OrthodoxChristianity.net
August 23, 2014, 11:41:38 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: John of Damascus' exegesis of De 4:15 is impossible  (Read 37145 times) Average Rating: 5
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,380



« Reply #765 on: August 20, 2010, 05:22:07 PM »

Problem is, Alfred, the iconoclasts you revere so much showed their disapproval nor only by destroying the icons - but also those who venerated them.  Are those your heroes?

No, not at all. My heroes are in the Bible, but I will include Athanasius, an exception.

Even though he venerated icons?
Athanasius made clear he was repeating apostolic doctrine re the Holy Trinity, not inventing it.
And you are right: Pope St. Athanasius claimed only to teach the Apostolic Faith
Oh?  St. John of Damascus quotes Pope St. Athansius the Great in defense of the Holy Icons:
Quote
We, who are of the faithful, do not worship images as gods, as the heathens did, God forbid, but we mark our lovingdesire alone to see the face of the person represented in image. Hence, when it is obliterated, we are wont to throw the image as so much wood into the fire. Jacob, when he was about to die, worshipped on the point of Joseph's staff, not honouring the staff but its owner. Just in the same way do we greet images as we should embrace our children and parents to signify our affection. Thus the Jew, too, worshipped the tablets of the law, and the two golden cherubim in carved work, not because he honoured gold or stone for itself, but the Lord who had ordered them to be made.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2010, 05:23:05 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Melodist
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: The Faith That Established The Universe
Jurisdiction: AOANA
Posts: 2,523



« Reply #766 on: August 25, 2010, 04:15:16 PM »

Orthodox statements affirm icons convey veneration to the prototype, or somehow veneration given to them passes to the prototype. Either way, one must conclude the prototype is not present, if he were, then no icon would be needed.

In the military, men and women are required to salute the flag to honor the country. This is still done when they are in this country. Saluting the flag does not necessarily mean that one is absent from the country. Also, marines stand at attention when they hear the Marines Hymn and the national anthem. This does not mean that cease to be marines or citizens of this country.
Logged

And FWIW, these are our Fathers too, you know.

Made Perfect in Weakness - Latest Post: The Son of God
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #767 on: October 31, 2010, 08:28:09 AM »

Orthodox statements affirm icons convey veneration to the prototype, or somehow veneration given to them passes to the prototype. Either way, one must conclude the prototype is not present, if he were, then no icon would be needed.

In the military, men and women are required to salute the flag to honor the country. This is still done when they are in this country. Saluting the flag does not necessarily mean that one is absent from the country. Also, marines stand at attention when they hear the Marines Hymn and the national anthem. This does not mean that cease to be marines or citizens of this country.

Unsound analogy, people don't say flags have prototypes, they aren't icons of the original. That is relevant to the point, if the Original isn't present, then an icon is used...therefore its use is PROOF the venerator doesn't experience the presence of the Prototype. If he did, he wouldn't use the icon.



Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #768 on: October 31, 2010, 08:42:53 AM »

Problem is, Alfred, the iconoclasts you revere so much showed their disapproval nor only by destroying the icons - but also those who venerated them.  Are those your heroes?

No, not at all. My heroes are in the Bible, but I will include Athanasius, an exception.

Even though he venerated icons?
Athanasius made clear he was repeating apostolic doctrine re the Holy Trinity, not inventing it.
And you are right: Pope St. Athanasius claimed only to teach the Apostolic Faith
Oh?  St. John of Damascus quotes Pope St. Athansius the Great in defense of the Holy Icons:
Quote
We, who are of the faithful, do not worship images as gods, as the heathens did, God forbid, but we mark our lovingdesire alone to see the face of the person represented in image. Hence, when it is obliterated, we are wont to throw the image as so much wood into the fire. Jacob, when he was about to die, worshipped on the point of Joseph's staff, not honouring the staff but its owner. Just in the same way do we greet images as we should embrace our children and parents to signify our affection. Thus the Jew, too, worshipped the tablets of the law, and the two golden cherubim in carved work, not because he honoured gold or stone for itself, but the Lord who had ordered them to be made.

I don't believe Athanasius said that, I can only find the text in John of Damascus.

« Last Edit: October 31, 2010, 08:43:54 AM by Alfred Persson » Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,380



« Reply #769 on: October 31, 2010, 09:34:16 AM »

Orthodox statements affirm icons convey veneration to the prototype, or somehow veneration given to them passes to the prototype. Either way, one must conclude the prototype is not present, if he were, then no icon would be needed.

In the military, men and women are required to salute the flag to honor the country. This is still done when they are in this country. Saluting the flag does not necessarily mean that one is absent from the country. Also, marines stand at attention when they hear the Marines Hymn and the national anthem. This does not mean that cease to be marines or citizens of this country.

Unsound analogy, people don't say flags have prototypes, they aren't icons of the original. That is relevant to the point, if the Original isn't present, then an icon is used...therefore its use is PROOF the venerator doesn't experience the presence of the Prototype. If he did, he wouldn't use the icon.






Have you met dattaswami? You have  much in common.

I can't remember if it was here or on of the other absurd threads you started when I pointed out that when I worked security I talked to a video monitor with people at the door, i.e. present, a lot.  At my graduation from the University of Chicago, they had a large monitor for those in the back of the chapel (I"m told such things are used in concerts too, but I don't go to concerts) to see big what was happened (way) in front of them.  In some  counciling/therapy techniques, a person addresses/confronts another one in the room by talking to the other person's picture or an object that represents them (a doll for instance) PRECISELY because they experience the presence of the person in the room they are confronting. Such things can be multiplied, for those of us who live in the real world.

As for the flag analogy, Americans view things differently than most, and yes, they do view the U.S. flag as having a prototype (whether they say so or are even aware is not determinative: most people can't given a philsophical reasoning for any of their actions). Hence why they talk of "flag desecration," a particularly American idea.

With a gold coin, both the icon and the original (unlike a gold bond or bank note) are both present.  Hence "face value," because the one holding it exeperiences the presence of the prototype (i.e. the price of gold per ounce) no matter what denomination the coin comes in.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,380



« Reply #770 on: October 31, 2010, 09:47:39 AM »

Problem is, Alfred, the iconoclasts you revere so much showed their disapproval nor only by destroying the icons - but also those who venerated them.  Are those your heroes?

No, not at all. My heroes are in the Bible, but I will include Athanasius, an exception.

Even though he venerated icons?
Athanasius made clear he was repeating apostolic doctrine re the Holy Trinity, not inventing it.
And you are right: Pope St. Athanasius claimed only to teach the Apostolic Faith
Oh?  St. John of Damascus quotes Pope St. Athansius the Great in defense of the Holy Icons:
Quote
We, who are of the faithful, do not worship images as gods, as the heathens did, God forbid, but we mark our lovingdesire alone to see the face of the person represented in image. Hence, when it is obliterated, we are wont to throw the image as so much wood into the fire. Jacob, when he was about to die, worshipped on the point of Joseph's staff, not honouring the staff but its owner. Just in the same way do we greet images as we should embrace our children and parents to signify our affection. Thus the Jew, too, worshipped the tablets of the law, and the two golden cherubim in carved work, not because he honoured gold or stone for itself, but the Lord who had ordered them to be made.

I don't believe Athanasius said that, I can only find the text in John of Damascus.


Let's be honest: if you found it in Schaff's Athanasius, would it make a difference to you?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #771 on: October 31, 2010, 09:57:12 AM »

Orthodox statements affirm icons convey veneration to the prototype, or somehow veneration given to them passes to the prototype. Either way, one must conclude the prototype is not present, if he were, then no icon would be needed.

In the military, men and women are required to salute the flag to honor the country. This is still done when they are in this country. Saluting the flag does not necessarily mean that one is absent from the country. Also, marines stand at attention when they hear the Marines Hymn and the national anthem. This does not mean that cease to be marines or citizens of this country.

Unsound analogy, people don't say flags have prototypes, they aren't icons of the original. That is relevant to the point, if the Original isn't present, then an icon is used...therefore its use is PROOF the venerator doesn't experience the presence of the Prototype. If he did, he wouldn't use the icon.






Have you met dattaswami? You have  much in common.

I can't remember if it was here or on of the other absurd threads you started when I pointed out that when I worked security I talked to a video monitor with people at the door, i.e. present, a lot.  At my graduation from the University of Chicago, they had a large monitor for those in the back of the chapel (I"m told such things are used in concerts too, but I don't go to concerts) to see big what was happened (way) in front of them.  In some  counciling/therapy techniques, a person addresses/confronts another one in the room by talking to the other person's picture or an object that represents them (a doll for instance) PRECISELY because they experience the presence of the person in the room they are confronting. Such things can be multiplied, for those of us who live in the real world.

