Skip to content

0 thoughts on “My new favourite painting

  1. woldeyesus

    Mine is the XIV STATION OF THE THE CROSS in the church at Rennes le Chateau in the south of France.

    The image is adorned in an eccentric and enigmatic manner: the moon is shown as having reason, night has fallen, the Passover has begun. No one of the Jewish faith would be handling a dead body at this time.This image then is depicting, still living, being carried out of his tomb rather than into it.

    What great secret was the priest of this church revealing?
    (Source: Maichael Baigent, THE JESUS PAPERS, p. 51)

    The reason why this is my favorite painting is found in "the kind of death Jesus suffered" which Christianity has suppressed (John 12: 32-33)

  2. Si Hollett

    So what you are saying woldeyesus (in possibly the least criptic comment you've ever made) is that Paul is lying when he said "that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures." - you seem to suggest that they tried to bury him, but he was already raised in defiance of the scriptures - as has been pointed out a few weeks ago.

    I don't get how the 14th station, which depicts the burial of Jesus, is where to find "the kind of death Jesus suffered" - that's station 12, which shows the crucifixion, which is what all the "lifted up" stuff is referring to. I really don't think Christianity has suppressed that.

    And if there's a top secret resurrection of Jesus on Friday night, like you have suggested in the past, then it was so secret that Jesus either didn't know about it, or didn't tell his disciples about it, misdirecting them constantly with "third day" talk. It's not that Christianity has suppressed this (at least no more than Jesus himself), it's that Christianity hasn't heard of this other than from wackjob conspiracy theorists like Baigent.

    Also, I looked up that picture - how did Jesus get to France (as that's where the picture appears to be set) to be pulled out of the tomb?

  3. John B

    It's so difficult to narrow it down to just one painting. Of paintings of the Passion, I'd say that Caravaggio's The Entombent of Christ is my favorite. As an overall choice for favorite painting, I'd go with Gauguin's Where Do We Come From? What Are We? Where Are We Going?.

  4. woldeyesus

    Si Hollett,

    The priest in the church at Rennes le Chateau has preserved artistically the EMMAUS ROAD LESSON on the Messiah's "suffering-glory" continuum as foretold in the Law of Moses, the writings of the prophets and the Psalms leading to personal knowledge of God for all. (Luke 24: 13-53)

  5. Si Hollett

    Can you say that again, in English? Your religious language (not just jargon, but the way you say it to make you sound holier-than-thou) means that most of your comments are impenetrable.

    I can't see where the Emmaus Road lessons come in - Jesus doesn't seem to be talking, and there's no OT passages referred to in the painting (not least because there's no references to a secret resurrection, let alone one in France).

    What the priest in Rennes le Chateau has done is thrown the Bible out the window and stoked the fires of conspiracy theorists in a self-serving move. He's preserved artistically little more than a fantasy in his head for his own glory.

  6. woldeyesus

    The great secret the priest was freely communicating, with artistic license, is how "the Messiah, the Son of the living God" was defined by his death on the cross according to the Scriptures, just as Jesus said he would be and did too!

    I don't know how this sounds like "holier than thou" unless theologians (if you are one of them) want to do all the talking!

  7. Si Hollett

    Your first and third (most recent) comments in this thread have been readable, the second was in what I consider to be 'standard-woldeyesus-speak' that is very difficult, if at all possible, to understand. Such impenetrability certainly comes across as holier-than-thou (look at me, I use the buzzwords and jargon and thus am better than you). You might get weird writing styles like that out of the more ivory tower set of theologians.

    How does this painting communicate what you say it does? I can't see it - neither looking at it, reading your comments on it, reading others' comments on it. It says next to nothing about Jesus' death, other than it happened (briefly) - surely station 12 images around the world, and other similar art show it much better? They at least have a dead Jesus and a cross - this painting has neither.

    It could be considered artistic license to have it set in France, and the darkness and night-time setting are common artistic tools to show that this is a sad event - which the burial of Jesus would be. However that it's strange men removing a live Jesus from a tomb, rather than people who've appeared before in the images laying a dead Jesus in a tomb is going beyond artistic license and denying the Scriptures. The conspiracy theories that have been fuelled by the picture certainly reject Jesus, putting a fake one in his place.

  8. woldeyesus

    The deep secret truth artistically depicted in the "XIV Station of the Cross" is Christ's survival of the crucifixion as per the applicable laws of God's self-revelation in terms of immortality and "life-giving Spirit" developed in the following "THE SUFFERING-GLORY CONTINUUM":

    1) "The tree of life" (Gen. 2: 8-9);

    2) "A flame coming from the middle of a bush on fire but not burning up", a.k.a., self-sufficient fire, in personal introduction to Moses (Ex. 3: 1-15);

    3) "The lifting up of the bronze snake on a pole in the desert (Num. 21: 4-9)applied for healing of deadly snake bites;

    4) The terms and seal of the "new covenant" for salvation of the world (Jer. 31: 31-34; Matt. 26: 26-29, 64).

    Therefore, the XIV Station of the Cross artistically promotes the power of salvation resident in Christ's death on the cross! (Ibid, 27: 50-56)

  9. Si Hollett

    You talk about Jesus surviving the crucifixion in one breath, then death on the cross in the next. Make your mind up - did Jesus actually die on the cross?

