Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

The Cross


Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I've heard that perspective a lot so I think a lot of people agree with you.

I've heard people take it further and say things like, "if Jesus was shot with a gun, would I wear a necklace with a gun around my neck?" IMO that is quite a silly response as it misses an important aspect of the symbol. Yes, the cross represents Jesus' death & resurrection (empty cross), but the cross also represents each individual's willingness to follow God, no matter the cost. "Take up your cross" and follow me. IOW- It's not just about Jesus's cross, but also about ours.

It was mentioned by others earlier about the translation issues around "cross" and/or "tree". IIRC in ancient Judaism being hung on a tree was a symbol of condemnation before God. Of course Jesus wasn't condemned of God, but he received our condemnation and removed it (empty cross).

I don't use the gun analogy for a different reason (In principle, I think it gets the point just fine).  My reason is I don't wish to get counter-productively embroiled in a fight over  which symbol is "right"--a behavior which I believe does mis the point of the  Gospel (i.e. becoming like Christ).

If people prefer to wear the cross, then what is that to me? If other people prefer not to wear the cross, or prefer other symbols of their religious beliefs, then why should anyone care? Either way, the intent and outcome is good and not bad. To each their own.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Wade Englund said:

I prefer symbols that emphasize life rather than death.

il_794xN.1475714073_cefg.jpg

...not that endowed members need any additional symbols adorning their bodies.

Thanks, -Wade Enlgund

I bought that one for my wife. Seriously.

;)

 

Link to comment
5 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

Tamales! :) 

And posole, biscochitos, and sopaipillas with butter and honey.

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Great typo.

Living in LA it just popped right out at me. The city of angles, not to mention twists and turns.

That seems about right. ;)

At times, I have to laugh at my own dyslexia. I could have sworn I typed it "el" rather than "le." But, there it is. :D

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Link to comment
2 hours ago, USU78 said:

What seest thou?

This is a start, plus prohibitions against worshipping a groves. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asherah_pole

And then you have the lingam and yoni and the vesica piscis, all of which are related to life and then there is the Egyptian ankh, which really nails it.

Arguably a cross and or a lingam and yoni and or vesica piscis. 

All are symbols of life.

The parable of the draught of fishes is also related to this and the number of fish 153 was a gnostic symbol ratio for the vesica piscis.

There's tons.

For modern examples Google the logo for "worldwide marriage encounter."

Heck the heart symbol itself, so prominent on Valentine's day.

But I'm trying to make my temple shift right now. ;)

 

Edited by mfbukowski
Link to comment
4 minutes ago, Wade Englund said:

No chorizo? 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Chorizo isn't specifically used during Christmas. While all of the food listed is eaten year round (I'm steaming up some tamales tonight a co-worker's mother made), the one's listed tend to be focused on during Christmas. Especially tamales, at least down here in the south.

Posole and menudo are great hang over soups, lol. Menudo, the breakfast of crudo...

ETA: my tamales are green chile and cheese, not the normal red chile and pork. It's Lent... no meat for traditional Catholics

Edited by MiserereNobis
Link to comment
1 hour ago, teddyaware said:

It would be most interesting to listen in on a conversation between President Hinkley and the Apostle Paul if they they were tp set forth their mutual views concerning the value of the cross of Christ as a symbol of the salvation of Christ:

18 (For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the CROSS of Christ: (Philippians 3)

14 But God forbid that I should glory, save in the CROSS of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world. (Galatians 6)

17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the CROSS of Christ should be made of none effect. 

18 For the preaching of the CROSS is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. (1Corinthians 1)

14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his CROSS; (Colossians 2)

16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the CROSS, having slain the enmity thereby: (Ephesians 2)

Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the CROSS, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God. (Hebrews 12)

12 As many as desire to make a fair shew in the flesh, they constrain you to be circumcised; only lest they should suffer persecution for the CROSS of Christ. (Galatians 6)

And there are many more...

 

 
 
 

 

Yes, no doubt they each, do to their different circumstances, cultures, and experiences, have different perspectives about the best way to teach about the Atonement.  Because of it's use in history, religion, theology, and even pop culture, the cross is, in a lot of ways, a different symbol today than it was in Paul's day, and I think that Pres. Hinckley's view of it has been greatly informed by all of those things.  

I don't think either way of teaching about the Atonement is wrong. 

