/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

I got one from my folks not too long ago. It's a plain cross because they're prots and don't like to look at the crucified cross made of stainless steel with a diamond in the center. I personally keep it under my clothes because the people around my area wear them as fashion statements, and I don't want mine to be seen as that.

Where's a good place to buy a cross?

>>581922

This is precisely my issue with them. They've been co-opted by all manner of people for whom, bizarrely, they have no religious significance whatsoever. I don't understand how they came to be fashion symbols in the hip-hop world of all places, but there it is. I am tempted to wear one openly simply to make some effort to culturally reclaim them. I don't think anyone would mistake it for a fashion item as I dress fairly conservatively.

>>581923

>I don’t think material matters.

Would you approve of someone spending a lot of money on a gold cross, for example, or would that be overdoing it?

What do you guys do with that joke/argument that tupac wouldn't want you wearing a gun around your neck?

>>581919

I wear a small white plastic rosary around my neck, obscured. I would spring for a nicer one but it's a humble piece and I literally found it on the road while I was in a faithless rut so I consider it a gift.

>>581920

Cool hobbitcore fashion anon.

>>581930

>it's a humble piece and I literally found it on the road while I was in a faithless rut so I consider it a gift.

That's lovely, and I think you should treasure it.

>>581930

>found it on the road while I was in a faithless rut

That's a really nice story.

>hobbitcore

Is that what it's called? All I know is linen shirts and vests are comfy when it's 100 degrees outside with 90% humidity.

>>581926

I wouldn’t care. If you want a nice expensive cross, get one

>>581929

The cross is a sign of Christ’s victory over sin and death, Christ wasn’t defeated by the cross. Also I’d tell them to not ape old Bill Hicks material.

>>581919

Plain cross. Images of Christ are blasphemous.

>>581935

>The cross is a sign of Christ’s victory over sin and death, Christ wasn’t defeated by the cross. Also I’d tell them to not ape old Bill Hicks material.

Gr8 argument, thanks

>>581934

>Is that what it's called?

No I just ad libbed that, but Sam would be proud.

>>581919

I bought a medal with st. Michael on one side and our Lady of the Immaculate on the other. I'm still looking for a proper chain now and I need to have it blessed.

>>581925

I got mine on Etsy

>>581952

are you trying to taunt me or something?

>>581920

> I wear them openly.

Are you of the cloth?

>>581962

We all are, every one of us.

But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light 1 Peter 2:9

>>581919

no

all they encourage is idolatry

I think it's fine if it's just a cross(no graven image of Jesus) and if it's not fancy.

>>581976

I find this perspective curious. If something as simple as a plain cross necklace is, or encourages, idolatry, then to what other applications of the cross symbol does this view apply? Should churches have no crosses in their architecture and on their altars? Should we never use the symbol of the cross at all when representing our faith, so that its physical shape is never seen but is kept in our imagination only?

>>581981

Man, don't bother. They have a totally different definition of idolatry. They can't understand that if you make an image you don't pray to the image but to what the image represents.

>>581919

Nothing wrong with it. Someone interested might ask you a few questions about the faith, who knows. I don't see what bad could come out of it.

But https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Christianity_and_Cleavage.jpg (mild nsfw) and similar isn't appropriate.

>>581976

mashallah brother

>>581988

You mean that cross is too showy or using the cross as an excuse to show off your cleavage (assuming you're a woman) (or to show anything off for that matter) is the problem?

>>581994

The image was uploaded to flickr and then reuploaded to wikimedia commons as an example of someone wearing a cross.

To be fair, it's categorized under

>Religion and sex

>Christian crosses

>Necklaces in cleavage

>Close-up photographs of female human breasts

>Cross chains

>>581996

The issue is the cross featuring in borderline pornography by someone who is most likely not Christian.

>>582003

The fatwa (religious decree) against images of Mohammed was issued many years after his death, in the 1500s I think.

I have a golden one on a gold chain, wearing it under the clothes.

>>581925

At your local church to support them.

>>581929

>What do you guys do with that joke/argument that tupac wouldn't want you wearing a gun around your neck?

Did Tupac defeat death by death? No? Then it doesn't matter.

>>581925

ymmv but we got ours through gi jewelry, ordered via amazon. simple, inexpensive, stainless steel so no issues, they have a variety of designs, ours is the russian 3-bar. my wife put hers on a better chain but still stainless.

