/christian/ - Christianity

Religious discussions and spirituality

SAVE THIS FILE: Anon.cafe Fallback File v1.1 (updated 2021-12-13)

Want your event posted here? Requests accepted in this /meta/ thread.

Max message length: 20000

Drag files to upload or
click here to select them

Maximum 5 files / Maximum size: 20.00 MB

Board Rules

(used to delete files and postings)

Iconoclasm Thread Anonymous 01/21/2022 (Fri) 08:34:13 No.3034
Daily reminder that icons and statues in churches are idols and no amount of linguistic pilpuling about ‘veneration’ will change this fact. God is extremely clear in what He commands: >Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them And yet when one goes into an Orthodox Church, this is exactly what one sees. Lines of people going in and bowing before icons of saints and Mary, crossing themselves and kissing the icons. The deacons go about and wave incense before the icons of the saints, Mary and Jesus. The same goes for Catholics. I tried to fall for the so-called ‘apostolic’ church meme for a while, but to see them kiss and worship the images of saints rang major alarm bells in my head, no matter how many copes I read from apologists online. Iconolatry is idolatry, and idolatry will lead you to the hellfire. Protestantism has flaws, but at least ones who are consistent in reading Scripture can realize that nothing but God is due worship and veneration, and that the praying to the saints and Mary is a pagan innovation. Faith in Christ and gathering in His name is enough. Do not be led astray by idol-venerators and other crypto-pagans.
Was Christ, in His earthly body, not an icon of God? Genuine question! I don't know much about these things.
>>3034 >>2781 Hello, Mahomet. You are not even remotely new, and are as wrong then as you are now >>3039 Yes. A God we could finally see and touch down here on Earth.
>>3039 >Was Christ, in His earthly body, not an icon of God? The commandment in Exodus is that one should not make for themselves any idol or representation of things to worship. We have been forbidden to do this. It is to equivocate to say that just because the Word took flesh and walked among us out of His own free choice, that therefore we can make images and statues and kiss them and offer them incense. The logic does not follow in the slightest. If Jesus had come and said “Make icons, for you have seen me”, that would refute my point, but there’s nothing like that. Iconolatry in practice is indistinguishable from idolatry, and I’ve seen it in practice dozens of times. >>3043 >Hello, Mahomet. You are not even remotely new, and are as wrong then as you are now Still waiting for the proof that we can pray to Mary and kiss icons
>>3048 This autism? Do you understand the difference between veneration and worship, anon?
>>3049 As expected, you are ignoring the clear Biblical evidence that has been presented against the practice of iconolatry, and have instead attempted to entangle me in a semantics debate that has nothing to do with Scripture. You’re pilpuling the clear words of God-breathed Scripture in order to support your pagan innovations. There’s no functional difference between veneration and worship. The way Orthodox and Catholics explain their pseudo-theology behind it is identical in every way to how Hindus explain how they see their idols. It makes perfect sense, then, why Hezekiah smashes the Nehushtan from the time of Moses, since the Israelites had begun to ‘venerate’ it with incense. Idol worshipers will not inherit the Kingdom.
>>3050 I asked you a direct question, Arius, now answer me.
>was just thinking about this and anon made a thread about it
Using imageboards is idolatry.
>>3034 There's a difference between a symbol and an image. Do you think the pope thinks of God as an old bearded dude in the sky because that's what is painted in the sistine chapel? Idolatry means to literally think the image itself is divine, instead of it representing something divine. Note that the passage you quoted refers directly to bowing to the image rather than what the image represents. The "no other gods" is covered elsewhere.
>>3060 What about when people claim an icon or some other item is blessed? Again genuine question.
>>3061 Blessed in the sense of the actual thing that happens where a priest or a lay person speaks a blessing over it, consecrating it in a similar (though quite distinct) manner to an altar? Or blessed in the sense that some wonder happened involving the thing in question and now people go there to pray for wonders happening to them? In case of the former, any respect the image as such receives is not much different to that of an altar - the act of consecration/blessing has dedicated it as a pathway/symbol of holy things, thus it is to be treated as some degree of such, but not on account of itself, but of what it represents. In case of the latter, it's a saint/some part of the trinity electing to manifest his blessing through that material, and thus it's sort of self-consecrated. It's still not the statue that's saintly or making the miracles happen.
>>3061 This is literally the big debate at the seventh ecumenical council of 787, where the patriarchs of Rome, Constantinople, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Alexandria decried Iconoclasm and supported the veneration of icons. However a number of the Western Churches in France, England, and Germany dissented from the decision including the Holy Roman Emperor, Charlemagne, who assembled a rival council at Frankfurt in 794 and had a book composed denouncing icon "worship". His motive for doing so has historically been argued to be out of spite for not being invited as an emperor to the Byzantine court to oversee proceedings, rather than out of piety, looking for an excuse to accuse them of heresy. As Pope Hadrian I supported the decision though, Charlemagne didn't put the book into widespread circulation and it fell into obscurity until the Reformation when it was found by John Calvin and used to make the same argument that OP made. In the council and the book though, the argument was not the icons should be destroyed, but that while they were useful for teaching and preaching they had no special holy power of their own, and therefore should not be celebrated with ritual and incense. They explicitly excused from this the sign of the cross and of the power of holy relics. When a Spanish bishop, Claudius, attempted to initiate an iconoclasm in 825 after transfer to the Italian see of Turin, he was vehemently denounced not in accordance with the decisions of the Byzantine council but with the doctrine outlined in Frankfurt and in Charlemagne's books. In any event the council and the book were based on a faulty translation from Greek into Latin about what the actual decisions of the council were, and by the Photian Schism of 869-879 both East and West reaffirmed their support for the veneration of icons if not doubling down on it to shore up their credentials in that controversy. Those that still rejected the decision in support of veneration at that point were excommunicated. It's not clear cut that if you don't support the decisions of the council of 787 that you're an instant heretic though. Another requirement was that every church in the world should have a holy relic, and the punishment for raising a church without a relic was excommunication, which is obviously not followed by those that claim to adhere to its canons today and led to a lot of fake relic production in the Middle Ages.
>>3051 The teachings of Arius are not in accordance with Scripture. Yet again you bring no arguments. >>3052 Hive mind >>3060 If Orthodox and Catholics thought that their imagery was merely images and nothing more, they would not do what they do. I have attended an Orthodox liturgy at least a dozen times in the last two or three months, and it is amazing to watch these people file into the churches, bow before the idols, kiss them and cross themselves. Deacons also offer incense to the idols, and kiss a small idol on the main entrance to the iconostasis as well. It's an abomination before God. When you offer reverence and devotion in a spiritual setting to something other to God, you are a pagan. Plain and simple. When you pray to Mary instead of the God, you are a pagan. There's no reason to ever pray to Mary, or any other created being. There's no reason to have a liturgy full of litanies to saints and Mary saying that she is even higher than the angels. There's no reason to line up and kiss and worship idols in a church. The Bible condemns this in the harshest terms possible, and you are putting the traditions of men before Christ.
