Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Desecration as a Political Weapon: Lenin destroyed churches for a reason.
FrontPageMagazine.com ^ | November 20, 2002 | Johannes L. Jacobse

Posted on 11/20/2002 7:20:17 AM PST by SJackson

Back in 1999 artist Chris Ofili smeared elephant feces and pasted pornographic photographs on an image of the Virgin Mary and hung it in the Brooklyn Museum of Art. It caused a firestorm of protest. Olifi's detractors were outraged at the sacrilege. His defenders retorted with the predicable arguments citing freedom of expression and artistic autonomy but avoided any serious engagement with the real meaning of the piece.

Ofili's desecration is nothing new. In recent years we have seen "Piss Christ" where a crucifix was submerged in a jar of urine, Neonazis painting swastikas on synagogues, even Madonna simulating sex acts in a set designed as a church.

Shortly after the Bolshevik Revolution, Lenin ordered soldiers into Russian villages that resisted the imposition of the Communist yoke. Lenin discovered that religious faith informed much of the resistance. Especially troublesome was the teaching that the statutes governing human affairs were subject to the higher judgment of God. It repudiated the Marxist denial of the ideal and everything it implied including the establishment of the state as the final arbiter of all human affairs.

Religious faith was a grave threat to Marxism and Lenin knew it. The soldiers struck at the heart of this faith by striking at the symbols that defined it. Churches, when not burned, were turned into the village dump - a kind of lasting testimonial of desecration. Soldiers urinated in chalices and defecated on altars. Almost all priests were killed. The offense caused by this desecration ran deep. It proclaimed that a new way of ordering the universe - a new faith - had entered the world.

The word symbol in the Greek means the place where two realities come together. Religious symbols have a particular power because religion speaks of the higher unseen things like meaning, purpose, value, and destiny, and thus represent a moral comprehension about how the universe is ordered and how man ought to live within it. In fact, the symbol itself can be said to contain this view. The symbol in other words, functions as a placeholder in space and time of eternal and timeless truths.

Religious symbols bind an individual to a religious community and testify to the sacred inheritance of that community. They represent the body of teaching and instruction inherited from the past that directs how the community ought to live today. This tradition shapes the culture of the community so that the tradition itself can be passed on to the next generation. The symbol identifies the community by what it believes and how it lives.

Desecration is more than the destruction or misuse of the symbol itself. Desecration is sacrilege; the use of the symbol in ways hostile to its meaning and in ways that the tradition considers profane. By desecrating the symbol, the desecrator not only defiles the symbol, he also denies the legitimacy of the community to whom the symbol belongs.

Secularists are unaware of the turmoil that desecration can cause because they have acculturated the Marxist denial of the ideal even though many may not realize it. The secularist perceives transcendence as social universals expressed in the language of "rights" and applied through politics. He regards the state as the final arbiter of truth and falsehood, justice and injustice, good and evil, all the constituents that shape culture, because the state is both the source and end of political life.

There no Moses and no Paul in the secular tradition - no sense of eternal or timeless truth. Rather, the secular prophets like Rousseau, Marx, Lenin, Hitler, Sanger, Gramsci, Alinsky, and others, reduce transcendence to social utility and thus establish the state as the guarantor of heaven on earth. Today this secular view dominates public discourse and explains why most discussions about the desecration of religious symbols address only their political and legal ramifications. The cultural ramifications seldom show up on the radar screen and when they do, the secular censors are quick to dismiss it.

Religion is not the product of culture, religion is the source writes philosopher Russell Kirk. "It's from an association in a cult, a body of worshipers, that human community grows.when belief in the cult has been wretchedly enfeebled, the culture will decay swiftly. The material order rests on the spiritual order."*

When the dominant religious symbols in the culture are desecrated, the beliefs and values that define and shape culture are weakened and can be overthrown. The overthrow of culture is why Lenin destroyed churches and Hitler destroyed synagogues (and why the Taliban blew up a 5000 year old Buddha). This is why a crucifix was submerged in urine and an icon of the Virgin Mary was smeared with feces.

