A fully grown tree looks a lot different from when it was a sapling. YiM's argument is essentially,"But it's got all these big branches, fruits, and flowers, and stuff, it can't be the same plant as that little sapling." If you try to hack off all the branches of a tree to try and make it look like a sapling, you'll just mutilate the tree and kill it. Same with the Church.
The metaphor is incorrect & loaded.
The "metaphor"-which is actually an analogy-is spot on. The only thing it is loaded with is the truth.
Which is why you don't like it.
As a sapling was created through the fruit of another tree. In the torah we read "after its own kind". Iconography is not after any kind, and was purely created by men.
The images of the Tabernacle, Temple and Synagogue show otherwise.
Iconography was not written in our scriptures at all and there are not provable icons or usage of them.
Neither is the Table of Contents of the Biblical Canon, but you use ours (at least of the NT) anyways.
They are a major part of EO theology, yet not in originality.
Yes, we are familiar with your mantra. No, it has not grown in strength by repetition.
"the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have beheld His Glory"..."He who has seen Me has seen the Father"..."But even if our Gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, 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. 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."..."He is the icon of the invisible God...in Whom the Godhead was pleased to dwell."
We have the promise of Christ that Hell will never prevail over the Church-if the Church fell into idolatry, as you accuse her, then He is a liar.
We have no promise about you, just a warning:
I know you are kind of being cute on this one, like saying I'm the heretic who Paul warned about.... No, the one St. (II) Peter (3) warned about:
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: 3Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts...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
Icons in ornate served settings, being bowed to by clergy like that... The likenesses of things in heaven. No proof in the 1st century, and very little proof of icons until the 4-5th century.Just every Church ever discovered before the 4th century has them.
And the catacombs, which are full of them, went out of use in the 4th century. By the 10th century, they were all but forgotten, a hidden surprise for the iconoclast Protestants a century after the Reformation.
Do you really think Paul warned about people trying to follow God's commands, or those who try to convince people to break God's commands?"His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction."
You are following the Pharisee Saul, not St. Paul.
As the EO faith claims to be the original, why are there no writings by the earliest Christians, artifacts, or scriptures referencing icons or the veneration of them? Even in the writings of the earliest saints..
You are the living proof that history should be done by historians. And that too much crime TV shows are ruining juries.
Look, we can pot shot all we want guys, but there is this thing called the truth.
Yes, and you have proved yourself a stranger to it, while we know Him.
I've asked for historical reference, proof, and writings of Christians between 0-150AD referencing the veneration of icons, use of icons, etc. Also looking for artifacts of that time.
It think that is fair.
Only if you can produce a Christian artifact of the same time period.
You guys used to challenge us for something predating Constantine. And then the catacombs were discovered....
Immaturity & pot shots do not equate to proof.
Your posts are proof of that.
They may make the EO feel better about their position, with an underlay of delusion.
And your proof that you are not deluding yourself?
You have already accepted our proof, i.e. the Scriptures, while denying its source. Jesusisiamism is going to have to have its Joseph Smith Jr. moment to get the scriptures to "prove" its point.
As important and widespread use of iconography there is within the EO faith - which claims originality - why are there no writings about them or icons themselves (from 0-150ad)?
Why are there next to no writings, if not none, about them 200-313, when we have the actual images themselves (Dura Europas, catacombs, etc.)?
There's a task for you: show us some writing on icons from 200-313 AD.