OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 22, 2014, 09:54:00 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: When were icons first introduced & can be proven?  (Read 9291 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Agia Marina
Site Supporter
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA, Bulgarian Diocese
Posts: 424


St. Marina of Antioch


WWW
« Reply #135 on: June 19, 2013, 03:50:40 AM »

Soooo, using your "logic," I must conclude that the ancient pagans didn't worship idols, or have images.  After all, if their most famous examples don't exist, why should I believe they ever existed?
+1   Wink
Logged

“When I have a little money I buy books; and if any is left, I buy food and clothes.” - Erasmus

"God became man so that man might become a god." ~St. Athanasius the Great

Poster formerly known as EVOO.
primuspilus
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,667


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #136 on: June 19, 2013, 09:59:41 AM »

Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #137 on: June 19, 2013, 10:16:16 AM »

Not really. All you guys have ever done for years now is say the above. "We're right, its clear!" as if that really meant something.

I don't know what happened during the years of my absence from this forum, but from my total time here, I don't know if this is an entirely fair assessment.  Many different people seem to have offered answers to this and similar questions from different angles to try and present a comprehensive answer (I myself learned some new things from this discussion).  But the only answer that seems like it would satisfy the questioner is something outrageous along the lines of "Here is a photo of an icon from the first century, along with a treatise written by the Apostle Silas describing the apostolic theology of icons and how to venerate them...you'll notice the same procedure outlined in the Jordanville Prayer Book nineteen centuries later".  Absent this, his attitude seems to be that icons are just plain old idolatry.  All manner of Youtube videos making outrageous claims with flimsy evidence are acceptable when they fit his narrative, but the moment something doesn't, the only way to prove it is to pull a first century example out of your hat.  Nonsense. 
I have to concur with your diagnosis on our physician who cannot heal himself.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,667


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #138 on: June 19, 2013, 10:18:06 AM »

Not really. All you guys have ever done for years now is say the above. "We're right, its clear!" as if that really meant something.

I don't know what happened during the years of my absence from this forum, but from my total time here, I don't know if this is an entirely fair assessment.  Many different people seem to have offered answers to this and similar questions from different angles to try and present a comprehensive answer (I myself learned some new things from this discussion).  But the only answer that seems like it would satisfy the questioner is something outrageous along the lines of "Here is a photo of an icon from the first century, along with a treatise written by the Apostle Silas describing the apostolic theology of icons and how to venerate them...you'll notice the same procedure outlined in the Jordanville Prayer Book nineteen centuries later".  Absent this, his attitude seems to be that icons are just plain old idolatry.  All manner of Youtube videos making outrageous claims with flimsy evidence are acceptable when they fit his narrative, but the moment something doesn't, the only way to prove it is to pull a first century example out of your hat.  Nonsense. 
I have to concur with your diagnosis on our physician who cannot heal himself.
Par for the course 'round these parts.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #139 on: June 19, 2013, 10:37:46 AM »

I say icons were not part of the earliest church at all, as I have never been able to find a record or writing of them from early on.   I've searched so many early writings.. Nothing.

How do you define "earliest church?" Your likely answer, combined with the implied assumption that the "earliest church" is the criterion of faith, would cause problems as even if one were to grant that icons weren't part of the "earliest church," other things like the completed New Testament itself wouldn't be part of the "earliest church." Since hey, no writings saying these 27 works are the dogmatic compilation of post-OT Scripture are found from time of the apostles. Right?

I mostly focus on 1st and 2nd century Christianity.
Too bad you live in the 21st century.
Logged

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

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #140 on: June 19, 2013, 11:42:50 AM »

I think the first known example of Christian icon-veneration is when the apostles bowed down before Christ (Matthew 28:9), the icon of God the Father (Colossians 1:15).

There's also the Alexamenos graffito, which is a satire of a Christian venerating a cross (which has the same theological justification as venerating an icon).

I don't know if jesusisiamism accepts independent evidence as proof. (btw, at the LATEST, this grafitto dates two centuries after the Crucifixion, and might just be one century after, or even less).

Maybe jesusisiam can pitch his views here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jesus_Seminar
« Last Edit: June 19, 2013, 11:47:53 AM by ialmisry » Logged

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

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #141 on: June 19, 2013, 11:45:23 AM »

When was the idea of Christ introduced and can it be proven?  I don't want legends from the so-called gospels or later additions to Josephus or made-up tradition.  DNA evidence is preferable.  If you have videotapes of any of his miracles, that would help me out too.  I also accept live-streaming of any of his sermons. Also, it might help me out if we could get Jesus' thoughts on calling His mom the Theotokos, anybody have any recordings on that?  Roll Eyes
You mean, the Jesus film
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_(1979_film)
isn't a home movie?
Logged

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

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #142 on: June 19, 2013, 12:05:28 PM »

When was the idea of Christ introduced and can it be proven?  I don't want legends from the so-called gospels or later additions to Josephus or made-up tradition.  DNA evidence is preferable.  If you have videotapes of any of his miracles, that would help me out too.  I also accept live-streaming of any of his sermons. Also, it might help me out if we could get Jesus' thoughts on calling His mom the Theotokos, anybody have any recordings on that?  Roll Eyes

I'm usually all for mocking as a way to get a point across, but in this case it seems like he has serious questions and really wants to be able to be Orthodox. There is nothing wrong asking for reasonable evidence to back the claim that icon painting comes directly from Christ and the apostles. I would claim no such thing. But maybe I'm wrong in that. If it needs to be proven as true and we have enough historical evidence to verify other practices, it seems reasonable to be able to provide some evidence for this. I think that the framework is there for imagery in worship settings in the temple and at early Christian gathering sites, but he seems to want evidence of people bowing before and kissing images in the early centuries. I personally don't think anyone's gonna find it because I don't think anyone was doing it.
It's not like they were rubbing themselves with the Apostles' napkins or anything.  Acts 19:12

The problem with jesusisiam's conscience is that he credits it and its "knowledge" more than the wisdom and fidelity of the Church. Ever since Lucifer's tumble down to Satan, Pride hath come before a fall.
Logged

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

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,670



« Reply #143 on: June 19, 2013, 12:27:13 PM »

I think the first known example of Christian icon-veneration is when the apostles bowed down before Christ (Matthew 28:9), the icon of God the Father (Colossians 1:15).

There's also the Alexamenos graffito, which is a satire of a Christian venerating a cross (which has the same theological justification as venerating an icon).

I don't know if jesusisiamism accepts independent evidence as proof. (btw, at the LATEST, this grafitto dates two centuries after the Crucifixion, and might just be one century after, or even less).

Maybe jesusisiam can pitch his views here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jesus_Seminar

Wow. Never saw this before.

The Classics department at one University I was at had a collection of a lot of graffiti from antiquity. Nothing much different than you would find scrawled on a men's bathroom stall.

This is crazy. Thanks.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Fabio Leite
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 3,518


Future belongs to God only.


WWW
« Reply #144 on: June 19, 2013, 12:34:07 PM »

God ordered we venerate His image in ourselves when He ordered chastisty.

God ordered the construction of images of Heaven in the Temple and on the Ark, made His own Presence there, and ordered that His Presence should be venerated there.

God shows the difference between God-oriented veneration and idolatry in the case of healing serpent of bronze of Moses. God orders veneration of the serpent for the healing of the people, God destroys the image when it turns into idolatry. So you have images that were rightfully venerated in the Temple, images that were worshipped (the Golden Calf) and a pedagogical example where one turns into the other, so we would be able to differentiate, neither denying the first, nor falling into the second.

Revelations is filled with liturgical imagery and it's an entirely visual book. Although divinely inspired, in its form it's clearly the product of a religious environment that is primarily visual and liturgical.