There is contempt of the past, a senseless denial of any possibility of enduring meaning, in desecration art. Desecration art functions like the parasite; it destroys the heritage from which it draws its meaning. Ofili's piece illustrates this. The icon gives the piece meaning, yet the icon is what the piece seeks to destroy. Destroy the meaning of the icon and the meaning of the piece is destroyed with it like the parasite that dies with its host. The artist is vandal and the museum the gate to this cultural barbarism.

If the artist succeeds in destroying the heritage of western culture, the precepts that give his desecration meaning will die along with it. He follows the same path as the Marxist soldiers sent in to quell rebellious villagers: destroy the enduring truths to prepare the way for a Utopia that will never arrive.

*Russell Kirk "Civilization with Religion" The Heritage Foundation Report (July 24, 1992).

Johannes L. Jacobse is a priest in the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America. See his site OrthodoxyToday.org.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-59 next last

1 posted on 11/20/2002 7:20:17 AM PST by SJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: dennisw; Cachelot; Yehuda; Alouette; Nix 2; veronica; Catspaw; knighthawk; Optimist; weikel; ...
If you'd like to be on or off this middle east/political ping list, please FR mail me.
2 posted on 11/20/2002 7:20:45 AM PST by SJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Religious symbols have a particular power because religion speaks of the higher unseen things like meaning, purpose, value, and destiny, and thus represent a moral comprehension about how the universe is ordered and how man ought to live within it. In fact, the symbol itself can be said to contain this view. The symbol in other words, functions as a placeholder in space and time of eternal and timeless truths.

Hooey. Incitement in service of a false premise.

The symbols have no power other than that which is vested in them by the people, who by that act, lose spiritual power. When one walks with God in spirituality one needs no reminder, no binder, and thus gives no opportunity for an act of desecration, which does more to put people into a blind rage than it does to make them an effective army.

There is no doubt of what Lenin was attempting to accomplish and the author is in that respect correct, but there is nothing timeless about symbology else the entire meaning of the stonehenge would be obvious.

3 posted on 11/20/2002 7:42:48 AM PST by Carry_Okie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Note that this desecration thing was first recorded in the Old Testament: Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon, captured all of Israel and he and his son, Belshazzar, utilized sacred items from the Temple for booze and whore parties.
See the Book of Daniel, Ch. 5.

About 15 years ago I wrote an essay (published) about the desecration of the Roman Catholic Church's music for worship and began the piece with the quotation "...by the waters of Babylon...we wept..."

We still weep.
4 posted on 11/20/2002 8:26:12 AM PST by ninenot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Polycarp; NYer; Desdemona; ELS; patent; Catholicguy; sinkspur; BlackElk; maryz; Aquinasfan; ...
Ping
5 posted on 11/20/2002 8:28:15 AM PST by ninenot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
The symbols have no power other than that which is vested in them by the people, who by that act, lose spiritual power. When one walks with God in spirituality one needs no reminder, no binder, and thus gives no opportunity for an act of desecration, which does more to put people into a blind rage than it does to make them an effective army.

Your argument is with the Russian Orthodox Church then. It is they who put emphasis on icons, for example, as more than merely symbolic representations of spiritual truths. That's what the iconoclast controversy was all about with the Eastern Church and settled by Church Councils.

Personally, I would agree with you that the symbols are only temporally imputed with non-transcendant characteristics. However, the fact of their destruction is more indicative of the disrespect and disdain which Lenin held towards Church property and the IDEA of a transcendant reality beyond Lenin's presumed materialism.

6 posted on 11/20/2002 8:28:30 AM PST by Lent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
BOOKMARKED
BUMP
7 posted on 11/20/2002 8:38:19 AM PST by ppaul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
There is contempt of the past, a senseless denial of any possibility of enduring meaning, in desecration art. Desecration art functions like the parasite; it destroys the heritage from which it draws its meaning.

