Perssonism's teaching on icons.

[ialmisry]

Since you refuse to address St. John's arguments,
http://books.google.com/books?id=x_U1mtafEPMC&pg=PA90&dq=John+of+Damascus+on+the+divine+images+4:15&hl=en&ei=65hXTM3QBIyJnQfpnM3YCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAA#v=snippet&q=mercy%20seat&f=false
but just assert your own teaching.

John's exegesis of De 4:15f is impossible. God expressly rules out any kind of male human icon as imaging His similitude.

There are different kinds of image.  The first kind is the natural image.  In each thing it is necessary that first there is what is by nature, and then what is contrived or by imitation, for example, first there is a human being by nature and then what is contrieved by imitation.  Therefore, the first natural and undeviating image of the invisible God is the Son of the Father, showing in himself the Father.  "For no one has ever seen God," and again, "it is not the case that anyone has seen the Father."  That the Son is the image of the Father is affirmed by the Apostle: "Who is the Image of the invisible God," and, to the Hebrews, " Who being the radiance of his glory and the express image of His person," and that, He shows in Himself the Father in the Gospel according to John, when Philip says, "show us the Father and is it enough for us," and the Lord replies, "Have I been so long with you, and you have not known me, Philip? Whoever has seen Me has seen the Father."

Deu 4:15 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 (EIKWN), the likeness of male or female,-LXX, Brenton

Bravo on using the Bible of the Church.

Therefore, all who image the flesh of Jesus, and insist this does not contradict De 4:15f, thereby deny 1)He is God; 2)The Word became male human flesh.

It is clear that whenyou see the bodilesss become human for your sake, then you may accomplish the figure of a human form; when the invisible becomes visible in the flesh, then you may depict the likeness of something seen; when One Who, by transcending His Own nautre, is bodiless, formless, incommensurable, wihtout magnitude or size, that is, One Who is in the form of God, taking the form of a slave, by this reduction to quantity and magnitude puts on the characteristics of a body, then depict Him on a board and set up to view the One Who has accepted to be seen.

You sylllogism makes absolutely no sense, unless you deny the Incarnation. But the Apostle taught us "The Word became Flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory." Moses did not. Exodus 33:20.

Moreover separating Transcendent Deity from His Flesh is Nestorianism.

Yes, and you are guilty of it.

Both natures are united indivisibly in the One Person of the Eternal Son.

So taught the Fathers in the Seven Ecumenical Council, preserving the Faith handed them by the Apostles.

One cannot image the male human flesh of Jesus without thereby rending Him from His infinitude and making Him like His creation.

We don't have to image Him: the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have beheld His glory.

It is deducible from God's commanding images of cherubim overshadowing the Mercy seat, that the reason for the prohibition is the transcendence of God not be undermined.

Answer me this question.  Is God one God?  Yes, you say, as it seems to me, one lawgiver.  When then does He decree whatis contradictory?  For the cherubim are not outside creation..  Why does He prescribe carved cherubim fashioned by human hands to overshadow the mercy seat?  It is clear that it is impossible to make an image of God or of anything like God, since He is uncircumscribable and unimaginable, lest the creation be venerated in worship as God.  Since the cherubim are circumscribable, He prescribs the making of an image of them prostrate before the divine throne, to overshadow the mercy seat; for it was fitting that the image of the divine mysteries should shadow the image of the heavenly servants...Of old, God the incorporeal and formless was never depicted, but now that God has been seen in the flesh and has associated with human kind, I depict what I have seen of God.

Therefore, any EIKONA of Jesus is violating not just the letter of Deu 4:15f, but also its spirit.

Submit to the tradition of the Church and allow the veneration of images of God and friends of God....Do not abuse matter, for it is not dishonarable, this is the view of the Manichees.  The only thing that is dishonorable is something that does not have its origin from God, but is our own discovery, by the free inclination and turning of our will from what is natural to what is unnatural, that is sin.  If because of the law you dishonor images and prohibit them as fashioned from matter, see what Scriptures says: "And the Lord spoke to Moses saying...let everyone wise in heart among you come and work everything, that the Lord has commanded, the tabernacle...."  Look at the likeness of the cherubim. How therefore can you say that what the law orders to be made is prohibited by the law?  If, because of the law, you prohibit images, watch that you keep the sabbath and are circumcised; for these the law unyieldingly commands. But know that if you keep the law, "Christ is no use to you; you who would be justified by the law, have fallen from grace."  Israel of old ddi not see God, "but we, with unveiled face, behold the glory of God."

Contrary to St. John Damascene's

Fixed that for you.  Learn from Miriam's example.

citing the images of cherubs etc as collaborative proof, their existence does the opposite as God never commanded these be venerated, nor are God's people shown venerating them anywhere in scripture, except in two instances by the Patriarchs, and it is evident from the Law's prohibition of this, that God did not approve. He clearly "winked" at their error (Ac 17:30):

An "error" that He commanded them to commit.  Rather novel idea.  Actually, no: the Muslims held it before you.

Keep your hands to yourself, Uzzah.

Abraham planted a grove

Gen 21:33 "Then Abraham planted a field at the Well of Oath, and there he called on the name of the Lord."-Orthodox Study Bible

33. Abraham planted a grove—Hebrew, “of tamarisks,” in which sacrificial worship was offered, as in a roofless temple.
[1]Jamieson, R., Fausset, A. R., Fausset, A. R., Brown, D., & Brown, D. (1997). A commentary, critical and explanatory, on the Old and New Testaments. On spine: Critical and explanatory commentary. (Ge 21:33). Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

Jacob set up a pillar

Gen 18:16 Then Jacob awoke from his sleep and said, "The Lord is in this place, and I did not know it."
Gen 18:17 So he was afraid and said "How awesome is this place! This is none other than the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven."
Gen 18:18 Now Jacob rose early in the morning, and took the stone he put at his head, set it up as a pillar, and poured oil on top of it.-Orthodox Study Bible

This veneration was not acceptable to God as He later forbade both in Deuteronomy 16:21f

Deut 16:21 You shall not plant for yourself any grove or any tree near the altar of the Lord your God which you build for yourself.
Deut 16:22 You shall not set up a pillar the Lord your God hates.- Orthodox Study Bible.

The King of Glory hung from the tree of the Cross, and keep the Sabbath in the Garden Tomb.  "Tear down this Sanctuary, and in three days I will  raise it up."

[ialmisry]

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.

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.

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

[jnorm888]

Exodus 20: 4-5
"You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth. "You shall not worship them or serve them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me,

The Early Christians always had Signs, Symbols and Icons of birds, fish, the cross, people ........etc.  And so the point that he was trying to make was already shot in the foot in early Christianity. The same is true for alot of Jews as well, for even they had signs, symbols, and icons of birds, fruit, trees, stars, people ......etc











ICXC NIKA

[jnorm888]

http://energeticprocession.wordpress.com/2008/07/21/elvira-mistress-of-the-cheesy/ (The local western Synod of Elvira: Did it really condemn Icons? The answer is no)

http://energeticprocession.wordpress.com/2010/03/31/irenaeus-and-icons/ (Irenaeus and Icons)

http://energeticprocession.wordpress.com/2010/06/12/picking-cherries/ (The Iconoclastic controversy)

http://orthodox-apologetics.blogspot.com/search/label/A%20Defense%20of%20the%20Holy%20Icons (A Defense of the Holy Icons)

http://orthodox-apologetics.blogspot.com/2010/06/fourth-century-arian-icons.html (Fourth Century Arian Icons)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YN4bHegr6QY (Holy Icons: The ancient Christian tradition of images)


Vatican: Oldest known images of apostles Andrew and John found......I think they were dated to the 4th century











ICXC NIKA

[ialmisry]

Why do you accept the canon of the Old Testament that you use to attack us?

Because evidently he doesn't accept the New Testament. Galations 5:12.

[ialmisry]

As we have seen the human flesh of the Son, Gods' transcendent Deity remained transcendent:

Christ is no mere "avatar" remote controlled from heaven. Christ is the second person of the Trinity. Christ is God, and we have seen him. The Father remains unseen, but we have still seen God.

If depicting Christ is tearing Divinity from humanity and falling into nestorianism, then all who saw Christ were nestorians (I will stand or fall together with them). I fail to understand the difference between seeing Christ and depicting Christ.

EDIT: Mayby I should also read this essay, written by Saint John of Damascus, that you all talk about. Thank you for the link LBK.

The OO nonchalcedonians also embrace Icons and so according to his logic this will make them Nestorians too!

The truth is, his argument is a Nestorian one, he just doesn't know it yet. I wonder if he is able to call our blessed Mother Theotokos?

His argument against Icons and the 7th council would have to be against the 3rd council as well.

ICXC NIKA

Incorrect. It is elementary icons are inspiring heresy because:

1)If icons image the Incarnate flesh only, they are tearing His human nature from the divine, Nestorian.
2)If icons image the whole Christ, then they confuse the two natures in the one icon, Monophysite.

