Micah returns silver to his mother, which she made into an idol.

The Danites find their homes (Judges 18) - In this chapter, the Danites find a home and settle it.  They basically took it from the "quiet and secure" people of Laish.

The Danites were just looking for a new place to settlement.  Perhaps they too had been displaced by the Philistines.  After all, they had iron chariots, right?  Not even Yahweh could stop one of those!

The Danites sent out five scouts who came upon Laish, and the scouts realized that the people of Laish were pushovers!  They were "quiet and secure", and didn't even have a formal leader or magistrate.  So, they look for a reason to conquer these people.

They find out that these people use idols!  An ephod, a teraphim, a graven image, and - a molten image!  I don't even know what a molten image, but the ephod is an ornate vest/apron.  A teraphim is a small idol, or a 'household god', which would give good fortune to its owner.  They just looked like small statues, basically.  A graven image is basically a drawing.  That's right - the Second Commandment is a rule against artwork.

Anyways, the scouts now have a reason and return to the Danite elite, telling them about the idols.  They then send 600 guys out and they utterly slaughter the poor Laishites, and the Danites move in and settle.

Oddly enough, the Danites still use the graven image of Micah - and set it up "until the day of the captivity of the land."

This is odd, because the authors seem to have no problem with the Danites having an idol; though they just obliterated a small settlement for that very reason.

If the Commandments were in order of importance, this would be the second most immoral thing you could do.

Deuteronomy, Chapter 4 - once again Yahweh brings up the Second Commandment. "When thou ... make a graven image, or the likeness of any thing, and do evil in the sight of the Lord, you shall perish upon the land and be utterly destroyed."

I'm trying to understand this irrational paranoia about the graven image. While I'm convinced the punishment is ridiculous, I kind of understand what the authors were trying to get at. A graven image isn't the thing itself, or the 'ding an sich'. It's merely a representation of something.

So, a drawing of a bird, for example, is nothing more than a manmade representation of a bird. It's obviously not the real thing. Apparently, to the ancient Hebrews, this was a problem.

Since they were the descendents of Sumerians and Canaanites, it's quite likely that a lot of Israelites still held on to the beliefs in other gods within the Sumerian/Canaanite pantheon. And they probably had a lot of idols to represent each of these gods. The Israelite priesthood, who was really trying to get this Yahweh thing off the ground, decided that the best way to deal with this was to ban graven images entirely.

The Catholic Church, a 1000 years later, approached the subject with a different strategy. Instead of banning idols, they simply incorporated their own images to substitute the idols of various barbarian tribes. The Catholic saints are usually the replacement of various pagan gods. For example, St. Nicholas replaces the Greek god Poseidon.

I'm inclined to believe that the Catholic Church's tactic was a little more successful. It incorporated more people, and it didn't alienate them at all.