Mike Reed Posted December 7, 2009 Report Posted December 7, 2009 http://www.lds.org/pa/pdf/PrinciplesGospel_Mil.pdfPage 64"we do not use the symbol of His death as the symbol of our faith." Yes. This is the same as what is found in the "True to the Faith" manual (see pp 45-46). Thanks for the link.It says it a lot better than I do :)-MaxI am less satisfied with the entry. I find it to be a post-hoc rationalization that lacks historical basis and logical consistency.
Mike Reed Posted December 7, 2009 Report Posted December 7, 2009 Not only that, many of the early christian members were hanged on the same cross fixture by the romans.What is your point?
Moksha Posted December 7, 2009 Report Posted December 7, 2009 I need to remind myself that I am not on an apologetics forum when participating here. Thank goodness for that. Such a forum would be like the complete cellular disruption in The Garden and then being nailed to a cross.Not only that, many of the early christian members were hanged on the same cross fixture by the romans. More interesting trivia to add to this one: The Apostle Peter was crucified on a cross hung upside down.
Moksha Posted December 7, 2009 Report Posted December 7, 2009 .I have given some reasons why I find cross-focused worship perhaps a bit distasteful. Does anybody actually worship the cross or The Garden."By their olive gardens ye shall know them"
Vort Posted December 7, 2009 Report Posted December 7, 2009 I have given some reasons why I find cross-focused worship perhaps a bit distasteful.Does anybody actually worship the cross or The Garden.You may have misread what I wrote. I didn't say that anyone worshiped the cross; rather, I spoke of "cross-focused worship".
prisonchaplain Posted December 7, 2009 Report Posted December 7, 2009 Does anybody actually worship the cross or The Garden. Pam did exhibit an almost reverence at that Olive Garden gathering ... Not sure if it was the great food, or the excellent company.
Hemidakota Posted December 7, 2009 Report Posted December 7, 2009 What is your point?Do you wear the holocaust emblem to remember the Jews of World War II who died under the hands of the German Nazism? I surely don't...neither do I wear anything that resembles a Roman cross that hanged people, especially the Savior. In my office, there are images of the Savior and Joseph Smith, side-by-side to keep them in remembrance. The two greatest men of our time...
Hemidakota Posted December 7, 2009 Report Posted December 7, 2009 More interesting trivia to add to this one: The Apostle Peter was crucified on a cross hung upside down.By request and not at the expense of the Romans. But he could been beheaded instead as did Paul.
Mike Reed Posted December 7, 2009 Report Posted December 7, 2009 Do you wear the holocaust emblem to remember the Jews of World War II who died under the hands of the German Nazism? I surely don't...neither do I wear anything that resembles a Roman cross that hanged people, especially the Savior. Are you equally against holocaust monuments? If so, why? Many find such monuments to be extremely important. I am among them.How about the French Revolution and the Reign of Terror? Are you aware of the history of the choker? How about 9-11? Consider the new US Navy battleship made from recycled steel of the World Trade Center. Regarding Mormon symbolism, consider the examples that I listed in post #106. If these symbols of death and torture are acceptable in the LDS Church, why shouldn't the cross be?
Vort Posted December 7, 2009 Report Posted December 7, 2009 Are you equally against holocaust monuments? If so, why? Many find such monuments to be extremely important. I am among them.How about the French Revolution and the Reign of Terror? Are you aware of the history of the choker? How about 9-11? Consider the new US Navy battleship made from recycled steel of the World Trade Center. Regarding Mormon symbolism, consider the examples that I listed in post #106. If these symbols of death and torture are acceptable in the LDS Church, why shouldn't the cross be?Mike, in the LDS Church, we follow the lead of our prophets. Any explanations we give to explain ourselves beyond that are pretty much post hoc rationalizations, as has already been pointed out.In any case, it's a symbol of the underlying reality. We accept and cling to that underlying reality, even if we don't use exactly the same symbolism. Isn't that the important thing, after all?
Mike Reed Posted December 7, 2009 Report Posted December 7, 2009 By request and not at the expense of the Romans. But he could been beheaded instead as did Paul.You miss an important point. Why do these traditions say that Peter desired to be crucified upside down? Because he was unworthy to be crucified like Jesus was... which shows that (at least in their mind) there was something sacred about the actual means by which Jesus was killed. Whether you like it or not, the Cross was sacred symbol to early Christians. It was also sacred to many early Latter-day Saints.
Mike Reed Posted December 7, 2009 Report Posted December 7, 2009 Mike, in the LDS Church, we follow the lead of our prophets. Any explanations we give to explain ourselves beyond that are pretty much post hoc rationalizations, as has already been pointed out.In any case, it's a symbol of the underlying reality. We accept and cling to that underlying reality, even if we don't use exactly the same symbolism. Isn't that the important thing, after all?Yes indeed. And I am happy to stand in defense against the common anti-Mormon claim, which has insisted that Mormons aren't Christian because of their rejection of the material symbol.
