Ever hear that this was sacrilegious?

My son's grandmother brought back from Iran a beautiful 24k gold cross with Jesus on it. Well, the Christian/pastor counselor told my son it was sacrilegious to wear the necklace. So my son never wore it again. And at the time, I was such a mess that I could not think straight and I thought a preacher would know.. right?? I never heard of such a thing, but at the time, I guess I thought the counselor knew what he was talking about since he was a preacher, so I believed him

Such a delayed reactor I am, as many, years has passed and this whole thing somehow crept back into my mind. And now I am wondering if anyone has ever heard of such a thing?????

I think it depended on the relgious beliefs of the pastor, was a "local" ruling :-) It sounds like a "Catholic" sort of cross with Jesus on it; they often have lots of pictures/representations of Jesus on the Cross. Your pastor may have been reacting to that. Or, the Jews were originally told not to make "graven images" -- artwork of what was Holy/God because you can't really represent "God" in all His Glory and God had the trouble with the early Jews of them worshipping whatever they made; the golden calf, etc. Relying on the "symbol" instead of the actual Living God is a no-no and a lot of people get to treating a rosary or necklace or some object like that kind of like a "lucky" charm (St. Christopher medal comes to mind). That the necklace was so valuable, 24k gold, makes it appear too/very "special" in its own right rather than what it's representing and that's going the wrong way.

But it's all according to one's personal beliefs! If I liked the necklace and was not feeling wrong toward it, just liked it as a necklace, etc. I would have continued to wear it (or, if I didn't have the same beliefs as the pastor). No one outside ourselves has the keys/knowledge about our beliefs. Beliefs are 100% personal, non-transferable, etc. The necklace was sacrilegious to the pastor but that doesn't make it sacrilegious to you/your son unless you choose to belief that way. The pastor is not God, can't make any rules, just suggestions and comments on his own beliefs of what is true.

From my Protestant point of view, I don't particularly like to see symbols of Jesus STILL hanging on the cross. My Redemer Lives!

My mom also didn't like any kind of crusifix and wouldn't even have an empty cross in the house. She likened it to keeping a pistor or a knife on the mantel to remind you that a brother, father, etc had been killed by that instrument.

I don't see it that way. An empty cross reminds me that my Saviour died for ME... as well as the world. I accept that sacrifice because if I don't, it's like denying the fact that I'm saved.

If a representation of Christ's empty grave was readily available, I'd surely have one in some context/medium. But I can admit I haven't looked for one.

Ultimately, like Perna said, it's what YOU think, what YOUR conscience dictates to YOU.

The cross represents Christs love for us...in that he was willing to die for us so that we might be saved...

I think it is a beautiful sight to look upon as it reminds me of His love.

Thanks Perna and September.

Actually this was the first necklace I had ever seen with Jesus on the cross. All the ones I had seen were just of the cross. When I see the "cross" it is a reminder that Jesus died on the cross for our sins. And seeing "Jesus" on the cross reminds me of the pain he suffered.

I don't know at this time how I feel about wearing a necklace with Jesus on the cross. Good point made is that Jesus is alive and not still on the cross. But it also reminds one of the pain and suffering he endured.

I was never into wearing cross necklaces. Just this was a special gift from my son's grandmother. I thought it was thoughtful of her to give the necklace to my son, since she is Muslim and of course we are Protestant/Christian.

You are right tho. "your conscience dictates".

Thanks again

another topic to put in the "resolution" bucket. A few more "topics" and maybe the new year will start fresh without a lot of baggage

oh yes, I agree... The cross represents Christ's love for us and salvation. Yes, a reminder of His love. Which I tend to need often. Come to think of it, many churches have a cross in front of it.. And when I see the cross, I feel comfort and yet humbled. Guess I have a lot of growing to do in my spiritual walk..

the crusifix is a symbol of Christ on the Cross, it is up to the person if they wear it or hang it on a wall, my hubby found a necklace with Jesus arms out streached and I wear it once and awhile it makes me feel closer to my faith at times

Jesus on the cross is typically (these days) a symbol of catholocism. The emphasis is on Jesus SUFFERING on the cross for our sins.

