This is My Comfort in My Affliction (Thomas Manton, 1620-1677)

 

This is my comfort in my affliction; for thy word hath quickened me.—Psalm 119. 50.

IN the former verse the man of God had complained of the delay of the promise, and that his hope was so long suspended; now in this verse he showeth what was his support, and did revive him during this delay and the sore afflictions which befell him in the meantime. The promise comforted him before performance came, 'This is my comfort in my affliction, thy word hath quickened me.' 

1. Observe here, the man of God had his afflictions; for we are not exempted from troubles, but comforted in troubles. God's promise, and hope therein, may occasion us much trouble and persecution in the world. Yet— 

2. This very promise which occasioneth the trouble is the ground of our support; for one great benefit which we have by the word is comfort against afflictions. 

3. This comfort which we have by the word is the quickening and life of the soul. The life of our soul is first received by the word, and still maintained by the same word: James 1:18, 'Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth;' 1 Peter 1:23, 'Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.' 

Doct. That all other comforts in affliction are nothing to those comforts which we have from the word of God. 

David confirmeth it from experience; in his deepest pressures and afflictions, his soul was supported and enlivened by the word of God. The apostle Paul doctrinally asserts it: Rom. 15:4, 'Whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we, through patience and comfort of the scriptures, might have hope.' The general end of scripture is instruction; the special end is comfort and hope. Id agit tota scriptura, ut credamus in Deum (Luther)—the business and design of scripture is to bring us to believe in God, and to wait upon him for our salvation; to hope either for eternal life, which is the great benefit offered in the scriptures, or those intervening blessings which are necessary by the way, and also adopted into the covenant. The reasons are taken— 

1. From the quality of those comforts which we have from the word of God. 

2. From the provision which the word hath made for our comfort. 

3. From the manner whereby this comfort is received. 

First, From the quality of those comforts which we receive from the word of God. 

1. It is a divine comfort: Ps. 94:19, 'In the multitude of my thoughts within me thy comforts delight my soul.' In all the comforts we have, it is good to consider from whence it cometh. Is it God's comfort, or a fancy of our own? A comfort that is made up of our own fancies is like a spider's web, that is weaved out of its bowels, and is gone and swept away with the turn of a besom. But God's comfort is more durable and lasting; for then it floweth from the true fountain of comfort, upon whose smiles and frowns our happiness dependeth. Now God's comforts are such as God worketh, or God alloweth. Take them in either sense, they come in with a commanding or overpowering efficacy upon the soul. If God exciteth it by his Spirit, who is the comforter, Ps. 4:7, 'Thou hast put gladness into my heart.' There is little warmth in a fire of our own kindling: the Holy Ghost raiseth the heart to a higher degree of a delightful sense of the love of God than we can do by a bare natural act of our own understanding. Or whether it be of such comforts as God alloweth, if we have God's covenant for our comfort we have enough; no comfort like his comfort. In philosophy, man speaketh to us by the evidence of reason; in the scripture, God speaketh to us by way of sovereign authority: in his commands he interposeth his power and dominion; in his promises he empawneth his truth. And therefore scriptural comforts are God's comforts, and so more powerful and authoritative. 

2. It is a strong comfort: Heb. 6:18, 'That the heirs of promise might have strong consolation,' ἰσχυρὰν παράκλησιν. Other comforts are weak and of little force; they are not affliction-proof, nor death-proof, nor judgment-proof; they cannot stand before a few serious and sober thoughts of the world to come; but this is strong comfort, that can support the soul, not only in the imagination and supposition of a trouble, when we see it at a distance, but when it is actually come upon us, how great soever it be. If we feel the cold hands of death ready to pluck out our hearts, and are summoned to appear before the bar of our judge, yet this comfort is not the move impeached; that which supported us in prosperity can support us in adversity; what supports in life can support us in death; for the comforts of the word endure for ever, and the covenant of God will not fail us, living or dying. 

3. It is a full comfort, both for measure and matter. 

[1.] Sometimes for the measure; the apostle speaketh of 'comforts abounding by Christ.' 2 Cor. 1:5, and Acts 13:52, 'The disciples were filled with joy, and with the Holy Ghost;' and the apostle Paul, 2 Cor. 7:4, ὑπερπερισσεύομαι τῇ χαρᾷ, 'I am filled with comfort, and am exceeding joyful in all your tribulations.' Paul and Silas could sing praises in the prison, and in the stocks, after they had been scourged and whipped, Acts 16:25. And our Lord Jesus Christ, when he took care for our comfort, he took care that it might be a full comfort: John 15:11, 'These things have I spoken, that my joy might remain in you, and that your joy might be full.' The joy of believers is a full joy, needing no other joy to be added to it; it is full enough to bear us out under all discouragements. If Christians would improve their advantages, they might by their full joy and cheerfulness entice carnal men, who are ensnared by the baits of the world and the delights of the flesh, once to come and try what comforts they might have in the bosom of Christ, and the lively expectation of the promised glory. 

[2.] For the matter; it is full, because of the comprehensiveness of those comforts which are provided for us. There is no sort of trouble for which the word of God doth not afford sufficient consolation; no strait can be so great, no pressure so grievous, but we have full consolation offered us in the promises against them all. We have promises of the pardon of all our sins, and promises of heaven itself; and what can we desire more? We have promises suited to every state—prosperity and adversity. What do we need, which we have not a promise of? Prosperity, that it shall not be our ruin, if we take it thankfully from God, and use it for God; for, 'to the pure all things are pure,' Titus 1:15. But especially for adversity, when we most need; there are promises either of singular assistance or gracious deliverance. In short, the word of God assureth us of the gracious presence of God here in the midst of our afflictions, and the eternal enjoyment of God hereafter; that he will be with us in our houses of clay, or we shall shortly be with him in his palace of glory; and so here is matter of full comfort. 

(1.) His presence with us in our afflictions: Ps. 91:15, 'I will be with him in trouble;' and Isa. 43:2, 'When thou passest through the waters, I will be with thee; and through the rivers, they shall not overflow thee;' and many other places. Now if God be with us, why should we be afraid? Ps. 23:4, 'When I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will not be afraid, for thou art with me;' and in many other places. We see in the body, if any member be hurt, thither presently runneth the blood to comfort the wounded part; the man himself, eye, tongue, and hand, is altogether employed about that part and wounded member, as if he were forgetful of all the rest. So we see in the family, if one of the children be sick, all the care and kindness of the mother is about that sick child; she sits by him, blandisheth him, and tendeth him, so that all the rest do as it were envy his disease and sickness. If nature doth thus, will not God, who is the author of nature, do much more? For if an earthly mother do thus to a sickly and suffering child, will not our heavenly Father, who hath an infinite, incredible, and tender love to his people? Surely he runneth to the afflicted, as the blood to the hurt member; he looketh after the afflicted, as the mother to the sick child. This is the difference between God and the world; the world runneth after those that flourish, and rejoice, and live in prosperity, as the rivers run to the sea, where there is water enough already; but God 'comforteth us in all our tribulations,' 2 Cor. 1:4. His name and style is, 'He comforteth those that are cast down,' 2 Cor. 7:6. The world forsaketh those that are in poverty, disgrace, and want; but God doth not withdraw from them, but visiteth them most, hath communion with them most, and vouchsafeth most of his presence to them, even to those that holily, meekly, and patiently bear the afflictions which he layeth upon them; and one drop of this honey is enough to sweeten the bitterest cup that ever they drank of. If God be with us, if 'the power of Christ will rest upon us,' then we may even glory in infirmities, as Paul did. 

(2.) Of our presence with God, when our afflictions are over; that is our happiness hereafter; we shall be there where he is: John 12:26, 'There where I am shall my servant be;' and John 17:24, 'Father, I will that they also whom thou hast given me be with me where I am, that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me.' When we have had our trial and exercise, we shall live with him for ever; therefore is our comfort called everlasting consolation: 2 Thes. 2:16, 'Who hath given us everlasting consolation, and good hope through grace.' Nothing more can be added or desired, if we have but the patience to tarry for it, that we may come to the sight of God and Christ at last. Surely this will lighten the heart of that sorrow and fear wherewith it is surcharged. Here is an everlasting ground of comfort; and if it doth not allay our fears and sorrows, the fault is not in the comfort, for that is a solid and eternal good; but on the believer's part, if he doth not keep his faith strong, and his evidences clear. 

4. It is a reviving comfort, which quickeneth the soul. Many times we seem to be dead to all spiritual operations, our affections are damped and discouraged; but the word of God puts life into the dead, and relieveth us in our greatest distresses. Sorrow worketh death, but joy is the life of the soul. Now when dead in all sense and feeling, 'the just shall live by faith,' Hab. 2:4; and the hope wrought in us by the scriptures is 'a lively hope,' 1 Peter 1:3. Other things skin the wound, but our sore breaketh out again and runneth; faith penetrates into the inwards of a man, doth us good to the heart; and the soul reviveth by waiting upon God, and gets life and strength. 

Secondly, The provision which the word hath made for our comfort; it might be referred to four heads. 

1. Its commands. 

[1.] Provisionally, and by way of anticipation. The whole scripture is framed so that it still carrieth on its great end of making man subject to God and comfortable in himself. Our first lesson in the school of Christ is self-denial: Mat. 16:24, 'If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.' Now this seemeth to be grievous, but provideth for comfort; for self-denial plucketh up all trouble by the root; the cross will not be very grievous to a self-denying spirit. Epictetus summed up all the wisdom that he could learn by the light of nature in these two words, ἀνέχου καὶ ἀπέχου—bear and forbear; to which answereth the apostle's 'temperance, patience,' 2 Peter 1:6. Certainly were we more mortified and weaned from the world, and could we deny ourselves in things grateful to sense, we should not lie open to the stroke of troubles so often as we do. The greatness of our affections causeth the greatness of. our afflictions. Did we possess earthly things with less love, we should lose them with less grief. Had we more entirely resigned ourselves to God, and did love carnal self less, we should less be troubled when we are lessened in the world. Thus provisionally, and by way of anticipation, doth the word of God provide against our sorrows. The wheels of a watch do protrude and thrust forward one another; so one part of Christian doctrine doth help another: take any piece asunder, and then it is hard to be practised. Patience is hard if there be no thorough resignation to God, no temperance and command of our affections; but Christianity is all of a piece; one part well received and digested befriendeth another. 

