simonthezealot

have you not read,what God has spoken unto you?
Apr 17, 2006
16,461
1,919
Minnesota
✟19,953.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
SNIP> It never has and never will be able to symbolize God’s holiness, His glory or His majesty, which means what you try to show people, is a God in your own image.
Right on! any attempt to symbolize the supremacy of Christ as laid out for example in Colossians 1 is FUTILE.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JesusFreak78
Upvote 0

Kristos

Servant
Aug 30, 2006
7,379
1,068
Minnesota
✟37,552.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Wood and paint are certainly not necessary to create God in one's own image - liberal theologians seem to manage just fine without it:)

The point being missed here is that God DID reveal His image to us through the Incarnation - this is not creating God in our own image, this is a declaration of the Incarnation of God Himself. Can this be abused just like Scripture - absolutely, without a doubt, it can and is, but that doesn't mean it must. Just like Scripture, the foundation must be sound in order for the walls to stand.
 
Upvote 0

Kristos

Servant
Aug 30, 2006
7,379
1,068
Minnesota
✟37,552.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
If you think Catholics don't agree, then you're not reading your Hans Urs von Balthasar or Henri de Lubac. Or even your Scott Hahn. I would recommend the latter's Letter and Spirit and new Consuming the Word.

My comments were only related to the specific quotation. If I had time to read all these books I guess I would have to change my occupation:)
 
Upvote 0

JesusFreak78

Reformed Baptist
Feb 11, 2005
4,294
1,530
45
Minnesota, USA
✟27,855.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
Wood and paint are certainly not necessary to create God in one's own image - liberal theologians seem to manage just fine without it:)

The point being missed here is that God DID reveal His image to us through the Incarnation - this is not creating God in our own image, this is a declaration of the Incarnation of God Himself. Can this be abused just like Scripture - absolutely, without a doubt, it can and is, but that doesn't mean it must. Just like Scripture, the foundation must be sound in order for the walls to stand.

I agree with you, you don't need wood and paint to create God in one's own image and there is people who abuse the bible and I condemn it all.

People create God in their own image because they are more interested in continue in their sin than to submit to the one true Holy and perfect God. In some cases people are just ignorant/just doesn't know any better.

Now we need to get back on topic.
 
Upvote 0

Cappadocious

Well-Known Member
Sep 29, 2012
3,885
860
✟30,661.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Right on! any attempt to symbolize the supremacy of Christ as laid out for example in Colossians 1 is FUTILE.
If the incarnate God cannot be represented, then there was no true incarnation, but a creation of some sort of un-depictable demigod flesh.
 
Upvote 0

JesusFreak78

Reformed Baptist
Feb 11, 2005
4,294
1,530
45
Minnesota, USA
✟27,855.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
If the incarnate God cannot be represented, then there was no true incarnation, but a creation of some sort of un-depictable demigod flesh.

I know this post isn't for me, but I would like to answer this.

Only God can represent God and that's why Jesus walking on earth is a true representation of God. All man made images of God can not represent God because we don't fully understand or comprehend God's Majesty, Glory, Holiness and Perfection.
 
Upvote 0

simonthezealot

have you not read,what God has spoken unto you?
Apr 17, 2006
16,461
1,919
Minnesota
✟19,953.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
If the incarnate God cannot be represented, then there was no true incarnation, but a creation of some sort of un-depictable demigod flesh.

Hebrew 1
The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact expression of His nature...

John 1
No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.

And you feel man can rightly do this?
 
  • Like
Reactions: JesusFreak78
Upvote 0

Kristos

Servant
Aug 30, 2006
7,379
1,068
Minnesota
✟37,552.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I know this post isn't for me, but I would like to answer this.

Only God can represent God and that's why Jesus walking on earth is a true representation of God. All man made images of God can not represent God because we don't fully understand or comprehend God's Majesty, Glory, Holiness and Perfection.

Once again - your argument pertains not just to images but to everything man-made - words, sentences, conceptions, descriptions etc. Yes, God is ineffable - the eastern Christianity is acutely aware of this and in practice tends towards apophatic theology, but in cases where God has specifically revealed Himself, this can and even must be affirmed, thus the gospel was spoken and eventually written in human words and the image of Christ was painted as He was incarnate in the flesh.
 