>>3068 >Hive mind You literally echoed the sentiments of Charlemagne's book anon: >Charlemagne, with the aid of his chaplains, especially Alcuin, prepared and published, three years after the Nicene Council, an important work on image-worship under the title Quatuor Libri Carolini (790).555 He dissents both from the iconoclastic synod of 754 and the anti-iconoclastic synod of 787, but more from the latter, which he treats very disrespectfully.556 He decidedly rejects image-worship, but allows the use of images for ornament and devotion, and supports his view with Scripture passages and patristic quotations. The spirit and aim of the book is almost Protestant. The chief thoughts are these: God alone is the object of worship and adoration (colondus et adorandus). Saints are only to be revered (venerandi). Images can in no sense be worshipped. To bow or kneel before them, to salute or kiss them, to strew incense and to light candles before them, is idolatrous and superstitious. It is far better to search the Scriptures, which know nothing of such practices. The tales of miracles wrought by images are inventions of the imagination, or deceptions of the evil spirit. On the other hand, the iconoclasts, in their honest zeal against idolatry, went too far in rejecting the images altogether. The legitimate and proper use of images is to adorn the churches and to perpetuate and popularize the memory of the persons and events which they represent. Yet even this is not necessary; for a Christian should be able without sensual means to rise to the contemplation of the virtues of the saints and to ascend to the fountain of eternal light. Man is made in the image of God, and hence capable of receiving Christ into his soul. God should ever be present and adored in our hearts. O unfortunate memory, which can realize the presence of Christ only by means of a picture drawn in sensuous colors. The Council of Nicaea committed a great wrong in condemning those who do not worship images. https://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/hcc4.i.x.xiii.html
>>3068 ... Nigga, I was calling you that as direct slap to the face. Because what are the Seraphim atop the Ark of the Covenant? What was the image of the snake made in the desert? What were all the images carved in the Temple of Solomon? What are the scratchings of text in the Bible itself? All graven images! The importance is that none of them were worshipped, and the Cross and the icons are the same. http://orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/inq_veneration.aspx http://orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/presumptuous.aspx https://www.ccel.org/ccel/damascus/icons.i.iv.html John Damascene has had your number for many centuries, anon. You want to pronounce judgement where it was never your place to do so, read what a much wiser man than I had to say on it first.
>>3075 >Because what are the Seraphim atop the Ark of the Covenant? God commanded explicitly that the Cherubim be put there. >What was the image of the snake made in the desert? God command explicitly that that be created, and it was of course later turned by the Israelites into something offered incense to by the Israelites, thus Hezekiah smashed it as an idol in 2 Kings 18:4 >What were all the images carved in the Temple of Solomon? What we see in this temple is two cherubim and artistic decorations of flowers and palm trees. This is nothing like an Orthodox or Catholic church. Give me the slightest piece of proof that people were kissing the images of flowers and palm trees, or the cherubim, and giving them incense, and pretending that they were ‘windows into the divine’. You’re not going to find any. They were not bowed down to or worshiped like Orthodox / Catholic idols are today. It is like the cross. You can have a cross in your church, but anyone who goes up to the cross, starts kissing it and bowing before it is committing idolatry. The case of the Nehushtan makes this clear. >John Damascene Was an idolator. >>3074 Interesting. Thanks for the link.
Open file (253.67 KB 1080x462 Caroline_Books_1.jpg)
Open file (936.67 KB 1080x1688 Caroline_Books_2.jpg)
Open file (984.17 KB 1078x1693 Caroline_Books_3.jpg)
>>3075 >>3078 By God we are literally reenacting the 8th century.
>>Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: >or that is in the earth beneath Does this literally prohibit the making of images of physical things? Even pictures?
>>3108 No. With the coming of Christ, we have a visible image of God. We are not Muslims, nor should we seek to emulate their barbarous creed.
>>3109 Christians ought to recognize that this privilege is what dignifies the church over Judaism and Islam.
>>3108 The section is clear that it is in relation to worshiping and bowing down to. Pagan heretics sneak in idolatry with terms like ‘veneration’, and do exactly what Scripture forbids in how they bow before icons, kiss them and offer them incense. >>3109 Idolators will not inherit the kingdom of God. Scripture does not support this heresy.
>>3172 You are a pagan sowing discord. Begone heretic.
An old and poor heresy. The only purpose you serve is to sharpen our rhetoric and increase our awareness of historical moments. Not even Charlemagne approved of you, not of what you suggest. A milder reproof than what the churches offered is not and never was such a thing.
>>3176 *smooches on an icon*
>>3183 Kissing is a greeting in Mediterranean and Eastern Europe, haughty one. >Greet one another with a holy kiss Romans 16:16, 1 Corinthians 16:20, 2 Corinthians 13:12, 1 Thessalonians 5:26, 1 Peter 5:14 It acknowledges that the saints alive in heaven and our fellow servants in Christ.
Open file (123.28 KB 588x786 Clasm_Chludov.jpg)
>>3180 OP is a revival of the spurious presumptions of Leo III, Constantine V, Leo V, Michael II, and the illicit Councils of Hieria in 754 and Constantinople in 815, who initiated iconoclasm to emulate the Muslims out of superstition. Their confession was quoted at Second Nicaea for the purpose of its refutation: https://ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214/npnf214.xvi.x.html Both they and he even do the same in anathemizing John Damascene: >God preserve your Empire!  You have now more firmly proclaimed the inseparability of the two natures of Christ!  You have banished all idolatry!  You have destroyed the heresies of Germanus [of Constantinople], George and Mansur [μανσουρ, John Damascene].  Anathema to Germanus, the double-minded, and worshipper of wood!  Anathema to George, his associate, to the falsifier of the doctrine of the Fathers!  Anathema to Mansur, who has an evil name and Saracen opinions!  To the betrayer of Christ and the enemy of the Empire, to the teacher of impiety, the perverter of Scripture, Mansur, anathema!
>>3183 Your icon is one of chaos and meaningless arguing.
>>3187 >If anyone does not confess that the holy Virgin is truly the Mother of God, etc. . >If anyone shall not confess the holy ever-virgin Mary, truly and properly the Mother of God, to be higher than every creature whether visible or invisible, and does not with sincere faith seek her intercessions as of one having confidence in her access to our God, since she bare him, etc.
>>3186 Thanks for proving that you literally ‘greet’ a painting, which if it were truly just an inanimate object, you would not do. Ergo, iconolatry is idolatry. Orthodox and Catholics can’t read the Bible and are disobeying God in one of the clearest prohibitions in the entire Bible.
>>3198 And you still lost. You shall always lose, so long as you share more in common with the derangement of the Abbasid than of the Christian.
>>3198 You don't worship the icon. If the saints that were depicted in them thought that you were worshipping them rather than God which they serve they would rebuke you. People may appear to go beyond veneration in their expressions of devotion and you can criticize them for that. >However, be careful that your freedom may never become a stumbling block to the weak. 1 Corinthians 8:9 Don't use bad faith and assume that they are so mentally retarded as to see the saints or the icons as gods in themselves, as pagans do of their idols, and second Orthodox icons are painted, not engraved. Where is your charity? Did you ever try talking to them? Ask them why they do what they do? Or do you lurk among them as a stranger and come to this board to complain instead?
>>3199 Orthodox and Catholics have literally slid into paganism so hard that Muhammadans are more Christian than you in some areas. Wow! >>3200 >Did you ever try talking to them? Ask them why they do what they do? I’ve already said in this thread that I have attended nearly a dozen divine liturgies at a local OCA church, and was taken aback by the blatantness of their paganism. The liturgy is beautiful and the people are friendly, but when it comes to Mary and the icons, Scripture simply says they are wrong. I get the ‘Holy Tradition’ argument, but this should not be license to literally reject the clear words of Scripture. And of course I asked them about it nicely. They say the same things said in this thread. It’s literally a whole bunch of cope. Veneration and worship is for God alone. This should not be a controversial point. If you want a picture of Jesus, go ahead, but as soon as you start bowing before it, kissing it and offering it incense, it has become an idol. Follow Ephiphanius: >Moreover, I have heard that certain persons have this grievance against me: When I accompanied you to the holy place called Bethel, there to join you in celebrating the Collect, after the use of the Church, I came to a villa called Anablatha and, as I was passing, saw a lamp burning there. Asking what place it was, and learning it to be a church, I went in to pray, and found there a curtain hanging on the doors of the said church, dyed and embroidered. It bore an image either of Christ or of one of the saints; I do not rightly remember whose the image was. Seeing this, and being loth that an image of a man should be hung up in Christ’s church contrary to the teaching of the Scriptures, I tore it asunder and advised the custodians of the place to use it as a winding sheet for some poor person. They, however, murmured, and said that if I made up my mind to tear it, it was only fair that I should give them another curtain in its place. As soon as I heard this, I promised that I would give one, and said that I would send it at once. Since then there has been some little delay, due to the fact that I have been seeking a curtain of the best quality to give to them instead of the former one, and thought it right to send to Cyprus for one. I have now sent the best that I could find, and I beg that you will order the presbyter of the place to take the curtain which I have sent from the hands of the Reader, and that you will afterwards give directions that curtains of the other sort—opposed as they are to our religion—shall not be hung up in any church of Christ. A man of your uprightness should be careful to remove an occasion of offence unworthy alike of the Church of Christ and of those Christians who are committed to your charge.