>>581919

my grandmother gave me a golden one i wear it all the time and if it outside or underneath my clothes depends on the day personally i see it as a reminder to myself that christ is always there for us and a pronouncement of faith

>>582007

>582003 (You) fatwa (religious decree) against images of Mohammed was issued many years after his death, in the 1500s I think

I was being pretty mean. I do have very different definitions of blasphemy than you. May Christ be with you.

>>582072

don't forget that since man is made in the image of God our existence is blaspheming, I guess

>>582084

That whole thing (copypasta aside) is pure cringe.

>What are you, a fag? Don't you want to be a real man like me? Don't you want to have a fuckin METAL combat rosary or do you like that girly glass-beads shit?

>>582081

No because He made us, just like He gave the blue prints for the ark of the covenant and mercy seat and tabernacle is not blasphemy for models of things in heaven

>>582088

All things considered they do have some pretty dope incense based balms and I have been considering beard oil anyways. Shame I won't be supporting this absolute nonsense.

>>582088

Also in the spirit of not being a false witness I should actually post this too.

https://catholicbalm.co/ourstory/

Guess they're not shills after all, although they definitely should definitely watch how they advertise. I think I may actually buy this stuff though.

>>582140

Christ is literally an image of the Father, not graven but living, like all of us are called to be dude. That's Christology 101. And using a statue or image to assist in calling to mind a very real God-Man is not the same as offering blood to rocks and calling them living gods like ancient semetic pagans, nor claiming that these images are literally our Gods like Aaron did.

>he believes memories are tiny pictures that your brain draws

But that is literally what imagination is if that's what you're getting at.

Look, anon should not be coming at you passive aggressively with this, but you should not be overcompensating in mockery because he idolatry the same way all Christians did for over a millennium and a majority still do.

>>582149

>using a statue or image to assist in calling to mind a very real God-Man

That's superstition, anon. That's implying there is spiritual power in the image because you're using it as a spiritual aid. As if though it's a druidic amulet or something.

>nor claiming that these images are literally our Gods like Aaron did

It's not like Aaron and the Jews had forgotten all sense and thought they had literally made the God who saved them, he said they were their gods in the same way someone can say this >>581952 'is' Jesus. As a picture. The purpose of the golden calf was to depict God for the worship of God, like the ancient Greek idols. They didn't think the image was their god, but that the god would be pleased by them worshipping their image since it meant in spirit they were worshipping them.

>>582157

>That's implying there is spiritual power

Except I literally just said that it's a mental aid and that the error is in attributing any real power to it.

>he said they were their gods in the same way someone can say this 'is' Jesus.

Did he tell you that that is Jesus? Does the Orthodox Church teach that that is Jesus? No? Then don't bear false witness against them.

>The purpose of the golden calf was to depict God for the worship of God, like the ancient Greek idols.

>They didn't think the image was their god

"And the Lord said unto Moses, Go, get thee down; for thy people, which thou broughtest out of the land of Egypt, have corrupted themselves

They have turned aside quickly out of the way which I commanded them: they have made them a molten calf, and have worshipped it, and have sacrificed thereunto, and said, THESE BE THY GODS, O Israel, which have brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.

The israelites certainly did not forget the Lord, but they also tried to put other gods beside him and attribute the same blessings that he wrought to them to a hunk of quarks. The apostolic churches are incredibly clear in their teaching that we are not to worship icons and we are not to consider them, as created being, equivalent to an eternal, uncreated God. And this passage is the exact reason. If you want to try and dissuade us from our practices then you need to prove you actually know what they are first.

>>582167

>Then who cares?

"Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? He that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?"-John 14:9

tldr: we do

> So if I opened somebodies head, I would find tiny drawings of all their memories?

Wait wut. If that's what you want to believe I'm getting at then sure. Again, clearly overcompensating.

>>582165

>Except I literally just said that it's a mental aid

A spiritual aid.

>Did he tell you that that is Jesus? Does the Orthodox Church teach that that is Jesus? No? Then don't bear false witness against them.

Who is this >>581952 in the image?

>THESE BE THY GODS

Which I already explained

>they also tried to put other gods beside him

"which have brought thee up out of the land of Egypt", no they intend this to be an image of God not other gods

>The apostolic churches are incredibly clear in their teaching that we are not to worship icons

But not practically. The only perceivable difference between latria and dulia is in the mind. The distinction is a phantasm.

where can u buy nice crosses online? (also rosaries)

>>582170

>A spiritual aid.

