Where Does the Power of an Image Lie?

For one might answer them, bringing the case before the court of truth: How does God answer, or become known, through such objects? Is it because of the material they are made of, or because of the form they have? If it is because of the material, what need is there of the form? Why did God not make himself known through all matter without exception, before these things were fashioned? And it was useless for them to build their temples to shut in a single stone, or block of wood, or piece of gold, when the whole world is full of these substances. But if the form added to the material is the cause of the divine appearing, what need is there of the material, gold and the rest? Why did God not make himself known through the actual living animals whose figures the images are? By the same reasoning, people would have had a nobler idea of God if he made himself known through living animals, rational or without reason, instead of being looked for in things without life or motion. [a]

In this they commit the most glaring impiety against themselves. They loathe and turn away from the real animals, beasts, birds and creeping things, either because they are fierce or because they are filthy. Yet they carve their forms in stone, wood or gold, and make them gods. It would be better for them to worship the living things themselves than to worship their figures in stone.

But perhaps neither is the case, and neither the material nor the form is the cause of the divine presence. Perhaps it is only skillful art that summons the deity, since art is an imitation of nature. But if the deity has dealings with the occupants of the temples because of the art, what need is there, once again, of the material, since the art resides in the men? For if God makes himself known solely because of the art, and if for that reason the images are worshiped as gods, it would be right to worship and serve the men who are masters of the art, since they are rational as well, and have the skill in themselves.