Further, in visions and dreams Gods makes His presence and will known through speech *and* icons. Although most certainly the ways of veneration have changed over the centuries, it was always a God-inspired tradition.
« Last Edit: June 19, 2013, 12:34:44 PM by Fabio Leite » Logged

Multiple Energies, Three Persons, Two Natures, One God.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #145 on: June 19, 2013, 12:41:56 PM »

There are the Dura-Europos Church which is from the think century. I also find this interesting (without being able to say anything about it's Scientific value:
Quote
A general assumption that Early Christianity was generally aniconic, opposed to religious imagery in both theory and practice, has been challenged by Paul Corby Finney's analysis of Early Christian writing and material remains (1994). This distinguishes three different sources of attitudes affecting Early Christians on the issue: "first that humans could have a direct vision of God; second that they could not; and, third, that although humans could see God they were best advised not to look, and were strictly forbidden to represent what they had seen". These derived respectively from Greek and Near Eastern pagan religions, from Ancient Greek philosophy, and from the Jewish tradition and the Old Testament. Of the three, Finney concludes that "overall, Israel's aversion to sacred images influenced early Christianity considerably less than the Greek philosophical tradition of invisible deity apophatically defined", so placing less emphasis on the Jewish background of most of the first Christians than most traditional accounts.[8] Finney suggests that "the reasons for the non-appearance of Christian art before 200 have nothing to do with principled aversion to art, with other-worldliness, or with anti-materialism. The truth is simple and mundane: Christians lacked land and capital. Art requires both. As soon as they began to acquire land and capital, Christians began to experiment with their own distinctive forms of art".[9]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Christian_art_and_architecture
His third source of attitudes faces the problem that as synagogues predating 313 have been unearthed, they have had iconography, including the one down the street from the Dura Europas Church.
Logged

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

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #146 on: June 19, 2013, 12:59:37 PM »

What i wanted to say was just that the thing that helped me in my journey towards iconography was looking on the truth matter, not history matter. Iconography was coined publicly as the church got so thanks to Constantine, but the understanding was there before, even long way back to the ark of the covenant.

Back in the early church a priest/monk could worship and love God much more just by watching the waves of the sea. If was need icons today, and the church can declare and prove it truthful, then history does not matter.

Forgive me if i point out some examples or questions. But the bible and its content/message can´t withstand the test we many times put forth on iconography. The texts and its entirety was kept through tradition, or else someone need to give me a new testament written 10 years after Christs death for me to believe it. No rather the truth within it is what matters, not where I can find the earliest copy. Same standard goes with it all, including icons.

If the EO worship in 100 years only would consist of prayer, 24 hours a day, among 100% of EO believers. What would the one seeking for 100% praying Christians say when he/she couldn´t find that through history. Is praying 24 hours a day then wrong?

That inlays another problem for another thread.  Constantine.... Yes, St. Constantine - murdered over 200k people AFTER Nicea.  Go check other threads.

And you keep killing that poor dead horse. How can you expect to be a saint?

Hey if a man who kills 200k people after his conversion to Christianity can be venerated on put on an iconostasis.......   Oh nevermind.  Tongue

200.000? I find that hard to believe.
don't let facts get in the way of the narrative.  Like the fact that St. Constantine could have been dumped after his death by his generation, like Stalin rightly was.

200,000, btw, would be about 5% of the population.  Stalin at most killed 10%, perhaps as low as 5%.
Logged

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

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #147 on: June 19, 2013, 01:03:01 PM »

Refuted no.  Murdered and excommunicated, yes.

The Iconodules weren't refuted but murdered and excommunicated.

He was speaking of iconoclasts and comparing me to one.  Iconoclasts were murdered by iconodules.
No, iconodules were murdered by iconoclasts.  Read history, not revisionism.
« Last Edit: June 19, 2013, 01:04:00 PM by ialmisry » Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of North America - Western Rite Orthodox
Posts: 6,667


Inserting personal quote here.


WWW
« Reply #148 on: June 20, 2013, 07:44:20 AM »

Refuted no.  Murdered and excommunicated, yes.

The Iconodules weren't refuted but murdered and excommunicated.

He was speaking of iconoclasts and comparing me to one.  Iconoclasts were murdered by iconodules.
You are an iconoclast.

Quote
I mostly focus on 1st and 2nd century Christianity
Other than the parts you dont like.

PP
Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,522


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #149 on: June 23, 2013, 10:49:38 PM »

Refuted no.  Murdered and excommunicated, yes.

The Iconodules weren't refuted but murdered and excommunicated.

He was speaking of iconoclasts and comparing me to one.  Iconoclasts were murdered by iconodules.
You are an iconoclast.

Quote
I mostly focus on 1st and 2nd century Christianity
Other than the parts you dont like.

PP

I just don't kiss paint and wood while saying "beam it up St. Peter".

And certainly I accept the 1st and 2nd Century stuff.  Why else do I ask for it so much?  Odd thing is, and the harsh reality, there were no icons used by the earliest Christians, or writings about icons.

Would love to see one writing from St. Polycarp stating "Veneration of images (or icons) will raise your kiss the that depicted in the image".    (or similar statement)

Nothing of the sort exists in early Christian writings....   Gah, and to think, this man worshiped on the Sabbath AND practiced the Jewish feasts.....  He's a saint too, but by EO canon, anathema.... Irony at its best.... You really can't make this stuff up.

There were no icons in use, nor venerated artificial images in the earliest Christian church.
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
Nephi
Monster Tamer
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Non-Chalcedonian Byzantine
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch
Posts: 4,735



« Reply #150 on: June 23, 2013, 10:57:47 PM »

There were no icons in use, nor venerated artificial images in the earliest Christian church.

Then did you make this thread for any other reason than to argue?
Logged
TheMathematician
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: American
Posts: 1,627


Formerly known as Montalo


« Reply #151 on: June 23, 2013, 11:04:57 PM »

In the earliest Christian Church, as you put it, what need would there to be icons? The death of Christ was still recent, and many of the disciples still knew Him firsthand, so why write icons of someone that way in your midst(as a living breathing person, ignoring everything else).
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,178


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #152 on: June 23, 2013, 11:16:59 PM »

Refuted no.  Murdered and excommunicated, yes.

The Iconodules weren't refuted but murdered and excommunicated.

He was speaking of iconoclasts and comparing me to one.  Iconoclasts were murdered by iconodules.
You are an iconoclast.

Quote
I mostly focus on 1st and 2nd century Christianity
Other than the parts you dont like.

PP

I just don't kiss paint and wood while saying "beam it up St. Peter".

And certainly I accept the 1st and 2nd Century stuff.  Why else do I ask for it so much?  Odd thing is, and the harsh reality, there were no icons used by the earliest Christians, or writings about icons.

Would love to see one writing from St. Polycarp stating "Veneration of images (or icons) will raise your kiss the that depicted in the image".    (or similar statement)

Nothing of the sort exists in early Christian writings....   Gah, and to think, this man worshiped on the Sabbath AND practiced the Jewish feasts.....  He's a saint too, but by EO canon, anathema.... Irony at its best.... You really can't make this stuff up.

There were no icons in use, nor venerated artificial images in the earliest Christian church.
Why are you so infatuated with first and second century Christianity?
Logged
Seraphim98
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 567



« Reply #153 on: June 23, 2013, 11:29:39 PM »

The Scriptures say that the Church is the pillar and foundation of all truth.

If the Orthodox Church is the Church in historical and spiritual continuity with the Apostles then this matter lies within her authority. She exercised that authority at the 7th Council to consider all these matters…the same authority used by the Church in Acts 15 to settle the questions surrounding the teachings of the Judaizers.  At the 7th council the boundaries with which images could be made and used within the Church were established, and various misuses discouraged and condemned.

The only essential question here is not what did the first century Church do…but rather what did the Church do with respect to the question of images. The Church, like her Head is not bound in Time, but is rather bound together by the Spirit across all ages both past and yet to come.  The Church, in the Spirit made a decision on this question. One accepts it or rejects it…but if you reject it, then wittingly or not you reject Christ as well as His Bride in to whose hands He committed this question.

If you protest the Council was not a Council of the Church then where did the "true" Church disappear to for several centuries. Did it go invisible all of a sudden after nearly a 1000 years of being historical and visible?  Where is this Church today? Can it still speak with the same authority as did the Church of the 7 councils?

If you admit the 7th Council was a Council of the Church, then you cannot escape the authority of that council and its canons upon the faith for all Christians of every age.  The Church has spoken on this issue. The matter was resolved and peace restored to the Church after 150 years of turmoil and persecution.

There is no appeal to a first or second century Church. The Church is one. It has one life just like there is but one life in ontological continuity between a seed and the cornstalk. The stalk may resemble the seed outwardly very little if at all…but inwardly it is the same…the same life, the same DNA unfolding and growing, and reproducing according to it's kind.  So…does the Orthodox Church reproduce in kind with the Apostolic Church? Does it still produce holy lives of transfigured men and women from that day till this of Apostolic character?  So, unless we suddenly have been bereft of Holy Elders and Living Saints in this age, then it is self evident the Orthodox Church still reproduces in kind, and thus show it is the Church in ontological continuity with the Apostles.

