Icons...

[Thekla]

Since you agree with me God's holiness can't be shown in an icon, I hope you can agree with me an icon will also strip God from His holiness and therefore can't be from God.

We are reading the bible because the bible is been given to us God, which makes it a big different from man-made icons.

I don't agree that icons "strip God from his holiness"; in fact nothing can separate God's holiness from Him.

God worked through men to 'make' the Scriptures; He inspired the men who wrote it with man made tools (ink, etc.).

We don't venerate the ink of the Scriptures nor do we venerate the paint of the icon.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

obviously what they kiss is the symbol of Torah


Just like they kiss the shema at their door.... Are aware that the shema says" Hear O Israel the Lord our God the Lord is one".; or kissing the wailing wall.....

Soooo if there is a symbolic veneration of kissing the wall for showing reverence to God then why would an icon would not be sufficient for the same action? Giving honor to God.... I do not see any difference...

Giving reference to icons is no different than Jews who give reverence to the West Wall (or Muslims giving reverence to the Kaaba). Jews in Judaic thought had to note to other Jews that they had no room to actually worship the Temple or make HOLY places where it was believed the Lord arrived to be places that you physically worshipped....Jacob being one example with what he did:

Genesis 28:14
16 When Jacob awoke from his sleep, he thought, “Surely the Lord is in this place, and I was not aware of it.” 17 He was afraid and said, “How awesome is this place! This is none other than the house of God; this is the gate of heaven.”
18 Early the next morning Jacob took the stone he had placed under his head and set it up as a pillar and poured oil on top of it. 19 He called that place Bethel,[e] though the city used to be called Luz.

Genesis 31:13
I am the God of Bethel, where you anointed a pillar and where you made a vow to me. Now leave this land at once and go back to your native land.’”
Genesis 31:12-14 /Genesis 31

Genesis 35:1
[ Jacob Returns to Bethel ] Then God said to Jacob, “Go up to Bethel and settle there, and build an altar there to God, who appeared to you when you were fleeing from your brother Esau.”
Genesis 35:1-3 / Genesis 35

​

No, Jacob didn't worship the altar he had built in honor of what he felt the Lord do - but the area he was in had GREAT significance because of what He felt God do there.

There are many Jews who make Holy Places areas that they actually worship and it has been an issue - Holy Land sites as well as places such as Starting with what occurred with Rachael weeping for her children at Rachel's Tomb where others (Jews and Muslims alike) come for prayer. On the context of that, Rachael was weeping for her children and it's why the rabbis said Rachael was left on the road/buried where she was.

Rachel died giving birth to her second child Benjamin before reaching Jacob's father house, 'before reaching Ephrath' - Bethlehem (Genesis 35:19). Jacob buries her where she died, in her own tomb (Gen 35:20; 48:17) and not in the ancestral tomb at Machpelah. And just before the entrance to the city of David, whose ancestor is Judah, Leah's fourth son. Jacob tells us that 'when I came from Paddan, Rachel, to my sorrow, died in the land of Canaan . . . and I buried her there' (48:7). Why does Jacob not carry Rachel's body the twenty or so miles south from the alleged place of her demise to the cave at Machpelah which Genesis states as the proper burial site for members of Abraham's family. Jacob himself tells us he buried Leah in the Machpelah (Gen.49:31) and he requests that he himself be buried there as well (50:13). So why does Jacob not bury his beloved Rachel at Machpelah, but rather in a roadside grave? According to a midrash because she dishonored her father by stealing (on the Ten Commandments)...and according to another midrash Jacob knew of that the Babylonian exiles would pass by and Rachel could pray for mercy (midrash Rabbah Gen. 82:10). Her early death is attributed by the Rabbis to Jacob's curse over the teraphim as seen in Genesis 31:31-33 and Genesis 31:17-20.

• Rachel: Midrash and Aggadah | Jewish Women's Archive

• 
  
  Capsule History - The Committee for Rachel's Tomb
  ​

In Jewish thought with Rachael weeping for her children/praying for them whenever they passed by her way. The Jews have been asking the matriarch Rachael for her intercessions since (according to one Jewish source*) the time of Joseph, who first asked his mother for her intercession as he passed her tomb on the way to his captivity. Her tomb is, to this day, a pilgrimage site as the devout still ask for her prayers.

Per this, the passage in Jeremiah (Rachel crying for her children) is interpreted in Judaism as her intercessions to God.

* Tanach, Stone edition, in a footnote.