Very true and very sad.
8 posted on 11/20/2002 8:44:37 AM PST by Desdemona
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
The role of the fine artist as a relevant and contributing part of society ended 150 years with the advent of Photography. Those artists who still want to actually affect society go on to be journalistic photographers, filmmakers, graphic designers or editorial cartoonists.

Some who still pursue fine arts may feel the need to shock and provoke to arouse attention and feel relevant.

They cry "censorship" but they thrive on it at the same time. It "empowers" them into relevancy. The best thing to do is to ignore them, or snicker at their infantile ideas and impotent way of expressing them. That will likely drive those neurotic personalities further into addiction, institutionalization....or, who knows, maybe a comfortable CPA career.

9 posted on 11/20/2002 8:45:46 AM PST by pollwatcher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
I can assure you that without any churches, religious schools, congregational meeting places, family instruction in religion, or Bibles, the inwardness of Protestantism is just as vulnerable as the ritualism of the Orthodox Church.
10 posted on 11/20/2002 8:47:59 AM PST by Cicero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Religious faith was a grave threat to Marxism and Lenin knew it.

Let's cut the euphemisms: It was Christianity that was the threat.

Can a parallel be found with the secularists [libertarians, rabid evolutionists and atheists] who, not finding the god of reason on their side, constantly belittle Christianity Parthian style?

11 posted on 11/20/2002 9:00:31 AM PST by Dataman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lent
However, the fact of their destruction is more indicative of the disrespect and disdain which Lenin held towards Church property and the IDEA of a transcendant reality beyond Lenin's presumed materialism.

Yup, they gave him that vulnerability and he took full advantage of it. There's a reason why that Commandment is natural law.

12 posted on 11/20/2002 9:02:53 AM PST by Carry_Okie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
I can assure you that without any churches, religious schools, congregational meeting places, family instruction in religion, or Bibles, the inwardness of Protestantism is just as vulnerable as the ritualism of the Orthodox Church.

I'll agree with that with one distinction: A bible is a book. It contains stored information. It is not a scared object unless a person imbues it with that character. The essence of that information; i.e., a recorded translation of God's is sacred, but it doesn't matter if it is received as oral tradition, CD, or paper.

As far as Protestantism is concerned (or for that matter IMHO the Church of Rome), I'd say that they've pretty well trodden that path to self-destruction on their own, embracing Lenin instead of understanding the word of God. Consider "Liberation Theology."

13 posted on 11/20/2002 9:08:48 AM PST by Carry_Okie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
As far as Protestantism is concerned (or for that matter IMHO the Church of Rome), I'd say that they've pretty well trodden that path to self-destruction on their own, embracing Lenin instead of understanding the word of God. Consider "Liberation Theology."

Liberation Theology is a phenomenon of the Catholic Church. I understand the Pope John Paul II has had some rather harsh things to say concerning this theology. The largest supporters have been in Central and South America. With respect to Socialism, Pius XI in Quadragesimo Anno(1931), stated, "Socialism, entirely ignorant of and unconcerned about the sublime end of both individuals and of society, affirms that human society was instituted merely for the sake of material well-being." Paul VI expressly condemned four principles of Marxist ideology which a Christian could not hold in Octogesima Adveniens(1971).

From the Protestant perspective, you are referring to the phenomenon characterized as the "Social Gospel". That it is thoroughly pervasive in Protestantism is not evident. However, that it characterizes the theology of a number of "mainstream" Protestant denominations is a reality.

14 posted on 11/20/2002 9:51:53 AM PST by Lent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Lent
From the Protestant perspective, you are referring to the phenomenon characterized as the "Social Gospel". That it is thoroughly pervasive in Protestantism is not evident. However, that it characterizes the theology of a number of "mainstream" Protestant denominations is a reality.