That too yes, one with no power of it's own but one which can be of much benefit to the faithful.

>Who is this in the image?

Jesus. And did that icon die for your sins? No? Then you shouldn't deliberately misrepresent the argument because it is bearing false witness.

>"which have brought thee up out of the land of Egypt", no they intend this to be an image of God not other gods

Is this like that protestant thing where Jesus says "this is my body" and the meaning of the word "is" is contested into absolute meaninglessness? If we trust the Bible we are to trust it literally, and the bible says that Aaron says "these be thy Gods." Not "these represent thy Gods" but actual, "living" idols like the idols worshiped by pagans in the Old Testament thousands of years ago and worshiped by pagans in India today.

>But not practically. The only perceivable difference between latria and dulia is in the mind. The distinction is a phantasm

The saints who we build statues to too would be the very first to say different because they know God from a pile of quarks, and at most we only ask them to pray for us, which as living people in heaven and in communion with us they can do. Again, you need to look closer at what we practice before you criticize it.

>>582175

>That too yes, one with no power of it's own but one which can be of much benefit to the faithful.

Using an image as a spiritual aid is superstitious and heathenistic

>Jesus

Thanks. Now can you stop intentionally misreading me?

>If we trust the Bible we are to trust it literally, and the bible says that Aaron says "these be thy Gods." Not "these represent thy Gods" but actual, "living" idols like the idols worshiped by pagans in the Old Testament thousands of years ago and worshiped by pagans in India today.

Ok, so I will now apply your argument of what this absolutely must mean to your own words, and conclude that since you said that image is Jesus, you absolutely must mean that the image is truly the living God-man.

>Again, you need to look closer at what we practice

I am fully aware of your practice and you just proved my point by failing to provide a real difference between latria and dulia.

>>582193

>Ok, so I will now apply your argument of what this absolutely must mean to your own words, and conclude that since you said that image is Jesus, you absolutely must mean that the image is truly the living God-man.

Do you want me to be more specific and state that that image is a series of photons flying into your eyes that form an image of Jesus, or do you just want to keep rejecting the whole "pile of quarks" aspect of my description of icons? Because I'm sorry but you aren't going to convince me of your exegesis if you cannot actually address the Church's without using strawmen.

>failing to provide a real difference between latria and dulia.

>differentiates between petitioning a created human being to pray for you and praying too the eternal God.

>failure

>>582044

It is done

>>582197

>Do you want me to be more specific and state that that image is a series of photons flying into your eyes that form an image of Jesus, or do you just want to keep rejecting the whole "pile of quarks" aspect of my description of icons? Because I'm sorry but you aren't going to convince me of your exegesis if you cannot actually address the Church's without using strawmen.

I don't think we can have a conversation if you're just going to refuse to engage

>>differentiates between petitioning a created human being to pray for you and praying too the eternal God

You don't just petition them to pray for you. Every single prayer to saints used by Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox is substantially different from how you ask men on earth to pray for you. You can't say "we're just asking them to pray for us" without justifying the praises and trust included in the prayers.

>>581976

If something as simple as a plain cross is going to cause you to forsake God and start worshipping it instead then yeah you probably are better off without one. For people who can differentiate between an object and God though it is a great tool for remembering Christ's sacrifice

>>582340

I guess the tradition is survived in the West with scapulars that have verses on them. The general idea with these practices appears to be the belief of the verses and words having spiritual talismanic power.

The use of leather scrolls traces back to the mystique of the Hebrew customs of writing down sacred scripture onto leather scrolls. Aside from having to use skin from a kosher animal, Judaic rules for writing torah scrolls specify to write on the inner side of the skin and not the external hide side of the animal skin. This is probably done for practical reasons of the writing surface being easier maybe but maybe it also symbolizes the words written on the inside being protected by the hide side. The threads for sewing the pages together are derived from animal tendon. Similar rules are probably applied across other scroll containing objects like the tefillin and the mezuzah.

>>582351

>spiritual talismanic power.

That's not how it works.

>>582355

Well authorities might not be keen on describing it in those terms but it still hasn't prevented it from being a common practical intent among users.

