Idolatry

Daniel Carlton · Sunday at 4:24 AM

prodromos said:
You keep making this claim, but it is one you have not demonstrated. We don't call icons 'gods' as Justin Martyr describes and it is ludicrous to even suggest we consider them to be 'gods'. The people depicted in the icons are either Christ Himself, or those whom God has revealed to be among those who now stand in His presence and are fervent intercessors to Him on our behalf. They are revealed by God to be righteous men and women whose prayers are powerful and effective (James 5:16).
I'm telling you the truth, they are not 'gods'. No one believes they are, so your claims of idolatry are empty.

Yeah, I get you do not call them Gods. Same way you do not call icons, idols.

And that is what we have shifted to - idolatry is wrong but icons are not idols. Okay, prove it!

Bob Crowley · Sunday at 6:36 AM

In our Catholic Church we have a crucified Christ on the wall, an altar, stations of the cross, a photograph of Pope Leo, another of our current Archbishop (soon to retire), an image of the sacred heart of Christ, a traditional wooden statue of Mary, and a photograph of St Mary McKillop, our only canonised Australian saint.

We don't bow down and worship any of them. They are reminders of Christ and Him crucified, the sacrifice He paid and obedience to His command to eat His flesh and drink His blood; Mary and the eternal heavenly host who are witnesses of our faith or the lack of it; and the reality of the earth bound church with its apostolic succession established 2000 years ago when Christ set up the Petrine office, and it is still going.

As my old Protestant pastor said to me once when I was still in his Presbyterian church "Protestants tell a lot of lies about Catholics and the Catholic Church".

Lying and character assassination are mortal sins incidentally.

On the reality of the earth bound church with its apostolic succession established 2000 years ago when Christ set up the Petrine office - Chirst said the proud gates of Hell would not prevail against it and that includes blatant and dishonest defamation by some Protestants. It is still going and will continue to do so.

If Catholics and Orthodox say they don't worship idols, they are telling the simple truth - nothing more and nothing less.

Strong in Him · Sunday at 7:30 AM

Daniel Carlton said:
The scripture does tell us what idolatry is in the second commandment. It is not an idol of the heart as you are implying but something that is made (graven image) and then bow to it (venerated).

Those who use/have icons are telling you that they don't worship hem, but worship God.
And the making of an image can't be wrong, as such, or God would not have commanded the Israelites to make an image of a serpent, look to IT and be healed.

Strong in Him · Sunday at 7:37 AM

Daniel Carlton said:
And that is what we have shifted to - idolatry is wrong but icons are not idols. Okay, prove it!

Why should anyone have to prove to you that when they look at/hold an icon, maybe in meditation or prayer, they are not worshipping it?
Some Christians light a candle before prayer - should they prove to you that they are not praying to the candle? If so, why?
Some Christians favour a certain translation of the Bible and will not use any other. Why should they have to prove that they are not worshipping the Bible?

I don't have, or use, icons myself by the way, so don't even imply that I am involved in idol worship.

The Liturgist · Sunday at 8:52 AM

Bob Crowley said:
If Catholics and Orthodox say they don't worship idols, they are telling the simple truth - nothing more and nothing less.

Also our Anglican and Lutheran friends and many other Protestants who have been smeared in this thread by the false accusation of idolatry.

The Liturgist · Sunday at 8:54 AM

Strong in Him said:
I don't have, or use, icons myself by the way, so don't even imply that I am involved in idol worship.

I have many icons and venerate all of them, and have at no point in my life engaged in any form of idolatry.

Hvizsgyak · Sunday at 1:07 PM

Daniel Carlton said:
That is exactly the point, you have just given it a different name and expect it to be believed. Sorry, I will not take your word for it - when a person or group create a thing, plant them in their place of worship, gives them names and make them fundamental part of their religion, to me that is literal idolatry.

Like I said about the early Christians, they do not call what you are doing icon veneration, they call it idolatry.

You complain I made up my mind but it is based off what I read in Gods word and the early Christians. You guys have done nothing except be dismissive and say ''it is not'' but that is not good enough for me when weighed against strong evidence.

The car was just an example and illustration and you are right - it is something but with a different badge. Like something else we are talking about.