That Church has spoken. And according to the Apocalypse the Spirt and Bride speak as one. The matter is settled. Your choice is only to accept and honor that authority or deny and dishonor it and thus the one Who gave that authority.  I see no other reasonable option.
« Last Edit: June 23, 2013, 11:38:52 PM by Seraphim98 » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #154 on: June 23, 2013, 11:38:32 PM »

Refuted no.  Murdered and excommunicated, yes.

The Iconodules weren't refuted but murdered and excommunicated.

He was speaking of iconoclasts and comparing me to one.  Iconoclasts were murdered by iconodules.
You are an iconoclast.

Quote
I mostly focus on 1st and 2nd century Christianity
Other than the parts you dont like.

PP

I just don't kiss paint and wood while saying "beam it up St. Peter".

And certainly I accept the 1st and 2nd Century stuff.
No, you do not.
Why else do I ask for it so much?
To feed your ego.

Odd thing is, and the harsh reality, there were no icons used by the earliest Christians, or writings about icons.
Odd thing is, and the harsh reality, you depend on the earliest Christians who used icons and wrote the Scriptures for the Bible you claim to read.

Would love to see one writing from St. Polycarp stating "Veneration of images (or icons) will raise your kiss the that depicted in the image".    (or similar statement)
The same St. Polycarp whose relics were gathered up for veneration immediately after his martyrdom?

Nothing of the sort exists in early Christian writings....
Neither does a Biblical canon.

Gah, and to think, this man worshiped on the Sabbath AND practiced the Jewish feasts.....  He's a saint too, but by EO canon, anathema.... Irony at its best.... You really can't make this stuff up.
And yet you continually do.

Btw, St. Polycarp worshiped on Sunday (and every day leading up to Saturday).  And no, he didn't practice the Jewish feasts.

There were no icons in use, nor venerated artificial images in the earliest Christian church.
so Jesusisiam pontificates ex cathedra outside of the Church.  Today.
Logged

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

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #155 on: June 23, 2013, 11:39:25 PM »

Refuted no.  Murdered and excommunicated, yes.

The Iconodules weren't refuted but murdered and excommunicated.

He was speaking of iconoclasts and comparing me to one.  Iconoclasts were murdered by iconodules.
You are an iconoclast.

Quote
I mostly focus on 1st and 2nd century Christianity
Other than the parts you dont like.

PP

I just don't kiss paint and wood while saying "beam it up St. Peter".

And certainly I accept the 1st and 2nd Century stuff.  Why else do I ask for it so much?  Odd thing is, and the harsh reality, there were no icons used by the earliest Christians, or writings about icons.

Would love to see one writing from St. Polycarp stating "Veneration of images (or icons) will raise your kiss the that depicted in the image".    (or similar statement)

Nothing of the sort exists in early Christian writings....   Gah, and to think, this man worshiped on the Sabbath AND practiced the Jewish feasts.....  He's a saint too, but by EO canon, anathema.... Irony at its best.... You really can't make this stuff up.

There were no icons in use, nor venerated artificial images in the earliest Christian church.
Why are you so infatuated with first and second century Christianity?
he worships a god of the gaps, thinking he can fill them in.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,643


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #156 on: June 24, 2013, 01:21:17 AM »

We proclaim Christ also by our senses on all sides, and we sanctify the noblest sense, which is that of sight. The image is a memorial, just what words are to a listening ear. What a book is to the literate, that an image is to the illiterate. The image speaks to the sight as words to the ear; it brings us understanding. Hence God ordered the ark to be made of imperishable wood, and to be gilded outside and in, and the tablets to be put in it, and the staff and the golden urn containing the manna, for a remembrance of the past and a type of the future. Who can say these were not images and far-sounding heralds? And they did not hang on the walls of the tabernacle; but in sight of all the people who looked towards them, they were brought forward for the worship and adoration of God, who made use of them.  It is evident that they were not worshipped for themselves, but that the people were led through them to remember past signs, and to worship the God of wonders.They were images to serve as recollections, not divine, but leading to divine things by divine power.

[20] And God ordered twelve stones to be taken out of the Jordan, and specified why. For he says: "When your son asks you the meaning of these stones, tell him how the water left the Jordan by the divine command, and how the ark was saved and the whole people." (Jos. 4.21-22) How, then, shall we not record on image the saving pains and wonders of Christ our Lord, so that when my child asks me, "What is this?" I may say, that God the Word became man, and that for His sake not Israel alone passed through the Jordan, but all the human race gained their original happiness. Through Him human nature rose from the lowest depths of the earth higher than the skies, and in His Person sat down on the throne His Father had prepared for Him.


From In Defense of the Holy Images. Indeed, there's nothing St John of Damascus can't answer.
Logged
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,643


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #157 on: June 24, 2013, 01:29:29 AM »

More from St John, from the same treatise:

Behold, then, matter is honoured, and you dishonour it. What is more insignificant than goat's hair, or colours, and are not violet and purple and scarlet colours? And the likeness of the cherubim are the work of man's hand, and the tabernacle itself from first to last was an image. "Look," said God to Moses, "and make it according to the pattern that was shown thee in the Mount," (Ex. 25.40) and it was adored by the people of Israel in a circle. And, as to the cherubim, were they not in sight of the people? And did not the people look at the ark, and the lamps, and the table, the golden urn and the staff, and adore? It is not matter which I adore; it is the Lord of matter, becoming matter for my sake, taking up His abode in matter and working out my salvation through matter. For "the Word was made Flesh, and dwelt amongst us." (Jn. 1.14)

It is evident to all that flesh is matter, and that it is created. I reverence and honour matter, and worship that which has brought about my salvation. I [73] honour it, not as God, but as a channel of divine strength and grace. Was not the thrice blessed wood of the Cross matter? and the sacred and holy mountain of Calvary? Was not the holy sepulchre matter, the life-giving stone the source of our resurrection? Was not the book of the Gospels matter, and the holy table which gives us the bread of life? Are not gold and silver matter, of which crosses, and holy pictures, and chalices are made? And above all, is not the Lord's Body and Blood composed of matter? Either reject the honor and worship of all these things, or conform to ecclesiastical tradition, sanctifying the worship of images in the name of God and of God's friends, and so obeying the grace of the Divine Spirit.

If you give up images on account of the law, you should also keep the Sabbath and be circumcised, for these are severely inculcated by it. You should observe all the law, and not celebrate the Lord's Passover out of Jerusalem. But you must know that if you observe the law, Christ will profit you nothing. (Gal. 5.2) You are ordered to marry your brother's wife, and so carry on his name, (Deut. 25.5ff) and not to sing the song of the Lord in a strange land. (Ps. 137.4) Enough of this! [74] "Those who have been justified by the law have fallen from grace." (Gal. 5.4)
Logged
orthonorm
Moderated
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,670



« Reply #158 on: June 24, 2013, 03:41:00 AM »

Why do you color the citation blue? It sorta makes its hard on the eyes to read.

For those who care the simplest solution is cut and paste of course.
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #159 on: June 24, 2013, 03:46:31 AM »

A veritable blitzkrieg of masterful argument!

Not really. All you guys have ever done for years now is say the above. "We're right, its clear!" as if that really meant something.
That is what I find most annoying... the people that want change are never happy to change themselves and allow others to remain the same, they insist on forcing it on everyone else. I guess it is the only way they feel legitimate.
The Faith was created by God, and people have no right or ability to change it, we must accept it as it is.

The other alternative is it has been created by people, and we have the right to change it. The problem here is that if the Faith is created according to the form of people's desires, it has no authority, there is no reason to accept it because it is not the truth - it is based on their own desires and not truth (ahem... Jeremiah 17:9).


(Sorry I was really trying to stay out of this thread)
« Last Edit: June 24, 2013, 03:49:55 AM by ialmisry » Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antioch
Posts: 859



« Reply #160 on: June 24, 2013, 04:53:31 AM »

In the earliest Christian Church, as you put it, what need would there to be icons? The death of Christ was still recent, and many of the disciples still knew Him firsthand, so why write icons of someone that way in your midst(as a living breathing person, ignoring everything else).

Hey easy there, fella!  Don't forget that "Faith" is about finding the things you like from each religion and customizing it to suit your own individualistic taste(s).  Just jumble it all together!   It's basically a postmodernists wet-dream.  

In that respect, it's perfectly reasonable to assume that the things you don't like about Orthodoxy, never really happened at all!  After all, if something really happened, there would be well documented evidence to support it.  This is especially true for the first century Church, which had plenty of time and resources to leave a detailed, secure record of all their practices and the meaning behind them.  If they wanted us to venerate icons, they wouldn't have left it to mere Tradition, right?