NKJV (you seem to like that), John 20:19 Then, the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in the midst, and said to them, “Peace be with you.” 20 When He had said this, He showed them His hands and His side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord.


24 Now Thomas, called the Twin, one of the twelve, was not with them when Jesus came. 25 The other disciples therefore said to him, “We have seen the Lord.”
So he said to them, “Unless I see in His hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe.”
26 And after eight days His disciples were again inside, and Thomas with them. Jesus came, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, “Peace to you!” 27 Then He said to Thomas, “Reach your finger here, and look at My hands; and reach your hand here, and put it into My side. Do not be unbelieving, but believing.”
28 And Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!”
29 Jesus said to him, “Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

SOoo.  If St. Thomas, as instructed by Christ, saw His hands and believed, he committed the error of Nestorius, and confessing the divinity of He Whose hand he beheld, he committed the error of Eutyces. The other Apostles, claiming they saw the Lord, evidently also committed both errors. And of course, we have to blame the Lord for teaching heresy, showing them His Body and telling them to loolk with their eyes and believe.  Rather odd theology Perssonism expouses.

He who sees Him sees the Father.

[ialmisry]

Now, to the actual task at hand- the Deuteronomy 4:15 passage.  I will bold the gaping hole in your logic.   "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 (EIKWN), the likeness of male or female,-LXX, Brenton"

By the way, the OSB, which you apparently own since you quoted it for your later texts renders this into a more modern grammatical structure as this: "So be careful to guard your souls, for you saw no form when the Lord spoke to you at Horeb on the mountain from the midst of the fire. 16 Do not act lawlessly and make for yourselves a carved form of any image; the likeness of male or female"  It seems that you merely selected a translation that would appear to back your argument up

No, I want it clear the Septuagint forbids every kind of (EIKWN)

Is the description God gave of the Tabernacle, the command to make the brazen serpent, the description of the Temple  Solomon built (with pillars, btw) upon which God's Presence rested not in your copy of the LXX.  You should get a better, more complete, copy.

And get of a copy of the sequel, the NT.

And you evaded my points:

1)John's exegesis of De 4:15f is impossible as God expressly rules out any kind of male human icon as imaging His similitude.

You haven't quoted St. John of Damascus' exegesis, so we can't address it. Just your eisogesis of the verse.

ἰδοὺ ἡ παρθένος ἐν γαστρὶ ἕξει καὶ τέξεται υἱόν καὶ καλέσεις τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ εμμανουηλ
Behold the virgin will have a child in the womb and shall bear a son and they will call His name Emmanoul.

If you miss the last part, consult St. Matthew:"which translated means 'God is with us.'" St. Matthew also tells us that the Father bore witness to Him saying "This is My beloved Son." But before that, the Magi "had come into the house, they saw the young Child with Mary His mother and prostrated and worshipped Him."

Deu 4:15 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 (EIKWN), the likeness of male or female,-LXX, Brenton

καὶ φυλάξεσθε σφόδρα τὰς ψυχὰς ὑμῶν ὅτι οὐκ εἴδετε ὁμοίωμα ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ᾗ ἐλάλησεν κύριος πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἐν χωρηβ ἐν τῷ ὄρει ἐκ μέσου τοῦ πυρός


ἀλλὰ ἑαυτὸν ἐκένωσεν μορφὴν δούλου λαβών, ἐν ὁμοιώματι ἀνθρώπων γενόμενος· καὶ σχήματι εὑρεθεὶς ὡς ἄνθρωπος  

5 Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, 7 but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in appearance [σχῆμα:outward appearance, form, shape] as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross. 9 Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, 10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, 11 and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

2)Moreover separating Transcendent Deity from His Flesh is Nestorianism.

If that is a bad thing, why do you do it?

Both natures are united indivisibly in the One Person of the Eternal Son.

Indeed.

Note the quote in the halo. It's from the OT.

3)It is evident from all the other God approved images in the Temple, Ark, etc, that God has no problem with images at all....ONLY those that render the Transcendent Infinite God finite like His creatures. That violates the Holiness of God, His separateness from all creation.

 Christ is the image (εἰκὼν, i.e. "icon") of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation....For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell. As He said "Before Abraham was, I AM." Despite the fact that He was not yet fifty years old.

There are more, but lets start with these, shall we?

What you have started St. John of Damascus, the Fathers of the Seventh Ecumenical Council and the Triumph of Orthodoxy ended long ago.


Since it bear's the image of Caesar, it is Caesar's, and therefore give it to Caesar. If the image of Christ, give it back to Christ, for it is Christ's.

[ialmisry]

proof.

Alfread Pearson, you say that icons are Nestorian. Can you please answer yes or no to the following questions?

A photo is similar to a painting. Yes/no?
Photos are taken using light sensitive sensors.  Yes/no?
Eyes are composed of light sensitive sensors. Yes/no?
Looking at someone creates an image of the person they are beholding within their eyes. Yes/no?
The first nestorian was Virgin Mary, because she looked at her own child. Yes/no?

If icons are nestorian then I claim that Virgin Mary was the first nestorian.

Maybe it was Abraham:
John 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad.”
57 Then the Jews said to Him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?”
58 Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”

[Robert W]

  This is turning into an absurd discussion about if Virgin Mary or Abraham was the first nestorian.

[ialmisry]

This is turning into an absurd discussion about if Virgin Mary or Abraham was the first nestorian.

Of course. Nestorius was the first Nestorian. Hence the term.

Some people refuse to learn from others' mistakes.

[Fr. George]

Why am I reminded of the confession of Basil of Ancyra at the 7th Ecumenical Council, when he said, "Anathema to those who apply the words of Holy Scripture which were spoken against idols, to the venerable images."  Hmmm.

[Fr. George]

Mr. Persson,

What do you think of the following?

he doctrine of the Eastern Church may be seen from the following from The Orthodox Confession of the faith of the Catholic and Apostolic Church of the East.

{Confes. Orthodox.  P. III. Q. LII. [apud Kimmel, Libri Symbolici Ecclesiæ Orientalis538538    This is not found in Schaff’s, The Creeds of Christendom, Vol. II., although part of the Orthodox Concession (viz. Pt. I.) is reprinted.  The editor explains (p. 275) that he has printed “the doctrinal part in full,” and has omitted the rest because it “belongs to Ethics rather than Symbolics.”  A somewhat extraordinary opinion to be held by anyone who has read the omitted parts.].}

Rightly therefore do we honour the Saints of God, as it is written (Ps. cxxxix. 17) “How dear are thy friends unto me, O God.”  And divine assistance we ask for through them, just as God ordered the friends of Job to go to his faithful servant, and that he should offer sacrifice and pray for them that they might obtain remission of sin through their patronage.  And in the second place this [First] commandment forbids men to adore any creature with the veneration of adoration (λατρείας).  For we do not honour the Saints as though adoring them, but we call upon them as our brothers, and as friends of God, and therefore we seek the divine assistance through these, our brethren.  For they go between the Lord and us for our advantage.  And this in no respect is opposed to this commandment of the decalogue.

Wherefore just as the Israelites did not sin when they called upon Moses to mediate between them and God, so neither do we sin, when we call for the aid and intercession of the Saints.

(Ibid.  Quæstio LIV.)

This [Second] Commandment is separate from the first.  For that treated of the Unity of the true God, forbidding and taking away the multitude of gods.  But the present treats of external religious ceremonies.  For besides the not honouring of false gods, we ought to dedicate no carved likeness in their honour, nor to venerate with adoration such things, nor to offer the sacrifices of adoration to them.  Therefore they sin against this commandment who venerate idols as gods, and offer sacrifices to them, and place their whole confidence and hope in them; as also the Psalmist says (Ps. cxxxv. 15), “The images of the heathen are silver and gold, etc.”  They also transgress this precept who are given up to covetousness, etc.

(Ibid.  Quæstio LV.)

There is a great distinction between idols and images (τῶν εἰδώλων καὶ τῶν εἰκόνων).  For idols are the figments and inventions of men, as the Apostle testifies when he says (1 Cor. viii. 4), “We know that an idol is nothing in the world.”  But an image is a representation of a true thing having a real existence in the world.  Thus, for example, the image of our Saviour Jesus Christ and of the holy Virgin Mary, and of all the Saints.  Moreover, the Pagans venerated their idols as gods, and offered to them sacrifices, esteeming the gold and silver to be God, as did Nebuchadnezzar.

But when we honour and venerate the images, we in no way venerate the colours or the wood of which they are made; but we glorify with the veneration of dulia (δουλείας), those holy beings of which these are the images, making them by this means present to our minds as if we could see them with our eyes.  For this reason we venerate the image of the crucifixion, and place before our minds Christ hung upon the cross for our salvation, and to such like we bow the head, and bend the knee with thanksgiving.  Likewise we venerate the image of the Virgin Mary, we lift up our mind to her the most holy Mother of God, bowing both head and knees before her; calling her blessed above all men and women, with the Archangel Gabriel.  The veneration, moreover, of the holy images as received in the orthodox Church, in no respect transgresses this commandment.