For more, as seen here at Judaism.com:

Ever since her passing, thousands of men, women, and children have journeyed to the Tomb of Rachel (Kever Rochel) to request her intercession on their behalf. The barren pray for children. The sick pray for health. The lost and the troubled pray for release and relief. And no one ever leaves empty-handed. For Emeinu (Our Mother) always gives her blessings.

Jacob must have known that her resting place would become, like Jerusalem, a destination for pilgrims. Therefore, the Bible writes, "Over her grave Jacob put up a pillar, it is the pillar at Rachel's grave to this day." (Genesis 35:20-21)
​

For some good resources to investigate, there are two editions of the OT; the LXX, and the Stone edition of the Tanach (Masoretic, tr. by a board of Rabbis). Amazon.com: Tanach: The Stone, Student Size Black (9781578191123): Nosson Scherman: Books That Joseph -3,500 years ago - was the first to request the prayers of his deceased mother, Rachel, is described in a footnote of the Tanach.

• The Tomb of Rachel
  [*]Rachel’s Tomb: The Bible vs. Tradition
  [*]
• Rachel's Tomb :: Jewish Media Resources
• Rachel Weeping: Jews, Christians, and Muslims at the Fortress Tomb

Of course, there's nothing saying that all HAVE to pray by where Rachael died - but on the same token, it's understood WHY they do so.


If one wishes to be technical, there's still the reality within Judaic custom that there's HIGH reverence toward Temple as well as Jerusalem in general - and there've been PLENTY of Jews giving the same if not more reverence to the West Wall than what other Muslims do with the Kaaba - both groups noting they don't worship the object itself (i.e. Muslims not worshipping the Kaaba and Jews not worshiping the Wall or other objects they kiss during service ....including their tallit corners being kissed) and do actions in reverence.

Within Judaism, there is no escaping the reality of how there has ALWAYS been symbolic worship that has gone down. There was already Biblical precedent where objects and items were consecrated for Holiness and with the Lord's power (more shared in here and #35/#36 ) - for within OT Israel, the objects used in tabernacle (and later Temple ) worship were prayed over/sanctified before the Lord and all of it spoke to the Work of the Lord. It is very powerful studying how the objects within the tabernacle looked (which one can go here or here for more on that) and how there was a reverence to things rather than acting as if it was common - things like the Showbread or the Golden Candlestick, within the Holy Place which provided light, and many other instruments had a Divine Purpose ( Exodus 27, Exodus 30:27-29, Exodus 31:8-10 , Exodus 35:15-17 , Numbers 4, Numbers 7:1-3 , Leviticus 8:10-12, 2 Chronicles 29:17-19, etc. ).

 

[Gxg (G²)]

The terminology varies, the effect is the same; carrier is actually something which is a tool (ie is not the thing itself but is a tool for transporting a thing).

Even others revered in Judaic culture such as Naaman the Syrian had similar experiences and ideologies:

2 Kings 5:1-22
15 Then Naaman and all his attendants went back to the man of God. He stood before him and said, “Now I know that there is no God in all the world except in Israel. So please accept a gift from your servant.”

16 The prophet answered, “As surely as the Lord lives, whom I serve, I will not accept a thing.” And even though Naaman urged him, he refused.

17 “If you will not,” said Naaman, “please let me, your servant, be given as much earth as a pair of mules can carry, for your servant will never again make burnt offerings and sacrifices to any other god but the Lord. 18 But may the Lord forgive your servant for this one thing: When my master enters the temple of Rimmon to bow down and he is leaning on my arm and I have to bow there also—when I bow down in the temple of Rimmon, may the Lord forgive your servant for this.”
19 “Go in peace,” Elisha said.
​

Naaman - under the impression that Israel's God can only be worshipped in the land of Israel/sacred territory - asked for dirt since it was necessary to create a "miniature Israel" in Syria - and of course, the question of how God could be worshiped in a foreign land became a serious one for Israel during the exile (Psalm 137:4)....but the reality of the matter is that actions were done symbolically because of what they symbolized. Two mules' burden of earth— Dirt with which to make an altar (Ex 20:24) Someone could have easily claimed Naaman wanted to worship dirt - but that was not his intention.

Moreover, when he bowed down, he knew the intent behind what he was doing - even though others around him had differing views.

Kissing/reverence are kissing and reverence - regardless. And seeing that neither were commanded when it comes to doing things symbolically (i.e. kissing a Torah Scroll or the Wailing Wall in reflection of God's Word being Holy - in the same way others although not all may kiss an icon and yet still), it is inconsequential whenever others argue for acceptance of one thing while trying to make another on the same level as if it's not equal.

Prayer is prayer.