If anything, you guys need to prove that there is a difference between an icon and an idol, because you are arguing the affirmative on that point.

So Catholics Worship Statues?

The first commandment says: I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before m...

www.catholic.com

Is Kneeling Before Statues Idolatry?

Joe Heschmeyer examines the true biblical meaning of "worship," how it relates to the second commandment, and what Evangelical Protestantism is missing.

www.catholic.com

prodromos · Sunday at 1:29 PM

Daniel Carlton said:
Yeah, I get you do not call them Gods. Same way you do not call icons, idols.

Bravo! We don't call them 'gods' because they aren't 'gods' and were never considered to be (except by the pagans). We don't call icons idols because they aren't idols. You're slowly getting there.

Daniel Carlton said:
And that is what we have shifted to - idolatry is wrong but icons are not idols. Okay, prove it!

I don't need to prove anything because you have entirely failed to prove your own claims. You also don't appear to be interested in hearing any proof since you have just been dismissing everything we've posted so far. Right now it would be like arguing with a flat earther. A complete waste of time.

Daniel Carlton · Sunday at 1:47 PM

Hvizsgyak said:
So Catholics Worship Statues?

The first commandment says: I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before m...

www.catholic.com

Is Kneeling Before Statues Idolatry?

Joe Heschmeyer examines the true biblical meaning of "worship," how it relates to the second commandment, and what Evangelical Protestantism is missing.

www.catholic.com

Unless I missed it, neither of these articles try to make a distinction between icon and idol. And that is the direction this discussion has moved to.

ViaCrucis · Sunday at 1:50 PM

Daniel Carlton said:
Okay, prove it!

Nope, that isn't how this works. You're the one making the positive claim that icons are idols, the burden of proof rests on you.

-CryptoLutheran

Daniel Carlton · Sunday at 1:55 PM

prodromos said:
Bravo! We don't call them 'gods' because they aren't 'gods' and were never considered to be (except by the pagans). We don't call icons idols because they aren't idols. You're slowly getting there.

I don't need to prove anything because you have entirely failed to prove your own claims. You also don't appear to be interested in hearing any proof since you have just been dismissing everything we've posted so far. Right now it would be like arguing with a flat earther. A complete waste of time.

My claim was basically people who do what you do, in your church is idolatry. The response immediately was “these are icons, not idols” which is a claim not being made by me. I cannot debate a case that has not been made - people who believe there is a “icons” and idols distinction need to do that, because that is your position and you should justify that.

Of course I am not demanding you do but the flip side of this is IF you are right, then something in my style of worship is missing. Do you believe that? Do you believe that a church is incomplete without these icons, statues etc? If so you should make that point if you want opposing views to believe what your saying is right.

prodromos · Sunday at 2:01 PM

Daniel Carlton said:
My claim was basically people who do what you do, in your church is idolatry.

No, you claimed that was the view of the early Church fathers. You haven't demonstrated that.

The Liturgist · Sunday at 2:13 PM

prodromos said:
except by the pagans

The pagans never even had idols resembling those of the Orthodox church, until some Buddhist groups copied the iconographic style of the Syriac Christians who had spread into the Far East, and lived there until the genocide initiated by Tamerlane in the 12th century (which the Buddhists do not appear to have done anything to stop, but in the case of Tibet they directly copied Assyrian hierarchy and there is some Assyrian influence noticeable in their Pagan worship. Likewise the Taoists of China and even the Buddhists of Japan use altars which clearly show Christian influence.

Daniel Carlton · Sunday at 2:16 PM

prodromos said:
No, you claimed that was the view of the early Church fathers. You haven't demonstrated that.

Yes, then you guys claimed there is an icon idol distinction. Which no-one has substantiated.

Have you actually read this thread? You started off by asking me for quotes when I already posted some. Just checking you understand how this talk has gone.

ViaCrucis · Sunday at 3:25 PM

Daniel Carlton said:
Yes, then you guys claimed there is an icon idol distinction. Which no-one has substantiated.

You are the one who has to demonstrate there is no distinction. The burden of proof rests on you.