But this is not one and the same with that we offer to God; nor do the orthodox give it to the art of the painting, but to those very Saints whom the images represent.  The Cherubim which overshadowed the mercy-seat, representing the true Cherubim which stand before God in heaven, the Israelites revered and honoured without any violation of the commandment of God, and likewise the children of Israel revered the tabernacle of witness with a suitable honour (II Sam. vi. 13), and yet in no respect sinned nor set at naught this precept, but rather the more glorified God.  From these considerations it is evident that when we honour the holy images, we do not transgress the commandment of the decalogue, but we most especially praise God, who is “to be admired in his Saints” (Ps. lxviii. 35).  But this only we should be careful of, that every image has a label, telling of what Saint it is, that thus the intention of him who venerates it may be the more easily fulfilled.

And for the greater establishment of the veneration of the holy images, the Church of God at the Seventh Ecumenical Synod anathematized all those who made war against the images, and set forth the veneration of the august images, and established it forever, as is evident from the ninth canon of that synod.

(Ibid.  Quæstio LVI.)

Why was he praised in the Old Testament who broke down the brazen serpent (II Kgs. xviii. 4) which long before Moses had set up on high?  Answer:  Because the Jews were beginning an apostasy from the veneration of the true God, venerating that serpent as the true God; and offering to it incense as the Scripture saith.  Therefore wishing to cut off this evil, lest it might spread further, he broke up that serpent in order that the Israelites might have no longer that incentive to idolatry.  But before they honoured the serpent with the veneration of adoration, no one was condemned in that respect nor was the serpent broken.

But Christians in no respect honour images as gods, neither in their veneration do they take anything from the true adoration due to God.  Nay, rather they are led by the hand, as it were, by the image to God, while under their visible representations they honour the Saints with the veneration of dulia (δουλικῶς) as the friends of God; asking for their mediation (μεσιτεύουσιν) to the Lord.  And if perchance some have strayed, from their lack of knowledge, in their veneration, it were better to teach such an one, rather than that the veneration of the august images should be banished from the Church.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xvi.xiii.html

[ialmisry]

Deu 4:15 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 (EIKWN), the likeness of male or female,-LXX, Brenton

It says that the Israelites you could not use any form to represent God, who had not revealed himself to them in any form at that point. God did finally reveal Himself in Jesus Christ, who does have a form.

Thanks for responding to the argument.

You have a whole thread here for your views.

You  argue the prohibition against male icons of God is because God never revealed Himself as a human male.

BUT if that is true, how is it God said they never saw His similitude, they certainly saw human males.

He had not been incarnated yet. Phillipians 1:7. Do keep up.

Therefore your exegesis is impossible.

Only if you repeat the error of Valentinus, who imagined that Chrsit brought His Body from Heaven, and passed through the Vrigin like a pipe.
http://books.google.com/books?id=rJw3AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA56&dq=Panarion+Christ+body+from+heaven&cd=1#v=onepage&q&f=false

Rather than permit the making of icons if God reveals His similitude, God stated a historical fact, "ye saw no similitude" and then prohibits any kind of icon of His similitude, including those imaging human flesh.

God stated a historical fact "'He who has seen Me has seen the Father'....and showing His hands said "Look! Be not unbelieving but believe."

Therefore any icon of God's similitude contradicts Deu 4:15f.

ὅς ἐστιν εἰκὼν τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ἀοράτου, πρωτότοκος πάσης κτίσεως,
Christ "is the image (icon) of the Invisible God, the firstborn of all creation," "the express image of His person," The fullfilment of Deut. 4:15, "for it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness dwell," for "God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets,  has in these last days spoken to us by His Son".

So if an icon of Jesus body is made, that is a denial 1)He is God, or 2)came in human flesh.

No, denying His icon is a confession of Docetism, that God only "seemed" to come in human flesh.

The rest of what you say is germane only if you can refute the above, so until then, lets focus on Deut 4:15f.

The veil of Moses does not cover our minds, so whenever we read the law of Moses we can only focus on John 1:14, 16-7.

[ialmisry]

The originator of Perssonism seems hell bent on repeating past erros, including his own:

Deu 4:15 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:

This isn't talking about the Incarnation. This is talking about the Ancient Jews not seeing similitude in the day in which the Lord spoke to them in Choreb on the mountain out of the midst of the fire.

If the incarnate body is not the "similitude of God" this verse is irrelevant to icons, which destroys the rational for making icons...that the incarnation made the similitude of God sensible and therefore can be imaged.

You can't have both as true, you must choose; either

1)the "similitude" in Deu 4:15 is the "incarnate body" of Christ

OR

2)the "similitude" in Deu 4:15 is NOT the "incarnate body" of Christ



If you pick #1, then: the icon's prototype is not 1)God for the prohibition doesn't have an except if you seen it clause; 2)His similitude is not human flesh as it is expressly ruled out as an image of His similitude.

If you pick #2, then: John D's rational for making icons of God vanishes, the prohibition remains and you are all idolatrous.


Pick one.

Its irrelevant how you understand that...what is material is your choice of these 2 possibilities:

1)the "similitude" in Deu 4:15 is the "incarnate body" of Christ

OR

2)the "similitude" in Deu 4:15 is NOT the "incarnate body" of Christ


Pick one.

Prove its relevance...show how that destroys the need to pick one of these two possibilities:

1)the "similitude" in Deu 4:15 is the "incarnate body" of Christ

OR

2)the "similitude" in Deu 4:15 is NOT the "incarnate body" of Christ

If you can't do that, you must pick one.

We pick the One, Holy Catholic, Apostolic and Orthodox Church, the Body of Christ, Who took flesh and dwelt among us, and the Church beheld His glory, to whom he gave the right to become children of God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets,  has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, rendering Deut. 4:15 "obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear."

[ialmisry]

Alfred Persson,

You have yet to respond to the points of discussion directed to your assertions in the following thread:
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,29149.0.html

Have a nice day.

You want I step into a "gauntlet". Kindly tell them all "Keep holding  your breath, he will be here any minute!"

ha ha!

God says "they saw no similitude",

They didn't. But God the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we behold His Glory.

they cannot make an ICON in the likeness of a human male etc.

They couldn't.  Being the Body of Christ, we can, should and do.

Therefore human flesh is not God's similitude, they have seen that.

No, we have seen Him, and thus we have seen God the Father.

Deu 4:15 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 (EIKWN), the likeness of male or female,-LXX, Brenton

God "hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. 7But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away: 8How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? 9For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory. 10For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth. 11For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious. 12Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech: 13And not as Moses, which put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished: 14But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ. 15But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart. 6Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away. (KJV-you seem to have changed your preference-II Corinthians 3)

"1Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us, 2Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God....18For ye are not come unto the mount that might be touched, and that burned with fire, nor unto blackness, and darkness, and tempest, 19And the sound of a trumpet, and the voice of words; which voice they that heard intreated that the word should not be spoken to them any more: 20(For they could not endure that which was commanded, And if so much as a beast touch the mountain, it shall be stoned, or thrust through with a dart: 21And so terrible was the sight, that Moses said, I exceedingly fear and quake:) 22But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, 23To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, 24And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel." Heb. 12).

John of Damascus says Jesus incarnate body is the similitude of God, we can make an icon of Him, this therefore does not violate Deu 4:15f

.

Are you quoting or do you assUme that is what St. John says?

As Deu does not allow icons of God in human flesh, the only way an icon of Jesus body does not violate Deut 4:15 is if:

1)The icon's prototype is not God.
2)The icon is not imaging human flesh.

Demonstrating yet again that you have not read St. John.

He who has seen Him has seen the Fatehr. Unless you follow Valentius, Nestorius, the Gnostics....

That is my First argument.

Hesiarchs before argued it. St. John answered it.

Here is the Second:

1)If icons image the Incarnate flesh only, they are tearing His human nature from the divine, Nestorian.
2)If icons image the whole Christ, then they confuse the two natures in the one icon, Monophysite.

Christ showed....the Apostles looked....they said "We have seen the Lord"...."be not unbeleiving, but believe"....."My Lord and My God." He who has seen Him has seen the Father, as the Word became flesh and dwelt among us and we beheld His glory.

Now  you can decry my pedigree, education, religion, ect, but until you actually treat my argument, nothing you gents say is relevant

If any reading this suddenly realize how foolish icons are and are wondering what to do next...

Remember what St. Paul said: 6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: 7Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. 8But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. 9As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed  (Galations 1)

Repent of idolatry and any mysticism with it and cry out to the LORD Jesus Christ, "save me a sinner, I beg you", publicly confess you believe He is LORD risen from the dead," for it is  written:

 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)

The Lord's sermon on the Mount (Matthew 7:)21Not every one that saith unto Me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of My Father which is in heaven. 22Many will say to Me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Thy name? and in Thy name have cast out devils? and in Thy name done many wonderful works? 23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from Me, ye that work iniquity.

