And Christian orthodoxy is what exactly? the Eastern Orthodox Church, which was excommunicated by the Roman church in 1034? Your assertion that historically Christian orthodoxy never shifted left and right is absolute baloney. Christianity has been constantly evolving and changing, the Roman church keeps updating its dogma every couple of centuries with their vatican councils. A religion that is based on divine revelation can never be amended by bishops and cardinals.
That was a schism, and the year was 1054, if you want to establish a tiny foothold on credibility, you have to know your stuff. You don't. Certain dogmas were incompatible with the views of the either Holy sees of Apostolic Church. None of it changed the Christian message, Scriptures, the past history of the Church, nor added to it. RCC's councils are not adding, amending or changing the tenets of the Christian faith either. They didn't redesign the faith but clarified it further for their followers. Also reviewing certain subjects are not inappropriate. The analogy is that people used candles back then now they use light bulbs, if you catch the drift.
Same with Islaam. But you have yet to define exactly what is "orthodox Christianity". Is it roman catholic or eastern orthodox?
Why is that definition relevant? Which is true islam? Sunni or Shiite? Orthodoxy means authorized and accepted theory, doctrine, or practice and the quality of conforming to such theories, doctrines, or practices...from late Greek
orthodoxia which means 'sound doctrine'. Apostolic Church always had the correct doctrine and preserved it. RCC and EO are the continuation of this historical Church, therefore both churches are Apostolic, meaning that they can trace their roots to the disciples of Christ.
Christianity has absolutely no concept of worship, no wander it is such a confused and messy faith.
How cute. What you commit is called argumentum ad verecundiam. You hold no authority on Christianity so that you can technically be an objective critic. All we have seen is bias so far. Christianity's concept of worship is something beyond great, the faith completely addresses the issues of the heart, it doesn't require empty motions, like washing oneself 7 times to clean himself, praying and repeating the same prayers daily because it is a duty and such nonsense.
Worship is exclusively for God, thus what can only be applied to God in worship cannot be applied to other than Him, and what can exclusively be applied to a creation cannot be applied to God. This is a basic principle of worship.
That is exactly what the Christian point of view is. Christians do not worship created beings. I know it is not rocket science but since some people struggle to grasp this simple fact, we are still running in the same circle.
That's a lie, see the pictures I posted of Christians directing their prayers to the icon (not merely praying in their presence). The cherubim and decoration of the Israelite temple and ark were exactly that (decoration), the Israelites never made them the focus of their worship.
Thanks for showing us the face of the true islam once again. Out of all people around here, only you "don't lie"... Now how can you even tell, how those people are praying, what is going on in their minds and hearts? You can't because Islam is all about motions and senseless rituals, repetitions, duties and works. If it doesn't show off any substance on the outside, then there is no meaning. Christians in that picture are praying to God in the presence of the icon, they are not praying to the icon. Your repetitive argument doesn't make what you are saying is true. There was no need to "decorate" the Temple, icons were made to represent the Holy. Focus of worship, for both Christians and Jews is God.
The Ark is not an image or an icon. You constantly forget the second commandment of your religion:
Stop ignoring my context, I mentioned the appropriate Scriptural background.
"You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing love to a thousand {generations} of those who love me and keep my commandments."
The issue with respect to the 2nd commandment is what does the word translated "graven images" mean? If it simply means carved images, then the images in the temple would be in violation of this Commandment. Our best guide, however, to what Hebrew words mean, is what they meant to Hebrewsand when the Hebrews translated the Bible into Greek, they translated this word simply as
"eidoloi", i.e. "idols." Furthermore the Hebrew word
pesel is never used in reference to any of the images in the temple. So clearly the reference here is to pagan images rather than images in general.
Let's look at the Scriptural passage in question more closely:
"Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image (i.e. idol), or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor shalt thou serve (worship) them..." (Exodus 20:4-5a).
Now, if we take this as a reference to images of any kind, then clearly the cherubim in the Temple violate this command. If we limit this as applying only to idols, no contradiction exists. Furthermore, if this applies to all imagesthen even the picture on a driver's license violates it, and is an idol. So either everyone with a driver's license is an idolater, or Icons are not idols.
Leaving aside, for the moment, the meaning of "graven images" lets simply look at what this text actually says about them. You shall not make x, you shall not bow to x, you shall not worship x. If x = image, then the Temple itself violates this Commandment. If x = idol and not all images, then this verse contradicts neither the Icons in the Temple, nor Orthodox Icons.
God called the Ark as the Footstool of His Feet, because only He is worthy of Worship. He wants you to worship Him at His Feet, He doesn't want you to bow to the sculpted feet of Virgin Mary, get it?
There is nothing that I don't get, Virgin Mary is not God, nor she is worshiped.