Upvote 0

JesusFreak78

Reformed Baptist
Feb 11, 2005
4,294
1,530
45
Minnesota, USA
✟27,855.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
Once again - your argument pertains not just to images but to everything man-made - words, sentences, conceptions, descriptions etc. Yes, God is ineffable - the eastern Christianity is acutely aware of this and in practice tends towards apophatic theology, but in cases where God has specifically revealed Himself, this can and even must be affirmed, thus the gospel was spoken and eventually written in human words and the image of Christ was painted as He was incarnate in the flesh.

This thread is about icons, so lets stick to that.
Also, what is written about God in the bible is from God, not man, which will take us back to God is the only one fit to tell us Who God is and what He is and about His attributes.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Kristos

Servant
Aug 30, 2006
7,379
1,068
Minnesota
✟37,552.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
This thread is about icons, so lets stick to that.
Also, what is written about God in the bible is from God, not man, which will take us back to God is the only one fit to tell us Who God is and what He is and about His attributes.

What is painted in an Icon is from God as well - why do you make a distinction? Are the ears more reliable than the eyes? I'm not changing the subject - the Incarnation was not literary - it was real, and this is what is presented in an icon of Christ just as it is heard with words in the gospel - no difference - the source is the same.
 
Upvote 0

JesusFreak78

Reformed Baptist
Feb 11, 2005
4,294
1,530
45
Minnesota, USA
✟27,855.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
What is painted in an Icon is from God as well - why do you make a distinction? Are the ears more reliable than the eyes? I'm not changing the subject - the Incarnation was not literary - it was real, and this is what is presented in an icon of Christ just as it is heard with words in the gospel - no difference - the source is the same.

I disagree with you the source is the same, but since you make the claim, I would like you present proof from the bible saying icons are from God.
 
Upvote 0

MarkRohfrietsch

Unapologetic Apologist
Supporter
Dec 8, 2007
30,381
5,250
✟816,630.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
What is painted in an Icon is from God as well - why do you make a distinction? Are the ears more reliable than the eyes? I'm not changing the subject - the Incarnation was not literary - it was real, and this is what is presented in an icon of Christ just as it is heard with words in the gospel - no difference - the source is the same.

I agree, as one learns about the symbolism in traditional icons, you can read them. Creativity and the arts are gifts from God. To have the God-given inspiration and ability to take the Word of God and translate it into a visual representation that inspires others is a blessing indeed.

I disagree with you the source is the same, but since you make the claim, I would like you present proof from the bible saying icons are from God.

I'm Lutheran, and like our Orthodox and Catholic brothers and sisters, icons and statues are not uncommon in our Churches. The temple in Jerusalem was adorned with images, the Ark of the Covenant had golden angels as commanded by God, there was the bronze serpent, also commanded by God.

Then there was also the Golden Calf; God seems to only have issues with objects which direct people away from Him, yet commanded images which point to Him and His glory.

Such images are like photographs. If we take a photo of a beautiful sunset, over a lake, on our vacation; then look at it later, it reminds us of the good time we had. If we have a picture of our loved ones on our desk; we don't love the picture, but we are reminded of those in the picture whom we do love.

Christian art, sculpture and icons do just that; they point to God.

Below are a couple of examples of what you may find in older, more traditional Lutheran Churches. In the first, there is a statue of Christ, a crucifix and an icon of the last supper on the Altar. On either side in stained glass is an icon of the resurrection and the Good Shepherd.

In the second photo there is an Icon of our Suffering Lord which reminds us of His Passion. A crucifix, and statues of Sts. Peter and Paul; two heroes of the New Testament, who brought many to the faith, and who's example is set before us and the Church, that we might do the same!
altar.png
FSLO-1167660475-111475.jpg
 
Upvote 0

Kristos

Servant
Aug 30, 2006
7,379
1,068
Minnesota
✟37,552.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I disagree with you the source is the same, but since you make the claim, I would like you present proof from the bible saying icons are from God.

You disagree that the source of an Icon of Christ is the Incarnation? So you want proof that Jesus Christ was God? Sorry, but I'm not following your logic here so it's difficult to respond in any meaningful way.
 
