Apostolic authenticity

Alan Asquith · Aug 22, 2018

prodromos said:
I suspect that you have a different understanding of Saints. I'm not simply speaking of modified behaviour, but rather completely transformed. For these men and women who the Orthodox Church recognises as Saints, they have put on the divine nature to the extent that the supernatural is their normal mode of existence.

Have you read the lives of any Protestant or Roman Catholic 'saints' for comparison?

Alan Asquith · Aug 22, 2018

~Anastasia~ said:
But I did want to welcome you.
God be with you.

Thank you very much Anastasia for your warm welcome today and for your replies to me previously.

~Anastasia~ · Aug 22, 2018

Oops sorry! You're welcome and I HAD already welcomed you, hadn't I? Forgive me. I seem to have been a bit forgetful recently. God bless you in your search though, and thank you for being gracious.

Alan Asquith · Aug 22, 2018

Northbrook said:
Good luck in your search for the True Church!

Thank you very much Northbrook and Virgil for recommending some books that you think may help me.

ArmyMatt · Aug 22, 2018

Alan Asquith said:
I haven't read the Church Fathers extensively but I'm curious to know, did any Church Father before 300 AD advocate venerating images/icons? And praying to dead saints? If so, can you cite the relevant passages please. Thank you.

the earliest I know is St Athanasius of Alexandria's letter to Antiochus the prefect, which means it was an already established practice before the early 300s.

praying to departed (because they are not dead, because they are alive in Christ) is in the Septuagint OT which was the OT of the earliest Christians.

but I can also say when we see the early Churches, we see basic images and graffiti of saint veneration on the walls.

plus the Temple, Tabernacle, and early 1st century synagogues where Christ and the Apostles would have gone had images.

Alan Asquith · Aug 22, 2018

Thank you ArmyMatt.

ArmyMatt said:
the earliest I know is St Athanasius of Alexandria's letter to Antiochus the prefect, which means it was an already established practice before the early 300s.

Is that letter online? If so, can you send me a link to it please.

ArmyMatt said:
praying to departed (because they are not dead, because they are alive in Christ) is in the Septuagint OT which was the OT of the earliest Christians.

Many quotes of OT passages in the NT match the Septuagint, but not all of them. Estimates vary from between 50% and 66%. The remaining quotes either match the Masoretic text or don't conform to either. So the apostles' intermittent use of the Septuagint doesn't prove they elevated the Septuagint above the Masoretic nor does it prove they necessarily endorsed the canon of the Septuagint.
2nd and 3rd century Christians almost exclusively used the Septuagint for the simple reason that the majority of them were Gentiles and they spoke Greek rather than Hebrew or Aramaic.

ArmyMatt said:
but I can also say when we see the early Churches, we see basic images and graffiti of saint veneration on the walls.

Do you mean church buildings in the 1st century had graffiti of saint veneration on the walls? Do you have evidence of them? Messages addressed to dead people on the walls of the catacombs are not equivalent to prayer, any more than "Rest in Peace" on a tombstone is a prayer to a dead person.

ArmyMatt said:
plus the Temple, Tabernacle, and early 1st century synagogues where Christ and the Apostles would have gone had images.

The apostles did not encourage Christians to slavishly imitate all the Jewish practices of the Temple and the 1st century synagogues (e.g. making burnt offerings to atone for sin!) The very first Christians attended those places of worship and prayer until they were thrown out, but their attendance was not tacit approval of everything that happened therein. Furthermore, images of lions and palm trees and pomegranates in the temple is not the same as venerating saints.

ArmyMatt · Aug 22, 2018

not sure if St Athanasius' letter is online. St John of Damascus uses it in his work On the Holy Images.

as for the Septuagint, I am not referring to what was written in the NT. Christ used the Septuagint as did the Apostles because that's what was used in the hinterlands, which was where they all were from. so for Christ, Who is Truth, to have used the Septuagint says something.

plus, all of the old lists count the Septuagint books as the OT canon.

as for the prayer, yeah, there has been found that asking for saint intercession. National Geographic actually took a small camera into the walls of the Holy Sepulchre and found rolled papers of prayers from the earliest centuries. plus, "rest in peace" technically is a prayer.

as for the images, if the Apostles continued until thrown out, that clearly shows holy images are not against Christ's teaching. and those images of cherubim and animals were venerated (respected), just in a different way.

prodromos · Aug 22, 2018

Alan Asquith said:
Have you read the lives of any Protestant or Roman Catholic 'saints' for comparison?