Mike Reed Posted December 7, 2009 Report Posted December 7, 2009 I wrote: Yes indeed. And I am happy to stand in defense against the common anti-Mormon claim, which has insisted that Mormons aren't Christian because of their rejection of the material symbol. In my recent Sunstone symposium, I stated the following:On the other hand… it is also problematic… no… it is more than problematic. It is a blatantly false claim to say that Latter-day Saints avoid displaying the symbol because they are non-Christian. The material display of the cross has not been a consistent or continuous custom in Christian history. Early Christians, for example, avoided displaying the cross because (1) they worshiped surreptitiously for fear of persecution; (2) the image was a stumbling block to Jews and Gentiles, and therefore not a useful emblem for attracting converts; and (3) they feared that depicting the cross (or any other sacred symbol) materially was in violation of the second of the Ten Commandments.It should not be concluded from these reservations that early Christians therefore believed the symbol of the cross to be an expression contrary to their faith. No… Although it may be true that early Christians avoided displaying the cross materially, they still embraced and promoted the symbol by actively searching out its hidden occurrence in the world around them. They also traced the cross invisibly on their foreheads, prayed in a cruciform posture with arms extended, and used crypto-crosses; such as those suggestive in the design of a ship’s sail or anchor. But even more relevant to the LDS church’s position, until the middle of the nineteenth century, American Protestants in general did not use the cross as a material symbol because of its association with Catholicism. And my MA thesis included the following postscript:There exists a common element that has driven the taboo (against depicting the cross materially) in early Christianity, early Protestantism, and Mormonism. The common element is fear. Early Christians feared idolatry and persecution. Protestants and Mormons feared Catholicism. For the early Christian and Protestant movements, it took over three centuries for their mainstreams to accept material depictions of the symbol. Although Latter-day Saints now look like the “odd man out,” it is important for critics (whether Catholic or Protestant) to understand that the LDS cross taboo has only been mainstream for less than a century. That being said, should the LDS Church take another two hundred years to become accepting of the symbol, comparatively speaking, such a length of time could be considered merely “par for the course.”
theophilus Posted December 8, 2009 Report Posted December 8, 2009 This thread has proved one thing: There is a difference between what church's believe and what individual members do. The same happens with Catholics. Earlier, a former Catholic said that Catholics involve the crucifix with some sort of idolatry. Perhaps that former Catholic did, but idolatry is not found in Catholicism. Period. Next: To Catholics, 1 Cor 1:24 describes that Christ crucified is the "power of God". Verse 23 says "...we preach Christ crucified..." Why does Paul preach Christ crucified? Doesn't he know that Jesus was raised from the dead? Of course he does. Again in 1 Cor 2:2, Paul is preaching Christ Crucified. Did Paul forget that Jesus was raised? Of course not. An empty cross has no power. That is why Catholics keep Him on the cross. We, too, preach Christ crucified. The Crucifix reminds us not only of God's power, but also His love for us. Romans 6:8 says that we must die with Christ. Where did he die? On the cross. The crucifix serves to remind us of this. Next: Someone commented on a giant crucifix present in the Mass. During Mass, the priest reads scripture during the Eucharist, "...a death He freely accepted...". Again, the Crucifix aids us in remembering Christ's act. The crucifix is not a symbol of death; it is a symbol of Christ, His love for us ("even death on a cross"), His acceptance to save us and even the hope we have. Also: As others have noted, the use of a cross without Jesus (I believe) is a product of anti-Catholics and Protestants not wanting to "appear Catholic." We Catholics don't have issues with crosses, we simply see the Crucifix as the better of two goods.
Hemidakota Posted December 8, 2009 Report Posted December 8, 2009 Are you equally against holocaust monuments? If so, why? Many find such monuments to be extremely important. I am among them.How about the French Revolution and the Reign of Terror? Are you aware of the history of the choker? How about 9-11? Consider the new US Navy battleship made from recycled steel of the World Trade Center. Regarding Mormon symbolism, consider the examples that I listed in post #106. If these symbols of death and torture are acceptable in the LDS Church, why shouldn't the cross be?I am against any monuments that is worshipped more than Deity. However, we could erect monuments for every battlefield knowing the lost of life was given for a cause.
Hemidakota Posted December 8, 2009 Report Posted December 8, 2009 Hmm....what is more important, the dead christ or a living Christ that can walk and talk too in person? To each his/her own on how they worship but for me, I rather worship a living Christ.
Misshalfway Posted December 8, 2009 Report Posted December 8, 2009 (edited) In my recent Sunstone symposium, I stated the following: That being said, should the LDS Church take another two hundred years to become accepting of the symbol, comparatively speaking, such a length of time could be considered merely “par for the course.”Why exactly do we have to accept the symbol as other faiths do? Because its popular? Because we "should"? If the early protestants gravitated towards it over time and mormons did not, who is right? Is there a "right" way to perceive the cross in the first place? Seems to me in the world of Christianity there is lots of wiggle room for variations. At least for some of us. Edited December 8, 2009 by Misshalfway
Flyonthewall Posted December 8, 2009 Report Posted December 8, 2009 LDS understand that the cross/crucifix is a sacred symbol to others, and really, we take no offense when we see other wear them, or when buildings have them. The only time it really becomes an issue, for the most part, is when threads like this open and a "more taste/less filling" type back and forth occurs. There may be some LDS people out there that make an issue of the cross, but that is a personal thing for them, not an LDS thing. The leadership has stated the reasons we do not use the cross, but it should not be used as an attack on anyone. To us, the cross reminds us of His death. We prefer to remember the resurrection, because that encompasses the entire atonement, and for that, there really isn't a symbol to use, other than our lives. To others, the cross reminds them of what Jesus has done for us, with an emphasis on his suffering and death. It was on the cross that He laid down His life for us and that is described as the greatest love of all. What it really boils down to, in my mind, is to-may-to/to-mah-to, po-tay-to/po-tah-to. In the end, it really won't matter a hill of beans.
john doe Posted December 8, 2009 Report Posted December 8, 2009 Are we about done with this subject? It's come down to non-LDS telling LDS what we believe now.
pam Posted December 8, 2009 Report Posted December 8, 2009 I vote for closing. All in favor say aye...Aye..Okay votes counted. Thread now closed.
Recommended Posts