As for the flag analogy, Americans view things differently than most, and yes, they do view the U.S. flag as having a prototype (whether they say so or are even aware is not determinative: most people can't given a philsophical reasoning for any of their actions). Hence why they talk of "flag desecration," a particularly American idea.

With a gold coin, both the icon and the original (unlike a gold bond or bank note) are both present.  Hence "face value," because the one holding it exeperiences the presence of the prototype (i.e. the price of gold per ounce) no matter what denomination the coin comes in.

I couldn't find Athanasius saying what John of Damascus claimed, evidently neither could you, so you ignored my request.

Early Christians had  NOTHING to do with images in worship, that is why the early fathers and the NT don't mention them.

The Orthodox CLAIM to follow the consensus of the fathers, but there is No Ante-Nicene consensus about icons, they are hardly mentioned...except when discussing images among the Gnostics.


So you want to change the subject as this is too embarrassing to you.

First the obligatory Ad hominem, followed by nonsequiturs. I'll treat your non sequiturs.


A video monitor is not an icon struck from the original, analogy fail.

But in this sense they are the same, there would be no need for a video monitor if you were talking to people in the room. So also icons, early Christians didn't need them, Christ was present with them.

THEN you cite what nutty people do in therapy, as relevant to sound Christian practice.To make it even worse, some might wonder if they are nutty because of demonic activity...

A nation's flag is not an icon, the Orthodox condemn any thought their icons are symbols only, and not imaging the prototype. A flag is symbolic only,  it is not an image of the original, the analogy unsound, incompatible property relevant to the question renders them dissimilar.

A Gold coin represents nothing, its money in gold, money is not a prototype...your attempt to cite it as analogous is absurd, nutty...which leads to the question; did you cite what they do in therapy, via experience?


« Last Edit: October 31, 2010, 10:14:00 AM by Alfred Persson » Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #772 on: October 31, 2010, 10:10:34 AM »

Problem is, Alfred, the iconoclasts you revere so much showed their disapproval nor only by destroying the icons - but also those who venerated them.  Are those your heroes?

No, not at all. My heroes are in the Bible, but I will include Athanasius, an exception.

Even though he venerated icons?
Athanasius made clear he was repeating apostolic doctrine re the Holy Trinity, not inventing it.
And you are right: Pope St. Athanasius claimed only to teach the Apostolic Faith
Oh?  St. John of Damascus quotes Pope St. Athansius the Great in defense of the Holy Icons:
Quote
We, who are of the faithful, do not worship images as gods, as the heathens did, God forbid, but we mark our lovingdesire alone to see the face of the person represented in image. Hence, when it is obliterated, we are wont to throw the image as so much wood into the fire. Jacob, when he was about to die, worshipped on the point of Joseph's staff, not honouring the staff but its owner. Just in the same way do we greet images as we should embrace our children and parents to signify our affection. Thus the Jew, too, worshipped the tablets of the law, and the two golden cherubim in carved work, not because he honoured gold or stone for itself, but the Lord who had ordered them to be made.

I don't believe Athanasius said that, I can only find the text in John of Damascus.


Let's be honest: if you found it in Schaff's Athanasius, would it make a difference to you?

I am honest, you are not. If you found it in Schaff's, you would copy paste the reference here.

Then I could research what scholars say about the text, whether its reliably his or not.

Recall John of Damascus cites "Blessed Denis" who is Pseudo-Dionysius.

I don't believe the quote genuine, it seems out of character for Athanasius.
Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,528


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #773 on: October 31, 2010, 11:01:17 AM »

I couldn't find Athanasius saying what John of Damascus claimed, evidently neither could you, so you ignored my request.


Oh goodness gracious.  Early on after you first came here, you completely ignored a number of things I asked you.  That is why I eventually stopped dealing with you.  You are not interested in dialogue. 
Logged

Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #774 on: October 31, 2010, 11:07:27 AM »

I couldn't find Athanasius saying what John of Damascus claimed, evidently neither could you, so you ignored my request.


Oh goodness gracious.  Early on after you first came here, you completely ignored a number of things I asked you.  That is why I eventually stopped dealing with you.  You are not interested in dialogue. 

And your reply proved the Athanasius quote genuine, how?
Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
theistgal
Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic gadfly
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Follower of Jesus Christ
Jurisdiction: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 2,082


don't even go there!


« Reply #775 on: October 31, 2010, 11:36:32 AM »

Um, because multiple quotes from multiple Chrurch Fathers you claimed to agree with were posted showing their support for icons, which you then totally ignored?

Just a wild guess;D
Logged

"Sometimes, you just gotta say, 'OK, I still have nine live, two-headed animals' and move on.'' (owner of Coney Island freak show, upon learning he'd been outbid on a 5-legged puppy)
Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,528


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #776 on: October 31, 2010, 11:48:51 AM »

I couldn't find Athanasius saying what John of Damascus claimed, evidently neither could you, so you ignored my request.


Oh goodness gracious.  Early on after you first came here, you completely ignored a number of things I asked you.  That is why I eventually stopped dealing with you.  You are not interested in dialogue. 

And your reply proved the Athanasius quote genuine, how?

It was a pot calling the kettle black kind of thing.

Another couple of questions which I am sure you'll ignore:

Do you really think you are going to convert anyone over here?  In other words, do you really think you are going to turn others to your point of view?

A lot of people here came to Orthodoxy from various forms of Protestantism.  I, for example, attended a Presbyterian Sunday School as a kid.  We've all heard your stuff before and have found it unconvincing.

So why are you here?
Logged

Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,528


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #777 on: October 31, 2010, 11:59:38 AM »

I don't mean to get off topic, and it could be that this has already been mentioned, but the earliest apologetic for icons was written about a century before John of Damascus, by an Armenian priest named Vertanes of Kertogh.  You can find it here:

http://www.looys.net/essays.html

He wrote it as a response to a Gnostic group that was spreading its heresy back then.  They didn't believe Christ had a body, so they rejected icons and sacraments.

I guess the only reason I am bringing this up is to point out that the belief that icons are important to our faith is not just something that was made up by John of Damascus. 
Logged

biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 12,987


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #778 on: October 31, 2010, 12:35:28 PM »

Thank you for posting, Salpy. It looks to be very edifying.  angel
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #779 on: October 31, 2010, 02:25:44 PM »

Um, because multiple quotes from multiple Chrurch Fathers you claimed to agree with were posted showing their support for icons, which you then totally ignored?

Just a wild guess;D

Which Fathers, where, when?

John of Damascus thought "Blessed Denis" was Dionysius, when he was Pseudo-Dionysius.

How do we know he didn't quote a pseudo-Athanasius?

I want to see the scholarly discussion on that quote of his.
Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #780 on: October 31, 2010, 02:30:38 PM »

I couldn't find Athanasius saying what John of Damascus claimed, evidently neither could you, so you ignored my request.


Oh goodness gracious.  Early on after you first came here, you completely ignored a number of things I asked you.  That is why I eventually stopped dealing with you.  You are not interested in dialogue.  

And your reply proved the Athanasius quote genuine, how?

It was a pot calling the kettle black kind of thing.

Another couple of questions which I am sure you'll ignore:

Do you really think you are going to convert anyone over here?  In other words, do you really think you are going to turn others to your point of view?

A lot of people here came to Orthodoxy from various forms of Protestantism.  I, for example, attended a Presbyterian Sunday School as a kid.  We've all heard your stuff before and have found it unconvincing.

So why are you here?

Actually its you folks evading facts kind of thing. I am here asking to see the facts, not a pot kettle thing at all.

Yes, I do think some readers will research these things.

Of course they won't suggest that to you, they see the way you treat me, how much worse would you insult them?

Going to a Presbyterian Sunday school clearly didn't make you a Presbyterian, just as going to a garage didn't make me a car.

I doubt you understood what you heard as a Presbyterian, bet you never bothered to check anything out by the scripture. Cite the precise Presbyterian doctrines you discovered were wrong with your scripture proofs.

I've heard the "I was there and now I'm here" bs all my apologetic life, I have yet to meet someone who really checked with scripture before they jumped ship.

Not saying they don't exist, just never met one while posting at various boards.

« Last Edit: October 31, 2010, 02:32:05 PM by Alfred Persson » Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #781 on: October 31, 2010, 02:37:21 PM »

I don't mean to get off topic, and it could be that this has already been mentioned, but the earliest apologetic for icons was written about a century before John of Damascus, by an Armenian priest named Vertanes of Kertogh.  You can find it here:

http://www.looys.net/essays.html

He wrote it as a response to a Gnostic group that was spreading its heresy back then.  They didn't believe Christ had a body, so they rejected icons and sacraments.

I guess the only reason I am bringing this up is to point out that the belief that icons are important to our faith is not just something that was made up by John of Damascus. 