God does not lie,

No, God doesn't. The gates of Hell shall never prevail against His Church, and He will be with her all the days until the end of the age.

do that, and you are saved. He will guide you what to do next.

Do as the apostle Paul said:"Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle." II Thessalonians 2:15..."Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the traditions, as I delivered them to you." I Corinthians 11:2...."Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us." II Thessalonians 3:6.

I recall obeying that myself, and haven't looked back at my former life wanting anything, these 30+ years Jesus has always been with me, never forsaking me.

So why did you forsake Him? Luke 10:16.

And He will do the same for you, but you must repent, and confess He is LORD in public, before the eyes of angels and men.

I Timothy 3:14These things write I unto thee, hoping to come unto thee shortly: 15But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

16And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

[Alfred Persson]

The "Apologia of St John Damascene Against Iconoclasts" is an argument by analogy: The similitude of God is like the Incarnate body of God:

"And the Lord spoke to you from the midst of the fire. You heard the voice of His words, but you saw not any form at all." (Deut. 4.12) And shortly afterwards: "Keep your souls carefully. You saw not any similitude in the day that the Lord God spoke to you in Horeb from the midst of the fire, lest perhaps being deceived you might make you a graven similitude, or image of male and female......
The Scripture says, "You have not seen the likeness of Him." (Ex. 33.20) What wisdom in the law-giver. How depict the invisible? How picture the inconceivable? How give expression to the limitless, the immeasurable, the invisible? How give a form to immensity? How paint immortality? How localise mystery? It is clear that when you contemplate God, who is a pure spirit, becoming man for your sake, you will be able to clothe Him with the human form. When the Invisible One becomes visible to flesh, you may then draw a likeness of His form. When He who is a pure spirit, without form or limit, immeasurable in the boundlessness of His own nature, existing as God, takes upon Himself the form of a servant in substance and in stature, and a body of flesh, then you may draw His likeness, and show it to anyone willing to contemplate it. Depict His ineffable condescension, His virginal birth, His baptism in the Jordan, His transfiguration on Thabor, His all-powerful sufferings, His death and miracles, the proofs of His Godhead, the deeds which He worked in the flesh through divine power, His saving Cross, His Sepulchre, and resurrection, and ascent into heaven. Give to it all the endurance of engraving and colour.-Apologia of St John Damascene Against iconoclasts,

"You have not seen the likeness of Him" paraphrases Deut 4:12, not Ex 33:20.

" When the Invisible One becomes visible to flesh, you may then draw a likeness of His form."

John's implied premise: God prohibits imaging the similitude of God because we have not seen it, therefore God would permit imaging the Incarnate body of God because we have seen it.

If this is not correct, John's argument fails. So the question is, "Did God say the Israelites could image His similitude had they seen it?" Was the fact its unlike anything in the experience of man the reason we cannot image it?

"So be careful to guard your souls, for you saw no form when the Lord spoke to you at Horeb on the mountain from the midst of the fire. 16. Do not act lawlessly and make for yourselves a carved form of any image the likeness of male or female. 17. the likeness of any cattle on the earth, or the likeness of any winged bird that flies under heaven. 18 the likeness of anything that creeps on the ground, or in the likeness of any fish in the waters beneath the earth."-Deu 4:15-18 Orthodox Bible.

No because this context is Moses' exegesis of the second commandment, which adds infinite heaven, where every possible image would exist, to the list of areas containing forbidden likenesses of His similitude:

"You shall not make yourself an image, neither any likeness of anything in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, or in the waters under the earth."-Deu 5:8 OB

God had revealed Himself in fire at Horeb, condescending to a Personal relationship with HIs people. It would be abhorrent to God if His children began to visualize Him as some dungy image as they communed with His Spirit.

"I am the Lord God; this is my Name. I will not give my glory to another, not My praise to carved images."-Isaiah 42:8 OB

When the transcendent God becomes a detestable image in the psyche of man, any personal relationship with God is defiled, driving God away:

"Then He said to me, "Son of man, do you see what they are doing? They commit great acts of lawlessness here to keep Me from My sanctuary."-Ezekiel 8:6 OP

21 Little children, keep yourselves from idols. Amen. (1Jo 5:21 NKJ)

[theistgal]

Idols are false gods.  Christ is the true God.  Therefore, an icon of Him is not an idol but simply a reminder that God became flesh and dwelt among us. 

[Fr. George]

No because this context is Moses' exegesis of the second commandment, which adds infinite heaven, where every possible image would exist, to the list of areas containing forbidden likenesses of His similitude:

"You shall not make yourself an image, neither any likeness of anything in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, or in the waters under the earth."-Deu 5:8 OB

Why, in one instance, would any image of anything in heaven or earth be forbidden, and yet in another instance God commanded the likenesses of Angels to be carved into the Ark?  Why would likenesses of angels be depicted in the Temple?  Why would He command Moses to make the Bronze serpent?  Your argument is sounding more Muslim than Christian.

[genesisone]

"So be careful to guard your souls, for you saw no form when the Lord spoke to you at Horeb on the mountain from the midst of the fire. 16. Do not act lawlessly and make for yourselves a carved form of any image the likeness of male or female. 17. the likeness of any cattle on the earth, or the likeness of any winged bird that flies under heaven. 18 the likeness of anything that creeps on the ground, or in the likeness of any fish in the waters beneath the earth."-Deu 4:15-18 Orthodox Bible.

Deut 4:19 "Also do not act lawlessly when you lift your eyes to heaven and see the sun, the moon, and the stars, all the adornment of heaven, and you thus go astray and worship and serve them, which the Lord your God assigned to all the nations under heaven." (SAAS)

From v16 "do not act lawlessly...."; from v19 "do not act lawlessly...." Note the parallel construction that then leads to "and you thus go astray and worship and serve them. If (carved) images are by their very nature idols, then so are all the heavenly bodies.

"You shall not make yourself an image, neither any likeness of anything in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, or in the waters under the earth."-Deu 5:8 OB

The thought of this verse is completed in verse 9: "you shall not bow down to them nor serve them...."(SAAS)
Context matters.

[ialmisry]

The "Apologia of St John Damascene Against Iconoclasts" is an argument by analogy: The similitude of God is like the Incarnate body of God:

"And the Lord spoke to you from the midst of the fire. You heard the voice of His words, but you saw not any form at all." (Deut. 4.12) And shortly afterwards: "Keep your souls carefully. You saw not any similitude in the day that the Lord God spoke to you in Horeb from the midst of the fire, lest perhaps being deceived you might make you a graven similitude, or image of male and female......
The Scripture says, "You have not seen the likeness of Him." (Ex. 33.20) What wisdom in the law-giver. How depict the invisible? How picture the inconceivable? How give expression to the limitless, the immeasurable, the invisible? How give a form to immensity? How paint immortality? How localise mystery? It is clear that when you contemplate God, who is a pure spirit, becoming man for your sake, you will be able to clothe Him with the human form. When the Invisible One becomes visible to flesh, you may then draw a likeness of His form. When He who is a pure spirit, without form or limit, immeasurable in the boundlessness of His own nature, existing as God, takes upon Himself the form of a servant in substance and in stature, and a body of flesh, then you may draw His likeness, and show it to anyone willing to contemplate it. Depict His ineffable condescension, His virginal birth, His baptism in the Jordan, His transfiguration on Thabor, His all-powerful sufferings, His death and miracles, the proofs of His Godhead, the deeds which He worked in the flesh through divine power, His saving Cross, His Sepulchre, and resurrection, and ascent into heaven. Give to it all the endurance of engraving and colour.-Apologia of St John Damascene Against iconoclasts,

"You have not seen the likeness of Him" paraphrases Deut 4:12, not Ex 33:20.

" When the Invisible One becomes visible to flesh, you may then draw a likeness of His form."

John's implied premise: God prohibits imaging the similitude of God because we have not seen it, therefore God would permit imaging the Incarnate body of God because we have seen it.

If this is not correct, John's argument fails. So the question is, "Did God say the Israelites could image His similitude had they seen it?" Was the fact its unlike anything in the experience of man the reason we cannot image it?

"So be careful to guard your souls, for you saw no form when the Lord spoke to you at Horeb on the mountain from the midst of the fire. 16. Do not act lawlessly and make for yourselves a carved form of any image the likeness of male or female. 17. the likeness of any cattle on the earth, or the likeness of any winged bird that flies under heaven. 18 the likeness of anything that creeps on the ground, or in the likeness of any fish in the waters beneath the earth."-Deu 4:15-18 Orthodox Bible.

No because this context is Moses' exegesis of the second commandment, which adds infinite heaven, where every possible image would exist, to the list of areas containing forbidden likenesses of His similitude:

"You shall not make yourself an image, neither any likeness of anything in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, or in the waters under the earth."-Deu 5:8 OB

God had revealed Himself in fire at Horeb, condescending to a Personal relationship with HIs people. It would be abhorrent to God if His children began to visualize Him as some dungy image as they communed with His Spirit.