>>3206 >cope You keep saying that, but why should two thousand years of tradition be wrong and you, a modern who fell into the Protestant tradition of Sola Scriptura, be right?
>>3206 You call historical authority a meme and have no idea as to the faith that converted the vast majority of Europe. You insert your own ideas and raise them to the status of the apostles. You have as an idol your own prideful humanistic reason. You deprecate the ancient faith, and contrive one that never existed. Why and what for, besides to cut up the church? Why and what for, but to desecrate it for the rape of the heathen? Mock, and incur the credit of the Hebrew and the Mohammedan, but in making your bed with them they will devour you as a den of lions. For you are no Daniel being cast by Nebuchadnezzar, no martyr before an emperor, but a madman who has thrown his lot in with a brood of vipers for no profit whatsoever. A suicidist.
>>3206 If you want further proof of the accursed side you are on, here is the Chronicle of Theophanes: >ANNUS MUNDI 6215 (SEPTEMBER 1, 722— AUGUST 31, 723) 7. 4. 9. 18. >In this year a Jewish wizard who made his headquarters at Phoenicia Laodikeia came to the Arab caliph Yezid. He told him that he would rule the Arab state for forty years if he would condemn the honored and revered icons in the Christians’ churches throughout his entire empire. The senseless Yezid believed him and promulgated an all-embracing edict against the holy icons. But by the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ and the intercession of His uncorrupt Mother and all the saints, Yezid died in the same year, no sooner than his satanic doctrine had been heard by the masses. >But the Emperor Leo caused us many evils, because he shared this malignant, illegal, and evil doctrine. He found a partisan for his stupidity: a man named Beser, who had been a Christian prisoner in Syria and had apostasized from his faith in Christ and converted to the Arabs’ doctrine. https://archive.org/details/TheChronicleOfTheophanesTrans.ByHarryTurtledove1982
>>3215 >Jewish wizard Why am I not surprised. These wizards don't have a good track record for living long, though. Just ask Prince Gleb.
>>3034 saying this is akin to saying you only venerate God instead of giving due worship, and its also metaphysically illiterate
>>3486 brother, have you seen... ...have you seen a low church service as of late?
Open file (150.10 KB 780x433 #mfw.png)
>>3488 I didn't need to see that. Anyway, was there ever a document on how much the Iconoclasts looted from the Church, much like how Henry VIII's Anglicans did?
>>3034 >God is extremely clear in what He commands Indeed. A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.
>>3034 What a stupid non-issue. Orthodox Christians don't 'worship' the saints or their images. Bowing and kissing is a sign of respect. If you bow to someone, or kiss your mother, that doesn't mean you're worshiping them. Pagans worshiped idols, which is what the commandment is condemning. You're like a Pharisee, following the letter of the law but not the spirit of the law. Dumb protestant.
>>3514 God commands that no one bow or create images in the Bible. It’s as clear as day. These are called idols. In the Greek the word ‘eikon’ is often used for the thing condemned as well, the exact same word Orthodox and Catholics use for ‘icons’. Kissing and bowing before images is idolatry, and you will to go to hell if you persist. I don’t say this to be inflammatory either. This is what the Bible says. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10: >Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. Amazing that you call me a Pharisee for reading the Bible. Paul evidently believed the spirit of the law did not entail kissing and bowing before man-made images either! >>3215 Not an argument. God-breathed Scripture condemns you as a pagan idolator. >>3211 >why should two thousand years of tradition be wrong Not every aspect of tradition is wrong. If Scripture is indeed God-breathed, it is blasphemous to say that the traditions of men supercede the Word of God, which clearly condemns idolatry and iconodulism (which literally means ‘slavery to images’). “You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men” (Mark 7:8)
Couldn't one also think that all the rituals the Israelites were performing in the Tabernacle were for all the relics there instead of God who they represent?
>>3034 This looks like the Catholic/Orthodox/Idolatry board, not a Christian board
>>3703 Orthodoxy is the one true Christianity.
>>3695 >not an argument He literally argued that Iconoclasts are the result of Talmudic whispering. Just because you don't like it doesn't make it 'not an argument'. Out of curiosity, do you believe that levity is forbidden among your definition of Christians? What brought you back here?
>>3695 >it is blasphemous to say that the traditions of men supercede the Word of God, which clearly condemns idolatry and iconodulism (which literally means ‘slavery to images’). “You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men” (Mark 7:8) The tradition of the church is the tradition of God, passed on by an unbroken line of consecrations dating back to the apostles. Tradition, scripture, and the life of the individual Christian form a self-reinforcing whole. None of these single components can be taken on its own and excluding one from two is deformed.
>>3695 Not an argument. You lose.
>>3695 God doesn't care if you show your respect to an image of a saint. He doesn't want people literally worshiping objects as gods, which is what idolatry is, you moron. You misunderstand the Laws. Like a Pharisee.
>>3726 I didn't read the rest of the thread as I'm tired. What I will say may have been said. This might not get through to you, but it may affect lurkers with more open minds. A saint can be beseeched, as their life example has specific moral and tutelary affectations, and can stimulate our minds to higher consciousness. Asking them to intercede for us toward God, while acknowledging only God is the true creator and provider, partitions the creator and the created, and is simply not the same as idol worship. Sometimes sinners may consider themselves unworthy of God's love, or are afraid of directly asking for help lest they offend God, or for other reasons, choose not to pray to God more directly. It's not strictly necessary, yet it provides a beneficial process for those in need of help.
>>3728 It was more necessary to use heavy handed bans against idol worship and anything similar that could lead to it before, but humanity has entered a higher average state of reason. Overwhelmingly, most Catholics do not mistake saints for gods.
>>3728 I wasn't clear. I know it's not idol worship. That's what I'm trying to say.
>>3747 Then I'm responding to whoever you were.
>>3731 >but humanity has entered a higher average state of reason. lol no they haven't.
>>3753 They have. Christianity won, and polytheism has been utterly suppressed.
>>3709 >What brought you back here? I was re-energized after discussing this issue deeper with the friend who I have been going to the local Orthodox Church with. Especially aftet consulting the Septuagint and seeing that indeed God condemns εἰκωνες by name in multiple verses throughout the New and the Old Testaments. After arguing for over an hour with someone after the liturgy on Sunday, it is even clearer now that the iconodule’s position is indistinguishable from idolatry in practice. They do not have good arguments. And this was an intelligent person. >>3717 >The tradition of the church is the tradition of God, passed on by an unbroken line of consecrations dating back to the apostles. Even if I am to grant the possibility of an unbroken line, this is irrelevant, because it does not preclude the possibilty of innovations and false doctrines being introduced over the course of the centuries, such as praying to saints, ‘venerating’ icons and many other things. If Scripture and Tradition contradict each other, something is wrong. Scripture is the historical record of the commandments of God, and of the prophets of God, and of Jesus Christ and His disciples. These were often written by those who witnessed the events themselves. If later traditions of men contradict Scripture, they are wrong and should be discarded. Simple as. This is what Jesus Himself taught against the scribes and Pharisees. >>3726 >God doesn't care if you show your respect to an image of a saint. He doesn't want people literally worshiping objects as gods, which is what idolatry is God commands that no images be made in the form of anything in the heavens above, on the earth below, or in the waters beneath. This is said as clear as day in Exodus 20. In Deuteronomy 4:16, God again condemns carved images AND icons >16 lest ye transgress, and make to yourselves a carved image, any kind of figure [εἰκόνα], the likeness of male or female, The Greek word is the same as is the word ‘icon’, the same word used to say that we are in the image of God. Paul condemns icons as well in Romans 1:23 >and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images [εἰκόνος] resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. Again the exact same word used for ‘icon’. They are idols. I can go on forever. We have another example in Hosea 13:2 >And now they have sinned increasingly, and have made for themselves a molten image [εἰκόνα] of their silver, according to the fashion of idols Your salvation is at risk if you keep kissing and prostrating before icons, which Scripture condemns repeatedly. Veneration is no different than worship. A man I interrogated on Sunday was unable to distinguish to me what is the difference *essentially* between the two. There is none.