There are no First Second Third apologetic for icons because the Christian  church didn't use them. If they did, the Jews would have cited it as proof of idolatry and Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho the Jew would have had a few chapters on it.

But thanks for the link, I'll read it and post my refutation of its fallacies here. It will be fun. There will be truth.

Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
Rufus
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: leet


Nafpliotis with sunglasses and a cigar.


« Reply #782 on: October 31, 2010, 02:39:13 PM »

Actually its you folks evading facts kind of thing. I am here asking to see the facts, not a pot kettle thing at all.

Yes, I do think some readers will research these things.

Of course they won't suggest that to you, they see the way you treat me, how much worse would you insult them?

Going to a Presbyterian Sunday school clearly didn't make you a Presbyterian, just as going to a garage didn't make me a car.

I doubt you understood what you heard as a Presbyterian, bet you never bothered to check anything out by the scripture. Cite the precise Presbyterian doctrines you discovered were wrong with your scripture proofs.

I've heard the "I was there and now I'm here" bs all my apologetic life, I have yet to meet someone who really checked with scripture before they jumped ship.

Not saying they don't exist, just never met one while posting at various boards.

Alfred you've totally convinced me that God hates icons and that they are idol worship im becoming protestant immediately thx rufus
« Last Edit: October 31, 2010, 02:40:32 PM by Rufus » Logged
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #783 on: October 31, 2010, 02:40:17 PM »

Problem is, Alfred, the iconoclasts you revere so much showed their disapproval nor only by destroying the icons - but also those who venerated them.  Are those your heroes?

No, not at all. My heroes are in the Bible, but I will include Athanasius, an exception.

Even though he venerated icons?
Athanasius made clear he was repeating apostolic doctrine re the Holy Trinity, not inventing it.
And you are right: Pope St. Athanasius claimed only to teach the Apostolic Faith
Oh?  St. John of Damascus quotes Pope St. Athansius the Great in defense of the Holy Icons:
Quote
We, who are of the faithful, do not worship images as gods, as the heathens did, God forbid, but we mark our lovingdesire alone to see the face of the person represented in image. Hence, when it is obliterated, we are wont to throw the image as so much wood into the fire. Jacob, when he was about to die, worshipped on the point of Joseph's staff, not honouring the staff but its owner. Just in the same way do we greet images as we should embrace our children and parents to signify our affection. Thus the Jew, too, worshipped the tablets of the law, and the two golden cherubim in carved work, not because he honoured gold or stone for itself, but the Lord who had ordered them to be made.

I don't believe Athanasius said that, I can only find the text in John of Damascus.


Let's be honest: if you found it in Schaff's Athanasius, would it make a difference to you?

WHAT? You haven't cited Schaff's yet, proving Athanasius said what John of Damascus claims?

What's the hold up?

What could possibly prevent you from making me look foolish?

Hmmm.
Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #784 on: October 31, 2010, 02:46:35 PM »

Actually its you folks evading facts kind of thing. I am here asking to see the facts, not a pot kettle thing at all.

Yes, I do think some readers will research these things.

Of course they won't suggest that to you, they see the way you treat me, how much worse would you insult them?

Going to a Presbyterian Sunday school clearly didn't make you a Presbyterian, just as going to a garage didn't make me a car.

I doubt you understood what you heard as a Presbyterian, bet you never bothered to check anything out by the scripture. Cite the precise Presbyterian doctrines you discovered were wrong with your scripture proofs.

I've heard the "I was there and now I'm here" bs all my apologetic life, I have yet to meet someone who really checked with scripture before they jumped ship.

Not saying they don't exist, just never met one while posting at various boards.

Alfred you've totally convinced me that God hates icons and that they are idol worship im becoming protestant immediately thx rufus

God hates any kind of image of Him because of what they do, defile users in His presence, making any communion impossible.

They misrepresent the transcendent God, as a finite image that looks nothing at all like Him:

 20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
 21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
 23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
 (Rom 1:20-23 KJV)
« Last Edit: October 31, 2010, 02:47:28 PM by Alfred Persson » Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
Rufus
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: leet


Nafpliotis with sunglasses and a cigar.


« Reply #785 on: October 31, 2010, 02:54:51 PM »

They misrepresent the transcendent God, as a finite image that looks nothing at all like Him:

What about the immanent Son of God?
Logged
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #786 on: October 31, 2010, 03:32:42 PM »

They misrepresent the transcendent God, as a finite image that looks nothing at all like Him:

What about the immanent Son of God?

A question is not an argument...if you want to build on that, an argument, I'll not do it for you.
Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
Rufus
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: leet


Nafpliotis with sunglasses and a cigar.


« Reply #787 on: October 31, 2010, 03:37:11 PM »

They misrepresent the transcendent God, as a finite image that looks nothing at all like Him:

What about the immanent Son of God?

A question is not an argument...if you want to build on that, an argument, I'll not do it for you.

God is transcendent, but the Son is simultaneously immanent, both limited and unlimited. You can take a photograph of Him. You can chat with Him on the road. You can draw a picture of Him. A perfect picture? No, but you can't write a perfect Bible translation, or say a perfect prayer, so the possibility of imperfection in an icon does not disqualify it.
« Last Edit: October 31, 2010, 03:37:52 PM by Rufus » Logged
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #788 on: October 31, 2010, 03:56:17 PM »

They misrepresent the transcendent God, as a finite image that looks nothing at all like Him:

What about the immanent Son of God?

A question is not an argument...if you want to build on that, an argument, I'll not do it for you.

God is transcendent, but the Son is simultaneously immanent, both limited and unlimited. You can take a photograph of Him. You can chat with Him on the road. You can draw a picture of Him. A perfect picture? No, but you can't write a perfect Bible translation, or say a perfect prayer, so the possibility of imperfection in an icon does not disqualify it.

Moses didn't make an icon of God even though He saw His immanent nature:

LXE  Exodus 33:23 And I will remove my hand, and then shalt thou see my back parts; but my face shall not appear to thee. (Exo 33:23 LXE)

KJV  Numbers 12:8 With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not in dark speeches; and the similitude of the LORD shall he behold: wherefore then were ye not afraid to speak against my servant Moses? (Num 12:8 KJV)

or Abraham:

 2 And he lift up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood by him: and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed himself toward the ground...

 13 And the LORD (YHWH)said unto Abraham, Wherefore did Sarah laugh, saying, Shall I of a surety bear a child, which am old?
 14 Is any thing too hard for the LORD(YHWH)? At the time appointed I will return unto thee, according to the time of life, and Sarah shall have a son.
 (Gen 18:2, 13-14 KJV)

Or Isaiah:

 5 Then said I, Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD(YHWH) of hosts. (Isa 6:5 KJV)

NKJ  John 12:41 These things Isaiah said when he saw His glory and spoke of Him. (Joh 12:41 NKJ)

None of these, who saw immanent God, made icons of Him. Why? Deut 4:12ff forbade ANY KIND OF ICON, that's why:

LXE  Deuteronomy 4:16 lest ye transgress, and make to yourselves a carved image, any kind of figure (πᾶσαν εἰκόνα), the likeness of male or female, (Deu 4:16
LXE)

Furthermore, the text expressly forbids making an icon of God in the likeness of male or female...

Therefore, as Jesus is God, all who make icons of Him are thereby denying His flesh was human.
« Last Edit: October 31, 2010, 03:58:44 PM by Alfred Persson » Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,839


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #789 on: October 31, 2010, 03:58:57 PM »

I couldn't find Athanasius saying what John of Damascus claimed, evidently neither could you, so you ignored my request.


Oh goodness gracious.  Early on after you first came here, you completely ignored a number of things I asked you.  That is why I eventually stopped dealing with you.  You are not interested in dialogue.  

And your reply proved the Athanasius quote genuine, how?

It was a pot calling the kettle black kind of thing.

Another couple of questions which I am sure you'll ignore:

Do you really think you are going to convert anyone over here?  In other words, do you really think you are going to turn others to your point of view?

A lot of people here came to Orthodoxy from various forms of Protestantism.  I, for example, attended a Presbyterian Sunday School as a kid.  We've all heard your stuff before and have found it unconvincing.

So why are you here?

Actually its you folks evading facts kind of thing. I am here asking to see the facts, not a pot kettle thing at all.

Yes, I do think some readers will research these things.

Of course they won't suggest that to you, they see the way you treat me, how much worse would you insult them?

Going to a Presbyterian Sunday school clearly didn't make you a Presbyterian, just as going to a garage didn't make me a car.

I doubt you understood what you heard as a Presbyterian, bet you never bothered to check anything out by the scripture. Cite the precise Presbyterian doctrines you discovered were wrong with your scripture proofs.

I've heard the "I was there and now I'm here" bs all my apologetic life, I have yet to meet someone who really checked with scripture before they jumped ship.