Oh yeah, and the Church has no authority to introduce other forms of worship that were not around in the first two centuries.
« Last Edit: June 24, 2013, 05:02:21 AM by john_mo » Logged

Love is not blind; that is the last thing that it is. Love is bound; and the more it is bound the less it is blind.

—G.K. Chesterton
Jason.Wike
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,046


« Reply #161 on: June 24, 2013, 05:11:03 AM »

A veritable blitzkrieg of masterful argument!

Not really. All you guys have ever done for years now is say the above. "We're right, its clear!" as if that really meant something.
That is what I find most annoying... the people that want change are never happy to change themselves and allow others to remain the same, they insist on forcing it on everyone else. I guess it is the only way they feel legitimate.
The Faith was created by God, and people have no right or ability to change it, we must accept it as it is.

The other alternative is it has been created by people, and we have the right to change it. The problem here is that if the Faith is created according to the form of people's desires, it has no authority, there is no reason to accept it because it is not the truth - it is based on their own desires and not truth (ahem... Jeremiah 17:9).


(Sorry I was really trying to stay out of this thread)

Nice to see you trolling around for stuff to troll and you spent three hours on it. Cheesy
« Last Edit: June 24, 2013, 05:11:21 AM by Jason.Wike » Logged
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,643


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #162 on: June 24, 2013, 05:17:59 AM »

A veritable blitzkrieg of masterful argument!

Not really. All you guys have ever done for years now is say the above. "We're right, its clear!" as if that really meant something.
That is what I find most annoying... the people that want change are never happy to change themselves and allow others to remain the same, they insist on forcing it on everyone else. I guess it is the only way they feel legitimate.
The Faith was created by God, and people have no right or ability to change it, we must accept it as it is.

The other alternative is it has been created by people, and we have the right to change it. The problem here is that if the Faith is created according to the form of people's desires, it has no authority, there is no reason to accept it because it is not the truth - it is based on their own desires and not truth (ahem... Jeremiah 17:9).


(Sorry I was really trying to stay out of this thread)

Nice to see you trolling around for stuff to troll and you spent three hours on it. Cheesy

They're your words ialmisry's quoting, Jason. Or are you denying you said them?
Logged
lovetzatziki
Moderated
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 430



« Reply #163 on: June 24, 2013, 05:24:24 AM »

A more serious but necessary challenge could be. Prove me that there was even a church existing in the 1th century.  

"I´m a historian, so your religious, traditional and fairy tale bible is not proof". I want more than that.

Yet we instantly accept as christians the fact that the church existed in the 1th century, not because the historian say yes or no on the matter. But because Christ promised it and he is the truth.

I thought the Bible as any written manuscript from the 1st century / 2nd century qualifies as a certified historical artefact of that time.
Logged
lovetzatziki
Moderated
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 430



« Reply #164 on: June 24, 2013, 05:29:49 AM »

I keep doing it, an NOBODY has EVER shown me an icon from the 1st century of the church.  Period.  Nor are there any writings of it on the 1st century of the church.

Can you point to a surviving manuscript from the New Testament from the first century? I don't think any manuscripts have survived from that period either.

I heard the same, that the original manuscripts of the New Testament did not survive. We don't have any original manuscripts of the Bible today. Just copies of copies.
Logged
Jason.Wike
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,046


« Reply #165 on: June 24, 2013, 05:34:34 AM »

A veritable blitzkrieg of masterful argument!

Not really. All you guys have ever done for years now is say the above. "We're right, its clear!" as if that really meant something.
That is what I find most annoying... the people that want change are never happy to change themselves and allow others to remain the same, they insist on forcing it on everyone else. I guess it is the only way they feel legitimate.
The Faith was created by God, and people have no right or ability to change it, we must accept it as it is.

The other alternative is it has been created by people, and we have the right to change it. The problem here is that if the Faith is created according to the form of people's desires, it has no authority, there is no reason to accept it because it is not the truth - it is based on their own desires and not truth (ahem... Jeremiah 17:9).


(Sorry I was really trying to stay out of this thread)

Nice to see you trolling around for stuff to troll and you spent three hours on it. Cheesy

They're your words ialmisry's quoting, Jason. Or are you denying you said them?

I'm not denying I said them. Its just funny (sad) he trawled through 1044 posts to re-post a bunch of things in different threads in response to me making him mad and some weird vendetta that seems to be developing.
« Last Edit: June 24, 2013, 05:36:36 AM by Jason.Wike » Logged
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Warned
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,643


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #166 on: June 24, 2013, 06:19:15 AM »

A veritable blitzkrieg of masterful argument!

Not really. All you guys have ever done for years now is say the above. "We're right, its clear!" as if that really meant something.
That is what I find most annoying... the people that want change are never happy to change themselves and allow others to remain the same, they insist on forcing it on everyone else. I guess it is the only way they feel legitimate.
The Faith was created by God, and people have no right or ability to change it, we must accept it as it is.

The other alternative is it has been created by people, and we have the right to change it. The problem here is that if the Faith is created according to the form of people's desires, it has no authority, there is no reason to accept it because it is not the truth - it is based on their own desires and not truth (ahem... Jeremiah 17:9).


(Sorry I was really trying to stay out of this thread)

Nice to see you trolling around for stuff to troll and you spent three hours on it. Cheesy

They're your words ialmisry's quoting, Jason. Or are you denying you said them?

I'm not denying I said them. Its just funny (sad) he trawled through 1044 posts to re-post a bunch of things in different threads in response to me making him mad and some weird vendetta that seems to be developing.

He wouldn't have needed to trawl through your every post. All he would have needed to do is a search on a keyword or phrase he knows you've used, and do a search, specifying your user name in the search.
Logged
lovetzatziki
Moderated
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 430



« Reply #167 on: June 24, 2013, 06:24:13 AM »

Quote
After the death and resurrection of Christ the new faith spread rapidly throughout the Roman world and the Near East. The stories of the Apostles and early witnesses who had seen and known Christ Himself were eagerly listened to by the converts to the new faith. Naturally, people who had seen Christ asked for descriptions of His appearance. At some point people began to create and distribute paintings of Christ. This also included his disciples and the reall martyrs of the Christian faith. The earliest images we know of was a statue of Christ which Eusebius, an important early Christian bishop, says had been set up in Caesarea-Phillipi (Paneaus) by the woman healed by Christ of an issue of blood. He also notes that in his time there were very ancient images of Peter and Paul.

However, the church was somewhat divided about images of Christ.
Eusebius refused to send the wife of Caesar Callus an image of Christ, for he thought it is idolatrous and a violation of Biblical injunctions. Some regional churches were against images as well, a local Spanish synod in 305 said images in churches were forbidden. However, the number of examples of paintings of the nativity and allegories of the Good Shepherd from around 250 AD, show how common Christian paintings had already become. The growth of images was concurrent with the development of the doctrine of the Incarnation of Christ and is closely tied to the growing awareness of this essential element of the Christian faith.

In early Christian times there were two images of Christ that were more or less standardized. One was of a young, idealized and clean shaven "hero" type. The second was the image we are familiar with today - a man in his late 20's or early 30's with long hair tied at the back, a smooth beard,