Link to comment
2 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I agree with much of what you say here, but I do think you underestimate the impact on membership of how some leaders have taught about the cross. I think Reed effectively makes the case that the teachings of leaders and their personal preferences regarding the cross deeply impacted the church as a whole in how it sees and uses the cross. Sure, it happened more in the past than it does today but that doesn't make it a historical problem. I think those teachings have led to the cross being stigmatized among many/most church members. But it would be interesting to study the differences of feelings about the cross amongst life-long members and converts coming from other Christian denominations. I suspect there may be a difference BIC members view the cross more harshly than people who grew up with the cross being a positive/normal part of their faith.

Just for fun, sharing a "Cross" song that I enjoy.

 

That could very well be. I'm 42 so while I remember well Pres. Hinckley's teachings on the subject, he is the only leader that I remember ever hearing even bring it up.

Link to comment
4 hours ago, Wade Englund said:

I prefer symbols that emphasize life rather than death.

According to LDS doctrine,

Quote

The Savior continued to suffer for our sins when He allowed Himself to be crucified—“lifted up upon the cross and slain for the sins of the world.” On the cross, He allowed Himself to die. His body was then laid in a tomb until He was resurrected and became “the firstfruits of them that slept.”  Through His death and Resurrection, He overcame physical death for us all. Link

I would say that being part of the event that overcomes physical death is in fact a symbol of life.

Also,

Quote

Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. Matt. 16:24-25

It seems that losing life (figuratively or literally) is a way to find life.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, MiserereNobis said:

Ha!

Let's not forget, though, the original full name of LA: El Pueblo de Nuestra Señora la Reina de los Ángeles

It's the city of the Blessed Virgin ;) 

 

Oh yeah heavenly mother! Functional equivalent

Link to comment
2 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

This is a start, plus prohibitions against worshipping a groves. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asherah_pole

And then you have the lingam and yoni and the vesica piscis, all of which are related to life and then there is the Egyptian ankh, which really nails it.

Arguably a cross and or a lingam and yoni and or vesica piscis. 

All are symbols of life.

The parable of the draught of fishes is also related to this and the number of fish 153 was a gnostic symbol ratio for the vesica piscis.

There's tons.

For modern examples Google the logo for "worldwide marriage encounter."

Heck the heart symbol itself, so prominent on Valentine's day.

But I'm trying to make my temple shift right now. ;)

 

And let's not forget the Master's rival for the hearts of Rome, Mithras, whose birth is sometimes associated with a tree, whose mysteries and rites evoke our temple worship (as well as the Mass), and one of whose most famous depictions is most evocative:

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRdqAWe00No3C80HGCNK8d

Edited by USU78
Link to comment
26 minutes ago, Thinking said:

According to LDS doctrine,

I would say that being part of the event that overcomes physical death is in fact a symbol of life.

Also,

It seems that losing life (figuratively or literally) is a way to find life.

Trees of life often make the point of showing roots, which are buried in the dirt drawing life in part from death (decay of other organics enriches soil).

A tree can be seen as a symbol of death as well as life. 

https://www.judaicawebstore.com/silver-and-gold-circle-of-life-tree-necklace-with-ruby-stone-P11888.aspx?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIxLveqeja4QIVUAOGCh2y4Q0rEAQYAiABEgKqoPD_BwE

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
4 hours ago, bluebell said:

Hinckley taught-

“I do not wish to give offense to any of my Christian colleagues who use the cross on the steeples of their cathedrals and at the altars of their chapels, who wear it on their vestments, and imprint it on their books and other literature. But for us, the cross is the symbol of the dying Christ, while our message is a declaration of the Living Christ.”

Pres. Hinckley clearly said "for us" (meaning the church as a whole, especially pertaining to adorning our buildings or decorating with the cross because he was answering a question asked by a Pastor about why there were no crosses in a newly constructed temple) to view the cross this way.

I said that his ¨the logic goes: LDS view cross as a symbol of death,¨ so I´m not sure what you´re pointing out here.

Quote

 He acknowledges that others view the cross differently, and therefore because he is not saying that one cannot view the cross in many different ways he is not created any false distinction.

This is not the false distinction. I was referring to the context of the story with the non-LDS leader - which raises the question of why crosses were not displayed at all in the temple or meeting houses - NOT why the cross was not the ¨symbol of the faith¨. Hinckley focuses on the ¨symbol of our faith¨ instead of just the general lack of cross use as a symbol at all. This is a false distinction - you can have the cross displayed, even prominently, and still have a separate focus and officialization of the lives of members as THE symbol of the LDS faith. I am basically pointing out that Hinckley´s response does not actually answer the question, in this regard. I think his answer is a good one for the most part- for ¨the symbol of our faith¨, even more as an intentional emphasis in order to avoid superficial use of symbols as mere labels. But his reasoning does not really deal with the issue of no crosses at all.