"I am the Lord God; this is my Name. I will not give my glory to another, not My praise to carved images."-Isaiah 42:8 OB

When the transcendent God becomes a detestable image in the psyche of man, any personal relationship with God is defiled, driving God away:

"Then He said to me, "Son of man, do you see what they are doing? They commit great acts of lawlessness here to keep Me from My sanctuary."-Ezekiel 8:6 OP

21 Little children, keep yourselves from idols. Amen. (1Jo 5:21 NKJ)

This seems to be a repeat of the post answered here.
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,29148.msg460023/topicseen.html#msg460023

[ialmisry]

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.

Ah, but consistent iconoclasts do.

"A picture is worth a thousand words."  If you put up a painting or a statute, it's for a reason.  If I have a picture on your wall of Jesus, it tells me something. If you have a picture of the Dalai Lama, Ann Rand, Marx, Che Guevara, Playboy's Miss August,....it tellls me something else. If if you do not pray before it or burn incense before it.

There's a reason why in the Soviet Union pictures of Lenin and Stlalin were all over, and why the picture of Lenin or Stalin being put in a public place spreads fear.  Few look at the Statue of Liberty without being moved in some way, Americans one way, al-Qaida another. Film is among the most, if not THE most effective means of propoganda: children often play what they see in film.  After "Top Gun" enlistment to the air force shot up.

Aniconists and Iconoclasts see the power of the image and shun it.  The Amish shun it based on their interpretation (with as much authority as your interpretation, i.e. none) of Exodus and Deuteronomy, knowing that pictures arose egoism (see how everyone preens and tries not to look like themself, i.e. the plain truth, when they sit for a photo.  Your like minded rabbis shun images whether or not they are used as idols.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aniconism_in_Judaism

An authoritative breakdown can be found in the Shulkhan Arukh, section yoreh deah which takes the literal meaning of פסל pesel as "graven image" (from the root פסל P-S-L, "to engrave." See Exodus 34:1, 4; Deuteronomy 10:1, 3.) The prohibition is therefore seen as applying specifically to certain forms of sculpture and depictions of the human face. In keeping with this prohibition, some illustrations from the Middle Ages feature fantastic creatures—usually bird-headed humanoids, even when the depictions are quite clearly meant to be those of historical or mythological humans. The most well-known is the Birds' Head Haggadah (Germany, circa 1300). Because such creatures as gryphons, harpies, sphynxes, and the Phoenix do not actually exist, no violation of the prohibition is perceived in such depictions. This is based on the fact that the Second Commandment, as stated in Exodus, refers specifically to "anything in the heaven above, on the earth below, or in the water below the land." However, it is forbidden to make the four faces on the Divine Chariot (Ezekiel I) or the ministering angels, because these are believed to be real beings that actually exist "in the heaven above." (Kitzur Shulkhan Arukh 138:1)

(the part on the sphinx being OK is odd, since although that idol is nothing in the world and that there is none other God but one, it was worshipped):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Sphinx_of_Giza

The Muslims shun images, in particular of Muhammad.  The Danish cartoon flap a few years ago brought this up, but most Muslims do not want even respectful pictures of their prophet-even a respectful one can get you killed.  For instance, here is a picture of Muhammad destroying the idols in the Ka'bah (btw, according to Muslim Tradition there was an icon of the Theotokos and Christ in the Ka'bah, which their prophet covered with his body while instructing his followers to destroy everything else).  He's the flame.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depictions_of_Muhammad
he is also shown veiled, when he is shown at all.


When Muslims make movies on Muhammad, he is never shown: the characters only talk about him, and when necessary, the camera takes the viewpoint of Muhammad.  Since Protestant iconoclasts come from a religion with icons, they have no problem with film and pictures of Christ. Except those who take their aniconic views seriously, who become iconoclasts, and like the B'nei Noach reject the incarnation as idolatry and join the rest who interpret the prohibition of images like you do.

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.

"He who has seen Me has seen the Father."  So you believe the Father is not transcendent Deity and not infinite? 

God made Himself finite when he took the likeness of man.  We had no means to accomplish that.  It was the good pleasure of the Father which did, emptying out the fullness of Godhead into the icon of the invisible God.

God doesn't want to be imaged in your psyche as you pray to Him,

The He would not have taken flesh and shown us His glory, showing on Tabor what was not seen on Sinai.

that would be like me visualizing you as dung as I spoke to you.[/b]

One of the early Muslim polemics about the incarnation have to do with the idea of God coming out of a filthy place (there words) full of urine and dung, and blood and menses.  The Holy Theotokos bore the Son. He wasn't her bowel movement.

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

We see Him as He is, the finite man Who is the firstborn of all creation, the icon of the invisible God.  In the beginning the Word was God, and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us and we beheld His glory.

[ialmisry]

...
You see, Alfred, you've come to an Orthodox Christian discussion forum to present a doctrine that contradicts what the Apostles taught us and we have always believed...

If that's the case, cite the apostolic teaching God is to be imaged, and venerated through that image.

He is the icon of the invisible God, in Whom it was the good pleasure of the Father that the fullness of the Godhead to dwell in Christ, reconciling the world to Himself, and when He came into the world God ordered that all His angels worship Him(Col. 1:15, 19, I Corinthians 5:19 Heb. 1:6)

Obviously you cannot,

We have, several times.

Vatican: Oldest known images of apostles Andrew and John found......I think they were dated to the 4th century

The reality/facts on the ground for early Christianity is one of:

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

As for back as we have physical evidence of Christianity, we find icons.

but I can cite where Paul contradicts what you have been taught:

NKJ  2 Corinthians 5:7 For we walk by faith, not by sight. (2Co 5:7 NKJ)

Then why does he "come to visions and revelations of the Lord" (2Cor 12;1) and ask the same Church "Am I not an apostle? Am I not free? Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? Are you not my work in the Lord?" (1Co 9:1). Before your quote the Apostles says:

(2Cor. 3:)4 And we have such trust through Christ toward God. 5 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think of anything as being from ourselves, but our sufficiency is from God, 6 who also made us sufficient as ministers of the new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit;[a] for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.7 But if the ministry of death, written and engraved on stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of the glory of his countenance, which glory was passing away, 8 how will the ministry of the Spirit not be more glorious? 9 For if the ministry of condemnation had glory, the ministry of righteousness exceeds much more in glory. 10 For even what was made glorious had no glory in this respect, because of the glory that excels. 11 For if what is passing away was glorious, what remains is much more glorious.
12 Therefore, since we have such hope, we use great boldness of speech— 13 unlike Moses, who put a veil over his face so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the end of what was passing away. 14 But their minds were blinded. For until this day the same veil remains unlifted in the reading of the Old Testament, because the veil is taken away in Christ. 15 But even to this day, when Moses is read, a veil lies on their heart. 16 Nevertheless when one turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. 17 Now the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. 18 But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as by the Spirit of the Lord.
What do you think is the mirror we are looking in? 2Cor. 4:3 But even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, 4 whose minds the god of this age has blinded, who do not believe, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the icon of God, should shine on them. 6 For it is the God who commanded light to shine out of darkness, who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. Read the Gospel book He holds open

[ialmisry]

Then the incarnation of Christ is irrelevant to your icon. If you don't make an icon of Christ because you have seen His flesh, then you may as well make an icon of God, even though you haven't seen His similitude.

The argument for icons rests upon seeing Christ's body, while not making one because of not seeing the similitude.

If you destroy the rationale for icons, then what's to prevent making icons of the Father and the Spirit?

I'm not sure how what I just said made the incarnation of Christ irrelevant. The person of God the Father has not been seen, and is therefore not depictable, the person of the Holy Spirit has been seen in the form of a dove and is depictable, and Christ was seen because of the incarnation, and is also depictable.

Think about your statement:

The person of God the Father has not been seen, and is therefore not depictable

It should follow:

"The person of God the Son has not been seen, and is therefore not depictable"

BUT it doesn't, you depict the Son. How? Because His body was seen.

So the very existence of  your icon rests, not upon the Person, but upon the body of Christ.

So your icon must be imaging His Body, even if you maintain the prototype is the whole Christ.

No, God maintains that:"He is the icon of the invisible God the firstborn of creation [He wasn't "of creation" until He had His body]...For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness [of Godhead] should dwell and by Him to reconcile all things to Himself, by Him, whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made peace through His blood [I think He got His blood from His body, let us know if you deny that] of His Cross." Col. 1:15, 19-20.  That  is, if you believe "Paul, an Apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God" 1:1.  Of course, he claimed "God was in Christ" II Corin. 5:19.

The Person, and infinite Being of God, are not visible to image, only His body is.

