Exodus 18:1-20:23(26) -- (parts 1 & 2)

[alon]

Jan 30, 2023 7:31:11 GMT -8 jimmie said:

A few verses that deal with images that seem not to be commanded to be destroyed:

Genesis 5:3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:
God made man in His own image, and so man reproduces children that bear his own image; that bear a resemblance to their parents. So yes, this would be another type of 'image.' Along those lines I suppose we as believers are to be like living images of Yeshua, going further of course than just the physical. Our lives should reflect our God. 

1 Samuel 19:13 And Michal took an image, and laid it in the bed, and put a pillow of goats' hair for his bolster, and covered it with a cloth.
1 Samuel 19:16 And when the messengers were come in, behold, there was an image in the bed, with a pillow of goats' hair for his bolster.
- The term used for image is תְּרָפִים terâphı̂ym.
- The prefix "ת" makes this third person, the suffix "ים" makes it plural; probably in the sense of majesty or place;  importance.
The term is a bit problematic. It can mean a household idol which, in mideastern cultures of the time also held title to lands. So it could just have been a title to his lands or holdings. It could also have been a prayer mask (which is also pagan). Recall in Gen 31 Rachael had stolen Laban's "household idols." In that time gods were thought to be associated with specific lands, and she was leaving her ancestral lands to go to another, distant land. So why take the idols from Laban? Probably because of their importance as land deeds, or titles. Recall the whole incident was precipitated by Laban cheating her husband, so we may surmise she was taking something more valuable that an image of a god not associated with where she was heading.

1 Samuel 19:11-16 (ESV) 11 Saul sent messengers to David's house to watch him, that he might kill him in the morning. But Michal, David's wife, told him, “If you do not escape with your life tonight, tomorrow you will be killed.” 12 So Michal let David down through the window, and he fled away and escaped. 13 Michal took an image [תְּרָפִים terâphı̂ym] and laid it on the bed and put a pillow of goats' hair at its head and covered it with the clothes. 14 And when Saul sent messengers to take David, she said, “He is sick.” 15 Then Saul sent the messengers to see David, saying, “Bring him up to me in the bed, that I may kill him.” 16 And when the messengers came in, behold, the image was in the bed, with the pillow of goats' hair at its head.
So was the pillow at the head of the תְּרָפִים terâphı̂ym, or at the head of the bed? Since the תְּרָפִים terâphı̂ym Rachael stole were small enough to conceal by sitting on them I'd say it would be impractical to place the pillow at its' head. Probably the pillow was at the head of the bed and the תְּרָפִים terâphı̂ym placed on it. The message would have been that Dovid had a title, or place appointed by Adonai.

Raphim is used in the context of demons or gods, so it is possible it can mean an image representing a god, or a prayer mask used for the same purpose- that being a conduit to a deity. In the case of Dovid I find this highly unlikely. But yes, it could be interpreted that way. While it was not unheard of for even Hebrew kings to have actual idols, Melech Dovid was said to be a man after God's own heart. So if he ever had an actual idol he would have repented of the practice at some time before assuming the throne. I'd say it had to occur before his anointing. At any rate such an important event you'd think would be recorded in scripture. I recall no such report. But my memory being what it is these days ... if you can think of something then help me out.

At any rate, a very interesting suggestion. Thanks. 
 
Matthew 22:20 And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?
Mark 12:16And they brought it. And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? And they said unto him, Caesar's.
Luke 20:24 Shew me a penny. Whose image and superscription hath it? They answered and said, Caesar's.
Both Matthew and Mark record Yeshua's next statement as “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.” So He was not saying it was ok to place a three dimensional likeness on a coin. Ha'moshiach merely acknowledged things like this occurred in the pagan societies in which we live, and we have to adjust. However this points to a very important biblical principle- separation of the holy and the profane. While a pagan coin we must use in daily commerce may have an image struck into them, and yes even our assemblies have to use them, they are not for God's people to either make or worship. They are profane, common, and as such they are not part of our worship nor practice.

Now, does this support your claim it is only our intention that matters? It certainly could be inferred. However inference is the weakest kind of logical argument, and I am not convinced. I think Yeshua is making a clear statement that we are to keep separate the common things over which we have no control and the way He expects us to walk out our lives.   

The split of the catholic & eastern orthodox church was partly over the use of statues and pictures (icons). The orthodox didn’t like statues and insisted that icons where the way to go. It seems to me the real issue should have been the use of any item in worship.
Should we not have two dimensional images? What about a mirror that produces a near perfect image, heads included?
As I indicated above, my opinion is that biblically 2 dimensional images are not proscribed, as are images without heads such as on military devices worn on uniforms. With a head, even if a uniform device, after service is completed they should not be kept. But for those newer to the forum, I always say I am not a rabbi and so cannot set or interpret halacha. This is my opinion only. As jimmie does here, you should do your due dilligence and research for yourself. Come to your own conclusions and, if different please share them and we can discuss. If I make a mistake I'd rather be corrected than to let false information stand; and if I am wrong and you can change my mind you may find yourself immortalized here in my "I Found Out I Was Wrong" thread (do a forum search, it actually exists). 

Job 37:18 Hast thou with him spread out the sky, which is strong, and as a molten looking glass?

James 1:23 For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass:

Yet the mirror can be misused and taken away:

Isaiah-3-16-23 Moreover the LORD saith, Because the daughters of Zion are haughty, and walk with stretched forth necks and wanton eyes, walking and mincing as they go, and making a tinkling with their feet: Therefore the Lord will smite with a scab the crown of the head of the daughters of Zion, and the LORD will discover their secret parts.
In that day the Lord will take away ...The glasses...
Both physically and metaphorically as these passages show us. Good pick to illustrate your point.   

I still think that how the image is used is the key. If it is designed to be or to aid in worship, it is against God.
Many would agree with you. I think its' use is important, as it relates to our heart condition as well as our obedience. However concerning obedience I disagree. God said not to make 3 dimensional likenesses, as I read and interpret scripture. But as I said, I cannot set nor interpret halacha for anyone, so your interpretation is well noted. Again, I would encourage everyone to research and make up their own minds. And remember, as meshiachim we pass everything through the fire (so to speak) many times. Always be open to others differing interpretations, but not so open minded your brains fall out. In other words, make 'em prove it to you before changing your opinion. And as here more than one interpretation can exist on some things without there being a schism.

An example of this is where I worship. They are Greek primacy concerning the "New Covenant," while I (and many others there) are Hebrew primacy throughout the Bible- including the "Renewed Covenant." We can have some lively discussions over this, however it is not so important a point as to disfellowship. In fact, I enjoy the theological and intellectual give and take there.

Thanks jimmie. Some good "theological and intellectual give and take" right there.     

[alon]

Feb 1, 2023 10:37:02 GMT -8 Elizabeth said:

I check in time to time and found this interesting because been wondering about how art and culture impact society. Always hear society impacts art and culture, but think it’s a two-way street. Just trying to figure out how the cultural elites influenced us so much. Anyway, found this interesting and think I can say something relevant.

First time we here something being made into the image of something in scripture, it’s God making man.

Then we learn He gives men dominion over the birds, animals, earth,….

I personally think the issue with graven images that He’s trying to address is about order and the center heart of idolatry, which is not only giving an image made by man honor above man, but above God. It turns His command for dominion completely upside down.

Regarding the render to Caesar what’s Caesar’s; to God what’s God’s…money literally being given to people because it can serve idolatrous purposes by symbolically indebting them to Caesar as some source of provision and power; meanwhile we are bearing God’s image, so I think it was about we then rendering ourselves to Him, and He was in some way showing what a joke the world system and its powerful are. Guess Caesar’s power can be likened to portable inanimate objects people give for something better.

In my mind if you make something with a sense of order and dominion - to create, and I know you’re certainly not going to think it equal to God, you’re probably just enjoying what He made.

Anyway, it seems at some point what else can we create in art but some depiction of what God already did….even in a lot of modern and abstract art, the whole point is undoing something orderly already created to get to something visceral about humans. It still has to depict something based on something in a creation not made by the artist even if it’s deconstructed.

I find this interesting recently. I am more concerned with abstract and deconstructive art than actual representative art because there’s so much atheist motive behind it. I’ve become acutely aware of the whole idea of “it can mean whatever you want” coming out of the culture and art world. I think maybe the whole “your own truth” mess began getting validation in art.

That’s off the topic maybe, but point is, anything can be idolatrous and anything can be perverted. Trying to create something that doesn’t represent anything God made is now coming from evil in our world because it celebrates chaos, so that can also be idolatrous and rebellious.

Think the image thing going back to order and dominion is key to whether it’s in a heart of idolatry overall. Sometimes people are so grateful for what God made so much, they want to create. I’m just not convinced if they paint in that heart it’s wrong, but if there’s any doubt, I wouldn’t because we’re told anything not done from faith is sin.

Don’t call myself messianic anymore. Still believe same things in terms of relevance of Torah, but think I have to wait for Yeshua to make a way. Basically think everything I was looking for now will be done then instead of stressing and forcing. prayers for everyone’s health and well-being.

 Hey Elizabeth, great to hear from you! I miss your insights, such as above. Great discussion. Read my reply to jimmie (above) and much of what you say I think is reflected there.

