OrthodoxChristianity.net
November 26, 2014, 05:07:13 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 40910 times) Average Rating: 5
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
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 #360 on: August 07, 2010, 12:41:17 PM »

This may be a silly question, but here goes:  if no one responds to the OP's satisfaction, what's the worst that could happen?

In other words, why bother with this at all?  He doesn't really seem interested in a serious discussion.

If this was CAF, his posts could be scrubbed clean, where they may never lead others astray, besides polluting the internet.  But since OC.net doesn't do that sort a thing (a policy I support. Pure gold fears no fire), a word or too is appropriate.  He seems to have run out of his repetoire.

Eight pages and four days later, he hasn't run out of his repetoire, and the Internet is still polluted.

I think I'll quit now, go outside, do some gardening, and prepare for Vespers.

What say the rest of you?   Cool

While you are gardening, remember, God never said He wanted to be imaged, He did say He didn't.

Then consider if you are following His desires.

Have a nice day.
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)
antiderivative
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Northeastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: A jurisdiction
Posts: 349


« Reply #361 on: August 07, 2010, 12:46:34 PM »

The painting is nothing, I would trash a defaced painting of Jesus, not consider it anything but trash. Its not Him, doesn't represent Him, and most likely doesn't even look like Him.

But why do you consider it OK to represent Jesus in the form of bread and wine? And why do you need to go eat bread and wine to remember Jesus' sacrifice? By your reasoning, if you have Jesus in you, then you would not need to eat bread and wine to remember His sacrifice.
Logged

signature
Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,835


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #362 on: August 07, 2010, 01:01:23 PM »

Alfred,

Thank you for clarifying your thoughts for me earlier.  I'm wondering about something else now, and that is whether you consider the Shroud of Turin to be real?
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 #363 on: August 07, 2010, 01:36:05 PM »

The painting is nothing, I would trash a defaced painting of Jesus, not consider it anything but trash. Its not Him, doesn't represent Him, and most likely doesn't even look like Him.

But why do you consider it OK to represent Jesus in the form of bread and wine? And why do you need to go eat bread and wine to remember Jesus' sacrifice? By your reasoning, if you have Jesus in you, then you would not need to eat bread and wine to remember His sacrifice.

You are still equivocating. The bread and wine "image" for me, is not the same as an "icon image" to the Orthodox.

I know the bread and wine symbolize Christ, they aren't His actual body nor do these have His body and blood as their "prototype".

Jesus was still using His body and blood when He had the first Eucharist, and even after the consecration, He calls the wine "the fruit of the vine," which is idiom for "wine" ...therefore it remained wine, nothing more.

 26 And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, "Take, eat; this is My body."
 27 Then He took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you.
 28 "For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
 29 "But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father's kingdom."
 (Mat 26:26-29 NKJ)

There is no prototype to bread and wine, that makes them different than your icons.

Therefore when I eat the bread and wine, its a "remembrance of Christ," an act of memory, not the thing being remembered.

Eating the bread and wine symbolizes ingesting Christ, His teachings completely, but it is only a symbol.

I keep answering your questions, you keep evading any of my points.

The most basic being, how can you practice what God forbade?

He expressly says "no images of me" yet you image Him, against His command.

Show me where God wants to be imaged by you.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2010, 01:38:50 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)
antiderivative
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Northeastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: A jurisdiction
Posts: 349


« Reply #364 on: August 07, 2010, 01:46:34 PM »


You are still equivocating. The bread and wine "image" for me, is not the same as an "icon image" to the Orthodox.

I know the bread and wine symbolize Christ, they aren't His actual body nor do these have His body and blood as their "prototype".

Jesus was still using His body and blood when He had the first Eucharist, and even after the consecration, He calls the wine "the fruit of the vine," which is idiom for "wine" ...therefore it remained wine, nothing more.

 26 And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, "Take, eat; this is My body."
 27 Then He took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you.
 28 "For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
 29 "But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father's kingdom."
 (Mat 26:26-29 NKJ)

There is no prototype to bread and wine, that makes them different than your icons.

Therefore when I eat the bread and wine, its a "remembrance of Christ," an act of memory, not the thing being remembered.

Eating the bread and wine symbolizes ingesting Christ, His teachings completely, but it is only a symbol.

I'm not arguing based on our view of the Eucharist. Your view of the Eucharist says that the bread and wine symbolize Christ. That means it does have a prototype. When it symbolizes something, that means it has a prototype, just like the icon symbolizes Christ.

You said earlier that a painted icon cannot represent Christ, but you claim your communion can represent Christ. On what authority do you make this claim?

Transubstantiation is completely irrelevant to this. For us the Eucharist is no prototype, image, or icon, it is literally Christ. You have reduced the Eucharist to a symbol, but by doing that you make it an icon or image. You may not honor or venerate it, but you are still making an image of Christ.

Quote
I keep answering your questions, you keep evading any of my points.

The most basic being, how can you practice what God forbade?

He expressly says "no images of me" yet you image Him, against His command.

Show me where God wants to be imaged by you.

We already gave you our interpretation of the verses in Deuteronomy. God forbids us to image his divine nature because we have not seen it. The incarnation of Christ made the the person of Christ visible in the flesh. We image the person of Christ through the His incarnation.

Once again, if making images of Christ is unnecessary because you claim Christ is in you, then why do you feel obligated to remember His sacrifice through eating bread and wine? Why not just remember His sacrifice without bread in wine?
« Last Edit: August 07, 2010, 01:54:47 PM by antiderivative » Logged

signature
katherine 2001
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 889


Eastern Orthodox Church--Established in 33 A.D.


