Icons...

[Thekla]

Who is saying this is wrong?

Icons are an expression of that recognition.

 

[Dorothea]

Here's good info on icons, including questions (probably some even asked here):


1. What is an Icon?

An Icon is an image (usually two dimensional) of Christ, the Saints, Angels, important Biblical events, parables, or events in the history of the Church.St. Gregory the Dialogist (Pope of Rome ca. 590-604), spoke of Icons as being Scripture to the illiterate:

"For what writing presents to readers, this a picture presents to the unlearned who behold, since in it even the ignorant see what they ought to follow; in it the illiterate read" (Epistle to Bishop Serenus of Marseilles, NPNF 2, Vol. XIII, p. 53).

To those who would suggest that this is no longer relevant in our enlightened age, let them consider the rather large functional illiteracy rate we have, and the fact that even the most literate societies always have a sizable illiterate segment... their young children.Icons also lift up our minds from earthly things to the heavenly. St. John of Damascus wrote, "we are led by perceptible Icons to the contemplation of the divine and spiritual" (PG 94:1261a). And by keeping their memory before us through the Icons, we are also inspired to imitate the holiness of those therein depicted. St. Gregory of Nyssa (ca 330-395) spoke of how he could not pass an Icon of Abraham sacrificing Isaac "without tears" (PG 46:572). Commenting on this, it was noted at the Seventh Œcumenical Synod, "If to such a Doctor the picture was helpful and drew forth tears, how much more in the case of the ignorant and simple will it bring compunction and benefit" (NPNF2, Vol 14, p. 539).For Further Reading:

The Functions of Icons, by Dr. Constantine Cavarnos. Ch. 3 from Orthodox Iconography.
A Discourse in Iconography, by St. John of Shanghai and San Francisco

2. Do Orthodox Christians pray to Icons?

Christians pray in the presence of Icons (just as Israelites prayed in the presence of Icons in the Temple), but we do not pray to the image.

3. Do Icons work miracles?

To put this question in proper perspective, let's consider a few other questions: Did the Ark of the Covenant work miracles (e.g. Joshua 3:15ff; 1st Samuel 4-6; 2nd Samuel 11-12)? Did the Bronze Serpent heal those bitten by snakes (Numbers 21:9)? Did the Prophet Elisha's bones raise a man from the dead (2nd Kings 13:21)? Did St. Peter's shadow heal the sick (Acts 5:15)? Did aprons and handkerchiefs that had touched St. Paul heal the sick and caste out evil spirits (Acts 19:12)?The answer to these questions are, Yes, in a manner of speaking. Nevertheless, to be precise, it was God who chose to work miracles through these things. In the case of the Ark and the Bronze serpent, we have images used to work miracles. God worked a miracle through the relics of the Prophet Elisha, through the shadow of a Saint, and through things that had merely touched a Saint. Why? Because God honors those who honor Him (1st Samuel 2:30), and thus takes delight in working miracles through his Saints, even by these indirect means. The fact that God can sanctify material things should come as no surprise to those familiar with Scripture. For example, not only was the Altar of the Temple holy, but anything that touched it was holy as well (Exodus 29:37). To reject the truth that God works through material things is to fall into Gnosticism.So yes, loosely speaking, Icons can work miracles—but to be precise, it is God who works miracles through Icons, because He honors those who have honored Him.

4. Do Orthodox Christians Worship Icons?
What's the difference between "worship" and "veneration"?

Orthodox Christians do not worship Icons in the sense that the word "worship" is commonly used in modern English. In older translations (and in some more recent translations in which the translators insist on using this word in its original sense), one finds the word "worship" used to translate the Greek word proskyneo (literally, "to bow"). Nevertheless, one must understand that the older use of "worship" in English was much broader than it is generally used today, and was often used to refer simply to the act of honoring, venerating, or reverencing. For example, in the old book of common prayer, one of the wedding vows was "with my body I thee worship," but this was never intended to imply that the bride would worship her husband in the sense in which "worship" is commonly used now.(For more on the use of the English word "worship" as it relates to Icons, see: orthodox.co.uk | Information and links for orthodox)