 
 http://www.kurskroot.com/history_of_icons.html

Quote
The earliest surviving Christian art comes from the late 2nd to early 4th centuries on the walls of tombs belonging, most likely, to wealthy[6] Christians in the catacombs of Rome, although from literary evidence there may well have been panel icons which, like almost all classical painting, have disappeared.
Initially Jesus was represented indirectly by pictogram symbols such as the Ichthys (fish), the peacock, or an anchor (the Labarum or Chi-Rho was a later development). Later personified symbols were used, including Jonah, whose three days in the belly of the whale pre-figured the interval between Christ's death and Resurrection; Daniel in the lion's den; or Orpheus charming the animals.[7] The Tomb of the Julii has a famous but unique mosaic of Christ as Sol Invictus, a sun-god.[8] The image of "The Good Shepherd", a beardless youth in pastoral scenes collecting sheep, was the most common of these images, and was probably not understood as a portrait of the historical Jesus at this period.[9] It continues the classical Kriophoros, and in some cases may also represent the Shepherd of Hermas, a popular Christian literary work of the 2nd century.[10]
Among the earliest depictions clearly intended to directly represent Jesus himself are many showing him as a baby, usually held by his mother, especially in the Adoration of the Magi, seen as the first theophany, or display of the incarnate Christ to the world at large.[11] The oldest known portrait of Jesus, found in Syria and dated to about 235, shows him as a beardless young man of authoritative and dignified bearing. He is depicted dressed in the style of a young philosopher, with close-cropped hair and wearing a tunic and pallium – signs of good breeding in Greco-Roman society. From this, it is evident that some early Christians paid no heed to the historical context of Jesus being a Jew and visualised him solely in terms of their own social context, as a quasi-heroic figure, without supernatural attributes such as a halo (a fourth-century innovation).
From the 3rd century onwards, the first narrative scenes from the Life of Christ to be clearly seen are the Baptism of Christ, painted in a catacomb in about 200,[18] and the miracle of the Raising of Lazarus,[19] both of which can be clearly identified by the inclusion of the dove of the Holy Spirit in Baptisms, and the vertical, shroud-wrapped body of Lazarus. Other scenes remain ambiguous – an agape feast may be intended as a Last Supper, but before the development of a recognised physical appearance for Christ, and attributes such as the halo, it is impossible to tell, as tituli or captions are rarely used. There are some surviving scenes from Christ's Works of about 235 from the Dura Europos church on the Persian frontier of the Empire. During the 4th century a much greater number of scenes came to be depicted,[20] usually showing Christ as youthful, beardless and with short hair that does not reach his shoulders, although there is considerable variation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depiction_of_Jesus

Quote

Rome, Catacombs of Sts. Marcellinus and Peter – Noah in the Ark   
There are also representations of the young people of Babylonia rescued from the flames of the furnace, Susan saved from the snares of the elders, Noah who escaped the flood, and Daniel who stayed unharmed in the lions’ den.

From the New Testament, the miracles are chosen of healing (the blind man, the paralytic, the hemorrhaging woman) and resurrection (Lazarus, the widow of Naim’s son, Jairus’ daughter), but also other episodes, such as the conversation with the Samaritan woman at the well and the multiplication of the loaves.

Rome, Catacombs of St. Sebastian – Funeral inscription with symbols   
The art of the catacombs is also a symbolic art in the sense that some concepts which are difficult to express are represented in a simple way. To indicate Christ a fish is depicted; to signify the peace of heaven a dove is represented; to express firmness of faith an anchor is drawn. On the closing slabs of the loculi, symbols with different meanings are often engraved. In some cases, a tool is depicted which indicates the dead person’s trade in life. Some symbols, such as glasses, loaves of bread and amphorae, allude to the funeral meals consumed in honor of the deceased, the so-called refrigeria. Most of the symbols refer to eternal salvation, such as the dove, the palm, the peacock, the phoenix and the lamb.

Return to Index

 

Rome, Catacombs of Priscilla – Our Lady with the Prophet

The catacombs and the Mother of God. In the Roman catacombs the most ancient image is preserved of Our Lady who is depicted in a painting in the cemetery of Priscilla on the Via Salaria. The fresco, which can be dated back to the first half of the third century, depicts the Virgin with the Child on her knees in front of a prophet (perhaps Balaam or Isaiah) who is pointing to a star to refer to the messianic prediction. In the catacombs other episodes with Our Lady are also represented such as the Adoration of the Magi and scenes from the Christmas crib, but it is thought that prior to the Council of Ephesus, all these representations had a Christological and not a Mariological significance.

Return to Index

 

Rome, Catacombs of Priscilla – The Good Shepherd

The Good Shepherd in the catacombs. One of the images represented the most in the art of the catacombs is the Good Shepherd. While the model is taken from pagan culture, it immediately takes on a Christological significance inspired by the parable of the lost sheep. Christ is thus represented as a humble shepherd with a lamb on his shoulders as he watches over his little flock that is sometimes made up of only two sheep placed at his sides.
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_commissions/archeo/inglese/documents/rc_com_archeo_doc_20011010_cataccrist_en.html#Arte

Quote
The Catacombs of Rome (Italian: Catacombe di Roma) are ancient catacombs, underground burial places under Rome, Italy, of which there are at least forty, some discovered only in recent decades. Though most famous for Christian burials, either in separate catacombs or mixed together, they began in the 2nd century,[1] much as a response to overcrowding and shortage of land. Many scholars have written that catacombs came about to help persecuted Christians to bury their dead secretly. The soft volcanic tuff rock under Rome is highly suitable for tunnelling, as it is softer when first exposed to air, hardening afterwards. Many have kilometres of tunnels, in up to four storeys (or layers).
The Christian catacombs are extremely important for the art history of early Christian art, as they contain the great majority of examples from before about 400 AD, in fresco and sculpture.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catacombs_of_Rome
« Last Edit: June 24, 2013, 06:33:43 AM by lovetzatziki » Logged
Jovan
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Serbian Orthodox Diocese of Great Britain and Scandinavia
Posts: 515



« Reply #168 on: June 24, 2013, 07:06:11 AM »

lovetzatziki, truly the best name ever here on this forum ;P
Logged

“Belatedly I loved thee, O Beauty so ancient and so new, belatedly I loved thee. For see, thou wast within and I was without, and I sought thee out there."
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #169 on: June 24, 2013, 01:56:56 PM »

A veritable blitzkrieg of masterful argument!

Not really. All you guys have ever done for years now is say the above. "We're right, its clear!" as if that really meant something.
That is what I find most annoying... the people that want change are never happy to change themselves and allow others to remain the same, they insist on forcing it on everyone else. I guess it is the only way they feel legitimate.
The Faith was created by God, and people have no right or ability to change it, we must accept it as it is.

The other alternative is it has been created by people, and we have the right to change it. The problem here is that if the Faith is created according to the form of people's desires, it has no authority, there is no reason to accept it because it is not the truth - it is based on their own desires and not truth (ahem... Jeremiah 17:9).


(Sorry I was really trying to stay out of this thread)

Nice to see you trolling around for stuff to troll and you spent three hours on it. Cheesy
I barely spent five minutes on it.
Logged

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

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #170 on: June 24, 2013, 02:00:42 PM »

A veritable blitzkrieg of masterful argument!

Not really. All you guys have ever done for years now is say the above. "We're right, its clear!" as if that really meant something.
That is what I find most annoying... the people that want change are never happy to change themselves and allow others to remain the same, they insist on forcing it on everyone else. I guess it is the only way they feel legitimate.
The Faith was created by God, and people have no right or ability to change it, we must accept it as it is.

The other alternative is it has been created by people, and we have the right to change it. The problem here is that if the Faith is created according to the form of people's desires, it has no authority, there is no reason to accept it because it is not the truth - it is based on their own desires and not truth (ahem... Jeremiah 17:9).


(Sorry I was really trying to stay out of this thread)

Nice to see you trolling around for stuff to troll and you spent three hours on it. Cheesy

They're your words ialmisry's quoting, Jason. Or are you denying you said them?

I'm not denying I said them. Its just funny (sad) he trawled through 1044 posts to re-post a bunch of things in different threads in response to me making him mad and some weird vendetta that seems to be developing.

He wouldn't have needed to trawl through your every post. All he would have needed to do is a search on a keyword or phrase he knows you've used, and do a search, specifying your user name in the search.
Odd that he should think I waste such time going through 1044 posts with such interest, when he doesn't devote such attention and interest to the Scriptures.
Logged

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

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,495


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #171 on: June 24, 2013, 02:10:31 PM »

A veritable blitzkrieg of masterful argument!

Not really. All you guys have ever done for years now is say the above. "We're right, its clear!" as if that really meant something.
That is what I find most annoying... the people that want change are never happy to change themselves and allow others to remain the same, they insist on forcing it on everyone else. I guess it is the only way they feel legitimate.
The Faith was created by God, and people have no right or ability to change it, we must accept it as it is.

The other alternative is it has been created by people, and we have the right to change it. The problem here is that if the Faith is created according to the form of people's desires, it has no authority, there is no reason to accept it because it is not the truth - it is based on their own desires and not truth (ahem... Jeremiah 17:9).


(Sorry I was really trying to stay out of this thread)

Nice to see you trolling around for stuff to troll and you spent three hours on it. Cheesy

It's called research.  I half-remember things people write here all the time and then I go looking for it to a) make sure my memory is correct and b) quote it so others can remember it, as well.

It's not difficult to do, either.
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
katherineofdixie
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 3,485



« Reply #172 on: June 24, 2013, 02:15:18 PM »

Why are you so infatuated with first and second century Christianity?