Quote

That's obvious. Pres. Hinckley never said you couldn't.  I think you might be looking for things to disagree with in his statement that aren't actually there.  That we choose not to does not mean that it's not possible.

Perhaps the above clarification helps now. Insofar as the non-LDS leader´s question is why is the symbol of the cross not used anywhere in LDS architecture, Hinckley´s focus on ¨the symbol of our faith¨ is not addressing the issue. It would be like someone asking a person who does all types of cardio exercises but never bikes why they don´t bike and the cardio enthusiast replies I prefer to focus on running. Yet, that person can focus on running (the symbol of the faith) and still do other cardio exercise (the symbol of the cross) as evidenced by the fact that the cardio enthusiast does just that with other cardio exercises (many other symbols used by LDS). The answer focuses on a particular instead of actually explaining why not the other. Hinckley only says that the cross reminds LDS of Christ´s death. More on this later.

Quote

Yep.

There wasn't anything in depth about my points.  It's basic stuff.   We use different symbols than other Christian religions do and have chosen not to use the symbol of the cross.  If you want to interpret that as a refusal to use the symbol of the cross in our worship of Christ that's fine, it doesn't really matter.

Technically ¨chosen not to use the symbol of the cross¨ is ¨refusal to use the symbol of the cross¨, no interpretation needed 😉 But I know what you´re saying.

Again, to use a multitude of symbols, to have used the cross in the past, but then stop using the cross is what it is.

Quote

I own his book, it's a good one.  I have a degree in History and love that stuff and I agree that it's incredibly obvious that our history with protestants and catholics impacted our views of the use of crosses as a symbol of Christianity, no doubt.

But our history does not generally impact how individual members view the use of the cross as a symbol of Christianity today.  When you read the comments on the members on this thread about their personal feelings about the use of the cross, it becomes very apparent that the historical reasons are just that, history.  They impact but they do not control our understanding of the cross today.

I know what you are saying here and as @HappyJackWagon simply because current members justify their views without reference to anti-catholicism does not mean that the history of LDS and protestant-converts to LDS has not had influence on these views. I am confident you know this, I just feel like your emphasis borders on stating that history has no influence at all on the present. 

Also, ¨when I read the comments¨ of members here I do see reasons given that do not mirror the reasons of the past, but I also see comments by members about ¨ick¨ and other phrases that indicate that the member him or herself is not quite sure why they have a particular knee-jerk reaction to the cross (now or in their past). I am pointing to the past as a possible source for subconscious influences certainly on these individuals, and of course possibly on all LDS thru history affecting the present - can´t understand the present without understanding the past - as I mentioned.

Quote

(Per the bolded part is a good example of why your lack of understanding of LDS doctrine leads you to some erroneous conclusions about how we should feel about things.  In LDS doctrine the resurrection is an integral part of the redemption.  It is our doctrine that there is no redemption without the resurrection.  And choosing not to integrate crosses into our worship does not mean that they are not welcome.)

I think I was conflating a couple of ideas while I was writing with too little sleep - I know, I´ve got to stop doing this. I think it was the Encyclopedia of Mormonism that said that so many things go into the LDS gospel that no one symbol can represent the faith as well as the actual lives of members. This point does not preclude using the cross at all among other symbols to represent part of the LDS gospel - like Moroni, etc. It also speaks to ¨the symbol of our faith¨ instead of any use of the symbol of the cross as I pointed out with Hinckley´s talk.

I can see how my writing gave you an opening to question my understanding of LDS doctrine, but it´s not the case in this particular. I was trying to point out how the death of Christ is just as much a part of LDS doctrine as the resurrection/living Christ, and so it can be used among other symbols that represent only parts of that gospel.

I should have written Hinckley´s inclusion of the resurrection in my comment. He clearly is contrasting the cross/death with the emptytomb/life but the cross/death is still part of the story so it can be part of the group of symbols used by LDS.

Quote

On Calvary He was the dying Jesus. From the tomb He emerged the Living Christ. The cross had been the bitter fruit of Judas’s betrayal, the summary of Peter’s denial. The empty tomb now became the testimony of His divinity, the assurance of eternal life, the answer to Job’s unanswered question: “If a man die, shall he live again?” (Job 14:14).