Not saying they don't exist, just never met one while posting at various boards.
Well, you met me. I checked the Scriptures to verify what the Orthodox Church says about herself. I even argued from Scripture with a Fundamentlist why his view of Scripture was wrong. I learned very quickly from that experience that, whether I win or lose the argument, just getting into such arguments is generally not wise, which explains my reticence to argue with you.
« Last Edit: October 31, 2010, 04:05:21 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
FormerReformer
Convertodox of the convertodox
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Online Online

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: I'll take (e) for "all of the above"
Posts: 2,404



WWW
« Reply #790 on: October 31, 2010, 04:17:27 PM »

I couldn't find Athanasius saying what John of Damascus claimed, evidently neither could you, so you ignored my request.


Oh goodness gracious.  Early on after you first came here, you completely ignored a number of things I asked you.  That is why I eventually stopped dealing with you.  You are not interested in dialogue.  

And your reply proved the Athanasius quote genuine, how?

It was a pot calling the kettle black kind of thing.

Another couple of questions which I am sure you'll ignore:

Do you really think you are going to convert anyone over here?  In other words, do you really think you are going to turn others to your point of view?

A lot of people here came to Orthodoxy from various forms of Protestantism.  I, for example, attended a Presbyterian Sunday School as a kid.  We've all heard your stuff before and have found it unconvincing.

So why are you here?

Actually its you folks evading facts kind of thing. I am here asking to see the facts, not a pot kettle thing at all.

Yes, I do think some readers will research these things.

Of course they won't suggest that to you, they see the way you treat me, how much worse would you insult them?

Going to a Presbyterian Sunday school clearly didn't make you a Presbyterian, just as going to a garage didn't make me a car.

I doubt you understood what you heard as a Presbyterian, bet you never bothered to check anything out by the scripture. Cite the precise Presbyterian doctrines you discovered were wrong with your scripture proofs.

I've heard the "I was there and now I'm here" bs all my apologetic life, I have yet to meet someone who really checked with scripture before they jumped ship.

Not saying they don't exist, just never met one while posting at various boards.



Mr Persson, plenty here not only checked with Scripture before they jumped ship, lives steeped in Scripture caused them to jump ship.  We've given you plenty of arguments from Scripture in favor of icons, you've rejected them all (not successfully argued against, just rejected).  Which is fine, no one says you have to accept our arguments, any more than we have to accept yours.

Speaking as a former Baptist I can give you three reasons from Scripture I left my former tradition, and a fourth reason (regarding icons) that was just plain "does not compute":

1) Grape juice and crackers.  That's all I have to say on that subject.  Grape juice and crackers.  What are we, five?  I read book after book as to why Southern Baptists believe "grape juice" is what was meant whenever wine was mentioned in a positive light, and they all fell before the words of the master of the feast: “Every man at the beginning sets out the good wine, and when the guests have well drunk, then the inferior. You have kept the good wine until now!” (John 2:10)  I've had grape juice and I've had wine.  I've had good wine and bad wine.  No matter how much grape juice I've had, I can always tell concentrate from fresh pressed.  Only when I've had a lot of good wine could I be fooled by bad wine.

2) The Real Presence.  Hammered into me from the time I was little was the world is only 6,000 years old and was created in 6 days because that's what Genesis says.  When our Lord says "This is My Body, this is My Blood" the literal interpretation is suddenly thrown out the window, because there's no way He could have possibly meant that!

3) Pre-Trib Rapture theory.  At no point in any of the prophecies regarding End Times is there any hint that Christians have a "get out of Tribulation Free" card.  In the intervening decade, of course, there is much in the popular Baptist eschatology I have issues with, but this was the one that got me thinking.

4) Iconoclasm- does not compute.  Using the same Old Testament proof-texts as you, I was constantly told how Roman Catholics and the Orthodox were wrong because of their use of icons.  At the same time, every church I went to had a cross behind the pulpit, and many of them had stain-glass windows and frescoes of Biblical scenes.  Now, the 2nd commandment and Deuteronomy 4:15-24 forbid any image but images abounded, in the windows, painted on the walls, in our Sunday School books, in our Bibles, in our homes, etc.  If we are going to live by the Law then we must live by the whole of the Law (James 2:10), if by Grace then we need to acknowledge that our icons are indeed worthy of veneration by the very nature of that which they present for view.  If by the Law, then no images, not even photographs of loved ones are permissible.  
Logged

"Funny," said Lancelot, "how the people who can't pray say that prayers are not answered, however much the people who can pray say they are."  TH White

Oh, no: I've succumbed to Hyperdoxy!
genesisone
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antioch
Posts: 2,475



« Reply #791 on: October 31, 2010, 05:11:39 PM »


I've heard the "I was there and now I'm here" bs all my apologetic life, I have yet to meet someone who really checked with scripture before they jumped ship.

Not saying they don't exist, just never met one while posting at various boards.
I described the basics of my move to Orthodoxy way back in one of these discussions. I remember that you made a very encouraging comment.

After fifty+ years in one denomination, including two years at a Bible college and three years on the mission field where, amongst other things, I taught young pastors-to-be Bible studies (I remember leading them through a study in Ephesians) as well as church history (as usual in Protestantism, the first fifteen centuries are summed up in fifteen minutes) and church doctrine. Led more Sunday School classes and Bible studies here at home than I could count. (Just as a side point, I should clarify that our pastoral training school was in no way equivalent to what we know as a seminary - many of those fine young men studying to be pastors had the equivalent of only a sixth grade education; we really had to teach the basics.)

One of the things that I noticed right away in Orthodoxy was the extensive use of Scripture in the services. I wasn't spending an hour and half singing songs of dubious value and listening to a pastor's thoughts punctuated by occasional quotes (i.e. proof-texting) from Scripture. In Orthodox services, the Scriptures speak for themselves, both when read specifically as such, or when used in our prayers and hymns.

Yes, at first some things troubled me, but I knew that I had to be patient and work through those things. Scripture was always part of my life and always at hand during my conversion process.
Logged
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #792 on: October 31, 2010, 05:23:35 PM »

I couldn't find Athanasius saying what John of Damascus claimed, evidently neither could you, so you ignored my request.


Oh goodness gracious.  Early on after you first came here, you completely ignored a number of things I asked you.  That is why I eventually stopped dealing with you.  You are not interested in dialogue.  

And your reply proved the Athanasius quote genuine, how?

It was a pot calling the kettle black kind of thing.

Another couple of questions which I am sure you'll ignore:

Do you really think you are going to convert anyone over here?  In other words, do you really think you are going to turn others to your point of view?

A lot of people here came to Orthodoxy from various forms of Protestantism.  I, for example, attended a Presbyterian Sunday School as a kid.  We've all heard your stuff before and have found it unconvincing.

So why are you here?

Actually its you folks evading facts kind of thing. I am here asking to see the facts, not a pot kettle thing at all.

Yes, I do think some readers will research these things.

Of course they won't suggest that to you, they see the way you treat me, how much worse would you insult them?

Going to a Presbyterian Sunday school clearly didn't make you a Presbyterian, just as going to a garage didn't make me a car.

I doubt you understood what you heard as a Presbyterian, bet you never bothered to check anything out by the scripture. Cite the precise Presbyterian doctrines you discovered were wrong with your scripture proofs.

I've heard the "I was there and now I'm here" bs all my apologetic life, I have yet to meet someone who really checked with scripture before they jumped ship.

Not saying they don't exist, just never met one while posting at various boards.
Well, you met me. I checked the Scriptures to verify what the Orthodox Church says about herself. I even argued from Scripture with a Fundamentlist why his view of Scripture was wrong. I learned very quickly from that experience that, whether I win or lose the argument, just getting into such arguments is generally not wise, which explains my reticence to argue with you.

Why  not reproduce the gist of that argument here, for my comment. Thanks.
Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
chrevbel
Site Supporter
High Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 708



« Reply #793 on: October 31, 2010, 05:33:13 PM »

I've heard the "I was there and now I'm here" bs all my apologetic life,...
The fact that you characterize this comment as BS speaks volumes.
Logged
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 12,987


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #794 on: October 31, 2010, 05:49:18 PM »

I wonder if Alfred knows that he is an icon of God, and so am I, and so are you.


Genesis 1:26
Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

(bold added)

 
Does your driver's license have a picture of you on it? Does that frighten you?

Do you get scared when you go into an art museum and look at the portraits?

Would you be scared if you saw Jesus in person? He was the image of God.