You would have to point out a Protestant Saint as I've never heard of any who would be anywhere near the same league as the holy men and women that the Orthodox Church has produced. As regards Catholic Saints, they have been few and far between since the great schism and of those the Catholic Church has recognised as Saints, there is often something about their lives that does not jive with Orthodox theology and praxis.
For example:
http://www.orthodox.cn/catechesis/potapov/13en.htm

~Anastasia~ · Aug 22, 2018

Alan Asquith said:
Have you read the lives of any Protestant or Roman Catholic 'saints' for comparison?

I know you weren't asking me, but I have read biographies of Catholics and Protestants such as you may be thinking of. And have admired their faith, or devotion, etc.

Certainly there are Catholics and Protestants who love God and seek Him, and see answers to prayer, etc.

But I agree with Prodromos that what I see in Orthodoxy is an entirely different kind of transformation.

Alan Asquith · Aug 23, 2018

ArmyMatt said:
not sure if St Athanasius' letter is online. St John of Damascus uses it in his work On the Holy Images.

Without reading that letter I wouldn't be able to tell whether Athanasius was actually endorsing the veneration of icons or just discussing it without approval. But anyway, Athanasius lived in the 4th century, which hardly proves it was a tradition instituted by the apostles. Isn't there any better evidence than that?

ArmyMatt said:
as for the Septuagint, I am not referring to what was written in the NT. Christ used the Septuagint as did the Apostles because that's what was used in the hinterlands, which was where they all were from. so for Christ, Who is Truth, to have used the Septuagint says something.

If you analyze which version of the OT got quoted in the NT, you can deduce which version of the OT were used by the NT writers. The question of which version Jesus and his first followers used is definitely not cut & dried. See, for example, "The Canon Debate" by Lee Martin McDonald and James A. Sanders.

ArmyMatt said:
as for the prayer, yeah, there has been found that asking for saint intercession. National Geographic actually took a small camera into the walls of the Holy Sepulchre and found rolled papers of prayers from the earliest centuries. plus, "rest in peace" technically is a prayer.

What do you mean by "the earliest centuries"? How early?
There are many passages about prayer in the New Testament, and (from my limited research) some of the Church Fathers wrote entire treatises on prayer. As a major part of the Christian life it was discussed frequently and in depth. But none of the New Testament passages or the early treatises on prayer advocate praying to the deceased, and they sometimes condemn the offering of prayer to anyone except God. So why is praying to the deceased either absent or contradicted early on? That suggests to me it is not a custom taught by the apostles but crept in at a later date.

ArmyMatt said:
as for the images, if the Apostles continued until thrown out, that clearly shows holy images are not against Christ's teaching. and those images of cherubim and animals were venerated (respected), just in a different way.

We're not discussing whether holy images are against Christ's teaching. We're discussing the veneration of images. What evidence do you have that the Jews venerated the images in the temple?

~Anastasia~ · Aug 23, 2018

How do you understand "veneration"?

How do you understand a person, say a respected elder, who is "venerable"?

ArmyMatt · Aug 23, 2018

Alan Asquith said:
Without reading that letter I wouldn't be able to tell whether Athanasius was actually endorsing the veneration of icons or just discussing it without approval. But anyway, Athanasius lived in the 4th century, which hardly proves it was a tradition instituted by the apostles. Isn't there any better evidence than that?

If you analyze which version of the OT got quoted in the NT, you can deduce which version of the OT were used by the NT writers. The question of which version Jesus and his first followers used is definitely not cut & dried. See, for example, "The Canon Debate" by Lee Martin McDonald and James A. Sanders.

What do you mean by "the earliest centuries"? How early?
There are many passages about prayer in the New Testament, and (from my limited research) some of the Church Fathers wrote entire treatises on prayer. As a major part of the Christian life it was discussed frequently and in depth. But none of the New Testament passages or the early treatises on prayer advocate praying to the deceased, and they sometimes condemn the offering of prayer to anyone except God. So why is praying to the deceased either absent or contradicted early on? That suggests to me it is not a custom taught by the apostles but crept in at a later date.

We're not discussing whether holy images are against Christ's teaching. We're discussing the veneration of images. What evidence do you have that the Jews venerated the images in the temple?

St Athanasius was born in the later third century, and iconography and veneration was already established. that puts what you are saying as being definitely established in the 200s.

prayer to the departed was never condemned early on. I would love any reference that shows early Christians rejected praying to the departed. it's in the Septuagint OT, in Maccabees and Baruch (I think on that last one). read the martyrdom of St Polycarp of Smyrna.

as for veneration. veneration means to respect. the priests would bless the images in the Temple with blood, the images on the Ark were not to be touched, etc. that is, by definition, veneration. the mode of venerating might have changed, but the fact that images were venerated have not.

Alan Asquith · Aug 23, 2018

~Anastasia~ said:
How do you understand "veneration"?
How do you understand a person, say a respected elder, who is "venerable"?

Hi Anastasia,
I understand veneration to mean showing respect for a particular person or object. I venerate certain people (some alive, some dead) and all holy angels. I also venerate certain objects, e.g. I never put my Bible on the floor.
If you gave me an icon of, say, of an apostle or a hero of the early church, I would probably venerate it too in the sense that I would handle it gently and not use it as a dartboard. I would not consider the wood or paint from which it was made to be specially holy but I would venerate the icon for the sake of the holy person it depicted.
But I would never attempt to approach God, or to harness or tap into spiritual power, by proximity, touching, or kneeling in front of a physical object.

ArmyMatt · Aug 23, 2018

Alan Asquith said:
Hi Anastasia,
I understand veneration to mean showing respect for a particular person or object. I venerate certain people (some alive, some dead) and all holy angels. I also venerate certain objects, e.g. I never put my Bible on the floor.
If you gave me an icon of, say, of an apostle or a hero of the early church, I would probably venerate it too in the sense that I would handle it gently and not use it as a dartboard. I would not consider the wood or paint from which it was made to be specially holy but I would venerate the icon for the sake of the holy person it depicted.
But I would never attempt to approach God, or to harness or tap into spiritual power, by proximity, touching, or kneeling in front of a physical object.

correct, however, the bones of Elisha, Peter's shadow, Paul's handkerchiefs, Christ's robe, etc all healed by God's power. God's holiness struck down a man via the Ark.

we don't harness God's power at all (that would be magic). but God has, can, and does work through physical objects.

~Anastasia~ · Aug 23, 2018

Alan Asquith said:
Hi Anastasia,
I understand veneration to mean showing respect for a particular person or object. I venerate certain people (some alive, some dead) and all holy angels. I also venerate certain objects, e.g. I never put my Bible on the floor.
If you gave me an icon of, say, of an apostle or a hero of the early church, I would probably venerate it too in the sense that I would handle it gently and not use it as a dartboard. I would not consider the wood or paint from which it was made to be specially holy but I would venerate the icon for the sake of the holy person it depicted.
But I would never attempt to approach God, or to harness or tap into spiritual power, by proximity, touching, or kneeling in front of a physical object.

The way you've worded it, I think I would agree with you completely.

If I pray in front of an icon (frequently I pray without one) ... the greatest advantage is to prevent other images from popping into my mind. (We are careful not to imagine Christ, angels, etc.) We do not seek to stir an emotional response with icons, even (which Catholic art frequently is aimed toward).

And I certainly don't consider myself to be "harnessing or tapping into spiritual power" through the icon - that strikes me as superstition or outright idolatry or conjuring.

But. As Fr. Matt said - sometimes God chooses to work through physical means. If that were an icon, or a Cross, or anointing oil, or a book of the Holy Scriptures, or Elijah's bones, or Peter's handkerchief - that's up to God.

I treat my icons as I would my Bible or my baptismal cross. I wouldn't want to disrespect any of them. I might kiss any of them. But I certainly wouldn't worship them as objects, nor do I consider the base material they are made up of to be supernatural. Their importance is in what they represent.

Alan Asquith · Aug 28, 2018

I would be very grateful if I could ask some questions about icons please.

How does it benefit you to pray in front of an icon? If you are praying to God, isn't it a distraction to be looking at the picture of a man or woman?

No one knows what the earliest individual Christians looked like. So all the icons of the apostles must be sheer guesswork and speculation. What is the point of having a picture of someone which may be totally different to what the person actually looked like?

All the icons I've seen of the apostles depict men who look Greek rather than Jewish. Their facial features are typically Caucasian and not Middle Eastern. Why is that?

And why do icons of the apostles and of Mary often depict them dressed in lavish costly garments as they were wealthy aristocrats?

And all the icons I've seen show people with a particular facial expression. They all look dour, melancholy, and lacking in vitality. Why is that?

This is not meant as a criticism of icons. I just want to find out the explanation for things I don't understand. I recognize that icons are a very important part of your worship. Thank you.

Alan Asquith · Aug 28, 2018

prodromos said:
As regards Catholic Saints, they have been few and far between since the great schism and of those the Catholic Church has recognised as Saints, there is often something about their lives that does not jive with Orthodox theology and praxis.
For example:
http://www.orthodox.cn/catechesis/potapov/13en.htm

I read the article you linked to and I am curious to understand more about the special transformation that Orthodox Christians are striving for. It seems very different to what I understand as spiritual growth or sanctification (or whatever you want to call it). My measure of spiritual growth would be conformity to the personal characteristics of Jesus, comprising his nature and his conduct. So for example, a Christian who, for the sake of Christ, would give away his last piece of bread to another person who was more hungry than himself, or a Christian who would give up fame and fortune to obey the call of Christ to do a menial job in obscurity helping suffering people. I think of people like Damien of Molokai, Charles Thomas Studd, Eric Liddell, and the martyrs of Sabaste.

But according to the article you linked to, the goal of Orthodoxy seems to be to focus on one's inner feelings and to try to cultivate a mystical state of consciousness. Rather than changing one's outward behavior there seems to be a prior concern about conjuring up a particular mental state and experiencing a glow or spiritual energy that feels like the life of God pulsating through your own spirit. This reminds me of Transcendental Meditation or kundalini yoga. What is the difference?

ArmyMatt · Aug 28, 2018

Alan Asquith said:
I would be very grateful if I could ask some questions about icons please.

How does it benefit you to pray in front of an icon? If you are praying to God, isn't it a distraction to be looking at the picture of a man or woman?

No one knows what the earliest individual Christians looked like. So all the icons of the apostles must be sheer guesswork and speculation. What is the point of having a picture of someone which may be totally different to what the person actually looked like?

All the icons I've seen of the apostles depict men who look Greek rather than Jewish. Their facial features are typically Caucasian and not Middle Eastern. Why is that?

And why do icons of the apostles and of Mary often depict them dressed in lavish costly garments as they were wealthy aristocrats?

And all the icons I've seen show people with a particular facial expression. They all look dour, melancholy, and lacking in vitality. Why is that?

This is not meant as a criticism of icons. I just want to find out the explanation for things I don't understand. I recognize that icons are a very important part of your worship. Thank you.

icons benefit the same way the cherubim in the Temple did. since prayer engages the whole man, icons help the eyes in prayer.

icons are not meant to be accurate, they are theology in color.

they are designed to look like they are illumined by the Light of God's grace, not white ethnically.

none of the icons of the Apostles I have seen have them in anything lavish, only different colors so you know who you are looking at. Mary being lavishly adorned (although not as common as her typical simple attire) is again a theological statement about all of our divine dignity.

the expression isn't dour, just straightfaced. prayer should take us past emotions.

Alan Asquith · Aug 28, 2018

Thank you ArmyMatt. I would like to understand your answers but they are so laconic I'm still puzzled. Could I ask you to elaborate please?

ArmyMatt said:
icons benefit the same way the cherubim in the Temple did. since prayer engages the whole man, icons help the eyes in prayer.

How did the cherubim benefit the worshipper? Only the high priest ever saw the cherubim, and he only saw it once a year. What do you mean by saying that icons help the eyes in prayer? How does it help you to look at the face of a man when you are praying to God?

ArmyMatt said:
icons are not meant to be accurate, they are theology in color.

What does "theology in colour" mean? Can you explain it in simple words rather than soundbites please?

ArmyMatt said:
they are designed to look like they are illumined by the Light of God's grace, not white ethnically.

It's not just the skin colour that looks Greek. It's the hairstyle, the shape of the eyes and nose, the size of the mouth, etc.

ArmyMatt said:
none of the icons of the Apostles I have seen have them in anything lavish, only different colors so you know who you are looking at.

Have you seen this?
Their holy books look very impressive too.

ArmyMatt said:
the expression isn't dour, just straightfaced. prayer should take us past emotions.

Beyond emotion? Prayer is more than just emotion but it is not without emotion. If we pray with all our mind and heart it will certainly involve our emotions, whatever deeper dimensions it may also include.
I will offer in his tent sacrifices with shouts of joy; I will sing and make melody to the Lord. (Psalms 27:6)
Hear my prayer, O Lord, and give ear to my cry; hold not your peace at my tears! (Psalms 39:12)
And being in agony he prayed more earnestly; and his sweat became like great drops of blood falling down to the ground. (Luke 22:44)

FenderTL5 · Aug 28, 2018

Alan Asquith said:
What does "theology in colour" mean?

There's an old expression that goes, "a picture is worth a thousand words."
Icons of people and events 'tell the story' of the person or event. It's not my area of expertise, but I know how a Saint is depicted, the way he/she is dressed, and the items they may be holding all tell parts of the Saint's story. e.g. An icon of a Saint holding a cross would indicate the Saint was martyred.
Icons of events, unlike the art in the west and particularly the 'masters', are not intended to be realistic, 'moment in time' depictions but are actually meant to encompass the whole story, even if the story itself is not contained in a moment. e.g. the Nativity of Christ not only has the Christ Child in the manger, it has elements of prophecy, the wise men, Joseph's struggle. the Angels etc all in the same icon.

Apostolic authenticity

Active Member

Active Member

† Handmaid of God †

Active Member

Regular Member

Active Member

Regular Member

Senior Veteran

† Handmaid of God †

Active Member

† Handmaid of God †

Regular Member

Active Member

Regular Member

† Handmaid of God †

Active Member

Active Member

Regular Member

Active Member

Κύριε, ἐλέησον.

Similar threads