[2.] Directly, and by way of express charge, the scripture requireth us to moderate our sorrow, to cast all our care upon God, to look above temporal things, and hath expressly forbidden distracting cares, and doubts, and inordinate sorrows: 1 Peter 5:7, 'Cast all your care upon God, for he careth for you;' and Phil. 4:6, 'Be careful for nothing.' We have a religion that Maketh it unlawful to be sad and miserable, and to grieve ourselves inordinately: care, fear, and anguish of mind are forbidden, and no sorrow allowed us but what tendeth to our joy: Isa. 35:4, 'Say to them that are of fearful hearts, Be strong, fear not;' Isa. 41:10, 'Fear not, I am with thee; be not dismayed, I am thy God.' To fear the rage, and power, and Violence of enemies, is contrary to the religion which we do profess: 'Fear not them which can kill the body,' Mat. 10:26, 28. Now surely the word, which is full fraught with precepts of this nature, must needs comfort and stay the heart. 

2. The doctrines of the word do quicken and comfort us in our greatest distresses, all of them concerning justification and salvation by Christ; they serve to deaden the heart to present things, and lift it up to better, and so to beget a kind of dedolency and insensibility of this world's crosses; but especially four doctrines we have in the word of God that are very comforting. 

[1.] The doctrine concerning particular providence, that nothing falleth out without God's appointment, and that he looketh after every individual person as if none else to care for. This is a mighty ground of comfort; for nothing can befall me but what my Father wills, and he is mindful of me in the condition wherein I am, knoweth what things I stand in need of, and nothing is exempted from his care, ordering, and disposal. This is a ground both of patience and comfort: Ps. 39:9, 'I was dumb, and opened not my mouth, because thou didst it.' So Hezekiah: Isa. 38:15, 'What shall I say? He hath both spoken unto me, and himself hath done it.' It is time to cease, or say no more; why should we contend with the Lord? Is it a sickness or grievous bodily pain? What difference is there between a man that owneth it as a chance or natural accident, and one that seeth God's hand in it? We storm if we look no further than second causes; but one that looketh on it as an immediate stroke of God's providence hath nothing to reply by way of murmuring and expostulation. So in loss of good children; how do we rave against instruments, if we look no further! But if we consider the providence of God, Job 1:21, not Dominus dedit, diabolus abstulit, but 'The Lord hath given, and the Lord hath taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord,' So for contumely and reproaches; if God let loose a barking Shimei upon us, 2 Sam. 16:11, 'The Lord bid him curse.' To resist a lower officer is to resist the authority with which he is armed. So in all other cases, it is a ground of patience and comfort to see God in the providence. 

[2.] His fatherly care over his people. He hath taken them into his family, and all his doings with them are paternal and fatherly. It allayeth our cares: Mat. 6:32, 'Your heavenly Father knoweth that ye hath need of all these things.' Our sorrows in affliction are lessened by considering they come from our Father: Heb. 12:5–7, 'Ye have forgotten the exhortation that speaketh upon you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him; for whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is that whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons;' and so those whom God doth love tenderly, he doth correct severely. 

[3.] His unchangeable love to his people. God remaineth unchangeably the same. When our outward condition doth vary and alter, we have the same blessed God as a rock to stand upon, and to derive our comforts from, that we bad before: he is the God of the valleys, as well as of the hills. Christ in his desertion saith, 'My God, my God,' Mat. 27:46. Surely we deserve that the creature should be taken from us, if we cannot find comfort in God: Hab. 3:18, 'Although the fig-tree should not blossom, neither shall fruit be in the vine, &c., yet will I rejoice in the Lord; I will joy in the God of my salvation;' 'Nothing can separate us from the love of God,' Rom. 8:36. Men may separate us from our houses, countries, friends, estates, but not from God, who is our great delight. In our low estate we have a God to go to for comfort, and who should be more to us than our sweetest pleasures

[4.] The scripture showeth us the true doctrine about afflictions, and discovereth to us the author, cause, and end of all our afflictions. The author is God, the cause is sin, the end is to humble, mortify, and correct his children, that they may be more capable of heavenly glory. God is the author; not fortune, or chance, or the will of man; but God, who doth all things with the most exact wisdom, and tender mercy, and purest love. The cause is just: Micah 7:9, 'I will bear the indignation of the Lord, because I have sinned against him.' The end is our profit, for his chastisements are purgative medicines, to prevent or cure some spiritual disease. If God should never administer physic till we see it needful, desire to take it, or be willing of it, we should perish in our corruptions, or die in our sins, for want of help in due time: 1 Cor. 11:32, 'But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.' Now, should we not patiently and comfortably endure those things which come by the will of our Father, through our sins, and for our good? 

3. The examples of the word, which show us that the dearly beloved of the Lord have suffered harder things than we have done, and with greater patience. Christ: 1 Peter 2:21, 'Who suffered for us, leaving us an example that we should follow his steps.' The servants of the Lord: James 5:10, 'Take, my brethren, the prophets of the Lord, who have spoken the word of the Lord, for an example of suffering affliction, and of patience.' We complain of stone and gout; what did our Lord Jesus Christ endure when the whole weight of his body hung upon four wounds, and his life dropped out by degrees? We complain of every painful disease, but how was it with Christ when his back was scourged, and his flesh mangled with whips? We are troubled at the swellings of the gout in hands or feet; how was it with him when those sinewy parts were pierced with strong and great nails? We complain of the want of spiritual consolations; was not he deserted? We mourn when God Maketh a breach upon our relations; was not Abraham's trial greater, when he was to offer his son with his own hands? Heb. 11:17, 'By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac; and he that had received the promise offered up his only-begotten son.' Job lost all his children at once by a blast of wind. The Virgin Mary near the cross of Christ, 'Woman, behold thy son,' John 19:26. She was affected and afflicted with that sight, 'as if a sword pierced through her heart.' We complain of poverty; Christ 'had not where to lay his head.' If we lose our coat to keep our conscience, others of God's children have been thus tried before us: Heb. 10:34, 'Ye took joyfully the spoiling of your goods, knowing in yourselves that you have in heaven a better and an enduring substance.' The Levites 'left their inheritance,' 2 Chron. 11:14. Thus God doth not call us by any rougher way to heaven than others have gone before us. 

4. The promises of scripture. To instance in all would be endless. There are three great promises which comfort us in all our afflictions—the promises of pardon of sins, and eternal life, and the general promises about our temporal estate. 

[1.] The promises of pardon of sin. We can have no true cure for our sorrow till we be exempted from the fear of the wrath of God. Do that once, and the heart of sorrow and misery is broken. Others may steal a little peace when conscience is laid asleep, but not solid comfort till sin be pardoned: Isa. 40:1, 2, 'Comfort ye, comfort ye my people, saith your God; speak ye comfortably unto Jerusalem, and cry unto her that her warfare is accomplished, that her iniquity is pardoned;' Mat. 9:2, 'Son, be of good cheer; thy sins be forgiven thee;' Rom. 5:1, 'Therefore, being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.' 

[2.] The promises of eternal life. Nothing will afford us so much content as one scripture promise of eternal life would do to a faithful soul. Heaven in the promise seen by faith is enough to revive the most doleful and afflicted creature: Mat. 5:12, 'Rejoice and be exceeding glad, for great is your reward in heaven.' Nothing can be grievous to him that knoweth a world to come, and hath the assurance of the eternal God that shortly he shall enjoy the happiness of it: Rom. 5:2, 'We rejoice in hope of the glory of God.' This comforts against troubles, sicknesses, wants. Everlasting case, everlasting joy, surely will counterbalance all that we can endure and suffer for or from God. There all our fears and sorrows shall be at an end, and all tears shall be wiped from our eyes. 

[3.] The general promises concerning our temporal estate. There are many particular promises concerning the supply of all our necessities, removing of our grievances and burdens, or else that God will allay our troubles and enable us to bear them, mix with them the taste of his goodness and fatherly love. But I shall only speak of those general promises, that we may be confident that he will never utterly fail his people: Heb. 13:5, 'He hath said, I will never leave thee nor forsake thee;' that he will not give us over to insupportable difficulties: 1 Cor. 10:13, 'There hath no temptation taken you but what is common to man; but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above what you are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that you may be able to bear it.' He will dispose of all things for the best to them that love him, Rom. 8:28. These things are absolutely undertaken, and these things should satisfy us. 

Thirdly, From the manner wherein this comfort is received. They are applied by the Spirit, who is a comforter, and received by faith. 

1. Applied by the Spirit, which is dispensed in a concomitancy with this word: Rom. 15:13, 'Now the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, that ye may abound in hope, through the power of the Holy Ghost.' The Holy Ghost is purposely given to be our comforter. If we are fit to receive it, he will not be wanting to give solid joy and delight to the penitent and believing soul. 

2. It is received by faith. The word of God cannot deceive us. Faith is contented with a promise, though it hath not possession; for, Heb. 11:1, 'Faith is the substance of things hoped for, and the evidence of things not seen.' Sickness with a promise, poverty with a promise, captivity with a promise, is better than health, riches, liberty without one; yea, death with a promise is better than life. What you possess without a promise you may lose when most secure: Luke 12:19, 20, 'I will say to my soul, Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years; eat, drink, and be merry. But God said unto him, Thou fool, this night shall thy soul be required of thee; then whose shall those things be that thou hast provided?' But in the eye of faith, that which we hope for is more than that which we possess; for we have God's word; it is set before us. 

Use 1. For information. 

1. How likely it is that the children of God will be exercised with afflictions, because God in his word hath laid in so many comforts before hand; a full third of the scriptures would be lost, and be as bladders given to a man that stands on dry land, and never meaneth to go into deep waters: 'Man is born to trouble as the sparks fly upward,' Job 5:7. Many think they come into the world not to bear crosses, but to spend their days in pleasure; but alas I how soon do they find themselves mistaken, and confuted by experience! If life be anything lengthened out, it is vexed with the remembrance of what is past, or trouble of what is present, or fear of what is to come. The first part of our life we know not ourselves; in the middle, we are filled with cares and sorrows; our last burdened with weakness and age. But now the godly are more appointed to troubles, because God will try their faith, perfect their patience, train them up for a better world. They are now hated by the world: 2 Tim. 3:12, 'Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution;' Acts 14:22, 'We must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God.' He that would not be exempted from the hopes of Christians, he must not look to be exempted from the troubles of Christians. 

