The U.S. military ordered soldiers to remove a cross and a steeple from atop a chapel and to board up cross-shaped windows at a remote American forward operating base in Afghanistan.
The removal of Christian symbols from the chapel at Forward Operating Base Orgun-E came after a solider complained â€” leading American Atheists president David Silverman to send a letter to the Pentagon.
â€śSoldiers with minority religious beliefs and atheists often feel like second-class citizens when Christianity is seemingly officially endorsed by their own base,â€ť Silverman told Fox News. â€śWe are very happy the Pentagon and the Army decided to do the right thing.â€ť...
its just another taking away of restraint of evil. making everything secular, everything unsanctfied, everything under the state. these men in harm's way have a soul and need prayers not drugs. May God have mercy on this wayward nation who puts the world on atlas.
The civil sword in Scripture was given to punish evil doers and to wage just war. This institution is also to reward well doing. God's institution must be governed by God's Moral Law. He is Creator of all men it is His due. Otherwise men can call evil good and good evil. God only is immutable. Changeable men by fallen nature often call good what ever pleases them, in time. When evil (defined by Scripture) comes in like a flood, God lifts up by precept His standard. If necessary, because of the hardness of men's hearts, he will act in providence or creation to execute His decrees as Almighty Sovereign. Hundreds of years ago the standards for waging a just were determined by Church and State. O how the mighty have fallen!
The Scripture is our standard not the symbol of Roman civil execution. The written word is what the military needs, it speaks of Christ crucified and sin forgiven. Christ raised and His Divinity magnified. He who knew no sin became sin for us that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.
Mike wrote: Let the Gospel not be associated with American imperialism and death. The military is a force for evil, killing and subjugating people in the Muslim world who mistakenly believe this is what Christianity commands. Christian, nationalism is a blind spot and the currency of bankrupt despots. Bloodshed is something God takes very seriously... do not support the military in thought, word or deed!
You do not know your scripture,the sword is given to goverment as a minister of God. Rm 13:3.4 The military is to be God's instrment of justice in the war on evil.
Let the Gospel not be associated with American imperialism and death. The military is a force for evil, killing and subjugating people in the Muslim world who mistakenly believe this is what Christianity commands. Christian, nationalism is a blind spot and the currency of bankrupt despots. Bloodshed is something God takes very seriously... do not support the military in thought, word or deed!
But I don't think we should accept the Epistle of Barnabas as valid and authentic.
Regarding symbolism, it is true the Lord has given us the symbols of bread and wine for the Lord's Supper, and the symbolism of baptism. But nowhere does he commend the use of crosses, stained glass windows, statues, icons, baptismal fonts, bits of old bones, reliquaries, and other religious artifacts. This army base will lose nothing by taking down the cross, and may actually gain by it.
Lekeb wrote: 3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me...
I agree with your post. However, I don't believe I ever inferred that RC crucifixes were something that was good. I said the second commandment is not violated by the making of a graven image (i.e. the seraphim or oxen under the sea found in the temple) it is CLEARLY violated if you worship the graven image or say that it represents God and should be reverenced. The second command says not to make images AND bow down and worship them (obviously a practice of the Canaanites). Our veneration of the cross is for what happened there not for the wood from which it was made as Frank points out. We should spend time in holy contemplation of our Lord's sacrifice there. It should be both a motive for service and deterrent against sin. We don't worship the cross, we worship the God who gave His life and shed His blood for the remission of our sins upon it. Putting anything above your relationship with God is what we all have to be careful not to do. If that is not how I expressed myself, then please forgive my lack of ability to communicate and thank you for admonition. My son is better,Frank, thanks for asking.
with all that the troops are put through, it is good that they have a place where the pressures are put aside and they can pray and talk wtih a chaplain. the cross is just a symbol but there is a reverence, even from the secular institution that a man can find rest for his soul there. once this is cut out, what is left for the sorrows of wore, but syndrome names, and psychotropic drugs?
Unprofitable Servant wrote: The second commandment is not violated by the making of graven images. God instructed Moses to make a brass serpent
3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me. 4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:
V4 is qualified by V3. The Reformers demonstrated that the idolatry of Rome was blasphemy as well as idolatry. Rome (and many others today) practice idolatry by the manufacture veneration and dedication to religious paraphernalia. The crucifix is such an idolatrous graven image and worn by those whose religion remains worldly.
Ask the RC to take off the crucifix graven image from around their neck and ditch it in the garbage can. Their reaction will show their misguided religious directions.
As for the brass serpent etc you allude to. God's purposes and commands were not that man should fabricate a competitive image for worship. They were providentially sent a task and the ability to perform said task, which further demonstrated the power of God and directed their worship to Him alone.
Unprofitable Servant wrote: Apparently those closest to the event see it differently. The following are from referenced quotes in Wikipedia. early Christians writers who speak of the shape of the particular gibbet on which Jesus died invariably describe it as having a cross-beam.
Thanks Luke 17:10! I have always considered it to be in the shape of a cross, but to me it wouldn't matter what shape it was. That makes it easy for me. In fact, if someone came up with the actual cross Christ was crucified on, it would have no more significance than any other piece of wood in my opinion.
