Obviously, care should be taken in this area, but the general rule I follow is: if it was a symbol in the Bible, even a symbol of God's presence, and not a symbol of God, per se, then depicting it should not be objectionable. Otherwise then we shouldn't try to imagine the tabernacle and temple, and many many other things, which were designed to be seen in those days; and a right understanding of them would rather (I say) encourage us to imagine them ourselves.

If the picture or symbol of a lamb is to put us in mind of the OT lambs, I say "fine;" it is a symbol of a symbol. But if meant to put us in mind of Christ, "this is THE Lamb," then I might be more likely to object, although I prefer to err on the side of charity and not take offense.

A picture of the Angel of the Lord, or the Spirit descending as a dove, the man Christ Jesus, etc., these should be avoided. But I don't feel the same about the burning bush, smoking firepot, pillar of cloud/fire, Sinai wreathed in darkness--all indicative of God's presence, but not forms of God. The latter spoke of God somewhat indirectly, rather than of his essence.

(In worship, there should be no deliberate visuals not directed by God--i.e., nothing besides water, bread and wine.)

__________________
Rev. Bruce G. Buchanan
ChainOLakes Presbyterian Church, CentralLake, MI


When posting friends, kindly bear those words of earthly wisdom in mind:
Oh, that God the gift would give us
To see ourselves as others see us.
--Robert Burns, 1786 (modernized) ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions? --