CAA: Christian Anime Alliance

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: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments. (Exodus 20:4-6)

Prior notice to debate - I'd rather not see this spiral into a discussion relates to the often clearly misinterpreted jealous part or this commandment or regarding sins passing from the father to the son for four generations.

Now, recently, I've been having a bit of an artistic boom. And, seeing how I am improving in nearly all forms, shapes and ways I've long wanted to create in CG the concepts for a massive church. Including stained glass, statues, all the bells and whistles one would expect. Perhaps even a statue of the big man himself, although I have no idea of how he would look like. 'I suspect Jesus would look middle-eastern, but would probably go with the more traditional depiction.'

Now, there used to be a grand conflict between the Orthodox and Catholic regarding the use of images in churches and so fourth. The east criticized the west for using statues and the west criticized the east for using icons. By modern interpretation, I would suspect the most common reflection upon the commandment means not to bow down to the images themselves, but to see them as a imperfect glorification. Muslims did not exactly disprove of aesthetics either in their role of worship, although symbols and patterns are quite liberally used.

So, going through various factions and establishing an own point of view regarding this matter I suppose I reach an unsatisfying conclusion. On one side, it would be great to finally be able to glorify God with my art, however imperfect it may be. And rest assured all used in order to create this would be in aim to glorify and not to put people astray. Yet, on the other hand, I cannot rightly say how theologically accurate my interpretation is. I'd also rather not offend God on that same note. Knowing full well that my imperfect art could never Glorify him enough just like my imperfect breath would never be able to glorify him properly. However imperfect both might be, my core goal is to stay secured from committing blasphemy.

In the end, should I consider the elements of the second commandment to be universal in every sense, meaning that it's not just about man's interpretation, but the attempt regardless of intentions to depict anything of the faith or even beyond. Or, should it be considered as more of a man to symbol relation, which would make the creation of it ok as long as the correct intent is there. I believe that aesthetics in many ways works the same way as marketing, and that glorification attracts attention that can often lead to good or bad depending on the intentions behind it.

So, what's your take on the topic of art for God?

Personally, I'm all for art, religious or otherwise. It's an expression of love to our Creator, and of glorifying Him.

Though I've never heard the cultural context of the time for why that commandment exists, and would love to hear it.

Typically I have no problem with the idea of depicting God, Jesus or the Holy Spirit in art as long as its done respectfully because I read the verse the same way you do: don't worship the images. The context in which it was made also seems to lend itself to this interpretation since God was speaking to a people who were going from a culture steeped in idolatry towards graven images and was moving to replace a culture that was steeped in idolatry towards graven images. Now a days I think it really depends on the culture you are living in. If you lived in the Middle East, for instance, I would probably tell you to abstain from it because the vast majority of people might be offended by your attempt to worship God with your art. Fortunately you don't and, based off of what you have written, your motivations sound pure so I would say go for it. If you don't feel good about it you could always get creative and present them without any distinguishable features. There's a painting by Salvador Dali which depicts the entire Trinity in a very cool, respectful and quite glorious way. Sadly...I wasn't able to find it on Google images to show what I meant by this...

Edit:And then I found the image...but I don't think I could post it on CAA...even though it is one of my favorite paintings...

I can hardly imagine anyone here will be opposed to pictures, given most of us have them as our avatars.

EDIT: And if images of God are forbidden, how can he say were were 'made in God's image'? :P

Yes, I don't see how arkwork could ever be bad as long as you are not seeking to make God look bad and as long as you aren't worshiping the image.

The problem with creating a graven image of something to worship is that you are now worshipping the creation, not the creator. Graven imagaes in and of themselves are not forbidden, and we know this because God Himself commanded Cheribum to be crafted atop the ark, as one of many examples. As long as you aren't going, "This is God and He is in my box." you're fine.

If you are looking for resources, Revelations has a lot of descriptions. XD

When the Isrealites were building the tabernacle the Bible says that God ordained the artisans and fine craftsman. http://www.gnpcb.org/esv/search/?q=Exodus+36

If you notice, God said to make the Pomegranates blue which that never happens in nature, so God personally gave license to artistic interpretation as well.

I think the Graven images means artwork designed for the worship thereof. If you're making art for the sake of worshiping it, which is what they were doing at the time, and are still doing in many parts of the world, than that's what's commanded against.

I think it only means were not to draw things to worship. Like that white guy people think is Jesus.

Otherwise, anything from silk flowers to ikea instructions would be unlawful. We couldn't draw or carve anything.

If your interested, Mathew Henry has a great commentary on these vereses: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/henry/mhc1.Ex.xxi.html

I'm all for having art and depictions of Jesus . Most of them do depict a European Jesus rather than a Middle-Eastern Jesus, but I for one prefer to at least have an idea of what he looked like rather than worship someone who could look like Chris Farley for all I know (extreme example, but I hope you get my point.). There is some evidence that he had long hair and a beard, as I'm sure most of you are familiar with the Edessa cloth (or Turin shroud as some know it). Could've been Jesus' gravecloth, could've been someone else's. There are some though, who have a weakness for pictures. Let me explain:
My friend is a member of the Orthodox church. They have many icons of Jesus and he recently took all his down because he felt he was paying too much attention to the icons and not to who they represented. So if you're like me and are able to remember what things represent and keep that in focus, it's fine, but there are others who may get too attached to the image and forget what it is there to remind them of. That being said, there are really no rules to glorifying God. I stand behind your decision, as I'd like to see your finished product. Go for it!

Let's not get into Christ's putative race, please. That gets dangerously close to ethnocentrism.