it. Now he seeks a relationship over sacrifice. Would this be also the same formula needed for idol worship nowadays? A relationship with an idol.
I actually meant no more need for pagan sacrifices. Made a typo on the 2nd paragraph.
Pagan sacrifices are still offered all over the world–many of the indigenous religions in China and India practice spirit appeasement. It still serves the same function as it always has for them–serving and caring for and appeasing the spirits that they feel can positively and negatively affect their lives. That has never been necessary if we want to go there, because God has always desired mercy and love more than sacrifice. Sacrifice among the ancient Israelites was always supposed to be relational–a drawing near to God through a one-sided (like the olah offering that was burnt entirely) or a shared meal (like the Todah or Shelamim) or through a mediated experience (the chattat or asham, where the animal was burnt except for the portion eaten by the priest, securing atonement). But what we see with Cain and Abel is not a blood sacrifice at all. The Hebrew word is minchat–so it was more of a tribute to their king, as it were. It certainly wasn’t a sin offering because those are entirely different words. It was a free will offering, more like a terumah.
So, if I understand where you are heading here–if you are saying that the pagans no longer need priests because Jesus did away with the priesthood, it would imply that they used to need them and don’t anymore. I suppose that either they never needed them at all or they always have and always will because of why they are doing it. In their minds, they have always and will always need to be right with their gods–who absolutely need to be fed and all that (in their minds) or they will start to starve and will retaliate. Jesus never changed how they will feel about that and the sacrifices to Yahweh were never for the same reason. No one is taking care of Him. He doesn’t need to eat 🙂
Baby dolls have existed from the beginning of time. Women are wired to be mothers and the baby doll offers a small child the opportunity to play pretend. As such, they aren’t any different than hot wheels cars allowing little boys to pretend how to drive. They can pretend to fill the tank with gas all they want but they aren’t worshiping an idol. In the same way, a child doesn’t think she is caring for a doll so that disaster will not fall on her village. It’s just a more realistic pretend game–like when my husband’s parents bought our three year old twins those electric cars that they drove around the yard all day every day for months. So, there isn’t the same mindset there–and pagans do not want a relationship with the diety. They want it happy so it will leave them alone.
The stories about Nimrod being involved with pagan worship, although popular, are neither reflected in the Bible or in history. Even in the first century, one of the Targums (Aramaic paraphrases of the Bible read in synagogues) was portraying Nimrod as a hero who was trying to drive people away from building the Tower at Babel. It was Josephus in the late first century who first credited Nimrod with responsibility for building the Tower. Legendary works among the Jews began to associate him with the Persian Zoroaster, who lived thousands of years later. From that, Nimrod started to be given credit for anything and everything pagan in the 1850’s when an anti-catholic propagandist named Alexander Hislop wrote a series of pamphlets that drove a stake through the heart of history and archaeology, associating Nimrod with Semiramis (a contemporary of King David/Solomon) and Tammuz, who wasn’t a human at all but a Babylonian shepherd god. But the Bible itself says nothing positive or negative about Nimrod. Three of the mentions are genealogical and one just states he was a mighty hunter before the Lord. From that, legends sprang up and we tend to read them into the Bible and see what we have been trained to see.
So, to sum up. A relationship with an idol is never enough and never the goal or even on their mind. The idol needs to be fed and cared for so that you won’t die at the hands of the angry god whom you are trying to keep happy. No little girl or little boy plays with their toys for that reason. Hope that helps.
Thank you so much Tyler for your time and response. And yes, your response is helpful. I will definitely purchase you books sometime soon to pick your brain on this subject. Thank you.
Hi, Tyler! Someone just pointed out that the:
“Making and Possession is clearly mutually exclusive to that of bowing and worship.” And the said person presented this verse and said:
“Deuteronomy 4:15-19 clearly commands to make no likenesses and does NOT mention bowing down or worshipping, but includes the warning LEST you be drawn away to worship the host of heavens.”
The person submits that simply owning toys/paintings and making art is breaking the 2nd commandment.
I got compelled with this and would really like your thoughts about the persons argument.