For the sake of the reader wanting more information on the historical aspect of mysticism within the Early Church, one can go online/research an organization under the name of "Jewish Roots of Eastern Christian Mysticism" ( ) as well as here in "Temple and Righteousness in Qumran and Early Christianity - Jewish Roots of Eastern Christian Mysticism" - as well as "Towards a Theology of the Tabernacle and its Furniture" ( ).

 

[Gxg (G²)]

God worked through men to 'make' the Scriptures; He inspired the men who wrote it with man made tools (ink, etc.).

We don't venerate the ink of the Scriptures nor do we venerate the paint of the icon.

Veneration and honor are very intensive things. People forget that there's a difference between worshiping an object and yet doing actions in symbolization of a higher reality.

And this is something that Eastern Christianity has often had to deal with especially when it comes to how it's compared to other cultures. There was a discussion elsewhere in regards to the reasons behind why so many in the Muslim world seem similar to what occurred with Eastern Christianity when it comes to prayer styles - and it has been noted by numerous scholars how much the Muslim world tended to reverse engineer from what Eastern Christians were already doing....WITH the actions of Eastern Christians based primiarily on what they saw within the scriptures.

As said in another discussion:

Hi

I've read that oriental orthodox Christians also prostrate oneself when praying, just as Muslims do.
And that Muslims have copied that from Christians.

Is this true?
Does anyone have a video. ?

Thanks for your answers.

Esdra

Prostration is done in the EO, OO and RC.

Prostration & Litany of the Saints - YouTube

It seems that if anything, Christians should use prostrations more in worship. I admire that aspect of Islam, the physicality of their worship. I wonder if modern Christians in the USA would stop seeing Church and God as this casual pop-culture deal if it involved us kneeling and pressing their forehead to the ground in abjection as we prayed.

Just a thought. If prayer looked more like this

and less of this

we'd be better off.

Side note.... There was an orthodox monk (a heretic who was excommunicated) involved in the institution of Islam. He was from an Orthodox Church. I think that it's the Muslims who pray by prostrating themselves like the Christians of the 7th century, not the other way around

Yeah, I heard once from a monk that Mohammad adopted the practice of prostrations in worship because he saw some Christians praying and was really impressed by the attitude of submission it conveyed.

We have a tendency to forget that there is a history behind the liturgy, the hierarchy, and everything else. Some things are now huge parts when initially they were simply practical solutions. For example, in the eastern liturgies, there are two processions, first where the priest takes the Book of the Gospels and processes, and a second where the bread and the wine are taken from the altar then processed. The first procession comes from early Christianity where someone would hide the Scriptures in their house during the week and then bring them in at that point in the service. The second procession comes from the Imperial liturgy in Constantinople where there were bakeries as part of the Hagia Sophia complex. The bread and wine would be brought in after the readings. Most parishes would do their best to mimic the Emperor and now today we have this procession which almost seems out of place in the rest of the service.

[/center]
When I was in Egypt I attended mosque every Friday and went to a Coptic church on Sunday. There was always great dialogue between my escort, who was a Muslim man, the Muslima's with me at mosque and those who went to the coptic church. One big difference is that, like Orthodoz Judaism, Islam seperates the sexes in worship and teaching, so attending a coptic church was a rare opportunity for man and wife to be together during teaching. Most i talked to enjoyed this and said they learned more together and had a better experience, although some (mostly older) did say it was a distraction...

What you said reminded me of the old saying "Not all roads lead to God---but God can meet us on any road."

..... Despite the long and well-known history of conflict between Christians and Muslims, their mystical traditions--especially in the Christian East and in Sufism (more here, here, here, here, here, here , here, here, here , here, here, here and here/ here / )--have shared for centuries many of the same spiritual methods and goals....and on that, its interesting to consider how things often connect. And on the issue of connections, I'm reminded of a solid book on the issue that one can go online and look up under the name of "From the Holy Mountain: A Journey Among the Christians of the Middle East" ( )

Its by William Dalrymple, who is a Catholic who went/explored the East for some time. Hisbook traces the Eastern Orthodox congregations scattered across the Middle East from their ancient origins, reviews how they have fared under centuries of Islamic rule, and discusses the complex relationship between Islam, Judaism, and Christianity in the region. As said in the book (for an excerpt):

.....

Later, in his old age, John took the habit at the desert monastery of Mar Saba where he began work on his great masterpiece, a refutation of heresies entitled the Fount of Knowledge. The book contains an extremely precise and detailed critique of Islam, the first ever written by a Christian, which, intriguingly, John regarded as a form of Christian heresy related to Arianism: after all Arianism, like Islam, denied the divinity of Christ. Although he lived at the very hub of the early Islamic world, it never seems to have occurred to him that Islam might be a separate religion. If a theologian of the stature of John Damascene was able to regard Islam as a new- if heretical- form of Christianity, it helps to explain how Islam was able to convert so much of the Middle Eastern population in so short a time, even though Christianity remained the majority religion until the time of the Crusades.