A number of people in my family are prominent Presbyterian theologists and administrators. They are typical, aging, Berkeley, Marin, and Palo Alto liberals living off old money. These folks milk their congregations for money while they soft-sell the agenda.

15 posted on 11/20/2002 10:42:33 AM PST by Carry_Okie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
A number of people in my family are prominent Presbyterian theologists and administrators. They are typical, aging, Berkeley, Marin, and Palo Alto liberals living off old money. These folks milk their congregations for money while they soft-sell the agend

Yup.

16 posted on 11/20/2002 10:58:16 AM PST by Lent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
bttt
17 posted on 11/20/2002 11:01:15 AM PST by lodwick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Maybe we're just being too nice. Can't turnabout be fair play? Why can't someone start desecrating the icons of liberal secularism? For example, how about a painting of Voltaire, smeared with feces? Or a photograph of Margaret Sanger, splattered with blood?
18 posted on 11/20/2002 1:06:46 PM PST by Stefan Stackhouse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Thank you so much for this post and the link to the author's site.
19 posted on 11/20/2002 1:13:38 PM PST by MarMema
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
So I can safely assume then that you have never been baptized?
20 posted on 11/20/2002 1:27:06 PM PST by MarMema
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: MarMema
So I can safely assume then that you have never been baptized?

What does that have to do with anything I said?
Why is it any of your business?
If I had or hadn't, what difference would it make?

21 posted on 11/20/2002 1:36:09 PM PST by Carry_Okie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
The symbols have no power other than that which is vested in them by the people, who by that act, lose spiritual power. When one walks with God in spirituality one needs no reminder, no binder

I am assuming that you would then conclude that the symbolism of baptism has no power other than that which we give it as people, and that it is not a binder.

22 posted on 11/20/2002 1:53:48 PM PST by MarMema
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Bookmark
Bump
23 posted on 11/20/2002 1:57:24 PM PST by Fiddlstix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MarMema
I am assuming that you would then conclude that the symbolism of baptism has no power other than that which we give it as people, and that it is not a binder.

Yup, exactly as I suspected: a dishonestly portrayed hidden agenda, and you tried to lay a trap to get it done. What a Christian (and, yes, I would prefer to be slapped in such a fashion were I as hypocritical as was your post).

As far as i know, Jesus never worshipped in any building dedicated to the purpose of worship except for the one and only temple erected by God's command. Last time I checked, Jesus was baptized in a river, not exactly a graven image there either. The essence of the sacrament was and is not symbolic, but substantive. Your association of such with "symbolism" and trying to connect that to "symbols," lacking that distinction speaks volumes.

24 posted on 11/20/2002 2:16:47 PM PST by Carry_Okie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: MarMema
BTTT....that was a great question!!
25 posted on 11/20/2002 2:24:38 PM PST by crazykatz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Jesus said the Gates of Hell shall not prevail against HIS CHURCH. And Mao, Lenin, Stalin, Castro, etc who all tried to destroy THE CHURCH which is the Body of Jesus Christ on this earth until He comes again, AND FAILED. They are all gone, but the Church of Jesus Christ remains! Bibles were likewise banned, burned, destroyed, prohibited - yet God's Unchangeable, Infallible, life-giving Word is still here - changing and transforming individual lives, families, and nations.

Upon the Rock of Jesus Christ and His Word, all who will can take their stand and can resist the threats and attacks of the enemy of our souls. HE is our rock and our refuge, no matter what is thrown at us. And WE can go on offense to pray against Satan and his lieutenants just as has been witnessed in these past two elections. MUCH was won by prayer. How much cannot be seen in this life - but we will know one of these days....further along.

For now - we are to pray for those who persecute us, for those who want us dead. Because THAT is the order our Commander in Chief has given to all who call upon the name of Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord!

26 posted on 11/20/2002 2:26:07 PM PST by Freedom'sWorthIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
"WHERE EVER TWO OR MORE ARE GATHERED IN MY NAME, THERE I SHALL BE AS WELL"....Jesus Christ.