So Christ lied when He told St. Philip "He who has seen Me has seen the Father." John 14:9. Obviously, St. Philip was only looking at His body.  If He did thus not behold the Person of Christ, the infinite Being of God, the Fullness of Godhead, the Word made flesh, and did not behold the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, then icons are a lie, as much a lie as the words of Christ the Word in John 14:9 God did not take the likeness of man, nor take flesh and dwell among us.

And the Holy Spirit caused St. Elizabeth to lie, as she was "filled with the Holy Spirit and spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. And whence is this to me, that the mother of My Lord should come to me?" Luke 1:41-43. The Lord could only have a mother if "when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law," (Gal. 4:4) and if that lying Spirit which made St. Elizabeth call the Holy Theotokos "the Mother of My Lord," then that same lying Spirit lies when "God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into [our] hearts, crying, Abba, Father" (Gal. 4: 6).

Matthew 12:31. Mark 3:29. Luke 12:10.

You seem intent on repeating Nestorius' mistakes.

So you can't tell me Christ's body is not being imaged by your icon.

Why would we deny that. Of course our icon images Christ's body, the icon of the invisible God, in which all the fullness of Godhead dwellt by the good pleasure of the Father, Whom we see, seeing the express image of His person in the face of Jesus Christ (2 Cor.4:6).

That's from centuries before the iconclasts, from Mt. Sinai. God is now seen there.

[ialmisry]

...
You see, Alfred, you've come to an Orthodox Christian discussion forum to present a doctrine that contradicts what the Apostles taught us and we have always believed...

If that's the case, cite the apostolic teaching God is to be imaged, and venerated through that image.

It's not just on icons that you came to preach to us, Alfred.  Besides, the denial of icons is itself a denial of the Incarnation, a doctrine foundational to the Gospel proclaimed by the Apostles.

On the contrary, it is elementary acceptance of icons denies Jesus is God. God outlaws every possible icon of Himself, including those imaging human nature. The Orthodox appear centuries later, making images of Jesus, based on His human nature.

Therefore either Jesus is not God, or His Incarnate flesh is not human.

Therefore it is axiomatic: All who venerate icons and claim this does not violate Deut 4:16 thereby proclaim Jesus is not God.

You can put it in boldface, color, italics...as much as you like. It remains your eisogesis, dreamed up well over a millenium and a half after the Word became flesh and dwelt among us and we beheld His glory. As much as you want to pull the wool of the veil of Moses over our eyes, we still see the the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ, the icon of God (2 Corin. 4:4) "if our gospel be hid it is hid to them that are lost, whom the the god of this world hath blinded the mind of them which believe not lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ who is the image of God should shine unto them."

It is simplisitc denial of icons which denies Jesus is God. God enjoins the only possible icons of Himself, those imaging the human nature which likeness He took. The iconoclasts appear centuries later, destroying images of Jesus, based on the nature of the Incarnate Word.

The Orthodox, from whom you purloined your Bible, have been here since Christ promised us the gates of Hell would not prevail against that One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church, with which He promised to be all the days even unto the end of the Age.  You're on your own, because thou  walkest disorderly and not after the Tradition which we received of the Apostles.

If He cannot be imaged, then His dvinity was not incarnate, the Word did not take flesh, and the fullness of Godhead did not dwell within Him, and Jesus is not God. We dealt with this with Nestorius a millenium and a half before you decided to repeat his mistakes. Either Jesus isn't God or His divinity is not incarnate. Or His incarnate flesh isn't human, which makes the words of God the Word "Behold My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself: handle Me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see Me have." Luke 24:39 a lie.

The denial of the icon of the invisible God is the denial that Jesus is God. God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by His Son, the brightness of His glory, and the express image of His person, and again, when He bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, He saith, "And let all the angels of God worship Him."

He who sees Me has seen the Father. Moses saw on Tabor what He did not see on Sinai.  Therefore it is axiomatic: All who refuse to venerate icons and claim this does not violate Deut 4:16 thereby proclaim Jesus is not God.

[ialmisry]

Full answer on the more appropriate thread on this link:

You seem intent on repeating Nestorius' mistakes.

That wasn't an answer, and its iconographers who accomplish two heresies, with one icon.

As they image because of the incarnation of Christ, they are tearing the humanity of Christ, from His deity = Nesotorian.

As they image the Person of Christ, with one image, they confuse the natures in one icon = Monophysite.

Yes, you have chanted that mantra before.  But none of us have converted to Hinduism in the meantime, so we won't be worshipping your sacred cow, even if you put it in Bethel or Dan.  Rather, we'll be serving up the sacred beef filled theological arguments of St. John and Christ's Church.

LOL. The Nestorians tear the humanity of Christ from His deity, which is why, like you, they don't have icons.

You evidently didn't know that fact, did you?

As for Monophystism, if that were so, so is the Apostle Paul, who tells us that the fullness of Godhead, by the pleasure of the Father, dwellt in the icon of the invisible God, Who was born of a woman. You are actually the monophysite, because confuse the natures in the Person of Christ, claiming like Eutyches that His humanity disappears in the ocean of His divinity: evidently Christ must be the invisible man, because you claim His person cannot be imaged. But the Word became flesh and dwelt among us and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the Only Begotten of the Father.

[Shanghaiski]

Alfred seems to find the incarnation horribly inconvenient.

[ialmisry]

Obviously you cannot, but I can cite where Paul contradicts what you have been taught:

NKJ  2 Corinthians 5:7 For we walk by faith, not by sight. (2Co 5:7 NKJ)

Interesting.  I've never seen that passage from 2 Corinthians misused in quite that way before.  You do realize that St. Paul wrote that verse within the context of his preaching on being at home in the body and absent from the Lord as opposed to our anticipated good pleasure of being absent from the body and present with the Lord?  To turn that verse into a proof text against the painting and veneration of icons is indeed quite a stretch not supported at all by its context.  Could it be that you've lost this debate and are now grasping for straws in your desperation to score points?

John of Damascus discusses his need for the sensible to focus his faith, BUT apostolic doctrine has us walking by faith without the sensible being needed at all:

This nonsense as already been answered.

John of Damascus discusses his need for the sensible to focus his faith,

Evidently, St. John wasn't the only one in need for the sensible to focus his faith.
Exodus33:11And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend. And he turned again into the camp: but his servant Joshua, the son of Nun, a young man, departed not out of the tabernacle...17And the LORD said unto Moses, I will do this thing also that thou hast spoken: for thou hast found grace in My sight, and I know thee by name. 18And he said, I beseech Thee, shew me Thy glory.

BUT apostolic doctrine has us walking:

LOL. What do you know of apostolic doctrine? as thou walkest disorderly, and not after the Tradition which are received of the Apostles, as St. John points out:

by faith without the sensible being needed at all:

Oh? Is your Bible written in invisible ink?  Is it written on the air? As St. John says "Israel of old did not see God, but we see the Lord's glory face to face."
He goes ont to show the absence of substance to this empty argument:

2Co 1:24 Not for that we have dominion over your faith, but are helpers of your joy: for by faith ye stand.
2Co 4:18 While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.

Then why does he "come to visions and revelations of the Lord" (2Cor 12;1) and ask the same Church "Am I not an apostle? Am I not free? Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? Are you not my work in the Lord?" (1Co 9:1). Before your quote the Apostles says:
(2Cor. 3:)4 And we have such trust through Christ toward God. 5 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think of anything as being from ourselves, but our sufficiency is from God, 6 who also made us sufficient as ministers of the new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit;[a] for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.7 But if the ministry of death, written and engraved on stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of the glory of his countenance, which glory was passing away, 8 how will the ministry of the Spirit not be more glorious? 9 For if the ministry of condemnation had glory, the ministry of righteousness exceeds much more in glory. 10 For even what was made glorious had no glory in this respect, because of the glory that excels. 11 For if what is passing away was glorious, what remains is much more glorious.
12 Therefore, since we have such hope, we use great boldness of speech— 13 unlike Moses, who put a veil over his face so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the end of what was passing away. 14 But their minds were blinded. For until this day the same veil remains unlifted in the reading of the Old Testament, because the veil is taken away in Christ. 15 But even to this day, when Moses is read, a veil lies on their heart. 16 Nevertheless when one turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. 17 Now the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. 18 But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as by the Spirit of the Lord.
What do you think is the mirror we are looking in? 2Cor. 4:3 But even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, 4 whose minds the god of this age has blinded, who do not believe, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the icon of God, should shine on them. 6 For it is the God who commanded light to shine out of darkness, who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. Read the Gospel book He holds open.

2Cor. 5:19To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself.

Rom 8:24 For we are saved by hope: but hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for?
Rom 8:25 But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it.

Rom 1:19 That which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20For 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.
Rom. 8:28And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose. 29For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the icon of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. 30Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.
16:25Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, 26But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith.

Gal 2:20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

So, you're invisible? Or blind, that sight isn't involved?
you seemed to have skipped the red part.
Gal. 4:4But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law.
Gal. 4:12Brethren, I beseech you, be as I am; for I am as ye are: ye have not injured me at all. 13Ye know how through infirmity of the flesh I preached the gospel unto you at the first. 14And my temptation which was in my flesh ye despised not, nor rejected; but received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus. 15Where is then the blessedness ye spake of? for I bear you record, that, if it had been possible, ye would have plucked out your own eyes, and have given them to me.