2. The excellency of the word of God and the religion it establisheth. It containeth store of sure comforts; and when all other comforts can do us no good, then the word of God affordeth us relief and support. Bare human reason cannot find out such grounds of comfort in all their philosophy; it doth not penetrate to the inwards of a man. It will tell us it is in vain to trouble ourselves about what we cannot help: Jer. 10:19, 'It is an evil, and I must bear it;' that we are not without fellows, others suffer as much as we do, &c.; but the word of God giveth us other consolations—the pardon of sin, the promises of a better life; that if we lose temporal things we shall have eternal; that we would not fear the threatenings of men, having the promises of God, &c., nor death, which hath life at the back of it; these are comforts indeed. When David was even dead in the nest, the word, that was not so clear then in these points as now, revived him. What would he have said if he had known the gospel so fully as we do? How should we be affected that live in so much light? 

Use 2. For reproof to those that seek other comforts,— 

1. In the vanities of the world. This is too slight a plaster to cure man's sore or heal his wound: the comforts of this world appear and vanish in a moment; every blast of a temptation scattereth them. It must be the hope and enjoyment of some solid satisfaction that can fortify the heart and breed any solid and lasting comfort, and this the world cannot give unto us; but in the word we have it. Alas! what is a dream of honour, or the good-will and word of a mortal man? Everlasting glory is as much above all these as the treasures of a kingdom before a child's toys. May-games, vain pleasures, are gone before we well feel that we have them. 

2. Or in philosophy. That cannot give a true ground of comfort. That was it the wise men of the world aimed at to fortify the soul against troubles; but as they never understood the true ground of misery, which is sin, so they never understood the true ground or way of comfort, which is Christ. That which man offereth cannot come with such authority and power as that which God offereth. The light of reason cannot have such an efficacy as divine testimony. This is a poor moonlight, that rotteth before it ripeneth anything. In short, they were never acquainted with Christ, who is the foundation of comfort; nor the promise of heaven, which is the true matter of comfort; nor faith, which is the instrument to receive comfort; so that you leave the fountain of living water for the dead puddle of a filthy ditch, if you think the writings of the heathens will comfort you and revive you, and neglect the word of God that brings rest for the soul. 

3. Those are to be reproved that are under a spiritual institution. and profess to keep to it, and do so little honour it, either by their patience or comfort, or hope under troubles. Wherefore were the great mysteries of godliness made known to us, and the promises of the world to come, and all the directions concerning the subjection of the soul to God, and those blessed privileges we enjoy by Christ, if they all be not able to satisfy and stay your heart, and compose it to a quiet submission to God when it is his pleasure to take away your comforts from you? What! 'Is there no balm in Gilead? is there no physician there?' Will not all the word of God yield you a cordial or a cure? Oh! consider what a disparagement you put upon the provision Christ hath made for us, as if the scripture were a weaker thing than the institutions of philosophy, or the vain delights of the world! But what may be the reasons of such an obstinacy of grief? 

[1.] Sometimes ignorance. They do not study the grounds of comfort, or do not remember them; for oblivion is an ignorance for the time: Heb. 12:5, 'Have ye forgotten the exhortation that speaketh to you as children?' They are like Hagar, have a well of comfort nigh, and yet ready to die for thirst. The scripture hath breasts of comfort, so full as a breast ready to discharge itself, and yet they are not comforted. 

[2.] They indulge and give way to the present malady, hug the distemper, and do not consider the evil of it; as 'Rachel refused to be comforted,' Jer. 31:15. 

[3.] They do not chide themselves, ask the soul the reason, cite it before the tribunal of conscience, which is one way to allay passions: Ps. 42:5, 'Why art thou so disquieted, O my soul?' They look to the grievance, not to the comfort, as that which is of use; they aggravate the grievance and lessen the love of God: 'Are the consolations of God so small with thee?' Job 15:11. It is spoken to them who have high thoughts of their troubles, low thoughts of God's comforts. 

[4.] Uncertainty in religion. Principles must be fixed before they can be improved, and we can feel their influence and power. But people will be making essays, and try this and try that. God's grounds of comfort are immutably fixed; God will not change his gospel laws for thy sake: and therefore, unless we would have a mountebank's cure, we must stand to them: Jer. 6:16, 'Thus saith the Lord, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls.' When we have tried all, we must come home at length to these things; and our uncertainty in religion will be none of the meanest causes of our troubles. 

[5.] They look to means and their natural operation, and neglect God; and God only will be known to be the God of all comfort: 2 Cor. 1:3, 4, 'Blessed be God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and the God of all comforts, who comforteth us in all our tribulation.' 

Use 3. To exhort us— 

1. To prize and esteem the scriptures, and consult with them often: there you have the knowledge of God, who is best worth our knowing; and the way how we may come to enjoy him, wherein our happiness lieth. It is a petty wisdom to be able to gather riches, manage your business in the world. Ordinary learning is a good ornament, but this is the excellent, deep, and profound learning, to know how to be saved. What is it I press you to know?—the course of the heavens, to number the orbs and the stars in them, to measure their circumference and reekon their motions, and not to know him that sits in the circle of them, nor know how to inhabit and dwell there? Oh, how should this commend the word of God to us, where eternal life is discovered, and the way how to get it! Other writings and discourses may tickle the fancy with pleasing eloquence, but that delight is vanishing, like a musician's voice. Other writings may represent some petty and momentary advantage; but time will put an end to that, so that within a little while the advantage of all the books in the world will be gone; but the scriptures, that tell us of eternal life and death, their effects will abide for ever: Ps. 119:96, 'I have seen an end of all perfections, but thy commandments are exceeding broad.' When heaven and earth pass away, this will not pass; that is, the effects will abide in heaven and hell. Know ye not that your souls were created for eternity, and that they will eternally survive all these present things? and shall your thoughts, projects, and designs be confined within the narrow bounds of time? Oh, no! Let your affections be to that book that will teach you to live well for ever, in comparison of which all earthly felicity is lighter than vanity. 

2. Be diligent in the hearing, reading, meditating on those things that are contained there. The earth is the fruitful mother of all herbs and plants, but yet it must be tilled, ploughed, harrowed, and dressed, or else it bringeth forth little fruit. The scripture containeth all the grounds of hope, comfort, and happiness, the only remedy of sin and misery, our rule to walk by till our blessedness be perfected; but we have little benefit by it unless it be improved by diligent meditation: Ps. 1:2, 'His delight is in the law of the Lord, and in that law doth he meditate day and night.' This must be your chief delight, and you must be versed therein upon all occasions: Ps. 119:97, 'Oh, how love I thy law! it is my meditation all the day.' When we love it and prize it, it will be so, for our thoughts cannot be kept off from what we love and delight in. 

3. Reader, hear, meditate with a spirit of application, and an aim of profit: Job 5:27, 'Hear it, and know thou it for thy good;' as the rule of your actions and the charter of your hopes;' Rom. 8:31, 'What shall we then say to these things?' That you may grow better and wiser, and may have more advantages in your heavenly progress, take home your portion of the bread of life, and turn it into the seed of your life. It is not enough to seek truth in the scriptures, but you must seek life in the scriptures. It is not an object only to satisfy your understandings with the contemplation of truth, but your hearts with the enjoyment of life; and therefore you must not only bring your judgment to find the light of truth, but your affections to embrace the goodness of life offered. Think not ye have found all, when you have found truth and learned it. No; except you find life there, you have missed the best treasure. You must bring your understandings and affections to them, and not depart till both return full. 

-----

From An Exposition of Psalm 119 by Thomas Manton

https://www.monergism.com/

Images of Christ a Violation of the Second Commandment

 It is our belief that images of Christ are unlawful not only to use, but even to make. This is the teaching of the Westminster Standards. We are persuaded that it is the teaching of God’s holy Word.

---

PICTURES OF CHRIST by J. Marcellus Kik

“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. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; and shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments” (Exodus 20:4-6).

In this second commandment we are forbidden to make any graven image or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. We are forbidden to bow down to them or to serve them. Now the question has been asked whether or not this commandment forbids the use of pictures of Christ. Naturally the commandment forbids the bowing down before such pictures and worshipping them. There can be no question of that.

But in many Protestant churches and in many evangelical churches pictures of Christ are used in teaching, and in the homes of Christians pictures of Christ are hung up to remind them, I suppose, of Christ. Is that Scriptural? Does it meet with the approval of God? Is it sinful? Is it another way of breaking the second commandment?

No doubt, if I state that the use of pictures of Christ is unscriptural; that it does not meet with the approval of God; that it is sinful; and that it is a breaking of the second commandment—I will be considered as a fanatic, a reactionary, and perhaps not quite normal. But before you have such unkind thoughts please hear me out. If we are Christians our service and worship will be regulated by the Word of God. The Bible is our infallible guide in faith and worship.

Now here is the surprising thing. Nowhere in the Bible, either in the Old Testament or New Testament, is there a physical description of Christ. Isn’t that strange if God wanted to use the picture of Christ in spreading the Gospel or in worship, that we are not told whether Christ was tall or short, fair or dark, light or dark hair, blue eyes or brown eyes?

With all their love for the Lord you would think that Peter or John would have given a description of him—unless, of course, they were forbidden. They wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Surely it is significant that neither they nor any other of the Scriptures gave a physical description of the Lord. Surely if God desired the use of pictures of Christ to further the cause of Christ he would have had a physical description of his Son in his Word. Why should we consider ourselves wiser than God and provide what he has deliberately left out?

The second amazing fact is that in the first four centuries of the history of the Church no picture of Christ was used. These were the years when the Church made her most astonishing growth. These were the years in which the Christians conquered pagan Rome. It is so frequently stated that we need pictures of Christ in order to teach people the Gospel. The apostle Peter did not need pictures of Christ to instruct the young or bring the Gospel to adults. The apostle John did not need pictures of Christ to convert pagans and instruct the Church. The apostle Paul did not need pictures of Christ to convert Barbarians and Greeks. The early church did not need pictures of Christ to conquer paganism. They accomplished it by preaching the Word in the power of the Holy Spirit.