At a guess, because we have so little from that time, that it allows one to claim authenticity and authority for one's own personal interpretations and pet beliefs.
Logged

"If but ten of us lead a holy life, we shall kindle a fire which shall light up the entire city."

 St. John Chrysostom
Jason.Wike
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,046


« Reply #173 on: June 24, 2013, 02:30:01 PM »

A veritable blitzkrieg of masterful argument!

Not really. All you guys have ever done for years now is say the above. "We're right, its clear!" as if that really meant something.
That is what I find most annoying... the people that want change are never happy to change themselves and allow others to remain the same, they insist on forcing it on everyone else. I guess it is the only way they feel legitimate.
The Faith was created by God, and people have no right or ability to change it, we must accept it as it is.

The other alternative is it has been created by people, and we have the right to change it. The problem here is that if the Faith is created according to the form of people's desires, it has no authority, there is no reason to accept it because it is not the truth - it is based on their own desires and not truth (ahem... Jeremiah 17:9).


(Sorry I was really trying to stay out of this thread)

Nice to see you trolling around for stuff to troll and you spent three hours on it. Cheesy

They're your words ialmisry's quoting, Jason. Or are you denying you said them?

I'm not denying I said them. Its just funny (sad) he trawled through 1044 posts to re-post a bunch of things in different threads in response to me making him mad and some weird vendetta that seems to be developing.

He wouldn't have needed to trawl through your every post. All he would have needed to do is a search on a keyword or phrase he knows you've used, and do a search, specifying your user name in the search.
Odd that he should think I waste such time going through 1044 posts with such interest, when he doesn't devote such attention and interest to the Scriptures.

So you have (broken) ESP now? Wow. Anyway, the fact that this turned into a veiled ad hominem by dredging up tons of old posts and calling me a 'burn out' just shows no one here can create a rational response. Address the topic, not the person and all that stuff, that everyone else is expected to follow.
Logged
lovetzatziki
Moderated
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 430



« Reply #174 on: June 24, 2013, 03:30:48 PM »

Quote
Concerning the teaching of icons
Venerating icons, having them in churches and homes, is what the Church teaches. They are "open books to remind us of God." Those who lack the time or learning to study theology need only to enter a church to see the mysteries of the Christian religion unfolded before them.

Concerning the doctrinal significance of icons
Icons are necessary and essential because they protect the full and proper doctrine of the Incarnation. While God cannot be represented in His eternal nature ("...no man has seen God", John 1:18), He can be depicted simply because He "became human and took flesh." Of Him who took a material body, material images can be made. In so taking a material body, God proved that matter can be redeemed. He deified matter, making it spirit-bearing, and so if flesh can be a medium for the Spirit, so can wood or paint, although in a different fashion.

I do not worship matter, but the Creator of matter, who for my sake became material and deigned to dwell in matter, who through matter effected my salvation... —St. John of Damascus

The seventh and last Ecumenical Council upheld the iconodules' postion in AD 787. They proclaimed: Icons... are to be kept in churches and honored with the same relative veneration as is shown to other material symbols, such as the 'precious and life-giving Cross' and the Book of the Gospels. The 'doctrine of icons' is tied to the Orthodox teaching that all of God's creation is to be redeemed and glorified, both spiritual and material.
http://orthodoxwiki.org/Seventh_Ecumenical_Council

Quote
Proceedings of the Council

First Session (September 24, 787) -- Three bishops, Basilius of Ancyra, Theodore of Myra, and Theodosius of Amorium begged for pardon for the heresy of iconoclasm.

Second Session (September 26, 787) -- Papal legates read the letters of Pope Hadrian I asking for agreement with veneration of images, to which question the bishops of the council answered: "We follow, we receive, we admit".

Third Session (September 28, 787) -- Other bishops having made their abjuration, were received into the council.

Fourth Session (October 1, 787) -- Proof of the lawfulness of the veneration of icons was drawn from Exodus 25:19 sqq.; Numbers 7:89; Hebrews 9:5 sqq.; Ezekiel 41:18, and Genesis 31:34, but especially from a series of passages of the Church Fathers;[1] the authority of the latter was decisive.

Fifth Session (October 4, 787) -- It was claimed that the iconoclast heresy came originally from Jews, Saracens, and Manicheans.

Sixth Session (October 6, 787) -- The definition of the pseudo-Seventh council (754) was read and condemned.

Seventh Session (October 13, 787) -- The council issued a declaration of faith concerning the veneration of holy images:

Aya Sofya of Nicaea, where the Council took place; Iznik, Turkey. It was determined that "As the sacred and life-giving cross is everywhere set up as a symbol, so also should the images of Jesus Christ, the Virgin Mary, the holy angels, as well as those of the saints and other pious and holy men be embodied in the manufacture of sacred vessels, tapestries, vestments, etc., and exhibited on the walls of churches, in the homes, and in all conspicuous places, by the roadside and everywhere, to be revered by all who might see them. For the more they are contemplated, the more they move to fervent memory of their prototypes. Therefore, it is proper to accord to them a fervent and reverent adoration, not, however, the veritable worship which, according to our faith, belongs to the Divine Being alone — for the honor accorded to the image passes over to its prototype, and whoever adores the image adores in it the reality of what is there represented."

Eighth Session (October 23, 787) -- The last session was held in Constantinople at the Magnaura Palace. The Empress Irene and her son were present and they signed the document.

The clear distinction between the adoration offered to God, and that accorded to the images may well be looked upon as a result of the iconoclastic reform. However sculpture in the round was condemned as "sensual". The twenty-two canons[7] drawn up in Constantinople also served ecclesiastical reform. Careful maintenance of the ordinances of the earlier councils, knowledge of the scriptures on the part of the clergy, and care for Christian conduct are required, and the desire for a renewal of ecclesiastical life is awakened.

The council also decreed that every altar should contain a relic, which remains the case in modern Catholic and Orthodox regulations (Canon VII), and made a number of decrees on clerical discipline, especially for monks when mixing with women.

The papal legates voiced their approval of the restoration of the veneration of icons in no uncertain terms, and the patriarch sent a full account of the proceedings of the council to Pope Hadrian I, who had it translated (the translation Anastasius later replaced with a better one).

This council is celebrated in the Eastern Orthodox Church, and Eastern Catholic Churches of Byzantine Rite as "The Sunday of the Triumph of Orthodoxy" each year on the first Sunday of Great Lent the fast that leads up to Pascha (Easter) and again on the Sunday closest to October 11 (the Sunday on or after October Cool. The former celebration commemorates the council as the culmination of the Church's battles against heresy, while the latter commemorates the council itself.
http://www.tutorgigpedia.com/ed/Second_Council_of_Nicaea

Quote
xtracts from the Acts

Session 1

(Labbe and Cossart, Concilia, Tom. VII., col. 53.)

[Certain bishops who had been led astray by the Iconoclasts came, asking to be received back. The first of these was Basil of Ancyra.]

The bishop Basil of Ancyra read as follows from a book: Inasmuch as ecclesiastical legislation has canonically been handed down from past time, even from the beginning from the holy Apostles, and from their successors, who were our holy fathers and teachers, and also from the six holy and ecumenical synods, and from the local synods which were gathered in the interests of orthodoxy, that those returning from any heresy whatever to the orthodox faith and to the tradition of the Catholic Church, might deny their own heresy, and confess the orthodox faith.

Wherefore I, Basil, bishop of the city of Ancyra, proposing to be united to the Catholic Church, and to Hadrian the most holy Pope of Old Rome, and to Tarasius the most blessed Patriarch, and to the most holy apostolic sees, to wit, Alexandria, Antioch, and the Holy City, as well as to all orthodox high-priests and priests, make this written confession of my faith, and I offer it to you as to those who have received power by apostolic authority. And in this also I beg pardon from your divinely gathered holiness for my tardiness in this matter. For it was not right that I should have fallen behind in the confession of orthodoxy, but it arose from my entire lack of knowledge, and slothful and negligent mind in the matter. Wherefore the rather I ask your blessedness to grant me indulgence in God's sight.