The longer you spend in the Christian communities of the Middle East, the more you become aware of the extent to which Eastern Christian practice formed the template for what were to become the basic conventions of Islam. The Muslim form of prayer with its bowings and prostrations appears to derive from the older Syrian Orthodox tradition that is still practised in pewless churches across the Levant.
​

​

 

[Gxg (G²)]

And Paul's handkerchief, and Christ's robe, and the waters at the pool of Bethesda when stirred by an angel ...

We can also add spit in the mud as well (John 9:5-7 /John 9 and Mark 8:22-24) - despite where spitting at people was seen as something that could make others unclean (Numbers 12:13-15 )

 

[Gxg (G²)]

It is something all need to be aware of. Of the five I met who were occultists, only one "visited" a "mainline" Church (though it was a multi-confessional Church, and I don't know that his activities were approved there). I hadn't thought of these people in years, but at the time it certainly "shook" me.

And for sure, even Satan can appear as "an angel of light".

At least it's not as if things jump out of the pictures and icons - as that'd be a bit too much for A LOT of folks

 

[Gxg (G²)]

I knew an Orthodox Icon painter (or writer as some prefer) and he definitely took his art seriously. It was an act of worship and service to God in his view. Painting icons can be a spiritual discipline of sorts. It's supposed to involve prayer too.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

About a decade ago, a monastery that called itself Orthodox (but with no canonical links) was selling "Orthodox Icons". I have to say, I didn't much like these and found them deeply "creepy". (Before I entered the Church, I admit I liked them, and had one of Archangel Michael iirc. By the time we had entered the EO, I had given this to my parents; they contacted an EO monastery about the icon, and were told they could post it to the monastery to be burned.) When more info. was found out about this business, the Orthodox vendors in the US stopped carrying their products en masse.

Another non-Orthodox Icon vendor had also became quite popular; when the catalogue came I showed it to a friend who worked at the parish bookstore. She found them so repulsive, she wouldn't even look at the catalogue further. As I investigated more closely, I noticed the descriptions given re: "Orthodox Saints" - clearly wrong. Yet she knew just by looking.

Did the parents have to be cleansed due to the influence of the icons after what occurred? Likewise, in the bookstore, did your friend have to get prayer to have any negative influences eradicated?

 

[Thekla]

Did the parents have to be cleansed due to the influence of the icons after what occurred? Likewise, in the bookstore, did your friend have to get prayer to have any negative influences eradicated?

We never carried them in the bookstore. But of course also, icons are to be blessed before having them in the home, so there is that as well.

(My parents weren't/aren't EO, but my dad was a minister; I don't recall precisely what was done tbh.)

 

[Gxg (G²)]

We never carried them in the bookstore. But of course also, icons are to be blessed before having them in the home, so there is that as well.

Thank goodness for the power of blessing..

(My parents weren't/aren't EO, but my dad was a minister; I don't recall precisely what was done tbh.)

Understood...

 

[Philothei]

All of those things are not carrier of grace. They are tools used by God, so God alone is the one that should get the glory for it.

The whole creation is a carrier of Grace... we are tools for God also we are used for His Glory. By saying that we are "instruments" of God we are making an object into something that is set apart for that purpose by taking grace we set it apart. Like for the Jews it was the Holy of the Hollies a separate place where only God dwelled. That is how an icon is a separated object that is reserved for God as it is used for His Glory. They are tools but not void of God's Grace. They are vessels of Grace that are separated for that purpose. God gets the Glory for through them we sanctify and give Glory back to Him. No one is silly enough to think that an icon is God It would be like saying that a ray of the sun is sun itself

 

[Gxg (G²)]

The whole creation is a carrier of Grace... we are tools for God also we are used for His Glory. By saying that we are "instruments" of God we are making an object into something that is set apart for that purpose by taking grace we set it apart. Like for the Jews it was the Holy of the Hollies a separate place where only God dwelled. That is how an icon is a separated object that is reserved for God as it is used for His Glory. They are tools but not void of God's Grace. They are vessels of Grace that are separated for that purpose. God gets the Glory for through them we sanctify and give Glory back to Him. No one is silly enough to think that an icon is God It would be like saying that a ray of the sun is sun itself

Never got to say A to what you said here...

 

[GoingByzantine]

Never got to say A to what you said here...

Agreed

 

[Mama Kidogo]

Agreed

ditto