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" - St. John of Damascus. 🙏 ☦
@@Diamondraw4Real Anabaptists began the low church movement. Low church is now Baptists, so-called "Non-denominational" Protestants, Independent congregations, Pentecostals, etc.. Basically their worship (really is veneration) consists of a few hymns, a short reading of a few verses of Scripture to prepare for the sermon, some prayer, and looong sermons. Crackers and juice symbolic communion are served once a month to once a quarter. Basically their worship services are what we call Bible Study night minus the crackers and juice, and with refreshments (some of them have those too during services). They may or may not have a "worship band" and may or may not play modern contemporary Protestant Christian songs. Some stick to an organ or piano or guitar and sing "traditional" Protestant hymns. They lack any of the worship of the early Church the most important being the Holy Eucharist, the center of worship. They have no reverence for Sacraments, even baptism which they view as not necessary for Salvation. They also might be iconoclasts or almost iconoclasts only allowing a picture of Jesus (non-iconographic at that) and/or an empty plain cross in their meeting houses. There's no altar but instead a pulpit and usually a choir would be where the altar should be. Sometimes a worship band will replace the choir.
@@truthdefenders- I think he is referring to the protestant views. They are nestorians, arians, iconoclast, and other forms of heresies that the Church of Christ crushed, but keep reappearing to deform the Truth.
Great video. Thank You. Myself, there was no exceptions written into the Second Commandment. It's Truly a struggle trying to understand the excuses various church denominations come up with as to why it's ok to have graven images.
There is absolutely no gain in graven images and idols for worship, veneration is in the definition of worship, it explicit commands not to do so over and over and over...etc
@@michael7144 Christ has redeemed matter and the world. Icons are not idols, nor are images. There are examples of religious iconography in the OT. The Orthodox don't make icons of the divine nature, but of the human nature of Christ, who is God over all. And also icons of the saints and Apostles and scenes of scripture. If you believe icons are idols, then you have to view the Bible as an idol as well. The Bible is full of many symbols and pictures you call "language" that forces the mind to build images in thought. How is that any different from an icon portraying images of scripture? An icon is simply an image form of the stories of scripture, virtually parallel with the Bible, and equally sacred since the Word of God transcends written text.
Good presentation. I read Packer’s Knowing God as a young Calvinist and now, as an Orthodox Christian, I find Calvinist arguments to exist in an echo chamber built on willful ignorance.
I do believe Packer also to be a sincere Christian who was interested in knowing God. As Pastor Fidias Echevarria once said: Examinarlo todo, desecha lo malo y conserve lo bueno (Examine everything, throw out the bad and keep the good)
@@6amsensei945that’s a straw man and not what anyone has said in this comment chain. Rejecting Calvinism isn’t rejecting God’s sovereignty. It’s rejecting the cruel and evil interpretation of our Lord’s sovereignty created by Calvin
Yeah ignorance to darkness- Exodus 20 says “Exodus 20:4 (LEB): “You shall not make for yourself a divine image with any form that is in the heavens above or that is in the earth below or that is in the water below the earth.” Did they just forget to add the part about “except those icons about God that’s totally cool??” Why was worshipping the icon of God wrong in Exodus 32? Jesus is literally defined as a bull in other places, so what’s wrong with having an icon of it?
Awesome. Great how you have a summary with time stamps. Makes it a great resource. Also, as a former protestant (baptised Orthodox for one year now) I'm only now beginning to realise just how damaging modern (the last 500 years) iconoclasm hase been.
In the book I’m reading for catechism, it states clearly that Christ himself is an icon, and that it’s impossible to differentiate whether or not the invisible God whom we call Father is represented by depictions of Christ, as he is the only representation we’ve ever been given. So in essence, icons of Christ could very well represent Christ himself as well as the Father. The second commandment has a pretty clear context: the Jews made a golden calf and worshiped it. We are neither worshipping images nor creating images that are disconnected from the Father. To the Pharisee class it was a heresy to even call God our Father. There will always be those people who protest the true faith. Amazing video
@@eldermillennial8330 It should actually be referred to the the Holy Shroud of Christ of Jerusalem, at Edessa, then Sophia, then Chambery, currently Turin.
God incarnated by his own will. Man makes images with his hand. Know the difference. When Israel did an idol while in the wilderness in exile, this is your gods who took you out of the Egypt, the wrath of God was on them. When Israel made the arc of the covenant and the two cherubim on it, did God said, you made an image of the things in heaven? No, God instructed them how to do the arc, and the image there of. The same thing with, Though shall not murder, but God sends Israel to war. One thing is when God commands, another thing is when men start doing things his own way.
@@michaelvatson7056 These catholics/orthodox all know images are wrong, but is doesnt phase them. They love their idolatry too much. Well, it is a false religion. What do you expect.
@@peterzinya407 a false religion? 😭 Do you only know who Jesus Christ was? I mean, y’all heretics just have literally founded a new religion (as muslims) on the Bible... Glory to God ! ☦️
Thank you. 'Logographic writing system'. This 'Protestant' (me) was just granted an epiphany, be it ever so small. I must love my siblings (spiritual), therefore; LORD, plz grant me understanding, for Your glory alone. Amen
I am starting to understand why, during those years as a Protestant/evangelical, I found the prevalent iconoclasm of the evangelicals extremely frustrating and unfulfilling. The Protestant prohibition.of icons is largely a resurrected form of gnosticism and medieval nominalism in the modern period and really proscribes God within certain boundaries.
I think it gives license to sin as we kind of make God unknowable/omni-potent and not really in charge of the material (here and now). Also why Protestantism is an atheist producing factory
Well done, my friend. I have been revisiting crucial, basic questions about Orthodoxy, i.e. how are we saved, why liturgical worship, role of icons, etc. Your videos have been a help to me. Thank you. P.S. - what is the name of the icon at 5:11 and where did you purchase it?
@@j.athanasius9832 Depends on what argument is being presented by iconoclasts. If images, made of the things of this world, limit the glory of God. Then that implies Christ, who is a man, made of the dust of the Earth, was an image of God that limited his glory. Yet we believe the Logos mystically became man “without change or alteration” in Christ.
This is a very sound exposition, thank you. It really boils down to what you believe about the Incarnation and Who Christ is, and as someone else mentioned, the Theotokos. Christ wasn’t teleported to Earth in a beam of light like the fictional Mr. Bean!
Very well-done! The point on pictorial scripts like Japanese is very interesting, and something I hadn't considered. I would offer a slight clarification. The Second Commandment was not so much a prohibition on syncretism (although of course, that is a sin), but a prohibition on worshiping God through idolatry. Idolatry can refer to the worship of other gods, but it can also refer to a form of worship which one might be attempted to direct toward the True God. It is the attempt to create a body for the god you seek to commune with, and then trap him in it, thus creating a weird parody and distortion of the Incarnation. It is an attempt to control as much as worship your god, and this was the practice of the ancient pagans. This is totally distinct from iconography, because the icon is not an attempt to trap or control God or the Saints in physical matter, but rather to honor them through physical matter, and to provide a channel through which we can see the Heavenly Kingdom. Idolatry is ultimately self-aggrandizing and an attempt to dominate, while iconography is humble and submissive.
“...the devil led the enemies of the church from one extreme to the other, from worshiping the images of men and animals in paganism to destroying the images of Christ and the saints in iconoclasm.”-Jaroslav Pelikan
"You shall not bow down to them" I don't think you can honestly say icons are not likenesses or graven images. I don't think you can honestly say that the church doesn't traditionally expect its body to bow its heads to and pray (worship) to them. So how can you argue that it's not idolatry?
Hope you're here to genuinely learn, not argue; I am here to explain. "Graven images" refers to idols (if you want to be technical "graven" is literal; "graven images" are statues, not paintings). Literally: an idol is a carving on rock, or sometimes a tree (known as a graven image), in the shape of a spirit or deity, with the intent that the spirit will possess the graven image. This was believed to give power to the followers, which would worship the rock or tree, assuming that a spirit has possessed it. "Bow down" simply means "worship", not literally bow down. The carved (graven) rocks or tree believed to be possessed by a spirit would be worshipped for power. This often included bowing down, but not necessarily. "Bow down" simply refers to worshipping the idol, regardless whether you are standing, bowing, jumping. As you can see, icons are not this. According the Eastern Orthodox Church, and icon is a symbol of Christ or His followers. This can include paintings, a cross, stain-glass windows, the Bible, movies with Christ, or simply writing the name "Christ" down is all considered an icon. In idols, Pagans believe that the spirits physically possess the rock, which they then worship... With icons, be it painting, cross, stain glass window, of the word "Christ" written down, nobody possesses the object. They are just that, objects. Symbols representing Christ, but they aren't Christ Himself. When you write down the word "Christ" in a sentence, you don't believe that Christ literally possesses the pen-ink, do you? The word "Christ" simply represents Him, but doesn't magically become Him. The same way, icons are just an image of Christ and His faithful, but not actually them. One more thing: Orthodox Christians are strictly forbidden from worshipping icons! However, we are allowed to "venerate" them. These terms often get confused, so let's clear it up: "Worship" means viewing the physical object as not just an object, but a spirit or God, and treating it that way. "Venerate" simply means showing respect to. Do you believe that a spirit physically possesses the Bible? Of course not. But you would never be disrespectful to the Bible and are always happy to see one - that is veneration. Veneration (meaning "showing respect to") doesn't have to be religious. Standing up on your national anthem or refusing to step on a national flag if it's on the floor is all veneration. A soldier kissing a picture of his wife knowing full well she's at home and not magically become the photo is also veneration. The soldier doesn't believe his wife suddenly become the photo - that would be idolatry. The soldier kisses the photo of his wife simply from respect (veneration), and because he misses her. Also, one last thing: Whilst "idol" traditionally means graven image (ie: a rock or a tree carved into a home for a spirit to possess), nowadays it has a far wider meaning. "Idol" can now also mean obsessing over money, sex, food, drugs, etc. If you obsess over one of the four above, it is still idolatry, and bowing down to a graven image, even if it isn't a statue!
I pity the iconoclasts; I now think of my icons as part of the promise that I may well be resurrected having developed a relationship with some of these people whom I often try to venerate in my heart. Joyless rule keeping won't save you, friends. You may well be joyful in keeping the second Commandment as you interpret it, iconoclasts; I will certainly take joy in keeping it as the Orthodox Church teaches it. God bless you.
I think of my icons as images, nothing more. I even printed some and hung on a wall, with biblical text, that I might stop and look and remember the word of God.
Im sure God hates all who aren't comfortable with and think its wrong to worship images and they will be damned to hell because your fake pagan church said so 🤣
@@michaelvatson7056You may think that, but from my perspective it is a sad view. I like John Damascenes view, don’t worship (in the Protestant sense) matter, but worship the God of matter. And part of that I posit is the honor and due reverence given to that which is from God (including matter). I see the reverence of matter (particularly images) as symbolic and not to the matter itself.
Iconoclasm is also linked to Protestant disdain for the Theotokos. By disregarding the centrality of the incarnation to our salvation, they fail to honor God’s mother, from whom he takes his humanity.
I’m reserving my thought about failing to honor “God’s mother”. For now, I’d like to know why the focus is on the Second Commandment instead of Exodus. Please refrain from addressing Mary.
@@wolkenpower Exodus 20? Btw, I credit the Lord for Christ’s humanity, per immaculate conception. I don’t believe in the veneration of Mary nor any other additions to the scripture, as found in the Latin Vulgate. Well… I asked you to refrain from addressing Mary, but I certainly haven’t held to the same standard.
@@wolkenpower My primary concern regarding images is whether or not they’re idolized. I’m confident that the Lord never intended each follower become a theologian in order to make a determination as to whether or not an image or idol is being worshipped, at least for the self. I have no distain for the Theotokos, for I’ve never heard of it. I’m 51, so it’s curious.
Would be ok if I download this video and add spanish subtitles to show it to my protestant family? I would love to send you the script too if you want.
I often wonder how a protestant bible written in English can be considered as the completely accurate and divinely inspired word of God when many of the translations completely eliminate concepts and deeper meanings that are found in the original Greek
Holy fathers instruct us to be like St. Athanasius the Great. Even if the entire human race is to turn away from god. We must stand firm in our faith and love of God (Christ Yeshua)
If I recall correctly, Fr. Thomas Hopko said that in Hebrew there are two words for word “one” - a numeric one and a one of unity, and that after the Church was established, Judaism exchanged the unity definition in the “Hear O Israel….” text to the numeric definition.
As Jay Dyer says, protestantism begins with soteriology, based on their rejection of tradition. This has them have a warped view of the incarnation The Orthodox Church begins with christology and that is why we have sacraments and Icoography, etc
The Orthodox don't "idolize" as someone growing up in the 50ties might have idolized Elvis Presley. What the Orthodox do they call "veneration." The word "venerate" has a whole range of meaning that fails to match what is implied by idolize. The main difference falls into the realm of commitment. In idolizing one tends to lose a somewhat reasonable appraisal of the object of attention. In many ways Elvis Presley was a jerk, but his worshippers were typically so overwhelmed by his rockin and a rollin that a quiet evaluation ended up out of the question. In veneration the tendency is to see the whole story and evaluate ones own life in terms of the venerated object. That being said it is painfully obvious that many if not most Orthodox have air between their ears and are capable of absorbing only the thud of the crashing waves.
Behind all that “veneration” Jesus becomes obscured. If you lived in traditionally orthodox nations you would see that clearly. No wonder so many people who seek Christ end up in protestant churches
@@synthesaurus Jesus is obscured with iconography putting him front and center, but made clear in a white-walled church with an empty cross full of people reading bad translations from incomplete bibles? Ok.
@@CHURCHISAWESUM You haven't lived in a country where Orthodoxy have been main religion. Most people, even those who go to church don't know the Gospel but full of weird superstitions.
@@synthesaurus The argument that all this "veneration" hides the glory of God, Jesus Christ in particular, is nonsense; You know why? Anyone can fall into pietism, even without icons, because they can take their Spiritual walk with God like a paint-by-numbers game. "If I do X, I'll get Y, regardless of my Spiritual condition, or what's in my heart." If we're not being attentive in Church, we're just another body taking up space. If I'm giving to the poor, but my heart is in the wrong place, guess what, it's idolatry!
@synthesaurus, Confront me. I've lived in both a Protestant and and Eastern Orthodox nation, and I can reassure you that is not the case. Veneration of icons simply means respecting the people represented by them - this is entirely God-focused. If you have seen anything else, then it is not Orthodox-permitted veneration. That is known as "cultural Christianity" and it is the equivalence of me accusing the Protestant nations of being either legalistic or everybody has become secular. Just because some people have misunderstood the point of icons, does not mean that is how it should be done. You should know this from the Bible. Also: I've seen Protestants turn to Catholicism and the Orthodox when seeking true Christianity to leave lukewarmness. I am yet to see an Orthodox become Protestant. Orthodoxy is the faith most closest and traditional to that of the original Christians. Protestant is a failed attempt to reform the Catholic Church then fell away from what the first Christians taught. Also do you genuinely not believe in a proper Eucharist? So you take "graven idols" to literally, but disobey the command Christ gave us? That's sad, this is why Protestants always turn to Orthodoxy.
We're not under the Law of Moses. We have freedom in Christ, but we don't use that freedom "as an opportunity for the flesh." In fact, legalism (perhaps even more than license) is the greatest threat to a person's "in Christ" status according to St. Paul: "You who are of (seek justification by) the law are cut off (separated, divorced) from Christ. You have fallen from grace."
When the signifier becomes the signified..... and it always does. When you witness the amount of attention (veneration, prayer etc) given to the ikons of the saints and Mary it makes you wonder.
it is one of the biggest sins. praying to dead is not a good idea demons might come into people's lives through prayers to those who died they cannot hear people in anyway. Bible says, when people die, and go to heaven, they are like angels. They live in Heaven. They cannot hear people from earth. But demons can . . .
For a Protestant, veneration sounds like a distinction without a meaningful difference from worship. If an icon is just an object, then discard it. The icon's existence has no bearing on whether or not you respect someone.
But in the septuagint, the second commandment continues, and clearly prohibits bowing down, using the proskynesis term specifically. Jesus also prohibits it in Matthew 4:9-10. All this, then, is idolatry. The 7th ecumenical council clearly had an agenda, and relied on the masses having no ability to study the greek. In the modern era, we can clearly see how we should worship, and these icons have no place in worshipping God "in spirit and in truth" as it says in John chapter 4.