I believe, therefore, and make my confession in one God, the Father Almighty, and in one Lord Jesus Christ, his only begotten Son, and in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of Life. The Trinity, one in essence and one in majesty, must be worshipped and glorified in one godhead, power, and authority. I confess all things pertaining to the incarnation of one of the Holy Trinity, our Lord and God, Jesus Christ, as the Saints and the six Ecumenical Synods have handed down. And I reject and anathematize every heretical babbling, as they also have rejected them. I ask for the intercessions (πρεσβείας) of our spotless Lady the Holy Mother of God, and those of the holy and heavenly powers, and those of all the Saints.
And receiving their holy and honourable relics with all honour (τιμῆς), I salute and venerate these with honour (τιμητικῶς προσκυνέω), hoping to have a share in their holiness. Likewise also the venerable images (εἰκόνας) of the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ, in the humanity he assumed for our salvation; and of our spotless Lady, the holy Mother of God; and of the angels like God; and of the holy Apostles, Prophets, Martyrs, and of all the Saints— the sacred images of all these, I salute and venerate— rejecting and anathematizing with my whole soul and mind the synod which was gathered together out of stubbornness and madness, and which styled itself the Seventh Synod, but which by those who think accurately was called lawfully and canonically a pseudo-synod, as being contrary to all truth and piety, and audaciously and temerariously against the divinely handed down ecclesiastical legislation, yea, even impiously having yelped at and scoffed at the holy and venerable images, and having ordered these to be taken away out of the holy churches of God; over which assembly presided Theodosius with the pseudonym of Ephesius, Sisinnius of Perga, with the surname Pastillas, Basilius of Pisidia, falsely called tricaccabus; with whom the wretched Constantine, the then Patriarch, was led (ἐματαιώθη) astray.

These things thus I confess and to these I assent, and therefore in simplicity of heart and in uprightness of mind, in the presence of God, I have made the subjoined anathematisms.

Anathema to the calumniators of the Christians, that is to the image breakers.

Anathema to those who apply the words of Holy Scripture which were spoken against idols, to the venerable images.

Anathema to those who do not salute the holy and venerable images.

Anathema to those who say that Christians have recourse to the images as to gods.

Anathema to those who call the sacred images idols.

Anathema to those who knowingly communicate with those who revile and dishonour the venerable images.

Anathema to those who say that another than Christ our Lord has delivered us from idols.

Anathema to those who spurn the teachings of the holy Fathers and the tradition of the Catholic Church, taking as a pretext and making their own the arguments of Arius, Nestorius, Eutyches, and Dioscorus, that unless we were evidently taught by the Old and New Testaments, we should not follow the teachings of the holy Fathers and of the holy Ecumenical Synods, and the tradition of the Catholic Church.

Anathema to those who dare to say that the Catholic Church has at any time sanctioned idols.

Anathema to those who say that the making of images is a diabolical invention and not a tradition of our holy Fathers.

This is my confession [of faith] and to these propositions I give my assent. And I pronounce this with my whole heart, and soul, and mind.

And if at any time by the fraud of the devil (which may God forbid!) I voluntarily or involuntarily shall be opposed to what I have now professed, may I be anathema from the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, and from the Catholic Church and every hierarchical order a stranger.

I will keep myself from every acceptance of a bribe and from filthy lucre in accordance with the divine canons of the holy Apostles and of the approved Fathers.

Tarasius, the most holy Patriarch, said: This whole sacred gathering yields glory and thanks to God for this confession of yours, which you have made to the Catholic Church.

The Holy Synod said: Glory to God which makes one that which was severed.

[Theodore, bishop of Myra, then read the same confession, and was received. The next bishop who asked to be received read as follows: (col. 60)]

Theodosius, the humble Christian, to the holy and Ecumenical Synod: I confess and I agree to (συντίθεμαι) and I receive and I salute and I venerate in the first place the spotless image of our Lord Jesus Christ, our true God, and the holy image of her who bore him without seed, the holy Mother of God, and her help and protection and intercessions each day and night as a sinner to my aid I call for, since she has confidence with Christ our God, as he was born of her. Likewise also I receive and venerate the images of the holy and most laudable Apostles, prophets, and martyrs and the fathers and cultivators of the desert. Not indeed as gods (God forbid!) do I ask all these with my whole heart to pray for me to God, that he may grant me through their intercessions to find mercy at his hands at the day of judgment, for in this I am but showing forth more clearly the affection and love of my soul which I have borne them from the first. Likewise also I venerate and honour and salute the relics of the Saints as of those who fought for Christ and who have received grace from him for the healing of diseases and the curing of sicknesses and the casting out of devils, as the Christian Church has received from the holy Apostles and Fathers even down to us today.

Moreover, I am well pleased that there should be images in the churches of the faithful, especially the image of our Lord Jesus Christ and of the holy Mother of God, of every kind of material, both gold and silver and of every colour, so that his incarnation may be set forth to all men. Likewise there may be painted the lives of the Saints and Prophets and Martyrs, so that their struggles and agonies may be set forth in brief, for the stirring up and teaching of the people, especially of the unlearned.

For if the people go forth with lights and incense to meet the laurata and images of the Emperors when they are sent to cities or rural districts, they honour surely not the tablet covered over with wax, but the Emperor himself. How much more is it necessary that in the churches of Christ our God, the image of God our Saviour and of his spotless Mother and of all the holy and blessed fathers and ascetics should be painted? Even as also St. Basil says: Writers and painters set forth the great deeds of war; the one by word, the other by their pencils; and each stirs many to courage. And again the same author How much pains have you ever taken that you might find one of the Saints who was willing to be your importunate intercessor to the Lord? And Chrysostom says, The charity of the Saints is not diminished by their death, nor does it come to an end with their exit from life, but after their death they are still more powerful than when they were alive, and many other things without measure. Therefore I ask you, O you Saints! I call out to you. I have sinned against heaven and in your sight. Receive me as God received the luxurious man, and the harlot, and the thief. Seek me out, as Christ sought out the sheep that was lost, which he carried on his shoulders; so that there may be joy in the presence of God and of his angels over my salvation and repentance, through your intervention, O all-holy lords! Let them who do not venerate the holy and venerable images be anathema! Anathema to those who blaspheme against the honourable and venerable images! To those who dare to attack and blaspheme the venerable images and call them idols, anathema! To the calumniators of Christianity, that is to say the Iconoclasts, anathema! To those who do not diligently teach all the Christ-loving people to venerate and salute the venerable and sacred and honourable images of all the Saints who pleased God in their several generations, anathema! To those who have a doubtful mind and do not confess with their whole hearts that they venerate the sacred images, anathema!

Sabbas, the most reverend hegumenus of the monastery of the Studium, said: According to the Apostolic precepts and the Ecumenical Synods he is worthy to be received back.

Tarasius, the most holy Patriarch, said: Those who formerly were the calumniators of orthodoxy, now have become the advocates of the truth.

[Near the end of this session, (col. 77)]

John, the most reverend bishop and legate of the Eastern high priests said: This heresy is the worst of all heresies. Woe to the iconoclasts! It is the worst of heresies, as it subverts the incarnation (οἰκονομίαν) of our Saviour.
Session 2

[The Papal Letters were presented by the Legates. First was read that to Constantine and Irene, but not in its entirety, if we may trust Anastasius the Librarian, who gives what he says is the original Latin text. Here follows a translation of this and of the Greek, also a translation of the Latin passage altogether omitted, (as we are told) with the consent of the Roman Legates.]

Part of Pope Hadrian's Letter.

[As written by the Pope.]

(Migne, Pat. Lat., Tom. XCVI., col. 1217.)

If you persevere in that orthodox Faith in which you have begun, and the sacred and venerable images be by your means erected again in those parts, as by the lord, the Emperor Constantine of pious memory, and the blessed Helen, who promulgated the orthodox Faith, and exalted the holy Catholic and Apostolic Roman Church your spiritual mother, and with the other orthodox Emperors venerated it as the head of all Churches, so will your Clemency, that is protected of God, receive the name of another Constantine, and another Helen, through whom at the beginning the holy Catholic and Apostolic Church derived strength, and like whom your own imperial fame is spread abroad by triumphs, so as to be brilliant and deeply fixed in the whole world. But the more, if following the traditions of the orthodox Faith, you embrace the judgment of the Church of blessed Peter, chief of the Apostles, and, as of old your predecessors the holy Emperors acted, so you, too, venerating it with honour, love with all your heart his Vicar, and if your sacred majesty follow by preference their orthodox Faith, according to our holy Roman Church. May the chief of the Apostles himself, to whom the power was given by our Lord God to bind and remit sins in heaven and earth, be often your protector, and trample all barbarous nations under your feet, and everywhere make you conquerors. For let sacred authority lay open the marks of his dignity, and how great veneration ought to be shown to his, the highest See, by all the faithful in the world. For the Lord set him who bears the keys of the kingdom of heaven as chief over all, and by Him is he honoured with this privilege, by which the keys of the kingdom of heaven are entrusted to him. He, therefore, that was preferred with so exalted an honour was thought worthy to confess that Faith on which the Church of Christ is founded. A blessed reward followed that blessed confession, by the preaching of which the holy universal Church was illumined, and from it the other Churches of God have derived the proofs of Faith. For the blessed Peter himself, the chief of the Apostles, who first sat in the Apostolic See, left the chiefship of his Apostolate, and pastoral care, to his successors, who are to sit in his most holy seat for ever. And that power of authority, which he received from the Lord God our Saviour, he too bestowed and delivered by divine command to the Pontiffs, his successors, etc.