Now, HE did not say... in a Temple or a Church....HE said, "WHERE EVER...".

Now, that could be in a Church or a Temple or it might NOT!!!

What is it about "where ever" don't you understand???

27 posted on 11/20/2002 2:30:49 PM PST by crazykatz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
I think many are missing the point here. The left by itself is more symbolic than substantive. So they naturally will try to desecrate the symbols standing in the way of their beliefs: churches, icons, artifacts, even history. etc..

I think I am going to become a modern artists and have a whole slew of art that are called "Piss Lenin", "Piss Stalin", "Piss Hammer & Sickle", "Piss Mao", "Piss Che Gueverra", and "Piss Castro". Now, all I have to do is get a jar and start drinking...

28 posted on 11/20/2002 2:32:45 PM PST by KC_Conspirator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: crazykatz
What is it about "where ever" don't you understand???

None. I have no disagreement whatsoever with what you said.

29 posted on 11/20/2002 2:38:01 PM PST by Carry_Okie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: ninenot
Please spare us stories of how Romans were wronged by people making fun of their music. It doesn't rise to the level of desacration. And it pales in comparison to the evil wrought by that group for the almost 1600 years it has existed since it's inception. Lest we forget, it got it's name from Theodoseus in what 438ad.
30 posted on 11/20/2002 2:39:57 PM PST by Havoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
You wrote: "As far as i know, Jesus never worshipped in any building dedicated to the purpose of worship except for the one and only temple erected by God's command.

That sounded like you don't see the need for Churches or Temples....buildings. "WHERE EVER" COULD BE IN A BUILDING or a hollow tree.

31 posted on 11/20/2002 2:55:40 PM PST by crazykatz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Havoc
Please spare us stories of how Romans were wronged by people making fun of their music.

He's talking about "Romans" who have destroyed their own music, not "people making fun" of anything.

And it pales in comparison to the evil wrought by that group for the almost 1600 years it has existed since it's inception.

Yawn. Must be nice to have such a simplistic worldview. Well, maybe not.

Lest we forget, it got it's name from Theodoseus in what 438ad.

Huh? What are you talking about? Theodosius was long dead by AD 438. The term "Catholic Church" was first used in writing by Ignatius of Antioch in AD 110. Whatever it is that I'm not supposed to forget seems like something you just made up.

32 posted on 11/20/2002 3:02:05 PM PST by Campion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Havoc
Sorry. Didn't mean to get you worked up. Actually, the story is how RC music for worship has been turned to 'soft rock' and 'sesame street' tunes from what was the heritage of Chant and polyphony.

It is quite a sad story.

More recently, the 'wreckovation' of RC churches has been another, parallel, experience to the destruction of the sacred.
33 posted on 11/20/2002 3:03:53 PM PST by ninenot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
... there is nothing timeless about symbology else the
entire meaning of the stonehenge would be obvious.

LOL  Boffo!

34 posted on 11/20/2002 4:11:19 PM PST by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: crazykatz
That sounded like you don't see the need for Churches or Temples....buildings. "WHERE EVER" COULD BE IN A BUILDING or a hollow tree.

Indeed it could and I don't think Jesus would have a problem with a hollow tree. He stayed in homes or camped and prayed wherever. He did have a problem with graven images and whipped those who would make worship into a business. Opulent buildings (other than THE Temple) full of expensive graven images, used barely once a week seem to me both contrary to the Commandment and rather profligate when the life of Christ was so dedicated to the poor. In fact, my guess is that He would disapprove of such structures. I don't think He would have a problem with a building for the purpose of organizing services to the sick and the poor or other gatherings for that matter, but I'd bet he'd prefer to keep it simple. The point is one of focus and stewardship.