« Reply #365 on: August 07, 2010, 02:34:27 PM »

Alfred, do you post under the name of "Let'sObeyChrist" on another forum?  If you do, do you plan to have these threads deleted when you have been shown to be wrong?  I have a suspicion that you may be because threads on these same topics (icons and St. John of Damascus) have shown up there in the last week or two.  The interesting thing about the two threads that were deleted is that they had not been closed by moderators for review.  When the first thread was deleted, the OP was asked what happened to the first thread and was given a very cryptic answer.  Within a day or so, the second one disappeared.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2010, 02:36:48 PM by katherine 2001 » Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,924


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #366 on: August 07, 2010, 02:57:46 PM »

Alfred, do you post under the name of "Let'sObeyChrist" on another forum?  If you do, do you plan to have these threads deleted when you have been shown to be wrong?
He can't do that here.  If he hasn't done anything to modify a post within about 15-30 minutes, the forum software won't allow him to modify or delete it after that.  After the window of opportunity for modifications has passed, only a moderator can delete the thread.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2010, 03:21:28 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,924


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #367 on: August 07, 2010, 03:19:57 PM »

Not one of those is God saying He wants us to image Him.


There is only your blather He does.

Not scripture.
Once again, that argument works only if you can prove that God speaks solely through Scripture.  If you cannot, then the thesis you're defending on this thread disintegrates.


From Page 4 of Weston's A Rulebook for Arguments:

3. Start from Reliable Premises

No matter how well you argue from premises to conclusion, your conclusion will be weak if your premises are weak.



As long as you cannot prove the strength of your premise that God speaks ONLY through the Scriptures, you will never convince us of your conclusion that God never says, "Make images of Me."

Incorrect, only affirmative claims can be proved.

To illustrate: Prove to me a thrown stone won't fly into outer space and hit the moon.

You cannot prove it will not, that is impossible because its a negative, it might if thrown hard enough.

Make the claim affirmative, then the claim can be tested. The stone is thrown as hard as possible, and if it can't reach outer space, you proved the claim wrong.
Do you realize the impact of what you just said?  YOU are the one asserting a negative.  The statement that God speaks solely through the Scriptures, and its logical equivalent that God does not speak apart from the Scriptures, are negative statements.  By your own definition, you are making statements that CANNOT logically be proven.  So then, not only are you asserting as premise a negative statement you're not equipped to prove, you're asserting as premise a statement that is logically impossible to prove.  You have defeated yourself!

I know God doesn't speak apart from Scripture since the apostles went to be with the LORD.
Inherent in this statement is the premise that God spoke only through the Apostles, which is logically equivalent to saying that God does not speak apart from the Apostles.  Another negative statement you cannot possibly prove.

If you want to argue He does, then you must produce God's Word apart from scripture, that we can test to see if its really God's Word.
I don't want to argue that God does speak apart from the Scriptures.  I just want to show you how impossible it is for you to prove that He does not.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2010, 03:26:57 PM by PeterTheAleut » 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 #368 on: August 07, 2010, 03:20:19 PM »


You are still equivocating. The bread and wine "image" for me, is not the same as an "icon image" to the Orthodox.

I know the bread and wine symbolize Christ, they aren't His actual body nor do these have His body and blood as their "prototype".

Jesus was still using His body and blood when He had the first Eucharist, and even after the consecration, He calls the wine "the fruit of the vine," which is idiom for "wine" ...therefore it remained wine, nothing more.

 26 And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, "Take, eat; this is My body."
 27 Then He took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you.
 28 "For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
 29 "But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father's kingdom."
 (Mat 26:26-29 NKJ)

There is no prototype to bread and wine, that makes them different than your icons.

Therefore when I eat the bread and wine, its a "remembrance of Christ," an act of memory, not the thing being remembered.

Eating the bread and wine symbolizes ingesting Christ, His teachings completely, but it is only a symbol.

I'm not arguing based on our view of the Eucharist. Your view of the Eucharist says that the bread and wine symbolize Christ. That means it does have a prototype. When it symbolizes something, that means it has a prototype, just like the icon symbolizes Christ.

You said earlier that a painted icon cannot represent Christ, but you claim your communion can represent Christ. On what authority do you make this claim?

Transubstantiation is completely irrelevant to this. For us the Eucharist is no prototype, image, or icon, it is literally Christ. You have reduced the Eucharist to a symbol, but by doing that you make it an icon or image. You may not honor or venerate it, but you are still making an image of Christ.

Quote
I keep answering your questions, you keep evading any of my points.

The most basic being, how can you practice what God forbade?

He expressly says "no images of me" yet you image Him, against His command.

Show me where God wants to be imaged by you.

We already gave you our interpretation of the verses in Deuteronomy. God forbids us to image his divine nature because we have not seen it. The incarnation of Christ made the the person of Christ visible in the flesh. We image the person of Christ through the His incarnation.

Once again, if making images of Christ is unnecessary because you claim Christ is in you, then why do you feel obligated to remember His sacrifice through eating bread and wine? Why not just remember His sacrifice without bread in wine?

You are trying to use fallacy to win an argument, it won't fly with me, symbolic is NOT iconic:

The Iconic and Symbolic in Orthodox Iconography...

Hence there are three stages in God's post-lapsarian relations to man. The first is depicted in the Old Testament and is characterized by symbol and shadow—symbolic prefigurations of the "good things to come." The second stage is embodied in the New Testament, which is characterized by the iconic (by image). Here we have the "true form [eikon, or icon] of these realities."
http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/general/orth_icon.aspx

My view of the Eucharist is its symbolic, so you are using my view of the Eucharist, its odd indeed you try to deny that, its like denying your own proof, to prove it.

I never said "my communion" represents Christ, I said I commune with Christ, He never leaves me or forsakes me. Jesus is more real to me than you are, I experience His presence constantly, I experience you only when I'm here and your presence is not actual. His is.

I fully expect you will keep repeating your failed argument or its permutations, and never answer my question.

So I'll be ignoring your posts until you answer my question:

Show me in Scripture where God wants to be imaged by men.

Telling me  you already did is not good enough.


« Last Edit: August 07, 2010, 03:28:19 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 #369 on: August 07, 2010, 03:30:56 PM »

Not one of those is God saying He wants us to image Him.


There is only your blather He does.

