What I find Interesting...
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| devnet Sep 14, 2006 9:13 AM EDT |
Is the History of the "Christian" fish symbol. From Wikipedia: Quoting:chthys was the lover-son of the ancient Babylonian sea goddess Atargatis, and was known in various mythic systems as Tirgata, Aphrodite, Pelagia or Delphine. The word also meant "womb" and "dolphin" in some tongues, and representations of this appeared in the depiction of mermaids. The fish is also a central element in other stories, including the Goddess of Ephesus (who has a fish amulet covering her genital region), as well as the tale of the fish that swallowed the penis of Osiris, and was also considered a symbol of the vulva of Isis. It continues: Quoting:The fish symbol may have also been known as "the Great Mother," a pointed oval sign, referred to as the Vesica Piscis. Also, in ancient Greek, "fish" and "womb" were denoted by the same word ("delphos"). Its link to fertility, birth, feminine sexuality and the natural force of women was acknowledged also by the Celts, as well as pagan cultures throughout northern Europe. Eleanor Gaddon traces a "Cult of the Fish Mother" as far back as the hunting and fishing people of the Danube River Basin in the sixth millennium B.C.E. Over fifty shrines have been found throughout the region which depict a fishlike deity, a female creature who "incorporates aspects of an egg, a fish and a woman which could have been a primeval creator or a mythical ancestress. . ." The "Great Goddess" was portrayed elsewhere with pendulous breasts, accentuated buttocks and a conspicuous vaginal orifice, resembling an upright Vesica Piscis. Gotta love that! As a religious scholar when I was in college, I was taken aback by this obvious pagan symbol being slapped on car bumpers everywhere as well as translation errors in the New Testament (after taking Greek and Hebrew...they were quite evident: See http://tinyurl.com/jxflg for a good read on the subject). I don't know about you guys, but if I want to use a Christian distro...I'll be downloading apt sources and calling it good. I won't be using something that mascots a pagan symbol. Just like many people tout pureness of open source (FLOSS) I tout pureness of my Christianity as much as possible in today's world. |
| dinotrac Sep 14, 2006 9:33 AM EDT |
>Just like many people tout pureness of open source (FLOSS) I tout pureness of my Christianity as much as possible in today's world. Amen. Your post reminds me of something our pastor did a couple of years ago. We had built a large wooden cross for our annual Easter drama -- a nice sturdy piece sufficient for, oh, hanging from... One Sunday, pastor had us take it and prop it horizontally across -- I don't even remember what we propped it up on. During the service, he got up and walked all over the cross. The point, of course, is that symbols are just symbols. There is nothing special about a cross -- it's just another thing in the world. It's useful as a symbol, or a stage prop, or some such thing, but...it's just wood (or plastic or gold or whatever). |
| Scott_Ruecker Sep 14, 2006 9:57 AM EDT |
Exactly, symbols only have meaning for the beholder. The object is meaningless in and of itself |
| jdixon Sep 14, 2006 10:26 AM EDT |
> is that symbols are just symbols. There is nothing special about a cross... Well, as a symbol, no. At the time it was in use, it did have a rather special meaning, very similar to what a hangmans noose or electric chair would now. Don't forget that there are reasons things attain symbolic status. |
| devnet Sep 14, 2006 12:39 PM EDT |
Quoting:Exactly, symbols only have meaning for the beholderIf you want pure worship, symbols should have NO meaning for you as a worshiper at all, nor should they be used in or as part of any worship...and I don't make this stuff up, it's right there for everyone to read in the Bible: Quoting:Acts 17:24, 25, 29 - we shouldn't think we can begin to create a symbol standing for God. Quoting:1 John 5:21 - doesn't say that some idols are ok, it states ALL idols/icons/symbols should be refrained from. Quoting:2 Corinthians 6:16 - similar to Acts 17 also, remember in John 14:6 that Jesus is the mediator between God and Men. This doesn't mean a cross is the mediator. Isn't it horrible that we lower Jesus to being a piece of wood? People look at the cross and pray...how is that different from what happened with the Golden Calf in Moses' day? It isn't I'm afraid...no matter how people try to justify it. It's better to just NOT have it present in any pure worship or prayer. To think that we can even capture ANY essence of the living God and place it into a Cross or Mary Statue or whatever is a horrible mistake. I'd feel pretty good if we didn't have crosses, fishes, statues, or any symbol for that matter in Christianity. |
