Icons...

[simonthezealot]

1.) Are they contrary to scripture?

2.) While legend has it that Luke the evangelist started this tradition is there any evidence in the first few centuries that this was an action which was acceptable by the Christian community?

3.) Does the fact that the Christian faith has had disputes over this issue over the centuries matter?

4.) What saith scripture?

 

[ivebeenshown]

1.) Are they contrary to scripture?

2.) While legend has it that Luke the evangelist started this tradition is there any evidence in the first few centuries that this was an action which was acceptable by the Christian community?

3.) Does the fact that the Christian faith has had disputes over this issue over the centuries matter?

4.) What saith scripture?

1.) God commanded that there be icons of cherubim on the ark and on the tapestries, so apparently God, being unchanging, does not have a problem with all images.

2.) I do not know.

3.) I do not think so.

4.) Is this a repeat of number one?

 

[sunlover1]

1.) Are they contrary to scripture?

I'm curious. I am stupid about "icons"

3.) Does the fact that the Christian faith has had disputes over this issue over the centuries matter?

Doesn't matter to me ... my plumb is Scripture.

4.) What saith scripture?

Good question.

 

[simonthezealot]

1.) God commanded that there be icons of cherubim on the ark and on the tapestries, so apparently God, being unchanging, does not have a problem with all images.

Did God command the reproduction of the EO icons?

 

[Thekla]

Christ came visibly to walk among us; iconography is an attestation of this fact (anti-gnostic).

Link to the work of St. Theodore the Studite on icons:
On the holy icons - Saint Theodore (Studites), Catharine P. Roth - Google Books

Link to St. John of Damascus on icons:
John of Damascus: Icons

Attestation to the truth is attestation to the Truth.
Whether in text, or paint, or speech, or song.

The controversy of the use of icons was the result of an effort to mollify adherents of Islam by the emperor of the Byzantine Empire.
This attempt at syncretism was successfully repulsed.

To note, it was the Muslims who labeled Jews and Christians the "people of the Book".
Christianity was not a "Book religion". It is an adherence to the Christ, and to the keeping of His revelation to us. All of it.

 

[simonthezealot]

Also, the Israelites did not bow down to the ark or to the statues of the cherubim, or serve them. To compare what God had set in place, to that of religious activity is folly.

 

[Thekla]

Also, the Israelites did not bow down to the ark or to the statues of the cherubim, or serve them. To compare what God had set in place, to that of religious activity is folly.

The OT was not produced in contemporary video; the most important bowing is the one that occurs in the heart.

 

[ivebeenshown]

Did God command the reproduction of the EO icons?

I do not know. There are a lot of things that we all do which God did not explicitly command.

 

[simonthezealot]

Christ came visibly to walk among us; iconography is an attestation of this fact (anti-gnostic).

Of the opposing or differing icons of the Christ...Which one is the right one?

Does it depict the description of the Messiah put forth in Colossians?

1:15He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. 17He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. 19For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.


Doubtful?

 

[ivebeenshown]

Also, the Israelites did not bow down to the ark or to the statues of the cherubim, or serve them. To compare what God had set in place, to that of religious activity is folly.

Take care that you do not attempt to judge the hearts of others based only on what you can see with your eyes.

1 Peter 3
15 But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, 16 keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.

 

[simonthezealot]

I do not know. There are a lot of things that we all do which God did not explicitly command.

Is that okay?
Is that an excuse to carry on an action if it seems to oppose scripture?

 

[ivebeenshown]

Is that okay?
Is that an excuse to carry on an action if it seems to oppose scripture?

No, it is not an excuse. We must take care not to trespass God's commandments.

 

[simonthezealot]

Take care that you do not attempt to judge the hearts of others based only on what you can see with your eyes.

1 Peter 3
15 But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, 16 keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.

Friend do not already begin this affront on my intentions, to question a religious activity as to it's soundness to the plumbline of scripture is NOT judging ones heart, only suggesting a review and discussion of the practice.

 

[Thekla]

Is that okay?
Is that an excuse to carry on an action if it seems to oppose scripture?

For you it "seems to oppose Scripture", but it actually opposes your interpretation of Scripture.

Christ came as a human to walk among us -- which of the senses was He not available to ?

(The plumb line of Scripture, btw is Jesus Christ.)

 

[simonthezealot]

No, it is not an excuse. We must take care not to trespass God's commandments.

Exactly.

 

[Tzaousios]

1.) Are they contrary to scripture?

According to your interpretation, and subsequent presupposition, they are. Thus, this is not really an interrogative question, but a rhetorical one.

2.) While legend has it that Luke the evangelist started this tradition is there any evidence in the first few centuries that this was an action which was acceptable by the Christian community?

History does not matter because of your accepted presupposition. No historical evidence that anyone could provide will change your mind. Thus, this is another rhetorical question.

Does the fact that the Christian faith has had disputes over this issue over the centuries matter?

No, it does not, according to your presupposition concerning icons.

What saith scripture?

This should read: "What saith simonthezealot's interpretation of scripture, because it is the only thing that matters and that he will accept, in the end?"

 

[simonthezealot]

For you it "seems to oppose Scripture", but it actually opposes your interpretation of Scripture.

So no one can find absolute truths in scripture?

 

[Thekla]

So no one can find absolute truths in scripture?

The absolute truth of Scripture is Jesus Christ.

He was misinterpreted when He walked among us, thus it is not surprising that misinterpretations still occur.

 

[simonthezealot]

So when people can't defend their position the proper thing is to attack the questioners presupposition and interpretation?

Weak.

 

[ivebeenshown]

Friend do not already begin this affront on my intentions, to question a religious activity as to it's soundness to the plumbline of scripture is NOT judging ones heart, only suggesting a review and discussion of the practice.

Sir, I have only said 'take care that you do not', I did not say that you have.