>>3728 >A saint can be beseeched, as their life example has specific moral and tutelary affectations, and can stimulate our minds to higher consciousness. There are no circumstances under which one should be beseeching someone or something lower than God. From a purely pragmatic perspective, one should always beseech that Being which is all perfect, good, powerful, knowing and loving. >Asking them to intercede for us toward God This is the job of the Holy Spirit, not saints. Read Romans 8:26-27 >In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. For we do not know how we ought to pray, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groans too deep for words. And He who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints according to the will of God Needless to say, all true Christians are saints. All mediators and intercessors exist in the Trinity. Christ is the way, the truth and the life, and the one mediator between the Father and man. The Holy Spirit is our intercessor. No saints or idols necessary.
>>3767 It's not necessary, but you didn't really establish that there's also a firm theological reason not to.
>>3766 >A man I interrogated on Sunday was unable to distinguish to me what is the difference *essentially* between the two. There is none. There's a meme about the congregrants of traditionalist denominations being less well versed in scripture and the theology of their own churches than their fundamentalist opponents and I find it funny that it holds up in observation.
>>3769 Why would you go through men when you could go directly to God? There are zero examples of praying to saints, angels or beings other than God in the Bible. As I said, the Spirit intercedes, and the Son is the mediator. Why would you add in middlemen? >>3771 Yeah. The guy was nice and all, but all he could do ultimately was spout Orthodox dogmas that had little to no firm Scriptural foundation. He got a bit defensive towards the end, so I think he will at least have some stuff to think about.
Anon, I just realized something odd about you: you've mentioned repeatedly visiting Orthodox churches. My question to you is, do you have one of your own?
Open file (106.76 KB 612x458 maccabees.jpg)
>>3773 >Why would you go through men when you could go directly to God? ...As I said, the Spirit intercedes, and the Son is the mediator. Why would you add in middlemen? Intercession of the saints is from the deuterocanonicals / apocrypha, 2nd Maccabees: >And so comforting them out of the law and the prophets, and with all putting them in mind of the battles that they won afore, he made them more cheerful. And when he had stirred up their minds, he gave them their charge, showing them there with all the falsehood of the heathen, and the breach of oaths. Thus he armed every one of them, not so much with defence of shields and spears, as with comfortable and good words: and beside that, he told them a dream worthy to be believed, as if it had been so indeed, which did not a little rejoice them. >And this was his vision: That Onias, who had been high priest, a virtuous and a good man, reverend in conversation, gentle in condition, well spoken also, and exercised from a child in all points of virtue, holding up his hands prayed for the whole body of the Jews. This done, in like manner there appeared a man with gray hairs, and exceeding glorious, who was of a wonderful and excellent majesty. Then Onias answered, saying, This is a lover of the brethren, who prays much for the people, and for the holy city, to wit, Jeremias the prophet of God. Whereupon Jeremias holding forth his right hand gave to Judas a sword of gold, and in giving it spake thus, Take this holy sword, a gift from God, with the which thou shalt wound the adversaries. >Thus being well comforted by the words of Judas, which were very good, and able to stir them up to valour, and to encourage the hearts of the young men, they determined not to pitch camp, but courageously to set upon them, and manfully to try the matter by conflict, because the city and the sanctuary and the temple were in danger. For the care that they took for their wives, and their children, their brethren, and folks, was in least account with them: but the greatest and principal fear was for the holy temple. 2 Maccabees 15:9-18 So from this account is seen the impact of the patronage of the saints on the conscience. However, as you said, it doesn't explicitly present any: >examples of praying to saints, angels or beings other than God in the Bible It was though, a historic practice of the church from the patristic era up to the Protestant Reformation, when the content of the Septuagint not found in the (Pharasaic) Hebrew Canon was removed. Even then, Martin Luther only got into theology after praying upon Saint Anne when he got caught in a storm. So unless you're intending to go full Calvin, and to rewrite the history and the doctrines of the church to fit some perfect vision of what you think it practiced rather than what it actually practiced, and basically throwing out historic continuity for an individual dogma (leading to the situation where over 8000 Protestant denominations exist that all claim to have the Truth yet all disagree with each other on what that is), it's not prudent to confound time-honored rite but rather to renew and to redeem the understanding of it.
>>3773 Why are there angels and saints? Why is there so much reverence to Saint Michael, when according to you, we should only be admiring God? Where do you draw the line between worship, reverence, and respect? It's not as clear cut as you think. Why do ropes hanging from helicopters sometimes have rescuers risking themselves to grab a victim? If there are niches that can be filled adequately by saints, who already raised their minds to God better than everyone else has, what's the prime reason why it can't be done? This isn't like real polytheistic times, where people slip into clear cut idolatry.
>>3774 I don’t have a formal church of my own. A few months ago I decided to look into Orthodoxy with another friend of mine, and attended the liturgies fairly regularly from November up through now. At first I was liking what I was seeing, especially theologically, but the longer I watched how people treated the icons, the more I realized how idolatrous it all seemed, and through further research into Scripture, it seems like this is the inescapable conclusion. Tomorrow is most likely the last time I am going to visit, as I have to return a book that I borrowed. Until I find a good church, I merely abide by Matthew 18:20— >For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them. And I do talk fairly regularly with other like-minded IRL. >>3775 >2 Maccabees 15:9-18 I have no doubt that the patronage of holy people could be an encouraging thing, as is demonstrated in this passage, but as you say, it is different than the Orthodox and Catholic practices as they exist today, in that it does not involve praying to a being other than God. >>3776 Holy people from history can be great inspirations. We know from Scripture that Paul said to imitate him, and Paul in-turn simply imitated God, as he advised other Christians to do as well in Ephesians 5:1. As you yourself say, the line between worship, respect and reverence is often not extremely clear, and so really this is all the more reason to strictly focus on God alone rather than obscuring our focus with venerating saints, Mary, and other figures—not to say that reading and thinking about their lives cannot be beneficial to us spiritually. Paul clearly taught hierarchy in the church, where some were held to a stricter standard than others—such people are worthy of respect and honor and are figures to imitate as they themselves imitate God, but to talk of praying to them, or making images of them is clearly unnecessary at best or wrong at worst.
>>3910 Go to an ACNA church, it sounds like your thing.
Open file (961.68 KB 171x172 alex jones squinting.gif)
>it's another episode of "Protestants do Muslim heresies but whinier and with less testosterone"
>>3912 How liberal are they? >>4047 Islam is a heretical split-off from Christianity. Some things they have correct such as iconoclasm, almost every other thing they do not.
>>4067 >Islam is a heretical split-off from Christianity Just like Protestantism :^))) >such as iconoclasm And Sola Fides, and Sola Scriptura, and abandoning the Logos of God to focus solely on His will, and making God arbitrary, and in making God the author of sin. There are even Muslims who believe in a sort of double predestination. You start counting some of the weirder Prot offshoots like JW, and you can even find Prot-adjacents who have the same triadology as Islam. It really is interesting how two heresies separated by more than a millennium have so much in common between them, really shows that there's nothing new under the sun.