Yes, the problem with arguments like that is a general unfamiliarity with idolatry in the ancient world. Now, the Pharisees of the first century would actually agree that any paintings or carved reliefs, even, would qualify–which made their ability to produce a coin with Caesar’s head on it plus the claim that he was the son of the Divine Augustus, and on the Temple Mount, no less, very shocking–and it was why they lost the argument with Yeshua/Jesus in Mark 12. Notice, however, that He never accused them of idolatry for having that coin–only highlighted their hypocrisy in front of the crowd (I have an upcoming teaching on that on my radio show in late June, I think). It is very understandable, that they had gone rather crazy with their legalistic rulings in this regard. After all, they did not want to repeat the sins of their parents and get exiled again from the Land by even coming close to breaking the Second Commandment. And so they built so many fences around it that became rather ridiculous. By this argument, owning any coinage or bills would be idolatrous. But for an image to be idolatrous, it requires a subversion of devotion–involving such things as appeasement and care, with the belief that your wellbeing will be positely or negatively affected if you succeed in or fail to care for the image. The image must be felt to be imbued by a spiritual force to which you have committed yourself to serve. That’s what the carvings represented. Unfortunately, when we take it further than that, we enter into the realm of building so many fences around the commandment that it loses all meaning entirely. Of course, Jewish children play with dolls now and we all handle coinage. This tends to be something that people claim to want to adhere to, but until they are willing to go without any sort of currency, it is all a moot point. The Pharisees seemed to have limited their violent objections to images to the Temple Mount itself and Jerusalem, but of course, they still carried coins declaring Caesar the son of the divine Augustus, who was decalred a god posthumously. I hope that helps.
Here is a website, for example, with many Jewish themed dolls. https://www.traditionsjewishgifts.com/jewish-dolls-collector.html
I’ve read an article about the Ten Commandments published by the publisher of a very similar article that may or may not be the one you mentioned in paragraphs 7 and 12 but anyway I got compelled by it because it says that exodus 20:5 does not supply the context for verse 4 because they are 2 separate stand alone commands because they both have the Hebrew word lo which translates to you shall not (and also absolute prohibition although that’s not mentioned in the article) and that believing verse 5 does supply the context for verse 4 is considered rejecting gods words and following/creating a substitute of/leaning on our own understanding thus creating an idol of the heart, he also said in the comments of an article on a different website that we should not trust anything we hear or read and should always check scripture first for ourselves to see what it actually says, is this true or false? And explain why.
If I understand the author’s point correctly, and I might not, but it sounds like they have made the common error is mistaking their interpretation of the Word for the only possible interpretation of the Word. It’s an unfortunate thing I see with non-scholars who are not educated enough to really understand how much disagreement people can actually have when viewing an ancient text. The Hebrew Scriptures function as ancient wisdom literature, which is something that we have strayed away from in our understandings. When Judaism (and then Christianity) became Hellenized in the few hundred years before the first century, the way the Scriptures was used began to change and under the Pharisees (and also the Qumran sectarians) came to be used more as a law code and less as what it would have originally been–namely, guidance literature designed by God in order to teach His people the concepts of right rulings based on loving God and one another beginning in the brutal ancient near eastern world and designed in such a way as to become increasingly more just and fruitful. The fruit of the Spirit was always the goal, as was the Sermon on the Mount but when you take wisdom literature and try to make it into a law code, it tends to become a cold and barren sort of thing–a checklist or do’s and don’t instead of a teacher toward genuine loving-kindness. Some really good books I can recommend on this subject are The Lost World of Torah by John Walton, and The Sin of Certainty and How the Bible Actually Works by Peter Enns. The last two are controversial, actually all three are, but they represent a more ancient way of viewing the Bible far removed from Evangelicalism and Fundamentalism, both of which are relatively modern ways of looking at the Word. Hope that helps.
and sorry for the delay in answering–I am in an airplane and I have all comments on hold because of people who want to advertise viagra on my polygamy blogs…
Will it still be acceptable to own 3d replicas of living things if you don’t understand the authors point correctly?
Yes, of course. I mean, when we look at Solomon’s Temple, there were images of cherubim to each side of the ark in the Holy of Holies and the Spirit came and rested there, plus there were two others commanded on the top of the ark. Solomon’s throne was flanked by rows of carved lions. The graven images were not the problem, the purpose was the problem. If the purpose was to worship them, then they were forbidden. It’s like the carved snake on the pole, it was good for its purpose but once they began worshipping it hundreds of years later, it had to be destroyed.
What was the name of the article that you mentioned in paragraphs 7 and 12?
Goodness, I wrote this over six years ago–I have absolutely no idea. It was just the sort of thing I get sent from panicked people who are new to studying Torah from time to time, sorry. You could probably google the topic of toys being idols and find something similar as there are many people who read the Bible through modern western lenses and come up with inappropriate doctrines.
The publisher also published an article about 7 biblical guidelines to studying scripture and in it he says that we are not allowed to have our own (private) interpretation and then quotes 2 Peter 1:20 and that for an interpretation to be true,it must be in agreement with all of scripture.