@@adjustedbrass7551 absolutely! Do you not see how we are only to apply proskynesis to God alone? Jesus says so explicitly. Therefore, giving it to icons is equally blasphemous. Can you show me from scripture where it says we can bow to images, or even to anything except God?
7th ecumenical council damns anyone who doesnt worship and "venerate" these images so you better figure it out because other wise they will ban you from the church forever and you will be sent to hell 🤣
Replying to vrocs ……………………………. No one is braking any commandments here , Eastern Orthodox Church fully understands worshiping a tree 🌲 bush or a marble stone to total devotion to Jesus Christ right from the beginning. From translation of the Old Testament to the Hellenic language mostly spoken in that part of the world ( like it or not ) direct heritage of Alexander the Great , including the Jewish community ( whereby Alexander the Great allowed the Jewish community to worship Freely their faith ) One needs to excel in the understanding of the oral and written classical Hellenic language in order to correctly understand Holy Scripture, Church Canons , and way of worship taught by the early Church fathers , when the Church was One Holy, Apostolic, Catholic Church . There is an authentic worship of God in the Eastern Orthodox Church, focused on our Salvation and how to go about it. Through the authentic Eucharist weekly , fasting Wednesday and Friday year round, daily prayer , vespers and the Divine Liturgy. For the Eastern Orthodox Church this is a lifelong effort, confession, communion . When a dear, precious loved one passes away and I take a picture and kiss the picture of the passed person NOT a piece of paper- clearly. It’s the person that counts here. Historically, the some hierarchical leaders could not and refused to read Hellenic language, and due to the barbaric invasions in the West , lost contact with there Eastern brothers, thus the West created their own erroneous interpretations and truth. I see nothing wrong with having an image of Jesus Christ and adoring Him through performing the Cross , praying, reciting passages of the Holy Scripture in front of the image of Christ. He came as flesh and blood and people witnessed his glory and beauty and love on earth for the Salvation of man , through His crucifixion and resurrection. Jesus Christ did His part , we are not saved merely because we found Jesus Christ, we are saved by continuing in adoring Him through worship . Jesus Christ came and lived amongst us , He is a real person not something abstract, such was the case in the Old Testament Images of Jesus Christ are real testimony of this. Through genuine adoration and worship of Jesus Christ throughout of lives until we depart is the way to be saved- it’s the actions that is vital here not an arbitrary statement “ I found Jesus, thus I am saved “ No way , does not work that way Jesus Christ has and will not change His relationship with us , it’s we who constantly change our beliefs that accommodates our human lives and what we choose as being a burden, we disregard- history is proof of this. ☦️ P. S. The broadcaster is completely correct and took part of his time to eloquently explain misconceptions that certain Christian denominations have and a direct response to Packer which is solid. You choose not to believe or not convinced , that’s fine, direct judgment on a Christian faith ( Eastern Orthodox- officially , Orthodox Catholic Church) which existed since the time of Jesus Christ,over 2000 years unchanged, is not.
This does not compare. This argument is like this: God said to Adam that he will die, therefore, Adam should also make others die, because God made Adam die.
no, read different translations. It speaks about not just graven, in my Bible it says: Carved Images Indeed you cannot pray and worship anything but God. When people pray to dead Saints - it is considered a witchcraft for God, it can open doors to demons
That's not the thought process, considering that statuary is _technically_ permitted by Nicaea II but is still less preferred than painted icons (painted iconography has established standards meant to maximize its spiritual value in praxis). The issue being pointed to in Second Commandment has to be understood in the context of the times. The Hebrew word "pesel" refers to a specific concept: a carved statue meant as an object of worship. Polytheists in the ANE would create these statues representing their gods with ritual tools near a river, and upon finishing, would throw those tools in a river and declare that the statue was not made by human hands. They legitimately thought that these idols were themselves the god they sought to worship. Icons aren't idols-- they aren't made in the same way as above, they aren't conceived in the same way as above, and they aren't used in the same way as above. The icon points to who's meant to be depicted, and honor befitting them is directed to the depicted with the icon serving as a "pointer". Idol worshippers in the OT thought their graven images were in fact their gods. Even in the case of the Greeks and Romans-- who I reckon didn't consider their statutes their gods themselves-- their issue was that their gods were at best delusions of demons, and at worst demons, and their worship was thus misdirected.
The Ark of the Covenant had two Cherubim on the lid. The pole with the brass serpents was an image. The curtains to the Tabernacle as well as the Temples to God had depictions of Cherubim and I think a few other things. Heck even the temple lamp/candle stand that'd become what we call the menorah today was modelled after the Tree of Life in the Garden of Eden. Just wanted to throw those out there, I don't have an opinion one way or another about this topic.
Many of your examples are from the commandment of God. When man takes charge by his own will, see what happens, the calf in the wilderness, the whole Judges and Kings books. It is no written that the serpent on pole was meant to be used as an worshiping image. Yet, Israel kept it, and probably worshiped it, Israel not knowing that it was not the pole who cured them, but God. God made them to trust God, so He would heal them. The thing that God did through all the history of ancient Israel. These things you wrote does not justify the improper use of icons.
@@peterzinya407 You'll cling to the fake mary statues straight to the lake of fire. Humans have always been dumb and stubborn insisting to cling to their dumb little wooden carved figurines. Nothing is new under the sun.
@@michaelvatson7056I know this is an old comment, but my question is would God ever instruct Israel to do something that violates his will? And violates his view images?
The absence of explicit New Testament instructions on these specific matters does not imply that the practices of church buildings or iconography are invalid or prohibited. The early Christians, guided by the Holy Spirit and the teachings of the apostles, embraced various forms of worship and artistic expression as they sought to honor God, commemorate the life of Christ, and foster the spiritual growth of the community. As for icons, the use of visual imagery in religious contexts can be seen in the *Old Testament,* particularly in the construction of the Ark of the Covenant and the ornate decorations of the Temple. Cherubim statues were placed on top of the Ark, and various artistic elements adorned the Temple, including carvings and engravings of cherubim, flowers, and other symbolic imagery.
We see it in the Old Testament. This tradition simply never stopped after the birth of Christ. The first Christians practiced it (we still have remnants of a painting of Christ from one of the Apostles), and the Orthodox Church simply keeps the passed down traditions of the Church. Also, we do see it practiced in the New Testament, technically: "Icon" is simply a symbol of Christ. That can be painting, cross, the Bible, stain glass windows, movie including Christ, or simply the word "Christ" written down. Christ is the incarnation of God, and He is an icon of Himself. We are made in God's image, and the Orthodox Church teaches that we are icons too. (Also, icons veneration does appear I'm the New Testament - I suggest reading the prayer cloth in Acts 19. This is by definition an icon, based on Orthodox tradition.)
Let us try to not use Packer's mistakes as a weapon against the protestant church. I believe that most protestants are sincere Christians. Let's recognize that none of us are perfect and try to mostly stress what we have in common. It is, I think, the only way to reunite all Christians into one church.
They started letting in pagan practices in the 4th century and they never even started using icons in worship till the 7th century anyways but they wont tell you that🤣@@peterzinya407
@@wilsontexasOkay. Do you have any source for that? Do you have any points from the catechism of the Church or official encyclicals showing a goddess in Catholicism? Or are you just perpetuating falsehoods and stereotypes because you refuse to humble yourself and do the research from first principles?
@zeektm1762 observation of what catholics do versus what they claim when arguing. Also what catholics do with Mary compared to what other religions do with their Gods.
As a Protestant who does not use icons, I personally don't have anything against it when other people use it but I would never use it and I would never condense somebody else or doing that
I would because it is wrong. all these people who LOVE icons always forget to tell you that they didn't use icons till the 6th century and the early Christian s were prohibited from painting biblical figures until the religion became the right hand of the state and they started letting in pagan practices that the pagans wanted to practice to be more familiar with worship when they converted in the 4th century and these councils started getting loose with their beliefs then it all ends here where we have people defending pagan practices under the notion its all "for Christ"
@@1967-l7h St. Athanasius lived in the third and fourth centuries, and spoke about how exactly to use icons. We've found churches and catacombs from the third century adorned with icons, too.
@user-ci3gk8um8l What are you on about? Half of what you said is false. Where I'm from, we've got churches a few decades after Christ with iconography in them. The first post New-Testament icon was drawn by one of the Apostles, and its remnants are kept to this day and you can freely visit it. Iconography is embraced in the Old Testament.
When Jesus Christ returns, what happens to the sacred icons? For example there are icons that are said to perform miracles. Do they get preserved and taken up with the Christians?
Wow.. Orthodox have thee worst defense for iconography veneration... I wanna join the church so bad, but I'm having the hardest time seeing how icon vernation is not idolatry
I recant my statement, I am now Eastern Orthodox. Joshua 7:6 shows that bowing down to a holy image of God isn’t ideology because you’re not worshiping it, you’re honoring it, like how you honor a king.
Please repoat without background muaic. I have tried 3 times to listen to this. And this time I am alone without kids around and still can barely focus on your exposition becauae the music is so distracting. I'd really like to know what you are sharing.
A deep subject for such a simple mind as I. Aren't words written or spoken simply symbols to impart meaning. To in essence create mental pictures? If so the whole argument has no substance. Not that I think it does anyway. So which words, in what language, impart true meaning? There is a lengthy paragraph in a comment below in Latin which imparts no meaning to me because I do not understand Latin. So does this mean that the one true word, the truth, the way, and the light, is only the KJV? I think not. I think Calvin himself might have a "word" about that. If I am the type of person who is more visually oriented, if I learn better from pictures as my stepson does, and if he were more powerfully moved to fellowship with the church and a life in Christ though pictures, (Icons) rather than words is he condemned to enteral damnation? Having said that who am I to question the faith of those who find God in their own way, place and time?
The claim that no image can represent the glory of God might equally be applied to words. Everything we say or do is limited through our human imperfection. So why discard images and not words? It basically reduces to the brains on a stick view. In the end, we only have our bodies to worship God and proclaim his glory, be it in actions, words, songs or through images.
Packer might have been to radical with the icons. What are icons but images. Aren't words also images? Aren't words also symbols, drawings? There fore, aren't words on paper the same as images. Banning images is like banning written words. The problem is when people start thinking and using icons more than what they are, images made by people's hands. Living in an orthodox country, I know how the icons are used. Venerated, kissed, bow down to, prayed to, as if, the icons are the embodiment of God. Are used as a tool, as if, these icons are spiritually charged. (Spiritually charged? Makes no sense, there is no "power" as in sense of energy that exists, like heat, like gaia. There is God, that is spirit, and that's it.)
Hey Iconoclasts; Those who disrespect the image of the King, disrespect the King! If i place an icon of Jesus Christ in front of you, are you willing to trample upon it?! If you consider your answer, it reveals the disposition of your soul. If I punch you in the face, do I not do injury to Jesus Christ and to myself? You are made in the image of God! If I honor you, do I not honor God?! If God honors those who honor Him, and glorifies those who glorify Him, do I dare to dishonor that which God honors? Did not Jesus Christ take on the fullness of our human nature and deify it? Did He not ascend with His humanity to His throne at the right hand of God? We do not worship the humanity of Jesus Christ as God, but neither do we worship the person of Jesus Christ apart from His humanity; He is the God-man! Is not your body intended to the be habitation of God? Do you dishonor your body, as a temple of the Holy Spirit? Is it not forbidden to us to be gluttonous, drunkards, fornicators, on account of being joined to Jesus Christ in Baptism? Can we join Jesus Christ to a harlot? When you die, when your soul leaves your body, does your body stop being a temple consecrated unto God? Would you take a temple of God and burn it with fire, turning the glory of God into dust and ashes?
"You are made in the image of God!" Then go and bow down to any man, kiss him and worship him and say "I do not worship you, but God." Isn't man a better image than icons? After all, in the image and likeness of God were we made. "Is not your body intended to the be habitation of God?" You said well. Then, what does habitats inside icons that people misuse them? Do not mix what God does with what man does. God does what He wills, and His works are righteous and good. But the heart of man is an idol factory.
@@michaelvatson7056, in the culture of the United States of America, it is culturally inappropriate to kiss each other as a sign of respect. Other cultures, it is perfectly permissible to do so. The accusation that Orthodox Christians don't kiss other people because other people are icons is stupid, coming as it does from someone who lives in a culture who doesn't practice that. People who live in a culture where such a thing is practiced would also find it stupid because they do that exact thing. Nothing inhabits an icon. It is not holy because something lives inside of it. It is Holy because it is dedicated to God's service and reflects His image, His maracles, or His life-changing power. Do not rebel against what God has established, or confuse your man-made traditions with God's Truth revealed through His Word and His Church.
"Then go and bow down to any man, kiss him and worship him and say "I do not worship you, but God." Isn't man a better image than icons? After all, in the image and likeness of God were we made." But I do that! I kiss my parents, icons from God. I kiss my grandparents. I kiss my relatives. In Eastern Europe, friends kiss eachother when they meet. Further east, you kiss anybody older than you in respect. America is a messed up culture.
Yes. When you pray, are you ever distracted by your thoughts? It happens to me often, when I'm reciting a prayer I know well, like the Creed, or King David's Psalm of repentance, 50/51 depending on your Bible. The point I'm getting at, is that our intended acts of virtue don't benefit us properly if our hearts aren't in the right place; Matthew 6 witnesses to this. With or without Holy images, if we're not being attentive in our devotions to God, if we're daydreaming or distracted, we need to refocus our attention. If I'm full of pride, delusion, while I should be practicing humility, self-knowledge, and sober watchfulness, I'm not being benefitted no matter what I do.
If you take your eyes off of Jesus to pray to a sinner... You don't have an icon you have an idol! Idolatry and graven images are the cornerstone of the catholic church!
@@deer563 So some icons from churches, are three dimensional. You argument fails. The ark was a commanded by God, not done by the will of man. Know the difference.
Prayerful, well done, artist representation of the Word and the Spirit makes sense since they have manifestation historically, but not of the unseen Father. But veneration of these icons, praying before them, bowing to them, and kissing them is unnecessary and superfluous. More importantly, we all make inaccurate images of God in our minds from which we should move away to an imageless experience with God in contemplative prayer which is a prelude to the beatific vision.
amen! this is so true) The way we imagine God - is our human imaginations. They way Jesus is portrayed in most of Icons - is human imaginations, that's why his face is different everywhere Plus, God told us to worship only him. So, it is a sin as well to worship icons and to bow down to them (i have seen people doing that )
There is no doubt that images were employed in Old Testament worship... cherubim on the ark, bull, bronze sea, etc. The questions/issues I have is about the jump from depiction to veneration. No examples that I can find of worship directed to or through any of these objects ... more of background scenery ... pattern of the heavenly. Even the bronze serpent, used to heal from the bite of the fire serpents in the wilderness, later, literally became "idolized" and had to be destroyed: "He removed the high places, and broke in pieces the pillars, and utterly destroyed the groves, and the brazen serpent which Moses made: because until those days the children of Israel burnt incense to it: and he called it Neesthan". (2 King's 18:4 LXX) No examples come to mind where any of the Apostles of the One, Holy and Apostolic Church, employed or taught that the worship of God in Spirit and Truth required any depictions at all. The Gospel was preached vividly in word. There was also the Holy Eucharist, the Body and Blood of the Savior. No instructions to erect and/or venerate any images. Even among the most worthy of the Apostles, like Peter or a heavenly angel ... when someone bowed to them the instant response was essentially ... cut it out, get up, I'm a man / fellow servant ... worship God!(Acts 10:26; Rev 22:8-9) So, yes, hard to see how Peter or John, in light of this would encourage and bowing to themselves, angel etc . In person or depicted in a drawing. Also, so much emphasis is given, especially to the Gentiles to flee, abandon idolatry or its practices. Controversy on not even eating meat offered to idols as it could ruin a weaker fellow believers faith. (1 Cor 8:4-13) So, it seems quite tenuous to believe that converts from the Gentiles would, in any way, be instructed to worship in any way that would resemble their former idol worship. They were explicitly commanded: "abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell..." (Acts 15:29) This was in response to a push by Jewish believers that Gentiles needed to be circumcised. No, they didn't. No doubt, if icons had ever been employed (venerated) among Gentile believers, there would have been a major uproar again accusing them of idoatry. Paul even taught against a personality cult ... I follow Paul... I follow Apollo, etc... Christ is the One who died for us! (1 Cor 1:12) There were honest disagreements among Christian about icons. Valid because of the Incarnation and a blessing to the Church or idolatry and departure from the faith and bringing about her downfall (Mohammed/islam)?
nothing exists in worship as "background scenery", everything is intentional and sacred, including in the OT, we orthodox simply continue this tradition handed to us by God. The church's theology has always been of the spirit, not of the word, that is, the holy scriptures while being a core component of apostolic tradition, do not alone contain the fullness of the revelation of God. Typically, outside the gosepls in the NT, it deals with specific pastoral issues, the holy scriptures were never intended to be a comprehensive all encompassing corpus for every question, to force them to be so, would be a type of eisegesis- including the question of iconography and images. regarding "Bowing", this is a translation issue - the "bow" St John did in revelation, or the one St peter received were prostrations, that is, a form of worship reserved for God alone - touching the forehead to the ground, both were given out of earnest confusion between person and diety. However, the bowing and crossing we do before icons is the same one we would give to someone we revere. Basically not all bows are the same, and the type you do is what demarcates the difference between veneration and worship. Otherwise anyone that bows before a king, or eastern cultures were it is customary to bow to one's elders would be also guilty of "idolatry"
“There were honest disagreements among Christians” Yes there WAS. Until iconoclasts were defeated by an ecumenical council and the true believers won out.