>>4069 >And Sola Fides This is neither Islamic or Biblical. Anyone who reads the Bible will realize that faith without works is dead. Islam itself is all about works. >Sola Scriptura Muslims do not believe anything like this either. The Qur’an is supplemented by the Hadith, and Muslims who reject the Hadith are declared to be heretical and liberal. I have no problem per with tradition, as it was instrumental in the canonization of the Bible, but traditions should be in accordance with the Scripture, which is God-breathed. Jesus warned against the traditions of men, and this is what the Orthodox and Catholics have done, sadly, innovate wildly. >abandoning the Logos of God to focus solely on His will, and making God arbitrary, and in making God the author of sin. There are even Muslims who believe in a sort of double predestination. Yes, Muslims do these things, which is one of many reasons why they are wrong. >predestination. You start counting some of the weirder Prot offshoots like JW They’re not Christian and are obvious false prophets like Muhammad, given their failed prophecies and bad readings of Scripture. Protestants never wanted to fully break with the established church in the beginning. It was about *reform*. Catholics and Orthodox need to drop the idolatry and massively tone down the reverence of the saints and Mary, and then they’d essentially be fine as far as I’m concerned. Catholics would have to massively reform the papacy too.
Open file (1.11 MB 788x1024 ClipboardImage.png)
Open file (1.80 MB 887x1224 ClipboardImage.png)
Open file (1.70 MB 1085x1600 ClipboardImage.png)
Open file (2.33 MB 1200x1491 ClipboardImage.png)
Open file (723.76 KB 600x755 ClipboardImage.png)
This is now a feast day and icon thread. Feasts commemorated today, the 2nd of February (old style) in this 2022nd year of our Lord: THE MEETING OF OUR LORD, GOD, AND SAVIOR, JESUS CHRIST New Martyr Jordan of Trebizond (1650) New Martyr Gabriel of Constantinople (1670) Martyr Agathodorus of Cappadocia St. Anthimus of Chios (1960)
>>4076 >can’t refute the points >starts spamming his collectible idols Every time!
Open file (457.36 KB 460x700 ClipboardImage.png)
Open file (216.98 KB 300x393 ClipboardImage.png)
Open file (491.10 KB 545x385 ClipboardImage.png)
Open file (246.72 KB 400x311 ClipboardImage.png)
Open file (291.22 KB 287x450 ClipboardImage.png)
Feasts commemorated today, the 15th of February (new style) in this 2022nd year of our Lord: Apostle Onesimus of the 70 (109) New Hieromartyrs Michael Piatev and John Kumin (1930) St. Paphnutius, recluse of the Kiev Caves (13th c.) St. Paphnutius, monk, and his daughter St. Eophrosyne, nun, of Alexandria (5th c.) St. Eusebius, hermit of Syria (440) Vilensk and Dalmatian (1646) Icons of the Mother of God St. Dalmatus, abbot and founder of the Dormition Monastery in Siberia (1967) Martyr Major of Gaza (304) St. Oswy, king of Northumbria (670) St. Anthimus of Chios (1960) Synaxis of St. John the Theologian at Diaconissa St. Theognius, bishop of Bethelia near Gaza (523)
>>4077 Read Nicaea II nigger
>>4067 >How liberal are they? They are fundamentally anti-liberal. They split off from the Episcopal Church due to gay marriage, they're pro-life, and they are rolling back ordination of women on a provincial basis. My main criticism of them would be that they don't have liturgical uniformity. A weird trend in the traditional churches is where you have liberals officiating high church ceremonies; I think that they are basically theater fags that take church as a big playset. So when conservatives separate from them they end up being more low-church than high. This advice assumes you're in the US though.
>>3488 So disrespectful, sad sign of our sick times.
>>4077 >can’t refute the points >starts spamming insults of idolatry Every time!
The brass snake was legit and then became unlegit because people started worshipping as an idol thus the king had it destroyed. So the problem is not images but making idols out of them.
Open file (302.56 KB 366x450 ClipboardImage.png)
Another day, another post to the Icon Appreciator thread. Today is the feast day of St. Nicholas, the Enlightener of Japan, among many others.
You must fall down and worship the icon! Oh great icon grant me and the One True Church good crops this year. Hum-sha-ka-laka-laka! Hum-sha-ka-laka-laka!
>>4201 wut anime Man, I've seen better bantz out of actual boomers. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WaOcAWvhlRc https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4jC4rdNbxlQ https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Yy3E9_Wm7LU Icon-painting around the world.
Open file (95.48 KB 694x518 Tabernacle.jfif)
Couldn't the same accusations of idol worship, that are thrown and catholic/orthodox, also be laid on the ancient Israelites and with their various relics and sacrifices in the Tabernacle?
>>4205 I'll tell you the anime when you covert to my no-name church which is far better than smelly orthodox church... The anime is Battle Athletes Victory. Which to this day is only available as a DVD rip online. They remade the anime but took out the African character because tribal African people are racist to African culture or something. You can watch it if you have a lust resistant rating of 6. There is one or two underpants exposed and the characters wear fitting sport clothing.
>>4214 I don't think a sacrifice is the same thing and I don't think there's any way to prove if Jews knelt down to relics and said "Hum-sha-ka-laka-laka! Hum-sha-ka-laka-laka!" the way the Catholics do. We simply can't know these things. Of course I don't really care, I don't think anyone really thinks of it as idol worship. And even if you're praying to beings that aren't God, Jesus said to pray to the Father but he never said "don't pray to someone else in Heaven or behold you shall be sore afraid I'll pour you from the old wineskins!"
>>4214 The relics weren't graven images, they were just bowls and whatnot.
Open file (920.70 KB 320x180 funny baptist man.gif)
>>4201 >the American contribution to apologetics Protestants are in no position to accuse anyone else of adding funny dances to the service, anon. >>4222 Did you know that the pre-Incarnation Hebrews had iconography in their temples, too? It sure is funny how the practices of the faithful before the Incarnation look a whole lot like that of the apostolic churches. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkmh68urI6A
OP here. I just read St. John of Damascus' three treatises and found them to be highly interesting. I talked with a priest again on Sunday and he made many interesting points. Now I am conflicted. I still think the behavior towards them is a bit odd though (kissing, etc).
>>4331 Ahhhh. I told you he was reliable. ...Does this mean you're not going to sling around "idolator" anymore?
>>4331 Glad to see you're coming around. I think the easiest way to understand veneration is through analogy. Consider the Bible. Would you be okay with taking holy scripture and throwing it into the sewer, or spitting onto the pages? Does that mental image sit right with you, or do you grimace and turn away from it? Does telling yourself that the physical pages and ink are just a medium of information for the Law of God, and not an actual manifestation thereof, make the feeling to away? Would you be okay with someone using a portrait of Christ (not an icon or anything religious, just plain old artwork like you might see in a nativity scene) as a napkin, or worse? Is it any less disrespectful just because you're doing it to a symbol or an image instead of the real thing? I think very few Christians would be able to say they have no problem with the preceding; we understand to treat these things with respect. Iconodulia is simply the formalizing of that feeling. The Saints are a good resource on this subject, and Codex Justinianeus' article here >>4269 helps defend it biblically.
Open file (201.29 KB 700x400 theosis.jpg)
>>4335 >...Does this mean you're not going to sling around "idolator" anymore? Perhaps not. I've only read two of the three treatises that St. John of Damascus wrote, and from there I think he made an interesting case regarding the verses in the Old Testament, in how many of the prohibitions in the OT are framed in such a way that it relates to the fact that since the Israelites have not seen God, i.e. because he is invisible, incommesurable, etc. that thus they were forbidden to depict Him. Since Christ came, God has a form, and we are permitted to depict Him. This, I guess, is because the prohibition against images was never as absolute as one may have thought, since as has been pointed out ITT, God permitted the making of images of cherubim and the like so long as they were not taken as 'gods'. We know that an image of Christ is not a god, but that God has a depictable form, and we know that the saints themselves are not gods either, and neither are there images indwelt by the saints, so I assume that it is true that they would not be thought of as idols in the technical sense. So basically I think that he had made a good case regarding the depictability of Christ, but then I began to wonder about the Saints, and it seems like St. John was anticipating this objection, and answered with the fact that due to quotes that Christ will glorify those who glorify Him, and that through God we can become co-heirs, adopted sons, friends and indeed 'gods' through theosis, that they themselves are worthy of depiction and honor. I was also recommended a book 'The Image of the Father' by Fr. Steven Bigham and have found it to be interesting as well. It's basically how depiction of God the Father is unorthodox and an innovation in Tradition, because God the Father has never been seen by anyone, and He dwells in unapproachable light, etc. I guess I have a lot to think about still. I already believed that Orthodoxy is essentially the true Church from research beforehand and from my attendance of an Orthodox church since early November, but this would go a long way in smoothing out my few final objections. >>4335 I definitely think that the veneration (in terms of treating it respectfully) of the Bible, or the Cross, is something that is important. I guess my main hang-up was the permissability of the images from the Biblical perspective, not so much as showing them respect. This said though, you're right that I myself would not feel comfortable seeing someone disrespect images of Christ in a general sense. So I might hold to the iconodule attitude subconsciously anyway, maybe. Thanks for the link, I will be sure to look into it.
>>4336 >I was also recommended a book 'The Image of the Father' by Fr. Steven Bigham The correct title is 'The Image of God the Father and Other Studies'
Got anymore questions, OP?
>>4433 Not at the moment, but I'll be sure to bump this thread if I do. I'll have to talk to the priest on Sunday as well.
>>4433 Not him, but what are the readings for and against iconoclasm? I'd prefer an article part of a larger book on Christianity's relation with art, but even a list of theological works through the centuries would do.
>>4570 Pic related is an essential reading. Very readable too.
Tomorrow is the Sunday of Orthodoxy, commemorating the triumph over the Iconoloclast heretics.
>>3052 God provides
>>3055 >no one took his bait
>>3065 >it's a saint/some part of the trinity electing to manifest his blessing through that material >it's a saint/some part of the trinity electing to manifest his blessing > it's a saint/some part of the trinity >it's a saint > a saint manifests his blessing Cathagans... I...
>>5555 A saint cannot do anything apart from the fact that God is abiding in him, and he in God.
>>3200 >and second Orthodox icons are painted, not engraved. Talmud tier reasoning.
>>5558 I thought Prots were very concerned with the literal meaning of Scripture. Guess not
>>3214 Nice bait Aniconism has been there pretty much since the beginning and has popped up all throughout the history of Christianity.
>>3754 Take a look at the modern world anon, worship of wicked things and demonic visages is all around us, and faith in Christ is under attack.
>>5559 Yes, we are concerned with what scripture means. Unlike you.
>>5563 I’m glad you understand that icons are permissible and that veneration is not worship then
>>5566 Cope.
>>3200 So when you say if the saints depicted thought we were worshiping them(by venerating the icon) theyd rebuke us, do you mean the spirit of the saint or the icon itself? Does the spirit of the saint rest in the icon or is the icon a medium to the saint somehow? Sorry still new to idolatry and praying to spirits other than the Father.
>>5548 Bring whatever Icon you think is safely portable with you to Liturgy. You will observe a great panoply of them, big and small, simple and elaborate. Even one the size of a small card will do (as in the one you'd keep in your wallet). Remember that Icons are windows into Heaven, and so may on occasion become fragrant, or weep holy water, oil, or myrrh. They are not gods, but they are certainly more than pretty pictures.
Open file (257.74 KB 603x767 Triumph_orthodoxy.jpg)
>>5578 >Triumph of Orthodoxy The church peaked in doctrinal harmony with it in the 840s imo.
>>5572 The saint or whoever is depicted in the icon (Christ, etc) does not dwell in the icon. That would be an idol. >>5574 I wasn’t able to participate this year, unfortunately. I had no icon to bring yet. I think I will be buying one next week though. I have my eye on a reproduction of pic related. Hopefully I will be able to participate next year. A lot of people brought icons for the procession though, it was neat to see.
Open file (1.26 MB 759x1024 ClipboardImage.png)
>>5580 You could make a case for the peak occurring at 879. In this year Constantinople IV, the last council received by all the Pentarchy, was held.
>>5616 The issue with 879 is that Rome tried to weasel out of the result after the fact, and it was after the ugliness that was the Photian Schism, the issues of which seemed to be a preview of the split which would come in 1054.
>>5585 I really don't like that image of Christ, something feels really off about it. It feels almost... islamic.
>>5621 It’s a famous icon from a monastery in Sinai in Egpyt, and it is one of the few surviving icons from the pre-iconoclasm period of the Church. The two sides of the icon are thought to represent Christ’s human and divine natures respectively.
>>5619 >The issue with 879 is that Rome tried to weasel out of the result after the fact Yeah, but only more than two centuries after the fact. There's no evidence that contemporary Rome tried to renege on her reception of the council. Admittedly, reception of Constantinople IV was limited to near-nonexistent outside of Rome, but there was also no explicit repudiation by other Latin bishops, either--and this fits the sniff test for what qualifies as an ecumenical council. What's more, from the apologetics of St. Maximus the Confessor, we can tell that the Latins of that time period held to an orthodox, non-heretical understanding of filioque.
>>4269 >“Therefore take good heed to yourselves. Since you saw no form on the day that the Lord spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire, beware lest you act corruptly by making a graven image for yourselves, in the form of any figure, the likeness of male or female…” (Deuteronomy 4:15-17) Notice the reason why God says the Israelites weren’t allowed to make graven images “in the form of any figure,” it’s because they “saw no form” when God appeared to them. How does this explain why Moses was told to create images of cherubim? It’s because when God appeared to him on Mt. Sinai in Exodus 24, God revealed His divine glory to Moses, showing him the heavenly liturgy itself, in order that he might copy it over to the Israelites’ worship (Hebrews 8:5). This is why Exodus 25 begins and ends with God telling Moses to make everything in the sanctuary “according to the pattern shown to you on the mountain.” Moses saw the cherubim worshipping God in heaven, and this is why he was told to make images of these cherubim, in order to reflect the pattern of worship that was revealed to him, in Israel’s own system of worship. This does not follow that icons are allowed, just at most depictions of the living God and angels
>>5919 > This does not follow that icons are allowed, just at most depictions of the living God and angels ‘Depictions of the living God and angels’ are icons.
>>5926 Read what I said. At most those are allowed, not icons of Mary or men. Arguably only icons of Christ and not just God in general
>>5927 St. John of Damascus addresses this argument
>>5930 >either, therefore, give up the festal memorials of the saints, ... or accept the images, which, you say, are contrary to the law Doesn't seem like a hard choice to me
>>5940 I hope you’re circumcised and eating kosher, Shlomo
Where do you guys put your icon(s)? I just got one on Friday and had it blessed during Vespers but I haven’t decided where to put it. The priest said its best in a corner but I don’t really have any good corners. I’ve just been moving it aroung depending where I am spending time in the house—it serves as a good reminder, especially when certain things can draw me close to sinning (Internet)
>>6216 I have one on my computer desk. So that I can look at it and think of God instead of going on bad websites.
>>6216 Not Orthodox so I don't have icons but I keep my prayer stuff (rosary, prayer books etc) on a table in my library. If you don't have a library, you could consider a bedside table, desk or bookshelf.
>>6231 >>6230 Thanks for sharing, anons. I think I've basically combined the best parts of what you guys suggested - I put it for the time being next to my computer desk on a little table, near my bookshelf / library area. So it sits in my sight while also being just in a nice spot in general. I'll be interested to see how this icon effects my spiritual life. I think it definitely gives a different aura to the space I have it in.
>>6254 It's definitely a good place to start, near my PC is where I currently have my patron saint's icon. Eventually, what you might want to consider doing is getting a table, shelf, or wall dedicated specifically to iconography, on the east side of your home (so that you're facing east when looking at them). That becomes your prayer space, where you stand and kneel to do your morning and evening prayers.
>>6389 I definitely hope to get some more stuff in time. I want to take it slow though. Technically I'm still an inquirer who only has been looking into things since like late October, but I definitely will follow this advice in time!
>destroy and disrespect images of Jesus <protties approve >burn american flag <protties angry
>>6747 That's because Americanism is its own heresy. Ever hear of Solange Hertz?
>>6750 No but I have now and thank you for bringing her to my attention.
>>6747 Some subsects of American prots are basically cheerleaders for Zionism and Republicans, it’s sad
Open file (939.51 KB 1280x818 abortion jesus icon.jpg)
>>7134 If aborted babies go straight to Heaven, then shouldn't we abort more babies so they won't have a chance to go to Hell?
>>7165 Obviously a ludicrous trole, but the logic is sound from a demon's POV (but plainly neither God's nor a human's. Otherwise, why wouldn't He just create everyone 'pre-aborted'?). Obviously God means us all to live our lives. Abortion is clearly a demonically-inspired form of murder, and laid directly at the feet of Feminism & feminists first & foremost. Also, NTA, and I can't be certain of the artist's intent in that painting, but I'm highly-skeptical of the seemingly-common perspective that somehow babies that get aborted get a 'free pass' straight into Heaven. This notion clearly contradicts many passages in Scripture that indicate each and every one of us will make a freewill decision to serve God, or not. I can't pretend to understand what that truth entails for such victims, but I feel quite sure they will face their own trial of faith -- whatever form God chooses that to take. And as to your fundamental fallacy, God is giving everyone a 'chance' to go to Hell. The outcome is purely based on our own choices, He Himself has already made the greatest sacrifice conceivable to prevent us doing so.
>>5930 >But then they say, Make and image of Christ and of his Mother who gave birth to God, and let that suffice. What an absurdity! You confess clearly that you are an enemy of the saints! For if you make an image of Christ, but in no wise of the saints, it is clear that you do not prohibit the image, but rather the honor due to the saints Oh no how dare I honor God and recognize all glory belongs to him rather than honoring men. >, some-thing that no one has ever dared to do or undertake with such brazenness. That is provably false at best and a flat out lie at worst depending on when this was written and the writers knowledge. >You are not waging a war against images, but against the saints. First of all that doesn't logically follow, especially since most Christians who are against idols are against idols of God as well. Secondly worship of idols/icons (same word in the original greek) and the worship of men are both bad, and there is a very long tradition of pious Christians fighting both. >is is said that "God stands in the company of gods, in the midst he dis-criminates between the gods," Wow. Not only are you a pagan you also saying we are as gods. Hi lucifer. >I venerate the image of Christ, as God incarnate; of the mistress of all, the Mother of God So which is it, do you merely "venerate" God or do you worship Mary. >"we are not under the law, but under grace" >unironically saying one or all of the ten commandments no longer apply Go have a gay orgy then because you are no longer under the law. >Peter, the supreme chief of the apostles, Orthobros remain unslighted by this travesty it seems. >we do not mourn for the saints, but we celebrate their death. 32 Then, when Mary had come to where Jesus was, and saw Him, she fell down at His feet, saying to Him, “Lord, if You had been here, my brother would not have died.” 33 Therefore, when Jesus saw her weep (and also the Judeans who came with her weep), He groaned in the spirit and was troubled in Himself, 34 and said, “Where have you laid him?” They said to Him, “Lord, come and see.” 35 Jesus wept. How very Christian to celebrate death, when even our Lord wept for a man he would soon revive. >"For the honor given to the image passes to the archetype," Of course that's how it works, why else would God explicitly commanded people not to make images of Him. Also this is pretty much flat out admitting your idolatry. You are "honoring" images to honor what they represent, which is what half the cases of idolatry where. >and anyone who touched a corpse was reckoned unclean, even Moses himself. Now the memorials of the saints are celebrated. Yes, you've made quite a lot of oral traditions over praising parts of corpses, I can't believe catholics are proud of this. >Either, therefore, give up the festal memorials of the saints, which are contrary to the old law, or accept the images Don't worry, we did. :) I pray that you too stop rejecting the word of God.
>>7165 Not unless we want to go to hell for murder ourselves.
>>7202 >Oh no how dare I honor God and recognize all glory belongs to him rather than honoring men. The Bible shows holy men honoring kings, angels and other venerable people. Veneration is right in the Bible. >Secondly worship of idols/icons (same word in the original greek) εἴδωλον =/= εἰκών >and the worship of men are both bad, and there is a very long tradition of pious Christians fighting both. Latria of men is bad, dulia is Biblical. >Not only are you a pagan you also saying we are as gods. Hi lucifer. Calling Psalm 82 Satanic? LMAO >Go have a gay orgy then because you are no longer under the law. Law of Moses =/= moral law. Typical Protestant conflation. >Orthobros remain unslighted by this travesty it seems. The Orthodox Church recognizes the primacy of Peter but doesn't ascribe to papal supremacism. This statement doesn't perturb Orthos at all. >How very Christian to celebrate death, when even our Lord wept for a man he would soon revive. Celebrating that they have reposed in Christ is nothing bad. Did he say that we can shed no tears? >. You are "honoring" images to honor what they represent, which is what half the cases of idolatry where. Idolatry is worshiping an image as a god or believing that a god dwells within the image. This isn't what iconography is. >Yes, you've made quite a lot of oral traditions over praising parts of corpses, This comes straight from the miracles that were worked from Elisha's bones, bringing a man back to life with the power of God that worked through them. Even the bones of Polycarp, a disciple of John, were collected by his followers. It's both in the Bible and Holy Tradition.
Hey, Mister New Iconoclast, expound on why you believe that here so we can understand you.
>>7913 Who are you talking to?
>>7915 The guy from >>7908 , who else?
>>7916 What specifically are you asking me?
I'm being entered as a catechumen on Saturday, thanks for the help, anons.
>>7918 Congratulations, brother anon. Do tell us how things go. >>7917 I am asking you what sort of church(es) you attend, which sect you belong to, and how you reached them, so that I have a frame of reference for why you think it a good idea to destroy images of the God-Man Jesus Christ. One doesn't simply "read the Bible" and reach a single conclusion. By one's own wits, one can reach any number of them, from Seventh Day Adventist to Swedenborgianism. So tell me how you reached this particular conclusion.
>>7947 >By one's own wits, one can reach any number of them, from Seventh Day Adventist to Swedenborgianism. In your opinion which specific texts of scripture can be reasonably ascertained to genuinely teach these heresies?
>>7947 >Congratulations, brother anon. Do tell us how things go. Thanks, I'll be sure to! I'm a bit nervous
>>7949 Answer my question first. You are the unknown, while you think you know us. The OP answered honestly, and now I ask the same of you. It is only fair.
>>7979 Your "question" was a rhetorical attack on the holy bible.
>>7990 How? You deflect.
>>7998 >How? >>7947 >One doesn't simply "read the Bible" and reach a single conclusion. By one's own wits, one can reach any number of them, from Seventh Day Adventist to Swedenborgianism.
>>8000 Anon, the Bible is not and never has been something to be read without help. It requires understanding of context (which tradition usually provides), meaning (which can and often is misinterpreted), and a humble mindset (lacking in so many "Enlightenment" scholars). It is no insult to the Bible to call it a difficult book which not all are ready or capable of taking in fully. As for those specific heresies, that would require an in-depth examination which I do not have resources for at present. However, let me ask you something: why is it that so many splinters of the Reformation broadly if not specifically resemble the ancient heresies, which were each the result of individual heresiarchs' interpretations?
>>8001 >which tradition usually provides Lol. >It is no insult to the Bible to call it a difficult book which not all are ready or capable of taking in fully. Do you need help from tradition or your church to understand my words? >why is it that so many splinters of the Reformation Why is it that papists are so delusional they believe that everything that isn't part of their church has something to do with the Reformation?
>let me ask you something: why is it that so many splinters of the Reformation broadly if not specifically resemble the ancient heresies, which were each the result of individual heresiarchs' interpretations? Because the concerns of many ancient heresiarchs were never meaningfully addressed and persist unanswered
>>8017 >not meaningfully addressed >unanswered <what were the Ecumenical Councils <who were the Desert Fathers
>>8019 Not meaningful answers nor divinely inspired.
As even Martin Luther put it, Christian artistic works are "sermons for the eyes." Anyone can "read" them, no matter their own language. Perhaps iconoclasm returns in part because of the presumptive arrogance of an over-literate but meaningless society.
Do you hate saints? Do you envy them? Do you think they must not be given any recognition nor communicated with nor prayed to? Is their help when THEY pray for YOU to GOD on YOUR behalf worthless? There is no love in you. God does not know you. Honest and kind people on Heaven do not know you. No one knows you.
Everyone who dared to usurp authority of Pope was enemy of Pope, no matter how saintly they were. Our brothers and sisters, fathers and mothers, friends and advocates on Heaven, all of them had to SCRAM because Pope and Church said so. Don't get in their ways of gaining more POWER over kingdoms and states, or you will be punished and eradicated as heretics. That's what, at it's very root, iconoclasm was all about - being part of dogmatic power centralization. And, like pharisee, people in the church no longer cared about communion, but more about word and law, and callousness and pride grew in their hearts even as they defeated lust and gluttony.
>>8258 I am a saint sir, as is everyone who believes and the dead will not hear your prayers, instead your worship goes to the demons.
>>8261 Young man. I know people earn pocket money the way they can. Some sit and solve captchas like possessed, some shill on online websites like you do, but does your minuscule pay really worth your time? Maybe you should abandon this and get a little more proper job, idk, at a restaurant or a delivery service. It will be better for you. And if you JUST tell God about your needs, believe me, he WILL help you too. NO strings attached, NO obligations, FOR FREE. Even if you hate Him or the very concept of His existence. Trust this, He knows you more than you know your own five fingers. And one day you will meet him too.
>>8261 The Christian faith is indeed for the living -- including those who have passed on, but are alive together with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Moses. Or do you think such a heresy as to deny Christ's meeting with the Prophets from the very Gospel? Do you ignore the meaning of the torn cloth in the Temple and the rising dead? Do you also ignore Lazarus? Selectively ignoring Scripture does nothing for your case.
>>8271 Their souls are alive and their bodies are dead. You could no more contact them than the damned in Hell. Repent of your necromancy and repent of your idolatry, the Lord will not tolerate it.
>>8310 A thousand stories old and new, a thousand gallons of relic-generated oil, and a thousand miracles bespeak your continued ignorance of history. History and a life helped and guided by a thousand-thousand helpers under our Father's command. All you have to do is humbly ask, like Matin Luther did St. Anne during a terrible storm, and you might just be surprised. Demons demand sacrifice and evil as their payment, the Saints and Martyrs merely ask for a contrite heart. Go get your hands on a book called Evlogeite! , all who can afford to. It will demonstrate to you the rich and salutary history of Greek Saints, Martyrs, and Elders from the earliest days of the Church into the present. They are all alive in Christ, and are yet active in helping those who avail themselves of them. >bodies are dead In conclusion, so what? Those worthy enough to become Saints and achieve Theosis are not bound by that at all. Besides, come the Last Judgement, all dem bones are going to be clothed once more.
>>8310 The saints are as alive as you and me. Imagine thinking the Body of Christ is broken by death.
>>8320 >A thousand stories old and new, a thousand gallons of relic-generated oil, and a thousand miracles bespeak your continued ignorance of history We see now how the fall of Rome and Constantinople was caused by them ignoring the warnings of scripture and listening to whispers in the shadows like the older heathens did. For God knew that the devils would seek to destroy our faith through false miracles, and knowing the weakness of men for superstition we were warned "believe not every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God". We know that no spirit from God would lead men into idolatry and encourage worship of themselves, and no spirit from God would come in the guise of dead saints telling the people to cast spells of necromancy, for God said "thou shalt have no other gods before me" and "a man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death". >All you have to do is humbly ask, like Matin Luther did St. Anne during a terrible storm I swear to you that no false god will save you, but "all who call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved". That Luther's first thought was to beseech another god and offer himself to her betrays his paganism at that time, and the paganism of Rome and Constantinople down to this very day, so they must not be considered Christian churches in any way. It is the most accursed thing to give worship to the creation rather than the creator, it is the most damnable thing there is. >Those worthy enough to become Saints I am a saint sir, as are all who repent and believe in the Lord Jesus Christ. I encourage you to give up your idols and become a saint too. >are not bound by that at all They are bound to it as God as has bound them to it. >>8342 Imagine thinking you can talk to the dead.
>>8392 >all of that Thank you. I think I can finally tell what family of heresies you belong to, even if you didn't intend to tell me. This would've been a lot less tedious if you'd simply answered when I asked some days ago. So no, anon, I don't need two thousand years of tradition to figure you out, just a decent grasp of history and the lingo you thought was your own. But we'll get into that in the coming week. I am on a phone, and today is Palm Sunday. A blessed day to you.
>>8404 Cringe
>>8449 Okay, zoomer.
iconic bump
>>3039 https://anon.cafe/christian/res/10837.html Iconoclasm debunked biblically. -Biblical events symbolize/image other things The incarnated Son of God is an image/icon of the Divine. >Colossians 1:15: He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. >John 12:45: "And whoever sees me sees him who sent me." The old covenent is an image of the new covenent >Matthew 5:17: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. " Messianic prophecies through images (many examples but I will give one, joseph is an image of Christ) >Joseph was rejected by his family, was put in the earth, was accepted by gentiles, was exalted among gentiles, saved the entire world during the famine >Christ was rejected by Israelites, was accepted by gentiles, was put in the earth, was exalted, saved humanity by destroying death -Man made material images in place of worship Cherubim icons in place of worship >Exodus 26:1: “Moreover, you shall make the tabernacle with ten curtains of fine twined linen and blue and purple and scarlet yarns; you shall make them with cherubim skillfully worked into them." Joshua and Israelites bow down before two massive Cherubim icons. >Exodus 25:22: There I will meet with you, and from above the mercy seat, from between the two cherubim that are on the ark of the testimony, I will speak with you about all that I will give you in commandment for the people of Israel. >Joshua 7:6: Then Joshua tore his clothes and fell to the earth on his face before the ark of the Lord until the evening, he and the elders of Israel. And they put dust on their heads. -Divine effects from interacting with man made objects out of faith and obedience to God, not the object itself. Looking at a symbolic man made bronze serpent heals you >Numbers 21:8-9: And the Lord said to Moses, “Make a fiery serpent and set it on a pole, and everyone who is bitten, when he sees it, shall live.” So Moses made a bronze serpent and set it on a pole. And if a serpent bit anyone, he would look at the bronze serpent and live. Sick woman desperately tries to touch the garment of Christ, not out of faith for the garment, but out of faith in Christ. >Luke 8:44: "She came up behind him and touched the fringe of his garment, and immediately her discharge of blood ceased. "
Open file (13.88 KB 261x228 (You) .jpg)

Report/Delete/Moderation Forms

no cookies?