Monday, August 16, 2010

Sinners in the hands of an angry Coram Deo

CD said:

I want to emphasize that I really appreciate the Triabloggers, and I personally benefit much from your work; but I personally think this post does not serve to honor, or exalt, or bring God glory in any way, and therefore it comes across as strikingly out of place on this otherwise solid blog.

CD said:

The origin of the cartoon is to be found at Josh Harris’ blog under the heading “Jesus Calls Peter“. This clarifies who the graven image “jesus” is supposed to be speaking to, however as noted in the scripture reference above the scene doesn’t comport with the context of the Gospel narrative account. But then again faithfulness to the text probably isn’t to be expected when someone decides to create a blasphemous little cartoon mocking and trivializing the Risen Savior, the Eternal Son and Second Person of the Triune One True and Living God; the Word made flesh.

Is it not enough that the Lord in His earthly humiliation was mocked and scorned and ridiculed by His enemies that those who claim to be purchased by His blood find flesh-pleasing joy by glorying in bufoonish cartoon caricatures of Him, forcing putrid, insipid words into His mouth which He never uttered, and then chortling like brute beasts at their own foolish haughtiness?

How long will you tarry, oh Lord?!? How long will you bear with such a wicked and perverse generation, my King?

Be glorified, oh Lord! Be high and lifted up and exalted my God! Oh Lord please give your backslidden and wretchedly sinful people a glimpse of your unspeakable glory and holiness that we would flee from flesh-pleasing sinful corruption as if we were fleeing from a deadly plague! I pray Mighty One that you would mercifully give us sensitive submissive hearts, and grant the fear of the Lord to your people, oh Lord God Almighty!

CD said:

Evidently the sin remaining even in the fallen flesh of born-again believers never stops desiring an outlet to blaspheme the Triune One True and Living God, therefore their blasphemies are often couched and camoflauged as “humor” to make it more acceptable and palatable.

But the various responses in the comboxes beneath the filth masquerading as humor at Dan Phillips’ and Josh Harris’ blogs are nearly as troubling as the buffoonish caricature itself. Ostensibly self-professing Christian commenters are laughing it up at the expense of the Risen King of Glory!

“Hilarious!”; they say.
“Brilliant!”; they say.
“Genius!”; they say.

They seem like really “open-minded” and “tolerant” folks don’t they? Probably a really swell bunch to hang out with at a church BBQ. Never a dull moment with them, a laugh a minute, plenty of jokes to keep the brothers and sisters entertained and engaged…ROFL, right? “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die!” (Isa. 22:13; 1 Cor. 15:32)

But the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is decidedly “narrow-minded” and extremely “intolerant” of sinful human beings who mock Him.

Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap. – Gal. 6:7

For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few. – Matt. 7:14

How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace? – Heb. 10:29

In Christ,

CD said:


Brother I admire your fire, and I appreciate you; and that’s why I can say in all love that you’re smarter than this, and you ought to know better.

The “false christ” imagery at DefCon that you’re referring to was explicitly that, and the context was clearly a stern rebuke of the man-made “jesus”.

The images were representive of various false christs, and were in no way referents to the Jesus Christ of Scripture.

On the other hand, the cartoon “christ” under discussion at DefCon [and other blogs] is a direct referent to the Jesus Christ of Scripture as demonstrated a) by the title of Josh Harris’ original post, and b) by the imputation of a corrupted scriptural reference attributed to the christ-image in the adjoining speech balloon.

Despite your protestations to the contrary, there’s simply no rational correlation between the usages of the two sets of imagery within their respective contexts.

And I’ll only note in passing that your stated view of the 2nd commandment is easily argued to be as at least as overly narrow as the overly broad interpretation that you’re attempting to assign to me (see Westminster Larger Catechism Q&A 109).

Keep fighting the good fight of faith.