From the tefillin wiki

Maimonides details of the sanctity of tefillin and writes that "as long as the tefillin are on the head and on the arm of a man, he is modest and God-fearing and will not be attracted by hilarity or idle talk; he will have no evil thoughts, but will devote all his thoughts to truth and righteousness."

I have a simple cross made from pewter by my friend which I wear usually under my clothes.

>>582432

Is it any good?

>>583062

Did you serve in the Franco-Prussian war?

I ordered a simple Orthodox cross on Amazon. I haven't actually chosen a denomination, I just think the Orthodox cross is the most realistic.

I'm thinking of making my own cross necklace, vid related

>>583476

But the bible says that a sign was placed above Jesus's head, which would indicate that is was shaped like a lowercase t.

I wear a chaplet but I nest it under my tie.

>>581981

It makes sense to demonstrate it in an illustration alongside the word, to help explain what the death of Jesus on the cross actually is (as a visual aid)…but wearing it like a piece of jewelry just turns it into an idol.

It's like getting it tattooed on the body. Think of those who get other things tattooed on them…like phrases in a language they don't understand.

Before you know it, these people begin to collect idols; buying clothing with this stuff on it, or filling their home with ornaments of the same nature. They think it's "good" or "cool" and that it shows they as a person are actually acting out whatever its original meaning describes, but really they are just idolizing it, worshiping it as a symbol, and whatever meaning it once had is completely corrupted and lost due to it just becoming a commercialized decoration.

They worship the concept of it by collecting idols of it, but it does not mean they actually understand the meaning of it / actually practice it on a day to day basis.

The same thing applies to Christmas now too. Originally, it was a Christian giving gifts to those who are less fortunate, and they got killed for doing that. Now instead, a lot of modern day Christians are raised to expect the exchanging of gifts, rather than actually giving to those who are in need / less fortunate.

If you ask me, many modern day Christians are actually warping into pagans. They have allowed the devil to weaken their understanding of the word by adopting the works of demons into their faith to make it easier to consume for others, which results in a deteriorated faith of worshiping the existence of a concept, or worshiping a symbol that represents it, but without actually acting out what that concept originally meant.

It's become a consumable really. Just like the phrase "I shop, therefore I am", but instead "I own a cross necklace, therefore I am Christian".

"I bought a cross statue online once, therefore it means I act faithfully in a way that God would want me to."

It's kind of dystopian actually. Like a one-stop faith-shop where you can just "buy faith".

Get your premium faith! Cross jewelry, cross rub-on tattoos, cross statues, worship mix tapes with built-in auto-repeat….all at a low low price!

>>581922

Does that not make it kind of like an idol you are hiding in private, out of shame to be seen as having an idol that others openly wear in public?

>>581983

They still have a valid point though. What if someone else you are attempting to bring into the fold of God does not understand that difference, and so you present to them an image of Jesus on the cross…and they think that praying just means you worship that image of Jesus on the cross…and in their own time they only pray in the presence of that image?

Not that Jesus died on the cross for their sins, just the image you gave them.

Would that not over time become leaven and weaken Gods word? After all, it's a worldly thing. A physical thing, regardless of what it is. So if someone surrounds themselves with a bunch of worldly things, and prays only in the presence of those worldly things, but does nothing else to actually act out faith in God or share Gods word, are they really praying to God? Even if they deep down think so, what does that look like to someone who has just been introduced to Christianity?

It just looks like other Christians have surrounded their-selves with a bunch of worldly idols. Jewelry, statues, imagery, music, they are merely equating faith to having physical things that depict biblical themes…not to actually acting out faith.

Imagine if it was revealed that all that mass-produced cross jewelry was actually a product of slavery…would that be going for, or against Gods intentions?

>>581930

>>found it on the road while I was in a faithless rut

I'm sorry to hear that you had to go through that rut, I hope things are going better for you now.

>>584232

I like it.

>>584228

Man I bought a pack of three bracelets each with ten of these medals on them and two out of three were missing the pax at the top, feels bad man.

>>581919

Ask yourself: Why do I need a necklace with a cross/Rosary ? Do you need to wear it to profess your faith ? Then you shouldn't. Do you wear it as jewelry ? Then you shouldn't. Do you wear it in order to be able or reminded to pray ? Then it's absolutely fine, under your clothes.

