Icons...

[JesusFreak78]

He's wrong because I don't worship idols. Why would I need the bible to justify myself in this case? Unless it says "Dylan worships idols" or "Dylan does not worship idols", I don't think it is going to help.

So what you are saying is you have no biblical support for your use of icons.

 

[Dorothea]

Quite the leap there sister, even your link would not go that far...Instead they left an opening for areas of his teachings which they opposed by stating this,
"In his zeal to preserve the purity of the Orthodox Faith, St. Epiphanius could sometimes be rash and tactless. In spite of any impetuous mistakes he may have made, we must admire St. Epiphanius for his dedication in defending Orthodoxy against false teachings. After all, one of the bishop's primary responsibilities is to protect his flock from those who might lead them astray."

Quite on the contrary, Simon. It seems to me that you are trying to find something in that quote that applies to St. Ephiphanius' opposition to icons, when there isn't one. As we have said before, he wrote adamantly about heresies - a list of 80 of them - and the use of icons in the Church as heresy isn't one of them. Also, the fact that the Ecumenical Council pronounced him a Father of the Church, and they were there discussing the use of icons in the Church and determined it would continue, I find it extremely hard to believe, if not impossible, that they would have done this if he had denounced the use of icons in the Church. He would have been known as an iconoclast in opposition to the church and anathematized, considering the pretty direct and meaningful words of the Council...


THE COUNCIL'S PROCLAMATION

"We define that the holy icons, whether in color, mosaic, or some other material, should be exhibited in the holy churches of God, on the sacred vessels and liturgical vestments, on the walls, furnishings, and in houses and along the roads, namely the icons of our Lord God and Savior Jesus Christ, that of our Lady the Theotokos, those of the venerable angels and those of all saintly people. Whenever these representations are contemplated, they will cause those who look at them to commemorate and love their prototype. We define also that they should be kissed and that they are an object of veneration and honor (timitiki proskynisis), but not of real worship (latreia), which is reserved for Him Who is the subject of our faith and is proper for the divine nature, ... which is in effect transmitted to the prototype; he who venerates the icon, venerated in it the reality for which it stands."


The iconophilles believed that icons served to preserve the doctrinal teachings of the Church; they considered icons to be man's dynamic way of expressing the divine through art and beauty. The Iconoclast controversy was a form of Monophysitism: distrust and downgrading of the human side.

The Seventh Ecumenical Council — Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America

 

[Dylan Michael]

So what you are saying is you have no biblical support for your use of icons.

No, I'm saying that I don't worship idols.

 

[JesusFreak78]

No, I'm saying that I don't worship idols.

Do you bow down to them and kiss them?

 

[Dylan Michael]

Do you bow down to them and kiss them?

Bow down and kiss what? Besides, what does that have to do with anything?

 

[Tzaousios]

The purpose for those images is in a different context. In Exodus 20:4 we are talking about worshiping and in the later verse God is telling the Jews to put up images for none-worship purposes.

No, it is your opinion that veneration=worship based upon your opinion of what the verses prohibiting idolatry cover. You have done this every time despite being given historical, theological, and biblical evidence as to the definition of veneration and why the Orthodox do it.

Who is being more disingenuous then, you for perpetuating the criticism, or the Orthodox for sticking to the historical, theological, and biblical reasons for veneration as it has always been done in their Church?

You are the one that is defending the use of icons by saying you venerate them, so I would say it fits into the discussion.

Once again, ad nauseam, you believe that veneration=worship, and the Orthodox do not and have told you why. Thus, they are "defending" not a clearly prohibited practice of worshipping idols, but their historically-verifiable beliefs from the obstinate attacks of a few Evangelical Protestant aniconists and iconoclasts.

 

[Dylan Michael]

No, it is your opinion that veneration=worship based upon your opinion of what the verses prohibiting idolatry cover. You have done this every time despite being given historical, theological, and biblical evidence as to the definition of veneration and why the Orthodox do it.

Who is being more disingenuous then, you for perpetuating the criticism, or the Orthodox for sticking to the historical, theological, and biblical reasons for veneration as it has always been done in their Church?



Once again, ad nauseam, you believe that veneration=worship, and the Orthodox do not and have told you why. Thus, they are "defending" not a clearly prohibited practice of worshipping idols, but their historically-verifiable beliefs from the obstinate attacks of a few Evangelical Protestant aniconists and iconoclasts.

I would like to reiterate this.

 

[Tzaousios]

So what you are saying is you have no biblical support for your use of icons.

No, it means that he does not believe that the prooftexts from the Old Testament and Revelation tossed up by you and simonthezealot make out the veneration of Christian iconography to be "image worship" and "idolatry."

If I had to guess, it also means that he is not surprised that you disagree with the catholic Christians' interpretation of the Scripture they have offered and reject it out of hand due to your presuppositions.

 

[simonthezealot]

As we have said before, he wrote adamantly about heresies - a list of 80 of them - and the use of icons in the Church as heresy isn't one of them

So what? maybe the recorded experience of the torn curtain as detailed by Jerome happened after his writings on these heresies..

 

[Dorothea]

The purpose for those images is in a different context. In Exodus 20:4 we are talking about worshiping and in the later verse God is telling the Jews to put up images for none-worship purposes.

The Ark of the Covenant, where the mercy seat was in between the carved images of the Cherubim was most certainly bowed to and worshiped, seeing it as God's throne mystically to the Jews.

Also, you have just said God had Moses put up images in the Temple for non-worship use. You have just affirmed what we practice and that images were certainly in the Temple and were not banned or prohibited.

The bible says nothing about he saw God and since the bible clearly states in 6:46 that no one except from Jesus Christ has seen the Father, I will say that he didn't see God.