When pictures of Christ were first introduced they were opposed. The Church historian Eusebius, who lived in the fourth century, declared himself in the strongest manner against images of Christ in a letter to the Empress Constantia who asked him for such an image. Amongst other things Eusebius wrote: “Who can therefore counterfeit by dead and insensible colors, by vain shadowing painter’s art, the bright and shining glistering of such his glory? whereas his holy disciples were not able to behold the same in the mountain; who, therefore, falling on their faces, acknowledged they were not able to behold such a sight.”

Here Eusebius touches on one of the reasons why it is impossible to have a true picture of Christ. If you want a picture of Christ do you want it as he was upon earth or as he is now in heaven? If you want a picture of him as he was upon earth you have quite a problem. There was no picture of him painted. The so-called pictures of Christ which are present today are from the imaginations of the artists. That is why there are so many different pictures. Not one of them is a true picture. So every time you say this or that is a picture of Christ you are uttering a lie. You cannot teach truth by a lie. Christ is the Truth, and surely he would not want the use of a false means to point to him. Christ abhors lies and falsehoods.

How would you like it if someone who never saw you painted a picture and told every one that it was a picture of you? Certainly you would resent it. And certainly Christ must resent all those counterfeit pictures of him.

But supposing you wanted a picture of Christ as he is now. The disciples had such a vision of him on the mount of transfiguration. We read in Matthew 17:2, “And his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.” This was the glorified Christ. No artist could give us a picture of Christ which would show the glowing of Christ’s face as the sun and his raiment as white as the light. They would only rob Christ of his glory by miserably falling short of a true painting of Christ in his present glory.

But someone will state that at least we can depict the humanity of Christ as he appeared upon earth. But who are we to separate his humanity from his divinity! The apostle John states in his Gospel, chapter 1:14, “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.” Notice that the apostle states that even while Christ was in the flesh they beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father. In other words, they beheld his divinity as well as his humanity. This one cannot paint. So one must behold his humanity as separate from his divinity. Then one falls into the ancient error of Nestorius. He stated that Christ consisted of two persons: one human and the other divine. There was, according to Nestorius, a separation between the human and the divine persons.

That was the ground on which the Council called by Constantine V condemned paintings of Christ. You see, this question of pictures of Christ was the subject of controversy throughout the eighth century. So Constantine in 753 called a council of three hundred and thirty bishops. Their conclusion was this: “If any person shall divide the human nature, united to the Person of God the Word; and, having it only in the imagination of his mind, shall therefore attempt to paint the same in an image; let him be holden as accursed. If any person shall divide Christ, being but one, into two persons; placing on the one side the Son of God, and on the other side the son of Mary; neither doth confess the continual union that is made; and by that reason doth paint in an image the son of Mary, as subsisting by himself; let him be accursed. If any person shall paint in an image the human nature, being deified by the uniting thereof to God the Word; separating the same as it were from the Godhead assumpted and deified; let him be holden as accursed.”

This council points out the difficulty and indeed the impossibility of painting a portrait of Christ. Christ is more than man. He is God-man. It is impossible to depict by a painter’s brush the almighty power of Christ; the glorious majesty of Christ; the infinite knowledge of Christ. You cannot localize by a painter’s brush the everywhere-presence of Christ. One can only succeed in degrading Christ. When one considers the deity of Christ it is no wonder that the apostles did not attempt a physical description of their Lord and Saviour.

There is always, also, the danger of worshipping the picture of Christ and attaching power to it. Even a Protestant publishing firm stated that there is power in a picture of Christ. It stated: “When one plants deeply and firmly in his mind the picture of Christ, it has a strong and powerful influence in his life.” Thus instead of attributing this influence to Christ and the Holy Spirit they attribute it to the picture they are trying to sell! That is a breaking of the second commandment.

But can it not help in the saving of souls, it is asked. But how? Looking at a picture of Christ hanging upon the cross tells me nothing. It does not tell me that he hung there for sin. It does not tell me that he hung there for my sin. It does not tell me that he is the Son of God. Only the Word of God does that. And it is the Word of God that has been given us to tell the story of salvation through the blood of Christ. It is not through the foolishness of pictures that sinners are converted but through the foolishness of preaching.

It is amazing how slowly unscriptural practices enter the Christian Church. We must at all times go back to the Scriptures. The Bible is our infallible guide. And if our practices and doctrines do not conform with the teachings of the Scriptures, then we must eliminate them. The Bible instructs the Church not to make any likeness of Christ. The present day pictures of Christ are false and no one would make a serious claim that they resemble Christ upon earth. They separate his humanity from his deity. They do not at all give us a glimpse of his present glory. They are not condoned by the inspired apostles.

God has ordained the foolishness of preaching to evangelize the world. He has promised to attend the preaching of the Word with the power of the Holy Spirit. The so-called pictures of Christ are a hindrance and a temptation to idolatry. Let us cleanse the Temple of God from them.

---

PICTURES OF CHRIST by John Murray

The question of the propriety of pictorial representations of the Saviour is one that merits examination. It must be granted that the worship of Christ is central in our holy faith, and the thought of the Saviour must in every instance be accompanied with that reverence which belongs to his worship. We cannot think of him without the apprehension of the majesty that is his. If we do not entertain the sense of his majesty, then we are guilty of impiety and we dishonour him.

It will also be granted that the only purpose that could properly be served by a pictorial representation is that it would convey to us some thought or lesson representing him, consonant with truth and promotive of worship. Hence the question is inescapable: is a pictorial representation a legitimate way of conveying truth regarding him and of contributing to the worship which this truth should evoke?

We are all aware of the influence exerted on the mind and heart by pictures. Pictures are powerful media of communication. How suggestive they are for good or for evil, and all the more so when accompanied by the comment of the spoken or written word! It is futile, therefore, to deny the influence exerted upon mind and heart by a picture of Christ. And if such is legitimate, the influence exerted should be one constraining to worship and adoration. To claim any lower aim as that served by a picture of the Saviour would be contradiction of the place which he must occupy in thought, affection, and honour.

The plea for the propriety of pictures of Christ is based on the fact that he was truly man, that he had a human body, that he was visible in his human nature to the physical senses, and that a picture assists us to take in the stupendous reality of his incarnation, in a word, that he was made in the likeness of men and was found in fashion as a man.

Our Lord had a true body. He could have been photographed. A portrait could have been made of him and, if a good portrait, it would have reproduced his likeness.

Without doubt the disciples in the days of his flesh had a vivid mental image of Jesus’ appearance and they could not but have retained that recollection to the end of their days. They could never have entertained the thought of him as he had sojourned with them without something of that mental image and they could not have entertained it without adoration and worship. The very features which they remembered would have been part and parcel of their conception of him and reminiscent of what he had been to them in his humiliation and in the glory of his resurrection appearance. Much more might be said regarding the significance for the disciples of Jesus’ physical features.

Jesus is also glorified in the body and that body is visible. It will also become visible to us at his glorious appearing—“he will be seen the second time without sin by those who look for him unto salvation” (Hebrews 9:28).

What then are we to say of pictures of Christ? First of all, it must be said that we have no data whatsoever on the basis of which to make a pictorial representation; we have no descriptions of his physical features which would enable even the most accomplished artist to make an approximate portrait. In view of the profound influence exerted by a picture, especially on the minds of young people, we should perceive the peril involved in a portrayal for which there is no warrant, a portrayal which is the creation of pure imagination. It may help to point up the folly to ask: what would be the reaction of a disciple, who had actually seen the Lord in the days of his flesh, to a portrait which would be the work of imagination on the part of one who had never seen the Saviour? We can readily detect what his recoil would be. No impression we have of Jesus should be created without the proper revelatory data, and every impression, every thought, should evoke worship. Hence, since we possess no revelatory data for a picture or portrait in the proper sense of the term, we are precluded from making one or using any that have been made.

Secondly, pictures of Christ are in principle a violation of the second commandment. A picture of Christ, if it serves any useful purpose, must evoke some thought or feeling respecting him and, in view of what he is, this thought or feeling will be worshipful. We cannot avoid making the picture a medium of worship. But since the materials for this medium of worship are not derived from the only revelation we possess respecting Jesus, namely, Scripture, the worship is constrained by a creation of the human mind that has no revelatory warrant. This is will-worship. For the principle of the second commandment is that we are to worship God only in ways prescribed and authorized by him. It is a grievous sin to have worship constrained by a human figment, and that is what a picture of the Saviour involves.

Thirdly, the second commandment forbids bowing down to an image or likeness of anything in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. A picture of the Saviour purports to be a representation or likeness of him who is now in heaven or, at least, of him when he sojourned upon the earth. It is plainly forbidden, therefore, to bow down in worship before such a representation or likeness. This exposes the iniquity involved in the practice of exhibiting pictorial representations of the Saviour in places of worship. When we worship before a picture of our Lord, whether it be in the form of a mural, or on canvas, or in stained glass, we are doing what the second commandment expressly forbids. This is rendered all the more apparent when we bear in mind that the only reason why a picture of him should be exhibited in a place is the supposition that it contributes to the worship of him who is our Lord. The practice only demonstrates how insensitive we readily become to the commandments of God and to the inroads of idolatry. May the churches of Christ be awake to the deceptive expedients by which the archenemy ever seeks to corrupt the worship of the Saviour.

In summary, what is at stake in this question is the unique place which Jesus Christ as the God-man occupies in our faith and worship and the unique place which the Scripture occupies as the only revelation, the only medium of communication, respecting him whom we worship as Lord and Saviour. The incarnate Word and the written Word are correlative. We dare not use other media of impression or of sentiment but those of his institution and prescription. Every thought and impression of him should evoke worship. We worship him with the Father and the Holy Spirit, one God. To use a likeness of Christ as an aid to worship is forbidden by the second commandment as much in this case as in that of the Father and Spirit. (This article first appeared in Reformed Herald, February, 1961.)