People that openly wear crosses, Rosaries etc. irritate me, because if they have a strong faith and are baptized and confirmed, they have the seal of God on their hearts. But that's just me. However, do NOT wear anything Cross-related as talisman or jewelry and don't show off or try to piss off others (for example if you live in a muslim neighborhood) - because that'd the prideful or uncharitable, depending on your intention.

>>584252

>Do you need to wear it to profess your faith ? Then you shouldn't.

Why not?

>>584251

>A church should be mostly bare and the walls empty. You can't make out the details in wall paintings anyway since they're so high up, it ends up being an ugly mess of pastel colors.

You couldn't possibly be more wrong if you tried

>>584253

Maybe I worded that poorly(?). What I mean is, if you have to wear a cross to feel like a "believer", then you degrade the Cross of life to a talisman - to something very profane. And you really shouldn't to it.

>>584262

I think you are looking at this too negatively, for example one can wear a cross to remind himself of his faith and that God loves us, but you can also say that this person "wears a cross to feel like a believer".

Surely our faith in God is not bigger or smaller whether we wear a cross or not, believing so would just make us idolaters.

>>584264

Well just the pews are an innovation that directs toward comfort. Early congregations didn't use them and the tradition is preserved in eastern churches today.

>>584251

>Church isn't supposed to be comfy.

>provides pews and seats

>>584276

I believe that the Parthenon had a mosque built inside it rather than was turned into one, but this is pretty much like arguing semantics but with architecture.

>>584286

I wouldn't have a problem with reed mats or carpet.

>>584288

b8

>>584290

They seem to have done a done a similar thing with the Hagia Sophia and also had enough respect for the painting of Jesus to just cover it with plaster or something.

I think blankness could be more helpful for productive contemplation and could be more conducive to clearing the mind of excess clutter, but adherents will be fans and loyal to the things they do.

>>584251

My autism feels great just by looking at these church bunkers. But seriously I love art in all it's manifestations so this is too much.

In the modern day one is more inclined toward more spaciness and lighting whereas in the medieval Europe it was all about narrow halls, stained glass window, and a competition for the tallest tower.

Architecture is one of those things that's more open to flexibility as opposed to other aspects of religion.

Friends,

I have to walk through a metal detector every morning for work. I want a crucifix that I can wear at all times (like in shower as well).

Any recommendations for material?

>>584445

Plastic?

>>584445

Does it have to be permanent? Maybe something made out of stone is better feeling than plastic but also more at risk to break. There are also the Greek prayer ropes some of which are worn like bracelets.

I'd really think twice though about the ethics of donning the cross when naked and exposing oneself before it.

https://youtu.be/-AE6OR0V3a0

>>584459

I don't understand what you mean about being naked before the cross - why would God be offended by my nakedness?

I assume anyone wearing a cross necklace is a larper and not a real christian, because it is not sanctioned in the Bible to glorify God by wearing one. And anything not of faith is sin due to romans 14:23.

>should it be x material

>should it be a certain shape

>should you wear it openly against what matthew 6:4-8

Doesn't matter as there no biblical backing

/thread

>>584462

I dunno are worship services conducted in the nude? Animist tribal people might. Scripture however touched on the topic of nudeness in Genesis.

What about when relieving oneself?

>>584463

It could be grouped under things involving tradition.

>>584475

>tradition

collosians 2:8

>Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ

matthew 15:1-6

>THEN came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying,

>Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.

>But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?

>For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.

>But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me;

>And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.

>>584480

>le sola scriptura

https://www.catholic.com/tract/scripture-and-tradition

>>584496

Even scripture is tradition like the good news which was transmitted orally before being written down. Sounds like you're flipping through the Bible's pages taking passages out of context instead of being objective.

>>584452

wood, like the medieval hermits. Carved by yourself.

>>584502

>Even scripture is tradition like the good news which was transmitted orally before being written

Wow, I wonder which should be taken more seriously then? The what you so called "tradition" that is of God in the Bible, of which is above His own name. Or the tradition told to us by men such as the pope? The answer is obviously the scripture for it is above God's own name.

>Sounds like you're flipping through the Bible's pages taking passages out of context instead of being objective.

This isn't an arguement. You sound like a apostate trying to defend idolism of a cross necklace which isn't sanctioned by God in His word and is not of faith romans 14:23. Do you have a faith based arguement that also explains jeremiah 10:1-5 and verses like it?

>>584515

>idolism of a cross necklace

we muslim nao

>>584496

No one is worshiping their crucifixes. It isn't idolatry.