Hebrews 1

 1 God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, 2 has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds; 3 who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, 4 having become so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

(bold added)


Somehow, other portraits and photos are okay, but if a person stops for a few seconds to kiss one and say a prayer in front of it, suddenly that becomes a problem? When all that prayer went on in front of the Ark of the Covenant? It's not as if kissing an icon is an all-day, complicated mess where we sacrifice a goat or something. Not even close. There is not an Orthodox (or, for that matter, Catholic, Anglican or Lutheran) person alive who thinks that's what they're for. Talk to a person. Visit a church and see what they do with these things. You'll see the difference.

What do you think when a person in the military keeps a little picture of a loved one from home, and takes out the picture and kisses it, then puts it back? (Perhaps says a prayer that God will keep them safe?) Isn't this an acceptable use of it? If you don't believe in icons, you very quickly wind up in the spiritual quandary which prohibits all images of anything because you are afraid to lose your soul- very Native American or Muslim. And simply not true.

You can put your head in the ground all you want. It won't change a thing.
« Last Edit: October 31, 2010, 05:51:09 PM by biro » Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,380



« Reply #795 on: October 31, 2010, 05:53:55 PM »

Problem is, Alfred, the iconoclasts you revere so much showed their disapproval nor only by destroying the icons - but also those who venerated them.  Are those your heroes?

No, not at all. My heroes are in the Bible, but I will include Athanasius, an exception.

Even though he venerated icons?
Athanasius made clear he was repeating apostolic doctrine re the Holy Trinity, not inventing it.
And you are right: Pope St. Athanasius claimed only to teach the Apostolic Faith
Oh?  St. John of Damascus quotes Pope St. Athansius the Great in defense of the Holy Icons:
Quote
We, who are of the faithful, do not worship images as gods, as the heathens did, God forbid, but we mark our lovingdesire alone to see the face of the person represented in image. Hence, when it is obliterated, we are wont to throw the image as so much wood into the fire. Jacob, when he was about to die, worshipped on the point of Joseph's staff, not honouring the staff but its owner. Just in the same way do we greet images as we should embrace our children and parents to signify our affection. Thus the Jew, too, worshipped the tablets of the law, and the two golden cherubim in carved work, not because he honoured gold or stone for itself, but the Lord who had ordered them to be made.

I don't believe Athanasius said that, I can only find the text in John of Damascus.


Let's be honest: if you found it in Schaff's Athanasius, would it make a difference to you?

WHAT? You haven't cited Schaff's yet, proving Athanasius said what John of Damascus claims?

You are evading answering the question. Again.

Quote
What's the hold up?

What could possibly prevent you from making me look foolish?

The decision that since you do that so well, to just sit back and watch you do it.

Quote
Hmmm.

Scripture and Schaff have been cited to you plenty, not that that has ever meant anything to you.  The readers can see and decide.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #796 on: October 31, 2010, 05:54:21 PM »

I couldn't find Athanasius saying what John of Damascus claimed, evidently neither could you, so you ignored my request.


Oh goodness gracious.  Early on after you first came here, you completely ignored a number of things I asked you.  That is why I eventually stopped dealing with you.  You are not interested in dialogue.  

And your reply proved the Athanasius quote genuine, how?

It was a pot calling the kettle black kind of thing.

Another couple of questions which I am sure you'll ignore:

Do you really think you are going to convert anyone over here?  In other words, do you really think you are going to turn others to your point of view?

A lot of people here came to Orthodoxy from various forms of Protestantism.  I, for example, attended a Presbyterian Sunday School as a kid.  We've all heard your stuff before and have found it unconvincing.

So why are you here?

Actually its you folks evading facts kind of thing. I am here asking to see the facts, not a pot kettle thing at all.

Yes, I do think some readers will research these things.

Of course they won't suggest that to you, they see the way you treat me, how much worse would you insult them?

Going to a Presbyterian Sunday school clearly didn't make you a Presbyterian, just as going to a garage didn't make me a car.

I doubt you understood what you heard as a Presbyterian, bet you never bothered to check anything out by the scripture. Cite the precise Presbyterian doctrines you discovered were wrong with your scripture proofs.

I've heard the "I was there and now I'm here" bs all my apologetic life, I have yet to meet someone who really checked with scripture before they jumped ship.

Not saying they don't exist, just never met one while posting at various boards.



Mr Persson, plenty here not only checked with Scripture before they jumped ship, lives steeped in Scripture caused them to jump ship.  We've given you plenty of arguments from Scripture in favor of icons, you've rejected them all (not successfully argued against, just rejected).  Which is fine, no one says you have to accept our arguments, any more than we have to accept yours.

Speaking as a former Baptist I can give you three reasons from Scripture I left my former tradition, and a fourth reason (regarding icons) that was just plain "does not compute":

1) Grape juice and crackers.  That's all I have to say on that subject.  Grape juice and crackers.  What are we, five?  I read book after book as to why Southern Baptists believe "grape juice" is what was meant whenever wine was mentioned in a positive light, and they all fell before the words of the master of the feast: “Every man at the beginning sets out the good wine, and when the guests have well drunk, then the inferior. You have kept the good wine until now!” (John 2:10)  I've had grape juice and I've had wine.  I've had good wine and bad wine.  No matter how much grape juice I've had, I can always tell concentrate from fresh pressed.  Only when I've had a lot of good wine could I be fooled by bad wine.

2) The Real Presence.  Hammered into me from the time I was little was the world is only 6,000 years old and was created in 6 days because that's what Genesis says.  When our Lord says "This is My Body, this is My Blood" the literal interpretation is suddenly thrown out the window, because there's no way He could have possibly meant that!

3) Pre-Trib Rapture theory.  At no point in any of the prophecies regarding End Times is there any hint that Christians have a "get out of Tribulation Free" card.  In the intervening decade, of course, there is much in the popular Baptist eschatology I have issues with, but this was the one that got me thinking.

4) Iconoclasm- does not compute.  Using the same Old Testament proof-texts as you, I was constantly told how Roman Catholics and the Orthodox were wrong because of their use of icons.  At the same time, every church I went to had a cross behind the pulpit, and many of them had stain-glass windows and frescoes of Biblical scenes.  Now, the 2nd commandment and Deuteronomy 4:15-24 forbid any image but images abounded, in the windows, painted on the walls, in our Sunday School books, in our Bibles, in our homes, etc.  If we are going to live by the Law then we must live by the whole of the Law (James 2:10), if by Grace then we need to acknowledge that our icons are indeed worthy of veneration by the very nature of that which they present for view.  If by the Law, then no images, not even photographs of loved ones are permissible.  

1)Yes, its wrong. I wonder if the Prohibition forced it on some, they still had to celebrate communion during it. So you left a grape juice communion to bow before images. I fail to see the connection. Clearly you left a lot out. Connect the dots please...From grape juice...To icons...I just don't see it.


2) 20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you. (Luk 22:20 KJV)

Christ's words are figurative, there was no literal New Testament floating around in his blood, nor did it exist as Christ spoke. The New Covenant would not exist till AFTER Christ's blood was shed, therefore it is impossible He spoke literally.



3)Many Protestants reject Pre Trib rapture theory, as do I. BUT YOU jump to a church that denies the consensus of the Fathers Christ will reign a 1,000 years! Papias, Justin Martyr, Theophilus, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Caius according to Eusebius, Origin, Commodianus, Nepos accorinding to Dionysius of Alexandria, Victorinus, Methodius, Lactantius to name a few believed in the Millennial reign of Christ.

So by what law of logic do you leap from the few Protestant Churches who believe in Pre Trib Rapture, to a church that denies the Millennial Kingdom of Christ, an explicit teaching of Scripture?

NKJ  Revelation 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was committed to them. Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for the word of God, who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received his mark on their foreheads or on their hands. And they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.
 (Rev 20:4 NKJ)...

4 And I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was committed to them. Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for the word of God, who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received his mark on their foreheads or on their hands. And they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.
 5 But the rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
 6 Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years.
 7 Now when the thousand years have expired, Satan will be released from his prison
 8 and will go out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle, whose number is as the sand of the sea.

Clearly you have left something out, one doesn't leave a church because of a doctrinal error, for another church that teaches doctrinal error. You must connect the dots for me, From Error....To Error, how that is better or something God would want you to do?

4)The "Council in Constantinople" had hundreds of bishops who believed as I, clearly its not a new opinion.
"Leo III's policy suffered from having no theoretical foundation in theology. To eliminate this handicap, his successor Emperor Constantine V Copronymos sought to have images condemned by the Church and to impose iconoclasm as a duty of conscience as well as the obligation of a citizen. About 752 he elaborated an original theology of images, which he developed into treatises and which he -- like his father -- defended in public audiences. Two years later he had it ratified in a general council of the Byzantine episcopate (338 council fathers attending) held in the suburban palace of Hiereia from February 10 to August 8, its prime ecclesiastical movers being three prelates of Asia Minor, especially the Metropolitan Theodosius Apsimar of Ephesus (the patriarchal see being vacant)." (New Catholic Encyclopedia [1967], volume 7, p 327)

Throughout this thread I have given arguments why icons are a violation of Deut 4:12 ff, and not one of you have refuted the simple fact God forbade any kind of icon be made of God, and as Jesus is God, that includes Him, especially ICONS in the likeness of human flesh:

16 lest ye transgress, and make to yourselves a carved image, any kind of EIKONA figure, the likeness of male or female,
 (Deu 4:15-16 LXE)

All who make icons of Jesus thereby deny 1)He is God; 2)He came in human flesh.