---

FISHER’S CATECHISM, Selections from Q&A #51

Q. What is forbidden in the second commandment?
A. The second commandment forbiddeth, the worshipping of God by images, or any other way not appointed in his word.

Q. 1. What are the leading sins forbidden in this commandment?
A. Idolatry and will-worship.

Q. 2. What is the idolatry here condemned?
A. [The worshipping of God by images]: Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, etc.

Q. 3. What is an image?
A. It is a statue, picture, or likeness of any creature whatsoever.

Q. 4. Is it lawful to have images or pictures of mere creatures?
A. Yes, providing they be only for ornament; or the design be merely historical, to transmit the memory of persons and their actions to posterity.

Q. 5. Can any image or representation be made of God?
A. No; it is absolutely impossible; he being an infinite, incomprehensible Spirit (Isa. 40:18). “To whom will ye liken God? or, what likeness will ye compare unto him?” If we cannot delineate our own souls, much less the infinite God (Acts 17:29). “We ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device.”

Q. 6. What judgment should we form of those who have devised images of God, or of the persons of the adorable Trinity?
A. We should adjudge their practice to be both unlawful and abominable.

Q. 7. Why unlawful?
A. Because directly contrary to the express letter of the law in this commandment, and many other Scriptures; such as, Jer. 10:14-15; Hos. 13:2; and particularly Deut. 4:15-19, 23. “Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves, (for ye saw no MANNER OF SIMILITUDE on the day that the Lord spake unto you in Horeb, out of the midst of the fire) lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female,” etc.

Q. 8. How is it abominable?
A. As it is a debasing the Creator of heaven and earth to the rank of his own creatures; and a practical denying of all his infinite perfections (Psa. 50:21).

Q. 9. May we not have a picture of Christ, who has a true body?
A. By no means; because, though he has a true body and a reasonable soul (John 1:14), yet his human nature subsists in his divine person, which no picture can represent (Psa. 45:2).

Q. 10. Why ought all pictures of Christ to be abominated by Christians?
A. Because they are downright lies, representing no more than the picture of a mere man: whereas, the true Christ is God-man; “Immanuel, God with us” (1 Tim. 3:16; Matt. 1:23).

Q. 11. Is it lawful to form any inward representation of God, or of Christ, upon our fancy, bearing a resemblance to any creature whatsoever?
A. By no means; because this is the very inlet unto gross outward idolatry: for, when once the heathens “became vain in their imaginations, they presently changed the glory of the incorruptible God, into images made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things” (Rom. 1:21-23).

Q. 23. Is it lawful, as some plead, to have images or pictures in churches, though not for worship, yet for instruction, and raising the affections?
A. No; because God has expressly prohibited not only the worshipping, but the making of any image whatsoever on a religious account; and the setting them up in churches, cannot but have a native tendency to beget a sacred veneration for them, and therefore ought to be abstained from, as having, at least, an appearance of evil (1 Thess. 5:22).

Q. 24. May they not be placed in churches for beauty and ornament?
A. No: the proper ornament of churches is the sound preaching of the gospel, and the pure dispensation of the sacraments, and other ordinances of divine institution.

Q. 25. Were not images of the cherubim placed in the tabernacle and temple, by the command of God himself?
A. Yes: but out of all hazard of any abuse, being placed in the holy of holies, where none of the people ever came; they were instituted by God himself, which images are not; and they belonged to the typical and ceremonial worship, which is now quite abolished.

---

PICTURES OF CHRIST by Thomas Vincent

It is not lawful to have pictures of Jesus Christ, because his divine nature cannot be pictured at all, and because his body, as it is now glorified, cannot be pictured as it is, and because, if it do not stir up devotion, it is in vain; if it do stir up devotion, it is a worshipping by an image or picture, and so a palpable breach of the second commandment. (Excerpt from Exposition of the Westminster Assembly’s Shorter Catechism.)

---

IMAGES OF CHRIST by James Durham

And if it be said man’s soul cannot be painted, but his body may, and yet that picture representeth a man; I answer, it doth so, because he has but one nature, and what representeth that representeth the person; but it is not so with Christ: his Godhead is not a distinct part of the human nature, as the soul of man is (which is necessarily supposed in every living man), but a distinct nature, only united with the manhood in that one person, Christ, who has no fellow; therefore what representeth him must not represent a man only, but must represent Christ, Immanuel, God-man, otherwise it is not his image. Beside, there is no warrant for representing him in his manhood; nor any colourable possibility of it, but as men fancy; and shall that be called Christ’s portraiture? would that be called any other man’s portraiture which were drawn at men’s pleasure, without regard to the pattern? Again, there is no use of it; for either that image behooved to have but common estimation with other images, and that would wrong Christ, or a peculiar respect and reverence, and so it sinneth against the commandment that forbiddeth all religious reverence to images, but he being God and so the object of worship, we must either divide his natures, or say, that image or picture representeth not Christ. (From The Law Unsealed, or, A Practical Exposition of the Ten Commandments.)

---

PICTURES OF CHRIST by Loraine Boettner

Closely akin to the use of images is that of pictures of Christ. And these, we are sorry to say, are often found in Protestant as well as Roman Catholic churches. But nowhere in the Bible, in either the Old or New Testament, is there a description of Christ’s physical features. No picture of Him was painted during His earthly ministry. The church had no pictures of Him during the first four centuries. The so-called pictures of Christ, like those of Mary and the saints, are merely the production of the artist’s imagination. . . . No picture can do justice to his personality, for he was not only human, but divine. And no picture can portray his deity. All such pictures are fatally defective. . . . For most people the so-called pictures of Christ are not an aid to worship but rather a hindrance, and for many they present a temptation to that very idolatry against which the Scriptures warn so clearly. (Excerpt from Roman Catholicism.)

---

REFORMED CATECHISMS

Lord’s Day 35 (Heidelberg Catechism, 1563)

96. Q. What does God require in the second commandment?
A. That we in no wise make any image of God, nor worship him in any other way than he has commanded in his word.

97. Q. May we, then, not make any image at all?
A. God neither can nor may be visibly represented in any way. As for creatures, though they may be visibly represented, yet God forbids us to make or have any likeness of them in order to worship them or serve God by them.

98. Q. But may not images be tolerated in the churches as books for the laity?
A. No; for we must not be wiser than God, who will not have his people taught by dumb images, but by the living preaching of his word.

Q. 109. What sins are forbidden in the second commandment?
A. The sins forbidden in the second commandment are, all devising, counseling, commanding, using, and any wise approving, any religious worship not instituted by God himself; the making any representation of God, of all or of any of the three persons, either inwardly in our mind, or outwardly in any kind of image or likeness of any creature whatsoever; all worshiping of it, or God in it or by it; the making of any representation of feigned deities, and all worship of them, or service belonging to them; all superstitious devices, corrupting the worship of God, adding to it, or taking from it, whether invented and taken up of ourselves, or received by tradition from others, though under the title of antiquity, custom, devotion, good intent, or any other pretense whatsoever; simony; sacrilege; all neglect, contempt, hindering, and opposing the worship and ordinances which God hath appointed. (Westminster Larger Catechism, 1647.)

---

Adapted from the Blue Banner 

https://www.all-of-grace.org/

Should We Make Images of Jesus?

The Relationship between
the Second Commandment and Images of Christ

The Following is a Brief listing of just some of the Reformed Evangelical witnesses that directly address the creation and use of pictures of Jesus, either in worship, decoration, art, or mental imagery. They are arranged in chronological order from the Reformation to the present day.

 

 (1561) The Second Helvetic Confession – Chapter IV (Of Idols or Images of God, Christ and The Saints)

Images of God. Since God as Spirit is in essence invisible and immense, he cannot really be expressed by any art or image. For this reason we have no fear pronouncing with Scripture that images of God are mere lies. Therefore we reject not only the idols of the Gentiles, but also the images of Christians. Although Christ assumed human nature, yet he did not on that account assume it in order to provide a model for carvers and painters. He denied that he had come to abolish the law and the prophets (Matt. 5:17). But images are forbidden by the law and the prophets (Deut. 4:15; Isa. 44:9). He denied that his bodily presence would be profitable for the Church, and promised that he would be near us by his Spirit forever (John 16:7). Who, therefore, would believe that a shadow or likeness of his body would contribute any benefit to the pious? (II Cor. 5:5). Since he abides in us by his Spirit, we are therefore the temple of God (II Cor. 3:16). But what agreement has the temple of God with idols? (II Cor. 6:16).

(1648) The Westminster Larger Catechism Q&A 109
Q109: What are the sins forbidden in the second commandment?
A109: The sins forbidden in the second commandment are, all devising,[1] counseling,[2] commanding,[3] using,[4] and anywise approving, any religious worship not instituted by God himself;[5] tolerating a false religion;[6] the making any representation of God, of all or of any of the three persons, either inwardly in our mind, or outwardly in any kind of image or likeness of any creature whatsoever;[7] all worshiping of it,[8] or God in it or by it;[9] the making of any representation of feigned deities,[10] and all worship of them, or service belonging to them;[11] all superstitious devices,[12] corrupting the worship of God,[13] adding to it, or taking from it,[14] whether invented and taken up of ourselves,[15] or received by tradition from others,[16] though under the title of antiquity,[17] custom,[18] devotion,[19] good intent, or any other pretense whatsoever;[20] simony;[21] sacrilege;[22] all neglect,[23] contempt,[24] hindering,[25] and opposing the worship and ordinances which God hath appointed.[26]

1. Num. 15:39	14. Deut. 4:2
2. Deut. 13:6-8	15. Psa. 106:39
3. Hosea 5:11; Micah 6:16	16. Matt. 15:9
4. I Kings 11:33; 12:33	17. I Peter 1:18
5. Deut. 12:30-32	18. Jer. 44:17
6. Deut. 13:6-12; Zech. 13:2-3; Rev. 2:2, 14-15, 20, Rev. 17:12, 16-17	19. Isa. 65:3-5; Gal. 1:13-14
7. Deut. 4:15-19; Acts 17:29; Rom. 1:21-23, 25	20. I Sam. 13:11-12; 15:21
8. Dan. 3:18; Gal. 4:8	21. Acts 8:18
9. Exod. 32:5	22. Rom. 2:22; Mal. 3:8
10. Exod. 32:8	23. Exod. 4:24-26
11. I Kings 18:26, 28; Isa. 65:11	24. Matt. 22:5; Mal. 1:7, 13
12. Acts 17:22; Col. 2:21-23	25. Matt. 23:13
13. Mal. 1:7-8, 14	26. Acts 13:44-45; I Thess. 2:15-16

