Idolatry

Apple Sky · Friday at 3:17 AM

What about the Catholics is it wrong to worship and bow to the statue of the Virgin Mary or bow to the pope and call him father or call the priests father ?

stevevw · Friday at 3:19 AM

NBB said:
Some people have a custom of kneeling before statues, if that is not worship what it is?
Even if they are not worshiping, the bible says to not bow before other than God.

Because perhaps they are worshipping what the statue or cross represents which is beyond the thing itself. When I see a cross it reminds me f Christ on the cross and takes me back to the core of the gospel.

So in some ways in its right place icons can be a powerful reminder of the gospel.

I think of the church of the Holy Sepulchre. A church building that has represented a site over millenia as the place of Christs crucifixtion. Drawing people from all over the world.

When you decend into the foundation you are face to face with the place of Christs death. Just over a bit is His tomb and the place of His resurrection.

This experience has brought many to a deeper faith.

Aaron112 · Friday at 4:01 AM

NBB said:
People can also worship all kinds of things, like important people, or sports, art, or themselves, or who knows what.

33K views · 1.8K reactions | How many lives could have been saved? Corporate pharmacies made it nearly impossible—refusing to dispense medications like Ivermectin that providers prescribed as an alternative treatment. | HolisticSarah Medispa

How many lives could have been saved? Corporate pharmacies made it nearly impossible—refusing to dispense medications like Ivermectin that providers prescribed as an alternative treatment..

www.facebook.com

%20fda%20pays%20off%20pharmacies%20not%20give%20cure

Aaron112 · Friday at 4:02 AM

Daniel Carlton said:
I have plenty of quotes. I will start posting them tomorrow.

The enemy is prepared to fight back.

Daniel Carlton · Friday at 6:12 AM

public hermit said:
How about providing some quotes so we can get this show on the road? Present your evidence of what you have read, and then folks can agree/disagree.

Just a couple of points:

1) This is not a complete list. I did not take the time to record them all.

2) Not a single early church father promoted idolatry or even hinted it was Christian practice.

''But the way of darkness is crooked, and full of cursing; for it is the way of eternal death with punishment, in which way are the things that destroy the soul, viz, idolatry, over-confidence the arrogance of power. . .''

The epistle of Barnabas, chapter 20.

100A.D.

ViaCrucis · Friday at 7:48 AM

Daniel Carlton said:
Well you spoke of ignorance so I wondered how much of the early church you read. Your answer is very vague but it shows you have not really read the ancients.

No wonder you wanted to jump to the eighth century, you do not know the early church fathers.

I have almost completed the first three centuries, so when you catch up with me, we can have an informed conversation on that topic.

Instead of assuming I'm unfamiliar with the Ante-Nicene fathers, you could provide the patristic material you believe supports your Iconoclastic position and we could go from there. What in the Ante-Nicene Fathers do you consider to be supportive of Iconoclasm?

-CryptoLutheran

ViaCrucis · Friday at 7:54 AM

Daniel Carlton said:
Just a couple of points:

1) This is not a complete list. I did not take the time to record them all.

2) Not a single early church father promoted idolatry or even hinted it was Christian practice.

''But the way of darkness is crooked, and full of cursing; for it is the way of eternal death with punishment, in which way are the things that destroy the soul, viz, idolatry, over-confidence the arrogance of power. . .''

The epistle of Barnabas, chapter 20.

100A.D.

View attachment 368926

Of course idolatry is wrong. God says so many times in Holy Scripture, such as in the First Commandment where we are told to not worship any other gods or worship graven images.

Of course we should expect everyone in the ancient Church--and throughout the history of the Church--condemning idolatry. And we do.

The burden of proof that rests upon you is to demonstrate that the early fathers considered Icons to be idols. Not that the early fathers condemned idolatry; since your claim is that icons are idols and that the Ante-Nicene fathers condemned iconography as idolatry. Quoting a condemnation against idolatry is insufficient, because everyone in this thread agrees that idolatry is blatantly sinful and evil.

-CryptoLutheran

RileyG · Friday at 9:17 AM

Apple Sky said:
No - But the Golden calf was.

Yup. No argument from me.