And you have no authority from God to make images or icons of Virgin Mary. Show me one verse in the Bible which says its okay to make images of human beings, forget about bowing and prostrating before such images.
That argument would only be logical if you would accept the validity of Bible, since you don't you kill your own argument, I already quoted OT verses where there are icons. The venerable eighth century theologian, Saint John of Damascus-a champion for the cause of icons and for Orthodox Christianity-summarizes very well what true Christians in his day believed about God. See if you don't agree. "I believe in one God, the source of all things, without beginning, uncreated, immortal and unassailable, eternal, everlasting, incomprehensible, bodiless, invisible, uncircumscribed, without form. I believe in one superessential Being, one Godhead greater than our conception of divinity, in three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and I adore Him alone. I worship one God, one Godhead, but I adore three persons: God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and I adore Him alone". Nothing could be more sound, more biblical, more Christian, more Orthodox. But given our understanding of the Godhead, if God is invisible, as Saint John writes, how can we possibly depict God? Listen once again to Saint John of Damascus: "It is obvious that when you contemplate God becoming man, then you may depict Him clothed in human form. When the invisible One becomes visible to flesh, you may then draw His likeness. When He who is bodiless and without form, immeasurable in the boundlessness of His own nature, existing in the form of God, empties Himself and takes the form of a servant in substance and in stature and is found in a body of flesh, then you may draw His image and show it to anyone willing to gaze upon it". The old Chinese adage "A picture is worth a thousand words" comes to mind. If we use word-pictures to illustrate our sermons, what about graphic pictures to illustrate the gospel of Christ itself? This is Saint John's plea: "Depict His wonderful condescension, His birth from the Virgin, His baptism in the Jordan, His transfiguration on Tabor, His sufferings which have freed us from passion, His death, His miracles which are signs of His divine nature, since through divine power He worked them in the flesh. Show His saving cross, the tomb, the resurrection, the ascension into the heavens. Use every kind of drawing, word, or color". Absolutely! Right on target! It is incredibly important that we Christians be allowed the latitude to depict Christ's humanity and work, because by His incarnation He revealed Himself in and through material creation. And material creation thus sanctified must be allowed to reveal Him.
The fact that the pagans placed idols in the Kaaba and desecrated it for a while doesn't mean it is or ever was a pagan shrine.
For a while??? It was built by them. Their whirling rituals around it are still continuing today at Hajj. Further, the ridiculous theory that Abraham traveled to Mecca can not be supported by any documents or historical findings. It is Islam's clear attempt to establish credibility through Abraham.
Remember the temple of Jerusalem was also desecrated by the pagan Greeks under Antiochus, who placed images and idols into it. Doesn't mean the temple of Jerusalem was a pagan shrine.
Nor did Jews pick up pagan rituals like early muslims did.
Yes it was an object that healed people, by the authority of God. It had nothing to do with worship, people didn't bow or prostrate before it (they merely looked at it according to the bible).
You have no data go forth in terms of what they did. It is logical assume that they venerated it due to the sacredness of the object. Christians believe that God works through similar sacred objects, and these include icons. Since Christians do not worship icons, your point is moot.
I look forward to you explaining how exactly the bronze snake had anything to do with worship, though I am confident you will just dodge this and make another lame excuse that is completely irrelevant.
I already said it, do you lack the understanding, if so say it so it is further elaborated.
The bronze snake was never meant to be "honored" or "venerated". Moses never told people to start bowing or prostrating to it (like how Christians do to statues of Mary). It has nothing to do with worship, no matter how much nonsense you write trying to claim it was some kind of venerated icon, you can never change the facts.
But you can know the facts by just reading it superficially? That is great because it shows that you don't know our Scriptures. If you look at the passage in question (2nd Kings 18:4), you will see that the Bronze Serpent was not destroyed simply because people venerated it, but because they had made it into a serpent God, called "Nehushtan." Virgin Mary is not made or elevated in to a god, people pray to God, along with Virgin Mary herself.
I am at a loss at to why you are so afraid to explain what exactly "veneration" is in your definition, how it is different from worship, and what is the difference between you venerating icons of Mary and Hindus and Buddhists "venerating" idols.
It is quite illogical to state that one is afraid from explaining, when all they do is explaining in this thread along with others. The only logical outcome is that the one who is addressed is incapable of listening and/or comprehending, or plain out refusing, so the point of explanation becomes moot. Veneration is a special act of honoring, directed to saints, persons who have been identified as singular in the traditions of the religion. Veneration is a way to show great respect and love for the holy. It is to treat something or someone with reverence, deep respect, and honor. Veneration is distinct from worship, for worship is a total giving over of the self to be united with God, while veneration is showing delight for what God has done. There can be confusion because one may venerate what one worships as well as venerate others. Veneration is part of worship to the Orthodox faithful, but they show love and respect to more than the God they worship.