Not scripture.
Once again, that argument works only if you can prove that God speaks solely through Scripture.  If you cannot, then the thesis you're defending on this thread disintegrates.


From Page 4 of Weston's A Rulebook for Arguments:

3. Start from Reliable Premises

No matter how well you argue from premises to conclusion, your conclusion will be weak if your premises are weak.



As long as you cannot prove the strength of your premise that God speaks ONLY through the Scriptures, you will never convince us of your conclusion that God never says, "Make images of Me."

Incorrect, only affirmative claims can be proved.

To illustrate: Prove to me a thrown stone won't fly into outer space and hit the moon.

You cannot prove it will not, that is impossible because its a negative, it might if thrown hard enough.

Make the claim affirmative, then the claim can be tested. The stone is thrown as hard as possible, and if it can't reach outer space, you proved the claim wrong.
Do you realize the impact of what you just said?  YOU are the one asserting a negative.  The statement that God speaks solely through the Scriptures, and its logical equivalent that God does not speak apart from the Scriptures, are negative statements.  By your own definition, you are making statements that CANNOT logically be proven.  So then, not only are you asserting as premise a negative statement you're not equipped to prove, you're asserting as premise a statement that is logically impossible to prove.  You have defeated yourself!

I know God doesn't speak apart from Scripture since the apostles went to be with the LORD.
Inherent in this statement is the premise that God spoke only through the Apostles, which is logically equivalent to saying that God does not speak apart from the Apostles.  Another negative statement you cannot possibly prove.

If you want to argue He does, then you must produce God's Word apart from scripture, that we can test to see if its really God's Word.
I don't want to argue that God does speak apart from the Scriptures.  I just want to show you how impossible it is for you to prove that He does not.

No, its a positive. Its easy to falsify, cite the Word of God that appears outside of scripture.

Try again.
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 #370 on: August 07, 2010, 03:35:19 PM »

Alfred, do you post under the name of "Let'sObeyChrist" on another forum?  If you do, do you plan to have these threads deleted when you have been shown to be wrong?
He can't do that here.  If he hasn't done anything to modify a post within about 15-30 minutes, the forum software won't allow him to modify or delete it after that.  After the window of opportunity for modifications has passed, only a moderator can delete the thread.

I post as LetsObeyChrist.

Your slander is noted. I never did that, moderators delete threads, not me. I protested the deletion...I protested being banned at Catholic Answers, and probably will eventually be banned here...as you gents continue to fail miserably at defending your icons.

Its a good thing for you they wouldn't let me post my separate arguments under separate threads, the witness of all those losses by your side would have been devastating.

Now they are all buried in this one thread.

But I am hopeful one of you will tire of evading the subject, and actually show me where, in scripture, God says He wants to be imaged.

I only see where He condemns the practice:

 15 And take good heed to your hearts, for ye saw no similitude in the day in which the Lord spoke to you in Choreb in the mountain out of the midst of the fire:
 16 lest ye transgress, and make to yourselves a carved image, any kind of figure(EIKONA), the likeness of male or female,
 (Deu 4:15-16 LXE)




« Last Edit: August 07, 2010, 03:44:43 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)
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,476


« Reply #371 on: August 07, 2010, 03:38:24 PM »

Quote from: 2 Thessalonians 2, 15
So then, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye were taught, whether by word, or by epistle of ours.
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 #372 on: August 07, 2010, 03:47:39 PM »

Quote from: 2 Thessalonians 2, 15
So then, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye were taught, whether by word, or by epistle of ours.

That teaches sola scriptura. We are to obey ONLY words or epistles "of theirs" the apostles.

Today we find that material only in the Bible.

Therefore sola scriptura.
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: 12,835


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #373 on: August 07, 2010, 03:48:19 PM »

But I am hopeful one of you will tire of evading the subject, and actually show me where, in scripture, God says He wants to be imaged.



You mean like this?



http://www.warnersallman.com/collection/images/head-of-christ/

If God doesn't want to be imaged, then having the above picture would be a sin, since the persons who put it in their homes use it to remind themselves of Christ, who is the Son of God.  You yourself have said that you would put it in your home.

I'm very confused.  Are you saying having images of Christ is forbidden by the Bible, or only venerating them is forbidden?  If it is the former, than the above image is not OK, even if it is not in the traditional iconic style of the East.  And yet you say you would have this in your home.

If you are saying it's OK to image Christ, but just not to venerate the image, then you should explain what you mean by continually asking where God says He wants to be imaged.  It's really confusing.  I'm not just saying that.  It really is.  Maybe you should change your question to "Where does God say to venerate His image?"
Logged

PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,924


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #374 on: August 07, 2010, 03:48:35 PM »

Not one of those is God saying He wants us to image Him.


There is only your blather He does.

Not scripture.
Once again, that argument works only if you can prove that God speaks solely through Scripture.  If you cannot, then the thesis you're defending on this thread disintegrates.


From Page 4 of Weston's A Rulebook for Arguments:

3. Start from Reliable Premises

No matter how well you argue from premises to conclusion, your conclusion will be weak if your premises are weak.



As long as you cannot prove the strength of your premise that God speaks ONLY through the Scriptures, you will never convince us of your conclusion that God never says, "Make images of Me."

Incorrect, only affirmative claims can be proved.

To illustrate: Prove to me a thrown stone won't fly into outer space and hit the moon.

You cannot prove it will not, that is impossible because its a negative, it might if thrown hard enough.

Make the claim affirmative, then the claim can be tested. The stone is thrown as hard as possible, and if it can't reach outer space, you proved the claim wrong.
Do you realize the impact of what you just said?  YOU are the one asserting a negative.  The statement that God speaks solely through the Scriptures, and its logical equivalent that God does not speak apart from the Scriptures, are negative statements.  By your own definition, you are making statements that CANNOT logically be proven.  So then, not only are you asserting as premise a negative statement you're not equipped to prove, you're asserting as premise a statement that is logically impossible to prove.  You have defeated yourself!