 

(1674) Thomas Vincent, A Family Instructional Guide
“QUESTION 5: Is it not lawful to have images or pictures of God by us, so we do not worship them, nor God by them?
ANSWER: The images or pictures of God are an abomination, and utterly unlawful, because they debase God, and may be a cause of idolatrous worship.
QUESTION 6: Is it not lawful to have pictures of Jesus Christ, he being a man as well as God?
ANSWER: It is not lawful to have pictures of Jesus Christ, because his divine nature cannot be pictured at all; and because his body, as it is now glorified, cannot be pictured as it is; and because, if it do not stir up devotion, it is in vain; if it stir up devotion, it is a worshipping by an image or picture, and so a palpable breach of the second commandment.” [Thomas Vincent, A Family Instructional Guide]

(1679) John Owen, The Glory of Christ
Many there are who, not comprehending, not being affected with, that divine, spiritual description of the person of Christ which is given us by the Holy Ghost in the Scripture, do feign unto themselves false representations of him by images and pictures, so as to excite carnal and corrupt affections in their minds. By the help of their outward senses, they reflect on their imaginations the shape of a human body, cast into postures and circumstances dolorous or triumphant; and so, by the working of their fancy, raise a commotion of mind in themselves, which they suppose to be love unto Christ. But all these idols are teaches of lies. The true beauty and amiableness of the person of Christ, which is the formal object and cause of divine love, is so far from being represented herein, as that the mind is thereby wholly diverted from the contemplation of it. For no more can be so pictured unto us but what may belong unto a mere man, and what is arbitrarily referred unto Christ, not by faith, but by corrupt imagination.

The beauty of the person of Christ, as represented in the Scripture, consists in things invisible unto the eyes of flesh. They are such as no hand of man can represent or shadow. It is the eye of faith alone that can see this King in his beauty. What else can contemplate on the untreated glories of his divine nature? Can the hand of man represent the union of his natures in the same person, wherein he is peculiarly amiable? What eye can discern the mutual communications of the properties of his different natures in the same person, which depends thereon, whence it is that God laid down his life for us, and purchased his church with his own blood? In these things, O vain man! does the loveliness of the person of Christ unto the souls of believers consist, and not in those strokes of art which fancy has guided a skilful hand and pencil unto. And what eye of flesh can discern the inhabitation of the Spirit in all fulness in the human nature? Can his condescension, his love, his grace, his power, his compassion, his offices, his fitness and ability to save sinners, be deciphered on a tablet, or engraven on wood or stone? However such pictures may be adorned, however beautified and enriched, they are not that Christ which the soul of the spouse does love;­they are not any means of representing his love unto us, or of conveying our love unto him;­they only divert the minds of superstitious persons from the Son of God, unto the embraces of a cloud, composed of fancy and imagination.

Others there are who abhor these idols, and when they have so done, commit sacrilege. As they reject images, so they seem to do all love unto the person of Christ, distinct from other acts of obedience, as a fond imagination. But the most superstitious love unto Christ­that is, love acted in ways tainted with superstition­is better than none at all. But with what eyes do such persons read the Scriptures? With what hearts do they consider them? What do they conceive is the intention of the Holy Ghost in all those descriptions which he gives us of the person of Christ as amiable and desirable above all things, making wherewithal a proposal of him unto our affections­inciting us to receive him by faith, and to cleave unto him in love? yea, to what end is our nature endued with this affection­unto what end is the power of it renewed in us by the sanctification of the Holy Spirit­if it may not be fixed on this most proper and excellent object of it? This is the foundation of our love unto Christ namely, the revelation and proposal of him unto us in the Scripture as altogether lovely. The discovery that is made therein of the glorious excellencies and endowments of his person­of his love, his goodness, and grace­of his worth and work­is that which engageth the affections of believers unto him. It may be said, that if there be such a proposal of him made unto all promiscuously, then all would equally discern his amiableness and be affected with it, who assent equally unto the truth of that revelation. But it has always fallen out otherwise. In the days of his flesh, some that looked on him could see neither “ form nor comeliness ” in him Therefore he should be desired; others saw his glory­“ glory as of the only-begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth ”. To some he is precious; unto others he is disallowed and rejected­a stone which the builders refused, when others brought it forth, crying, “ Grace, grace unto it ” as the head of the corner. Some can see nothing but weakness in him; unto others the wisdom and power of God do evidently shine forth in him. Therefore it must be said, that notwithstanding that open, plain representation that is made of him in the Scripture, unless the holy Spirit gives us eyes to discern it, and circumcise our hearts by the cutting off corrupt prejudices and all effects of unbelief, implanting in them, by the efficacy of his grace, this blessed affection of love unto him, all these things will make no impression on our minds.

As it was with the people on the giving of the law, notwithstanding all the great and mighty works which God had wrought among them, yet having not given them “ a heart to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear ”­which he affirms that he had not done, Deut. 29:4, they were not moved unto faith or obedience by them; so is it in the preaching of the gospel. Notwithstanding all the blessed revelation that is made of the excellencies of the person of Christ therein, yet those into whose hearts God does not shine to give the knowledge of his glory in his face, can discern nothing of it, nor are their hearts affected with it.

We do not, therefore, in these things, follow “ cunningly-devised fables. ” We do not indulge unto our own fancies and imaginations;­ they are not unaccountable raptures or ecstasies which are pretended unto, nor such an artificial conjoining of thoughts as some ignorant of these things do boast that they can give an account of.

Our love to Christ ariseth alone from the revelation that is made of him in the Scripture is ingenerated, regulated, measured, and is to be judged thereby.

(1692) Thomas Watson, The Ten Commandments
If it is not lawful to make the image of God the Father, yet may we not make an image of Christ, who took upon him the nature of man?
No! Epiphanies, seeing an image of Christ hanging in a church, brake it in pieces. It is Christ’s Godhead, united to his manhood, that makes him to be Christ; therefore to picture his manhood, when we cannot picture his Godhead, is a sin, because we make him to be but half Christ – we separate what God has joined, we leave out that which is the chief thing which makes him to be Christ.

(1700) Wilhelmus A’Brakel, The Christian’s Reasonable Service
Question: Are men permitted to make images of God—that is, of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit—and of deceased saints, in order to worship and honor them, or to serve God and the saints by them?

We declare, on the contrary, that the making of images of the Trinity is absolutely forbidden. We neither know the spiritual nature of the angels nor the true physical appearance of Christ and the apostles. Thus, the images made of them are without resemblance, and it is vanity to make an image and say: That is Christ, that is Mary, that is Peter, etc. Yes, even if we had their true pictures, we may nevertheless not worship, honor, nor engage in any religious activity toward them. We may not honor Christ, Mary, Peter, and other saints in this manner. The question is twofold, and we shall refute each part individually.

In the first place, one may make no images of God whatsoever; that is, of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.

Firstly, this is absolutely forbidden in this commandment and in many other passages. Consider only the following passage: “Ye heard the voice of the words, but saw no similitude; take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves…lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female, the likeness of any beast that is on the earth, the likeness of any winged fowl that flieth in the air, the likeness of any thing that creepeth on the ground, the likeness of any fish that is in the waters beneath the earth: and lest thou lift up thine eyes unto heaven, and when thou seest the sun, and the moon, and the stars, even all the host of heaven, shouldest be driven to worship them, and serve them, which the LORD thy God hath divided unto all nations under the whole heaven” (Deut. 4:12, 15–19). Who then, while believing the Word of God, would be so bold to act blatantly contrary to this and make images of God—a practice clearly forbidden?

Secondly, God cannot be depicted and it is therefore God’s will that such ought not to occur. “To whom then will ye liken God? or what likeness will ye compare unto Him?” (Isa. 40:18).

Thirdly, it highly dishonors God. “And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things” (Rom. 1:23). The Papists readily imitate this. They depict God the Father in the appearance of a man, that is, of an old man; God the Son in the appearance of a four–footed beast, that is, of a lamb; and God the Holy Spirit in the appearance of a bird, that is, a dove. They thus dishonor God as the heathen do.

Fourthly, it corrupts man. “Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves…lest ye corrupt yourselves” (Deut. 4:15–16). For this prompts man to think of God—who is a Spirit, and who must be served in Spirit—in physical terms.
…
Objection #2: Both the images of God and of the saints have educational value .
Answer:
(1) God has nevertheless forbidden this. This is pagan thinking and we should not pretend it to be beneficial, since it is forbidden.
(2) God will not have us taught by dumb images, but by His Word. “Thy testimonies also are my delight and my counsellors. Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path” (Ps. 119:24, 105).

(1753) Ebenezer Erskine and James Fisher, The Assembly’s Shorter Catechism Explained, By Way of Question and Answer
Q. 9. May we not have a picture of Christ, who has a true body?
A. By no means; because, though he has a true body and a reasonable soul, John 1:14, yet his human nature subsists in his divine person, which no picture can represent, Psalm 45:2.

Q. 10. Why ought all pictures of Christ to be abominated by Christians?
A. Because they are downright lies, representing no more than the picture of a mere man: whereas, the true Christ is God-man; “Immanuel, God with us,” 1 Tim. 3:16; Matt. 1:23.

(1949) J.G. Vos (son of Geerhardus Vos) Commentary on the Westminster Larger Catechism
2. Is it wrong to make paintings or pictures of our Savior Jesus Christ? According to the Larger Catechism, this is certainly wrong, for the catechism interprets the second commandment as forbidding the making of any representation of any of the three persons of the Trinity, which would certainly include Jesus Christ, the second person of the Trinity, God the Son. While pictures of Jesus are extremely common in the present day, we should realize that in Calvinistic circles this is a relatively modern development. Our forefathers at the time of the Reformation, and for perhaps 300 years afterward, scrupulously refrained, as a matter of principle, from sanctioning or making use of pictures of Jesus Christ. Such pictures are so common in the present day, and so few people have conscientious objections to them, that; it is practically impossible to obtain any Sabbath School helps or Bible story; material for children that is free of such pictures. The American Bible Society is to be commended for its decision that the figure of the Savior may not appear in Bible motion pictures issued by the Society.