Heb 10:38 Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him.
Heb 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. For by it the elders obtained a good report.

3Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear

Heb 11:27 By faith he forsook Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king: for he endured, as seeing him who is invisible.

7By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet...
13These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.
23By faith Moses, when he was born, was hid three months of his parents, because they saw he was a proper child; and they were not afraid of the king's commandment.
39And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise: 40God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.

"1Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us, 2Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God....18For ye are not come unto the mount that might be touched, and that burned with fire, nor unto blackness, and darkness, and tempest, 19And the sound of a trumpet, and the voice of words; which voice they that heard intreated that the word should not be spoken to them any more: 20(For they could not endure that which was commanded, And if so much as a beast touch the mountain, it shall be stoned, or thrust through with a dart: 21And so terrible was the sight, that Moses said, I exceedingly fear and quake:) 22But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, 23To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, 24And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel." Heb. 12).

Heb.1:1God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, 2Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds; 3Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person.
Heb. 1:6And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.
Heb. 2:8But now we see not yet all things put under him.
9But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour.
14Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same.  16For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. 17Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren. [angels are invisible, flesh and blood are not].
Heb. 10:19Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, 20By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh;

1Pe 1:8 Whom having not seen, ye love; in whom, though now ye see him not, yet believing, ye rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory:

1Pe 1:10Of which salvation the prophets have inquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: 11Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. 12Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.
1Pe 4:1Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin.
1Pe 5:1The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed.

2Pe. 1:16For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. 18And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.
2:1But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. 2And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. 3And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not
19We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: 20Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 21For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
3:1This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance: 2That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour.
14Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless. 15And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; 16As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. 17Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness. 18But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen.

[Fr. George]

I should probably just quote this entire thread to Mr. Persson in the other thread, where he insists on having all the refutations centralized so he can ignore them in one place.

[LBK]

I should probably just quote this entire thread to Mr. Persson in the other thread, where he insists on having all the refutations centralized so he can ignore them in one place.

 

[ialmisry]

I should probably just quote this entire thread to Mr. Persson in the other thread, where he insists on having all the refutations centralized so he can ignore them in one place.

LOL. It's just as easy not to address two threads as it is to not address one.

[Paisius]

All who refuse to venerate icons and claim this does not violate Deut 4:16 thereby proclaim Jesus is not God.

"As the prophets beheld, as the Apostles have taught, as the Church has received, as the Teachers have dogmatised, as the Universe has agreed, as Grace has shown forth, as Truth has revealed, as falsehood has been dissolved, as Wisdom has presented, as Christ awarded, thus we declare; thus we assert, thus we preach Christ our true God, and honour His Saints in words, in writings, in thoughts, in sacrifices, in Churches, in Holy Icons; on the one hand worshiping and reverencing Christ as God and Lord; and on the other hand honouring as true servants of the same Lord of all and accordingly offering them veneration.

"This is the Faith of the Apostles, this is the Faith of the Fathers, this is the Faith of the Orthodox, this is the Faith which has established the Universe!"

[ialmisry]

All who refuse to venerate icons and claim this does not violate Deut 4:16 thereby proclaim Jesus is not God.

"As the prophets beheld, as the Apostles have taught, as the Church has received, as the Teachers have dogmatised, as the Universe has agreed, as Grace has shown forth, as Truth has revealed, as falsehood has been dissolved, as Wisdom has presented, as Christ awarded, thus we declare; thus we assert, thus we preach Christ our true God, and honour His Saints in words, in writings, in thoughts, in sacrifices, in Churches, in Holy Icons; on the one hand worshiping and reverencing Christ as God and Lord; and on the other hand honouring as true servants of the same Lord of all and accordingly offering them veneration.

"This is the Faith of the Apostles, this is the Faith of the Fathers, this is the Faith of the Orthodox, this is the Faith which has established the Universe!"

John 12:44Jesus cried and said, He that believeth on me, believeth not on me, but on him that sent me. 45And he that seeth me seeth him that sent me. 46I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness. 47And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world. 48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. 49 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. 50 And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak

[ialmisry]

The Holy Spirit wanted "both sides" of the coin revealed, and chose this way to do it. Both are correct, there is no contradiction at all. But the resolution of the apparent paradox will have to wait for another thread...its quite elementary actually...implicit in the following:

NKJ  Romans 8:29 For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image icon (EIKWN) of His Son
 (Rom 8:29 NKJ)

ὅτι οὓς προέγνω, καὶ προώρισε συμμόρφους τῆς εἰκόνος τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ, εἰς τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν πρωτότοκον ἐν πολλοῖς ἀδελφοῖς·
fixed that for you.

[ialmisry]

No, most were like a Bible study in a house.

Have you looked at the archeological evidence which shows the layout of early house-churches? They were set up for liturgical worship. If they were sitting around having Bible studies which might resemble what many Protestants do today, how were they understanding the texts they were looking at? Who was guiding them in their exegesis?

They certainly were not letting the Scripture interpret itself, as the communities only had some, not all of the later-canonized New Testament writings. They were reading some gospels, some epistles, and what you would likely consider a bunch of superstitious fantasy, like the Acts of Paul and Thecla. I would actually be suspicious of Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism if they lacked any references in their tradition to such works, as they themselves were a part of the life of the Church. Through its liturgical life, the Church has commemorated and preserved many of these stories within the tradition, at least those which were true and beneficial for the flock.

So anyway, the point is that they certainly would have been studying the Septuagint, which we still use in perfect continuity with not only the early Church but also with the LORD Christ, St. Paul and all of the New Testament quotations of the Old Testament. But beyond that they were confined to regional and communal texts, and there was a lot of ambiguity surrounding what were to be considered authoritative writings. Even if every house church had been full of literate Christians (which they were not), who all carried around pocket-sized Septuagints (which they didn't), they still would have looked to their bishop to teach them what they learned from the apostles. They would certainly not have looked to themselves for an authoritative interpretation. Those who did where infamous. They were the heretics.

The earliest house churches were not set up for liturgy.

The earliest house Churches had Divine Liturgy. That is what made them a house Church. On the earliest evidence we have:

But I remember them, they were precisely like the apostolic church:

LOL. Rmember? You were neither in an Apostle's Church in person, nor by extension. You have to be there first to remember.

I've been to several House Churches, for instance the House of St. Ananias in Damascus and in the Decapolis, where the Hebrew Christian fled after the martyrdo of St. James the Brother of God, the first patriarch of Jerusalem. The best preserved in original condition is the Dura Europas House Church, which, like all the house Churches, show that it was renovated to accommodate liturgical worship. And yes, it is covered iin icons.

Btw, we still have plenty of house Churches among the Orthodox in this country. I was just at a former one for Transfiguration. Former, because now it has been fully converted into a Church, but you can still see, if you look close, where the walls that used to seperate rooms were removed, etc. My own Church used to be a Lutheran Church, and we had a lot of adaptation to bring it into line with Orthodox worship (like removing the pews).

Peter's house was perhaps the first house church:

No, the Upper Room of St. Mark''s mother Maria, site of the Last Supper and Pentecost (among other events), "Holy and glorious Sion, mother of all churches" (Intercession in the Divine Liturgy of St. James, the Brother of God)

"Church of the Apostles Found on Mt. Zion," Bargil Pixner.  Biblical Archaeological Review May/June 1990 Issue
http://www.centuryone.org/apostles.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cenacle#History

It has been set up for Divine Liturgy, but it has been extensively destroyed and reconstructed, so I don't know if you can make anything of that.

I was there in the early '90's, and a Pentecostal couple was sitting there railing against "dead Tradition [sic], like Lazarus in the tomb." (they thought the Orthodox even deader than the Vatican). They placed great store in being in the spot of the original Church.  They were perplexed when I raised the issue of how they knew that that was the spot, as only "dead" Tradition could provide that information. I also reminded them that Lazarus rose from the tomb.