John of Damascus' argument we saw the incarnate Christ therefore we can make an icon of it, is directly contradicted by the fact Abraham, Moses, and Isaiah saw the similitude of God, and yet do not make images of it:

Moses didn't make an icon of God even though He saw His immanent nature:

LXE  Exodus 33:23 And I will remove my hand, and then shalt thou see my back parts; but my face shall not appear to thee. (Exo 33:23 LXE)

KJV  Numbers 12:8 With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not in dark speeches; and the similitude of the LORD shall he behold: wherefore then were ye not afraid to speak against my servant Moses? (Num 12:8 KJV)

or Abraham:

 2 And he lift up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood by him: and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed himself toward the ground...

 13 And the LORD (YHWH)said unto Abraham, Wherefore did Sarah laugh, saying, Shall I of a surety bear a child, which am old?
 14 Is any thing too hard for the LORD(YHWH)? At the time appointed I will return unto thee, according to the time of life, and Sarah shall have a son.
 (Gen 18:2, 13-14 KJV)

Or Isaiah:

 5 Then said I, Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD(YHWH) of hosts. (Isa 6:5 KJV)

NKJ  John 12:41 These things Isaiah said when he saw His glory and spoke of Him. (Joh 12:41 NKJ)


Clearly you have left something out in your story why you became Orthodox, it cannot be Scripture gave you the idea.

If one had only the New Testament to read, and then appeared in this world suddenly, if asked to describe what a New Testament Church looked like, he certainly would NOT describe an Orthodox service.
« Last Edit: October 31, 2010, 06:14:12 PM by Alfred Persson » Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,380



« Reply #797 on: October 31, 2010, 06:02:18 PM »

Problem is, Alfred, the iconoclasts you revere so much showed their disapproval nor only by destroying the icons - but also those who venerated them.  Are those your heroes?

No, not at all. My heroes are in the Bible, but I will include Athanasius, an exception.

Even though he venerated icons?
Athanasius made clear he was repeating apostolic doctrine re the Holy Trinity, not inventing it.
And you are right: Pope St. Athanasius claimed only to teach the Apostolic Faith
Oh?  St. John of Damascus quotes Pope St. Athansius the Great in defense of the Holy Icons:
Quote
We, who are of the faithful, do not worship images as gods, as the heathens did, God forbid, but we mark our lovingdesire alone to see the face of the person represented in image. Hence, when it is obliterated, we are wont to throw the image as so much wood into the fire. Jacob, when he was about to die, worshipped on the point of Joseph's staff, not honouring the staff but its owner. Just in the same way do we greet images as we should embrace our children and parents to signify our affection. Thus the Jew, too, worshipped the tablets of the law, and the two golden cherubim in carved work, not because he honoured gold or stone for itself, but the Lord who had ordered them to be made.

I don't believe Athanasius said that, I can only find the text in John of Damascus.


Let's be honest: if you found it in Schaff's Athanasius, would it make a difference to you?

I am honest, you are not. If you found it in Schaff's, you would copy paste the reference here.

No,  I wouldn't. You have ever changed the subject when proved wrong. I'm not doing your homework for you.

Quote
Then I could research what scholars say about the text, whether its reliably his or not.

You've proved yourself quite incapable of that.

Quote
Recall John of Damascus cites "Blessed Denis" who is Pseudo-Dionysius.

Yes, and? He and I also cites the use of the term icon in the Scriptures.  You have yet to handle that.

Quote
I don't believe the quote genuine, it seems out of character for Athanasius.
LOL. As if you knew Pope St. Ahtanasius....

The scriptural quotes are real enough.  But speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which you, unlearned and unstable, wrest, as you do also the other scriptures, unto your own destruction.  We therefore seeing we know these things before, beware lest we also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from our own stedfastness, as St. Peter says.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #798 on: October 31, 2010, 06:05:57 PM »

Problem is, Alfred, the iconoclasts you revere so much showed their disapproval nor only by destroying the icons - but also those who venerated them.  Are those your heroes?

No, not at all. My heroes are in the Bible, but I will include Athanasius, an exception.

Even though he venerated icons?
Athanasius made clear he was repeating apostolic doctrine re the Holy Trinity, not inventing it.
And you are right: Pope St. Athanasius claimed only to teach the Apostolic Faith
Oh?  St. John of Damascus quotes Pope St. Athansius the Great in defense of the Holy Icons:
Quote
We, who are of the faithful, do not worship images as gods, as the heathens did, God forbid, but we mark our lovingdesire alone to see the face of the person represented in image. Hence, when it is obliterated, we are wont to throw the image as so much wood into the fire. Jacob, when he was about to die, worshipped on the point of Joseph's staff, not honouring the staff but its owner. Just in the same way do we greet images as we should embrace our children and parents to signify our affection. Thus the Jew, too, worshipped the tablets of the law, and the two golden cherubim in carved work, not because he honoured gold or stone for itself, but the Lord who had ordered them to be made.

I don't believe Athanasius said that, I can only find the text in John of Damascus.


Let's be honest: if you found it in Schaff's Athanasius, would it make a difference to you?

WHAT? You haven't cited Schaff's yet, proving Athanasius said what John of Damascus claims?

You are evading answering the question. Again.

Quote
What's the hold up?

What could possibly prevent you from making me look foolish?

The decision that since you do that so well, to just sit back and watch you do it.

Quote
Hmmm.

Scripture and Schaff have been cited to you plenty, not that that has ever meant anything to you.  The readers can see and decide.

Yes, they will decide you mentioned Schaff inadvisedly, foolishly. John of Damascus claims Athanasius' support, but I could not document that.

I like Athanasius, icons appear out of character with what I know about Him via His writings.

So I want proof he supported icon veneration, and YOU failed to provide that, after implying it existed.

I called your bluff, that is what readers can see and decide, you should fold...you only embarrass yourself by refusing to fold, you have nothing.

If we were in a Casino, the Dealer would have called Security long ago, to boot you out. You lost, your bluff was called.
« Last Edit: October 31, 2010, 06:07:11 PM by Alfred Persson » Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,528


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #799 on: October 31, 2010, 06:13:00 PM »


Yes, I do think some readers will research these things.

Is that your answer to my question asking why you are here?  You think we haven't already researched these things, especially since so many of us came from your tradition?

Quote

Of course they won't suggest that to you, they see the way you treat me, how much worse would you insult them?


Are you saying other people here won't suggest to me that I research what you have said because they are afraid of me?  Am I really that scary?  Have I really treated you that badly?  Can you show me an example of my insulting behavior toward you?

Quote
Going to a Presbyterian Sunday school clearly didn't make you a Presbyterian, just as going to a garage didn't make me a car.

I doubt you understood what you heard as a Presbyterian, bet you never bothered to check anything out by the scripture. Cite the precise Presbyterian doctrines you discovered were wrong with your scripture proofs.

I've heard the "I was there and now I'm here" bs all my apologetic life, I have yet to meet someone who really checked with scripture before they jumped ship.

Not saying they don't exist, just never met one while posting at various boards.


The Presbyterian Sunday School I went to was at my Dad's church and it was very nice.  The teachers were kind, loving people, and I have very fond memories of them.  We were very thoroughly taught the Bible and, when we were old enough, were given doses of Calvin's Commentaries and The Institutes.  So I have some concept of their beliefs. 

With regard to checking scripture before "jumping ship," I did that.  In the Sunday School classes we were always taught to not believe in anything unless it was in the Bible.  One day it occurred to me that the Reformation was not in the Bible.  There was no mention of John Calvin, John Knox, or even Martin Luther.  It just wasn't there.  So that, coupled with a desire for a deeper spirituality and a more scripture based form of worship, I began going to the Church that I knew from my mother's side of the family, which was the Armenian Orthodox Church.
Logged

Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,528


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #800 on: October 31, 2010, 06:14:55 PM »

Has anyone here been convinced yet that icons are bad?  Alfred has been here since August and has made over 800 posts.  Has he converted anyone yet?

It's OK to let us know.  We won't be mean to you.   Smiley
Logged

ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,380



« Reply #801 on: October 31, 2010, 06:16:49 PM »

Orthodox statements affirm icons convey veneration to the prototype, or somehow veneration given to them passes to the prototype. Either way, one must conclude the prototype is not present, if he were, then no icon would be needed.