I know God doesn't speak apart from Scripture since the apostles went to be with the LORD.
Inherent in this statement is the premise that God spoke only through the Apostles, which is logically equivalent to saying that God does not speak apart from the Apostles.  Another negative statement you cannot possibly prove.

If you want to argue He does, then you must produce God's Word apart from scripture, that we can test to see if its really God's Word.
I don't want to argue that God does speak apart from the Scriptures.  I just want to show you how impossible it is for you to prove that He does not.

No, its a positive. Its easy to falsify, cite the Word of God that appears outside of scripture.

Try again.

The ease by which someone can falsify your statement is exactly why it's so impossible for you to prove it.

Additionally, you are aware of a concept known as burden of proof?  The person in an argument who is actively trying to convince others to embrace his point of view bears the burden of proof in the argument to provide sufficient warrant for his position.  This burden of proof becomes even stronger when said person is arguing against beliefs held firmly by his opponents.  YOU are the person in this debate trying to convince us to abandon our veneration of icons.  YOU are the one trying to convince us that God never commanded us to image Him in icons.  YOU are the one trying to convince us that God does not speak apart from the Scriptures.  YOU are the one fighting so hard against traditions we've held firmly for over a millennium.  The burden of proof is therefore squarely on YOU to prove your claims true.  I bear no burden of proof to provide sufficient warrant for any claim that God has spoken outside of the Scriptures.  Even though I personally believe that claim, I've chosen not to argue it here, since it's YOUR job to prove that He cannot have.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2010, 03:49:49 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,835


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #375 on: August 07, 2010, 03:52:59 PM »

Quote from: 2 Thessalonians 2, 15
So then, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye were taught, whether by word, or by epistle of ours.

That teaches sola scriptura. We are to obey ONLY words or epistles "of theirs" the apostles.

Today we find that material only in the Bible.

Therefore sola scriptura.

Where does he say that he is only referring to the 27 books that today make up the New Testament?  Where does the Bible have a list of the 27 books that today make up the New Testament, and say these books are scripture?

Have you studied the development of the canon of scripture?  Are you aware that the fourth and fifth century bishops who put together the list of 27 books we now call the New Testament, and made the decision that those books alone would be the New Testament, were bishops of a Church that venerated icons and believed in Tradition?
Logged

PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,924


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #376 on: August 07, 2010, 03:54:40 PM »

Quote from: 2 Thessalonians 2, 15
So then, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye were taught, whether by word, or by epistle of ours.

That teaches sola scriptura. We are to obey ONLY words or epistles "of theirs" the apostles.
Actually, that passage does NOT say we are to obey ONLY the words of the Apostles.  It says that we are to obey the words of the Apostles, but it does NOT say that we are NOT to obey any other authority.

Today we find that material only in the Bible.
PROVE IT!!!  Prove to us that it's impossible for us to find that material anywhere else.

Therefore sola scriptura.
Shades of Martin Luther?
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 #377 on: August 07, 2010, 03:58:21 PM »

Quote from: 2 Thessalonians 2, 15
So then, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye were taught, whether by word, or by epistle of ours.

That teaches sola scriptura. We are to obey ONLY words or epistles "of theirs" the apostles.

Today we find that material only in the Bible.

Therefore sola scriptura.

Where does he say that he is only referring to the 27 books that today make up the New Testament?  Where does the Bible have a list of the 27 books that today make up the New Testament, and say these books are scripture?

Have you studied the development of the canon of scripture?  Are you aware that the fourth and fifth century bishops who put together the list of 27 books we now call the New Testament, and made the decision that those books alone would be the New Testament, were bishops of a Church that venerated icons and believed in Tradition?

He defined the word and epistle as "of ours", leaving out everything else you would like to mix in.

I obey the apostles, I only heed what they taught, and that is found only in scripture, hence sola scriptura.

This thread is about icons....perhaps I'll start one on sola scriptura...feel free to argue against it there...I won't be discussing it here...I haven't exhausted my arguments...I was just giving you gents time to respond...before I post the next one that completely refutes iconography as a Christian doctrine.
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)
antiderivative
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Northeastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: A jurisdiction
Posts: 349


« Reply #378 on: August 07, 2010, 04:05:12 PM »


You are trying to use fallacy to win an argument, it won't fly with me, symbolic is NOT iconic:

The Iconic and Symbolic in Orthodox Iconography...

Hence there are three stages in God's post-lapsarian relations to man. The first is depicted in the Old Testament and is characterized by symbol and shadow—symbolic prefigurations of the "good things to come." The second stage is embodied in the New Testament, which is characterized by the iconic (by image). Here we have the "true form [eikon, or icon] of these realities."
http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/general/orth_icon.aspx
The icon is still a symbol, but it is more, since it is visual and has form. Symbol can be more vague, but the fact remains, your Eucharist is visual as well. Don't you teach the bread symbolizes the body, while the wine symbolizes the blood? You must admit, that bread would visually resemble the body, while wine visually resembles the blood. You could not symbolize Christ's body and blood through bread and wine without the incarnation. This is visual imagery, like it or not.

Quote
My view of the Eucharist is its symbolic, so you are using my view of the Eucharist, its odd indeed you try to deny that, its like denying your own proof, to prove it.

It's all hypothetical, and it points out the inconsistency of your views. You say it's impossible for us to symbolize Christ with paint, but you claim to symbolize Christ with bread and wine. The original Byzantine iconoclasts did not have to deal with this issue because they didn't change the churches' teaching on the Eucharist.
Logged

signature
SolEX01
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 11,670


WWW
« Reply #379 on: August 07, 2010, 04:07:12 PM »

SolEX01, just what do you hope to accomplish by continuing to accuse Alfred of being a Mormon?

I've had enough with Alfred.  Time to watch my daily post average go down.   Grin
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,924


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #380 on: August 07, 2010, 04:09:11 PM »

Quote from: 2 Thessalonians 2, 15
So then, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye were taught, whether by word, or by epistle of ours.