RileyG · Friday at 9:19 AM

Apple Sky said:
What about the Catholics is it wrong to worship and bow to the statue of the Virgin Mary or bow to the pope and call him father or call the priests father ?

They aren’t being worshipped. Good grief. No Catholic worships Mary or the Pope. That’s a myth.

Was it wrong when St. Paul said he became spiritual Father to those he taught? It’s right there in scripture.

RileyG · Friday at 9:19 AM

Daniel Carlton said:
Just a couple of points:

1) This is not a complete list. I did not take the time to record them all.

2) Not a single early church father promoted idolatry or even hinted it was Christian practice.

''But the way of darkness is crooked, and full of cursing; for it is the way of eternal death with punishment, in which way are the things that destroy the soul, viz, idolatry, over-confidence the arrogance of power. . .''

The epistle of Barnabas, chapter 20.

100A.D.

View attachment 368926

Icons aren’t idols. They aren’t being worshipped.

RileyG · Friday at 9:21 AM

David Lamb said:
Some Anglicans do, just as some Anglicans address their clergymen as "Father," use incense, and practice confession to a "priest." But their are evangelical Anglican churches that to not use icons, or do any of the things I have just mentioned.

Priest. No need for the quotation marks. It comes from a German word translated to English that means elder.

ViaCrucis · Friday at 1:01 PM

RileyG said:
Priest. No need for the quotation marks. It comes from a German word translated to English that means elder.

It literally descends from the Greek word presbyteros "elder".

Greek presbyteros -> Latin presbyter -> Vulgar Latin prester

From Vulgar Latin it entered into the Germanic languages, this includes Anglo-Saxon (Old English) where it was preost, evolving from Old English through Middle English and into Modern English as priest.

The word "priest" has, in English, become a more catch-all term for "holy person" as such is used to describe the Jewish kohanim (the Levitical priests), and various officials of religious duties from across multiple religious traditions, such as various Pagan religions.

Language is weird.

-CryptoLutheran

RileyG · Friday at 2:19 PM

ViaCrucis said:
It literally descends from the Greek word presbyteros "elder".

Greek presbyteros -> Latin presbyter -> Vulgar Latin prester

From Vulgar Latin it entered into the Germanic languages, this includes Anglo-Saxon (Old English) where it was preost, evolving from Old English through Middle English and into Modern English as priest.

The word "priest" has, in English, become a more catch-all term for "holy person" as such is used to describe the Jewish kohanim (the Levitical priests), and various officials of religious duties from across multiple religious traditions, such as various Pagan religions.

Language is weird.

-CryptoLutheran

Thank you!

Grafted In · Friday at 10:02 PM

RileyG said:
Exodus 25:10-22

Notice how the Ark of the Covenant is constructed.

Was that idolatry? No.

I aggree.
And I'd like to add that we no longer have it with us.

ViaCrucis · Friday at 10:15 PM

Grafted In said:
I aggree.
And I'd like to add that we no longer have it with us.

We have a far greater Kapporet, a far greater Holy of Holies than what was instructed to Moses and given at Sinai.

We have Jesus Christ, and we enter into the Holy of Holies where we receive His own flesh and blood which was broken and shed for us.

-CryptoLutheran

RileyG · 2025-08-23T00:36:16-0500

Grafted In said:
I aggree.
And I'd like to add that we no longer have it with us.

According to legend, the Coptic Orthodox Church has the Ark of the Covenant, but I doubt it’s true. I really think it’s lost to history.

RileyG · 2025-08-23T00:36:32-0500

ViaCrucis said:
We have a far greater Kapporet, a far greater Holy of Holies than what was instructed to Moses and given at Sinai.

We have Jesus Christ, and we enter into the Holy of Holies where we receive His own flesh and blood which was broken and shed for us.

-CryptoLutheran

Amen!

Daniel Carlton · 2025-08-23T11:22:06-0500

public hermit said:
How about providing some quotes so we can get this show on the road? Present your evidence of what you have read, and then folks can agree/disagree.

Yes, I am arguing the affirmative and I will prove not only that idolatry was condemned by the ancient church but also it is as we see in the second commandment- made things that are venerated.