In the military, men and women are required to salute the flag to honor the country. This is still done when they are in this country. Saluting the flag does not necessarily mean that one is absent from the country. Also, marines stand at attention when they hear the Marines Hymn and the national anthem. This does not mean that cease to be marines or citizens of this country.

Unsound analogy, people don't say flags have prototypes, they aren't icons of the original. That is relevant to the point, if the Original isn't present, then an icon is used...therefore its use is PROOF the venerator doesn't experience the presence of the Prototype. If he did, he wouldn't use the icon.






Have you met dattaswami? You have  much in common.

I can't remember if it was here or on of the other absurd threads you started when I pointed out that when I worked security I talked to a video monitor with people at the door, i.e. present, a lot.  At my graduation from the University of Chicago, they had a large monitor for those in the back of the chapel (I"m told such things are used in concerts too, but I don't go to concerts) to see big what was happened (way) in front of them.  In some  counciling/therapy techniques, a person addresses/confronts another one in the room by talking to the other person's picture or an object that represents them (a doll for instance) PRECISELY because they experience the presence of the person in the room they are confronting. Such things can be multiplied, for those of us who live in the real world.

As for the flag analogy, Americans view things differently than most, and yes, they do view the U.S. flag as having a prototype (whether they say so or are even aware is not determinative: most people can't given a philsophical reasoning for any of their actions). Hence why they talk of "flag desecration," a particularly American idea.

With a gold coin, both the icon and the original (unlike a gold bond or bank note) are both present.  Hence "face value," because the one holding it exeperiences the presence of the prototype (i.e. the price of gold per ounce) no matter what denomination the coin comes in.

I couldn't find Athanasius saying what John of Damascus claimed, evidently neither could you, so you ignored my request.

Early Christians had  NOTHING to do with images in worship, that is why the early fathers and the NT don't mention them.
that lie of yours has been exposed many times over, e.g.
I apologize.

Perhaps this then:

I've heard folks get irrational when you attack their idols, they respond to reasoned argument with reviling etc.

Is that true?

No, Alfred. Most of us try to be dispassionate and objective, using verifiable Orthodox tradition (scripture, the writings of the Fathers, the liturgical deposit of the Church, the resolutions of the Ecumenical Councils), as well as history.

There is nothing new under the sun. Iconoclasm is as old as Christianity itself,

Actually no. Although some cannot learn from the mistakes of others, Iconoclasm does not reach that far back as the Apostles.
Quote
and keeps reinventing itself in the form of Calvinist prohibitions of images,  the Jehovah's Witnesses insistence that Christ was executed on a vertical pole, not on a cross, etc etc - yet iconography survives and thrives to this day.
I did not see reasoned argument in that quote...only a claim.
Well, you ought to know.


Quote
I would truly enjoy a dispassionate objective, and verifiable Orthodox response, citing the scripture we both love dear, how you suppose it contradicts my argument.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dura-Europos#The_house_church

Quote
The Orthodox CLAIM to follow the consensus of the fathers, but there is No Ante-Nicene consensus about icons, they are hardly mentioned...except when discussing images among the Gnostics.

We have plenty of ante-nicene icons.  That they covered the catacombs shows our consensus.

Quote
So you want to change the subject as this is too embarrassing to you.

First the obligatory Ad hominem, followed by nonsequiturs. I'll treat your non sequiturs.

A video monitor is not an icon struck from the original, analogy fail.

But in this sense they are the same, there would be no need for a video monitor if you were talking to people in the room. So also icons, early Christians didn't need them, Christ was present with them.

THEN you cite what nutty people do in therapy, as relevant to sound Christian practice.To make it even worse, some might wonder if they are nutty because of demonic activity...

A nation's flag is not an icon, the Orthodox condemn any thought their icons are symbols only, and not imaging the prototype. A flag is symbolic only,  it is not an image of the original, the analogy unsound, incompatible property relevant to the question renders them dissimilar.

A Gold coin represents nothing, its money in gold, money is not a prototype...your attempt to cite it as analogous is absurd, nutty...which leads to the question; did you cite what they do in therapy, via experience?
\
Actually yes: I used to work in a psych hospital in the locked unit.  I know the unstable when I see him.

I'll let the reader test the gold from the fool's gold here.  Pure gold fears no fire.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,380



« Reply #802 on: October 31, 2010, 06:19:43 PM »

Has anyone here been convinced yet that icons are bad?  Alfred has been here since August and has made over 800 posts.  Has he converted anyone yet?

It's OK to let us know.  We won't be mean to you.   Smiley
I increased my appreciation for the wisdom of Proverbs 26:4.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #803 on: October 31, 2010, 06:22:24 PM »


Yes, I do think some readers will research these things.

Is that your answer to my question asking why you are here?  You think we haven't already researched these things, especially since so many of us came from your tradition?

Quote

Of course they won't suggest that to you, they see the way you treat me, how much worse would you insult them?


Are you saying other people here won't suggest to me that I research what you have said because they are afraid of me?  Am I really that scary?  Have I really treated you that badly?  Can you show me an example of my insulting behavior toward you?

Quote
Going to a Presbyterian Sunday school clearly didn't make you a Presbyterian, just as going to a garage didn't make me a car.

I doubt you understood what you heard as a Presbyterian, bet you never bothered to check anything out by the scripture. Cite the precise Presbyterian doctrines you discovered were wrong with your scripture proofs.

I've heard the "I was there and now I'm here" bs all my apologetic life, I have yet to meet someone who really checked with scripture before they jumped ship.

Not saying they don't exist, just never met one while posting at various boards.


The Presbyterian Sunday School I went to was at my Dad's church and it was very nice.  The teachers were kind, loving people, and I have very fond memories of them.  We were very thoroughly taught the Bible and, when we were old enough, were given doses of Calvin's Commentaries and The Institutes.  So I have some concept of their beliefs. 

With regard to checking scripture before "jumping ship," I did that.  In the Sunday School classes we were always taught to not believe in anything unless it was in the Bible.  One day it occurred to me that the Reformation was not in the Bible.  There was no mention of John Calvin, John Knox, or even Martin Luther.  It just wasn't there.  So that, coupled with a desire for a deeper spirituality and a more scripture based form of worship, I began going to the Church that I knew from my mother's side of the family, which was the Armenian Orthodox Church.

I knew it you weren't a real Presbyterian. None of them think like that, you  are making it up for my benefit. The latter part of your statement is probably true, you desired the ritual you saw in Armenian Church. Nothing wrong with that, but pretending you were a real Bible thumping Presbyterian is a misrepresentation. You went to a Presbyterian church a few times, just as I've been in a few garages, and you didn't become a Presbyterian, and I didn't become a car...THAT is the truth.




Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,380



« Reply #804 on: October 31, 2010, 06:22:42 PM »

Problem is, Alfred, the iconoclasts you revere so much showed their disapproval nor only by destroying the icons - but also those who venerated them.  Are those your heroes?

No, not at all. My heroes are in the Bible, but I will include Athanasius, an exception.

Even though he venerated icons?
Athanasius made clear he was repeating apostolic doctrine re the Holy Trinity, not inventing it.
And you are right: Pope St. Athanasius claimed only to teach the Apostolic Faith
Oh?  St. John of Damascus quotes Pope St. Athansius the Great in defense of the Holy Icons:
Quote
We, who are of the faithful, do not worship images as gods, as the heathens did, God forbid, but we mark our lovingdesire alone to see the face of the person represented in image. Hence, when it is obliterated, we are wont to throw the image as so much wood into the fire. Jacob, when he was about to die, worshipped on the point of Joseph's staff, not honouring the staff but its owner. Just in the same way do we greet images as we should embrace our children and parents to signify our affection. Thus the Jew, too, worshipped the tablets of the law, and the two golden cherubim in carved work, not because he honoured gold or stone for itself, but the Lord who had ordered them to be made.

I don't believe Athanasius said that, I can only find the text in John of Damascus.


Let's be honest: if you found it in Schaff's Athanasius, would it make a difference to you?

WHAT? You haven't cited Schaff's yet, proving Athanasius said what John of Damascus claims?

You are evading answering the question. Again.

Quote
What's the hold up?

What could possibly prevent you from making me look foolish?

The decision that since you do that so well, to just sit back and watch you do it.

Quote
Hmmm.

Scripture and Schaff have been cited to you plenty, not that that has ever meant anything to you.  The readers can see and decide.

Yes, they will decide you mentioned Schaff inadvisedly, foolishly. John of Damascus claims Athanasius' support, but I could not document that.

I like Athanasius, icons appear out of character with what I know about Him via His writings.

So I want proof he supported icon veneration, and YOU failed to provide that, after implying it existed.