Upvote 0

Cappadocious

Well-Known Member
Sep 29, 2012
3,885
860
✟30,661.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Hebrew 1
The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact expression of His nature...

John 1
No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.

And you feel man can rightly do this?
Do you think that if you took a photograph of Christ back in the day, it wouldn't have developed or something?

Christ became truly 100% human, exactly as you or I, except without sin. And part of condescending to be human means that he became a particular man in a particular place with a particular history and nationality and language, and family, etc. And in him, the un-locatable God becomes located.

If Christ really became human, then you can depict him. If he cannot be depicted, then something about him shining forth in his humanity isn't real, it's a fraud. It means that when you see Christ, you aren't seeing God as man, but God as part of man, where God fills in the blanks where man is missing.

The whole notion that God cannot condescend to become human, to become depictable, because of his transcendent radiance, is Islamizing and anti-Christian.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

simonthezealot

have you not read,what God has spoken unto you?
Apr 17, 2006
16,461
1,919
Minnesota
✟19,953.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Do you think that if you took a photograph of Christ back in the day, it wouldn't have developed or something?

Christ became truly 100% human, exactly as you or I, except without sin. And part of condescending to be human means that he became a particular man in a particular place with a particular history and nationality and language, and family, etc. And in him, the un-locatable God becomes located.

If Christ really became human, then you can depict him. If he cannot be depicted, then something about him shining forth in his humanity isn't real, it's a fraud. It means that when you see Christ, you aren't seeing God as man, but God as part of man, where God fills in the blanks where man is missing.

The whole notion that God cannot condescend to become human, to become depictable, because of his transcendent radiance, is Islamizing and anti-Christian.
Any attempt can not fulfill the exact expression of His nature, Christ was 100% man but as well in the hypostatic union 100% God...
This is what human hands will never express, furthermore a prime example of God's disgust in this is how angry He became when the Israelites made Him out to be a golden calf.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JesusFreak78
Upvote 0

Tzaousios

Αυγουστινιανικός Χριστιανός
Dec 4, 2008
8,504
609
Comitatus in praesenti
Visit site
✟19,229.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
This is what human hands will never express, furthermore a prime example of God's disgust in this is how angry He became when the Israelites made Him out to be a golden calf.

Please don't tell me that you are trying again to draw a connection between icons and the Gold Calf... :doh:
 
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
I agree, as one learns about the symbolism in traditional icons, you can read them. Creativity and the arts are gifts from God. To have the God-given inspiration and ability to take the Word of God and translate it into a visual representation that inspires others is a blessing indeed.



I'm Lutheran, and like our Orthodox and Catholic brothers and sisters, icons and statues are not uncommon in our Churches. The temple in Jerusalem was adorned with images, the Ark of the Covenant had golden angels as commanded by God, there was the bronze serpent, also commanded by God.

Then there was also the Golden Calf; God seems to only have issues with objects which direct people away from Him, yet commanded images which point to Him and His glory.

Such images are like photographs. If we take a photo of a beautiful sunset, over a lake, on our vacation; then look at it later, it reminds us of the good time we had. If we have a picture of our loved ones on our desk; we don't love the picture, but we are reminded of those in the picture whom we do love.

Christian art, sculpture and icons do just that; they point to God.

Below are a couple of examples of what you may find in older, more traditional Lutheran Churches. In the first, there is a statue of Christ, a crucifix and an icon of the last supper on the Altar. On either side in stained glass is an icon of the resurrection and the Good Shepherd.

In the second photo there is an Icon of our Suffering Lord which reminds us of His Passion. A crucifix, and statues of Sts. Peter and Paul; two heroes of the New Testament, who brought many to the faith, and who's example is set before us and the Church, that we might do the same!
altar.png
FSLO-1167660475-111475.jpg
:clap:


Excellent :)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
I agree, as one learns about the symbolism in traditional icons, you can read them. Creativity and the arts are gifts from God. To have the God-given inspiration and ability to take the Word of God and translate it into a visual representation that inspires others is a blessing indeed.
Some of what you were noting was discussed elsewhere in other threads dedicated to discussing the Biblical merit behind icons, as seen here:
Originally Posted by ContraMundum
Scripture did in fact require certain artworks. We know this. We also know from history that the Temple was well decorated and rather lavish in places. What we can all agree on (and the article in the OP does not disagree with) is that the things commanded by God to be carved and used in the religion were not to be bowed down to or worshiped. So, the strict Calvinist interpretation of that (no artwork at all, no pictures, paintings or musical instruments in worship aka the RPW) is incorrect. The NPW is correct and orthodox. Hence, there should be no lightning bolt from the sky blasting you for putting pictures in your synagogue.
Gxg (G²);60897040 said:
Just found out on this recently and thought you'd like it, as it's an icon-image of the Biblical character of Samson...very interesting to consider when it comes to examining the ways early Israel was very much for the concept of icons within fellowships and not against pictures. For more, one can go to the following:

idSfTKEevXYM.jpg



A 1,600-year-old mosiac found in Huqoq, Israel. Photos from Israel Antiquities Authority, photographer Jim Haberman, via Bloomberg.​


Also, for more:​


Gxg (G²);59234635 said:
Terms can be an issue, I think. For when one sees a painting one made of the Heavenlies or of the Messiah that done unto God's glory or prayed over for ministry--and someone appreciates it--it's essentially the same thing as adoring it. Memorial plaques (without pictures), pics of past rabbis/leaders in the hallway at the entrance and other things are all honored in one way or another..and that in/of itself is veneration.

Whenever pictures are placed up of what the Torah looks like, as has occurred here frequently over the years, one is involved in choosing to adore something....and yet the argument has been how the pictures help in thinking about what the scriptures make clear. To venerate something is about appreciation/reverence of it--and as long as there is the practice of kissing Torah scrolls occurring within Messianic Jewish synagouges or treating objects with reverence, I wonder if what occurs is condeming one thing (as others may see it worthy of condemnation) while doing the same thing in differing language/expression.

No one worships an image, but to appreciate it/hold it in reverence or consecration is another. And on the issue of venneration, people often forget that veneration was about honor--and bowing down was something even the people of God did when honoring others ( Genesis 18:1-3, Genesis 23:6-13 Genesis 33:2-4 Genesis 48:11-13 , Exodus 18:6-8 , Ruth 2:9-11 , 1 Samuel 20:40-42 1 Samuel 24:7-9 1 Samuel 25:22-24 , 2 Samuel 9:5-7 2 Samuel 18:27-29 2 Samuel 24:19-21 1 Kings 1:15-17 1 Kings 1:30-32 , etc). For those bowing down in remembrance of others who went before us, just as people bow their heads at a funeral or when seeing a picture of a departed love one out of respect. That's the basis behind icons when it comes to depictions of the saints.

If something glorious is bowed to in order to worship it apart from the Lord, that's another issue. John in Revelation had that temptation with the angel teaching him and was warned against it ( Revelation 19:1-15 )


Some say that there's a difference between a Torah scroll being kissed and an icon in an Orthodox Church since they see a Torah Scroll as a symbol of revelation while they view an icon as an image of something on heaven or earth that is to be venerated. In their view, to venerate a Torah scroll is to venerate the self-disclosure of God through ancient prophetic writing while to venerate an icon is to venerate an image..but it seems silly since veneration is occurring REGARDLESS with both sets---and the image is a artisitc portrayal of what ancient prophetic writing described.


As said elsewhere, with the ICon issue, I really wonder at times what is so difficult to understand with the concept. Within OT Israel, the objects used in tabernacle (and later Temple ) worship were prayed over/sanctified before the Lord and all of it spoke to the Work of the Lord. If studying how the objects within the tabernacle looked (which one can go here or here for more on that), it's really powerful. There was a reverence to things rather than acting as if it was common. Things like the Showbread or the Golden Candlestick, within the Holy Place which provided light, and many other instruments had a Divine Purpose ( Exodus 27, Exodus 30:27-29, Exodus 31:8-10 , Exodus 35:15-17 , Numbers 4 , etc ).
Leviticus 8:10-12
Moses said to the assembly, “This is what the LORD has commanded to be done.” Then Moses brought Aaron and his sons forward and washed them with water. He put the tunic on Aaron, tied the sash around him, clothed him with the robe and put the ephod on him. He also fastened the ephod with a decorative waistband, which he tied around him. He placed the breastpiece on him and put the Urim and Thummim in the breastpiece. Then he placed the turban on Aaron’s head and set the gold plate, the sacred emblem, on the front of it, as the LORD commanded Moses.


