What Jesus do you see?

[amariselle]

Why would they mention it? The text of Matthew was first written in Hebrew, translated by The Church at Antioch to Greek and distributed with the icon by St. Luke who lived in Antioch.

Forgive me...

I guess there is no real way to confirm that. However, we do know we can trust God's inspired word. (And no matter how beautiful or elaborate a icon is, it has no specific and distinct meaning apart from the clarification and explanation of His word.)Without it, it is just an image.

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

I guess there is no real way to confirm that. However, we do know we can trust God's inspired word. (And no matter how beautiful or elaborate a icon is, it has no specific and distinct meaning apart from the clarification and explanation of His word.)Without it, it is just an image.

You have no other way of confirming the gospels either. The source is the same. The Ancient Church.

Either have faith or don't. If it doesn't increase your faith, I suggest you leave it.

Forgive me...

 

[amariselle]

You have no other way of confirming the gospels either. The source is the same. The Ancient Church.

Either have faith or don't. If it doesn't increase your faith, I suggest you leave it.

Forgive me...

Sure I do. Scripture speaks, specifically to it's authority as "God-breathed"/inspired.

The Bible is the very word of God.

And I do have faith, thank you.

"Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." - Romans 10:17

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

Sure I do. Scripture speaks, specifically to it's authority as "God-breathed"/inspired.

What you quoted speaks of Preachers and Evangelists, and of the duties of clergy, not text.

Forgive me...

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

Sure I do. Scripture speaks, specifically to it's authority as "God-breathed"/inspired.

The Bible is the very word of God.

And I do have faith, thank you.

"Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." - Romans 10:17

Technically, the only text that would fit being spoken of as authoritative by any New Testament author would be the Septuagint.

Forgive me..

 

[amariselle]

Technically, the only text that would fit being spoken of as authoritative by any New Testament author would be the Septuagint.

Forgive me..

Except we can trust that all Scripture is God's word. I do anyway.

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

Except we can trust that all Scripture is God's word. I do anyway.

What books would that include and which interpretation? I'm being picky... but you see where I'm going?

Forgive me...

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

none of them. there should be no pictures of Jesus as we have no information as to what he looked like.

 

[amariselle]

What books would that include and which interpretation? I'm being picky... but you see where I'm going?

Forgive me...

All of them. As for which "interpretation", are you referring to which "translation"?

 

[DamianWarS]

Suggests? Then surely you admit that you are guessing.

Nimbus? I don't know this term. It's not Greek.

Forgive me...

halo

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

All of them. As for which "interpretation", are you referring to which "translation"?

"found in the Septuagint but are not present in the Hebrew. These additional books are Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Jesus son of Sirach, Baruch, Letter of Jeremiah(which later became chapter 6 of Baruch in the Vulgate), additions to Daniel (The Prayer of Azarias, the Song of the Three Children, Susanna and Bel and the Dragon), additions to Esther, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, 3 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, 1 Esdras, Odes, including the Prayer of Manasseh, the Psalms of Solomon, and Psalm 151."

Forgive me....

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

halo

Thanks... what council was that?

Forgive me...

 

[amariselle]

"found in the Septuagint but are not present in the Hebrew. These additional books are Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Jesus son of Sirach, Baruch, Letter of Jeremiah(which later became chapter 6 of Baruch in the Vulgate), additions to Daniel (The Prayer of Azarias, the Song of the Three Children, Susanna and Bel and the Dragon), additions to Esther, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, 3 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, 1 Esdras, Odes, including the Prayer of Manasseh, the Psalms of Solomon, and Psalm 151."

Forgive me....

There's a lot of confusion around those writings. And that goes way back. I still trust the God is faithful and has preserved His word.

 

[DamianWarS]

Thanks... what council was that?

Forgive me...

Does there need to be a council? Christians adopted the nimbus/halo in their art around the 4th century from outside influences. Luke (or Matthew) didn't paint Jesus or Mary with one but it was probably started to complement the term "theotokos" as the addition of the nimbus uniquely identified Jesus as divine, so childhood/baby images with the nimbus would mirror the same values that theotokos stood for.

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

There's a lot of confusion around those writings. And that goes way back. I still trust the God is faithful and has preserved His word.

Never the less, the Septuagint is the text refereed to by Christ and the Apostles. And many things have been discarded. As you would have done with the icons.

Forgive me...

 

[amariselle]

Never the less, the Septuagint is the text refereed to by Christ and the Apostles. And many things have been discarded. As you would have done with the icons.

Forgive me...

As you said, icons are not necessary for salvation. The Gospel is.

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

Does there need to be a council? Christians adopted the nimbus/halo in their art around the 4th century from outside influences. Luke (or Matthew) didn't paint Jesus or Mary with one but it was probably started to complement the term "theotokos" as the addition of the nimbus uniquely identified Jesus as divine, so childhood/baby images with the nimbus would mirror the same values that theotokos stood for.

So you're saying that someone came later and added halo's to this icon?

Forgive me...

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

As you said, icons are not necessary for salvation. The Gospel is.

Well, no, not the text. The "truth" is necessary for salvation.

Lot's of saved people have been without the text of the bible. Yet, they were told the truth, the Gospel message as you had quoted.

Forgive me...

 

[2Timothy2:15]

this guy?

maybe this guy?

or is this guy more proper?

perhaps this guy is better?

or do you prefer this guy

does it matter?

Since the bible does not tell us exactly what he looked like I do not pretend to know. The Jesus I see is the one revealed in his word.

 

[bling]

none of them. there should be no pictures of Jesus as we have no information as to what he looked like.

Is. 53: 1. Who has believed our message
and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?
2 He grew up before him like a tender shoot,

and like a root out of dry ground.

He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him,


nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.
Jesus was very approachable.