@@DysmasTheGoodThiefI have read about that as well. And so there should be ample evidence in early Church History, etc. of veneration, bowing, kissing, etc. of this original icon and like objects by all believers everywhere. Any reports from St. Polycarp, St. Clement, St. Ireneaus, the Didache, et al on this practice?
@@DysmasTheGoodThief The objections were a genuine concern about breaking one of the Commandments. From all I can gather from New Testament practices in Holy Scriptures, there are no examples when the Church was young, of any of these aids to worship (icons). Did Paul evangelize any of the Gentiles by saying that we Christians also pray before images of our heroes, saints just like you, etc. If anything, he was grieved that they were wholly given over to idolatry. Would he favor a practice that looked like it? I know this looks a lot like idolatry - but, it's not. No doubt, more studying on my part is needed. Was it a victory for believers? Was it a demand to practice that which was known from the beginning by Christians?
A man made object being a god. What a ridiculous idea!! Objects cannot forgive sins or solve any of our spiritual problems. I find this utterly foolish and a worthless attack against Catholics use of statues and art to remind us of our saintly heroes that we try to follow in an attempt to get to heaven.
I have no issue with people who want to use icons in worship - God knows the hearts of all worshipers and can accept or reject the worship as He sees fit. However, when orthodoxy claims to be the one true church and adopts a man-made rule that all who do not worship in this manner will be declared anathema and subject to excommunication and therefore damnation? That is a different Gospel than preached by Jesus and the apostles who put no such restrictions on the saving grace that was proclaimed throughout scripture.
"They can be false ideas about God." Well, false Bible interpretations and the false doctrines they spawn. Which the Western Churches are now full of, has just as much caused the falling away of the church from the true faith. The early Church, according to Revelations, had the same problem. Images or not. OH, and by the way, Jesus in the flesh was the "Son of Man", so I'd think that his representation, as an illustration, would be allowed, don't you?
I don't think so. You can imagine and paint. But the problem is that people take those images too serious, they look at them and imagine God that way. Then they pray to them. I have seen people kissing icons! I have seen people asking icons to do smth for them. That's why it is better no image, no icon not to confuse people. Psalm 97:7 says about images Acts 17:29 Being then God's offspring, we ought not to think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and imagination of man. Isaiah 44:15 Then it becomes fuel for a man. He takes a part of it and warms himself; he kindles a fire and bakes bread. Also he makes a god and worships it; he makes it an idol and falls down before it. This one is the scariest: Deuteronomy 27:15 “‘Cursed be the man who makes a carved or cast metal image, an abomination to the Lord, a thing made by the hands of a craftsman, and sets it up in secret.’ And all the people shall answer and say, ‘Amen.’ Lord speaks curses upon those people who make the images
Exodus: 9 Then Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy elders of Israel went up, 10 and they saw Israel’s God. Under God’s feet there was what looked like a floor of lapis-lazuli tiles, dazzlingly pure like the sky. 11 God didn’t harm the Israelite leaders, though they looked at God, and they ate and drank. They saw God, more cleary the hypostatis of the Son, the Logos. Since the Father himself is invisible. Cleary, imagery and seeing God directly is crucial even in the Old Testament.
Orthodox and Catholicism certainly worships idols, and places divine holiness on icons. As a greek man, who's fanily is half Orthodox i can say this with certainity. Being a reform Presbyterian, i follow the biblical text, as a Bible based, Christ centered Christian; i do not see this as biblical. For our God is a Jealous God. And he deserves our obedience and our hearts to be regenerative.
For a start, I am Orthodox, and I can tell you, no we do not worship idols. Perhaps you left Orthodoxy because you were confused? Anyways, as much as I love you guys, Presbyterians have a very messed up image of the Lord, so you are definitely not the ones to speak here, lol
@@cerebrummaximus3762 *Comparing Presbyterian Faith to Orthodox Faith: A Biblical Critique* The Presbyterian faith and the Orthodox faith, while both branches of historic Christianity, diverge significantly in theology, worship, and practice. The Presbyterian tradition, grounded in the Reformation and expressed through confessions like the Westminster Confession of Faith, holds to what it sees as a pure, biblical faith. In contrast, Eastern Orthodoxy, though ancient and rich in tradition, departs from core biblical principles in several key areas, particularly regarding the Second Commandment and the veneration of icons and saints. -The Sufficiency of Scripture in Presbyterianism At the heart of Presbyterian theology is *sola Scriptura*-the doctrine that the Bible alone is the authoritative Word of God. All doctrines and practices are subject to Scripture's rule. Presbyterians believe that God's Word provides everything necessary for faith and life (2 Timothy 3:16-17), and they strive to follow its teachings without addition or subtraction. Presbyterians reject practices that are not clearly commanded in Scripture, especially when it comes to worship. The Regulative Principle of Worship, a hallmark of Presbyterian theology, teaches that only what is explicitly commanded in Scripture should be used in worship. This is in stark contrast to the Orthodox tradition, which incorporates many traditions and rituals not found in the Bible. -Orthodox Departure from Biblical Christianity One of the primary areas where Orthodoxy has departed from biblical Christianity is its view of images and the veneration of saints. The Orthodox Church teaches that icons are windows to heaven and can be venerated (though not worshiped). They believe that saints, especially Mary, the mother of Jesus, serve as intercessors for believers, and thus, prayers to saints are common in Orthodox practice. From a Presbyterian perspective, these practices violate the Second Commandment, which explicitly forbids the making of images for the purpose of veneration or worship. The Bible clearly states, "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. You shall not worship them or serve them" (Exodus 20:4-5, LSB). Presbyterians understand this commandment as prohibiting not just the worship of false gods but also any representation of the true God in visible form or the use of physical images in worship. The Orthodox use of icons and prayers to saints stands in direct violation of this commandment. -The Veneration of Saints and Icons In addition to icons, the veneration of saints is a central aspect of Orthodox worship. Orthodox Christians often pray to saints, asking for their intercession and viewing them as powerful mediators between God and man. This practice is also unbiblical from a Presbyterian perspective. The Bible clearly teaches that "there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (1 Timothy 2:5, LSB). Jesus Christ alone is the mediator who reconciles humanity to God, and no human-no matter how saintly-can assume that role. Furthermore, prayers to the dead are a significant departure from the biblical pattern of prayer. In Scripture, believers are instructed to pray directly to God the Father in the name of Jesus Christ, through the power of the Holy Spirit (John 14:13-14). There is no biblical warrant for praying to anyone other than God, let alone to deceased humans who cannot hear or answer prayers. -A Departure from Orthodoxy The very name "Orthodox" suggests that the Eastern Orthodox Church sees itself as holding to the true faith. However, from a Presbyterian viewpoint, Orthodoxy has rapidly departed from biblical orthodoxy, adopting practices that distort the simplicity and purity of Christian worship as established in Scripture. The focus on ritual, tradition, and mystical practices within Orthodoxy stands in contrast to the Reformation's emphasis on returning to the biblical sources and reforming the church according to God's Word. While Orthodoxy claims an ancient heritage, this does not guarantee that its teachings and practices are correct. The Bible warns of traditions that make void the Word of God (Mark 7:13), and Presbyterians see many Orthodox practices as examples of such traditions. Presbyterianism, grounded in Scripture alone, adheres closely to the Bible’s teachings on worship, the role of Christ as mediator, and the prohibition of idolatry. The Orthodox faith, by venerating icons and praying to saints, departs from these clear biblical commands. While Orthodox Christians may value their long-standing traditions, these traditions are a significant departure from the biblical orthodoxy that the early church once held. Presbyterianism stands as a Reformation faith that calls the church back to biblical purity, upholding the Second Commandment and rejecting any form of idolatry, thereby maintaining a faith that is both truly orthodox and entirely biblical.
@@cerebrummaximus3762 As a Reformed Covenantalist Presbyterian, I believe that Presbyterianism follows the Bible more rigorously than any other Christian tradition, including Orthodox Christianity, because it adheres solely to the authority of Scripture in all matters of faith and practice. Our commitment to *sola Scriptura*-the principle that the Bible alone is our final authority-ensures that our theology, worship, and church governance align with God's revealed Word. In contrast, the Orthodox Church, while claiming to be the original and unchanging church, departs from biblical teachings in significant ways, adopting practices and traditions that emerged centuries after the New Testament period. -The Authority of Scripture One of the most crucial distinctions between Reformed Covenantalist Presbyterianism and Orthodox Christianity is our approach to Scripture. In the Presbyterian tradition, we believe that the Bible is the inspired, inerrant, and sufficient Word of God. Everything we believe and practice must be rooted in Scripture. This conviction shapes our understanding of worship, the sacraments, church government, and the Christian life. The Westminster Confession of Faith, our doctrinal standard, affirms that "the whole counsel of God, concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man's salvation, faith, and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture." In contrast, Orthodox Christianity elevates church tradition to a level of authority that often rivals or supersedes Scripture. The Orthodox Church has accumulated centuries of traditions-many of which are not found in the Bible-and these traditions are considered equally authoritative. Practices such as the veneration of icons, prayers to saints, and the use of relics, for example, are central to Orthodox worship but have no basis in Scripture. These developments are extrabiblical, and the Bible itself warns against adding to God's Word (Deuteronomy 4:2, Proverbs 30:6). -The Second Commandment and Worship A key area where Reformed Covenantalist Presbyterianism rigorously follows the Bible is in our understanding of worship. We hold to the Regulative Principle of Worship, which teaches that we should only worship God in the ways He has commanded in Scripture. This principle is based on passages like Exodus 20:4-6 (the Second Commandment) and Deuteronomy 12:32, which prohibit the making of images for worship and warn against adding to or taking away from God's instructions. Orthodox Christianity, on the other hand, has long embraced the veneration of icons, which directly contradicts the Second Commandment's clear prohibition against making graven images for worship. Orthodox Christians claim that they are not "worshiping" these icons but rather "venerating" them. However, this distinction is not biblical. In the Bible, any form of reverence toward a physical image in a religious context is considered idolatry (Isaiah 42:8, Romans 1:23). The Orthodox Church's defense of icons is rooted in later church tradition, not in the Bible. Furthermore, Orthodox Christianity has institutionalized practices like prayers to saints and the use of relics-practices completely absent from Scripture. The Bible teaches that Christ alone is our mediator (1 Timothy 2:5) and that we should pray directly to God through Jesus Christ (John 14:13-14). Nowhere in the Bible do we see prayers directed toward deceased believers. These practices developed gradually over centuries, with no biblical foundation, especially after the fall of Rome, and they represent a departure from biblical orthodoxy. -The Historical Church and the Fall of Rome The Orthodox Church often claims to be the original church, tracing its lineage back to the apostles. While it is true that Orthodoxy preserves certain ancient traditions, it is important to recognize that many of its core doctrines and practices did not develop until long after the early church period. In fact, much of what defines Orthodoxy today-its complex liturgy, iconography, and hierarchical structure-emerged in the centuries following the fall of Rome, particularly between the 3rd and 8th centuries. This timeline is significant because it shows that Orthodoxy, far from being a direct continuation of the apostolic church, underwent significant changes over time. The Orthodox Church's reliance on post-biblical tradition reveals a gradual departure from the simplicity and purity of the New Testament church. Reformed Covenantalist Presbyterianism, on the other hand, is a product of the Reformation, which sought to return the church to its biblical roots. The Reformers recognized that the medieval church, including both Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, had strayed from the teachings of Scripture, and they sought to recover the faith of the early church as revealed in the Bible. -The Case for Reformed Covenantalist Presbyterianism What sets Reformed Covenantalist Presbyterianism apart is our commitment to the covenants of Scripture, our understanding of God’s redemptive work through history, and our emphasis on covenantal objectivity. We recognize that God works through His covenant people, and the church is the visible manifestation of His covenant on earth. Our theology of the sacraments-baptism and the Lord's Supper-reflects this covenantal understanding. These sacraments are means of grace, ordained by Christ Himself, and they are administered according to His commands in Scripture. Our approach to church government, which is based on a system of elders (presbyters), is also thoroughly biblical. The New Testament clearly teaches a form of government led by elders (1 Timothy 3:1-7, Titus 1:5-9), and this model is consistently followed in Reformed Presbyterianism. Orthodox Christianity, by contrast, has adopted a hierarchical structure with bishops, priests, and deacons that is far removed from the simple, biblical model of church leadership. In conclusion, Reformed Covenantalist Presbyterianism is the most biblical form of Christianity because it rigorously adheres to the authority of Scripture in all things. We follow the Bible's clear teachings on worship, sacraments, and church governance, without adding unbiblical traditions. While the Orthodox Church claims to be the original and unchanged church, its practices tell a different story-one of gradual departure from the Bible and reliance on traditions that arose after the fall of Rome. The Reformation called the church back to its biblical foundations, and Reformed Presbyterianism continues that legacy, standing as the most faithful expression of the Christian faith as revealed in Scripture.
Not one of the people you mentioned in 7:15 accepted veneration of images. Starting with Justin the Martyr (1 Apology 9.1-5, Migne PG 6: 340), Athenagoras of Athens (A Plea for the Christians 15, Migne PG 6: 920; A Plea for the Christians 18, Migne PG 6: 925), Irenaeus of Lyon (Adversus Haereses 1.25.6: Migne PG 7: 685-686, who additionally said that some group of gnostics after the manner of gentiles had and venerated the image of Jesus, Plato, etc.), Clement of Alexandria (Exhortation to the Heathen IV.57.5-6, IV.58.2), Tertullian (Apology 12.7, Migne PL 1: 343; On the Spectacles 10, Migne PL 1: 643; On idolatry 4.1, Migne PL 1: 740-741; CSEL 20: 33.7- 13), Marcus Minucius Felix (Octavius 10.1-4; 32.1-3, Migne PL 3: 263-265), Origen (Against Celsus 7.64, Migne PG 11: 1512C-D), Lactantius (On the Deaths of the Persecutors 12, CSEL 27.2: 186-187; The Divine Institutes 2.5, CSEL 19: 114) we see opposition to images as a whole or to images used in the religious context. Of course, the context of their rejection of images is the use of images by the pagans, because there were no Christians who venerated images at that time. Later after more and more pagans were converted by the state to Christianity, we see Eusebius of Caesarea (Letter to the Empress Constantia 10, Migne PG 20: 1548; Church History 7.18.3), Synod of Elvira (Canon 36, Migne PL 84: 306), Epiphanius of Salamis (Letter 51.9, Migne PL 22:526-527 in Jerome's corpus of letters), Augustine of Hippo (Sermo 198,16-17; On faith and Symbol 7.14, Migne PG 40: 188; Exposition of Psalm 113(2).5-6, Migne PL 37: 1484), John Cassian (The Conferences 10.5.1-3, Migne PL49: 824-826) who peached against the ignorant Christians who started venerating images. So only later we see the start of the cult of images, and even then we have a lot of Fathers who opposed it or simply approved of the didactic purpose of images (like Gregory the Great). So saying that "the most widely accepted valid historical witnesses to Christianity wrote favorably about icons" is simply false. If you ignore everyone up to the VI century and then the massive opposition to images in the VII and VIII century, then this sentence could be true :)
@@Theoria The first ones - yes. The Church at that time didn't use images, so they critique only the culture around them, not other Christians (like later Epiphanius, Augustine, and others did) because such a practice hasn't evolved yet. The thing is that they critique it in such a way, that it excluded their approval of venerating images in the Christian context. Just look for example at Irenaeus, who wrote: "Alii vero ex ipsis signant, cauteriantes suos discipulos in posterioribus partibus exstantiae dextrae auris. Unde et Marcellina. quae Romam sub Aniceto venit, cum esset huius doctrinae, multos exterminavit. Gnosticos se autem vocant: et imagines quasdam quidem depictas, quasdam autem et de reliqua materia fabricatas habent, dicentes formain Christi factam a Pilato, illo in tempore quo fuit Jesus cum hominibus. Et has coronant et proponunt eas cum imaginibus mundi philosophorum, videlicet cum imagine Pythagorae et Platonis et Aristotelis et reliquorum: et reliquam observationem circa eas, similiter ut gentes faciunt." (Adversus Haereses I.25.6: Migne, PG 7: 685-686) If someone is critiquing the gnostics for using the image of Jesus, which was supposedly ordered by Pilate himself, saying that they do it, just like the pagans do (similiter ut gentes faciunt) and he doesn't in other places of his work says anything positive about images in the religious context, it is obvious where he stood on this topic. Reading more and more on this topic one will be more and more convinced that this practice didn't come from the apostles but was borrowed from the pagans. Even conservative catholic scholars (for example where I'm from - that is Poland - the last catholic country in Europe) admit that it was the case and that Christians simply borrowed it and changed the meaning of it (though of course, the pagans didn't venerate the image, but the one represented on the image as we are told by Athenagoras, Arnobius or Augustine.