10 Then Moses took the anointing oil and anointed the tabernacle and everything in it, and so consecrated them. He sprinkled some of the oil on the altar seven times, anointing the altar and all its utensils and the basin with its stand, to consecrate them. He poured some of the anointing oil on Aaron’s head and anointed him to consecrate him.
Numbers 7:1-3
[ Offerings at the Dedication of the Tabernacle ] When Moses finished setting up the tabernacle, he anointed and consecrated it and all its furnishings. He also anointed and consecrated the altar and all its utensils.
2 Chronicles 29:18
Then they went in to King Hezekiah and reported: “We have purified the entire temple of the LORD, the altar of burnt offering with all its utensils, and the table for setting out the consecrated bread, with all its articles.
2 Chronicles 29:17-19
THis was the case with the imagery included in the tabernacle/temple as well...and the same concept is there with Icons. They prayed over pictures they make which are physical representations of what occurred within scripture...just as the images of the Cheribum and other aspects of the Heavenlies were prayed over and the physical element was able to bring others into the spiritual dynamic of seeing what God's throne in Heaven was truly like.

It has NEVER been an issue of bowing down in worship to anything apart from the Lord--for anyone truly wishing to listen (even if you disagree)--and for some good places to investigate, one can go here to the following:


Gxg (G²);59235012 said:
IMHO...

When it comes to the commands not to make any graven images/bow down in worhsip, I think the reality behind passages such as Exodus 20:4 and many others similar was one concerning how the mode or fashion of worship appropiate to the Lord forbid any attempt to represent or caricature Him by the use of anything made when out of bounds. It is a significant stretch, however, to say that total censure of artistic expression was what the issue was. When reading Exodus 20:4, it seems that what the command was about is the totally human tendency to Create God according to the way WE want Him to be (regardless of what he "looks like" or has described his personality/character as), and for Him to be "motivated" as WE are, and to require the things of US that we require of OTHERS so that that they meet OUR (false god's) definition of what's "just"", and of course to think, evaluate, and JUDGE things as we do in our overactive religious human imaginations.

An image alone would not be a problem if that image accurately described a trait of the Lord that he described of Himself/his saints within the Word. One good place for study would be the following:

Some of what occurs with ICons is similar (IMHO to what's occurring today with others who do Prophetic Art, where the artwork they make is anointed and something where the Spirit of God can be felt/seen in. The artwork takes on aspects of the foretelling nature of prophecy (i.e. predicting future events to come) or forthtelling (i.e. preaching/declaring what the Word of God says and what the Lord's heart is revealed in scripture). For more, one can look into this:



If you've ever heard of the term "New Renaissance”, things may make more sense. For this term emerged several years ago as God began to reveal His desire to release a fresh outpouring of creativity upon His people that would be a catalyst for transformation in the culture of our world. The historical Renaissance was a surge of creativity and innovation that literally brought European society out of the Dark Ages, and transformed every facet of the culture of the time. Many of the greatest works of art unto the Lord were done, from Michangelo's David to his work "The Creation of Adam", which is a section of Michelangelo's fresco Sistine Chapel...and many others:




It was a time of reformation and a tremendously significant shift in cultural paradigm, and the vehicle for this movement of change was the Arts. In recent years, others have noted how the Lord has been speaking through various leaders and prophetic voices within the body of Christ, as well as leading influencers in secular society (such as Patricia Martin of RenGen--as seen here in her book), that we are on the verge of a second Renaissance. Ultimately, God’s desire once again is to pour out His Spirit upon His people through all realms of creative expression that His heart would be revealed to the world and culture would once again be transformed.....

This is not hard to consider, IMHO. For throughout history we can see that all transformations in culture are preceded by the arts. From the Renaissance to the Impressionists, as artists reached a new dimension in ability and style, civilization responded to the change the arts ushered. .












 
Upvote 0