3. What attitude should we adopt in view of the present popularity of pictures of Jesus Christ? The following considerations may be suggested as bearing on this question: (a) The Bible presents no information whatever about the personal appearance of Jesus Christ, but it does teach that we are not to think of him as he may have appeared “in the days of his flesh,” but as he is today in heavenly glory, in his estate of exaltation (2 Cor. 5:46). (b) Inasmuch as the Bible presents no data about the personal appearance of our Savior, all artists’ pictures of him are wholly imaginary and constitute only the artists’ ideas of his character and appearance. (c) Unquestionably pictures of the Savior have been very greatly influenced by the theological viewpoint of the artist. The typical modem picture of Jesus is the product of nineteenth-century “Liberalism” and presents a “gentle Jesus” who emphasized only the love and Fatherhood of God and said little or nothing about sin, judgment, and eternal punishment. (d) Perhaps more people living today have derived their ideas of Jesus Christ from these typically “liberal” pictures of Jesus than have derived their ideas of Jesus from the Bible itself. Such people inevitably think of Jesus as a human person, rather than thinking of him according to the biblical teaching as a divine person with a human nature. The inevitable effect of the popular acceptance of pictures of Jesus is to overemphasize his humanity and to forget or neglect his deity (which of course no picture can portray). (e) In dealing with an evil so widespread and almost universally accepted, we should bear a clear testimony against what we believe to be wrong, but we should not expect any sudden change in Christian sentiment on this question. It will require many years of education in scriptural principles before the churches and their members can be brought back to the high position of the Westminster Assembly on this question. Patience will be required.

4. Are not pictures of Jesus legitimate provided they are not worshiped or used as “aids to worship”? As interpreted by the Westminster Assembly, the second commandment certainly forbids all representations of any of the persons of the Trinity, and this coupled with the truth taught in the Westminster Standards that Christ is a divine person with a human nature taken into union with himself, and not a human person, would imply that it is wrong to make pictures of Jesus Christ for any purpose whatever. Of course, there is a difference between using pictures of Jesus to illustrate children’s Bible story books or lessons, and using pictures of Jesus in worship as Roman Catholics use them. Admittedly the former is not an evil in the same class with the latter. In spite of this distinction, however, there are good reasons for holding that our forefathers of the Reformation were right in opposing all pictorial representation of the Savior. We should realize that the popularity – even the almost unchallenged prevalence – of a particular practice does not prove that it is right. To prove that a practice is right we must show that it is in harmony with the commands and principles revealed in the Word of God. Merely showing that a practice is common, is useful, or seems to have good results does not prove it is right.

(1961) Prof. John Murray, Pictures of Christ
“Secondly, pictures of Christ are in principle a violation of the second commandment. A picture of Christ, if it serves any useful purpose, must evoke some thought or feeling respecting him and, in view of what he is, this thought or feeling will be worshipful. We cannot avoid making the picture a medium of worship. But since the materials for this medium of worship are not derived from the only revelation we possess respecting Jesus, namely, Scripture, the worship is constrained by a creation of the human mind that has no revelatory warrant. This is will-worship. For the principle of the second commandment is that we are to worship God only in ways prescribed and authorized by him. It is a grievous sin to have worship constrained by a human figment, and that is what a picture of the Saviour involves.”

(1970) G.I. Williamson, The Shorter Catechism For Study Classes
The second commandment is broken when men attempt to make a graven image or a picture of the Lord Jesus Christ. The Bible teaches us that there is one God. It teaches us to worship the three persons, the father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, as one God, the same in substance, equal in power and glory. But Paul tells us that we “ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone graven by art and man’s device” (Acts 17:29)…

There was a time when the Protestants recognized this evil. They saw the images in the Roman Catholic Church and they understood that this was a violation of the second commandment. They realized that this was wrong – this making of images and likenesses of Christ – even though the Roman Catholic Church was careful to say that it did not want people to worship these images, but only to worship the Lord through these images. But now, it seems, many Protestants have accepted the Roman Catholic position. They may not realize this. And they may still think, in their minds, that there is an important difference between a statue (image) and a picture (likeness). But the commandment recognizes no such difference. It forbids us to make any likeness, just as it forbids us to make any image, of the Lord.

(1973) J.I. Packer, Knowing God, Chapter 4
What does the word idolatry suggest to your mind? Savages groveling before a totem pole? Cruel–faced statues in Hindu temples? The dervish dance of the priests of Baal around Elijah’s altar? These things are certainly idolatrous, in a very obvious way; but we need to realize that there are more subtle forms of idolatry as well.

Look at the second commandment. It runs as follows, “You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God” ( Ex 20:4–5 ). What is this commandment talking about?

If it stood alone, it would be natural to suppose that it refers to the worship of images of gods other than Jehovah­the Babylonian idol worship, for instance, which Isaiah derided ( Is 44:9–20 ; 46:6–7 ), or the paganism of the Greco–Roman world of Paul’s day, of which he wrote in Romans 1:23 , 25 that they “exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles. . . . They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator.” But in its context the second commandment can hardly be referring to this sort of idolatry, for if it were it would simply be repeating the thought of the first commandment without adding anything to it.

Accordingly, we take the second commandment­as in fact it has always been taken­as pointing us to the principle that (to quote Charles Hodge) “idolatry consists not only in the worship of false gods, but also in the worship of the true God by images.” In its Christian application, this means that we are not to make use of visual or pictorial representations of the triune God, or of any person of the Trinity, for the purposes of Christian worship. The commandment thus deals not with the object of our worship, but with the manner of it; what it tells us is that statues and pictures of the One whom we worship are not to be used as an aid to worshiping him.

The Dangers in Images:
It may seem strange at first sight that such a prohibition should find a place among the ten basic principles of biblical religion, for at first sight it does not seem to have much point. What harm is there, we ask, in the worshiper’s surrounding himself with statues and pictures, if they help him to lift his heart to God?

We are accustomed to treating the question of whether these things should be used or not as a matter of temperament and personal taste. We know that some people have crucifixes and pictures of Christ in their rooms, and they tell us that looking at these objects helps them to focus their thoughts on Christ when they pray. We know that many claim to be able to worship more freely and easily in churches that are filled with such ornaments than they can in churches that are bare of them. Well, we say, what is wrong with that? What harm can these things do? If people really do find them helpful, what more is there to be said? What point can there be in prohibiting them? In the face of this perplexity, some would suggest that the second commandment applies only to immoral and degrading representations of God, borrowed from pagan cults, and to nothing more.

But the very wording of the commandment rules out such a limiting exposition. God says quite categorically, “Thou shalt not make any likeness of any thing” for use in worship. This categorical statement rules out not simply the use of pictures and statues which depict God as an animal, but also the use of pictures and statues which depict him as the highest created thing we know­a human. It also rules out the use of pictures and statues of Jesus Christ as a man, although Jesus himself was and remains man; for all pictures and statues are necessarily made after the “likeness” of ideal manhood as we conceive it, and therefore come under the ban which the commandment imposes.

Historically, Christians have differed as to whether the second commandment forbids the use of pictures of Jesus for purposes of teaching and instruction (in Sunday–school classes, for instance), and the question is not an easy one to settle; but there is no room for doubting that the commandment obliges us to dissociate our worship, both in public and in private, from all pictures and statues of Christ, no less than from pictures and statues of his Father.

But what, in that case, is the point of this comprehensive prohibition? From the emphasis given to the commandment itself, with the frightening sanction attached to it (the proclaiming of God’s jealousy, and his severity in punishing transgressors), one would suppose that this must really be a matter of crucial importance. But is it?

The answer is yes. The Bible shows us that the glory of God and the spiritual well–being of humans are both directly bound up with it. Two lines of thought are set before us which together amply explain why this commandment should have been stressed so emphatically. These lines of thought relate, not to the real or supposed helpfulness of images, but to the truth of them. They are as follows:

1. Images dishonor God, for they obscure his glory . The likeness of things in heaven (sun, moon, stars), and in earth (people, animals, birds, insects), and in the sea (fish, mammals, crustaceans), is precisely not a likeness of their Creator. “A true image of God,” wrote Calvin, “is not to be found in all the world; and hence . . . His glory is defiled, and His truth corrupted by the lie, whenever He is set before our eyes in a visible form. . . .Therefore, to devise any image of God is itself impious; because by this corruption His majesty is adulterated, and He is figured to be other than He is.”

The point here is not just that an image represents God as having body and parts, whereas in reality he has neither. If this were the only ground of objection to images, representations of Christ would be blameless. But the point really goes much deeper. The heart of the objection to pictures and images is that they inevitably conceal most, if not all, of the truth about the personal nature and character of the divine Being whom they represent.

To illustrate: Aaron made a golden calf (that is, a bull–image). It was meant as a visible symbol of Jehovah, the mighty God who had brought Israel out of Egypt. No doubt the image was thought to honor him, as being a fitting symbol of his great strength. But it is not hard to see that such a symbol in fact insults him, for what idea of his moral character, his righteousness, goodness and patience could one gather from looking at a statue of him as a bull? Thus Aaron’s image hid Jehovah’s glory.

In a similar way, the pathos of the crucifix obscures the glory of Christ, for it hides the fact of his deity, his victory on the cross, and his present kingdom. It displays his human weakness, but it conceals his divine strength; it depicts the reality of his pain, but keeps out of our sight the reality of his joy and his power. In both these cases, the symbol is unworthy most of all because of what it fails to display. And so are all other visible representations of deity.

Whatever we may think of religious art from a cultural standpoint, we should not look to pictures of God to show us his glory and move us to worship; for his glory is precisely what such pictures can never show us. And this is why God added to the second commandment a reference to himself as “jealous” to avenge himself on those who disobey him: for God’s “jealousy” in the Bible is his zeal to maintain his own glory, which is jeopardized when images are used in worship.