Basically my argument goes:

1) symbols don´t have to represent the whole faith in order to be used in it at all (so Hinckley´s overall argument while good as an emphasis doesn´t answer the question)

2) symbols don´t have to represent the whole gospel (or whatever that quote was - I can probably locate it if needed) in order to be used
3) similarly, symbols often only represent part of a faith or gospel, and thus necessarily are used for only that purpose (like so many other LDS symbols) [and no one gets hurt😉]

4) Hinckley´s most direct answer to the question is that the cross is seen as a symbol of Christ´s death, but Christ´s death is part of the gospel and the faith, so it certainly qualifies for use among all of the other ¨non-symbol of our (whole) faith¨ ¨non-gospel summarizing (in toto) symbols¨ that the LDS church does endorse with use in its structures.

 

I think this is a valid critique of Hinckley´s talk; no evidence of me hunting for things to disagree with that are not actually there.  I really think Hinckley´s focus on the lives of members to represent Christ is a good idea - its taught in the Bible. But it doesn´t actually deal with the issue of not using the symbol of the Cross at all - so it is misapplied. And the closest he gets to answering the question (its viewed as a symbol of his death), while it does qualify as a justification for not using it to symbolize the whole LDS faith, does not justify why it is not used at all.

Edited by Joshua Valentine
added redundant specification
Link to comment
2 hours ago, Joshua Valentine said:

I think this is a valid critique of Hinckley´s talk; no evidence of me hunting for I things to disagree with that are not actually there.  I really think Hinckley´s focus on the lives of members to represent Christ is a good idea - its taught in the Bible. But it doesn´t actually deal with the issue of not using the symbol of the Cross at all - so it is misapplied. And the closest he gets to answering the question (its viewed as a symbol of his death), while it does qualify as a justification for not using it to symbolize the whole LDS faith, does not justify why it is not used at all.

 

Is a Christian who chooses to use the symbol of the cross a better Christian than a Christian who chooses not to use the symbol of the cross? If so, why? If not, why not?

Link to comment
5 hours ago, Wade Englund said:

No chorizo? 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Not for Christmas Eve at my house. Maybe for breakfast with the juevos rancheros?

Link to comment
5 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

Ha!

Let's not forget, though, the original full name of LA: El Pueblo de Nuestra Señora la Reina de los Ángeles

It's the city of the Blessed Virgin ;) 

 

Not so much any more.

Link to comment
5 hours ago, USU78 said:

And let's not forget the Master's rival for the hearts of Rome, Mithras, whose birth is sometimes associated with a tree, whose mysteries and rites evoke our temple worship (as well as the Mass), and one of whose most famous depictions is most evocative:

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRdqAWe00No3C80HGCNK8d

There you go.

There's a whole lot right there in that piece.

Link to comment
7 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

Chorizo isn't specifically used during Christmas. While all of the food listed is eaten year round (I'm steaming up some tamales tonight a co-worker's mother made), the one's listed tend to be focused on during Christmas. Especially tamales, at least down here in the south.

Posole and menudo are great hang over soups, lol. Menudo, the breakfast of crudo...

ETA: my tamales are green chile and cheese, not the normal red chile and pork. It's Lent... no meat for traditional Catholics

All I know is my best friend loves chorizo.  He tried to get me to eat some, and I almost did until I read the two main ingredients. YIkes.

Ranchero-Chorizo-Puerco-Pork-339.jpg

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Link to comment
6 hours ago, Thinking said:

According to LDS doctrine,

I would say that being part of the event that overcomes physical death is in fact a symbol of life.

Also,

It seems that losing life (figuratively or literally) is a way to find life.

 

5 hours ago, Calm said:

Trees of life often make the point of showing roots, which are buried in the dirt drawing life in part from death (decay of other organics enriches soil).

A tree can be seen as a symbol of death as well as life. 

https://www.judaicawebstore.com/silver-and-gold-circle-of-life-tree-necklace-with-ruby-stone-P11888.aspx?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIxLveqeja4QIVUAOGCh2y4Q0rEAQYAiABEgKqoPD_BwE

 

To emphasize life is not to deny death, any more than to emphasize death does not deny life.  It simply places more of a focus on the one or the other--not entirely unlike focusing more on the rose doesn't deny the thorns, or vice versa.

To each their own.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Is a Christian who chooses to use the symbol of the cross a better Christian than a Christian who chooses not to use the symbol of the cross? If so, why? If not, why not?

Is an lds member who buys decorative merchandise from Deseret Book to hang on their walls more righteous than one who does not? 

 

We are so subconsciously driven in so many ways.  Or at least, I am.  Just wondering why we still intend on chopping the end off the roast. 

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...