Empty cross is typically (these days) a symbold of protestentism. The emphasis is on Jesus having RISEN AGAIN and transcended death.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifix

One night a man had a dream.
He dreamed he was walking along
the beach with the Lord.

Across the dark sky flashed scenes from his life.
For each scene, he noticed
two sets of footprints in the sand,
one beloning to him and the other to the Lord.

When the last scene of his life flashed before him,
he looked back at the footprints in the sand.
He noticed that many times along the path of his life
there was only one set of footprints.
He also noticed that it happened at the
very lowest and saddest times in his life.
This bothered him and he questioned the Lord about it.

"Lord, you said that once I decided to follow you,
you'd walk with me all the way.
But I have noticed that during the most
troublesome times in my life there is
only one set of footprints.
I don't understand why when I needed you most
you would leave me."

The Lord replied "My precious, precious child,
I love you and would never leave you.
During your times of trial and suffereing,
when you see only one set of footprints in the sand,
it was then that I carried you."

when i moved into this house, i found a beautiful antique crucifix on the bedroom wall......the lady who died here was Catholic and it was left here after she left. i contacted her family and no one wanted it.

i kept it and look at it daily. it is a wonderful piece of art and also reminds me of my mother and her faith.........

I can't personally comprehend how that would be sacriligeous..to Christians.
I was raised with a "fundamentalist" background and they kinda had issues with Christian statuary and such...which is purely symbolic. But...then THEY really stressed baptism for new Christians...which is also purely symbolic.
The way I seez it; There is enough guilt for all of us to go around many times, we don't need it in our religious beliefs.
That sort of stuff did not come from the Christ who stated; "Come unto me all ye who labor and are heavy laden and I will give you rest." Mathew 11-28.
Wear your cross proudly...and tell others of Christ!
m.b.

Hey. Yeah, I think I agree with Moody. I do think, though, that quite often beliefs can be informed by what has gone before. Some time in English history there were all kinds of fights between the Catholics and the protestents. In Ireland too. In those situations I guess protestants would take the wearing of a crucifix (with Jesus on it) as a symbol of catholic doctrine / dogma / belief and they wouldn't consider it fitting for a protestant.

Maybe your pastor has formed his beliefs along those lines...

Or maybe he thinks it is a symbol of Islam or something?

Could you ask him why he doesn't approve? Maybe if you discussed it he might change his mind? Perhaps?

I have a preacher friend that emails me "Footprints In The Sand" and I love it.

Ty ster for posting this. Many times I tend to forget -The Lord replied "My precious, precious child,
I love you and would never leave you.
During your times of trial and suffereing,
when you see only one set of footprints in the sand,
it was then that I carried you."

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
"Come unto me all ye who labor and are heavy laden and I will give you rest." Mathew 11-28.
Wear your cross proudly...and tell others of Christ!

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

all I can think of is amen

This all happened many years ago. I don't "do" therapy anymore. This is one of the several things that kept popping up from when I was in therapy and I guess never resolved...

Your comment on the counselor thinking on the terms of an Islamic symbol got me to thinking that it is unusual that a cross with Jesus on it could be bought in Iran, considering Iran is a Muslim country. They do believe in Jesus except they do not believe Jesus to be the Son of God. I don't think they believe in the crucifixion. So it is interesting she bought this necklace in Iran. Off topic again.. oops

I should have questioned him when I was in therapy. Just I was not "thinking clearly" then and most everything overwhelmed me.

Ah, I didn't get that it happened years ago, I thought it was recent.

I think there are a significant number of christians in Iran... Also... I'm not 100% sure on this but I thought that Islam was one of those 'additions to christianity' type religions like how christianity is one of those 'additions to judaism' type religions. I mean that I thought that muslims accepted jesus but they had later prophets (kinda like the mormons with joseph smith). Though I do think that some of those religions think Jesus was just a holy man rather than the son of god (like how some buddists think of buddah).

I dunno...

Yes you are right. There are Christians in Iran. And I was wrong about folks being hung in Iran for celebrating Christmas.. oops.. Guess they do celebrate Christmas too. I am a little confused with this info I just found.. Because I know folks that are Muslim can not leave Islam without fearing for their life. So I don't understand how there can be Christian Iranians living in Iran. But it is true.. There are Iranian Christians..

Iranian Christians Celebrate Christmas in Iran

Iranian Christians celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ in a somewhat similar fashion as it is celebrated around the world. ... Christianity arrived in Iran during the Parthian dynastic period (248 BC- 224 AD). Parthian kings showed great tolerance toward other religions and Christianity gradually spread in various parts of the Persian Empire. ... The celebration of Christmas on the 25th of December is said to have originated in ancient Persia and Mithraism and has its roots in the Mithraist festival of Yalda, the celebration of the birth of Sun God, Mithra, on the eve of the first day of the winter which falls on 21st of December. http://irannewsblog.blogspot.com/200...christmas.html

Yes, Christianity sprang from Judaism I think... My understanding is that Islam did not come from Christianity.

Islam
Islam (properly called al-Islam, "submission to Allah," or God) is the name given to the religious thought system resulting from the mission of the Prophet Mohammed in Arabia in the 7th Century A.D. During his 40-year ministry, Mohammed authored the Quiran, the holy scripture of the faith. The Quiran distinguishes between submission and belief, or faith. Submission requires strict adherence to a code of righteous behavior. One who submits to the will of God is a Muslim. http://www.allfaithseminary.org/religions.asp

Radioflyer,

I haven't posted in this forum before as I try to avoid topics of religion-- but your question caught my eye.

My family was Catholic and I had a little upbringing in it-- I was taught that wearing a cross is fine but NOT the crucifixion, those are for putting on the wall and on rosaries. If a crucifixion is worn the person doesn't face it and that is disrepectful--it's kind of like hanging it on the wall with it facing the wall.-- at least this is what I was taught...........

mandy

What you say does make sense as to if a crucifixion is worn the person doesn't face it and that is disrespectful. never thought of it that way

You know, I never felt comfy with the necklace. although it is beautiful. So many diverse opinions where they all make sense. And yet a little confusing. Maybe I will just put it in a picture frame and hang it on the wall..

thanks again mandy

Hey. My understanding is that there is considerably diversity within Islam as there is considerable diversity within Christianity. As such, it is hard to make true generalisations across such a large (and diverse) group of people.

The religious practices of a group of people can often be tied up with cultural practices and the cultural practices of a comparatively small group of people can sometimes be mistaken for the religious practices of the whole group.

I think that there are some extremists (of all religions) who capture the majority of the media attention and thus the 'common sense' conception of the Islamic religion in the western world comes to be based on the activities of a few extremists. That would be like... Taking the kkk or those who think it is okay to murder abortionists to be representative of christianity. (Both are fairly clearly unfair overgeneralisations).

This website seems pretty good. I haven't had the time to read it all yet, but I probably will return to it:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/comp_isl_chr.htm

My notion of Islam being derived from Christianity as Christianity is derived from Judaism is as follows:

In the beginning there was the old testament. Those of the Jewish faith accept this as a religious text. And... My understanding is that those of Christian and Islamic faith also accept this as a religious / spiritual text (though for the latter two later religous texts 'trump' the old testament).

Then came the new testament. Those of the Jewish faith do not accept this as a religious text. Those of the christian faith accept this as their most important religious text, however. And my understanding is that those of muslim faith fairly much accept this as well, though they also consider this to be trumped by a later text.

(There are variations as to what is considered to be part of the new testament by different 'sects'. The Roman Catholic church accepts additional books to protestant churches, for example. It is fairly interesting to read about the politics involved in the decisions as to what writings got to be part of the new testament and which writings did not get to be part of the new testament. I have this funny feeling that the book of Judas will never make it in even though it is as authentic as the other books in the new testament: http://www.nationalgeographic.com/lostgospel/ )

And then along comes Mohammed and the Quiran. Jewish people don't accept this and neither do Christians. But Muslim people accept this as their most important religious text.