@@Theoria While I know that it's an Orthodox channel, it is quite telling that even Johny Henry Newman, a convert from Anglicanism to Roman Catholicism, admitted in his "An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine" that the Christian use of icons is a practice borrowed from the surrounding pagan culture.
@@ometlo9632 I hope you realize that Luke being "the first Christian iconographer" is a later myth not supported by the earlier evidence. "[W]e have a plethora of archeological evidence - as well as many other historical evidence - that shows us that iconography was commonly practiced in the apostolic age of the Church" That's not entirely accurate. We have some examples of images in catacombs etc. (of course they are not from the apostolic age but from the III century) but we don't have any evidence that they were venerated. Even though in Dura Europos we find some decorations and paintings of biblical scenes is worth mentioning that in the main meeting hall where quasi-services probably took place, there were no paintings (The World’s Oldest Church: Bible, Art, and Ritual in Dura, Europos, Syria, Yale University Press 2016, p.17). I'm not opposed to images as such, I'm opposed to the cult of images (as the first Christians were, including Epiphanius and Augustine, and many others) as present in Orthodox and Catholic churches. "I think you may be interpreting your citations independently of the historical context in which they were written" I'm not. In context, they prove what I have written, but the comment section is not a good place for such a discussions.
@@damiandziedzic23 thank you for your response. Here also in Irenaeus there is a mode of interpretation, as he speaks of the image of Christ being placed among images of the philosophers (Plato, et al). I certainly see your concern though and am grateful for your citations.
So... can I please have my 30 minutes back? ;) You (Theoria) asked me to watch this video. You did this rather than address my comment (responding to your short video on how to venerate icons) that we see no instruction or example from Christ, the apostles, or in the early Church to venerate icons. Not only do we have no such instruction, but we have multiple examples in the NT by apostles and angels that specifically prohibit the veneration of people or angels. If we are not to venerate people or even angels, then attempts to justify venerating images that represent them are obviously problematic. The 2nd Council of Nicaea commands people to venerate icons, and expressly condemns anyone who does not, or who even holds that we should not. In other words, it expressly condemns the examples from Scripture and the early Church. I did not claim that icons were idols. I pointed out that we have no instruction or example to venerate them from Christ, the apostles, or early Church, and that we have repeated instructions to not venerate people or angels. Like so many efforts at apologetics, this video pretends to justify an erroneous act or belief by explaining away extreme, equally-erroneous positions. Specifically, you attempt to justify the veneration of icons as a contrast to extreme iconoclasm, but this is just a basic thinking/reasoning error (false dichotomy). There isn't necessarily anything wrong with an icon or image in and of itself. The problem is in venerating them or, worse, mandating such veneration under the threat of eternal damnation. Pointing out that they aren't idols, or manufacturing a distinction between worship and veneration doesn't solve the problem. That being said, your video is very well made and your presentation was very clear. I'm sure that you are a wonderful person who is seeking Christ and trying to help others do the same.
You do not have a clue what the difference between worship and veneration is. It seems you are using them interchangeably which is reflection of your ignorance. Get educated and discern the two properly.
@@johnnyd2383, perhaps rather than just call other people stupid, you could at least pretend to be Christian and address the claims or arguments being presented. I know it is a lot to ask these days. Precisely what did I write that was incorrect?
@@philoalethia Why would I waste my time with you.? You are obviously NOT a member of the Lord's Orthodox Church and you are coming here with the conclusions w/o any interest in learning. You can take your heresy with you as we have condemned it many centuries ago. Should we care about followers of those condemned heresies.? Sure. This video offers you an insight, direction and basis for your further study... and if you are still stiff necked (like OT Pharisees)... not even miracles God worked through the icons would have convinced you otherwise. I will dust off my sandals here and leave for good. Sayonara.
@@johnnyd2383 writes: "Why would I waste my time with you.? " Yes, your Christ-like charity is overwhelming. In any event, thank you for demonstrating why many people choose not to become Orthodox today: in addition to mandating things clearly prohibited by apostles and angels, they don't actually have any charity for others and, rather than engaging in dialogue, just make ignorant assumptions about others. Yes, people like you are precisely why truth seekers choose not to join Orthodoxy. Perhaps that is something to reflect upon.
@@johnnyd2383 writes "Why would I waste my time with you.?" Well, thank you for demonstrating the lack of Christian charity for which many Orthodox are quite infamous, and demonstrating precisely why so many people have chosen to not join Orthodoxy: the attitudes of many of its members.
I didn't understand a single word this man said. I really wish theologians from all sides would put aside their damn egos and open dialogue with each other. This whole searching for truth as a layman within Christianity is just stupid.
I find it twisted. Trying to justify, excuse, the unappropriated use of icons. Saying, tradition, and church philosophy. The Jews tried that with John the baptist and Christ. And what did Christ and John said about them?
There is nothing on the new testament about the importance of icons. Although I see that as a form of Christian art, like music, I do not see nothing sacred on icons. Just a picture to remind what happened, who the people were in the past, just it....
That is the Orthodox view of icons too, congrats. Btw, in the Old Testament, God endorsed iconography in the Ark. This tradition simply never stopped, was passed down by the Apostles (most famously St Paul and St Luke), and still practiced to this day.
No. The OT Law speaks against graven images Icons are not graven, they are written. Christ is Logos ( Eternal Word) A Word is Written not graven. Plus all this talk about images... Does not Scripture say that Christ IS THE Image of the Father? Apparently, These people know nothing of the Orthodox doctrinal concept of Theosis Worship is not given to paint and wood but to God . God became Man that man might become like God ( not in his essence, but united to Him in his love and mercy which are Infinite)
To any of my Orthodox brothers and sisters that care to comment: (If this thought is offensive to anyone, I apologize. Just a protestant trying to understand the "new" ideas presented) (writing this comment during the section about logographic writing systems) If word and image are essentially the same thing by the argument presented in this video (which I agree with), would, then, venerating an icon of Christ be the same as to venerate his word (the bible)? What does it mean to venerate an icon? Are there other ways Icons are used in worship? Apologies if my question is poorly worded!
I'll give this a shot, though I'm still a catechumen so others are more qualified than me and may correct me. Holy Scripture has a special place at the center of holy tradition. In that way, we hold Scripture to be above icons, but it's not like we have to choose. We will often take good care of our bibles, kiss them, and say special prayers before reading the gospel and epistle readings for the day. As for what veneration looks like, it looks much like what I just described for the bible. Think of it like how you'd treat a folded American flag, a picture of a lost loved one, etc. Veneration means respect and honor, not worship. The thing that I think confuses American protestant culture is the kissing, but it's important to remember that Orthodoxy is a very old world thing and in the old world, kissing was a lot more common and a lot more casual. You can see this if you spend any time in Orthodox areas or even Europe. Fun fact, the Greek word for venerate found in Orthodox texts going back all the way to the very beginning is proskyneo, while the word used in those same texts for worship, given to God alone, is latreia. So from the very start they sought a strict delineation between the two concepts to avoid the abuse of holy images. Hope this clears things up.
they say they venerate it. (means to honor, respect, revere, venerate, hallow, honour) But, the icons are human imaginations. One thing is to make it as a nice decoration of church. (even though i am against it) But another thins is to respect an icon. And to connect it to God. God and Icons have nothing in common. People who are portrayed there are dead. God says: I am a God of living, not dead. Jesus said: let the dead bury the dead. So, now we see people praying to them, I have seen it many times. They pray to dead people portrayed in icons that are human fantasies. Where is God here? God is alive. He is a spirit. It is a big sin and abomination to God to worship and even to create icons.
@@mixk1d the souls are alive, but people are dead. The same way, your grand grand mother is dead. You do not call her alive, right? The same way, when people die, they are called dead people, not alive even if their souls are in heaven.
@@SoldierOfChrist-YHWH God tells us that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are alive. He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living. You are therefore greatly mistaken." - Mark 12:27
The early church farhers and apostles didnt pray to nor venerate mary so you are following a man made tradition invented and added hundreds of years after the death of jesus.
Please do your research. Iconography is a tradition begun by God in the Old Testament. It is continued in the New Testament, though never mentioned, but implied by St Paul. St Mark drew the first ever post-new Testament icon.
@@cerebrummaximus3762 Virtually no historical proofs of that, early christians were notoriously aniconic or iconoclast (like Tertullian), this is well recognized by any historian that the practice of icon veneration became a reality much and much later. Even Augustine wrote against this kind of use of the images.
You have got it all wrong I grew up in the orthodox church and live in a country where the main religion is orthodox. When you hang gold on icons of Saint Irene or Luke and pray to Irene or Luke that is worship my friend and that's what the Almighty over and over condemns and warns us not to do. I'm not against icons or imagery but worshiping kissing them and praying to them that's another thing but if you talk to an orthodox he won't accept it
The prohibition is against "graven*" images In order for it to be graven it must be 3 dimensional, like a statue. The golden calf of Exodus was graven out of gold. Icons are flat, 1 dimensional No "graving"
Is that right? Some icons from churches are not paintings, but engravings (then painted over with silver or gold, or just made fully of these metals). Your words fell.
@@michaelvatson7056 Colossians 1:15 Christ IS The Image Of the invisible God The fullness of the God Head. The Incarnation...God Becomes Human For Us. Jesus' suffering began the night He was born. Herod sought the child to kill him They had to flee to Egypt in the middle of the night. As for Icon it's eikona an ancient Greek word for Image The woman who wiped the face of Jesus was named Veronica by the Church Because Christ left His countenance on her veil. Christ Jesus Our Savior and God Became THE Image...For Us
@@cabellero1120 Yes? I agree. Is this a justification for icons (that is the painted images on matter), because I do not see it. Jesus is the Logos, the Word. I don't see how this allows to consider paintings more than, well, paintings. Can icons inspire, yeah, sure. But to venerate icons, to consider them spiritually empowered, no. What the scriptures says, who believed in the name of Jesus?
@@michaelvatson7056 Icons are not paintings or in any way artistic renderings of Christ. You're thinking of the Renaissance ( which was mostly Roman Catholic) Orthodoxy is Not Catholicism...Many Protestants conflate the two. Christ Jesus Is the Logos the Eternal Word Words are not painted or drawn they're Written. Worship is Not given to paint and wood ( matter) But to the Prototype who is Christ Our God He is called Pantokrator, an ancient Greek word for Creator Of All Things Does Scripture not say " And Apart From HIM Nothing came to be" Protestants have So Many objections, Yet Orthodox look upon them as Heretics and Schismatics. All those who pick up the sword shall perish by it.. It would be sad, indeed, if Protestants choked on their own hatred of Catholics, Orthodox, Anglicans....
@@cabellero1120 I agree with what you said. Still, I don't see why icons are different than graven images. If icons are not paintings (which today, most of them are prints) then what are? Are these more than words in the bible can express?
![The Perpetual Virginity of Mary [Why I Changed My Mind]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/DfgKAUlbWMI/mqdefault.jpg)
![The Perpetual Virginity of Mary [Why I Changed My Mind]](/img/tr.png)
If you want more, subscribe. Also, join our discord: discord.gg/WRedTw5cpD
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" - St. John of Damascus. 🙏 ☦
@@eldermillennial8330 low church?
@@Diamondraw4Real Anabaptists began the low church movement. Low church is now Baptists, so-called "Non-denominational" Protestants, Independent congregations, Pentecostals, etc.. Basically their worship (really is veneration) consists of a few hymns, a short reading of a few verses of Scripture to prepare for the sermon, some prayer, and looong sermons. Crackers and juice symbolic communion are served once a month to once a quarter.
Basically their worship services are what we call Bible Study night minus the crackers and juice, and with refreshments (some of them have those too during services). They may or may not have a "worship band" and may or may not play modern contemporary Protestant Christian songs. Some stick to an organ or piano or guitar and sing "traditional" Protestant hymns. They lack any of the worship of the early Church the most important being the Holy Eucharist, the center of worship.
They have no reverence for Sacraments, even baptism which they view as not necessary for Salvation. They also might be iconoclasts or almost iconoclasts only allowing a picture of Jesus (non-iconographic at that) and/or an empty plain cross in their meeting houses. There's no altar but instead a pulpit and usually a choir would be where the altar should be. Sometimes a worship band will replace the choir.
@@LadyMaria you’re absolutely right . I was raised Protestant and always felt it lacked the worshipping of God 🥴
Where did St. John of Damascus write these words?
Clear as day that St John Damascus acknowledges we don't worship matter, as well as being in full support of iconography
Becoming Orthodox made me really realize just how little is new under the sun.
Yup, paganism of the EO is not new.
@@truthdefenders-
(Laughs in Saint Irenaeus)
Ah yes, paganism; truly the thing the Body of Christ is known for.
@@truthdefenders- I think he is referring to the protestant views. They are nestorians, arians, iconoclast, and other forms of heresies that the Church of Christ crushed, but keep reappearing to deform the Truth.
@@issaavedra Rome and the EO have adopted so many pagan practices and heretical doctrines they should be ashamed to identify as Christians.
Really thorough and well-done. Great work, Ben!
Thanks!
The short answer is no, just FYI
You're awesome doing this. Thank you.
Great video. Thank You. Myself, there was no exceptions written into the Second Commandment. It's Truly a struggle trying to understand the excuses various church denominations come up with as to why it's ok to have graven images.
@@georgevirginia3785 they aren't graven images, nor idols, nor false gods. you missed the point of the video
There is absolutely no gain in graven images and idols for worship, veneration is in the definition of worship, it explicit commands not to do so over and over and over...etc
@@michael7144 Christ has redeemed matter and the world. Icons are not idols, nor are images. There are examples of religious iconography in the OT. The Orthodox don't make icons of the divine nature, but of the human nature of Christ, who is God over all. And also icons of the saints and Apostles and scenes of scripture. If you believe icons are idols, then you have to view the Bible as an idol as well. The Bible is full of many symbols and pictures you call "language" that forces the mind to build images in thought. How is that any different from an icon portraying images of scripture? An icon is simply an image form of the stories of scripture, virtually parallel with the Bible, and equally sacred since the Word of God transcends written text.
Good presentation. I read Packer’s Knowing God as a young Calvinist and now, as an Orthodox Christian, I find Calvinist arguments to exist in an echo chamber built on willful ignorance.
I do believe Packer also to be a sincere Christian who was interested in knowing God. As Pastor Fidias Echevarria once said: Examinarlo todo, desecha lo malo y conserve lo bueno (Examine everything, throw out the bad and keep the good)
So God isn't Sovereign to you?
