Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
nobody's making you bow to an "idol" simon.
nobody can take away Icons from the other side either.
I tend to agree with you on this.How is kissing an icon or let us say the crucifix the same as kissing the idol of Zeus?
The Jews opposed to kissing ANY Christian symbol (although the Orthdox Jews kiss the Shema every time they go in and out from their homes) an idol... because Christ was a "blasphemere" since God had no son.. Not because they objected it be an idol...They had other motives for rejecting Christ. The icons was the "icing on the cake" in their proving that He had nothing to do with "their" God and Christians were worshiping a false god... an idol...
But this was all nice a dandy to do....
kissing a schroll....venerating it ... I can say they worship it if i wanted to be picky could I??
Or also kissing the Torah...
or a muslim woman kissing the Koran...
How this is different? Are these good folks worshiping the book?? or their content?
You decide...
Readily????????????Dear Simon,
Let us examine this word 'worship' you use so readily.
Simon, nobody ever figured that you'd be quiet... don't worry!Nope they sure aren't making me...I wouldn't for fear of offending my maker.
Oh yeah someone can take away the icons.
-God, the history as written in the OT shows as much and God is the same yesterday today and forever.
They offend Him that much is clear in scripture you can choose not to speak up against it but I won't be so quiet.
Peace.
Yes with some even though it shouldn't be.... but I would say that the same vein of "worship" is given the word of God itself.
Good one UB, and your right no probably ever would figure that.Simon, nobody ever figured that you'd be quiet... don't worry!
and I think you are confusing Roman Catholicism with the Orthodox in this one matter.
Your speaking of kissing the bible and such I assumed? well put it this way I have never kissed my bible...I don't tiz out if I drop it on the floor...how much respect do you apply to the word of God?
Dear Simon,Readily????????????
You guys have been trying to back me into a corner for this very purpose that much is obvious, 200 Plus posts the accusations of worship did not come from my mouth it actually came from your putting words in my mouth, so now it is READILY.
You have no desire to discuss the valid points of this topic and have not a bit.
I'M the one who claims veneration is worship, & that the invention of equating intention with acceptable degrees thereof is vain imagination.Readily????????????
You guys have been trying to back me into a corner for this very purpose that much is obvious, 200 Plus posts the accusations of worship did not come from my mouth it actually came from your putting words in my mouth, so now it is READILY.
You have no desire to discuss the valid points of this topic and have not a bit.
which seemed to me, as it still does, to imply that worship and veneration are practically the same.I certainly take serious issue with the image practice your church and the catholic DEEM a necessity, I am not familiar enough with your dulia hyper dulia type lingo to accuse anyone of worship in the strichtest sense, but I do generally observe that if things act walk and talk like a duck 999 out 1000 times they are a duck.
Dear Montalban,
I suspect that during the time when exchanges fly fast and furious, we all miss things posted by others, and perhaps the times comes when we need just to let some things go by?
The question you pose here is a very interesting one:
My understanding would be that since the Word becomes Incarnate, what we see in Christ is both God in His fullness, but with that fullness incarnate in human form. We see the outwardness, but through a glass darkly, as it were, so he who has seen the Father has seen the Son, but we do not look at the face of God in the way that, say Moses did. That is my poor understanding, and I should be glad of any correction.
peace,
Anglian
You're not one who sees Jesus in a burrito are you?interesting! I can get all the same experiences on a picnic lunch in the park.
I myself don't care if people use icons. despite my fellow protestant objections, I don't see the paralell between bowing to a golden cow, and remembering a saint through an icon. (I do have reservations about praying to saints, but that's a entirely seperate issue, of course.) I just wonder, though, if the CONSTANT use of icons in worship doesn't in some way make it that you are unable to worship (corporately, that is) without them. As for the use of icons, as a rule, it's not that big a deal for me. I'm neither Catholic or EO... so it doesn't come up much, outside this virtual cooking pot.
You could quote Hitler in a context to say, for example "Even Hitler was fond of art", or something. However I think you're protesting against people using evidence that supports their case, and I don't follow that drift.ok.... but using that Rubric, I can quote Hitler, right? He said a few truisms in his day too... some that were fairly profund. he was a murdering lunatic, of course, but hey.... it should be fine!
As long as they realise he wasn't 100% Kosher, then I don't see a problem with quoting supporting evidence. That seems to be your beef.never happens though. I wasn't thinking of EO specifically when it comes to Origen anywho. I was thinking more RC. They quote ECF's like scripture itself... and sometimes they quote their heretics too.
To whom our fathers would not obey, but thrust him from them, and in their hearts turned back again into Egypt,
Acts 7:40 Saying unto Aaron, Make us gods to go before us: for as for this Moses, which brought us out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him.
Acts 7:41 And they made a calf in those days, and offered sacrifice unto the idol, and rejoiced in the works of their own hands.
Acts 7:42 Then God turned, and gave them up to worship the host of heaven; as it is written in the book of the prophets, O ye house of Israel, have ye offered to me slain beasts and sacrifices by the space of forty years in the wilderness?
Acts 7:43 Yea, ye took up the tabernacle of Moloch, and the star of your god Remphan, figures which ye made to worship them: and I will carry you away beyond Babylon.
Moloch went by many names including, but not limited to, Ba'al, Moloch, Apis Bull, Golden Calf, Chemosh, as well as many other names, and was widely worshipped in the Middle East and wherever Punic culture extended (including, but not limited to, the Ammonites, Edomites and the Moabites). Baal Moloch was conceived under the form of a calf or an ox or depicted as a man with the head of a bull.
http://remphan.idoneos.com/http://www.biblelearn.com/east3103.htmBible Dictionary
Remphan
(acts 7:43) and Chi un, (amos 5:26) have been supposed to be names of an idol worshipped secretly by the Israelites in the wilderness, difficulty has been occasioned by this corresponding occurrence of two names so wholly different in sound. The most reasonable opinion seems to be that Chiun was a Hebrew or Semitic name, and Remphan an Egyptian equivalent substituted by the LXX. This idol corresponded probably to Saturn or Molech. The mention of Chiun or Remphan as worshipped in the desert shows that this idolatry was, in part at least that of foreigners, and no doubt of those settled in lower Egypt.
Dear Montalban,
I suspect that during the time when exchanges fly fast and furious, we all miss things posted by others, and perhaps the times comes when we need just to let some things go by?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?