Actually, it does.

Exodus 33:18 "Moses replied, 'Reveal Yourself to me." 19 Then God said, 'I will pass before you in My glory, and I will proclaim My name, the Lord, before you. I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.' 20 But He said, 'You cannot see My face for no man can see My face and live.' 21 Moreover, the Lord said, 'Here is a place by Me you shall stand on the rock. 22 So it shall be, while My glory passes by, that I will put you in the cleft of the rock, and will cover you with My hand while I pass by. 23 Then I will take away My hand, and you shall see My back; but My face shall not be seen."

That was Christ's back Moses saw.

Jesus Christ is the image of the Father, but I still haven't seen any image that is able to represent Christ correctly and I doubt that will ever happen. It's also impossible if you try to make the image portrait His divinity.

Nobody is trying to make the perfect Image of Christ God. It is not like we are trying to do a sitting portrait of him or snap a photo. The point is that Christ came in the flesh, in matter, came onto the earth and took on humanity and rejoined it with Himself and reconciled it to the Father. God showed us who He was in the flesh, making it possible for us to see who the Father is through Christ. Therefore, in testament to Christ's Incarnation, the holy icons show this.

 

[Dorothea]

So what? maybe the recorded experience of the torn curtain as detailed by Jerome happened after his writings on these heresies..

You keep hoping so, Simon, but again, there is no proof of this.

 

[simonthezealot]

No, it means that he does not believe that the prooftexts from the Old Testament and Revelation tossed up by you and simonthezealot make out the veneration of Christian iconography to be "image worship" and "idolatry."

If I had to guess, it also means that he is not surprised that you disagree with the catholic Christians' interpretation of the Scripture they have offered and reject it out of hand due to your presuppositions.

How can anyone accept anything other than warnings from scripture about image and idol veneration? There are none examples of venerating anything throughout the NT.........

 

[simonthezealot]

You keep hoping so, Simon, but again, there is no proof of this.

So Jerome probably the most well known of all the early authors of Christianity is not proof?

 

[Dorothea]

Do you bow down to them and kiss them?

This is another misconception that needs to be cleared up. Bowing and kissing is a tradition and part of many countries' cultures. Trying to compare what people have done for centuries to the American culture and its traditions does not work.

As was posted earlier, even though it was from Asia, it did show that bowing, which is recognized worldwide, means more than ONE thing. It is a sign of respect, greeting, and humility.

Orthodox Christianity is the Ancient Church and of the Ancient Church, which means, its cultural and traditions it has had for the past 2000 years are not that of the American traditions and culture we Americans are enmeshed in and used to. So, when an Orthodox Christian bows or kisses the Bible, a Cross, an icon, a layperson, a priest, holy relics, etc., it is showing respect and honor. That is how many cultures show respect for others and holy things. Therefore, when someone bows and kisses an icon, they are transmitting that to the person in the icon, just as they would to their fellow parishoner, when they greet them with a kiss on each cheek and a hug, and sometimes a bow.

This is different than the bowing and prostrations done before the Lord in worship.

 

[Dorothea]

So Jerome probably the most well known of all the early authors of Christianity is not proof?

That was a letter allegedly from St. Ephiphanus to Jerome, is that correct? Or did Jerome write about the torn curtain and not St. Ephiphanius?

 

[Tzaousios]

Jesus Christ is the image of the Father, but I still haven't seen any image that is able to represent Christ correctly and I doubt that will ever happen. It's also impossible if you try to make the image portrait His divinity.

Yes, but I am willing to bet that no one here thinks that you would admit it if you had seen a "correct" or even "good" representation of Christ's earthly image.

Also, how is it "impossible" to represent Christ's divinity? I do not think the point of Christian iconography of Christ is to portray the fullness or the essence of his divinity. It is to provide a representation of his divinity. You fail to acknowledge this distinction and leap instead to impossibilities.

By the way, I would very much like to see you offer these criticisms to the pastors and Sunday school teachers of Evangelical Protestant churches in which one can find many embarrassing and laughable portraits of Jesus on walls or in teaching quarterlies.

 

[Tzaousios]

So Jerome probably the most well known of all the early authors of Christianity is not proof?

No, I would say that Augustine of Hippo is the "most well known" of early Christian authors, if I had to narrow it down to one. He did not reject religious iconography. He did not use Old Testament laws prohibiting idolatry to try rhetorically to demonize the practice of painting or venerating them. How do you reconcile this fact with your plundering of his soteriological views and grandfathering him in as an elect Proto-Calvinist?

 

[simonthezealot]

That was a letter allegedly from St. Ephiphanus to Jerome, is that correct? Or did Jerome write about the torn curtain and not St. Ephiphanius?

It was a letter from Epiphanius penned by Jerome and written to John the bishop of Jerusalem in 392

 

[Catherineanne]

Icons are fine because they are venerated not worshipped; that much is clear.

And iconoclasm has no part in our faith because Christianity is not Islam. Confusion about mistaking images for what they represent is a feature of cultures without an established art world. Ours is not such a culture. We can understand the concept of art and photography. This means that we are happy to have photographs of our children, friends or loved ones, without mistaking them for the original, or thinking that in kissing a photograph it is the image we are kissing. It is in fact our loved one that we are kissing, through the picture.

There is no reason to treat icons any differently.

You really have to take a massive step backwards culturally to revisit iconoclasm. You have to accept that a picture of your wife is culturally and notionally the SAME as your wife. It isn't. The picture connects you to the prototype. Moslems can get away with an iconoclastic kind of thinking, just, but Western Christians, not so much.

 

[Thekla]

Can the Scriptures accurately and fully represent the divinity of Christ ?