Move over...Mickey Mantel

Make room for Mike Hearth.

So... How long before there is a plaque for Billy Crystal?

This reminds me of a old trick trivia question.

"Who are the only two (now three) Cardinals to have plaques at Yankee Stadium?"

Maury, I have to assume that you deliberately misspelled Mantle's name just to get our attention. Please tell me that I'm right about this.

I once saw a small classified ad that offered "old baseball cards" of "Willy Mays, Micky Mantel, and Duke Snyder." That was one hell of a Golden Sombrero.

Mickey? The Knights of Columbus? When does Milt "The Stilt" Finkel get his plaque?

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 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.

That allows for anything walking on the earth, I think.

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.

Merriam-Webster on-line

Graven image
: an object of worship carved usually from wood or stone : idol

I can guarantee no one is going to be worshipping Benedict's plaque.

Also from Merriam-Webster on-line:

Or
used as a function word to indicate an alternative <coffee or tea><sink or swim>

That allows for anything walking on the earth, I think.

"In" the earth, in this context, doesn't mean "underground", any more than "in the water under the earth" means "in aquifers".

But in any case, even if you ignore that, then they sure better take that plaque down once the current pope is dead and buried.

That allows for anything walking on the earth, I think.

The general interpretation of that is that you can make statues or representations, as long as you don't worship 'em.

Also from Merriam-Webster on-line:
Or
used as a function word to indicate an alternative <coffee or tea><sink or swim>

So you're saying all pictures, sculptures or represenations, of anything, are banned by the 10 commandments?

The general interpretation of that is that you can make statues or representations, as long as you don't worship 'em.

Unfortunately for the general (a.k.a. "convenient") explanation, the "worship" part is confined to the first half of the sentence, which is split by an "or".

So you're saying all pictures, sculptures or represenations, of anything, are banned by the 10 commandments?

No. Just those of non-imaginary things.

Unfortunately for the general (a.k.a. "convenient") explanation, the "worship" part is confined to the first half of the sentence, which is split by an "or".

Only in the King James translation, which is hardly the definitive text.

From the NRSV -

You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

So you're saying all pictures, sculptures or represenations, of anything, are banned by the 10 commandments?
No. Just those of non-imaginary things.

That's a bizarre interpretation which has never been followed by Jews or Christians.

"In" the earth, in this context, doesn't mean "underground", any more than "in the water under the earth" means "in aquifers".

Worms and moles are O.K. then! 8-)

No. Just those of non-imaginary things.

Cthulhu is O.K. then! 8-)

1. There is no such thing as "the definitive text". The KJV, however, is "the definitive text for a lot of Christians", including a lot of those who interpret things in the most absurdly literal ways.

2. Bizarre? Yes. The Bible has a lot of bizarre stuff.

3. Never been followed by Jews or Christians? Perhaps. I don't know if that's actually true or not, but perhaps. I suspect that "not followed by large numbers of Jews or Christians, especially in recent centuries" is more accurate. In any case, it is closer to the way that many flavors of Islam behave regarding these rules. And there are lots of things in the Bible that (especially) Christians ignore due to convenience, so I'm not sure why "never been followed by Christians" is all that important.

4. Images of Cthulhu are fine, as long as (A) he's not real, and (B) you don't worship the images.

To be clear, regarding #4, I mean "from the point of view of the Ten Commandments". It's perfectly OK with me if you make an image of Cthulhu, regardless of whether or not he's real, or whether or not you worship it.

There is no such thing as "the definitive text". The KJV, however, is "the definitive text for a lot of Christians", including a lot of those who interpret things in the most absurdly literal ways.

I have never, ever met either a Christian or a Jew who believes this, nor have I even heard of one.

I'm sure that you can dig around through history and find someone who believed this at some point in time, but it's never been the doctrine of any mainstream church.

I have never, ever met either a Christian or a Jew who believes this, nor have I even heard of one.

I'm not claiming you will, or even that there are any.

I am, however, claiming that a literal reading of the KJV arrives at the interpretation that I am pointing out, and that there are a lot of Christians who insist on a literal reading of the KJV.

That they don't arrive at the actual literal interpretation of this particular passage is neither here nor there, unless you want to discuss hypocrisy.

3. Never been followed by Jews or Christians? Perhaps. I don't know if that's actually true or not, but perhaps. I suspect that "not followed by large numbers of Jews or Christians, especially in recent centuries" is more accurate. In any case, it is closer to the way that many flavors of Islam behave regarding these rules. And there are lots of things in the Bible that (especially) Christians ignore due to convenience, so I'm not sure why "never been followed by Christians" is all that important.

I've never heard of this idea outside of radical Islamic circles.

The Catholic, Eastern, and Oriental Orthodox Churches, which all go back to the Apostles, have always had icons, devotional images etc.

None of these Churches believe in "literal interpretation" of the Bible either.

Remember there was no Bible for more than 3 centuries, and the Church still functioned and spread rapidly.

I am, however, claiming that a literal reading of the KJV arrives at the interpretation that I am pointing out, and that there are a lot of Christians who insist on a literal reading of the KJV.

Who? I don't know of anyone who both (1) still uses the King James Bible and (2) insists on a word-for-word literal interpretation of it.

I hear the next monuments in Yankee Stadium will be to commemorate the Dallas Cowboys and Microsoft.

So you're saying all pictures, sculptures or represenations, of anything, are banned by the 10 commandments?

All pictures, sculptures or representations, of anything, are the property of MLB and cannot be used without written consent.

I'm howling into the wind right about now, but I wish they'd put Momument Park in the new Yankee Stadium in fair territory, as it was in the pre-1974 Stadium. I happen to LIKE ballparks being idiosyncratic...

The Catholic, Eastern, and Oriental Orthodox Churches, which all go back to the Apostles, have always had icons, devotional images etc.

There actually was a period in the 8th and 9th century where this matter was very much in dispute in the Byzantine Church, and the Iconoclasts (anti-icon) did hold sway for about 50 years. Eventually the pro-icon group prevailed and iconoclasm was ruled to be heresy.

http://www.neobyzantine.org/orthodoxy/history/iconoclast.php has a brief summary if you're interested.

not to put too fine a point on it, but i don't think popes are considered cardinals once they've ascended to the papacy. so the trivia question about 'cardinals with plaques in yankee stadium monument area' maybe should be 'ex-cardinals' ... ?

not to put too fine a point on it, but i don't think popes are considered cardinals once they've ascended to the papacy. so the trivia question about 'cardinals with plaques in yankee stadium monument area' maybe should be 'ex-cardinals' ... ?

Nobody with a monument is actually still a Cardinal, either.

not to put too fine a point on it, but i don't think popes are considered cardinals once they've ascended to the papacy. so the trivia question about 'cardinals with plaques in yankee stadium monument area' maybe should be 'ex-cardinals' ... ?

Then all the Yankees would be ex-Yankees; which I think is what Dr. Memory is getting at.