>>584518

Then why do you not do what is in faith, and see what God has to say about things He did not sanction being used to glorify Him in the Bible? Because jeremiah 10:1-5 clearly states not to glorify Him through unsanctioned/pagen means. Especially since you aren't explaining how you could be doing this in faith as romans 14:23 demands.

>>584517

1 corinthians 7:19

>Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God.

How is wearing the cross necklece a "keeping of the commandments of God"?

As another anon said, it sounds like you're just picking verses out of context to justify this edgy rejection of cross necklaces.

>>584515

>Wow, I wonder which should be taken more seriously then?

You're either trolling or illiterate. If the first, remember Proverbs 26:18-19; if the second, READ A BOOK EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE.

>>584527

And you aren't showing me any verses on why I should accept them.

>>584532

>if the second

I read the Bible if that wasn't obvious.

>If the first, remember Proverbs 26:18-19

>As a mad man who casteth firebrands, arrows, and death,

>So is the man that deceiveth his neighbour, and saith, Am not I in sport?

Hath ye not read colossians 2:8?

>Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

Why do you try to deceive people after the ruidiments of the world, a unsanctioned piece of matter shaped like a cross, instead of after Christ? How have I even deceived you at that?

>>584525

>How is wearing the cross necklece a "keeping of the commandments of God"?

How is not? My muslim friend go take a cold shower.

>>584541

>How is not?

It's like you didn't read jeremiah 10:1-5

>HEAR ye the word which the LORD speaketh unto you, O house of Israel:

>Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them.

>For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe.

>They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not.

>They are upright as the palm tree, but speak not: they must needs be borne, because they cannot go. Be not afraid of them;

Do not learn the way of the heathen, if the cross necklace is not sanctioned in the Bible then it is not of faith because romans 14:23. Therefore it is of the heathen, or of sin. Not a muslim btw. There is another example in 1 kings 15 where king Asa kept high places dedicated to God, but God rejected them, and yet Asa's heart was perfect with God because he thought the high places were sanctioned/gloryfieing to God

Now explain how it is keeping the commandments of God. How could it be 1 corinthians 14:26? Or in romans 14:23?

>>584537

Oh well, it's your soul, not mine.

>>584537

>tfw the pope is going to hell for wearing a crucifix necklace

>>584547

then why to wear a tefilim since it's made by human hands? Jesus affirms

But all their works they do to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments.

This is not a prohibition of a symbolic Torah, and the love of Jesus is greater than the Law. This kind of things separate me from protties, law bounded, again.

>>584463

>Doesn't matter as there no biblical backing

There is no Biblical backing for imageboards, or the internet, or the English language, yet you don't seem to have a problem using them. A terrible argument.

>>584554

Yes there is, I am using it to better edify christians in line with what 1 corinthians 14:26 says. Both english and imageboards that is.

>>584553

Where in the Bible is any of that said?

>>584549

This is not what you should be taking away from this, even if it is true if said person were really a 1 corinthians 15:44.

>>584562

Why can't I use my cross to better edify Christians?

>>584567

Well you can. But how exactly are you using it to better edify the brethern?

>>584569

Sometimes it's just a matter of letting someone know they're not alone. They could be shy or sheepish about being a Christian surrounded by nu-/pol/ type atheist pagans, but then they see the cross around my neck and get a little more brave.

Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house. - Matt 5:15

>>584597

Ok. So you are wearing it to let weaker christians who think such things matter know you are a christian. I guess that's in line with 1 corinthians 14:26 if you are out preaching.

>>584469

The Lord made it so you must relieve yourself. I'm sure He doesn't mind the process.

>>584917

bar salad/10

>>590370

Those are too big and pretty expensive.

>>590373

Yes they are pretty expensive, but they are only 1 by 2 inches

>>590370

Wow at the first one.

>>590439

>Images are haram

>I will prove it by using images

What part of "any" in your flawed translation do you not understand?

Not to mention that those pic have little to no value, Crosses were used since catacombs times

>>590468

>images =/= idols (symbols of worship).

Not according to iconclasting bibles that mistranslate commandments unto "any graven image"

>There is a good reason the bible warns you against using symbols of worship. You wouldn't wear a picture of a pentagram, yet a cross is okay despite it referencing the same satan.

<Cross refrence satan

<Cross

<Symbol of Christ's triumph over death, satan and sin

<The very icon of Christ itself

<Satanic

>Idolatry is an ancient heresy.