I also read an article about 7 biblical guidelines to following scripture made by the same publisher as that 10 commandments article and it says that we are not allowed to have our own (private) interpretation of scripture and then quotes 2peter 1:20 and then says that scripture has many levels of truth just like an onion, for example one piece of scripture may have a meaning in biblical/historical context while a lighter may have additional meanings in a prophetic ( as in some words have several levels of meanings in allegorical sense which requires reading prof 1:2-6 to fully understand) context and that for an interpretation to be true it must be in agreement with all of scripture and have no contradictions to any scripture passage when considered as a whole (weather it be in the old or New Testament and regardless of how many interpretation levels are apparent, as well as 2 or 3 witnesses of scripture to confirm it’s true and will thus have to find anoughter interpretation just in case it is false). is this true or false when viewed through the publishers perspective and please explain why.
No contradictions to any Scripture passage at all? Well, that sounds like Fundamentalist inerrancy doctrines which sound really good on the surface but the truth is that Scripture reverses itself all over the place–when viewed through that sort of lens. Proverbs 26:4 and 5 are an excellent example of this phenomenon, and all of Ecclesiastes. When I am talking about Scripture as a whole, I am referring to the movement of Yahweh to return us to complete worldwide communion with Him as it was in the beginning. The Bible is Yahweh’s story and we are simply bit players screwing it up regularly and showing how patient and faithful he is lol. So, Scripture as a whole is about loving God and one another and Yahweh’s journey in correcting what went wrong in Gen 3, step by step. Anything that is not in agreement with His plans is obviously going to be false. And when we get to the teachings of Yeshua/Jesus, we begin to see the problem because of Moses’s allowances in the law (as per Yeshua’s words in Mark 10) for example, where Moses makes allowances for the evils of ancient Near Eastern culture despite the fact that it cannot possibly be God’s ultimate will that one sort of human can own another, or that women should be so dehumanized to have no say in being forced to marry the soldiers who slaughtered their family, or that only men can divorce women and only for indecency. Those laws were radical at the time–a preventative for abandoning wives for any reason whatsoever, sanctions against wartime rape and the power of men in the ancient world to kill family members without consequence, over-the-top, unhindered abuse of slaves, etc. They were amazingly humane for the times and would have dazzled that world but Yeshua actually spoke against some of it and said, “Um, no, keep going, you need to strive toward perfection in loving one another and especially those who do you harm.” So, they never see it this way, but what they do is take Yeshua’s preaching above and beyond the Torah to the point that Torah looks super easy in comparison, and put Him in a place where you can find verses that are not in agreement with Him even though what He is teaching follows logically and beautifully the metanarrative of regaining Eden. Hope that helps.
And as in when viewed through the publishers perspective I also mean when looking at an article very similar to the one you mentioned in paragraphs 7 and 12.
And the comment I posted 2 days ago (all 3 at the same time)
Yeah, I am having a lot of problems with your comments triple posting or partially posting. I might be having problems with the website as I had a friend over the weekend telling me that my links are not working.
I’ve read in various similar articles by different publishers and they say that the only reason Moses was allowed to make the bronze serpent and the cherubim on the ark of the covanent was because god commanded him to do it and it was not his decision to make them and anoughter said that it was gods specific instructions to have him make them for a specific reason for a specific purpose and that no where does it say the lions oxen and cherubim in solomons temple were instructed to be made and anoughter said that the bronze serpent had a hidden parable which would be revealed to the people at a later time:do not commit action 1 least you corrupt yourselfs and do action 2,action 1 being owning it and action 2 being worshiping it basically saying that the Israelites worshiped the bronze serpent simply by owning it, are these true or false and please explain why.
In I Chron 28:19, David claims that all of the plans for the Temple built by Solomon were given to him, in writing, by the Spirit. So, even though we don’t have the tavnit, the blueprint, and all of the directions he spoke of, ew can be reasonably sure that whatever Solomon built as per the Temple, was expressly endorsed and planned by God. The Serpent on the pole should have been kept as a sign of remembrance so that Israel would remember what happened in the wilderness, same as with the jar of manna and Aaron’s staff–but from other Scriptures it seems clear that by that time they had lost the Torah and had forgotten and saw it as just another idol. At that point they were worshiping so many foreign gods that one more wouldn’t have seemed that big of a deal. As for their arguments that it is okay to build an image if the Lord says so, that’s just as much guesswork as anything else. Nowhere does the text say it but the truth of the matter is that the text says relatively little about most things. As the Bible was given to us in order to teach us about God and His character and His plan to reinstate Eden at the end of the age, there are shockingly few details given to us on how to keep commandments–hence all the opinions. I will say that evidently Solomon (pre-apostate Solomon) didn’t see the lions around his throne as objects of worship but as ancient Near Eastern symbols of kingly authority. No one would have seen them as idols as that was not their purpose.
I’ve read a comment on a article similar to the one you mentioned in paragraphs 7 and 12 and it says that if we don’t obey god immediently, we will question his command and will then make excuses as to why it makes no sence,is this true or false when put in the context of the article and please explain why.