Orthodox Christians do venerate Icons, which is to say, we pay respect to them because they are holy objects, and because we reverence what the Icons depict. We do not worship Icons any more than Americans worship the American flag. Saluting the flag is not exactly the same type of veneration as we pay to Icons, but it is indeed a type of veneration. And just as we do not venerate wood and paint, but rather the persons depicted in the Icon, patriotic Americans do not venerate cloth and dye, but rather the country which the flag represents.This was the reasoning of the Seventh Œcumenical Synod, which decreed in its Oros the following:

"Since this is the case, following the royal path and the teaching divinely inspired by our holy Fathers and the Tradition of the catholic Church—for we know that it is inspired by the Holy Spirit who lives in it—we decide in all correctness and after a thorough examination that, just as the holy and vivifying Cross, similarly the holy and precious Icons painted with colors, made with little stones or with any other matter serving this purpose (epitedeios), should be placed in the holy churches of God, on vases and sacred vestments, on walls and boards, in houses and on roads, whether these are Icons of our Lord God and Savior, Jesus Christ, or of our spotless Sovereign Lady, the holy Mother of God, or of the holy angels and of holy and venerable men. For each time that we see their representation in an image, each time, while gazing upon them, we are made to remember the prototypes, we grow to love them more, and we are more induced to worship them by kissing them and by witnessing our veneration (proskenesin), not the true adoration (latreian) which, according to our faith, is proper only to the one divine nature, but in the same way as we venerate the image of the precious and vivifying cross, the holy Gospel and other sacred objects which we honor with incense and candles according to the pious custom of our forefathers. For the honor rendered to the image goes to its prototype, and the person who venerates an Icon venerates the person represented in it. Indeed, such is the teaching of our holy Fathers and the Tradition of the holy catholic Church which propagated the Gospel from one end of the earth to the other."

The Jews understand the difference between veneration and worship (adoration). A pious Jew kisses the Mezuza on his door post, he kisses his prayer shawl before putting it on, he kisses the tallenin, before he binds them to his forehead, and arm. He kisses the Torah before he reads it in the Synagogue. No doubt, Christ did likewise, when reading the Scriptures in the Synagogue.The Early Christians also understood this distinction as well. In the Martyrdom of Polycarp (who was St. John the Apostle's disciple, and whose Martyrdom was recorded by the faithful of his Church, who were eyewitnesses of all that it recounts), we are told of how some sought to have the Roman magistrate keep the Christians from retrieving the body of the Holy Martyr

"'lest,' so it was said, 'they should abandon the crucified one and begin to worship this man'—this being done at the instigation and urgent entreaty of the Jews, who also watched when we were about to take it from the fire, not knowing that it will be impossible for us either to forsake at any time the Christ who suffered for the salvation of the whole world of those that are saved—suffered though faultless for sinners—nor to worship any other. For Him, being the Son of God, we adore, but the martyrs as disciples and imitators of the Lord we cherish as they deserve for their matchless affection towards their own King and Teacher.... The centurion therefore, seeing the opposition raised on the part of the Jews, set him in the midst and burnt him after their custom. And so we afterwards took up his bones which are more valuable than precious stones and finer than refined gold, and laid them in a suitable place; where the Lord will permit us to gather ourselves together, as we are able, in gladness and joy, and to celebrate the birth-day [i.e. the anniversary] of his martyrdom for the commemoration of those that have already fought in the contest, and for the training and preparation of those that shall do so hereafter" (The Martyrdom of Polycarp 17:2-3; 18:1-3).

5. Doesn't the 2nd Commandment forbid Icons?

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 Hebrews—and 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 images—then even the picture on a driver's license violates it, and is an idol. So either every Protestant 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.