That teaches sola scriptura. We are to obey ONLY words or epistles "of theirs" the apostles.
So let me ask you a question, Alfred.  Who taught YOU to follow the Apostles and no one else?  Surely you didn't just crack open the Bible one day and decide to live by it after never having been exposed to the Christian faith before.  Someone other than an Apostle must have taught you to follow after the Apostles.  Why do you obey that extrabiblical authority if God has spoken solely through the Scriptures and the Apostles?  Was it not God who spoke to you through the person of him/her who led you to Christ and the Way of the Apostles?  If this was not God who spoke to you outside of the Bible to lead you to Christ, then how did you even come to Christ and learn to obey Him?
« Last Edit: August 07, 2010, 04:13:39 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,835


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #381 on: August 07, 2010, 04:15:07 PM »

Where does he say that he is only referring to the 27 books that today make up the New Testament?  Where does the Bible have a list of the 27 books that today make up the New Testament, and say these books are scripture?

Have you studied the development of the canon of scripture?  Are you aware that the fourth and fifth century bishops who put together the list of 27 books we now call the New Testament, and made the decision that those books alone would be the New Testament, were bishops of a Church that venerated icons and believed in Tradition?

He defined the word and epistle as "of ours", leaving out everything else you would like to mix in.


Where does he define "of ours" as the list of 27 books we have as New Testament scripture?  It's easy to answer.  All you have to do is give me the Bible verse that lists the 27 books.

Or could it be that the Bible never says what books make up the scripture?  Could it be that a bunch of icon-venerating fourth and fifth century bishops came up with that concept?
Logged

Fabio Leite
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 3,434



WWW
« Reply #382 on: August 07, 2010, 04:30:06 PM »

Alfred,

did God forbid the making of all images or of His images only?

I will answer if you first answer me...

Where does God say He wants to be imaged?

I will answer if you, who claim to know the fundaments of debates answer this:

is absence of evidence, evidence of absence?
Or in other words, in all unsolved murders, the absence of evidence of the identity of the murderer is evidence that this identity is actually absent (and therefore the murder was committed by a person withouth identity)?

No, an argument from silence is unsound, proves nothing. BUT I admit your statement is obscure and perhaps you are asking "if I don't have it, does that prove I don't have it." I'd say yes.

I was not talking about myself. I was talking about the Bible. See below:

Quote
Now you can answer:
Where in scripture does God say "image me"

The absence of evidence in the Bible for *any*thing, is not evidence of absence of that idea.

I will make a list of commandments that are not in the Bible:

"Do not have sex with children, not even marry them."

"Do not be gay."

"Image me."

"Do not have slaves."

"Do not practice cannibalism."

"There are no other gods."

Now, if you believe that absence of evidence is evidence of absence, the absence of all these commandments sure should lead us to believe that we are allowed to contradict them all. Indeed, many "liberal" christians, like you, abuse the lack of a direct statment to claim this absence is proof that it is not meant to be. Likewise, the absence of a direct statemament against slavery has lead many christians to honestly believe this is not a problem before God. Like you, they think that the absence of a direct statement means God has not pronounced Himself about it.

But He has. God is unchanging but societies and cultures do change and He speaks always the same thing in a way His children can understand. Although God made marriage to be between a man and woman, He did not refrain from using the polygamous Abrahan and Jacob for His plan. Because the Hebrews were a hard people, He forced them into a great fast by wandering in the desert for more time than necessary to get to the Promised Land.

Concerning images, the passages in you have been quoting do not mean "don't make images of me", but "don't make images of things that are not me *as if* they were me". That is the sense of an idol: something that you take to be God and is not. So many times He says that "don't do it *because* you have not seen me". And because the OT is so full of the sentiment of th coming of the Messiah, one can almost read in these passages a certain "anxiety" in God: "I'm coming. Don't try to guess. Soon I'll be there with you and then you will see me".

Oh, Alfred. The God you love is not an amorphous intellectual idea, an invisible spirit only. He came here for *you* visibly. He wants so much to be seen by you, not in words and ideas only. He came in flesh, with a body to be seen. Do not mutilate the mistery of the Incarnation. It is this visible image that you refuse that He came to glorify. Rejoice! God is born among us! Visibly! He does not shun from having His presence between the statues of the Cherubin. Because He loves you more. He does not shun from healing from an image of a serpent. Because He loves you more. He does not shun from showing His hand to the faithful and reproaching the injust men. Because He loves you more. He did not shun from healing from the image of St. Peter in his shadow (Acts 5:15-16). Because He loves you more. It is because we have His presence that we can paint His image. Only a painter who doesn't see the model can't paint him. Oh, Alfred, He is alive, and here *visibly*, for you. Not as an idea. Not as just a memory in a book. In flesh and blood, visibly. Take part in Him, accept that He glorified *everything* with His incarnation, even the material visible world. Do not come to the feast and eat just part. Eat abundantly of *all* He did for us.  He loves you and more than to just see you from afar like a mathematical abstraction, He wants to be seen by you, not only intellectually, not only "in the heart" but *physically* as well. That is why He came *physically* to us and not only "in the heart" or "intellectually". Be not like the rocks in which the seeds grow a little but are choked, but like the fertile ground where they grow and are abundantly fruitful. Accept *everything* He changed for us.



Logged

Many Energies, Three Persons, Two Natures, One God.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

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: 37,963



« Reply #383 on: August 07, 2010, 06:54:43 PM »

This may be a silly question, but here goes:  if no one responds to the OP's satisfaction, what's the worst that could happen?

In other words, why bother with this at all?  He doesn't really seem interested in a serious discussion.

If this was CAF, his posts could be scrubbed clean, where they may never lead others astray, besides polluting the internet.  But since OC.net doesn't do that sort a thing (a policy I support. Pure gold fears no fire), a word or too is appropriate.  He seems to have run out of his repetoire.

Eight pages and four days later, he hasn't run out of his repetoire, and the Internet is still polluted.

LOL. Mindlessly repeating mantras doesn't indicate a rich repetoire.