In Him,

CD said:

Just because empty-headed “evangelical” compromisers and their erstwhile apologists think they know better than God, and choose to profane Him with their false images with impunity doesn’t make the practice acceptable. In fact, when we see how far backslidden the broader professing church truly is in the light of scripture we find in many cases that “broad-minded church acceptability” is all too often a fairly accurate barometer of apostasy.

Yet not unlike the sad, pathetic and repeated cycle of failures of OT Israel, God will still have his 7,000 who have not bowed their knees to the Ba’al of worldly pragmatism, nor the false, idolatrous images of the Laodicean harlot church.

CD said:

I too saw a connection to Romanism, albeit from a different perspective.

The general reaction to "Seeing Jesus" that I've been observing in the blogosphere over the past few days bears a striking resemblance to Rome's e-pologists coming out in force whenever a dogma peculiar to the Mother Church is prodded by a Reformed blogger, even as they sit by blithely ignoring [or promoting!] the grossest of blasphemies, impieties, and indignities being heaped upon the Triune One True and Living God.

CD said:

So we have Triablogger Paul Manata on the record as a functional icono-pologist.

CD said:

The 2nd Commandment is expression of God's eternally unchanging and unchangable holy character and will, therefore to violate its prohibitions against human efforts to image His divine Being by representing any of the divine Persons via visual media [i.e. graven images] is sinful.

However forgiveness for violating God's law is available to all those who repent, turning away from their sin with a contrite and humble heart, and placing their trust in the Lord Jesus Christ, who is the end of the law for all those who believe.

CD said:

With this in mind it becomes clear that all endeavors to defend or offer counterarguments against God's 2nd Commandment prohibition against human efforts to image Him are sinful, and sinfully motivated.

Thus those who image God, and their erswhile apologists (or e-pologists), enablers, and defenders are partakers of the same bitter root of sin.

With this in mind it becomes obvious that all involved in this type of sinful behavior are to be rebuked and called to repentance for their ungodly perversions.

CD said:

It would seem that in they eyes of some here at Triablogue Jeroboam might have been commended as being somewhat of a reformer since before the kingdom was split Solomon's apostasy was rampant with many foreign gods filling Israel due to the influence of his many pagan wives.

CD said:

One would think the overwhelming preponderance of Biblical admonitions, exhortations, warnings and threatenings against idolatry/images, and the pathetically sad spiritual reality of man's natural bent towards this abominable sin ought to give the local graven image e-pologists here at Triablogue pause, but evidently it doesn't.


  1. Brings to mind the passage in Romans about relating to a weaker brother in the faith.

    I don't know if Coram Deo should be treated as the weaker brother or the ones arguing with Coram Deo should be treated as the weaker brother, but this spiraling-down quarreling is spiritually unhealthy.

  2. I'm with TUD. I've been peripherally watching this debate here on TB and I think it's rather shameful at this point.

    So much for being of one mind.

  3. I don't know if Coram Deo should be treated as the weaker brother or the ones arguing with Coram Deo should be treated as the weaker brother, but this spiraling-down quarreling is spiritually unhealthy.

    The issue isn't about matters of conscience so much as it is about a blogger whose general MO has been to make an assertion that is not expressly stated in Scripture (and which does not obviously follow from Scripture), make no argument as to why his position follows from Scripture, and then proceed to condemn those who disagree with him. There are impressionable Christians that might be influenced by CD's churlish tactics, and it is loving to call him out, at least for their sake, if for no other reason.

    It would be one thing if CD were arguing fine points of exegesis and theology in an effort to demonstrate his position. But his general MO has been to simply assert what he believes, without argument, and then proceed to castigate those who disagree with him. I am of the mind that exposing the absurdities of such practices, and exhibiting them as an example not to follow is also a good and profitable thing.

  4. A thoughtful comment, Matt.

  5. Ok... But I still don't like it. :|

  6. Sorry, Mr. Fosi. But, well, FWIW, if anything, here are some of my own thoughts on the matter. I hope they're fair and respectful enough. Please feel free to add other thoughts if you like. Thanks.