For all intents and purposes, this house as originally built is indistinguishable from all other houses of ancient Capernaum. Its indoor living area is somewhat larger than usual, but overall it is about the same size as other houses. Its building materials are the usual ones. It was built with no more sophistication than the others in the region. In short, there is nothing to distinguish this house from its neighbors, except perhaps the events that transpired there and what happened to it later.- Editor, H. S. (2004; 2004). BAR 08:06 (Nov/Dec 1982). Biblical Archaeology Society[/b]

Beginning in the latter half of the first century AD, this house displayed markedly different characteristics than the other excavated houses. The rough walls were reworked with care and were covered with inscriptions; the floor was covered with a fine layer of plaster. Furthermore, almost no domestic ceramics are recovered, but lamps abound. One explanation suggested for this treatment is that the room was venerated as a religious gathering place, a domus-ecclesia or house church, for the Christian community. (Loffreda, 1984)
The 4th-century transformation
In this period, the sacra insula acquired a new appearance. First, a thick-walled, slightly trapezoidal enclosure was built surrounding the entire insula; its sides were 27-30 meters long. Made of plaster, they reached a height of 2.3 meters on the north side. It had two doors, one in the southwest corner and the other in the northeast corner.
Next, although there is evidence that the private houses remained in use after the transformation, the one particular room that had before been treated differently was profoundly altered and expanded. A central archway was added to support a roof and the north wall was strengthened with mortar. New pavement was installed, and the walls and floor were plastered. (Loffreda, 1974)
This structure remained until the middle of the fifth century when the sacra insula was dismantled and replaced with a larger basilica.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capernaum#The_House_of_Peter

[Andrew21091]

according to Muslim Tradition there was an icon of the Theotokos and Christ in the Ka'bah, which their prophet covered with his body while instructing his followers to destroy everything else). 

Sorry for the off topic question but where is this tradition from? Is it in the Hadith or some other local tradition?

[ialmisry]

according to Muslim Tradition there was an icon of the Theotokos and Christ in the Ka'bah, which their prophet covered with his body while instructing his followers to destroy everything else). 

Sorry for the off topic question but where is this tradition from? Is it in the Hadith or some other local tradition?

Both.

[Andrew21091]

according to Muslim Tradition there was an icon of the Theotokos and Christ in the Ka'bah, which their prophet covered with his body while instructing his followers to destroy everything else). 

Sorry for the off topic question but where is this tradition from? Is it in the Hadith or some other local tradition?

Both.

Thanks.

[ialmisry]

I came across this in St Irenaeus "Against the Heretics" bk II, cp XXVI, and I thought of Mr. Persson's eisogesis:

Knowledge puffs up, but love edifies.
1. It is therefore better and more profitable to belong to the simple and unlettered class, and by means of love to attain to nearness to God, than, by imagining ourselves learned and skilful, to be found [among those who are] blasphemous against their own God, inasmuch as they conjure up another God as the Father. And for this reason Paul exclaimed, Knowledge puffs up, but love edifies: 1 Corinthians 8:1 not that he meant to inveigh against a true knowledge of God, for in that case he would have accused himself; but, because he knew that some, puffed up by the pretence of knowledge, fall away from the love of God, and imagine that they themselves are perfect, for this reason that they set forth an imperfect Creator, with the view of putting an end to the pride which they feel on account of knowledge of this kind, he says, Knowledge puffs up, but love edifies. Now there can be no greater conceit than this, that any one should imagine he is better and more perfect than He who made and fashioned him, and imparted to him the breath of life, and commanded this very thing into existence. It is therefore better, as I have said, that one should have no knowledge whatever of any one reason why a single thing in creation has been made, but should believe in God, and continue in His love, than that, puffed up through knowledge of this kind, he should fall away from that love which is the life of man; and that he should search after no other knowledge except [the knowledge of] Jesus Christ the Son of God, who was crucified for us, than that by subtle questions and hair-splitting expressions he should fall into impiety.

2. For how would it be, if any one, gradually elated by attempts of the kind referred to, should, because the Lord said that even the hairs of your head are all numbered, Matthew 10:30 set about inquiring into the number of hairs on each one's head, and endeavour to search out the reason on account of which one man has so many, and another so many, since all have not an equal number, but many thousands upon thousands are to be found with still varying numbers, on this account that some have larger and others smaller heads, some have bushy heads of hair, others thin, and others scarcely any hair at all—and then those who imagine that they have discovered the number of the hairs, should endeavour to apply that for the commendation of their own sect which they have conceived? Or again, if any one should, because of this expression which occurs in the Gospel, Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? And not one of them falls to the ground without the will of your Father, Matthew 10:29 take occasion to reckon up the number of sparrows caught daily, whether over all the world or in some particular district, and to make inquiry as to the reason of so many having been captured yesterday, so many the day before, and so many again on this day, and should then join on the number of sparrows to his [particular] hypothesis, would he not in that case mislead himself altogether, and drive into absolute insanity those that agreed with him, since men are always eager in such matters to be thought to have discovered something more extraordinary than their masters?
[ Schaff has the interesting note: "Illustrated by the history of modern thought in Germany" the motherland of "higher criticism."]
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.ix.iii.xxvii.html

3. But if any one should ask us whether every number of all the things which have been made, and which are made, is known to God, and whether every one of these [numbers] has, according to His providence, received that special amount which it contains; and on our agreeing that such is the case, and acknowledging that not one of the things which have been, or are, or shall be made, escapes the knowledge of God, but that through His providence every one of them has obtained its nature, and rank, and number, and special quantity, and that nothing whatever either has been or is produced in vain or accidentally, but with exceeding suitability [to the purpose intended], and in the exercise of transcendent knowledge, and that it was an admirable and truly divine intellect which could both distinguish and bring forth the proper causes of such a system: if, [I say,] any one, on obtaining our adherence and consent to this, should proceed to reckon up the sand and pebbles of the earth, yea also the waves of the sea and the stars of heaven, and should endeavour to think out the causes of the number which he imagines himself to have discovered, would not his labour be in vain, and would not such a man be justly declared mad, and destitute of reason, by all possessed of common sense? And the more he occupied himself beyond others in questions of this kind, and the more he imagines himself to find out beyond others, styling them unskilful, ignorant, and animal beings, because they do not enter into his so useless labour, the more is he [in reality] insane, foolish, struck as it were with a thunderbolt, since indeed he does in no one point own himself inferior to God; but, by the knowledge which he imagines himself to have discovered, he changes God Himself, and exalts his own opinion above the greatness of the Creator.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103226.htm

[ialmisry]

It is all well and good to say "any doctrine that can't be found", but at the same time, what doctrines are these, Mr Persson?  Well before I came to the Orthodox Church I tested Her doctrines against the Scriptures, and I can tell you, Mr Persson, Her doctrines are the sound doctrines given Her by the Apostles, upheld by the saints throughout history.  Our Sacraments are the same now as they were in the time of the Apostles, our Church hierarchy has changed but little (priests [an English word derived from "presbyter"] serving under bishops were a necessity after the Church grew to such an extent that one Church could no longer house the whole of the believers in one location)  and is the same as in the time of St Athanasius, and there is no heresy to be found within Her.  We are the ones who defied Arius, Nestor, Apollinarius, Montanus, Marcion, and a host of Roman emperors be they pagan or heretic or apostate; we are the ones who gave you the Gospel and Epistles; we are the ones who hold fast to the traditions we were taught by word, while you wave the Epistles in our face claiming we neglect Truth (your own quote: stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle.), though we also follow the Epistles to the letter. 

You give us some fake bogeyman when you talk to us of heresy, for there is no heresy that has not been challenged and defeated by the Orthodox Church.

Give me time, I'm just started to post here. As for your claim, its impossible you found icon veneration in the NT, it isn't there. Its an inference, one that never occurred to the early church,

I've posted the quotes from the NT and the exogesis of the Fathers thereof. I won't repeat myself this time.

hundreds of years later,

It is held that the Apostle John fell asleep in 100, and the Apostles Peter and Paul in the 60's. The Apostle martyred, St. James, was put to Herod's sword in 44. 

The House Church of Dura Europas, in the backwater of the Roman Empire, covered in icons, can be precisely dated to the 230's

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

So at most, even if you talk your word as true ( ), there is at most 184 years and really only 130 years from the last Apostle to the earliest physical icons we have presently that can be dated precisely.  That is not to talk about the ones that cannot be dated precisely and the ones that may one day be found-Dura Europas was only found in 1920. Before that Protestants used to wax eloquent on the blank walls of the ancient Churches.  If we include the ones that cannot be dated precisely, we have a century before Constantine packed full of icons we still physically have.  Oh, well.

So you don't even have a second century, by any stretch, to say "hundreds of years later," and that's only if I give you perceived silence, ambiguous cases, etc.

From then on the archeological record is quite full, even if the literary sources are not: icons are not mentioned so much.  So your iconoclasts, if they had existed, would have had half a millenium to do their prooftexting and inferences for this heresy. Yet no, no dogmatic works on this untill the edict of 726-30.  And we have plenty of documents from those centuries in which we have nothing but silence from your imaginary iconoclasts, in contrast to the mere fragments we have on any aspect of the Faith from the first century after the Apostles.

people started thinking about images, not the church militant that conquered the Roman empire.

The Holy Icons, both by archeology and sources, are well documented before the Church conquered the Roman Empire, the fulfilment of the sign of Jonah on the political plane: Ninevah had converted.

[DennyB]

What is Perssonism's teaching on icons?  Easy,get rid of the icons,and build new ones,formed by one's reason,intellect,and imagination,all by using Scripture alone!!! And my, don't the myriads and myriads of images abound!!!

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Orthodox-Other Christian Discussion > Topic: Perssonism's teaching on icons.