I think I'll quit now, go outside, do some gardening, and prepare for Vespers.

What say the rest of you?   Cool

While you are gardening, remember, God never said He wanted to be imaged, He did say He didn't.

Then consider if you are following His desires.

Have a nice day.
Have a nice day, theistgal  While your are gardening, recall that God created the first Adam in His image and likenesss and set him in a garden, so that He might in the fullness of time be seen, seen by St. Mary, Apostle to the Apostles, as the New Adam, gardening by the Tomb.

Rejoice that the veil of Moses has been lifted from your heart, and take the blessing of Our Lord who said "Blessed are your eyes which see, for many prophets longed to see what your eyes see, but did not."  Rejoice with Moses, who beheld on Tabor Him Who He could not see on Sinai. Enter the good pleasure of the invisible Father that His Icon took the likeness of Man so that, seeing Him, you have seen the Father, and bow before His pure Icon in gratitude.

And pray for those who walk in darkness, and cling to the veil of Moses like a security blanket. Kisss many icons for us all.  Time at Vespers is better spent than here.

« Last Edit: August 07, 2010, 07:18:52 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
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

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: 37,963



« Reply #384 on: August 07, 2010, 07:03:35 PM »

No images are objectionable per se (except those of God), its the act of venerating them that is objectionable.

I could have those pictures on my living room wall, but I could never venerate them.

So it's OK to have an image of Jesus, just as long as you don't venerate that image or think of it as an image of God?

Sure, paintings, statues, film, don't see the harm.

Worshiping Jesus via an image, or having an image of Him in mind during worship,  rends Him from His transcendent Deity, making finite what is infinite.

God doesn't want to be imaged in your psyche as you pray to Him, that would be like me visualizing you as dung as I spoke to you.

You would be insulted...God is insulted when you visualize Him as finite xyz, He isn't that at all.

It only becomes insulting if you start to think of Jesus as nothing more than a pile of flesh. An icon isn't the image of a nature, but that of a person. It's not a matter of trying to image Christ's humanity or His divinity like the two could be seperated, but imaging Christ the Person. He is a person, not a nature.

On a practical note, looking at an image Christ while praying can does help one to better focus their thoughts on Him.

So back to my question, veneration aside...

Is it ok to say that an image of Jesus is not an image of the Second Person of the Trinity?

Incorrect, Jesus' Person is infinite, transcendent. You change that when you imagine Him as some image, that changes what is true, into a lie.

So He never took flesh and dwellt among us, taking on the finite likeness of man?

Quote
From the fire came the voice of the Lord: you hear the sound of words, but you do not see a form—only the sound! The phrasing of this sentence is made very dramatic in the Hebrew by the use of active participles (rendered in English by the present tense). This experience the Hebrews were not to forget. If in their most profoundly moving encounter with their God there was no physical representation or form of him, but only his voice, any attempt to represent God in form would be totally inadequate and misleading
Craigie, P. C. (1976). The Book of Deuteronomy. The New International Commentary on the Old Testament (133). Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.



I don't "focus" on Jesus when communing with Him, I commune with Him, for He is in me and I in Him.

If you keep denying Christ is come in the flesh, that's not the Spirit of Christ in you that you are communing with.

Craigie. 1976. Yes, that certainly trumps the unbroken chain of the Fathers of the Church from 33 to the present day. Roll Eyes

And you have lengthy conversations with yourself accusing me of all sorts of heretical belief. Its amusing, but odd.
LOL. Just refuting the heresies of Perssonism as they rear their ugly head.

The reader of any intelligence can judge for Himself.  The Holy Spirit does the rest.  The Spirit of Christ which proclaims Him as come in the flesh.
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 #385 on: August 07, 2010, 09:28:31 PM »

The absence of evidence in the Bible for *any*thing, is not evidence of absence of that idea.

I will make a list of commandments that are not in the Bible:

"Do not have sex with children, not even marry them."

"Do not be gay."

"Image me."

"Do not have slaves."

"Do not practice cannibalism."

"There are no other gods."

Now, if you believe that absence of evidence is evidence of absence, the absence of all these commandments sure should lead us to believe that we are allowed to contradict them all. Indeed, many "liberal" christians, like you, abuse...

I am not a liberal Christian, and I do not abuse the scripture. When you allege such things, you should document it...copy paste the text I abused, or you should apologize for the false witness.

Your "proofs" are flawed as all of the things you list are deducible from scripture, they are not absent, and when it comes to slavery, that was never prohibited.
Your argument is a self contradiction, "if there is an absence of evidence for 'A'"  then that fact is certainly proof there is an absence of evidence for "A".



A word of advice: Learn the basics of "critical thinking" (Amazon.com), you are trying to run before learning to walk.

peace
al
« Last Edit: August 07, 2010, 09:33:24 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)
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 #386 on: August 07, 2010, 09:31:36 PM »

And pray for those who walk in darkness, and cling to the veil of Moses like a security blanket. Kisss many icons for us all.  Time at Vespers is better spent than here.

Yes indeed!  I wound up having to do Vespers here at home, as my husband needed to take the car and run some errands.  Fortunately we have a very nice icon corner, and I did indeed kiss every single one of our icons!

And the reason I kissed them?  To honor the God who created each of the saints depicted in them (aka "icons" of the living God), of course!  Why else?  Cheesy
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)
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 #387 on: August 07, 2010, 09:41:36 PM »

Where does he say that he is only referring to the 27 books that today make up the New Testament?  Where does the Bible have a list of the 27 books that today make up the New Testament, and say these books are scripture?

Have you studied the development of the canon of scripture?  Are you aware that the fourth and fifth century bishops who put together the list of 27 books we now call the New Testament, and made the decision that those books alone would be the New Testament, were bishops of a Church that venerated icons and believed in Tradition?

He defined the word and epistle as "of ours", leaving out everything else you would like to mix in.


Where does he define "of ours" as the list of 27 books we have as New Testament scripture?  It's easy to answer.  All you have to do is give me the Bible verse that lists the 27 books.