Now my opponents are going to get desperate, engage personal attacks and perhaps even deliberately tell lies. Why? Becuase they are here to defend their church. I am here to defend the faith, one true faith.

There has already been a bogus term introduced - “icon”. An icon is an idol. The people who attempt to make a (false) distinction between idol and icon are simply trying to justify their error and sin.

(Next witness)

Justin martyr.

Credited as the first Christian apologist defines idolatry as “set in shrines and called Gods”. So something that is made and venerated.

Approx 140 A.D.

First apology of Justin martyr - chapter 9.

RileyG · 2025-08-23T11:24:38-0500

Daniel Carlton said:
Yes, I am arguing the affirmative and I will prove not only that idolatry was condemned by the ancient church but also it is as we see in the second commandment- made things that are venerated.

Now my opponents are going to get desperate, engage personal attacks and perhaps even deliberately tell lies. Why? Becuase they are here to defend their church. I am here to defend the faith, one true faith.

There has already been a bogus term introduced - “icon”. An icon is an idol. The people who attempt to make a (false) distinction between idol and icon are simply trying to justify their error and sin.

(Next witness)

Justin martyr.

Credited as the first Christian apologist defines idolatry as “set in shrines and called Gods”. So something that is made and venerated.

Approx 140 A.D.

First apology of Justin martyr - chapter 9.

View attachment 368975

Icons aren’t idols because no one is worshipping them.

ViaCrucis · 2025-08-23T22:16:54-0500

RileyG said:
Icons aren’t idols because no one is worshipping them.

It's also a matter of basic biblical language.

An eidlon is one thing, and an eikon is another. The New Testament consistently presents an eidolon in the negative, the pagans worshiped idols (eidolona); however eikon is used in many ways, but very often positively. Christ is the eikon of God.

ὅς ἐστιν εἰκὼν τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ἀοράτου πρωτότοκος πάσης κτίσεως - Colossians 1:15

The Septuagint version of Genesis 1:27 speaks of human beings being made in God's eikona

καὶ ἐποίησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν ἄνθρωπον κατ᾽ εἰκόνα θεοῦ ἐποίησεν αὐτόν ἄρσεν καὶ θῆλυ ἐποίησεν αὐτούς

The Bible clearly makes a distinction between images in a good sense, and images in a bad sense. The idea that all images are violations of the First Commandment is neither Jewish nor Christian, but is an innovation of Islam. However, in the worst case scenario, it is flagrantly Gnostic as it denies the innate goodness of material creation, the innate goodness of the physical world.

The difference between sacred images and idols is that the latter robs the Creator of His rightful worship by replacing Him with something false or by trying to drag Him down to be represented or depicted in the same way as any other false pagan god.

This is also why, historically, images of God the Father are considered illegitimate, likewise with the Holy Spirit. Since the Divine Essence cannot be depicted. But Christ, the God-Man, is depicted in His physical humanity. This is why this is an Incarnation issue.

But God has declared that He has an Image. He created human beings to bear His selem, or in Greek eikona. Through the fall the Divine Image has been battered and bruised and distorted by sin and death; in Christ God restores the Divine Image. As Christ is the New and Second Adam. Icons serve a ministerial purpose in asserting that the Good Creator is present to us in and through His creation. Again, that's what the Incarnation is: God became flesh. That's what the Sacraments are, tangible material grace. God's own word, the Scriptures, did not fall down immaterial from the voiceless lips of angels; but through human authors and human prophets, written with ink and parchment.

We are Christians, not Gnostics. We affirm a Good Creator God who made sky, land, and sea.

"The Church, though dispersed throughout the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations of God, and the advents, and the birth from a virgin, and the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the ascension into heaven in the flesh of the beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord, and His appearing from heaven in the glory of the Father 'to gather all things in one' and to raise up anew all flesh of the whole human race," - St. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book I, Ch. 10:1

-CryptoLutheran

Idolatry

In Sight Like Unto An Emerald

inquisitive

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Confessional Lutheran

Confessional Lutheran

Veteran

Veteran

Veteran

Veteran

Confessional Lutheran

Veteran

Newbie

Confessional Lutheran

Veteran

Veteran

Active Member

Veteran

Confessional Lutheran

Similar threads