35 posted on 11/20/2002 4:45:16 PM PST by Carry_Okie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Stefan Stackhouse
"Maybe we're just being too nice. Can't turnabout be fair play? Why can't someone start desecrating the icons of liberal secularism? For example, how about a painting of Voltaire, smeared with feces? Or a photograph of Margaret Sanger, splattered with blood."

If "Piss Christ" is allowed, why not a "Piss Quran". Any bets on how long you live afterward?
36 posted on 11/20/2002 4:49:37 PM PST by Ruy Dias de Bivar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ninenot
I wrote an essay (published) about the desecration of the Roman Catholic Church's music for worship

Where was it published? Can we get a copy?

37 posted on 11/20/2002 5:15:56 PM PST by ELS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Didn't Hamza just say that all infidels are cows to be taken by any believer who wants to. What do you say about a peaceful religion that supports amputation for petty theft but, has no regard whatsoever for human rights?
38 posted on 11/20/2002 5:46:18 PM PST by Righty1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
The gigantic statue of the Buddha destroyed by the Taliban was not 5000 years old, unless it was carved 2,500 years before the Buddha lived.
39 posted on 11/20/2002 5:54:15 PM PST by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie; MarMema; FormerLib
You know what...you are a bit biased against the faith of MILLIONS of Christians who suffered and died at the hands of soviet authorites simply because they were believers and followers of JESUS CHRIST.

THe RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHRISTIANS and the millions of other Orthodox Christians, who died at the hands of the Turks and other islamics, were JUST AS CHRISTIAN AS YOU....and they had icons as reminders of their Faith in God....not as graven idols!!

You do them a vast disservice by inferring that their FAITH is less, somehow than yours. Shame on you.

Who are you to say that? Just because these Christians WORSHIPPED JESUS CHRIST in a way that YOU do not approve of... you infer that they were less CHRISTIAN.

Just because you don't approve of ICONS or beautiful Churches( BUILT TO HONOR GOD, by the way), You say that you guess Christ would not have approved of their worship.

YOU GUESS???

Well, that is not good enough for me.

The early Church Fathers KNEW much more than you about Jesus Christ...I will heed them.

And, further, I will honor the Orthodox Christian martyrs for JESUS CHRIST and forgive you your insentivity to their sacrifices.

40 posted on 11/20/2002 8:00:07 PM PST by crazykatz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: ELS
Homiletic and Pastoral Review. I am afraid that this was LONG before digital era publishing/archiving. I have a couple of print copies and will (eventually) mail them at your request.

Another avenue which you may pursue if you like is to see if your public library (or Chancery/seminary) has a subscription to the quarterly Sacred Music. If they do, there's a series of articles on music in the Church after VII by Msgr. Schuler (Ph.D.) which is far more articulate and worth reading than my piece. His series was published about 12-15 years ago, as well.
41 posted on 11/20/2002 8:17:18 PM PST by ninenot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar
Any bets on how long you live afterward?

Not long enough to make the bet...

42 posted on 11/20/2002 8:19:21 PM PST by ninenot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: ninenot
LOL....you two guys are hilarious!!
43 posted on 11/20/2002 8:22:19 PM PST by crazykatz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: crazykatz
You know what...you are a bit biased against the faith of MILLIONS of Christians who suffered and died at the hands of soviet authorites simply because they were believers and followers of JESUS CHRIST.

Many FReepers speak disparagingly of Islam. There are over a BILLION of them. Many are willing to die for their faith. All sorts of people get used. Although I respect their commitment, I think you would agree that they have been misled (if you understood the origins of Islam, you would have compassion for the people who take the Koran literally). So it would seem that neither massive numbers nor martyrdom make for an objective reading of scripture, not even in your book. To make such an argument to me as if it were convincing, therefore, isn't.

THe RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHRISTIANS and the millions of other Orthodox Christians, who died at the hands of the Turks and other islamics, were JUST AS CHRISTIAN AS YOU....and they had icons as reminders of their Faith in God....not as graven idols!!