Or could it be that the Bible never says what books make up the scripture?  Could it be that a bunch of icon-venerating fourth and fifth century bishops came up with that concept?

Not only are you evading the fact the Bible never says to us "Image God," but you are in hopeless self contradiction.

You allege I cannot decide which books are canon without an infallible list, but you decided upon a church without an infallible list.

Sola scriptura is not contradicted by the lack of an infallible list even as your "sola ecclesia" is not contradicted by the lack of an infallible list.

I chose which books are canon to me using my judgment, just as you chose which church you believed correct, using your judgment.

And to top off your irrationality, every day you make decisions about life without infallible lists, proving you can do it if you want to!

So you are special pleading, a fallacy. You are your own best refutation!

Thanks.


« Last Edit: August 07, 2010, 09:43:36 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: 12,835


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #388 on: August 07, 2010, 09:51:49 PM »

I don't get what you just said.
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 #389 on: August 07, 2010, 09:55:52 PM »

Quote from: 2 Thessalonians 2, 15
So then, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye were taught, whether by word, or by epistle of ours.

That teaches sola scriptura. We are to obey ONLY words or epistles "of theirs" the apostles.
So let me ask you a question, Alfred.  Who taught YOU to follow the Apostles and no one else?  Surely you didn't just crack open the Bible one day and decide to live by it after never having been exposed to the Christian faith before.  Someone other than an Apostle must have taught you to follow after the Apostles.  Why do you obey that extrabiblical authority if God has spoken solely through the Scriptures and the Apostles?  Was it not God who spoke to you through the person of him/her who led you to Christ and the Way of the Apostles?  If this was not God who spoke to you outside of the Bible to lead you to Christ, then how did you even come to Christ and learn to obey Him?

As I am preparing "More Devastating Arguments Against Icons The Orthodox Cannot Answer" I will take break by answering you. My mind needs a rest.

Public education indoctrinated me against God, but the proofs for creationism convinced me to read the Bible. When I read it, the power of its words captured me, I knew God was speaking to me through scripture. I became a believer in Christ. Christ authorized His apostles, so I believed in them.

There was no pope or patriarch guiding me...

God spoke to me through scripture.

But I wasn't saved until I heard a radio preacher exegete Romans 10:10

 9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.
 10 For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

 (Rom 10:9-10 NKJ)

He insisted God cannot lie, that if I did precisely what God said to do, I would be saved.

So I did precisely that, repenting of my evil ways, and confessing Jesus is LORD before my fellow Merchant Mariners, before the eyes of angels and men.

And the preacher was right about God, He doesn't lie. He saved me then, when I believed.

AND He can save you, do not merely listen to the word, do what it says,  precisely, and seasons of refreshing will come upon you, the LORD Jesus Christ Himself, will come to you:

Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me. (Rev 3:20 KJV)
« Last Edit: August 07, 2010, 10:00:13 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 #390 on: August 07, 2010, 10:03:20 PM »

I don't get what you just said.

Keep reading it over and over, look up the concepts of paradox and self contradiction and logical fallacies such as special pleading, and consider what you said...then perhaps you will.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2010, 10:04:31 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: 12,835


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #391 on: August 07, 2010, 10:14:26 PM »

Sorry, I still don't get it.

Can you tell me why God is OK with the Western images of Christ you would put in your home, even though He never explicitly said to image Him?  
« Last Edit: August 07, 2010, 10:19:25 PM by Salpy » Logged

Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,835


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #392 on: August 07, 2010, 10:16:01 PM »

You also still haven't given me the Bible verse that lists the 27 books of the New Testament and says these are scripture.  I really want that verse.  Thanks.
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 #393 on: August 07, 2010, 10:23:01 PM »

You also still haven't given me the Bible verse that lists the 27 books of the New Testament and says these are scripture.  I really want that verse.  Thanks.

I will, after you give me the infallible list you followed that indicated the Orthodox Church among all the churches on the planet, is the true church.

Just as the list of scripture books are not in the Bible, so also your list cannot be from the Orthodox church.

After all, why would you follow their list BEFORE you knew it was the true church?

As I said, you are in hopeless paradox, and you are my best refutation of your argument.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2010, 10:26:36 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)
katherine 2001
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 889


Eastern Orthodox Church--Established in 33 A.D.


« Reply #394 on: August 07, 2010, 10:28:36 PM »

Salpy, he decided on what makes up the canon of the NT himself.  I'd be curious to know which books of the NT he has thrown out. 
Alfred, which bibles are we talking about?  Are we talking about the OT which the Orthodox and the Roman churches use or are we talked about the stripped down version that most Protestants use? 
Logged
Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,835


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #395 on: August 07, 2010, 10:29:31 PM »

You also still haven't given me the Bible verse that lists the 27 books of the New Testament and says these are scripture.  I really want that verse.  Thanks.
Just as the list of scripture books are not in the Bible,

Thank you for that.  So if you are "Bible-Only" (Sola Scriptura) you really have no justification for believing in the New Testament.  

It was, after all, put together by a bunch of icon-venerating fourth and fifth century bishops.  
Logged

Salpy
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Armenian Church
Posts: 12,835


Pray for the Christians of Iraq and Syria.


« Reply #396 on: August 07, 2010, 10:30:39 PM »

Salpy, he decided on what makes up the canon of the NT himself.  I'd be curious to know which books of the NT he has thrown out. 
Alfred, which bibles are we talking about?  Are we talking about the OT which the Orthodox and the Roman churches use or are we talked about the stripped down version that most Protestants use? 

Yeah, I'm curious too.
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 #397 on: August 07, 2010, 10:48:49 PM »

As I am preparing "More Devastating Arguments Against Icons The Orthodox Cannot Answer" I will take break by answering you. My mind needs a rest.

Public education indoctrinated me against God, but the proofs for creationism convinced me to read the Bible. When I read it, the power of its words captured me, I knew God was speaking to me through scripture. I became a believer in Christ. Christ authorized His apostles, so I believed in them.