I'll just comment on a couple of things. Painting first: I consider paintings 2 dimensional. However some have disagreed with me elsewhere, saying because the brush strokes leave ridges and thus raise the image they are 3 dimensional. I've even heard it argued that since the development of film removes some metals or pigments photographs are 3 dimensional. People can carry these arguments either for or against to whatever extremes they want. While the discussion may be complex, I like to keep things at their core simple. So I go with they are basically 2 dimensional and thus ok. But again, that's just me- and probably you and garrett also.

God did, as you say make man in His image, and gave us 'dominion.' Kings often erected statues in their own image in order to show dominion over lands and people. One reason Elohim said not to make images of other elohim (small e) is we were meant to be His 'living statues.' Our lives as believers should reflect the image of the One who created us. As the kings' statue or his likeness on coins bears witness to his dominion, our lives should show who really has dominion. As you alude to that is Elohe Yisroel, the One we worship. God uses the weak (us) to confound the mighty (rulers) and show them impotent and foolish, as you say. Our God still has dominion.

I think you'd enjoy where I worship now. We are Messianic, however they do not take on the trappings of either contemporary Judaism nor of Christianity. We do however obey Torah, and so do things such as wear tzitziyot which would be considered Jewish. And yes, we are grafted onto the Hebrew rootstalk, which is Christian doctrine as well. We just demonstrate this more fully in our lives and worship. So we may have some similarities because we have the same 66 book Bible (though just the TNK of Judaism) and worship the same God (El Elohei Yisroel). However we are truly our own separate entity.  Our group leader does not take on the title 'rabbi' because he acknowledges that others say there is as important as his. Neither he nor the qahal (assembly) as a whole will condone bad doctrine. But we will discuss any viewpoint respectfully and biblically. I am fortunate to have found them. However if I had not I would still either worship with a more traditional Messianic synagogue or, if all else failed just come here and fellowship online.

Just a couple of questions, if you don't mind. If you don't call yourself Messianic, what would you say you are? Have your beliefs changed?

[Elizabeth]

Christian.

I just want clarity and direct association in other people’s minds with Yeshua. Then, I’ll go from there in terms of distinctions because that word can mean a lot of things. I want to talk more about Him than me or what I do, so that just simplifies things for me.

I think I’m reacting to society a bit because I’m sick of debates and words being obstacles. I just think in this country it’s a quicker route to express my own convictions and get to the point and just directly associate myself with defining distinctions.

I don’t know that my beliefs have changed. I just really believe in Yeshua and what Yeshua does.

I still rest on Saturdays don’t eat pork and shellfish and remember the Feast days. I just don’t think it so definitive of me or reflective of other believers if they don’t. If they’re with Him, they’re righteous through Him. Then He will lead us all into complete obedience in the Kingdom while sanctifying us here.

In time I really believe we who belong to Him will all arrive at the same place, and it’s a observant place. I just think I have to wait for it to be, and trust Him to teach, convict, guide, and so on.

I also think there being no Temple is a distinguishing factor between us.

[jimmie]

Elizabeth,

Good to hear from you. "In time I really believe we who belong to Him will all arrive at the same place, and it’s a observant place."
Some of the time while discussing topics with christians I like to end with the statement, "When we get to heaven, you will believe just like me. I may be the one changing my mind, but you will believe just like me."

Alon,

I would like to discuss the two-dimensional image further. I am not exactly how you arrive at the conclusion they could be okay. Could you explain a little further, please.


There are a couple of two-dimensional images that are displayed in most churches here in the Bible Belt that I really take issue with. One is the obelisk (translation: my lord's reproductive organ) and the other is the sun burst. Granted the obelisk has a 3D counterpart in the church spire or steeple. The 2D versions usually come in the form of stained-glass windows and wall hangings. to me these are far worse than the christmas trees that are displayed seasonally.

[alon]

Feb 3, 2023 14:42:00 GMT -8 jimmie said:

Alon,

I would like to discuss the two-dimensional image further. I am not exactly how you arrive at the conclusion they could be okay. Could you explain a little further, please.


There are a couple of two-dimensional images that are displayed in most churches here in the Bible Belt that I really take issue with. One is the obelisk (translation: my lord's reproductive organ) and the other is the sun burst. Granted the obelisk has a 3D counterpart in the church spire or steeple. The 2D versions usually come in the form of stained-glass windows and wall hangings. to me these are far worse than the christmas trees that are displayed seasonally.

  graven- deeply impressed; carved; sculptured:

  פֶּסֶל pesel From H6458; an idol: - carved (graven) image.

My view comes from the term "graven," as defined above both in the English and Hebrew. Since a painting is not sculpted and the ridges from brush strokes are minimal I do not consider them graven images. Photographs are even less so since any "sculpting" from removing materials in the development process would be at the microscopic level.

Agree with you about some paintings or photos being offensive. There are instructions in Torah for dealing with those subjects on their own, graven or not.