I think you had better examine that idea a little more closely. I seriously doubt the the most unsophisticated animist practicing voo-doo believes that the spirits reside in their figurines. They are reminders, channeling devices, and symbols too. "Graven" means constructed by artifice. "Image" means graphic symbol, not the thing itself. Those are facts, and neither custom nor plurality can change them. There is a reason for that Law and I doubt that you saw it in my first post, blinded by your affrontery for having your adherence to custom having been supposedly disparaged. It was that which I was saying is one of the costs of the practice.

You do them a vast disservice by inferring that their FAITH is less, somehow than yours. Shame on you.

I never said that. You are projecting in order to have something to attack. I said that it diminishes their spiritual power and puts them in a blind rage (see above). That says nothing of my faith, which to me is a matter between me and the Father. It was an observation, not a comparison, that I don't pretend to make.

Who are you to say that? Just because these Christians WORSHIPPED JESUS CHRIST in a way that YOU do not approve of... you infer that they were less CHRISTIAN.

Me? What does that matter? MY approval hardly matters. I think that judgment is up to the Lord. I said that I thought the Salvation Army had it about right, yet I am not one of them. So you see, I made no pretense. It was an observation, not posturing. For that you had best commune with Mr. MarMema.

44 posted on 11/20/2002 10:12:36 PM PST by Carry_Okie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie; MarMema
Your opinion matters less to me than you can ever imagine....you are a bigot about ANYBODY who differs from your BRAND OF CHRISTIANITY.

Your comments comparing Orthodox Christians to NON-CHRISTIAN muslims and animists proves it. SHAME ON YOU!!

"Mr." Marmema is a lady....and an Orthodox Christian.

Oh, yes God the Father will be the judge of YOUR actions and comments on the sacrifices of his followers and NOT, you.

Please refrain yourself from ever posting to me again. I do not like you or your weird ideas.

45 posted on 11/20/2002 10:25:30 PM PST by crazykatz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
I guess you missed the part about Christ going to the synagogues?
46 posted on 11/20/2002 10:29:05 PM PST by FormerLib
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: crazykatz
Perhaps we need to try to suffer such fools more gladly. Do not let such tempt you into anger as that only serves their master.
47 posted on 11/20/2002 10:30:15 PM PST by FormerLib
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: FormerLib
Well, I for one, appreciate the sacrifice of all Christians who died for their belief in and love of Jesus Christ. To make light of that or dismiss it, is a sin.

Just because a Christian happens to have an Icon or a rosary or a fancy church building or a cross...does NOT make him any less of a Christian than...let's say...carrie okie.

48 posted on 11/20/2002 10:38:36 PM PST by crazykatz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: FormerLib
"I guess you missed the part about Christ going to the synagogues?".....

Saint Paul taught in synagogues...he taught Jews about Jesus Christ there. And he was put in jail for it too.

49 posted on 11/20/2002 10:40:38 PM PST by crazykatz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: FormerLib
Synagogue is a Greek word meaning "assembly." IIRC these became houses of worship (lacking the Temple) in about the 5th or 6th Century AD. I might add, long after the stint in Babylon.

Do you propose that Christ ignored the torah?

DEU 12:11 Then there shall be a place which the LORD your God shall choose to cause his name to dwell there; thither shall ye bring all that I command you; your burnt offerings, and your sacrifices, your tithes, and the heave offering of your hand, and all your choice vows which ye vow unto the LORD:

DEU 12:13 Take heed to thyself that thou offer not thy burnt offerings in every place that thou seest:

DEU 12:14 But in the place which the LORD shall choose in one of thy tribes, there thou shalt offer thy burnt offerings, and there thou shalt do all that I command thee.

There is a difference between a synagogue and a temple. As I recall, Christ went to synagogue to teach and talk with the elders; i.e., an assembly.
50 posted on 11/20/2002 10:46:20 PM PST by Carry_Okie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-59 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson