Author Topic: HoH an Idol? (Read 4999 times)

TheHobbit13 · « **on:** June 08, 2010, 08:08:57 PM »

I wonder if Holy of Holies should be considered to be depicting an idol because it shows two things that look really similar to an assyrian god. Of all the pictures of the Ark that I have seen on the Internet there are no creature by it that look like those. I wonder was this picture taken in context? I

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #1 on:** June 08, 2010, 10:20:21 PM »

No, those are supposed to be the Cherubim mentioned in the verse on the card. See the discussion here.

Mr.Hiatus · « **Reply #2 on:** June 08, 2010, 10:26:22 PM »

The HOLY OF HOLIES, an idol...?

Captain Kirk · « **Reply #3 on:** June 08, 2010, 10:28:24 PM »

The Bible is pretty clear that they are figures of Cherubim on top of the Ark of the Covenant, as MJB mentioned. Read the passage if you disbelieve.

Kirk

TheHobbit13 · « **Reply #4 on:** June 08, 2010, 10:57:56 PM »

Quote from: Captain Kirk on June 08, 2010, 10:28:24 PM

The Bible is pretty clear that they are figures of Cherubim on top of the Ark of the Covenant, as MJB mentioned. Read the passage if you disbelieve.

Kirk

They don't look like cherubim and they aren't on the ark.

Here is a picture of the holy of holies.
http://www.threelionsgaming.com/cards/c_d/Holy-of-Holies.png

here is a picture of cherubim.
http://rosettasister.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/ark-of-the-covenant.jpg

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on June 08, 2010, 11:02:43 PM

Since Holy of Holies has been relegated to making Trembling Demon stronger, I agree that it should be considered an idol for Redemption purposes.

Finally somebody is thinking rationally.

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #5 on:** June 08, 2010, 11:02:43 PM »

Since Holy of Holies has been relegated to making Trembling Demon stronger, I agree that it should be considered an idol for Redemption purposes.

Captain Kirk · « **Reply #6 on:** June 08, 2010, 11:08:21 PM »

Quote from: TheHobbit13 on June 08, 2010, 10:57:56 PM

They don't look like cherubim and they aren't on the ark.

Haha, I read this thread as being about the Ark of the Covenant, not Holy of Holies, my bad.

Kirk

YourMathTeacher · « **Reply #7 on:** June 08, 2010, 11:24:47 PM »

I think the picture is based off the Solomon's Temple passage:

Quote

1 Kings 6:23-28 (King James Version)

23And within the oracle he made two cherubims of olive tree, each ten cubits high.

24And five cubits was the one wing of the cherub, and five cubits the other wing of the cherub: from the uttermost part of the one wing unto the uttermost part of the other were ten cubits.

25And the other cherub was ten cubits: both the cherubims were of one measure and one size.

26The height of the one cherub was ten cubits, and so was it of the other cherub.

27And he set the cherubims within the inner house: and they stretched forth the wings of the cherubims, so that the wing of the one touched the one wall, and the wing of the other cherub touched the other wall; and their wings touched one another in the midst of the house.

28And he overlaid the cherubims with gold.

I'm not 100% sure how big 10 cubits is, but I think it's a lot bigger than the Ark. Regarding the pictures, if you keep searching images of Cherubim, the one on the card will show up eventually. The issue may be with the number of times "ten cubits" comes up. The Ezekiel description of the Cherubim is vague at best, but if the Cherub was supposed to be ten cubits high and ten cubits long, then the one on the HoH card makes more sense than the humanoid form.

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #8 on:** June 08, 2010, 11:26:02 PM »

See I prefer the fact that when the Israelites took it into battle with Hophni and Phinehas there were idolizing the ark.

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #9 on:** June 08, 2010, 11:36:09 PM »

Quote from: TheHobbit13 on June 08, 2010, 08:08:57 PM

I wonder if Holy of Holies should be considered to be depicting an idol because it shows two things that look really similar to an assyrian god. Of all the pictures of the Ark that I have seen on the Internet there are no creature by it that look like those. I wonder was this picture taken in context? I

Aside from the fact that you seem to think "I" can make a sentence, I agree with you. I've thought this before. With a little research, I think the image on HoH much more closely resembles the Assyrian god Ninip than a cherubim, which is supposed to have 4 heads, isn't it?

Master KChief · « **Reply #10 on:** June 08, 2010, 11:48:37 PM »

hoh is an idol.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #11 on:** June 09, 2010, 12:19:33 AM »

Quote from: YourMathTeacher on June 08, 2010, 11:24:47 PM

I'm not 100% sure how big 10 cubits is, but I think it's a lot bigger than the Ark.

A cubit is the distance between the elbow and the index finger or roughly 18 inches. That makes 10 cubits about 15 feet.

Quote from: BubbleBoy on June 08, 2010, 11:36:09 PM

With a little research, I think the image on HoH much more closely resembles the Assyrian god Ninip than a cherubim, which is supposed to have 4 heads, isn't it?

Ezekial described cherubim as having four heads. The problem with using this to argue that the figures in the picture on Holy of Holies are not cherubim is two-fold. First, you need to establish that the "cherubim" mentioned in Kings are the same "cherubim" mentioned in Ezekiel. Second, you need to show that Ezekiel's description of cherubim was meant to be taken as a physical description (as opposed to being treated symbolically, for example).

The main problem with the Hobbit's thesis is that the card is titled Holy of Holies. Given that it is not a stretch to believe that the artwork is meant to represent the Holy of Holies (whether it is an accurate representation or not is a separate unrelated argument). Comparing the creatures in the artwork with the description of the cherubim placed in the Holy of Holies (1 Kings 6:27), it is fairly clear there is a one to one correspondence.

Mr.Hiatus · « **Reply #12 on:** June 09, 2010, 01:19:19 AM »

Why are you arguing about the picture of the card. We all know the picture on the card means nothing. DO I need to show examples? First one is FSP promo.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #13 on:** June 09, 2010, 04:25:41 AM »

I agree, def. female.

Forsworn Angel · « **Reply #14 on:** June 09, 2010, 04:29:26 AM »

or both.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #15 on:** June 09, 2010, 04:31:25 AM »

Lady Gaga? When did we start talking about hir?

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #16 on:** June 09, 2010, 07:52:33 AM »

Quote from: Mr.Hiatus on June 09, 2010, 01:19:19 AM

Why are you arguing about the picture of the card.

Beats not arguing about the picture of a card.

Quote

We all know the picture on the card means nothing.

Except where another cards talks about "depicting." The "pict" in "depicting" is the same "pict" as in "picture" (and has little or nothing to do with ancient Celtic tribes).

Quote

DO I need to show examples?

Please, sir.

Quote

First one is FSP promo.

(That, that) Dude looks like a lady.
(That, that) Dude looks like a lady.

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #17 on:** June 09, 2010, 08:47:42 AM »

Just for reference, does this...

look more like this...

or more like this...

?

To me, it is obvious. I mean come on! A beard? A little hat? And there isn't even a box on the picture! The guys are just standing there! Where's the manna? In the garage?

Yes, I know it's the holy of holies, but still, if a card physically depicts an idol, there's no errata you can give to change that. Just make sure that if you reprint it (again), you use a better picture.

P.S. I find it funny that this is something Doug Gray drew.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #18 on:** June 09, 2010, 10:11:47 AM »

Just for reference, Scripture says...

Quote from: 1 Kings 6:27

And he set the cherubims within the inner house: and they stretched forth the wings of the cherubims, so that the wing of the one touched the [one] wall, and the wing of the other cherub touched the other wall; and their wings touched one another in the midst of the house.

Now compare to an artist's recreation of the Ark...

To me it is obvious. The objects depicted in this picture can't possibly be the cherubim described in the temple because their wings do not touch the walls, they touch each other. I am also trying to figure out how each of these figures on the top in this picture are fifteen foot tall, like is says in 1 Kings 6:26. If they are fifteen feet tall. then the Ark there is about forty feet high and the carry poles are going to be twelve feet off the ground.

Quote

Just make sure that if you reprint it (again), you use a better picture.

Yeah, Cactus should try to use a picture that actually represents what is described in Scripture. A picture where the cherubim are fifteen foot tall and have wing spans that stretch from one wall to the middle of the room. Oh wait, that is exactly what we have now.

Seriously, though, why are you claiming that the creatures pictured on top of the Ark in your chosen artistic recreation are accurate representations of what the actual cherubim in the actual Holy of Holies looked like? In the original reference I linked to it was noted that scholars have no idea what the cherubim looked like. You obviously disagree with this claim, and I am curious as to why.

BubbleBoy · « **Reply #19 on:** June 09, 2010, 10:38:37 AM »

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on June 09, 2010, 10:11:47 AM

Quote
Just make sure that if you reprint it (again), you use a better picture.
Yeah, Cactus should try to use a picture that actually represents what is described in Scripture. A picture where the cherubim are fifteen foot tall and have wing spans that stretch from one wall to the middle of the room. Oh wait, that is exactly what we have now.

Cactus should try to use a picture that doesn't look exactly like an Assyrian god.

Quote

Seriously, though, why are you claiming that the creatures pictured on top of the Ark in your chosen artistic recreation are accurate representations of what the actual cherubim in the actual Holy of Holies looked like?

My point was not meant to be that the picture did not look like the actual cherubim in the Holy of Holies, but that it did look like something else, and to a higher degree than I can imagine anything else doing so. I couldn't really find a good picture of the 15-foot-tall cherubim, except maybe this, which still looks less like this than this does.

Quote

In the original reference I linked to it was noted that scholars have no idea what the cherubim looked like. You obviously disagree with this claim, and I am curious as to why.

I never said that. It's just that I would never assume that the cherubim look exactly like an Assyrian god.

Although, you know what? I just realized something while posting this: The Assyrian god Ninip could actually have been a fallen cherub (perhaps even Lucifer himself) that was idolized and made into a god, in which case illustrations of him might be the most accurate examples we have of what the cherubim really looked like. This is an interesting thought indeed...

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #20 on:** June 09, 2010, 11:52:50 AM »

I would just like to see some evidence, any evidence at all, that Doug Gray intended the statuary on his imagining of the Holy of Holies to be anything other than the cherubim mentioned in 1 Kings.

No one knows what the actual cherubim looked like, but we know they had wings that touched one wall and extended to the middle of the room. Doug's picture has two creature that have wings that touch one wall and stretch to the middle of the room. Most biblical scholars believe that the cherubim of the temple were two-winged human-animal hybrids, and that matches what was drawn. We know that this is a depiction of the Holy of Holies, where we are told that 15 foot cherubim stood, and we have no reason to believe that Assyrian idols were ever found there.

Master KChief · « **Reply #21 on:** June 09, 2010, 12:02:51 PM »

isnt the holy of holies actually a place and not an artifact? i say we settle this easily and just ban and destroy all copies.

The Warrior · « **Reply #22 on:** June 09, 2010, 12:04:41 PM »

Quote from: Master KChief on June 09, 2010, 12:02:51 PM

isnt the holy of holies actually a place and not an artifact? i say we settle this easily and just ban and destroy all copies.

Fortress!

ChristianSoldier · « **Reply #23 on:** June 09, 2010, 01:56:19 PM »

I did some reading on the word cherub:
1) cherub, cherubim (pl)
a) an angelic being
1) as guardians of Eden
2) as flanking God's throne
3) as an image form hovering over the Ark of the Covenant
4) as the chariot of Jehovah (fig.)

Also they were always depicted as a combination of a man, ox, lion and eagle, which symbolize power and wisdom.

Reference: http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=H3742&t=KJV

TheKarazyvicePresidentRR · « **Reply #24 on:** June 09, 2010, 03:20:07 PM »

Btw, Middle of the picture is the ark of the cov.

News:

Author Topic: HoH an Idol? (Read 4999 times)

TheHobbit13

TheHobbit13