| TPuffin Sep 14, 2006 12:45 PM EDT |
Yes, I've often wondered about all these people wearing necklaces or earrings in the shape of a cross - would they wear a little guillotine? How about a lethal injection syringe? |
| techiem2 Sep 14, 2006 12:59 PM EDT |
>would they wear a little guillotine? How about a lethal injection syringe? Well, I'm sure SOMEBODY would.... Personally I'm more disturbed when I see people wearing the crosses with Jesus still on them than the plain ones. |
| Scott_Ruecker Sep 14, 2006 1:33 PM EDT |
It is inherent in the Human Condition that it is easier for us to focus our energies when we have an object to focus it on. You realize that there is an Eastern Orthodox Church because of the difference of interpretation of how symbols are used between Rome and Constantinople in the late 300 and early 400 AD's? Rome didn't see a problem with it but those in Constantinople did, thus the rift. >would they wear a little guillotine? How about a lethal injection syringe?< No but give them a thousand years to think about it and they probably would. Any object will work as long as it implies a meaning to the beholder. |
| dinotrac Sep 14, 2006 2:51 PM EDT |
>I'd feel pretty good if we didn't have crosses, fishes, statues, or any symbol for that matter in Christianity. Doesn't bother me so long as we put them in their places. For example...Our church had no crosses anywhere. Turns out, it was hard for people to find us. We embedded a big white cross by staining selected concrete panels on the outside of the building. Now people can tell we're a church. Much easier to find. The cross makes a good reminder of what Jesus went through -- but useful only so long as we have no problem burning it to keep us warm, tossing it in the trash, etc -- just another thing of this world, that might have some use as a reminder. For that matter, I feel the same way about the Bible...that is, the physical printed words. The Word is, if you will, the IP, not the pages and ink. |
| dcparris Sep 14, 2006 10:17 PM EDT |
> Personally I'm more disturbed when I see people wearing the crosses with Jesus still on them than the plain ones. An awful lot of the folks who wear any kind of cross have little grasp of what they wear. When I was stationed in the UK, a young lady I began seeing asked whether I was Catholic or Protestant. When I explained that I was Protestant, she got all excited. That prompted me to ask what she believed. Her response? "Oh, I don't know. I was just the only member of my family christened as a Protestant." It helped me realize the real nature of the conflict in Ireland, which honestly has little to do with actual faith. You could divide the folks into the blue team and the green team and the result would be the same. Dino, you can probably imagine the state of mind of a certain 24-year-old with sorta fundamentalist leanings, and fresh out of the Corps, when his Old Testament professor threw the Bible on the floor to discuss the definition of what makes something "holy". ;-) That was worse than her stomping on Old Glory. As for the printed words, try telling someone that Jesus didn't speak the King's English. Sheesh! But I mostly agree with your point. |
| dinotrac Sep 15, 2006 3:31 AM EDT |
>try telling someone that Jesus didn't speak the King's English. Sheesh! No kidding. My favorites are the folks who have no problem with "as far apart as the east is from the west" being metaphorical, but, by golly, a day is 24 hours. Hmmm...somehow, people are capable of artistic expression -- often the best and most powerful way to communicate something difficult -- but God is not? Right. |
| herzeleid Sep 15, 2006 10:23 AM EDT |
dinotrac said - > No kidding. My favorites are the folks who have no problem with "as far apart as the east is from the west" being metaphorical, but, by golly, a day is 24 hours. Wow, excellent point! |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!