Orthodoxy And The Religion Of The Future

Pistachio

Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2019
Messages
763
Orthodoxy’s insistence on the use of idols (“icons”) should be taken into serious consideration. Just because they are better than the Catholic Church on many issues doesn’t make them scriptural. Having moral superiority over the Catholic Church is a very low standard.
Iconoclasts like yourself don't understand the role of icons in worship, like most Protestants. They are there to help worshippers focus, not to be the object of worship.
 

Summer

Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2019
Messages
851
Iconoclasts like yourself don't understand the role of icons in worship, like most Protestants. They are there to help worshippers focus, not to be the object of worship.
There is nothing scriptural about icons. They have 0 role in worship outside of paganism.
 

Perry Staltic

Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2020
Messages
8,186
Iconoclasts like yourself don't understand the role of icons in worship, like most Protestants. They are there to help worshippers focus, not to be the object of worship.

They were never meant to help worshipers focus. That's why God forbade images in the 2nd commandment of the law. But Catholics expunged that commandment from the law for the sake of their idolatry. I don't know what excuses Orthodoxy makes for its idolatrous practices. God is spirit (invisible) and seeks people who will worship him in spirit and truth. God's children are iconoclasts because the power of the devil is images.
 
Last edited:

Pistachio

Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2019
Messages
763
There is nothing scriptural about icons. They have 0 role in worship outside of paganism.
And you shall make two cherubim of gold [i.e., two gold statues of angels]; of hammered work shall you make them, on the two ends of the mercy seat. Make one cherub on the one end, and one cherub on the other end; of one piece of the mercy seat shall you make the cherubim on its two ends. The cherubim shall spread out their wings above, overshadowing the mercy seat with their wings, their faces one to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubim be” (Exodus. 25:18–20).

What do you think was on the ark of the Covenant? Come on.
 

Summer

Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2019
Messages
851
Okay now show me where the instruction is for them to aid anyone in worship.

Your little pictures are neither holy nor do they have any root in scripture. They’re merely echoes of paganism that your church won’t let go of.
 

Perry Staltic

Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2020
Messages
8,186
And you shall make two cherubim of gold [i.e., two gold statues of angels]; of hammered work shall you make them, on the two ends of the mercy seat. Make one cherub on the one end, and one cherub on the other end; of one piece of the mercy seat shall you make the cherubim on its two ends. The cherubim shall spread out their wings above, overshadowing the mercy seat with their wings, their faces one to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubim be” (Exodus. 25:18–20).

What do you think was on the ark of the Covenant? Come on.

No one saw that during worship except the high priest for a few moments on one day of the year.. If he even saw it much at all because the holiest place was dark; there was no light in it except for candlelight filtering in from the outer chamber or perhaps a small lamp or glowing coals he would have taken with him, and the mercy seat and cherubim were to be covered with smoke when he worshiped from the incense he placed on the coals. Solomon had images of creatures crafted for the temple (oxen, cherubim), but he was an idolater and the unified kingdom was destroyed because of his practices.

And he shall take a censer full of burning coals of fire from off the altar before the LORD, and his hands full of sweet incense beaten small, and bring it within the vail: And he shall put the incense upon the fire before the LORD, that the cloud of the incense may cover the mercy seat that is upon the testimony that he die not: Leviticus 16:12-13
 
Last edited:

HighT

Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2021
Messages
383
Location
България
Исус.JPG
 

Blossom

Moderator
Forum Supporter
Joined
Nov 23, 2013
Messages
11,032
Location
Indiana USA
I’m not remotely qualified to discuss Icons/Iconography and it’s definitely historically and to this day a controversial and complicated subject but I did find these quotes interesting:

An Iconographer’s perspective-



Icons are more than mere decorations, and shouldn't really be treated as a painting or a picture to hang on a wall. Icons are a visual proclamation that the God who created the world became a man for our salvation, that he suffered and died for us, that he rose from the dead, and ascended into heaven taking our human nature with Him. Furthermore they testify to the fact that Christians can be transformed back to the image and likeness of God, and that indeed God dwells within Christians and shines forth in those who live according to His will. They proclaim the same message that the Gospels do. Hanging an icon in your home or your church makes a profound statement. While icons can be decorative, they are not decorations. A Bible can be beautifully printed, bound with the finest materials, and filled with beautiful word, but it would be a mistake to see it as a work of art rather than as a means of encountering God.



Referring to Icons as windows to heaven is a convenient metaphor, but I wouldn't take it too far. Icons are meant to depict heavenly realities more so than earthly realities. They are intended to focus our thoughts on the kingdom of heaven rather than on the things of this world. The look of icons is greatly influenced by their intended purpose. As such, icons are a way of gazing upon heaven, albeit in a way that will be surpassed when we see it for real when Christ returns.



Iconoclasm came about for a number of reasons. I think many people would like to think that Iconoclasm came about because of the OT prohibition of images, but I think this would be a very inaccurate depiction of Iconoclasm. Some of the drive to remove icons from the church had to do with genuine abuses. There is an account of some priests who had actually started to add chips of paint from icons to the Eucharist as though this would somehow make it holier. These abuses were a very legitimate cause for alarm. A desire to react against abuses and an increasing influence from Islam had a great influence on the development of the iconoclast movement. Ironically it was Scripture that was used to defend the use of icons.



This is why we don't depict Christ as a lamb. Canon 82 of the Quinisext Council in Troullo:



"In some of the paintings of the venerable icons, a lamb is inscribed as being shown or pointed at by the Precursor’s finger, which was taken to be a type of grace, suggesting beforehand through the law the true lamb to us, Christ our God. Therefore, eagerly embracing the old types and the shadows as symbols of the truth and preindications handed down to the Church, we prefer the grace, and accept it as the truth in fulfillment of the Law. Since, therefore, that which is perfect even though it be but painted is imprinted in the faces of all, the Lamb who taketh away the sin of the world Christ our God, with respect to His human character, we decree that henceforth He shall be inscribed even in the icons instead of the ancient lamb: through Him being enabled to comprehend the reason for the humiliation of the God Logos, and in memory of His life in the flesh and of His passion and of His soterial death being led by the hand, as it were, and of the redemption of the world which thence accrues."
 

Perry Staltic

Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2020
Messages
8,186
Ironically it was Scripture that was used to defend the use of icons.

This simply isn't true. Images are never sanctioned in scripture; the 2nd commandment forbade them. Technically, we are not under the law, so we can only look to the 2nd commandment for instructional purposes. At best they are a distraction from true obedience, and possibly at worst a stumbling block or even grave sin if it becomes idolatry. We are instructed to bring every thought (mental image) captive to the obedience of Christ. That is the real issue. If people can do that while looking at icons, then there's no problem. To the pure (clean) all things are pure (clean). However, all of these hand-waving justifications for using them for worship are carnal and counterproductive, and possibly worse.

You shall not make to yourself an image (εἴδωλον eidolon), nor any representation (ὁμοίωμα homoioma), as much as is in the heaven upward, nor as much as is in the earth below, nor as much as is in the waters underneath the earth. You shall not do obeisance to them, nor shall you serve them. For I am the LORD your God, a jealous God, visiting sins of fathers upon children unto the third and fourth generation to the ones hating me; and showing mercy to thousands loving me and guarding my commandments. Exodus 20:4-6
G1497 εἴδωλον eidolon (ei-d̮ō'-lon) n.
1. an image, idol (i.e. for worship).
2. (by implication) a heathen god.
3. (plural) the worship of such.
[from G1491]
G1491 εἶδος eidos (ei'-d̮os) n.
a view, i.e. form.
{literally or figuratively}
[from G1492]
G1492 εἴδω eido (ei'-d̮ō) v.
1. (properly) to see (but not limited to the eye).

G3667 ὁμοίωμα homoioma (ho-moi'-ō-ma) n.
1. a form.
2. (abstractly) resemblance.
 

Blossom

Moderator
Forum Supporter
Joined
Nov 23, 2013
Messages
11,032
Location
Indiana USA
This simply isn't true. Images are never sanctioned in scripture; the 2nd commandment forbade them. Technically, we are not under the law, so we can only look to the 2nd commandment for instructional purposes. At best they are a distraction from true obedience, and possibly at worst a stumbling block or even grave sin if it becomes idolatry. We are instructed to bring every thought (mental image) captive to the obedience of Christ. That is the real issue. If people can do that while looking at icons, then there's no problem. To the pure (clean) all things are pure (clean). However, all of these hand-waving justifications for using them for worship are carnal and counterproductive, and possibly worse.

You shall not make to yourself an image (εἴδωλον eidolon), nor any representation (ὁμοίωμα homoioma), as much as is in the heaven upward, nor as much as is in the earth below, nor as much as is in the waters underneath the earth. You shall not do obeisance to them, nor shall you serve them. For I am the LORD your God, a jealous God, visiting sins of fathers upon children unto the third and fourth generation to the ones hating me; and showing mercy to thousands loving me and guarding my commandments. Exodus 20:4-6
G1497 εἴδωλον eidolon (ei-d̮ō'-lon) n.
1. an image, idol (i.e. for worship).
2. (by implication) a heathen god.
3. (plural) the worship of such.
[from G1491]
G1491 εἶδος eidos (ei'-d̮os) n.
a view, i.e. form.
{literally or figuratively}
[from G1492]
G1492 εἴδω eido (ei'-d̮ō) v.
1. (properly) to see (but not limited to the eye).

G3667 ὁμοίωμα homoioma (ho-moi'-ō-ma) n.
1. a form.
2. (abstractly) resemblance.
Thanks, I appreciate your input.
 

Blossom

Moderator
Forum Supporter
Joined
Nov 23, 2013
Messages
11,032
Location
Indiana USA

Perry Staltic

Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2020
Messages
8,186
Thanks, I appreciate your input.

The reason God doesn't like images is because they take our minds off of him. He gets jealous when we are paying attention to images in our minds (which is really all a physical image is, ultimately) instead of worshiping him in spirit in a lowly mind. A high mind is the realm of images; the voice of Christ can only be heard in a lowly mind. Satan deceived Eve to move from her lowly mind to operate in her high mind in which she conceived images of glory that ultimately led her to sin.
 

Blossom

Moderator
Forum Supporter
Joined
Nov 23, 2013
Messages
11,032
Location
Indiana USA
The reason God doesn't like images is because they take our minds off of him. He gets jealous when we are paying attention to images in our minds (which is really all a physical image is, ultimately) instead of worshiping him in spirit in a lowly mind. A high mind is the realm of images; the voice of Christ can only be heard in a lowly mind. Satan deceived Eve to move from her lowly mind to operate in her high mind in which she conceived images of glory that ultimately led her to sin.
Thanks for explaining further. As a repentant sinner myself I find that particularly challenging but I continue to persist in the struggle and stay faithful. :)
 

Perry Staltic

Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2020
Messages
8,186
Thanks for explaining further. As a repentant sinner myself I find that particularly challenging but I continue to persist in the struggle and stay faithful. :)

The more you get the words of godly men (scripture) in you, the easier it becomes.
 

TheSir

Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2019
Messages
1,952
The reason God doesn't like images is because they take our minds off of him. He gets jealous when we are paying attention to images in our minds (which is really all a physical image is, ultimately) instead of worshiping him in spirit in a lowly mind. A high mind is the realm of images; the voice of Christ can only be heard in a lowly mind. Satan deceived Eve to move from her lowly mind to operate in her high mind in which she conceived images of glory that ultimately led her to sin.
What do these two states of mind mean in practice?
 

Perry Staltic

Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2020
Messages
8,186
What do these two states of mind mean in practice?

Lowly mind: in essence, a stilled, self-controlled mind that allows one to hear the still, gentle voice to ensure conformity to God's will

High mind: in essence, unrestrained imaginations that seek the admiration and praise of men
 

Perry Staltic

Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2020
Messages
8,186
Here’s a brief OCA write up on the topic:

The fact that so many iconodules were willing to sacrifice their lives for icons is very concerning. That speaks to me of real entrenched idolatry because there's nothing in scripture to even suggest such a practice much less give one's life for such.
 

Blossom

Moderator
Forum Supporter
Joined
Nov 23, 2013
Messages
11,032
Location
Indiana USA
The fact that so many iconodules were willing to sacrifice their lives for icons is very concerning. That speaks to me of real entrenched idolatry because there's nothing in scripture to even suggest such a practice much less give one's life for such.
Indeed.
I believe icons are considered part of Holy Tradition in Orthodoxy. You might not actually enjoy visiting like I had previously thought because Icons are everywhere in the church.
“Holy Tradition is the deposit of faith given by Jesus Christ to the Apostles and passed on in the Church from one generation to the next without addition, alteration or subtraction. Vladimir Losskyhas famously described the Tradition as "the life of the Holy Spirit in the Church." It is dynamic in application, yet unchanging in dogma. It is growing in expression, yet ever the same in essence.

Unlike many conceptions of tradition in popular understanding, the Orthodox Church does not regard Holy Tradition as something which grows and expands over time, forming a collection of practices and doctrines which accrue, gradually becoming something more developed and eventually unrecognizable to the first Christians. Rather, Holy Tradition is that same faith which Christ taught to the Apostles and which they gave to their disciples, preserved in the whole Church and especially in its leadership through Apostolic Succession.”
 

Perry Staltic

Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2020
Messages
8,186
I believe icons are considered part of Holy Tradition in Orthodoxy. You might not actually enjoy visiting like I had previously thought because Icons are everywhere in the church.

It wouldn't bother me I think (to the pure all things are pure), but I probably wouldn't find a home there.
 

Similar threads

M
Replies
9
Views
1K
Back
Top Bottom