I called your bluff, that is what readers can see and decide, you should fold...you only embarrass yourself by refusing to fold, you have nothing.

If we were in a Casino, the Dealer would have called Security long ago, to boot you out. You lost, your bluff was called.
I haven't seen you put your cards on the table, though I have noticed that you are not playing with a full deck.  I've seen no proof that you know anything of St. Athanasius. What do you know about him (lower case, btw, he's not God)? What have you read of his, except his, i.e. our, canon (he's the first to list the books of the NT as we have them, LOOONG after icons that have surved until today were produced).

Btw, yes, I did check everything out with Scripture before jumping ship off the Titanic.  Scripture wasn't proved wanting, only evangelical Protestantism.
« Last Edit: October 31, 2010, 06:26:13 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #805 on: October 31, 2010, 06:25:03 PM »

First the obligatory Ad hominem, followed by nonsequiturs. I'll treat your non sequiturs.

A video monitor is not an icon struck from the original, analogy fail.

But in this sense they are the same, there would be no need for a video monitor if you were talking to people in the room. So also icons, early Christians didn't need them, Christ was present with them.

THEN you cite what nutty people do in therapy, as relevant to sound Christian practice.To make it even worse, some might wonder if they are nutty because of demonic activity...

A nation's flag is not an icon, the Orthodox condemn any thought their icons are symbols only, and not imaging the prototype. A flag is symbolic only,  it is not an image of the original, the analogy unsound, incompatible property relevant to the question renders them dissimilar.

A Gold coin represents nothing, its money in gold, money is not a prototype...your attempt to cite it as analogous is absurd, nutty...which leads to the question; did you cite what they do in therapy, via experience?
\
Actually yes: I used to work in a psych hospital in the locked unit.  I know the unstable when I see him.

I'll let the reader test the gold from the fool's gold here.  Pure gold fears no fire.

I thought so.
Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,380



« Reply #806 on: October 31, 2010, 06:27:03 PM »

First the obligatory Ad hominem, followed by nonsequiturs. I'll treat your non sequiturs.

A video monitor is not an icon struck from the original, analogy fail.

But in this sense they are the same, there would be no need for a video monitor if you were talking to people in the room. So also icons, early Christians didn't need them, Christ was present with them.

THEN you cite what nutty people do in therapy, as relevant to sound Christian practice.To make it even worse, some might wonder if they are nutty because of demonic activity...

A nation's flag is not an icon, the Orthodox condemn any thought their icons are symbols only, and not imaging the prototype. A flag is symbolic only,  it is not an image of the original, the analogy unsound, incompatible property relevant to the question renders them dissimilar.

A Gold coin represents nothing, its money in gold, money is not a prototype...your attempt to cite it as analogous is absurd, nutty...which leads to the question; did you cite what they do in therapy, via experience?
\
Actually yes: I used to work in a psych hospital in the locked unit.  I know the unstable when I see him.

I'll let the reader test the gold from the fool's gold here.  Pure gold fears no fire.

I thought so.
That's the difference: I know so.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,380



« Reply #807 on: October 31, 2010, 06:29:06 PM »


Yes, I do think some readers will research these things.

Is that your answer to my question asking why you are here?  You think we haven't already researched these things, especially since so many of us came from your tradition?

Quote

Of course they won't suggest that to you, they see the way you treat me, how much worse would you insult them?


Are you saying other people here won't suggest to me that I research what you have said because they are afraid of me?  Am I really that scary?  Have I really treated you that badly?  Can you show me an example of my insulting behavior toward you?

Quote
Going to a Presbyterian Sunday school clearly didn't make you a Presbyterian, just as going to a garage didn't make me a car.

I doubt you understood what you heard as a Presbyterian, bet you never bothered to check anything out by the scripture. Cite the precise Presbyterian doctrines you discovered were wrong with your scripture proofs.

I've heard the "I was there and now I'm here" bs all my apologetic life, I have yet to meet someone who really checked with scripture before they jumped ship.

Not saying they don't exist, just never met one while posting at various boards.


The Presbyterian Sunday School I went to was at my Dad's church and it was very nice.  The teachers were kind, loving people, and I have very fond memories of them.  We were very thoroughly taught the Bible and, when we were old enough, were given doses of Calvin's Commentaries and The Institutes.  So I have some concept of their beliefs. 

With regard to checking scripture before "jumping ship," I did that.  In the Sunday School classes we were always taught to not believe in anything unless it was in the Bible.  One day it occurred to me that the Reformation was not in the Bible.  There was no mention of John Calvin, John Knox, or even Martin Luther.  It just wasn't there.  So that, coupled with a desire for a deeper spirituality and a more scripture based form of worship, I began going to the Church that I knew from my mother's side of the family, which was the Armenian Orthodox Church.

I knew it you weren't a real Presbyterian. None of them think like that, you  are making it up for my benefit. The latter part of your statement is probably true, you desired the ritual you saw in Armenian Church. Nothing wrong with that, but pretending you were a real Bible thumping Presbyterian is a misrepresentation. You went to a Presbyterian church a few times, just as I've been in a few garages, and you didn't become a Presbyterian, and I didn't become a car...THAT is the truth.
evidently you going past a few librairies and schools didn't make you learned either.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Alfred Persson
Jesus is LORD, God the Eternal Son
Moderated
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Protestant but no Filioque
Jurisdiction: usa
Posts: 1,207


Primitive Orthodox


« Reply #808 on: October 31, 2010, 06:35:41 PM »


I've heard the "I was there and now I'm here" bs all my apologetic life, I have yet to meet someone who really checked with scripture before they jumped ship.

Not saying they don't exist, just never met one while posting at various boards.
I described the basics of my move to Orthodoxy way back in one of these discussions. I remember that you made a very encouraging comment.

After fifty+ years in one denomination, including two years at a Bible college and three years on the mission field where, amongst other things, I taught young pastors-to-be Bible studies (I remember leading them through a study in Ephesians) as well as church history (as usual in Protestantism, the first fifteen centuries are summed up in fifteen minutes) and church doctrine. Led more Sunday School classes and Bible studies here at home than I could count. (Just as a side point, I should clarify that our pastoral training school was in no way equivalent to what we know as a seminary - many of those fine young men studying to be pastors had the equivalent of only a sixth grade education; we really had to teach the basics.)

One of the things that I noticed right away in Orthodoxy was the extensive use of Scripture in the services. I wasn't spending an hour and half singing songs of dubious value and listening to a pastor's thoughts punctuated by occasional quotes (i.e. proof-texting) from Scripture. In Orthodox services, the Scriptures speak for themselves, both when read specifically as such, or when used in our prayers and hymns.

Yes, at first some things troubled me, but I knew that I had to be patient and work through those things. Scripture was always part of my life and always at hand during my conversion process.

Among all the responders here, you impress me the most with your sincerity.

I agree some songs are a waste of time, there's only a few I like, and all taken verbatim from scripture.

But you have been cagey...saying Orthodoxy must be understood in the context of mysticism...not logic...which of course leaves me unable to respond...I can only refute a precise claim...if none is made, I am disarmed.

Perhaps you are clever enough to know that...

I am not suggesting you are purposely saying this...I am convinced you are sincere, both in your beliefs and statements, and I commend that.

I can agree to disagree with you, agreeably.

I do not say there aren't Christians who are Orthodox. Christians are everywhere, in every part of the body of Christ, all that confess Nicene Trinitarianism (1 Cor 3:10-15; 12:5ff).

If pressed, I would guess everyone posting here are Christians or of the elect of God, even those who adamantly disagree with me. I trust Jesus will  sort us all out. Don't tell my brethren that, they'll think I'm going soft. But I think I'm being scriptural, seeing more of God's plan more clearly than before.

Think. Would a child of the Devil spend time on this board talking about religion, when there is so much evil and sin to do?  I don't think so...only Christians, or unconverted elect, would do that.

Don't worry, I don't expect the favor will be returned to me. That was not a reason for this statement at all.



When I was in the Middle East, I didn't quibble if someone were Catholic, or Copt, we were all in the same fox hole, figuratively speaking (I've never been in the military.) Bos'n in the Merchant Marine, but that isn't military.
« Last Edit: October 31, 2010, 06:56:28 PM by Alfred Persson » Logged

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. (Rom 1:18-19 NKJ)
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,839


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #809 on: October 31, 2010, 06:42:32 PM »

If we were in a Casino, the Dealer would have called Security long ago, to boot you out. You lost, your bluff was called.
The problem, Alfred, is that you're in OUR "casino".
« Last Edit: October 31, 2010, 06:46:10 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
Tags: icons Perssonism sola scriptura this again cheval mort utter futility circular reasoning doesn't give up 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 »   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.241 seconds with 71 queries.