@@6amsensei945that’s a straw man and not what anyone has said in this comment chain. Rejecting Calvinism isn’t rejecting God’s sovereignty. It’s rejecting the cruel and evil interpretation of our Lord’s sovereignty created by Calvin
Yeah ignorance to darkness- Exodus 20 says “Exodus 20:4 (LEB): “You shall not make for yourself a divine image with any form that is in the heavens above or that is in the earth below or that is in the water below the earth.”
Did they just forget to add the part about “except those icons about God that’s totally cool??” Why was worshipping the icon of God wrong in Exodus 32? Jesus is literally defined as a bull in other places, so what’s wrong with having an icon of it?
Awesome.
Great how you have a summary with time stamps. Makes it a great resource.
Also, as a former protestant (baptised Orthodox for one year now) I'm only now beginning to realise just how damaging modern (the last 500 years) iconoclasm hase been.
In the book I’m reading for catechism, it states clearly that Christ himself is an icon, and that it’s impossible to differentiate whether or not the invisible God whom we call Father is represented by depictions of Christ, as he is the only representation we’ve ever been given. So in essence, icons of Christ could very well represent Christ himself as well as the Father.
The second commandment has a pretty clear context: the Jews made a golden calf and worshiped it.
We are neither worshipping images nor creating images that are disconnected from the Father.
To the Pharisee class it was a heresy to even call God our Father.
There will always be those people who protest the true faith.
Amazing video
@@eldermillennial8330 really good argument. And I didn’t know that about the shroud. I’ll forever refer to it as the shroud of Sophia now.
@@eldermillennial8330 It should actually be referred to the the Holy Shroud of Christ of Jerusalem, at Edessa, then Sophia, then Chambery, currently Turin.
This was an outstanding presentation - organized, well sourced, thoughtful and poignant! Thank you for this!
Gladly, thanks, Kyle! Will be going live in 12 minutes from 12p-1p Eastern for an ask anything about Orthodoxy!
God: *incarnates*
Packer: “You really shouldn’t do that; people will get the wrong idea.”
😂
😂...yes, this is why the Incarnation doesn't make sense to Jews (God became law) and to Muslims (God became book).
God incarnated by his own will.
Man makes images with his hand.
Know the difference.
When Israel did an idol while in the wilderness in exile, this is your gods who took you out of the Egypt, the wrath of God was on them.
When Israel made the arc of the covenant and the two cherubim on it, did God said, you made an image of the things in heaven? No, God instructed them how to do the arc, and the image there of. The same thing with, Though shall not murder, but God sends Israel to war.
One thing is when God commands, another thing is when men start doing things his own way.
@@michaelvatson7056 These catholics/orthodox all know images are wrong, but is doesnt phase them. They love their idolatry too much. Well, it is a false religion. What do you expect.
@@peterzinya407 a false religion? 😭 Do you only know who Jesus Christ was? I mean, y’all heretics just have literally founded a new religion (as muslims) on the Bible...
Glory to God ! ☦️
Thank you.
'Logographic writing system'. This 'Protestant' (me) was just granted an epiphany, be it ever so small. I must love my siblings (spiritual), therefore;
LORD, plz grant me understanding, for Your glory alone. Amen
Glory to God!
I am starting to understand why, during those years as a Protestant/evangelical, I found the prevalent iconoclasm of the evangelicals extremely frustrating and unfulfilling. The Protestant prohibition.of icons is largely a resurrected form of gnosticism and medieval nominalism in the modern period and really proscribes God within certain boundaries.
I think it gives license to sin as we kind of make God unknowable/omni-potent and not really in charge of the material (here and now). Also why Protestantism is an atheist producing factory
It's one thing to disagree with protestantism on icons, but don't make wild and unsubstantiated claims about aniconism being gnostic nominalism.
Well done, my friend. I have been revisiting crucial, basic questions about Orthodoxy, i.e. how are we saved, why liturgical worship, role of icons, etc. Your videos have been a help to me. Thank you.
P.S. - what is the name of the icon at 5:11 and where did you purchase it?
Christ Pantacrator Hilander legacyicons.com/christ-pantocrator-hilander-icon-x133/
I’m very impressed with the thoroughness of your treatment here! Also, the 2000s vibes with the purple backlighting is a nice touch.
Absolutely amazing. Glory to God! great work
Thank you, Christian! Through your prayers
Thank you for defending holy Orthodoxy! God grant you many years! 🙏 P.S. it was empress Irene not Theodora.
Ahhhh oops yikes
This video has a very good presentation of the subject.
Thank God! And thanks for watching
Will those images save you on the great and terrible Day of theLord?
Beautifully said and thoroughly explained brother. Thank you 🙏🏻
Excellent video - chasing down iconoclasm too far leads to denying the incarnation itself.
I still fail to see this logic. Even when I was an inquirer in Orthodoxy.
@@j.athanasius9832 Depends on what argument is being presented by iconoclasts. If images, made of the things of this world, limit the glory of God. Then that implies Christ, who is a man, made of the dust of the Earth, was an image of God that limited his glory. Yet we believe the Logos mystically became man “without change or alteration” in Christ.
This is a very sound exposition, thank you. It really boils down to what you believe about the Incarnation and Who Christ is, and as someone else mentioned, the Theotokos. Christ wasn’t teleported to Earth in a beam of light like the fictional Mr. Bean!
This is great, thank you! I will show it in my class :)
მადლობა ! thank you ! 🍇☦🍇
Even we are icons. We are created in the image and likeness of God.
Very well-done! The point on pictorial scripts like Japanese is very interesting, and something I hadn't considered.
I would offer a slight clarification. The Second Commandment was not so much a prohibition on syncretism (although of course, that is a sin), but a prohibition on worshiping God through idolatry. Idolatry can refer to the worship of other gods, but it can also refer to a form of worship which one might be attempted to direct toward the True God. It is the attempt to create a body for the god you seek to commune with, and then trap him in it, thus creating a weird parody and distortion of the Incarnation. It is an attempt to control as much as worship your god, and this was the practice of the ancient pagans. This is totally distinct from iconography, because the icon is not an attempt to trap or control God or the Saints in physical matter, but rather to honor them through physical matter, and to provide a channel through which we can see the Heavenly Kingdom. Idolatry is ultimately self-aggrandizing and an attempt to dominate, while iconography is humble and submissive.
You forgot to mention that the 2nd commandment prohibits bowing befor images, which catholics love to do.
@@peterzinya407 Have you ever bowed or honored another person in your life? Congratz! You just venerated an image of God.
Define "images", Zenya
Excellent. Very educational. Thank you brother. ✝️
There are countless wonders provided by God thru Icons and relics, that fact sums it up.
Beautiful and clear arguments for those who have ears to hear.
“...the devil led the enemies of the church from one extreme to the other, from worshiping the images of men and animals in paganism to destroying the images of Christ and the saints in iconoclasm.”-Jaroslav Pelikan
As an anglo-catholic, thank you for the summary you give in this video
Thank you for another very well-produced video.
"You shall not bow down to them" I don't think you can honestly say icons are not likenesses or graven images. I don't think you can honestly say that the church doesn't traditionally expect its body to bow its heads to and pray (worship) to them. So how can you argue that it's not idolatry?
Hope you're here to genuinely learn, not argue; I am here to explain. "Graven images" refers to idols (if you want to be technical "graven" is literal; "graven images" are statues, not paintings). Literally: an idol is a carving on rock, or sometimes a tree (known as a graven image), in the shape of a spirit or deity, with the intent that the spirit will possess the graven image. This was believed to give power to the followers, which would worship the rock or tree, assuming that a spirit has possessed it.
"Bow down" simply means "worship", not literally bow down. The carved (graven) rocks or tree believed to be possessed by a spirit would be worshipped for power. This often included bowing down, but not necessarily. "Bow down" simply refers to worshipping the idol, regardless whether you are standing, bowing, jumping.
As you can see, icons are not this. According the Eastern Orthodox Church, and icon is a symbol of Christ or His followers. This can include paintings, a cross, stain-glass windows, the Bible, movies with Christ, or simply writing the name "Christ" down is all considered an icon.
In idols, Pagans believe that the spirits physically possess the rock, which they then worship...
With icons, be it painting, cross, stain glass window, of the word "Christ" written down, nobody possesses the object. They are just that, objects. Symbols representing Christ, but they aren't Christ Himself. When you write down the word "Christ" in a sentence, you don't believe that Christ literally possesses the pen-ink, do you? The word "Christ" simply represents Him, but doesn't magically become Him. The same way, icons are just an image of Christ and His faithful, but not actually them.
One more thing: Orthodox Christians are strictly forbidden from worshipping icons!
However, we are allowed to "venerate" them. These terms often get confused, so let's clear it up:
"Worship" means viewing the physical object as not just an object, but a spirit or God, and treating it that way.
"Venerate" simply means showing respect to. Do you believe that a spirit physically possesses the Bible? Of course not. But you would never be disrespectful to the Bible and are always happy to see one - that is veneration. Veneration (meaning "showing respect to") doesn't have to be religious. Standing up on your national anthem or refusing to step on a national flag if it's on the floor is all veneration.
A soldier kissing a picture of his wife knowing full well she's at home and not magically become the photo is also veneration. The soldier doesn't believe his wife suddenly become the photo - that would be idolatry. The soldier kisses the photo of his wife simply from respect (veneration), and because he misses her.
Also, one last thing: Whilst "idol" traditionally means graven image (ie: a rock or a tree carved into a home for a spirit to possess), nowadays it has a far wider meaning. "Idol" can now also mean obsessing over money, sex, food, drugs, etc. If you obsess over one of the four above, it is still idolatry, and bowing down to a graven image, even if it isn't a statue!
I miss when this channel put out content like this
Incredible. Thank you for this video!
I pity the iconoclasts; I now think of my icons as part of the promise that I may well be resurrected having developed a relationship with some of these people whom I often try to venerate in my heart.
Joyless rule keeping won't save you, friends. You may well be joyful in keeping the second Commandment as you interpret it, iconoclasts; I will certainly take joy in keeping it as the Orthodox Church teaches it.
God bless you.
I think of my icons as images, nothing more.
I even printed some and hung on a wall, with biblical text, that I might stop and look and remember the word of God.
Im sure God hates all who aren't comfortable with and think its wrong to worship images and they will be damned to hell because your fake pagan church said so 🤣
@@michaelvatson7056You may think that, but from my perspective it is a sad view. I like John Damascenes view, don’t worship (in the Protestant sense) matter, but worship the God of matter. And part of that I posit is the honor and due reverence given to that which is from God (including matter). I see the reverence of matter (particularly images) as symbolic and not to the matter itself.
This video. Made it all make sense. I will engage with icons for the first time and see how it goes. I dont want to feel lost anymore.
Iconoclasm is also linked to Protestant disdain for the Theotokos. By disregarding the centrality of the incarnation to our salvation, they fail to honor God’s mother, from whom he takes his humanity.
I’m reserving my thought about failing to honor “God’s mother”. For now, I’d like to know why the focus is on the Second Commandment instead of Exodus.
Please refrain from addressing Mary.
@@junior.von.claire I don't know what you mean by "instead of Exodus."
@@wolkenpower Exodus 20?
Btw, I credit the Lord for Christ’s humanity, per immaculate conception. I don’t believe in the veneration of Mary nor any other additions to the scripture, as found in the Latin Vulgate.
Well… I asked you to refrain from addressing Mary, but I certainly haven’t held to the same standard.
@@junior.von.claire I’m not sure what exodus 20 has to do with icons or the Theotokos.
@@wolkenpower My primary concern regarding images is whether or not they’re idolized. I’m confident that the Lord never intended each follower become a theologian in order to make a determination as to whether or not an image or idol is being worshipped, at least for the self.
I have no distain for the Theotokos, for I’ve never heard of it. I’m 51, so it’s curious.
This was well done. Thank you.
Amazing video! Thank you so much
Seriously, I am considering converting to orthodoxy, and I had a discussion with a Protestant pastor about this. I'm trying to learn.
Excellent breakdown, thank you!
Would be ok if I download this video and add spanish subtitles to show it to my protestant family? I would love to send you the script too if you want.
the best analysis on icon controversy
I often wonder how a protestant bible written in English can be considered as the completely accurate and divinely inspired word of God when many of the translations completely eliminate concepts and deeper meanings that are found in the original Greek
Holy fathers instruct us to be like St. Athanasius the Great. Even if the entire human race is to turn away from god. We must stand firm in our faith and love of God (Christ Yeshua)
If I recall correctly, Fr. Thomas Hopko said that in Hebrew there are two words for word “one” - a numeric one and a one of unity, and that after the Church was established, Judaism exchanged the unity definition in the “Hear O Israel….” text to the numeric definition.
God bless you brother amen ☦️☦️☦️☦️⛪️
As Jay Dyer says, protestantism begins with soteriology, based on their rejection of tradition. This has them have a warped view of the incarnation
The Orthodox Church begins with christology and that is why we have sacraments and Icoography, etc
Commenting just for the algorithm.
we can always pray and ask Jesus Himself
The Orthodox don't "idolize" as someone growing up in the 50ties might have idolized Elvis Presley. What the Orthodox do they call "veneration." The word "venerate" has a whole range of meaning that fails to match what is implied by idolize. The main difference falls into the realm of commitment. In idolizing one tends to lose a somewhat reasonable appraisal of the object of attention. In many ways Elvis Presley was a jerk, but his worshippers were typically so overwhelmed by his rockin and a rollin that a quiet evaluation ended up out of the question. In veneration the tendency is to see the whole story and evaluate ones own life in terms of the venerated object. That being said it is painfully obvious that many if not most Orthodox have air between their ears and are capable of absorbing only the thud of the crashing waves.
Behind all that “veneration” Jesus becomes obscured. If you lived in traditionally orthodox nations you would see that clearly. No wonder so many people who seek Christ end up in protestant churches
@@synthesaurus Jesus is obscured with iconography putting him front and center, but made clear in a white-walled church with an empty cross full of people reading bad translations from incomplete bibles?
Ok.
@@CHURCHISAWESUM You haven't lived in a country where Orthodoxy have been main religion. Most people, even those who go to church don't know the Gospel but full of weird superstitions.
@@synthesaurus
The argument that all this "veneration" hides the glory of God, Jesus Christ in particular, is nonsense; You know why? Anyone can fall into pietism, even without icons, because they can take their Spiritual walk with God like a paint-by-numbers game.
"If I do X, I'll get Y, regardless of my Spiritual condition, or what's in my heart."
If we're not being attentive in Church, we're just another body taking up space. If I'm giving to the poor, but my heart is in the wrong place, guess what, it's idolatry!
@synthesaurus, Confront me. I've lived in both a Protestant and and Eastern Orthodox nation, and I can reassure you that is not the case. Veneration of icons simply means respecting the people represented by them - this is entirely God-focused.
If you have seen anything else, then it is not Orthodox-permitted veneration. That is known as "cultural Christianity" and it is the equivalence of me accusing the Protestant nations of being either legalistic or everybody has become secular. Just because some people have misunderstood the point of icons, does not mean that is how it should be done. You should know this from the Bible.
Also: I've seen Protestants turn to Catholicism and the Orthodox when seeking true Christianity to leave lukewarmness. I am yet to see an Orthodox become Protestant. Orthodoxy is the faith most closest and traditional to that of the original Christians. Protestant is a failed attempt to reform the Catholic Church then fell away from what the first Christians taught. Also do you genuinely not believe in a proper Eucharist? So you take "graven idols" to literally, but disobey the command Christ gave us? That's sad, this is why Protestants always turn to Orthodoxy.
We're not under the Law of Moses. We have freedom in Christ, but we don't use that freedom "as an opportunity for the flesh." In fact, legalism (perhaps even more than license) is the greatest threat to a person's "in Christ" status according to St. Paul:
"You who are of (seek justification by) the law are cut off (separated, divorced) from Christ. You have fallen from grace."
So then, should we abandon the law? Paul answered these.
When the signifier becomes the signified..... and it always does. When you witness the amount of attention (veneration, prayer etc) given to the ikons of the saints and Mary it makes you wonder.
it is one of the biggest sins.
praying to dead is not a good idea
demons might come into people's lives through prayers to those who died
they cannot hear people in anyway. Bible says, when people die, and go to heaven, they are like angels.
They live in Heaven. They cannot hear people from earth.
But demons can . . .
@god_iswithinme9868 you have no proof for anything you just said.
That's very un- Biblical.
As ever great job
God bless the orthodox Church.. I hope it will grow and bless the western world with it marvelous eastern liturgy.