So... The later texts are typically considered to 'trump' what has gone before... And the differences between the religions (with respect to religious texts anyway) is a layering exercise... Kind of like this:

Old testament -> New testament -> Quiran.

People of Jewish faith get off the boat at stage one.
People of Christian faith get off the boat at stage two.
People of Islamic faith get off the boat at stage three.

And the mormons... Well... Instead of the Quiran they think that Joseph Smith found additional religious texts and thus you get the books of the mormon bible (which might be viewed as a layer on Christianity as Islam is). And for mormons... The books of the mormon bible trump what has gone before.

I hope this post is okay... It was in response to the thoughts of the person who started the thread and...

It is okay to learn about religions, right?

And all that was a way of deriving the interesting fact (that I didn't know) that people of Islamic faith don't believe that Jesus died on the cross (they believe he ascended straight to heaven) and thus the crucifix would not be an Islamic religious icon). Also... They are much stricter on their interpretation of 'Idols' hence the problem around depicting Mohamid in artistic (or cartoon) form...

This is just my prospective on the subject from things I learned growing up and then converting to mormonism as a teen. Was raised Catholic, so big change.

Mormons don't use crosses or statues. With the belief that Jesus died, was buried and then rose again on the third day. So Mormons don't wear crosses or have crosses in their churches.

I don't really see it as sacrilegious if someone wears a cross. It means what it means to that person. So if someone wants to wear a cross, more power to them, because it means something to them.

But for me as a Mormon I don't wear or have any crosses. It's not how Jesus died that matters, but that he rose again.

Lis

Not to "drift" from the subject much but the Jewish and Islamic races share the same common father Abraham.
Read Genesis chapter 16...also 19. Abraham had a son through his wife Sarah's handmaiden Hagar....the Egyptian....
m.b.

I am also LDS (Mormon). I agree with Monty Girl's comments on Mormons not using crosses. We do have pictures that depict Jesus on the cross, etc., as that is part of our beliefs. To us, it is just that we emphasize that Jesus was resurrected and lives again (that we might also live again), and also that he atoned for our sins. I don't have a problem with others using crosses as a symbol, or wearing them. We have symbols too. I think that it is a matter of what your own beliefs are, whether or not the pendent is sacriligious.

Regarding the history of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, my understanding is that these all do have much in common. I don't know whether or not Moslems still read or believe in the Bible in addition to the Koran. That is an interesting question. As for LDS (we prefer to be called Latterday Saints, as we do not worship Mormon - he was one of many prophets and a servant of God), the Book of Mormon (named for him because he was the one who compiled the important writings of his people) does not replace other scripture. The Old Testament and New Testament are of equal importance, as are the writings of modern prophets. The Book of Mormon is valuable to us as it is the keystone of our religion. If it is true, so is the gospel as we understand it. If not, than neither is the gospel. Also, the Bible has been translated many times, and some of what was originally included in it has been lost over time. We believe that the Book of Mormon contains more completeness because it has not been translated so many times, and was translated through inspiration. The Bible and Book of Mormon are complementary of each other.

I think that sharing each other's beliefs and learning about them is fine in this forum as long as we respect one another's beliefs and do not let it become a debate or discussion of one being better than another. I enjoy sharing my beliefs with anyone who is interested, particularly if there is anything that I can share that is helpful. I am also interested in hearing about beliefs and customs and cultures that are different from mine. I believe that we can learn from all religions.

umm actually Islam and Christianity are opposites in their beliefs....

How do you mean 'opposites in their beliefs'?
Which beliefs do you have in mind?

That was interesting about the Latter Day Saints. I'll admit that I really know very little about them. There was a temple and a community based around the temple back home. A college and stuff. I remember people used to go out there to look at the christmas decorations which were very pretty with the temple all lit up. People used to go out there to find out about their family history too, because geneology is important to the faith and so they kept extensive geneological records.