Ex 20:4 vs Ex 25:18

[Truthseeker]

The text of Ex 25:4 says "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:...", now focusing exclusively on the sub-text "Thou shalt not make unto thee ...any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above..." there is a total prohibition on making images of anything in heaven, full stop (according to some protestant denominations).

Exodus 25:4?

"Unto thee" (KJV) or "for yourself" (NCV): I confess uncertainty what difference these words makes, but they must make much difference. I think we have to consider the context. It is about making idols, right? So, making images or representations is OK as long as they are not meant to be idols.

[foudroyant]

Exodus 25:4?

"Unto thee" (KJV) or "for yourself" (NCV): I confess uncertainty what difference these words makes, but they must make much difference. I think we have to consider the context. It is about making idols, right? So, making images or representations is OK as long as they are not meant to be idols.

Thank you. I pointed this out twice (Post #2 and Post #6) to apostoli but somehow he just can't get it.

[apostoli]

Thank you. I pointed this out twice (Post #2 and Post #6) to apostoli but somehow he just can't get it.

As Calvin argued copiously: the mere creation of an image inspires people to idolatry irrespective of the originators intention. I'm RCC so I'm not in total agreement with Calvin...However, I do find his viewpoint engaging...

Calvin gives an interesting insight into the Cherubim.

Calvin says in his Institutes "... God sometimes appeared in the form of a man, but this was in anticipation of the future revelation in Christ, and, therefore, did not give the Jews the least pretext for setting up a symbol of Deity under the human form. The mercy-seat, also (Exod. 25:17, 18, 21), where, under the Law, God exhibited the presence of his power, was so framed, as to intimate that God is best seen when the mind rises in admiration above itself: the Cherubim with outstretched wings shaded, and the veil covered it, while the remoteness of the place was in itself a sufficient concealment...For what, pray, did these figures mean, if not that images are unfit to represent the mysteries of God, since they were so formed as to cover the mercy-seat with their wings, thereby concealing the view of God, not only from the eye, but from every human sense, and curbing presumption? To this we may add, that the prophets depict the Seraphim, who are exhibited to us in vision, as having their faces veiled; thus intimating, that the refulgence of the divine glory is so great, that even the angels cannot gaze upon it directly, while the minute beams which sparkle in the face of angels are shrouded from our view. " (I I.11.3)

Calvin in his works tells us that the Cherubims faces and form were concealed by their wings. Thus, imu, this would mean that no "image" of the Cherubim was actually made, merely a concealing form (with function similiar to a curtain)...

[foudroyant]

Calvin: There is no need of refuting the foolish fancy of some, that all sculptures and pictures are here condemned by Moses, for he had no other object than to rescue God’s glory from all the imaginations which tend to corrupt it. And assuredly it is a most gross indecency to make God like a stock or a stone. Some expound the words, “Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven image, which thou mayest adore;” as if it were allowable to make a visible image of God, provided it be not adored; but the expositions which will follow will easily refute their error. Meanwhile, I do not deny that these things are to be taken connectedly, since superstitious worship is hardly ever separated from the preceding error; for as soon as any one has permitted himself to devise an image of God, he immediately falls into false worship. And surely whosoever reverently and soberly feels and thinks about God Himself, is far from this absurdity; nor does any desire or presumption to metamorphose God ever creep in, except when coarse and carnal imaginations occupy our minds. Hence it comes to pass, that those, who frame for themselves gods of corruptible materials, superstitiously adore the work of their own hands. I will then readily allow these two things, which are inseparable, to be joined together; only let us recollect that God is insulted, not only when His worship is transferred to idols, but when we try to represent Him by any outward similitude.
http://www.studylight.org/commentari...cgi?bk=1&ch=20

Calvin teaches that all pictures and sculptures are not condemned (first sentence) and that making an idol would inevitably lead to worshiping it.

[apostoli]

Calvin: There is no need of refuting the foolish fancy of some, that all sculptures and pictures are here condemned by Moses, for he had no other object than to rescue God’s glory from all the imaginations which tend to corrupt it. And assuredly it is a most gross indecency to make God like a stock or a stone. Some expound the words, “Thou shalt not make to thyself a graven image, which thou mayest adore;” as if it were allowable to make a visible image of God, provided it be not adored; but the expositions which will follow will easily refute their error. Meanwhile, I do not deny that these things are to be taken connectedly, since superstitious worship is hardly ever separated from the preceding error; for as soon as any one has permitted himself to devise an image of God, he immediately falls into false worship. And surely whosoever reverently and soberly feels and thinks about God Himself, is far from this absurdity; nor does any desire or presumption to metamorphose God ever creep in, except when coarse and carnal imaginations occupy our minds. Hence it comes to pass, that those, who frame for themselves gods of corruptible materials, superstitiously adore the work of their own hands. I will then readily allow these two things, which are inseparable, to be joined together; only let us recollect that God is insulted, not only when His worship is transferred to idols, but when we try to represent Him by any outward similitude.
http://www.studylight.org/commentari...cgi?bk=1&ch=20

Calvin teaches that all pictures and sculptures are not condemned (first sentence) and that making an idol would inevitably lead to worshiping it.

I'm totally aware of Calvin's comments on Ex 20:4-6 in his Harmony of the Law. Now Calvin is widely criticised by even some Calvinists for his viewpoint on images. So a question mark arises whether his remark is a later interpolation or Calvin had a change of mind. In the text you have drawn upon Calvin states "The words simply express that it is wrong “C’est une folie et perversite.” — Fr. for men to seek the presence of God in any visible image, because He cannot be represented to our eyes. The command that they should not make any likeness, either of any thing which is in heaven, or in the earth, or in the waters under the earth, is derived from the evil custom which had everywhere prevailed; for, since superstition is never uniform, but is drawn aside in various directions..."

Calvin is notorious for his criticism of the RCC's adornment of their churches on the grounds they encourage idolatry...

Calvin teaches that all pictures and sculptures are not condemned (first sentence) and that making an idol would inevitably lead to worshiping it.

Try and find time to read a lot more of Calvin or for that matter the ancient church father Cyprian. In the later's case, all images, plays, sports etc lead to idolatry (then again he railed against the Roman world, which from what I can tell wasn't too dissimilar to modern popularism.)