6. Doesn't Deuteronomy 4:14-19 forbid any images of God?
How then can you have Icons of Christ?

This passage instructs the Jews not to make a (false) image of God, because they had not seen God, however, as Christians, we believe that God became Incarnate in the person of Jesus Christ, and so we may depict that "which we have seen with our eyes" (1st John 1:1). As St. John of Damascus said:

"Of old, God the incorporeal and uncircumscribed was never depicted. Now, however, when God is seen clothed in flesh, and conversing with men, I make an image of the God whom I see. I do not worship matter, I worship the God of matter, who became matter for my sake, and deigned to inhabit matter, who worked out my salvation through matter. I will not cease from honouring that matter which works my salvation. I venerate it, though not as God. How could God be born out of lifeless things? And if God's body is God by union, it is immutable. The nature of God remains the same as before, the flesh created in time is quickened by, a logical and reasoning soul."



Orthodox Icons - FAQ

will post a bit more on next post.

 

[Dorothea]

7. But considering the violent opposition which Jews had to images how could the early Christians have accepted Icons?

Not only does one find Iconography throughout Christian Catacombs, but they are also found in Jewish catacombs of the same period. We also have the well preserved Jewish Icons of Dura-Europos, which were in a city destroyed by the Persians in the mid 3rd century (which of course puts a limit on how recent these Icons could have been made).Often Josephus' views on Iconography are erroneously taken as the standard Jewish view on the subject, but this is clearly not the case. The specific text usually cited is the one referring to a riot which took place when the Romans placed an imperial eagle on the gate of the Temple.This story is not so open and shut as some would like to think. These were zealots. Josephus, who was also a rebel, though one who switched sides and later aided the Romans, records these events.

Josephus records that the Romans mounted an eagle over the entrance to the Temple, which the people tore down as sacrilegious—but was it images of beasts per se that were at issue, or was it Roman eagles on the Entrance to the Temple that were the issue. Josephus' views were so extreme on this subject that he thought the statues of animals in connection with the Brazen Sea in Solomon's Temple were a sin (Antiquities VIII,7,5).The over all attitude of Jews towards religious art was not nearly so Iconoclastic. The Palestinian Talmud records (in Abodah Zarah 48d) "In the days of Rabbi Jochanan men began to paint pictures on the walls, and he did not hinder them" and "In the days of Rabbi Abbun men began to make designs on mosaics, and he did not hinder them." Also, the Targum Pseudo-Jonathan repeats the command against idols, but then says "but a stone column carved with images and likenesses you may make upon the premises of your sanctuaries, but not to worship them."Also, Jewish holy books have been illustrated as far back as we have them. They contain illustrations of Biblical scenes, much like those found at the Synagogue of Dura Europos (and like the Church found near by) which was buried in the mid 3rd century when the Persians destroyed that city (See "The excavations at Dura-Europos conducted by Yale University and the French Academy of Inscriptions and Letters," Final Report VII, Part I, The Synagogue, by Carl H. Kraeling).It is note worthy that the earliest Icons of the Catacombs were mostly Old Testament scenes, and Icons of Christ. The dominance of Old Testament scenes shows that this was not a Pagan practices Christianized by converts, but a Jewish practice, adopted by the Christians. To see the images found in the Synagogue of Dura Europos, click on the following links:

A Great Assemblage
http://www.pitt.edu/~tokerism/0040/images2/213.jpg

8. If Icons are so important, why do we not find them in the Scriptures?

Ah, but we do find them in the Scriptures—plenty of them! Consider how prevalent they were in the Tabernacle and then later in the Temple. There were images of cherubim:

On the Ark—Ex. 25:18
On the Curtains of the Tabernacle—Ex. 26:1
On the Veil of the Holy of Holies—Ex. 26:31
Two huge Cherubim in the Sanctuary—1st Kings 6:23
On the Walls—1st Kings 6:29
On the Doors—1st Kings 6:32
And on the furnishings—1st Kings 7:29,36
In short, there were Icons everywhere you turned.

9. Why were there only Icons of Cherubim, and not of Saints?

The Temple was an image of Heaven, as St. Paul makes clear:

"[the priests who serve in the Temple in Jerusalem] serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount" (Hebrews 8:5; cf. Exodus 25:40).