Daniel Carlton said:
Have you actually read this thread? You started off by asking me for quotes when I already posted some. Just checking you understand how this talk has gone.

Have you? I think everyone else has done just a fine job following this thread. You, apparently, are struggling. You provided sources saying idolatry is bad. Of course idolatry is bad. Nobody here argues otherwise.

It's up to you to argue that there is no distinction between idols and icons. That's the argument you have to demonstrate. You have to demonstrate that the early fathers believed there was no distinction between idols and icons.

You have accomplished neither of these, nor have you made any effort to do so.

You don't get to make a baseless claim and then force everyone to refute your baseless claim. You have to back your claim with something.

And, yes, it is a baseless claim. You have already acknowledged that an image is not, in and of itself, an idol; demonstrated by those sacred images which God Himself personally instructed. So the mere existence of imagery itself is not sufficient grounds to argue that something is an idol. And you have acknowledged this. So your premise: The fathers of the first three centuries regarded icons to be idols, is something you actually have to demonstrate.

Provide your evidence. Back up your claim.

-CryptoLutheran

Strong in Him · Sunday at 4:18 PM

Daniel Carlton said:
Yes, then you guys claimed there is an icon idol distinction.

There is.

Have you ever looked at old family photo albums?
Has anyone in those photos since died?
Have you ever thought, for example, "dear grandad; he really loved the Bible and taught me such a lot about it"? "Great aunt Ethel served the Lord all her life and prayed for me before I was born "? "My lovely cousin led me to Christ and we taught Sunday school together"?
Were you worshipping your dead relatives?

Hvizsgyak · Sunday at 5:04 PM

Daniel Carlton said:
Unless I missed it, neither of these articles try to make a distinction between icon and idol. And that is the direction this discussion has moved to.

Did you ever think that God may not want you to waste your time trying to make a distinction between icon and idol. The argument between venerating something and someone and worshipping something and someone has been going on for thousands of years. The Church has settled the issue so take the information and believe what God has given you. There is no need to debate the issue. God has given you everything to make the right decision.

Daniel Carlton · Sunday at 5:21 PM

Hvizsgyak said:
Did you ever think that God may not want you to waste your time trying to make a distinction between icon and idol. The argument between venerating something and someone and worshipping something and someone has been going on for thousands of years. The Church has settled the issue so take the information and believe what God has given you. There is no need to debate the issue. God has given you everything to make the right decision.

Well if it is of no importance, why are people bringing it up as their reason?

prodromos · Sunday at 5:30 PM

Daniel Carlton said:
Yes, then you guys claimed there is an icon idol distinction. Which no-one has substantiated.

Sure we have. Justin Martyr clearly states regarding idolatry that the idolaters considered their idols to be their 'gods'. We don't believe any such thing regarding icons. That is a super clear distinction.

Daniel Carlton said:
Have you actually read this thread? You started off by asking me for quotes when I already posted some. Just checking you understand how this talk has gone.

I asked for citations in response to your OP, as I had not seen any on the first two pages of the thread. It wasn't until after I had posted that I continued through the thread and saw your two quotes, neither of which support your claim. Generally when you make a claim, you would then immediately provide citations to back up your claim, not wait two days.

Daniel Carlton · Sunday at 5:36 PM

prodromos said:
Sure we have. Justin Martyr clearly states regarding idolatry that the idolaters considered their idols to be their 'gods'. We don't believe any such thing regarding icons. That is a super clear distinction.

I asked for citations in response to your OP, as I had not seen any on the first two pages of the thread. It wasn't until after I had posted that I continued through the thread and saw your two quotes, neither of which support your claim. Generally when you make a claim, you would then immediately provide citations to back up your claim, not wait two days.

At the end of all of this I still see what you are doing in your church as idolatry. Many claimed there is an icon-idol distinction but that was never substantiated. And it never will be substantiated.

We are going around in circles nothing new being produced so I am going to stop doing this, because it is pointless.

Idolatry

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Great is thy faithfulness

Great is thy faithfulness

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Active Member

Confessional Lutheran

Active Member

Senior Veteran

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Active Member

Confessional Lutheran

Great is thy faithfulness

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Senior Veteran

Active Member

Similar threads