As an aside, I hope your son is doing well. If he has any more need for prayer, please let me know.
Apparently those closest to the event see it differently. The following are from referenced quotes in Wikipedia. early Christians writers who speak of the shape of the particular gibbet on which Jesus died invariably describe it as having a cross-beam. For instance, the Epistle of Barnabas, which was certainly earlier than 135, and may have been of the 1st century AD, the time when the gospel accounts of the death of Jesus were written, likened it to the letter T (the Greek letter tau, which had the numeric value of 300), and to the position assumed by Moses in Exodus 17:11â€“12. Justin Martyr (100â€“165) explicitly says the cross of Christ was of two-beam shape: "That lamb which was commanded to be wholly roasted was a symbol of the suffering of the cross which Christ would undergo. For the lamb, which is roasted, is roasted and dressed up in the form of the cross. For one spit is transfixed right through from the lower parts up to the head, and one across the back, to which are attached the legs of the lamb." Irenaeus, who died around the end of the 2nd century, speaks of the cross as having "five extremities, two in length, two in breadth, and one in the middle, on which [last] the person rests who is fixed by the nails." Just passing this on
Christopher000 wrote: Hi John, maybe I've missed something but why do you say that Jesus was crucified on a single beam? The beam with a cross member, the cross, is a matter of historical record and well documented as a Roman invention.
Morning Chris. Firstly, crucifixion was not a Roman invention. Secondly, it is not well documented that the cross used a cross member. There were many different shapes, including T and X, as well as |.
Galatians 3:13 KJV 13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for **it is written**, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:
Acts 5:30 KJV 30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.
It is written. The crucifixion was prophesied, fore-ordained. Crucified on a tree (trunk). Now here it gets confusing. Some say that "stauros" in OT times always meant a SINGLE STAKE, like a tree trunk. But that when the NT was written, "stauros" had changed somewhat and could also mean a cross with a cross-beam.
I can find no hard and fast proof either way.
But I am uneasy in my spirit about the symbol of the cross. Check out the "ankh" and you will see what I mean.
I have seen the JW's promote the stake rather than a cross, but also good Protestants also say it was a stake.
John 20:25 The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.
It is of interest that nails is plural and some try to say that means Christ was nailed to a cross beam, but it is equally possible plural nails can be through the hands onto a stake.
My thought: If those crucified carried the stake then it must take the Romans some time to erect such.
If it was a cross beam (still a single piece of wood) then the tree or upright stake would already be prepared...therefore nailing the cross beam would be easier?
The cross beam could be removed and the stake left in place for the next person to suffer the same?
Watchtower literature used to have Christ on a cross, but changed later to nailed to a stake. In their books though there was only one nail through the hands, not plural!
Hi John, maybe I've missed something but why do you say that Jesus was crucified on a single beam? The beam with a cross member, the cross, is a matter of historical record and well documented as a Roman invention. I'm not looking to argue because I really don't care if it was a cross or a single stake, but I've just never heard this. Seems to me that the body would succomb to death much quicker if the arms were positioned straight up and stretched over the head like that. I would think breathing would become labored very quickly. What do you think?
Unprofitable Servant wrote: Thanks Frank and Mike for your gracious posts. John you lost me buddy. Baptism is a symbol of the death, burial and resurrection of Christ. The Lord's supper is a symbol (not the substance for our Catholic friends) of the Lord's broken body and shed blood. The cross has become a symbol of the Christian faith.
Bro, I agree with your entire post. However...
With baptism being symbolic of the death, burial and resurrection of Christ, and also of us in him, it is important to have the correct symbol, namely baptism by immersion. Sprinkling hardly does the job. Then too, a Christian symbol of the crucifixion of our beloved Saviour should not be of pagan origin, but a representation of the **stake" upon which the Prince of Glory died. A single upright. Please note that Simon of Cyrene was "compelled to carry his "stake". There was not two parts to The Cross, but only one. We have been hoodwinked into believing incorrectly, just as the Catholics have been hoodwinked into believing incorrectly about the symbolism of the Lord's Supper.
The cross is a pagan symbol, and very pretty it looks, too. There would be no commercial value in a plain, simple upright, on the end of a chain.
Thanks Frank and Mike for your gracious posts. John you lost me buddy. Baptism is a symbol of the death, burial and resurrection of Christ. The Lord's supper is a symbol (not the substance for our Catholic friends) of the Lord's broken body and shed blood. The cross has become a symbol of the Christian faith. We even sing about it being the emblem of suffering and shame. It symbolizing that which is an offense to the world and all man made religions. It is both our glory and our shame. Spending time meditating upon the passion of our Lord as he went from Gethsemane to Gabbatha to Golgotha should be a humbling, sanctifying exercise. It should cause us to weep. It should be a motive to hate the sin that nailed our Savior there. It should be a constant reminder of the greatness of His sacrificial love and intensify our love to Him. Oh how I fall short of in this sacred duty. There is so much more that could be said if character count would permit. It is hard for me to say that which represents something so sacred is just a secular object. We all know a cross on a building doesn't make it a church or its occupants sanctified. We all are thankful it was there He was wounded for our transgression, and the travail of His soul bought our redemption. Bless His holy name.