Before Christ came in the flesh and triumphed over death by His Resurrection, the Saints of the Old Testament were not in the presence of God in Heaven, but were in Sheol (often translated as "the grave", and translated as "hades" in Greek). Before Christ's Resurrection, Sheol was the destiny of both the just and the unjust (Genesis 37:35; Isaiah 38:10), though their lot there was by no means the same. As we see in Christ's parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31; cf. Enoch 22:8-15 [although the book of Enoch is not included in the Canon of Holy Scripture, it is a venerable part of Holy Tradition and is quoted in the Epistle of St. Jude, as well as in many of the writings of the holy fathers]) there was a gulf that separated the just from the unjust, and while the righteous were in a state of blessedness, the wicked were (and are) in a state of torment—the righteous awaited their deliverance through Christ's Resurrection, while the wicked fearfully awaited their judgment. Thus under the old covenant, prayers were said only for the departed, because they were not yet in heaven to intercede on our behalves. For as St. Paul said to the Hebrews when speaking of the Old Testament Saints, "And all these, having obtained a good testimony through faith, did not receive the promise, God having provided something better for us, that they should not be made perfect apart from us" (Hebrews 11:39-40). In Hebrews 12, St. Paul goes on to contrast the nature of the Old Covenant (12:18ff) with that of the New (12:22ff)—and among the distinctions he makes, he says that in the New Covenant we "are come unto... the spirits of just men made perfect (12:22-23). As both the Scriptures and the rest of Holy Tradition tell us, while Christ's body lay in the tomb, His Spirit descended into Sheol and proclaimed liberty to the captives (Ephesians 4:8-10; 1st Peter 3:19, 4:6; cf. Matthew 27:52-53). And these Saints that have triumphed over this world, now reign with Christ in Glory (2nd Timothy 2:12), and continually offer up prayers for us before the Lord (Revelation 5:8; the Martyrdom of St. Ignatius, Ch. 7 [St. Ignatius was one of the disciples of the Apostle John, and was made Bishop of Antioch by him]).Thus, while in the Old Covenant, the Temple imaged heaven with only the attending Cherubim, in the New Covenant, our Temples image heaven with the great cloud of witnesses that now reside in glory there.

10. OK, granted that there are Icons of sorts in Scripture, but where were the Israelites told that they should venerate them?

The Scriptures do command the Israelites to bow before the Ark, which had two prominent images of cherubim on it. In Psalms 99:5, it commands: "bow before the footstool of His feet...." We should note first of all that the word for "bow" here, is the same word used in Exodus 20:5, when we are told to not bow to idols.And what is the "footstool of His feet"? In 1st Chronicles 28:2, David uses this phrase in reference to the Ark of the Covenant. In Psalm 99 [98 in the Septuagint], it begins by speaking of the Lord who "dwells between the Cherubim" (99:1), and it ends with a call to "bow to His holy hill"—which makes it even clearer that in context, this is speaking of the Ark of the Covenant. This phrase occurs again in Psalm 132:7, where it is preceded by the statement "We will go into His tabernacles..." and is followed by the statement "Arise, O Lord, into Thy rest; Thou and the Ark of Thy strength."Interestingly, this phrase is applied to the Cross in the services of the Church, and the connection is not accidental—because on the Ark, between the Cherubim was the Mercy Seat, upon which the sacrificial blood was sprinkled for the sins of the people (Exodus 25:22, Leviticus 16:15).

11. But what about the Bronze Serpent? Wasn't it destroyed precisely because the people began venerating it?

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 honored it, but because they had made it into a serpent God, called "Nehushtan."

12. Weren't there Iconoclasts in the Church, long before Protestants came along?

It is important to keep in mind, when considering the question of Icons (and thus also Iconoclasm), that there are two separate questions that are often confused:

1). Is it permissible to make or to have Icons?
2). Is it permissible to venerate them?