Iconoclasm too. Plus your pic is also stupid, since symbol of Saturn came from letters S and T and is medieval in origin.

Also

>All of early Christians were heretics

>>590468

>yet a cross is okay despite it referencing the same satan.

fuck off gnostic

>>590484

>Not according to iconclasting bibles that mistranslate commandments unto "any graven image"

<iconclasting

<One who destroys sacred religious images.

You're misusing that word, i never said to destroy sacred religious images. Also that's not what exodus 20:4 is about. "You shall not make yourself.." not "you must destroy…".

>Iconoclasm too.

Too bad it's not relevant to this subject, for the reasons above.

>since symbol of Saturn came from letters S and T and is medieval in origin.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NirJzmPnaE8 This video shows that it's not simply the christian cross that satan is using for indirect worship. The author is not a Gnostic, there is definitely truth there even if Gnosticism is a Luciferian religion, which is why i'm not a Gnostic, but you have to know evil to identify it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYjhozqFVlw This video shows how ancient the satanic mystery religions are.

>>All of early Christians were heretics

>there can't exist heretical organizations that pretend to be christian

<Cross refrence satan

<Cross

<Symbol of Christ's triumph over death, satan and sin

<The very icon of Christ itself

<Satanic

<Symbol of Christ's triumph over death, satan and sin

<The very icon of Christ itself

The cross is not biblical.

>Plus your pic is also stupid

It's clear you're not here to exchange a discussion (especially since you don't really have anything to say). You talking down to me in compensation for your lack of information/reason or reference is a real pity.

>>590486

>gnostic

I'm not a Gnostic just for knowing that Saturn means Satan. That's like calling me satanist because i know what the pentagram means. Believing that God is Saturn would make me a Gnostic, but exodus 20:4 is the answer to that.

>fuck off

I get it, you're sour because of the Gnostic shitposting, however it's not christian to send people away from a religion that tells you to win souls. A simple "> gnostic" and a picture of a something laughing is enough.

>Proverbs 29:11 Fools give full vent to their rage, but the wise bring calm in the end.

>>590509

>The cross is not biblical.

What do you mean by this?

>>590532

i'll check this out.

>>590546

The crucifix that Jesus died on is biblical, wearing a cross on your neck isn't.

>>581919

I think they are a good way to remind yourself about sacrifice of christ.

I don't wear one since i can't afford one and making one isn't an option for me (although i keep rosary on me if that counts and it's made out of plastic)

it should be made out of wood or cheap metal in my opinion, otherwise it just becomes a shiny jewerly.

both are fine.

I think you shouldn't show religious symbols in public like that, you should keep faith to yourself, and spread it only to those who are willing

>>590546

the koine greek term used was stauros, which means "stake", not cross.

>>590552

If wearing a Cross is anti-Christ, then Christ has condemned generations of Christians, ever since His own crucifixion.

We of course, know this isn't true.

I wear a cross necklace and a medal of saint benedict. I don't display them but this verse makes me wonder if i should:

"Whoever acknowledges me before others, I will also acknowledge before my Father in heaven." Matthew 10:32

>>592435

Same, but I'm afraid I'd be a little too prideful about it.

>>581919

My mother gave me one as a gift. It’s an unadorned stainless steel cross on a chain. I wear it occasionally under my shirt as a personal reminder of whose I am. I’m certain there’s nothing wrong with that alone, and I’m not sure what good you could do with it beyond that. I will admit I like the look that the chain gives when it is visible, so I suppose there is always a little vanity involved.

>>592273

>I can't afford a small piece of wood or cheap metal

Ouch, anon. I hope you're doing OK.

>>582140

>This might be the craziest thing I've ever read in my life. This is pure insanity. I can't even respond to this and truly convey how crazy you are

This is exactly what I think when I see anything writen by protestants or iconoclasts in general

>>592303

Are you a JW?

isnt idolatry bad to protestants?

>>592273

>it should be made out of wood or cheap metal in my opinion, otherwise it just becomes a shiny jewerly.

I was also of this opinion first, but then my brass necklace broke, so I had to buy a silver one.

Now, my little crucifix is losing its steel-silver coating, and the cheap brass is coming through.

I'd say go with sterling silver as it keeps both its shine and durability compared too mass manufactured jewelry.