I would say false because there are a lot of reasons why we might not obey right away–in fact, Scripture is full of people asking for signs before they will obey so that they are not being deceived (Gideon, for example). Sometimes, we are unclear as to how to proceed–I have had that happen many times, and so I had to wait. Oftentimes, people aren’t questioning at all, they are just terrified. That’s where grace comes in.
What do you mean as in shockingly few details on how to keep the commandments
From just what is written, there are almost never details on the how and how not to carry things out or when you have two laws conflict in a situation, which one is more important. From what is written, what can you and can’t you do?–not much there. Or the feasts. It’s a problem that a lot of people encounter when approaching Torah as an instruction manual instead of as wisdom literature. Lev 18 doesn’t even come close to covering all contingencies of incest or sex crimes, as some religious groups have exploited–like, there is zero permission on a man having sexual relations with a boy, only with a man. We can rightly argue that it is abusive and violates the spirit of Torah, but you won’t find anything in there specifically barring it, which is why the Talmud is so huge. They do debate all of the grey areas and things that aren’t specifically covered. The Sages weren’t debating for nothing 😉
Will exodus 20:5 always support/supply the context to verse 4 even thought they both contain the hebrew word lo which means you shall not (and also absolute/permanent prohibition)?
It goes beyond verse five–this commandment was given to an ancient Near Eastern audience who knew full well the context and didn’t need it explained to them. It is unfortunate that people come along later, now that the western world is uneducated about pagan practice in the ancient world, and try to expand the commandments in ways not supported by what was very clear at the time. Instead of all these articles you are reading online, I strongly encourage you to read scholarly materials from the experts and see if even a single one places this commandment outside of the practice of manufacturing and serving a god through the use of an idol as an intermediary. I recommend the New International Commentaries of the New/Old Testament (NICOT/NICNT), the NIV Application Commentaries, the Tyndale Old/New Testament Commentaries (TOTC, TNTC), the IVP Bible Background Commentaries, the Zondervan Illustrated Bible Background Commentaries, the Interpretations Commentaries, the New American Commentaries, and the Pillar New Testament Commentaries. I use all of these plus sometimes the JPS, Artscroll, and Kehati Mishnah, which are Jewish commentaries on the Bible and the Mishnah. The commandments are certainly forever but are not always absolute prohibitions just because of the use of “lo” which can mean a lot of different things–appearing over 5000 times in the Hebrew scriptures. Sometimes a no is just a no, so to speak. But a lot of the “thou shalt not’s” that we see in Scripture conflict with one another and the weightier commandment must be upheld in that instance and the lighter commandment must be broken. It was absolutely forbidden to eat the lechem ha’pannim, the Bread of the Presence, and yet David and his men did just that because human life almost always takes precedence. According to Jewish practice, any commandment can be broken in order to preserve innocent life except for those pertaining to idolatry and incest/adultery. This is because all laws have a context, and that context is life and devotion. If life/devotion is not served then the “thou shalt not” becomes a “thou shall–this time.”
Why didn’t you respond to my comments I really want a counterclaim she’s so convincing.
I caught your comments but I will not be responding to them. When I take more than a half hour to respond, you ask again and again and again. You demand that I read and watch articles and videos and then tell you if they are true or false. You are placing unbelievably intrusive demands on my time while pretty much ignoring what I have already told you. I am insanely busy and I just cannot do that for you. I do not sit all day at the computer except when I am putting together radio shows. I don’t have time to research this for you.
I just now logged on to six comments, five of them from today and one last night, two of which are harassing me about not answering you within thirty minutes of each other. Believe it or not, I do not sit at the computer all day. Today was a particularly busy day of catching up on things that I have gotten two months behind on in addition to tearing apart the house looking for something that my husband needs for tonight that has been misplaced. I have to say that it is very unnerving to have you spamming your comments when I don’t get back to you according to your timetable. I have mentioned this to you before about inundating me with comments. Most bloggers take quite a long time to get back on comments because we are busy with life and jobs and family. May is an incredibly busy month for my family just in general and I have three conferences I am preparing six hour long talks for plus my weekly broadcasts and other ministry work I do with people who are in crisis. Answering questions here is something I do when I have the time and it is not a priority. So, at this point, I am going to have to say no. It is very stressful for me to be bombarded and I am still recovering from the breakdown I had last year due to trauma and overwork. It’s okay with me if you have different opinions on this, and many of the questions you are asking me are not ones that I can answer in blog comments. I have spent a lot of time answering your questions but none of my answers seem to satisfy you so I feel it is safe to say that we are at an impasse, which is fine. I am certainly not going to force you to see things the way I do according to my studies.