For a Protestant, veneration sounds like a distinction without a meaningful difference from worship. If an icon is just an object, then discard it. The icon's existence has no bearing on whether or not you respect someone.
Then you have misunderstood the Orthodox view of iconography, and have failed basic research. Please try again.
@@cerebrummaximus3762 That’s not a substantive response.
Art as offering of worship to God!
But in the septuagint, the second commandment continues, and clearly prohibits bowing down, using the proskynesis term specifically. Jesus also prohibits it in Matthew 4:9-10. All this, then, is idolatry. The 7th ecumenical council clearly had an agenda, and relied on the masses having no ability to study the greek. In the modern era, we can clearly see how we should worship, and these icons have no place in worshipping God "in spirit and in truth" as it says in John chapter 4.
Did you seriously use Satan tempting Christ as an argument for iconoclasm????
@@adjustedbrass7551 absolutely! Do you not see how we are only to apply proskynesis to God alone? Jesus says so explicitly. Therefore, giving it to icons is equally blasphemous. Can you show me from scripture where it says we can bow to images, or even to anything except God?
@@adamhansen3897 🤦♂️
@@adjustedbrass7551 ok, but what do you have to say in response to my points?
@@adamhansen3897 forgive me for even starting. Our world views are far too different to properly talk on this.
Have a good day.
Fantastic video and explanation.
I am Orthodox with a protestant background and I'm still struggling with this.
7th ecumenical council damns anyone who doesnt worship and "venerate" these images so you better figure it out because other wise they will ban you from the church forever and you will be sent to hell 🤣
Replying to vrocs
…………………………….
No one is braking any commandments here , Eastern Orthodox Church fully understands worshiping a tree 🌲 bush or a marble stone to total devotion to Jesus Christ right from the beginning.
From translation of the Old Testament to the Hellenic language mostly spoken in that part of the world ( like it or not ) direct heritage of Alexander the Great , including the Jewish community ( whereby Alexander the Great allowed the Jewish community to worship Freely their faith )
One needs to excel in the understanding of the oral and written classical Hellenic language in order to correctly understand Holy Scripture, Church Canons , and way of worship taught by the early Church fathers , when the Church was One Holy, Apostolic, Catholic Church .
There is an authentic worship of God in the Eastern Orthodox Church, focused on our Salvation and how to go about it. Through the authentic Eucharist weekly , fasting Wednesday and Friday year round, daily prayer , vespers and the Divine Liturgy.
For the Eastern Orthodox Church this is a lifelong effort, confession, communion .
When a dear, precious loved one passes away and I take a picture and kiss the picture of the passed person NOT a piece of paper- clearly. It’s the person that counts here.
Historically, the some hierarchical leaders could not and refused to read Hellenic language, and due to the barbaric invasions in the West , lost contact with there Eastern brothers, thus the West created their own erroneous interpretations and truth.
I see nothing wrong with having an image of Jesus Christ and adoring Him through performing the Cross , praying, reciting passages of the Holy Scripture in front of the image of Christ.
He came as flesh and blood and people witnessed his glory and beauty and love on earth for the Salvation of man , through His crucifixion and resurrection.
Jesus Christ did His part , we are not saved merely because we found Jesus Christ, we are saved by continuing in adoring Him through worship .
Jesus Christ came and lived amongst us , He is a real person not something abstract, such was the case in the Old Testament
Images of Jesus Christ are real testimony of this.
Through genuine adoration and worship of Jesus Christ throughout of lives until we depart is the way to be saved- it’s the actions that is vital here not an arbitrary statement “ I found Jesus, thus I am saved “
No way , does not work that way Jesus Christ has and will not change His relationship with us , it’s we who constantly change our beliefs that accommodates our human lives and what we choose as being a burden, we disregard- history is proof of this.
☦️
P. S.
The broadcaster is completely correct and took part of his time to eloquently explain misconceptions that certain Christian denominations have and a direct response to Packer which is solid.
You choose not to believe or not convinced , that’s fine, direct judgment on a Christian faith ( Eastern Orthodox- officially , Orthodox Catholic Church) which existed since the time of Jesus Christ,over 2000 years unchanged, is not.
In Exodus 25 God tells to make curtains with Images if Seraphim and Two Seraphim on both sides of the ark.
@@elijahyoung11 is your church in communion with rome?
This is irrelevant to the 2nd commandment. I am an iconoclast, and I am aware of those facts.
This does not compare. This argument is like this: God said to Adam that he will die, therefore, Adam should also make others die, because God made Adam die.
That's a good one! I always love seeing iconoclasts cope this verse.
I'm definitely not an expert here, but doesn't the second commandment specifically refer to graven images, whereas icons are painted, so not graven?
no, read different translations. It speaks about not just graven, in my Bible it says: Carved Images
Indeed you cannot pray and worship anything but God.
When people pray to dead Saints - it is considered a witchcraft for God, it can open doors to demons
That's not the thought process, considering that statuary is _technically_ permitted by Nicaea II but is still less preferred than painted icons (painted iconography has established standards meant to maximize its spiritual value in praxis). The issue being pointed to in Second Commandment has to be understood in the context of the times.
The Hebrew word "pesel" refers to a specific concept: a carved statue meant as an object of worship. Polytheists in the ANE would create these statues representing their gods with ritual tools near a river, and upon finishing, would throw those tools in a river and declare that the statue was not made by human hands. They legitimately thought that these idols were themselves the god they sought to worship.
Icons aren't idols-- they aren't made in the same way as above, they aren't conceived in the same way as above, and they aren't used in the same way as above. The icon points to who's meant to be depicted, and honor befitting them is directed to the depicted with the icon serving as a "pointer". Idol worshippers in the OT thought their graven images were in fact their gods. Even in the case of the Greeks and Romans-- who I reckon didn't consider their statutes their gods themselves-- their issue was that their gods were at best delusions of demons, and at worst demons, and their worship was thus misdirected.
The Ark of the Covenant had two Cherubim on the lid. The pole with the brass serpents was an image. The curtains to the Tabernacle as well as the Temples to God had depictions of Cherubim and I think a few other things. Heck even the temple lamp/candle stand that'd become what we call the menorah today was modelled after the Tree of Life in the Garden of Eden. Just wanted to throw those out there, I don't have an opinion one way or another about this topic.
Many of your examples are from the commandment of God. When man takes charge by his own will, see what happens, the calf in the wilderness, the whole Judges and Kings books.
It is no written that the serpent on pole was meant to be used as an worshiping image. Yet, Israel kept it, and probably worshiped it, Israel not knowing that it was not the pole who cured them, but God. God made them to trust God, so He would heal them. The thing that God did through all the history of ancient Israel.
These things you wrote does not justify the improper use of icons.
@@michaelvatson7056 Im gonna ride my Mary statue al the way to heaven.
@@peterzinya407 You'll cling to the fake mary statues straight to the lake of fire. Humans have always been dumb and stubborn insisting to cling to their dumb little wooden carved figurines. Nothing is new under the sun.
@@michaelvatson7056
You're comparing the image of Christ to the Golden calf?
I'm sure that'll go over well.
@@michaelvatson7056I know this is an old comment, but my question is would God ever instruct Israel to do something that violates his will? And violates his view images?
Well done - thank you
Icons are by the God's providence put in place as a stumbling block for unfaithful ones.
Interesting!
Where in the New Testament did Jesus or the apostles explain anything of what a church building looks like or Icons??
The absence of explicit New Testament instructions on these specific matters does not imply that the practices of church buildings or iconography are invalid or prohibited. The early Christians, guided by the Holy Spirit and the teachings of the apostles, embraced various forms of worship and artistic expression as they sought to honor God, commemorate the life of Christ, and foster the spiritual growth of the community. As for icons, the use of visual imagery in religious contexts can be seen in the *Old Testament,* particularly in the construction of the Ark of the Covenant and the ornate decorations of the Temple. Cherubim statues were placed on top of the Ark, and various artistic elements adorned the Temple, including carvings and engravings of cherubim, flowers, and other symbolic imagery.
We see it in the Old Testament. This tradition simply never stopped after the birth of Christ. The first Christians practiced it (we still have remnants of a painting of Christ from one of the Apostles), and the Orthodox Church simply keeps the passed down traditions of the Church.
Also, we do see it practiced in the New Testament, technically:
"Icon" is simply a symbol of Christ. That can be painting, cross, the Bible, stain glass windows, movie including Christ, or simply the word "Christ" written down.
Christ is the incarnation of God, and He is an icon of Himself. We are made in God's image, and the Orthodox Church teaches that we are icons too.
(Also, icons veneration does appear I'm the New Testament - I suggest reading the prayer cloth in Acts 19. This is by definition an icon, based on Orthodox tradition.)
Let us try to not use Packer's mistakes as a weapon against the protestant church. I believe that most protestants are sincere Christians. Let's recognize that none of us are perfect and try to mostly stress what we have in common. It is, I think, the only way to reunite all Christians into one church.
Christians will never bow befor your idols.
Lots of catholics worship a goddess in reality.
They started letting in pagan practices in the 4th century and they never even started using icons in worship till the 7th century anyways but they wont tell you that🤣@@peterzinya407
@@wilsontexasOkay. Do you have any source for that? Do you have any points from the catechism of the Church or official encyclicals showing a goddess in Catholicism? Or are you just perpetuating falsehoods and stereotypes because you refuse to humble yourself and do the research from first principles?
@zeektm1762 observation of what catholics do versus what they claim when arguing. Also what catholics do with Mary compared to what other religions do with their Gods.
As a Protestant who does not use icons, I personally don't have anything against it when other people use it but I would never use it and I would never condense somebody else or doing that
I would because it is wrong. all these people who LOVE icons always forget to tell you that they didn't use icons till the 6th century and the early Christian s were prohibited from painting biblical figures until the religion became the right hand of the state and they started letting in pagan practices that the pagans wanted to practice to be more familiar with worship when they converted in the 4th century and these councils started getting loose with their beliefs then it all ends here where we have people defending pagan practices under the notion its all "for Christ"
@user-ci3gk8um8l the bible wasn't canonized until the 4th century so you had better throw that out to be safe
@@1967-l7h Archeology debunks you... icons found by archeology are dated much earlier.
@@1967-l7h St. Athanasius lived in the third and fourth centuries, and spoke about how exactly to use icons. We've found churches and catacombs from the third century adorned with icons, too.
@user-ci3gk8um8l What are you on about? Half of what you said is false. Where I'm from, we've got churches a few decades after Christ with iconography in them. The first post New-Testament icon was drawn by one of the Apostles, and its remnants are kept to this day and you can freely visit it. Iconography is embraced in the Old Testament.
When Jesus Christ returns, what happens to the sacred icons? For example there are icons that are said to perform miracles. Do they get preserved and taken up with the Christians?
Wow.. Orthodox have thee worst defense for iconography veneration... I wanna join the church so bad, but I'm having the hardest time seeing how icon vernation is not idolatry
I recant my statement, I am now Eastern Orthodox. Joshua 7:6 shows that bowing down to a holy image of God isn’t ideology because you’re not worshiping it, you’re honoring it, like how you honor a king.
Please repoat without background muaic.
I have tried 3 times to listen to this. And this time I am alone without kids around and still can barely focus on your exposition becauae the music is so distracting.
I'd really like to know what you are sharing.
A deep subject for such a simple mind as I. Aren't words written or spoken simply symbols to impart meaning. To in essence create mental pictures? If so the whole argument has no substance. Not that I think it does anyway.
So which words, in what language, impart true meaning? There is a lengthy paragraph in a comment below in Latin which imparts no meaning to me because I do not understand Latin. So does this mean that the one true word, the truth, the way, and the light, is only the KJV? I think not. I think Calvin himself might have a "word" about that.
If I am the type of person who is more visually oriented, if I learn better from pictures as my stepson does, and if he were more powerfully moved to fellowship with the church and a life in Christ though pictures, (Icons) rather than words is he condemned to enteral damnation?
Having said that who am I to question the faith of those who find God in their own way, place and time?
The claim that no image can represent the glory of God might equally be applied to words. Everything we say or do is limited through our human imperfection. So why discard images and not words?
It basically reduces to the brains on a stick view. In the end, we only have our bodies to worship God and proclaim his glory, be it in actions, words, songs or through images.
Packer might have been to radical with the icons. What are icons but images. Aren't words also images? Aren't words also symbols, drawings? There fore, aren't words on paper the same as images. Banning images is like banning written words.
The problem is when people start thinking and using icons more than what they are, images made by people's hands.
Living in an orthodox country, I know how the icons are used. Venerated, kissed, bow down to, prayed to, as if, the icons are the embodiment of God. Are used as a tool, as if, these icons are spiritually charged. (Spiritually charged? Makes no sense, there is no "power" as in sense of energy that exists, like heat, like gaia. There is God, that is spirit, and that's it.)
@@michaelvatson7056 God has energies. His energies can embody us and also things.
Hey Iconoclasts; Those who disrespect the image of the King, disrespect the King!
If i place an icon of Jesus Christ in front of you, are you willing to trample upon it?!
If you consider your answer, it reveals the disposition of your soul.
If I punch you in the face, do I not do injury to Jesus Christ and to myself? You are made in the image of God! If I honor you, do I not honor God?!
If God honors those who honor Him, and glorifies those who glorify Him, do I dare to dishonor that which God honors?
Did not Jesus Christ take on the fullness of our human nature and deify it? Did He not ascend with His humanity to His throne at the right hand of God?
We do not worship the humanity of Jesus Christ as God, but neither do we worship the person of Jesus Christ apart from His humanity; He is the God-man!
Is not your body intended to the be habitation of God? Do you dishonor your body, as a temple of the Holy Spirit? Is it not forbidden to us to be gluttonous, drunkards, fornicators, on account of being joined to Jesus Christ in Baptism? Can we join Jesus Christ to a harlot?
When you die, when your soul leaves your body, does your body stop being a temple consecrated unto God? Would you take a temple of God and burn it with fire, turning the glory of God into dust and ashes?
"You are made in the image of God!" Then go and bow down to any man, kiss him and worship him and say "I do not worship you, but God." Isn't man a better image than icons? After all, in the image and likeness of God were we made.
"Is not your body intended to the be habitation of God?" You said well. Then, what does habitats inside icons that people misuse them?
Do not mix what God does with what man does. God does what He wills, and His works are righteous and good.
But the heart of man is an idol factory.
@@michaelvatson7056, in the culture of the United States of America, it is culturally inappropriate to kiss each other as a sign of respect. Other cultures, it is perfectly permissible to do so. The accusation that Orthodox Christians don't kiss other people because other people are icons is stupid, coming as it does from someone who lives in a culture who doesn't practice that. People who live in a culture where such a thing is practiced would also find it stupid because they do that exact thing.
Nothing inhabits an icon. It is not holy because something lives inside of it. It is Holy because it is dedicated to God's service and reflects His image, His maracles, or His life-changing power.
Do not rebel against what God has established, or confuse your man-made traditions with God's Truth revealed through His Word and His Church.
"Then go and bow down to any man, kiss him and worship him and say "I do not worship you, but God." Isn't man a better image than icons? After all, in the image and likeness of God were we made."
But I do that! I kiss my parents, icons from God. I kiss my grandparents. I kiss my relatives. In Eastern Europe, friends kiss eachother when they meet. Further east, you kiss anybody older than you in respect.
America is a messed up culture.
Is it possible to bypass veneration of images and pray to God directly?
Yes.
When you pray, are you ever distracted by your thoughts? It happens to me often, when I'm reciting a prayer I know well, like the Creed, or King David's Psalm of repentance, 50/51 depending on your Bible.
The point I'm getting at, is that our intended acts of virtue don't benefit us properly if our hearts aren't in the right place; Matthew 6 witnesses to this.
With or without Holy images, if we're not being attentive in our devotions to God, if we're daydreaming or distracted, we need to refocus our attention.
If I'm full of pride, delusion, while I should be practicing humility, self-knowledge, and sober watchfulness, I'm not being benefitted no matter what I do.
They... aren't counter submissive, wdym?
It is better to explain the iconoclast crisis and the councils about this trouble (the council of Hieria and the 8th council, the council of Nicea)
If you take your eyes off of Jesus to pray to a sinner... You don't have an icon you have an idol! Idolatry and graven images are the cornerstone of the catholic church!
I can't take my eyes off Jesus because he isn't physically present. To not take my eyes off Jesus I'd need an icon.
The ark of the as the covenant has two statues of angels. An icon is one-dimensional no statue
@@glennherron9499 So Jesus is physically present in the eucharist?