    Also, why does Jesus talk about 'after three days' and 'on the third day' (Mark 8:31, 9:31, 10:34, Matt 12:40, 16:21, 17:23, 20:19, 26:61, Luke 9:22, 18:33, 24:7, 24:46, John 2:19)? It's rather frequent, and some of them are on the Road to Emmaus.

  10. woldeyesus

    Of course, Jesus physically died on the cross by his own free will and power.

    Why? Because there is no better way for man's conclusive knowledge of the divine Jesus Christ without the death of the human (John 19: 30-37).

    The question of why Jesus talked about 'after three days' and 'on the third day' is as enigmatic as why God made "the tree that gives knowledge of what is good and what is bad" together with "the tree that gives life" (Gen. 2:9).

    One suggestion is to test of man's obedience essential in prayer and true worship.

    (P.S. Si Hollett, many thanks for all your highly instructive questions!)

  11. John B

    Hi woldeyesus,

    If I'm following you here, you're saying that Jesus died on the cross, and was resurrected soon after, prior to any supposed burial. You see all of the references to resurrection on the third day, as figurative, and beyond human understanding. You say that the church has kept secret and suppressed the truth about this early resurrection, by a too literal reading of the accounts of Jesus' burial and resurrection in Scripture.

    What do you think is the church's motive for suppressing this truth?

  12. woldeyesus

    The motive for the church's apostasy significantly coincides with "Satan's disguise of himself to look like an angel of light" (Matt. 16: 21-23; 2 Cor. 11: 1-15) on the very day Paradise was regained with full access to the "tree of life" when Jesus declared "It is finished". (Luke 23: 40-43; 19: 30-37)

  13. John B

    woldeyesus, so, as I understand you, the church suppresses the truth of Jesus' resurrection prior to his burial by its adherence to an overly literal reading of the Gospel accounts; and their motive for doing so is because they are in league with Satan.

    The passage in Matthew 16 that you cite says that Jesus likened Peter to Satan when he objected to the foretelling of the crucifixion and resurrection on the third day.

    The Scriptures give no account of the moment of Jesus' resurrection. The church proclaims his resurrection on the third day, because this is what Jesus said, and because the first appearance of the risen Jesus was on the third day.

    I can see a good possibility that Jesus' speaking of the third day is figurative. The church historically doesn't oppose this idea at all. In fact, following Scripture, they weren't precise about the moment of the Resurrection. The Resurrection is the heart of the Christian faith. So we proclaim our belief by complete reliance on the witness of Scripture. We should meditate and ponder on God's word, but we can't view our speculations as doctrine. I think the church has done right to adhere strictly to the apostolic witness as passed down to us in the Scriptures; even though in our current day this view seems wooden and naive to many.

    It seems to me that what you've termed "apostasy" is the church's view about the moment of the Resurrection, which may allow for a difference from your own view on the precise time by up to 36 hours. If you're right, how do you think that Satan might use this untruth (or perhaps it's more accurate to say, imprecision).

  14. woldeyesus

    All the promises of personal knowledge of God to all (including eternal life) were literally fulfilled in Christ's death on the cross.

    As such, there is full account in the Scriptures of the very moment of Jesus Christ's resurrection proper including its power to give new life, to author/sustain faith, to open a "new way, a living way" of worship, to support growth in his grace and knowledge, ad infinitum.

    Resurrection on the third day, on the other hand, offers absolutely nothing except authority to men!

  15. John B

    woldeyesus, so, it seems that you're saying that the crucifixion and the resurrection are the same event. I was hoping for something more, but this is just another variation of an increasingly popular modernist viewpoint. (In a previous thread, I thought that you sounded quite Wesleyan; now, I'm thinking that you're sounding like Pope Benedict XVI.) Since Vatican II, many Catholic churches have exchanged the crucifix for a cross with an image of the risen Christ on it.

    So, what is it about resurrection on the third day that makes it more of a power grab than the modernist view held by you and the Pope?

    “…we could regard the Resurrection as something akin to a radical
    ‘evolutionary leap’, in which a new dimension of life emerges, a new dimension of human existence.” ~Pope Benedict XVI, in Jesus of Nazareth

  16. woldeyesus

    At the words, "It is finished!" (John 19:30), God has made a full circle: back to Genesis 2: 7-17 to resume his work of creation of all men in his image (John 3: 1-15) complete with man's freedom of choice. That is all!

  17. John B

    woldeyesus, said like a true pontiff, speaking infallibly, ex cathedra!

    Christ is risen from the dead.

    Then the other disciple, who had reached the tomb first, also went in, and he saw and believed; for as yet they did not understand the Scripture, that he must rise from the dead.(John 20:8-9)

  18. woldeyesus

    No one can speak infallibly, in his own right, except "the one true God", a.k.a., JESUS CHRIST in his transferrable "kind of death he suffered", i.e., immortality (eternal life).

    Therefore, I cannot praise the LORD enough. God bless you all!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Twitter widget by Rimon Habib - BuddyPress Expert Developer