In Isaiah 40:18 , after vividly declaring God’s immeasurable greatness, the Scripture asks us: “To whom, then, will you compare God? What image will you compare him to?” The question does not expect an answer, only a chastened silence. Its purpose is to remind us that it is as absurd as it is impious to think that an image modeled, as images must be, upon some creature could be an acceptable likeness of the Creator.

Nor is this the only reason why we are forbidden to use images in worship.

2. Images mislead us, for they convey false ideas about God . The very inadequacy with which they represent him perverts our thoughts of him and plants in our minds errors of all sorts about his character and will.

Aaron, by making an image of God in the form of a bull–calf, led the Israelites to think of him as a Being who could be worshiped acceptably by frenzied debauchery. Hence the “festival to the Lord ” which Aaron organized ( Ex 32:5 ) became a shameful orgy. Again, it is a matter of historical fact that the use of the crucifix as an aid to prayer has encouraged people to equate devotion with brooding over Christ’s bodily sufferings; it has made them morbid about the spiritual value of physical pain, and it has kept them from knowledge of the risen Savior.

These examples show how images will falsify the truth of God in the minds of men. Psychologically, it is certain that if you habitually focus your thoughts on an image or picture of the One to whom you are going to pray, you will come to think of him, and pray to him, as the image represents him. Thus you will in this sense “bow down” and “worship” your image; and to the extent to which the image fails to tell the truth about God, to that extent you will fail to worship God in truth. That is why God forbids you and me to make use of images and pictures in our worship.

Molten Images and Mental Images:
The realization that images and pictures of God affect our thoughts of God points to a further realm in which the prohibition of the second commandment applies. Just as it forbids us to manufacture molten images of God, so it forbids us to dream up mental images of him. Imagining God in our heads can be just as real a breach of the second commandment as imagining him by the work of our hands.

How often do we hear this sort of thing: “I like to think of God as the great Architect (or Mathematician or Artist).” “I don’t think of God as a Judge; I like to think of him simply as a Father.” We know from experience how often remarks of this kind serve as the prelude to a denial of something that the Bible tells us about God. It needs to be said with the greatest possible emphasis that those who hold themselves free to think of God as they like are breaking the second commandment. At best, they can only think of God in the image of man­as an ideal man, perhaps, or a superman. But God is not any sort of man. We were made in his image, but we must not think of him as existing in ours. To think of God in such terms is to be ignorant of him, not to know him.

All speculative theology, which rests on philosophical reasoning rather than biblical revelation, is at fault here. Paul tells us where this sort of theology ends: “The world by wisdom knew not God” ( 1 Cor 1:21 KJV). To follow the imagination of one’s heart in the realm of theology is the way to remain ignorant of God, and to become an idol–worshipper­the idol in this case being a false mental image of God, made by one’s own speculation and imagination.

In this light, the positive purpose of the second commandment becomes plain. Negatively, it is a warning against ways of worship and religious practice that lead us to dishonor God and to falsify his truth. Positively, it is a summons to us to recognize that God the Creator is transcendent, mysterious and inscrutable, beyond the range of any imagining or philosophical guesswork of which we are capable­and hence a summons to us to humble ourselves, to listen and learn of him, and to let him teach us what he is like and how we should think of him.

“For my thoughts are not your thoughts,” God tells us; “neither are your ways my ways,” for “as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts” ( Is 55:8–9 ). Paul speaks in the same vein: “Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out! Who has known the mind of the Lord?” ( Rom 11:33–34 ).

God is not the sort of person that we are; his wisdom, his aims, his scale of values, his mode of procedure differ so vastly from our own that we cannot possibly guess our way to them by intuition or infer them by analogy from our notion of ideal manhood. We cannot know him unless he speaks and tells us about himself.

But in fact he has spoken. He has spoken to and through his prophets and apostles, and he has spoken in the words and deeds of his own Son. Through this revelation, which is made available to us in holy Scripture, we may form a true notion of God; without it we never can. Thus it appears that the positive force of the second commandment is that it compels us to take our thoughts of God from his own holy Word, and from no other source whatsoever.

That this is the commandment’s positive thrust seems plain from the very form in which it is stated. Having forbidden the making and worshiping of images, God declares himself jealous; he will punish not image worshipers as such but all who “hate him,” in the sense of disregarding his commandments as a whole.

The natural and expected thing in the context would be a specific threat to image–users; why, instead, is God’s threat generalized? Surely this is in order to make us realize that those who make images and use them in worship, and thus inevitably take their theology from them, will in fact tend to neglect God’s revealed will at every point. The mind that takes up with images is a mind that has not yet learned to love and attend to God’s Word. Those who look to manmade images, material or mental, to lead them to God are not likely to take any part of his revelation as seriously as they should.

In Deuteronomy 4 , Moses himself expounds the prohibition of images in worship along exactly these lines, setting the making of images in opposition to the heeding of God’s word and commandments as if these two things were completely exclusive of each other. He reminds the people that at Sinai, though they saw tokens of God’s presence, they saw no visible representation of God himself, but only heard his word, and he exhorts them to continue to live, as it were, at the foot of the mount, with God’s own word ringing in their ears to direct them and no supposed image of God before their eyes to distract them.

The point is clear. God did not show them a visible symbol of himself, but spoke to them; therefore they are not now to seek visible symbols of God, but simply to obey his Word. If it be said that Moses was afraid of the Israelites borrowing designs for images from the idolatrous nations around them, our reply is that undoubtedly he was, and this is exactly the point: all manmade images of God, whether molten or mental, are really borrowings from the stock–in–trade of a sinful and ungodly world, and are bound therefore to be out of accord with God’s own holy Word. To make an image of God is to take one’s thoughts of him from a human source, rather than from God himself; and this is precisely what is wrong with image–making.

Looking to the True God:
The question which arises for us all from the line of thought which we have been pursuing is this: How far are we keeping the second commandment? Granted, there are no bull–images in the churches we attend, and probably we have not got a crucifix in the house (though we may have some pictures of Christ on our walls that we ought to think twice about); but are we sure that the God whom we seek to worship is the God of the Bible, the triune Jehovah? Do we worship the one true God in truth? Or are our ideas of God such that in reality we do not believe in the Christian God, but in some other, just as the Muslim or Jew or Jehovah’s Witness does not believe in the Christian God, but in some other?

You may say, how can I tell? Well, the test is this. The God of the Bible has spoken in his Son. The light of the knowledge of his glory is given to us in the face of Jesus Christ. Do I look habitually to the person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ as showing me the final truth about the nature and the grace of God? Do I see all the purposes of God as centering upon him?

If I have been enabled to see this, and in mind and heart to go to Calvary and lay hold of the Calvary solution, then I can know that I truly worship the true God, and that he is my God, and that I am even now enjoying eternal life, according to our Lord’s own definition, “Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent” ( Jn 17:3 ).

(1993) J.I. Packer – Additional Note
A steady trickle of letters over the years has urged that my dissuasive from using images of God for didactic or devotional purposes goes too far. Does it?

Three arguments are brought against it. First, the worship of God requires Christian aesthetic expression through the visual arts no less than it requires Christian moral expression through family love and neighbor love. Second, imagination is part of human nature as God made it and should be sanctified and expressed, rather than stigmatized and suppressed, in our communion with our Creator. Third, images (crucifixes, icons, statues, pictures of Jesus) do in fact trigger devotion, which would be weaker without them.

The principle of the first argument is surely right, but it needs to be rightly applied. Symbolic art can serve worship in many ways, but the second commandment still forbids anything that will be thought of as a representational image of God. If paintings, drawings and statues of Jesus, the incarnate Son, were always viewed as symbols of human perfection within the culture that produced them (white–faced Anglo–Saxon, black–faced African, yellow–faced Chinese or whatever), rather than as suggesting what Jesus actually looked like, no harm would be done. But since neither children nor unsophisticated adults view them in this way we shall in my opinion be wiser to do without them.

The principle of the second argument is also right, but the biblical way to apply it is to harness our verbal and visual imagination to the task of appreciating the drama and marvel of God’s historical doings, as is done in the Prophets and the Psalms and the book of Revelation, rather than to fly in the face of the second commandment by constructing static and seemingly representational images of him.

As for the third argument, the problem is that as soon as the images are treated as representational rather than symbolic, they begin to corrupt the devotion they trigger. Since it is hard for us humans to avoid this pitfall, wisdom counsels once more that the better, safer way is to learn to do without them. Some risks are not worth taking. [Packer, J.I. Knowing God., Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1996, c1973.]

(2004) Andrew Webb – Final Thoughts
To the arguments that are made above, I would add this pragmatic argument against making pictures of Jesus that I find particularly compelling.

Jesus is the Lord of the Nations. In Him the middle wall of separation is decisively broken down and “there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcised nor uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave nor free.” When we make a picture of Christ we inevitably portray him as representative of one race or another. Mel Gibson’s Jesus, for instance, is obviously very white. We have once again created a false Jesus that one race can feel comfortable with. He is “one of us.” While this is comforting to members of that particular race, it is inevitably irritating to people of other cultures and can actually be a barrier to communicating the gospel to other nations and races. As a result of all the images of the Scandinavian Hippy that westerners have called Jesus, there has been an inevitable backlash and now images of Asian, Middle-Eastern, African, etc. Jesus’ are being demanded, and these counter-images offend many Westerners. “That’s not Jesus!” they angrily proclaim, because they know what Jesus looks like – they’ve been seeing images of him since they were children. He’s tall, and blond, has a beard and a vaguely sorrowful expression.

The sad thing about this whole argument over what Jesus looked like is that it is so needless. The Apostolic church turned the whole world upside-down via the preaching of the Gospel. Not once did they use pictures of Jesus. What would Peter or Paul say coming into one of our churches and seeing one of our many images of Jesus? Obviously they wouldn’t recognize it as the image of the Savior they knew. Wouldn’t they assume that this was yet another example of the kind of Hellenistic idolatry they were so familiar, “Men of America, I perceive that in all things you are very religious…” Aren’t we best served proclaiming the gospel of a Christ who is too glorious to be portrayed as a mere man from any one race?

Posted on December 11, 2015 by Andrew Webb

https://biblebased.wordpress.com/