Nativity Scenes and the Second Commandment

Here is a quote from a friend of mine from another forum:

 

I think I agree with Dale-C and others with this viewpoint (i.e. DHK). I do not believe that we should make images of God. My husband thinks a nativity scene is okay (because we know Jesus was born a baby), and I originally agreed for the most part, but now I'm thinking otherwise. I recently purchased a nativity scene and had it set up, but then started questioning whether it was okay or not. Then I started looking it up and found this forum (and many other sites) as well... everyone has different opinions. I'm thinking we better play it safe and not have one unless we found out for sure that it was okay.

I am wondering if the nativity scenes [with the empty mangers] are okay, but I don't know. I read the article Dale-C provided the link for and it contained some valid points. Most of us look at a nativity scene and feel a feeling of adoration towards Jesus, but nevertheless, we still looked at the graven image first, right? So I guess that is using a graven image the wrong way. ?? Then I wonder if God meant to just not bow down and worship them. I'm thinking He meant not to make any graven images of anything that we bow down and worship and I also think that He does not want any images of Himself made either:

Dueteronomy 4:15-19
15 You saw no form of any kind the day the LORD spoke to you at Horeb out of the fire. Therefore watch yourselves very carefully, 16 so that you do not become corrupt and make for yourselves an idol, an image of any shape, whether formed like a man or a woman, 17 or like any animal on earth or any bird that flies in the air, 18 or like any creature that moves along the ground or any fish in the waters below. 19 And when you look up to the sky and see the sun, the moon and the stars—all the heavenly array—do not be enticed into bowing down to them and worshiping things the LORD your God has apportioned to all the nations under heaven.

 

Faith, welcome to the BB!

I grew up with a nativity scene in our home. It was actually going to my parents house and seeing my daughter (15 months) playing with the same cloth nativity scene that we had when I was growing up that made me think about it.

Why is it ok for us to have idols at Christmas time but it is wrong for the Catholics to have that the rest of the year.

 

Dale, are you no longer allowing her to play with that?

 

Alright... no 'image' of God in a figure representing the baby Jesus, but it's alright to have images-- pictures, figurines, reflections-- of other people or things (as many here indicate). So-- if there is a 'nativity scene' without a figure of the baby Jesus-- as if the manger/cradle has a solid side and/or there's only cloth rolled up implying a bundle-- how would you stand with that, then?

 

Dale: Do you think that all the school children who participate in a Christmas play really believe that doll they brought from home is Jesus?

Do you think that all the participants in a live nativity scene really believe they are Mary, Joseph, etc.

Do you think anyone in the audience thinks they are really who they are portraying?

I've yet to see anyone bow down and worship any of the above people...

 

It sounds okay, I think. lol

I am still thinking that one out myself!

 

Let me ask you this:
do you think that the Israelites really thought that a golden calf brought them out of the land of Egypt?
Please read the following account from Exodus:

 

I really wish you would stop answering my questions with another question of your own! :BangHead:

I ask you first! :laugh:

 

Ok, if you do not understand what I was getting at:

I believe that the kids and you and most everyone believes the same as the Children of Isreal did when Aaron made the Golden Calf.
Did they really think that an inanimate object made from gold had delivered them from Egypt?
I sure don't think so!
They believed that it represented the LORD that brought them out of egypt and a few thousand people died.

Do you really want to flirt with something that God takes so seriously?

 

Can I answer... I think they did.

The cow was an idol that was worshipped in Egypt... It was the God Apis.
.
Do some googling to find out more.

I think they lost their faith in the God of moses, and went back to worshipping the cow...

That being said.. they did not have this commandment yet...as Moses had not came down from the mountain...

 

Well, Tim, I will quote you from earlier in the thread:

BUt you believe that the people of Isreal who were not insane DID believe that a golden cow was actually truly what delivered them from the Egyptians?
Remember it was a feast to the LORD.

 

Yep, I'm agreeing with Tim, here. The scripture is clear that Aaron set up the idol and "this is the god that brought you up". That is a pretty clear denial of God in my book and that is the point. If you are worshipping an idol you are giving it credit for the things God has done.

 

So who was the LORD they were talking about?

 

Who said they were in their right minds?

If they believed in the gods of Egypt, their minds were twisted to begin with...

Remember they kept wanting to go back into Egypt.

I think they thought while Moses was leading them out that Moses' God was the one true God...
But when he failed to return, fear set in, and Satan used this to direct Aaron to make the Idol... And claim the calf god led them out... they would have been aware of Apis worship, and some probably still believed in the gods of Egypt... To many, Jehovah was probably just another god...

Like Isis, Horus, Apis, Ra, etc....

They thought, "Well since Jehovah failed us, let's try Apis"

 

Why the phrase "feast to the LORD"?

 

This obvoisly isn't going anywhere but I will say this:
You will sooner remove lust from pornographic images than remove religion from images of Christ.

 

You sound like one who would know.
But I will ask again: If the figure of the baby Jesus is removed from a 'nativity scene,' and all that's there is a solid-sided cradle or rolled up cloth, then is there no violation of any command?

 

I understood exactly what you were saying, but I think you're comparing apples and oranges.

Are you, by any chance, a lawyer? You're very good at evading questions. :type:

 

That is a good question and I have noticed that many people do that that.
As I have studied this issue, I have seen several people who say they do that.

I don't have a dogmatic approach to that one.
It is still using imaging in a religious context but I can't say that a picture of a historical character is inherently idolatrous.

I don't see any need whatsoever to have one? Why not remove all doubt and get rid of it. What good do they do?


So, I don't know for sure. but I would not have one.