@@deer563 So some icons from churches, are three dimensional. You argument fails.
The ark was a commanded by God, not done by the will of man. Know the difference.
A picture is worth a thousand words
Awesome!
Prayerful, well done, artist representation of the Word and the Spirit makes sense since they have manifestation historically, but not of the unseen Father. But veneration of these icons, praying before them, bowing to them, and kissing them is unnecessary and superfluous. More importantly, we all make inaccurate images of God in our minds from which we should move away to an imageless experience with God in contemplative prayer which is a prelude to the beatific vision.
amen! this is so true)
The way we imagine God - is our human imaginations.
They way Jesus is portrayed in most of Icons - is human imaginations, that's why his face is different everywhere
Plus, God told us to worship only him.
So, it is a sin as well to worship icons and to bow down to them (i have seen people doing that )
There is no doubt that images were employed in Old Testament worship... cherubim on the ark, bull, bronze sea, etc. The questions/issues I have is about the jump from depiction to veneration. No examples that I can find of worship directed to or through any of these objects ... more of background scenery ... pattern of the heavenly.
Even the bronze serpent, used to heal from the bite of the fire serpents in the wilderness, later, literally became "idolized" and had to be destroyed:
"He removed the high places, and broke in pieces the pillars, and utterly destroyed the groves, and the brazen serpent which Moses made: because until those days the children of Israel burnt incense to it: and he called it Neesthan".
(2 King's 18:4 LXX)
No examples come to mind where any of the Apostles of the One, Holy and Apostolic Church, employed or taught that the worship of God in Spirit and Truth required any depictions at all. The Gospel was preached vividly in word. There was also the Holy Eucharist, the Body and Blood of the Savior. No instructions to erect and/or venerate any images.
Even among the most worthy of the Apostles, like Peter or a heavenly angel ... when someone bowed to them the instant response was essentially ... cut it out, get up, I'm a man / fellow servant ... worship God!(Acts 10:26; Rev 22:8-9)
So, yes, hard to see how Peter or John, in light of this would encourage and bowing to themselves, angel etc . In person or depicted in a drawing.
Also, so much emphasis is given, especially to the Gentiles to flee, abandon idolatry or its practices. Controversy on not even eating meat offered to idols as it could ruin a weaker fellow believers faith. (1 Cor 8:4-13) So, it seems quite tenuous to believe that converts from the Gentiles would, in any way, be instructed to worship in any way that would resemble their former idol worship. They were explicitly commanded: "abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell..." (Acts 15:29) This was in response to a push by Jewish believers that Gentiles needed to be circumcised. No, they didn't. No doubt, if icons had ever been employed (venerated) among Gentile believers, there would have been a major uproar again accusing them of idoatry. Paul even taught against a personality cult ... I follow Paul... I follow Apollo, etc... Christ is the One who died for us! (1 Cor 1:12)
There were honest disagreements among Christian about icons. Valid because of the Incarnation and a blessing to the Church or idolatry and departure from the faith and bringing about her downfall (Mohammed/islam)?
nothing exists in worship as "background scenery", everything is intentional and sacred, including in the OT, we orthodox simply continue this tradition handed to us by God.
The church's theology has always been of the spirit, not of the word, that is, the holy scriptures while being a core component of apostolic tradition, do not alone contain the fullness of the revelation of God. Typically, outside the gosepls in the NT, it deals with specific pastoral issues, the holy scriptures were never intended to be a comprehensive all encompassing corpus for every question, to force them to be so, would be a type of eisegesis- including the question of iconography and images.
regarding "Bowing", this is a translation issue - the "bow" St John did in revelation, or the one St peter received were prostrations, that is, a form of worship reserved for God alone - touching the forehead to the ground, both were given out of earnest confusion between person and diety. However, the bowing and crossing we do before icons is the same one we would give to someone we revere.
Basically not all bows are the same, and the type you do is what demarcates the difference between veneration and worship.
Otherwise anyone that bows before a king, or eastern cultures were it is customary to bow to one's elders would be also guilty of "idolatry"
No examples of any of the apostles? Dude St Luke the apostle painted the first icon of the Theotokos and the Christ child.
“There were honest disagreements among Christians”
Yes there WAS. Until iconoclasts were defeated by an ecumenical council and the true believers won out.
@@DysmasTheGoodThiefI have read about that as well. And so there should be ample evidence in early Church History, etc. of veneration, bowing, kissing, etc. of this original icon and like objects by all believers everywhere. Any reports from St. Polycarp, St. Clement, St. Ireneaus, the Didache, et al on this practice?
@@DysmasTheGoodThief The objections were a genuine concern about breaking one of the Commandments. From all I can gather from New Testament practices in Holy Scriptures, there are no examples when the Church was young, of any of these aids to worship (icons). Did Paul evangelize any of the Gentiles by saying that we Christians also pray before images of our heroes, saints just like you, etc. If anything, he was grieved that they were wholly given over to idolatry. Would he favor a practice that looked like it? I know this looks a lot like idolatry - but, it's not.
No doubt, more studying on my part is needed. Was it a victory for believers? Was it a demand to practice that which was known from the beginning by Christians?
Yes
A man made object being a god. What a ridiculous idea!! Objects cannot forgive sins or solve any of our spiritual problems. I find this utterly foolish and a worthless attack against Catholics use of statues and art to remind us of our saintly heroes that we try to follow in an attempt to get to heaven.
I have no issue with people who want to use icons in worship - God knows the hearts of all worshipers and can accept or reject the worship as He sees fit. However, when orthodoxy claims to be the one true church and adopts a man-made rule that all who do not worship in this manner will be declared anathema and subject to excommunication and therefore damnation? That is a different Gospel than preached by Jesus and the apostles who put no such restrictions on the saving grace that was proclaimed throughout scripture.
"They can be false ideas about God." Well, false Bible interpretations and the false doctrines they spawn. Which the Western Churches are now full of, has just as much caused the falling away of the church from the true faith. The early Church, according to Revelations, had the same problem. Images or not. OH, and by the way, Jesus in the flesh was the "Son of Man", so I'd think that his representation, as an illustration, would be allowed, don't you?
I don't think so.
You can imagine and paint. But the problem is that people take those images too serious, they look at them and imagine God that way. Then they pray to them. I have seen people kissing icons! I have seen people asking icons to do smth for them.
That's why it is better no image, no icon not to confuse people.
Psalm 97:7 says about images
Acts 17:29
Being then God's offspring, we ought not to think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and imagination of man.
Isaiah 44:15
Then it becomes fuel for a man. He takes a part of it and warms himself; he kindles a fire and bakes bread. Also he makes a god and worships it; he makes it an idol and falls down before it.
This one is the scariest:
Deuteronomy 27:15
“‘Cursed be the man who makes a carved or cast metal image, an abomination to the Lord, a thing made by the hands of a craftsman, and sets it up in secret.’ And all the people shall answer and say, ‘Amen.’
Lord speaks curses upon those people who make the images
Exodus:
9 Then Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy elders of Israel went up, 10 and they saw Israel’s God. Under God’s feet there was what looked like a floor of lapis-lazuli tiles, dazzlingly pure like the sky. 11 God didn’t harm the Israelite leaders, though they looked at God, and they ate and drank.
They saw God, more cleary the hypostatis of the Son, the Logos. Since the Father himself is invisible.
Cleary, imagery and seeing God directly is crucial even in the Old Testament.
Orthodox and Catholicism certainly worships idols, and places divine holiness on icons. As a greek man, who's fanily is half Orthodox i can say this with certainity. Being a reform Presbyterian, i follow the biblical text, as a Bible based, Christ centered Christian; i do not see this as biblical. For our God is a Jealous God. And he deserves our obedience and our hearts to be regenerative.
Only a bгаוпdеаd Protestant pagan would think Icons of our Saints are idols...
For a start, I am Orthodox, and I can tell you, no we do not worship idols. Perhaps you left Orthodoxy because you were confused? Anyways, as much as I love you guys, Presbyterians have a very messed up image of the Lord, so you are definitely not the ones to speak here, lol
@@cerebrummaximus3762 what’s the 2nd commandment?
@@cerebrummaximus3762 *Comparing Presbyterian Faith to Orthodox Faith: A Biblical Critique*
The Presbyterian faith and the Orthodox faith, while both branches of historic Christianity, diverge significantly in theology, worship, and practice. The Presbyterian tradition, grounded in the Reformation and expressed through confessions like the Westminster Confession of Faith, holds to what it sees as a pure, biblical faith. In contrast, Eastern Orthodoxy, though ancient and rich in tradition, departs from core biblical principles in several key areas, particularly regarding the Second Commandment and the veneration of icons and saints.
-The Sufficiency of Scripture in Presbyterianism
At the heart of Presbyterian theology is *sola Scriptura*-the doctrine that the Bible alone is the authoritative Word of God. All doctrines and practices are subject to Scripture's rule. Presbyterians believe that God's Word provides everything necessary for faith and life (2 Timothy 3:16-17), and they strive to follow its teachings without addition or subtraction.
Presbyterians reject practices that are not clearly commanded in Scripture, especially when it comes to worship. The Regulative Principle of Worship, a hallmark of Presbyterian theology, teaches that only what is explicitly commanded in Scripture should be used in worship. This is in stark contrast to the Orthodox tradition, which incorporates many traditions and rituals not found in the Bible.
-Orthodox Departure from Biblical Christianity
One of the primary areas where Orthodoxy has departed from biblical Christianity is its view of images and the veneration of saints. The Orthodox Church teaches that icons are windows to heaven and can be venerated (though not worshiped). They believe that saints, especially Mary, the mother of Jesus, serve as intercessors for believers, and thus, prayers to saints are common in Orthodox practice.
From a Presbyterian perspective, these practices violate the Second Commandment, which explicitly forbids the making of images for the purpose of veneration or worship. The Bible clearly states, "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. You shall not worship them or serve them" (Exodus 20:4-5, LSB). Presbyterians understand this commandment as prohibiting not just the worship of false gods but also any representation of the true God in visible form or the use of physical images in worship. The Orthodox use of icons and prayers to saints stands in direct violation of this commandment.
-The Veneration of Saints and Icons
In addition to icons, the veneration of saints is a central aspect of Orthodox worship. Orthodox Christians often pray to saints, asking for their intercession and viewing them as powerful mediators between God and man. This practice is also unbiblical from a Presbyterian perspective. The Bible clearly teaches that "there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (1 Timothy 2:5, LSB). Jesus Christ alone is the mediator who reconciles humanity to God, and no human-no matter how saintly-can assume that role.
Furthermore, prayers to the dead are a significant departure from the biblical pattern of prayer. In Scripture, believers are instructed to pray directly to God the Father in the name of Jesus Christ, through the power of the Holy Spirit (John 14:13-14). There is no biblical warrant for praying to anyone other than God, let alone to deceased humans who cannot hear or answer prayers.
-A Departure from Orthodoxy
The very name "Orthodox" suggests that the Eastern Orthodox Church sees itself as holding to the true faith. However, from a Presbyterian viewpoint, Orthodoxy has rapidly departed from biblical orthodoxy, adopting practices that distort the simplicity and purity of Christian worship as established in Scripture. The focus on ritual, tradition, and mystical practices within Orthodoxy stands in contrast to the Reformation's emphasis on returning to the biblical sources and reforming the church according to God's Word.
While Orthodoxy claims an ancient heritage, this does not guarantee that its teachings and practices are correct. The Bible warns of traditions that make void the Word of God (Mark 7:13), and Presbyterians see many Orthodox practices as examples of such traditions.
Presbyterianism, grounded in Scripture alone, adheres closely to the Bible’s teachings on worship, the role of Christ as mediator, and the prohibition of idolatry. The Orthodox faith, by venerating icons and praying to saints, departs from these clear biblical commands. While Orthodox Christians may value their long-standing traditions, these traditions are a significant departure from the biblical orthodoxy that the early church once held. Presbyterianism stands as a Reformation faith that calls the church back to biblical purity, upholding the Second Commandment and rejecting any form of idolatry, thereby maintaining a faith that is both truly orthodox and entirely biblical.
@@cerebrummaximus3762 As a Reformed Covenantalist Presbyterian, I believe that Presbyterianism follows the Bible more rigorously than any other Christian tradition, including Orthodox Christianity, because it adheres solely to the authority of Scripture in all matters of faith and practice. Our commitment to *sola Scriptura*-the principle that the Bible alone is our final authority-ensures that our theology, worship, and church governance align with God's revealed Word. In contrast, the Orthodox Church, while claiming to be the original and unchanging church, departs from biblical teachings in significant ways, adopting practices and traditions that emerged centuries after the New Testament period.
-The Authority of Scripture
One of the most crucial distinctions between Reformed Covenantalist Presbyterianism and Orthodox Christianity is our approach to Scripture. In the Presbyterian tradition, we believe that the Bible is the inspired, inerrant, and sufficient Word of God. Everything we believe and practice must be rooted in Scripture. This conviction shapes our understanding of worship, the sacraments, church government, and the Christian life. The Westminster Confession of Faith, our doctrinal standard, affirms that "the whole counsel of God, concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man's salvation, faith, and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture."
In contrast, Orthodox Christianity elevates church tradition to a level of authority that often rivals or supersedes Scripture. The Orthodox Church has accumulated centuries of traditions-many of which are not found in the Bible-and these traditions are considered equally authoritative. Practices such as the veneration of icons, prayers to saints, and the use of relics, for example, are central to Orthodox worship but have no basis in Scripture. These developments are extrabiblical, and the Bible itself warns against adding to God's Word (Deuteronomy 4:2, Proverbs 30:6).
-The Second Commandment and Worship
A key area where Reformed Covenantalist Presbyterianism rigorously follows the Bible is in our understanding of worship. We hold to the Regulative Principle of Worship, which teaches that we should only worship God in the ways He has commanded in Scripture. This principle is based on passages like Exodus 20:4-6 (the Second Commandment) and Deuteronomy 12:32, which prohibit the making of images for worship and warn against adding to or taking away from God's instructions.
Orthodox Christianity, on the other hand, has long embraced the veneration of icons, which directly contradicts the Second Commandment's clear prohibition against making graven images for worship. Orthodox Christians claim that they are not "worshiping" these icons but rather "venerating" them. However, this distinction is not biblical. In the Bible, any form of reverence toward a physical image in a religious context is considered idolatry (Isaiah 42:8, Romans 1:23). The Orthodox Church's defense of icons is rooted in later church tradition, not in the Bible.
Furthermore, Orthodox Christianity has institutionalized practices like prayers to saints and the use of relics-practices completely absent from Scripture. The Bible teaches that Christ alone is our mediator (1 Timothy 2:5) and that we should pray directly to God through Jesus Christ (John 14:13-14). Nowhere in the Bible do we see prayers directed toward deceased believers. These practices developed gradually over centuries, with no biblical foundation, especially after the fall of Rome, and they represent a departure from biblical orthodoxy.
-The Historical Church and the Fall of Rome
The Orthodox Church often claims to be the original church, tracing its lineage back to the apostles. While it is true that Orthodoxy preserves certain ancient traditions, it is important to recognize that many of its core doctrines and practices did not develop until long after the early church period. In fact, much of what defines Orthodoxy today-its complex liturgy, iconography, and hierarchical structure-emerged in the centuries following the fall of Rome, particularly between the 3rd and 8th centuries.
This timeline is significant because it shows that Orthodoxy, far from being a direct continuation of the apostolic church, underwent significant changes over time. The Orthodox Church's reliance on post-biblical tradition reveals a gradual departure from the simplicity and purity of the New Testament church. Reformed Covenantalist Presbyterianism, on the other hand, is a product of the Reformation, which sought to return the church to its biblical roots. The Reformers recognized that the medieval church, including both Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, had strayed from the teachings of Scripture, and they sought to recover the faith of the early church as revealed in the Bible.
-The Case for Reformed Covenantalist Presbyterianism
What sets Reformed Covenantalist Presbyterianism apart is our commitment to the covenants of Scripture, our understanding of God’s redemptive work through history, and our emphasis on covenantal objectivity. We recognize that God works through His covenant people, and the church is the visible manifestation of His covenant on earth. Our theology of the sacraments-baptism and the Lord's Supper-reflects this covenantal understanding. These sacraments are means of grace, ordained by Christ Himself, and they are administered according to His commands in Scripture.