There was no pope or patriarch guiding me...

God spoke to me through scripture.

But I wasn't saved until I heard a radio preacher exegete Romans 10:10

 9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.
 10 For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

 (Rom 10:9-10 NKJ)

He insisted God cannot lie, that if I did precisely what God said to do, I would be saved.

So I did precisely that, repenting of my evil ways, and confessing Jesus is LORD before my fellow Merchant Mariners, before the eyes of angels and men.

And the preacher was right about God, He doesn't lie. He saved me then, when I believed.

AND He can save you, do not merely listen to the word, do what it says,  precisely, and seasons of refreshing will come upon you, the LORD Jesus Christ Himself, will come to you:

Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me. (Rev 3:20 KJV)


During my research I happened upon this gem:

God Does Not Give His Majesty to Another. Novatian (Novatian of Rome 235-258): We acknowledge, therefore, and know that he is God, the Creator of all things. He is our Lord, because of his power; our author, because of his creation. “He spoke, and all things were made. He commanded, and all things came forth.”8 Of him it is written, “You have made all things in wisdom.”9 Moses says of him, “God is in heaven above and on earth below,”10 and according to Isaiah, “He has measured the heavens with a span, the earth with the width of the fist”;11 he “looks upon the earth and makes it tremble.”12 He “holds the orb of the earth and those who live on it as if they were locusts”;13 he “weighed the mountains on scales and the groves on a balance,”14 by the exact precision of the divine plan. He laid out this weight of the earth’s mass with precise equipoise, lest the huge ill-balanced mass should easily fall into ruin, if they were not balanced by providential weights.15 It is he who says through the prophet, “I am God, and there is none beside me.”16 He says by means of the same prophet, “I will not give my majesty to another,”17 so that he might exclude all heathens and heretics with their images, proving that he is God who is not made by the hand of an artificer.18 Nor is he some God whom heretical ingenuity has devised.
Ferreiro, A. (2003). The Twelve Prophets. Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture OT 14. (35). Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press.

17 Isa 42:8; 48:11
18 Acts 19:26


NKJ  Isaiah 42:8 I am the LORD, that is My name; And My glory I will not give to another, Nor My praise to carved images. (Isa 42:8 NKJ)

NKJ  Isaiah 48:11 For My own sake, for My own sake, I will do it; For how should My name be profaned? And I will not give My glory to another. (Isa 48:11 NKJ)

NKJ  Acts 19:26 "Moreover you see and hear that not only at Ephesus, but throughout almost all Asia, this Paul has persuaded and turned away many people, saying that they are not gods which are made with hands.
 (Act 19:26 NKJ)

« Last Edit: August 07, 2010, 10:51:41 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)
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 #398 on: August 07, 2010, 11:00:05 PM »

lol, Alfred!  Your questions have all been answered many times.   May God bless you. Smiley
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)
ICXCNIKA
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 661



« Reply #399 on: August 07, 2010, 11:00:42 PM »

This Novatian?:

"Novatian was a schismatic of the third century, and founder of the sect of the Novatians; he was a Roman priest, and made himself antipope."

He was also excommunicated and he and his followers were declared heretics. Who will you qoute next? Luther? the Dali Lama?

I guess since your career as a proselytizer is a dismal failure it may be time to fall back on something else.
« Last Edit: August 07, 2010, 11:09:05 PM by ICXCNIKA » 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 #400 on: August 07, 2010, 11:06:54 PM »

lol, Alfred!  Your questions have all been answered many times.   May God bless you. Smiley

Its dark now...too late for your garden! And I was thinking ripe strawberries!

Stay tuned, new arguments to follow, one of them based on Hosea 8:1ff

NKJ  Hosea 8:1 "Set the trumpet to your mouth! He shall come like an eagle against the house of the LORD, Because they have transgressed My covenant And rebelled against My law.
 2 Israel will cry to Me,`My God, we know You!'
 3 Israel has rejected the good; The enemy will pursue him.
 4 "They set up kings, but not by Me; They made princes, but I did not acknowledge them. From their silver and gold They made idols for themselves-- That they might be cut off.
 5 Your calf is rejected, O Samaria! My anger is aroused against them-- How long until they attain to innocence?
 6 For from Israel is even this: A workman made it, and it is not God; But the calf of Samaria shall be broken to pieces.
 (Hos 8:1-6 NKJ)

"how long until they attain to innocence" proves this wasn't outright idolatry...otherwise the prophet would say so.

These Israelites had a calf image ICON with which they venerated the God of Israel, claiming their superior knowledge prevented them from committing idolatry...unlike the idol worshipers, they knew God!

Sound familiar?
« Last Edit: August 07, 2010, 11:11:20 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)
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 #401 on: August 07, 2010, 11:11:23 PM »

nope, plenty of ripe strawberries out there - help yourself! Smiley
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)
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 #402 on: August 07, 2010, 11:14:45 PM »

(and btw, I promised God I wouldn't argue with you anymore - what's the point, after all?  You believe what you believe in good faith, I'm sure. Just give us the same benefit of the doubt, OK?  God will let us all know who was right at the end. Smiley
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)
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 #403 on: August 07, 2010, 11:16:35 PM »

(and btw, I promised God I wouldn't argue with you anymore - what's the point, after all?  You believe what you believe in good faith, I'm sure. Just give us the same benefit of the doubt, OK?  God will let us all know who was right at the end. Smiley

Bless you, I do believe the same. God will sort it all out, when He comes.

And I do credit you folks with sincere belief, I just know you all are wrong!
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 #404 on: August 07, 2010, 11:23:33 PM »

Bless you, I do believe the same. God will sort it all out, when He comes.

And I do credit you folks with sincere belief, I just know you all are wrong!

Now see, we can agree on something - we each think the other one is completely wrong!   Cheesy

I knew I could turn this thread around!    Wink

Have a good evening, Alfred!    Cool
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)
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 0.184 seconds with 72 queries.