It is clear from the Old Testament that the answer to both questions is, Yes. While Protestants, however, object to the veneration of Icons, they typically do not object to the making or possession of images. If they did, they would not have illustrated Gospel tracts, TV's, or pictures... but aside from the Amish, one would be hard pressed to find another group of Protestants that consistently eschews images. Protestants do typically object to the veneration of images, but interestingly the arguments and evidence that they use almost always argues against any images of any kind, if the logic of their line of argumentation were consistently followed.The Iconoclasts, who are often cited by Protestants as supporting their position on this question, in fact actually argue against Protestants. On the one hand, the Iconoclasts anathematized all those who "venture to represent...with material colours..." Christ or the Saints—something almost all Protestants do themselves. On the other hand, they also anathematized all those who "shall not confess the holy ever-virgin Mary, truly and properly the Mother of God, to be higher than every creature whether visible or invisible, and does not with sincere faith seek her intercessions as one having confidence in her access to our God since she bare Him..." and they also anathematized anyone who "denies the profit of the invocation of the Saints..." (NPNF2, Vol. 14, p. 545f). So as a matter of fact, Protestants find themselves under more of the Iconoclast's anathemas than do the Orthodox.Protestants might wish to take solace that at least Iconoclasts opposed the veneration of images, but veneration was never an issue per se with the Iconoclasts. They only opposed venerating Icons, because they opposed Icons. They were not opposed to venerating holy things—the Iconoclasts venerated the Cross, and made no bones about it (Jaroslav Pelikan, The Spirit of Eastern Christendom (600-1700), Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1974, p. 110).Protestants also cite some other fathers and early writers of the Church to support their position. Most of these quotations simply denounce idolatry, and have nothing to do with Icons. In those few cases in which the quotes could plausibly be interpreted as condemning Icons (some of which are arguably later Iconoclastic interpolations) a consistent interpretation would require that no images be made... because again, the objection found in these texts is to the making of and possession of images. None of these texts even addresses the question of veneration.The Canon of the Synod of Elvira is often cited in support of an Iconoclast position. In its 36th Canon, the council decreed: "It is ordained that Pictures are not to be in churches, so that that which is worshipped and adored shall not be painted on walls." Even Protestant scholars concede that the meaning of this canon is not as clear as Protestant apologists often suggest. For one, it is unclear what was the occasion for this canon, and it is not clear what it was trying to prevent, a fact even Protestant scholars acknowledge:

"...no great weight can be attached to this [canon 36 of the council of Elvira], the exact bearing of the canon being unknown" [Edward James Martin, A History of the Iconoclastic Controversy (London: Society for the Promotion of Christian Knowledge, 1930), p. 19, fn 4].

Because of the wording of this canon, it is almost certainly not a blanket ban on images. What is not clear is what it is banning, and more particularly to what end. Plausible interpretations range from this being merely a ban on images in Church, to a precautionary measure to protect Icons from the Pagans (since the canon was composed during a time of persecution, this is certainly possible). In any case, the fact of the matter is that Icons were in use in Spanish Churches before this Synod, and they continued to be used after this Synod, without any further evidence of controversy. Furthermore, this Synod was of a purely local character, and was never affirmed on an Œcumenical level.

For rest of excellent article:
Orthodox Icons - FAQ

 

[JesusFreak78]

Icons are an expression of that recognition.

Based on Exodus 20:4 I don't think Christ would approve of using icons.

 

[Thekla]

Based on Exodus 20:4 I don't think Christ would approve of using icons.

Based on Exodus 20:4 along with the Scripture in full, I disagree,

 

[Dorothea]

Icons were all explained in what I posted. It is quite Scriptural.

 

[Kristos]

Based on Exodus 20:4 I don't think Christ would approve of using icons.

Based on John 1, I think He would.

 

[Kepha]

I find it scary to even think about I should imagine Christ in my mind since I would never be able to form a correct picture and by doing so I would brake the second commandment.

So you're afraid to use your mind's capacity to connect with Christ through an image because it can't be understood perfectly, yet you've no problem taking chances on being wrong about what God is or is not saying everytime you interpret Scripture then preach it to other Christians? I find that even scarier. And I will add that you've also no problem dwelling on certain qualities of God's personality without even being able to comprehend their full infinite definitions with your limited, frail, human mind.

I don't like children's book or children's bible since I think those pictures are given the wrong pictures when it comes to several things.

I would also assume that you never watch movies about Jesus where there's an actor portraying Christ in the film.

What is a relic?

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Relics

Why do you insist on focusing on everything else than Christ? You need only Christ to worship him and nothing else.

That's not what I am arguing for and I'm sure you know that.

So what the woman did by touching the cloak of Christ was wrong then?

 

[JesusFreak78]

Based on Exodus 20:4 along with the Scripture in full, I disagree,

I mean no offence, but I would expect no less from you.

 

[JesusFreak78]

Based on John 1, I think He would.

How did you come to that conclusion?

 

[Thekla]

I mean no offence, but I would expect no less from you.

"No less ..."

To worship Christ, and thus to recognize the effect of Christ is a lesser thing ?

 

[JesusFreak78]

So you're afraid to use your mind's capacity to connect with Christ through an image because it can't be understood perfectly, yet you've no problem taking chances on being wrong about what God is or is not saying everytime you interpret Scripture then preach it to other Christians?

When God tells me to make no images (see Exodus 20:4), I better fear Him enough to obey that. I'm not saying I'm doing this perfectly 100% all the time, but I do obey it the best I can.

No ones understanding of the scriptures are perfect 100% of the time.

I find that even scarier.

You are entitled to think that.

And I will add that you've also no problem dwelling on certain qualities of God's personality without even being able to comprehend their full infinite definitions with your limited, frail, human mind.

That is true, but I don't rely on my own understanding, but try my best to dwell on what the bible is telling me about God.

I would also assume that you never watch movies about Jesus where there's an actor portraying Christ in the film.

I have and have not been pleased with what I have seen.

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Relics

Thanks.

That's not what I am arguing for and I'm sure you know that.

So what the woman did by touching the cloak of Christ was wrong then?

I never said it was wrong, but I don't understand why you focusing on the cloak as the big thing. Instead you should focus on Christ and what He did for her.

 

[JesusFreak78]

"No less ..."

To worship Christ, and thus to recognize the effect of Christ is a lesser thing ?

What I mean is, it doesn't matter how many verses I post from the bible about not making images of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth because you will always find a way to excuse what you are doing.

 

[Thekla]

What I mean is, it doesn't matter how many verses I post from the bible about not making images of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth because you will always find a way to excuse what you are doing.

Read the commandment again; it says to not make idols and worship them.

 

[JesusFreak78]

Read the commandment again; it says to not make idols and worship them.

I have read it many times. Let me post it for you.

Exodus 20:4
“You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth.

As you see it doesn't only say to not make any idols, but it also says to not "make any likeness" of what is in heaven and so forth.

 

[Kristos]

How did you come to that conclusion?

Through the study of scripture, church history and the iconoclast controversy which culminated in the 7th Ecumenical council.

 

[Kristos]

I have read it many times. Let me post it for you.

Exodus 20:4
“You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth.

As you see it doesn't only say to not make any idols, but it also says to not "make any likeness" of what is in heaven and so forth.

You are not providing any new data. This was all resolved 1400 years ago.

 

[Fotina]

Based on Exodus 20:4 I don't think Christ would approve of using icons.

The 10 Commandments and the portrayal of the saints​

Let’s take a look at another maltreated passage, which is used by those opposed to icons. It is in Exodus, 20: 4 and it is one of the ten Commandments: “Thou shalt not make unto thyself any image, nor any likeness, of anything that is in the sky above, or in the earth below, or in the waters below the earth. Do not prostrate yourself before them, nor worship them, for I, the lord your God, am a zealous God…”
The deniers of icons say: “Here is a passage that forbids the depiction, even of creatures!” Our reply to this, is as follows: “Even this passage refers to the depiction of creatures as gods; and we can verify this, in Deuteronomy, 4: 12-19 : “And (although) the Lord spoke unto you…. yet you did not see any likeness (of Him). You only heard a voice. And he revealed to you … the ten commandments…. So, guard well your souls, (for you have seen no likeness on the day that the Lord spoke to you in Horeb, amidst the flames), lest you corrupt yourselves, and make unto yourselves any idol, an image of any form: of a male or female likeness…. or of beast, … or of vulture,….. or reptilian,…. or fish-like..… lest you lift up your eyes to the sky, and, upon seeing the sun and the moon and the stars and all the components of the firmament, and thus stray, and prostrate yourself and worship them”.
Here we see very analytically what was forbidden for depiction “as likenesses of God”. Once again, this is proof that there is no prohibition for the depiction of saints; only of God.
Here we also see that the reason it was forbidden to depict God, was “because there was no likeness of Him” .
Now, it is our turn to ask: How is it, that inside the temple of Solomon there were likenesses of oxen? How is it, that above the Ark of the Covenant there were likenesses of angels? How is it, that there were likenesses of angels inside the inner sanctum of the Tabernacle? (Exodus, 25:18 and 36:35, and Chronicles II, 4:3-4)
Can we therefore assume that only the likenesses of saints bother contemporary iconoclasts?

​

The portrayal of Jesus Christ​

Let’s look at something else now: Today, after so many years, do we Christians -who are no longer under Mosaic Law- have the right to depict God? As we noted previously, at the time the ten commandments were given, God had given no likeness of Himself. However, when the time had come, God revealed His image to us, in the person of Jesus Christ, as noted in Colossians, 1:15: “…who is the image of the invisible God; the firstborn before all creation”. Also, in John, 14:9, Jesus Christ says: “…whomsoever has seen me, has seen the Father”.
Therefore, today, we can see (and therefore also depict) God, in the person of Jesus Christ; we do not depict God in His divine nature, but only in His human nature, since we have never seen His Divinity.

​

Portrayals of God​

The only other instances that the divinely-inspired Church of the Lord allows us to depict God, is in the icon of “Abraham’s Hospitality”, where the three angelic messengers are portrayed, not as an image of God, but as a symbolism of the Holy Trinity; also, in the icon of Christ’s baptism, where the Holy Spirit descends from heaven in the form of a dove. And of course, this does not imply here that the Holy Spirit has the actual form of a bird; the Holy Spirit simply took on that form at the time.
In both of these icons, we depict only that which we -as humans- can perceive; We have no intention of portraying the invisible and indescribable nature of God.

Shadows, images and “things”​

Last of all, we shall examine a certain difference between the Old and the New Testaments, which pertains to our subject:
In the Epistle to Hebrews, 10 :1, the Holy Bible mentions the following: “The Law is but the shadow of the riches to come; it is not the (actual) image of things…”
According to these words, we can see that the Old Testament (=Law) was only the shadow, while the New Testament is THE (=THE PRESENT) image of the things to come.
The Old Testament spoke enigmatically of God, in a shadowy way, and was therefore unable to utilize images. The New Testament however showed us the image of exactly those celestial things, in other words, a clearer aspect of them.
Now that we have truly seen the image of God in Jesus Christ, and those who were sanctified in Christ’s image, we can depict them, until the moment comes when we shall meet them face to face; when we find ourselves within those things to come.

 

[Thekla]

I have read it many times. Let me post it for you.

Exodus 20:4
“You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth.

As you see it doesn't only say to not make any idols, but it also says to not "make any likeness" of what is in heaven and so forth.

You forgot the conjunction which denotes an incomplete statement and introduces the related thought in the next phrase to thus give the entire concept.

(And to mention again, that the Scripture, the LXX, states "idols".)

 

[ViaCrucis]

I have read it many times. Let me post it for you.

Exodus 20:4
“You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth.

As you see it doesn't only say to not make any idols, but it also says to not "make any likeness" of what is in heaven and so forth.

So you don't have any photographs of family or friends then? No puppy calendars or the like right?

Because, as you just quoted,

"You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness ..."

Any means any. That includes photographs, paintings, little cat figurines or action figures or puppets.

-CryptoLutheran