Our approach to church government, which is based on a system of elders (presbyters), is also thoroughly biblical. The New Testament clearly teaches a form of government led by elders (1 Timothy 3:1-7, Titus 1:5-9), and this model is consistently followed in Reformed Presbyterianism. Orthodox Christianity, by contrast, has adopted a hierarchical structure with bishops, priests, and deacons that is far removed from the simple, biblical model of church leadership.
In conclusion, Reformed Covenantalist Presbyterianism is the most biblical form of Christianity because it rigorously adheres to the authority of Scripture in all things. We follow the Bible's clear teachings on worship, sacraments, and church governance, without adding unbiblical traditions. While the Orthodox Church claims to be the original and unchanged church, its practices tell a different story-one of gradual departure from the Bible and reliance on traditions that arose after the fall of Rome. The Reformation called the church back to its biblical foundations, and Reformed Presbyterianism continues that legacy, standing as the most faithful expression of the Christian faith as revealed in Scripture.
As long as a follower of Christ is not required or expected to venerate anyone other than Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, it is a nonissue.
*worship.
*Holy Spirit
Not one of the people you mentioned in 7:15 accepted veneration of images.
Starting with Justin the Martyr (1 Apology 9.1-5, Migne PG 6: 340), Athenagoras of Athens (A Plea for the Christians 15, Migne PG 6: 920; A Plea for the Christians 18, Migne PG 6: 925), Irenaeus of Lyon (Adversus Haereses 1.25.6: Migne PG 7: 685-686, who additionally said that some group of gnostics after the manner of gentiles had and venerated the image of Jesus, Plato, etc.), Clement of Alexandria (Exhortation to the Heathen IV.57.5-6, IV.58.2), Tertullian (Apology 12.7, Migne PL 1: 343; On the Spectacles 10, Migne PL 1: 643; On idolatry 4.1, Migne PL 1: 740-741; CSEL 20: 33.7- 13), Marcus Minucius Felix (Octavius 10.1-4; 32.1-3, Migne PL 3: 263-265), Origen (Against Celsus 7.64, Migne PG 11: 1512C-D), Lactantius (On the Deaths of the Persecutors 12, CSEL 27.2: 186-187; The Divine Institutes 2.5, CSEL 19: 114) we see opposition to images as a whole or to images used in the religious context. Of course, the context of their rejection of images is the use of images by the pagans, because there were no Christians who venerated images at that time.
Later after more and more pagans were converted by the state to Christianity, we see Eusebius of Caesarea (Letter to the Empress Constantia 10, Migne PG 20: 1548; Church History 7.18.3), Synod of Elvira (Canon 36, Migne PL 84: 306), Epiphanius of Salamis (Letter 51.9, Migne PL 22:526-527 in Jerome's corpus of letters), Augustine of Hippo (Sermo 198,16-17; On faith and Symbol 7.14, Migne PG 40: 188; Exposition of Psalm 113(2).5-6, Migne PL 37: 1484), John Cassian (The Conferences 10.5.1-3, Migne PL49: 824-826) who peached against the ignorant Christians who started venerating images.
So only later we see the start of the cult of images, and even then we have a lot of Fathers who opposed it or simply approved of the didactic purpose of images (like Gregory the Great). So saying that "the most widely accepted valid historical witnesses to Christianity wrote favorably about icons" is simply false. If you ignore everyone up to the VI century and then the massive opposition to images in the VII and VIII century, then this sentence could be true :)
Those cited above are speaking, as you say, against pagan use of images/idols as gods in themselves, not against iconography, etc.
@@Theoria The first ones - yes. The Church at that time didn't use images, so they critique only the culture around them, not other Christians (like later Epiphanius, Augustine, and others did) because such a practice hasn't evolved yet. The thing is that they critique it in such a way, that it excluded their approval of venerating images in the Christian context.
Just look for example at Irenaeus, who wrote:
"Alii vero ex ipsis signant, cauteriantes suos discipulos in posterioribus partibus exstantiae dextrae auris. Unde et Marcellina. quae Romam sub Aniceto venit, cum esset huius doctrinae, multos exterminavit. Gnosticos se autem vocant: et imagines quasdam quidem depictas, quasdam autem et de reliqua materia fabricatas habent, dicentes formain Christi factam a Pilato, illo in tempore quo fuit Jesus cum hominibus. Et has coronant et proponunt eas cum imaginibus mundi philosophorum, videlicet cum imagine Pythagorae et Platonis et Aristotelis et reliquorum: et reliquam observationem circa eas, similiter ut gentes faciunt." (Adversus Haereses I.25.6: Migne, PG 7: 685-686)
If someone is critiquing the gnostics for using the image of Jesus, which was supposedly ordered by Pilate himself, saying that they do it, just like the pagans do (similiter ut gentes faciunt) and he doesn't in other places of his work says anything positive about images in the religious context, it is obvious where he stood on this topic.
Reading more and more on this topic one will be more and more convinced that this practice didn't come from the apostles but was borrowed from the pagans. Even conservative catholic scholars (for example where I'm from - that is Poland - the last catholic country in Europe) admit that it was the case and that Christians simply borrowed it and changed the meaning of it (though of course, the pagans didn't venerate the image, but the one represented on the image as we are told by Athenagoras, Arnobius or Augustine.
@@Theoria While I know that it's an Orthodox channel, it is quite telling that even Johny Henry Newman, a convert from Anglicanism to Roman Catholicism, admitted in his "An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine" that the Christian use of icons is a practice borrowed from the surrounding pagan culture.
@@ometlo9632 I hope you realize that Luke being "the first Christian iconographer" is a later myth not supported by the earlier evidence.
"[W]e have a plethora of archeological evidence - as well as many other historical evidence - that shows us that iconography was commonly practiced in the apostolic age of the Church"
That's not entirely accurate. We have some examples of images in catacombs etc. (of course they are not from the apostolic age but from the III century) but we don't have any evidence that they were venerated. Even though in Dura Europos we find some decorations and paintings of biblical scenes is worth mentioning that in the main meeting hall where quasi-services probably took place, there were no paintings (The World’s Oldest Church: Bible, Art, and Ritual in Dura, Europos, Syria, Yale University Press 2016, p.17).
I'm not opposed to images as such, I'm opposed to the cult of images (as the first Christians were, including Epiphanius and Augustine, and many others) as present in Orthodox and Catholic churches.
"I think you may be interpreting your citations independently of the historical context in which they were written"
I'm not. In context, they prove what I have written, but the comment section is not a good place for such a discussions.
@@damiandziedzic23 thank you for your response. Here also in Irenaeus there is a mode of interpretation, as he speaks of the image of Christ being placed among images of the philosophers (Plato, et al). I certainly see your concern though and am grateful for your citations.
So... can I please have my 30 minutes back? ;)
You (Theoria) asked me to watch this video. You did this rather than address my comment (responding to your short video on how to venerate icons) that we see no instruction or example from Christ, the apostles, or in the early Church to venerate icons. Not only do we have no such instruction, but we have multiple examples in the NT by apostles and angels that specifically prohibit the veneration of people or angels. If we are not to venerate people or even angels, then attempts to justify venerating images that represent them are obviously problematic.
The 2nd Council of Nicaea commands people to venerate icons, and expressly condemns anyone who does not, or who even holds that we should not. In other words, it expressly condemns the examples from Scripture and the early Church.
I did not claim that icons were idols. I pointed out that we have no instruction or example to venerate them from Christ, the apostles, or early Church, and that we have repeated instructions to not venerate people or angels. Like so many efforts at apologetics, this video pretends to justify an erroneous act or belief by explaining away extreme, equally-erroneous positions. Specifically, you attempt to justify the veneration of icons as a contrast to extreme iconoclasm, but this is just a basic thinking/reasoning error (false dichotomy).
There isn't necessarily anything wrong with an icon or image in and of itself. The problem is in venerating them or, worse, mandating such veneration under the threat of eternal damnation. Pointing out that they aren't idols, or manufacturing a distinction between worship and veneration doesn't solve the problem.
That being said, your video is very well made and your presentation was very clear. I'm sure that you are a wonderful person who is seeking Christ and trying to help others do the same.
You do not have a clue what the difference between worship and veneration is. It seems you are using them interchangeably which is reflection of your ignorance. Get educated and discern the two properly.
@@johnnyd2383, perhaps rather than just call other people stupid, you could at least pretend to be Christian and address the claims or arguments being presented. I know it is a lot to ask these days. Precisely what did I write that was incorrect?
@@philoalethia Why would I waste my time with you.? You are obviously NOT a member of the Lord's Orthodox Church and you are coming here with the conclusions w/o any interest in learning. You can take your heresy with you as we have condemned it many centuries ago. Should we care about followers of those condemned heresies.? Sure. This video offers you an insight, direction and basis for your further study... and if you are still stiff necked (like OT Pharisees)... not even miracles God worked through the icons would have convinced you otherwise. I will dust off my sandals here and leave for good. Sayonara.
@@johnnyd2383 writes: "Why would I waste my time with you.? "
Yes, your Christ-like charity is overwhelming.
In any event, thank you for demonstrating why many people choose not to become Orthodox today: in addition to mandating things clearly prohibited by apostles and angels, they don't actually have any charity for others and, rather than engaging in dialogue, just make ignorant assumptions about others.
Yes, people like you are precisely why truth seekers choose not to join Orthodoxy. Perhaps that is something to reflect upon.
@@johnnyd2383 writes "Why would I waste my time with you.?"
Well, thank you for demonstrating the lack of Christian charity for which many Orthodox are quite infamous, and demonstrating precisely why so many people have chosen to not join Orthodoxy: the attitudes of many of its members.
I didn't understand a single word this man said. I really wish theologians from all sides would put aside their damn egos and open dialogue with each other. This whole searching for truth as a layman within Christianity is just stupid.
I find it twisted. Trying to justify, excuse, the unappropriated use of icons. Saying, tradition, and church philosophy.
The Jews tried that with John the baptist and Christ. And what did Christ and John said about them?
There is nothing on the new testament about the importance of icons. Although I see that as a form of Christian art, like music, I do not see nothing sacred on icons. Just a picture to remind what happened, who the people were in the past, just it....
That is the Orthodox view of icons too, congrats. Btw, in the Old Testament, God endorsed iconography in the Ark. This tradition simply never stopped, was passed down by the Apostles (most famously St Paul and St Luke), and still practiced to this day.
No.
The OT Law speaks against graven images
Icons are not graven, they are written.
Christ is Logos ( Eternal Word)
A Word is Written not graven.
Plus all this talk about images...
Does not Scripture say that Christ IS THE Image of the Father?
Apparently, These people know nothing of the Orthodox doctrinal concept of Theosis
Worship is not given to paint and wood but to God . God became Man that man might become like God ( not in his essence, but united to Him in his love and mercy which are Infinite)
It's sad how the "Orthodox" church practices such blatant heresy. This is literal idolatry.
To any of my Orthodox brothers and sisters that care to comment: (If this thought is offensive to anyone, I apologize. Just a protestant trying to understand the "new" ideas presented)
(writing this comment during the section about logographic writing systems) If word and image are essentially the same thing by the argument presented in this video (which I agree with), would, then, venerating an icon of Christ be the same as to venerate his word (the bible)? What does it mean to venerate an icon? Are there other ways Icons are used in worship?
Apologies if my question is poorly worded!
I'll give this a shot, though I'm still a catechumen so others are more qualified than me and may correct me. Holy Scripture has a special place at the center of holy tradition. In that way, we hold Scripture to be above icons, but it's not like we have to choose. We will often take good care of our bibles, kiss them, and say special prayers before reading the gospel and epistle readings for the day.
As for what veneration looks like, it looks much like what I just described for the bible. Think of it like how you'd treat a folded American flag, a picture of a lost loved one, etc. Veneration means respect and honor, not worship. The thing that I think confuses American protestant culture is the kissing, but it's important to remember that Orthodoxy is a very old world thing and in the old world, kissing was a lot more common and a lot more casual. You can see this if you spend any time in Orthodox areas or even Europe.
Fun fact, the Greek word for venerate found in Orthodox texts going back all the way to the very beginning is proskyneo, while the word used in those same texts for worship, given to God alone, is latreia. So from the very start they sought a strict delineation between the two concepts to avoid the abuse of holy images. Hope this clears things up.
they say they venerate it. (means to honor, respect, revere, venerate, hallow, honour)
But, the icons are human imaginations. One thing is to make it as a nice decoration of church. (even though i am against it)
But another thins is to respect an icon. And to connect it to God.
God and Icons have nothing in common.
People who are portrayed there are dead.
God says: I am a God of living, not dead.
Jesus said: let the dead bury the dead.
So, now we see people praying to them, I have seen it many times.
They pray to dead people portrayed in icons that are human fantasies. Where is God here?
God is alive. He is a spirit.
It is a big sin and abomination to God to worship and even to create icons.
@@SoldierOfChrist-YHWH the saints are alive in christ. Death has been defeated
@@mixk1d the souls are alive, but people are dead. The same way, your grand grand mother is dead. You do not call her alive, right? The same way, when people die, they are called dead people, not alive even if their souls are in heaven.
@@SoldierOfChrist-YHWH
God tells us that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are alive.
He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living. You are therefore greatly mistaken." - Mark 12:27
You should debate a Protestant that is an expert in this area otherwise it’s just a one way argument with everyone agreeing with you.
The early church farhers and apostles didnt pray to nor venerate mary so you are following a man made tradition invented and added hundreds of years after the death of jesus.
Please do your research. Iconography is a tradition begun by God in the Old Testament. It is continued in the New Testament, though never mentioned, but implied by St Paul. St Mark drew the first ever post-new Testament icon.
@@cerebrummaximus3762 Virtually no historical proofs of that, early christians were notoriously aniconic or iconoclast (like Tertullian), this is well recognized by any historian that the practice of icon veneration became a reality much and much later.
Even Augustine wrote against this kind of use of the images.
gravewn is the operative word - a 3 D image a statue not a flat picture.
You have got it all wrong I grew up in the orthodox church and live in a country where the main religion is orthodox. When you hang gold on icons of Saint Irene or Luke and pray to Irene or Luke that is worship my friend and that's what the Almighty over and over condemns and warns us not to do. I'm not against icons or imagery but worshiping kissing them and praying to them that's another thing but if you talk to an orthodox he won't accept it
As an Anglican, he should have known better.
The prohibition is against "graven*" images
In order for it to be graven it must be 3 dimensional, like a statue. The golden calf of Exodus was graven out of gold.
Icons are flat, 1 dimensional
No "graving"
Is that right? Some icons from churches are not paintings, but engravings (then painted over with silver or gold, or just made fully of these metals). Your words fell.
@@michaelvatson7056 Colossians 1:15
Christ IS The Image
Of the invisible God
The fullness of the God Head.
The Incarnation...God Becomes Human For Us.
Jesus' suffering began the night He was born.
Herod sought the child to kill him
They had to flee to Egypt in the middle of the night.
As for Icon it's eikona an ancient Greek word for Image
The woman who wiped the face of Jesus was named Veronica by the Church
Because Christ left His countenance on her veil.
Christ Jesus Our Savior and God Became THE Image...For Us
@@cabellero1120 Yes? I agree. Is this a justification for icons (that is the painted images on matter), because I do not see it.
Jesus is the Logos, the Word. I don't see how this allows to consider paintings more than, well, paintings.
Can icons inspire, yeah, sure. But to venerate icons, to consider them spiritually empowered, no.
What the scriptures says, who believed in the name of Jesus?
@@michaelvatson7056 Icons are not paintings or in any way artistic renderings of Christ.
You're thinking of the Renaissance ( which was mostly Roman Catholic)
Orthodoxy is Not Catholicism...Many Protestants conflate the two.
Christ Jesus Is the Logos the Eternal Word
Words are not painted or drawn they're Written.
Worship is Not given to paint and wood ( matter)
But to the Prototype who is Christ Our God
He is called Pantokrator, an ancient Greek word for Creator Of All Things
Does Scripture not say
" And Apart From HIM Nothing came to be"
Protestants have So Many objections, Yet Orthodox look upon them as Heretics and Schismatics.
All those who pick up the sword shall perish by it..
It would be sad, indeed, if Protestants choked on their own hatred of Catholics, Orthodox, Anglicans....
@@cabellero1120
I agree with what you said.
Still, I don't see why icons are different than graven images.
If icons are not paintings (which today, most of them are prints) then what are? Are these more than words in the bible can express?