Being raised in a conservative evangelical baptist tradition, the issue of idols has been pretty simple for me. Images or statuary that one shows a worshipful attitude before is an idol. And idols are absolutely forbidden in the Bible. The logic for people in my faith tradition for being “iconoclasts” (destroyer of icons… or items that might be treated as idols) is primarily rooted in the Second of the Ten Commandments.
You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. 5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.
Exodus 20:4-6, New International Version
This seems pretty clear. One should not have even images of anything “in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below.” This is pretty lacking of nuance, at least in verse 4. Some take this to extremes where even photographs are wrong, and art can only be of abstract forms. Of course, it gets more muddy when you get to the next verse, verse 5, where, it seems as if the issue is not their existence, but rather their worshiping them. The early Jews did, for example, decorate their tabernacle and temple with forms of things on the earth (such as pomegranates and almond blossoms). This suggests that there was a formula here— replication of created forms AND worship. We see this with Moses who created a bronze serpent (Numbers 21) which seemed to be a perfectly acceptable thing to do, but in II Kings 18 it was destroyed because people were offering incense to it— apparently as part of an act of worship. An idol, as a representative created object that is used as an object of worship, is wrong…
This leads us to a question of what then is an idol? In modern Christian parlance we might say that money is my idol, or fame, or some other abstract thing. These would not be idols in terms of the 2nd commandment. We might also say that a living person is an idol, but again that is not so in terms of the 2nd commandment. Things get a bit more uncertain when it comes to things that are less representational but still are items of high veneration, if not worship. This might include the cross (Christianity), kaaba (Islam), or Guru Granth Sahib (Sikhism). One might argue that these are not representing God-created things. However, the line between representational art and abstract is not clearly defined. This brings us then to the question of what is worship.
Orthodox Christians, for example, like to speak in terms of Icons being decidedly different than Idols because with them one WORSHIPS THROUGH rather than WORSHIPS TO. With this idea the object becomes a focus point for worship, but not the object of worship. Among Evangelicals, prayer is (traditionally at least) done with eyes closed. However, some will focus on something, such as a cross. Some will worship trying to block out what is going on around them… while others may choose to “soak” in “worship music” or imagery that is seen as worship-conducive. Orthodox Christianity tends to use semi-representational images of Christ and the saints as a window to the divine. Roman Catholics do things in a somewhat similar way but often using statuary.
But that begs the question: IS ANYTHING THEN TRULY AN IDOL IN A 2ND COMMANDMENT WAY? Most religions seem to be well aware that stone or wood figures are not truly gods and that their prayers are not literally to those objects. Reading Celsus’ charge against Christians from the 2nd (or 3rd?) century makes it clear that Celsus as a pagan fully understood that the idols were not actually gods… but simply representations for the purpose of rituals directed to their gods.
One might argue that idols in the classic sense of representative art used with worship directed to it doesn’t actually exist. But does that mean that it is impossible to violate the 2nd Commandment? I feel that is taking things too far.
First, a lot of people, I believe, struggle with the nuance between “worship to” and “worship through.” I have seen activities in the Philippines with Catholic statues where I feel the general populace does not understand this difference.
While this is a good point, I don’t think it goes far enough. A key point in the Bible is that God wants it abundantly clear that there is a strong line of demarcation between God the Creator, and the Creation. As such, God chooses not to be put into a representational form. That leads to a second point.
Second, God wants to reveal something about Himself— and that is that He is transcendent… beyond creation. The “God Who Is” is far different in many ways from the “God We Worship” and that difference is muddied when we use stone, wood, or other substance to represent God.
Third, even if an idol (or icon) is understood as being used to “Worship Through” it is still problematic if the ultimate object of worship is other than the one true God.
Bringing these three points together makes a strong justification for the 2nd Commandment… but it does leave wiggle room in terms of Christian icons. In Christian theology, Jesus is God revealed to us in a physical manner, so does this provide an exception in terms of representational art? If the art points to God as He has chosen to be revealed, does that make images of Jesus an acceptable form to worship through? I don’t know. Maybe.
Many icons make no pretense to represent God in any sense. Rather they are images of various saintly figures. While I do have issues with the idea that we need a mediator other than Christ between us and the Father (that is for a different discussion) it is hard to see how such icons are wrong of themselves. If one takes an all-encompassing view of the 2nd Commandment (any image is wrong) I suppose that might work, but as I noted earlier, that doesn’t appear to be the point of that command. Praying to a saint seems highly unnecessary to me… but at least doing such makes it quite clear one is using the icon for a “Through” activity rather than a “To.” In addition, however, veneration of icons has sometimes drifted to a point where I don’t think it is separable from worship. That being said, God is the one that sees the heart, not us.
In terms of icons, I do tend to think that the images used by the Eastern church are less prone to misuse than the statuary of the Western church. I personally feel that we are better at seeing 2-D as “less real” than 3-D. I am not in a position to support this with documentary evidence.
I have been jumping all over the place on this post. I am not trying to come up with complete answers. In fact, my goal is to expand ambiguity. When we meet Christians of other denominations, or people of other religions… we shouldn’t jump to conclusions about what is going on when it comes to statues and images.
— Is a statue of Buddha always an object of pietistic worship? Is Buddha “their god”?
— Is a household “shrine” to family members who have died a place of worship to ancestors, or a place of honor and veneration?
–When is an object an icon, or an idol, or a fetish, or an amulet, or a talisman? When is it simply decorative artwork?
Images, and particularly images of religious significance, are laden with complex meanings. We need to study and ask questions before making judgments. Even if we are correct that something is wrong… it is worth the time to figure out WHAT EXACTLY IS WRONG ABOUT IT. Additionally, we need to ask ourselves whether we do the same wrong things but in ways that we are more comfortable with.