[As read in Greek to the Council.]

(Migne, Pat. Lat., Tom. XCVI., col. 1218.)

If the ancient orthodoxy be perfected and restored by your means in those regions, and the venerable icons be placed in their original state, you will be partakers with the Lord Constantine, Emperor of old, now in the Divine keeping, and the Empress Helena, who made conspicuous and confirmed the orthodox Faith, and exalted still more your holy mother, the Catholic and Roman and spiritual Church, and with the orthodox Emperors who ruled after them, and so your most pious and heaven-protected name likewise will be set forth as that of another Constantine and another Helena, being renowned and praised through the whole world, by whom the holy Catholic and Apostolic Church is restored. And especially if you follow the tradition of the orthodox Faith of the Church of the holy Peter and Paul, the chief Apostles, and embrace their Vicar, as the Emperors who reigned before you of old both honoured their Vicar, and loved him with all their heart: and if your sacred majesty honour the most holy Roman Church of the chief Apostles, to whom was given power by God the Word himself to loose and to bind sins in heaven and earth. For they will extend their shield over your power, and all barbarous nations shall be put under your feet: and wherever you go they will make you conquerors. For the holy and chief Apostles themselves, who set up the Catholic and orthodox Faith, have laid it down as a written law that all who after them are to be successors of their seats, should hold their Faith and remain in it to the end.

[The part which was never read to the Council at all.]

(Found in L. and C., Concilia, Tom. VII., col. 117.)

We greatly wondered that in your imperial commands, directed for the Patriarch of the royal city, Tarasius, we find him there called Universal: but we know not whether this was written through ignorance or schism, or the heresy of the wicked. But henceforth we advise your most merciful and imperial majesty, that he be by no means called Universal in your writings, because it appears to be contrary to the institutions of the holy Canons and the decrees of the traditions of the holy Fathers. For he never could have ranked second, save for the authority of our holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, as is plain to all. Because if he be named Universal, above the holy Roman Church which has a prior rank, which is the head of all the Churches of God, it is certain that he shows himself as a rebel against the holy Councils, and a heretic. For, if he is Universal, he is recognized to have the Primacy even over the Church of our See, which appears ridiculous to all faithful Christians: because in the whole world the chief rank and power was given to the blessed Apostle Peter by the Redeemer of the world himself; and through the same Apostle, whose place we unworthily hold, the holy Catholic and Apostolic Roman Church holds the first rank, and the authority of power, now and for ever, so that if any one, which we believe not, has called him, or assents to his being called Universal, let him know that he is estranged from the orthodox Faith, and a rebel against our holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

[After the reading was ended (col. 120)]

Tarasius the most holy patriarch said: Did you yourselves receive these letters from the most holy Pope, and did you carry them to our pious Emperor?

Peter and Peter the most beloved-of-God presbyters who held the place of Hadrian, the most holy pope of Rome, said: We ourselves received such letters from our apostolic father and delivered them to the pious lords.

John, the most magnificent Logothete, said: That this is the case is also known to the Sicilians, the beloved of God Theodore, the bishop of Catanea, and the most revered deacon Epiphanius who is with him, who holds the place of the archbishop of Sardinia. For both of these at the bidding of our pious Emperors, went to Rome with the most reverend apocrisarius of our most holy patriarch.

Theodore the God-beloved bishop of Catanea, standing in the midst, said: The pious emperor, by his honourable jussio, bid send Leo, the most god-beloved presbyter (who together with myself is a slave of your holiness), with the precious letter of his most sacred majesty; and he who reveres our [sic in Greek, your, in Latin] holiness, being the governor (στρατηγὸς) of my province of Sicily, sent me to Rome with the pious jussio of our orthodox Emperors.
And when we had gone, we announced the orthodox faith of the pious emperors.

And when the most blessed Pope heard it, he said: Since this has come to pass in the days of their reign, God has magnified their pious rule above all former reigns. And this suggestion (ἀναφορὰν) which has been read he sent to our most pious kings together with a letter to your holiness and with his vicars who are here present and presiding.

Cosmas, the deacon, notary, and chamberlain (Cubuclesius) said: And another letter was sent by the most holy Pope of Old Rome to Tarasius, our most holy and œcumenical Patriarch. Let it be disposed of as your holy assembly shall direct.

The Holy Synod said, Let it be read.

[Then was read Hadrian's letter to Tarasius of Constantinople, which ends by saying that, our dearly-loved proto-presbyter of the Holy Church of Rome, and Peter, a monk, a presbyter, and an abbot, who have been sent by us to the most tranquil and pious emperors, we beg you will deem them worthy of all kindness and humane amenity for the sake of St. Peter, coropheus of the Apostles, and for our sakes, so that for this we may be able to offer you our sincere thanks. The letter being ended (col. 128),]

Peter and Peter, the most reverend presbyters and representatives of the most holy Pope of Old Rome said: Let the most holy Tarasius, Patriarch of the royal city, say whether he agrees (στοιχεῖ) with the letters of the most holy Pope of Old Rome or not.

Tarasius the most holy patriarch said: The divine Apostle Paul, who was filled with the light of Christ, and who has begotten us through the gospel, in writing to the Romans, commending their zeal for the true faith which they had in Christ our true God, thus said: Your faith has gone forth into all the world. It is necessary to follow out this witness, and he that would contradict it is without good sense. Wherefore Hadrian, the ruler of Old Rome, since he was a sharer of these things, thus borne witness to, wrote expressly and truly to our religious Emperors, and to our humility, confirming admirably and beautifully the ancient tradition of the Catholic Church. And we also ourselves, having examined both in writing, and by inquisition, and syllogistically and by demonstration, and having been taught by the teachings of the Fathers, so have confessed, so do confess, and so will confess; and shall be fast, and shall remain, and shall stand firm in the sense of the letters which have just been read, receiving the imaged representations according to the ancient tradition of our holy fathers; and these we venerate with firmly-attached affection, as made in the name of Christ our God, and of our Spotless Lady the Holy Mother of God, and of the Holy Angels, and of all the Saints, most clearly giving our adoration and faith to the one only true God.

And the holy Synod said: The whole holy Synod thus teaches.

Peter and Peter, the God-loved presbyters and legates of the Apostolic See, said: Let the holy Synod say whether it receives the letters of the most holy Pope of Old Rome.

The holy Synod said: We follow, we receive, we admit them.

[The bishops then give one by one their votes all in the same sense.]

Session 3

(Labbe and Cossart, Concilia, Tom. VII., col. 188.)

Constantine, the most holy bishop of Constantia in Cyprus, said: Since I, unworthy that I am, find that the letter which has just been read, which was sent from the East to Tarasius the most holy archbishop and ecumenical patriarch, is in no sense changed from that confession of faith which he himself had before made, to these I consent and become of one mind, receiving and saluting with honour the holy and venerable images. But the worship of adoration I reserve alone to the supersubstantial and life-giving Trinity. And those who are not so minded, and do not so teach I cast out of the holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, and I smite them with anathema, and I deliver them over to the lot of those who deny the incarnation and the bodily economy of Christ our true God.

Session 4

[Among numerous passages of the Fathers one was read from a sermon by St. Gregory Nyssen in which he describes a painting representing the sacrifice of Isaac and tells how he could not pass it without tears.]

The most glorious princes said: See how our father grieved at the depicted history, even so that he wept.

Basil, the most holy bishop of Ancyra, said: Many times the father had read the story, but perchance he had not wept; but when once he saw it painted, he wept.

John the most reverend monk and presbyter and representative of the Eastern high priests, said: If to such a doctor the picture was helpful and drew forth tears, how much more in the case of the ignorant and simple will it bring compunction and benefit.

The holy Synod said: We have seen in several places the history of Abraham painted as the father says.

Theodore the most holy bishop of Catanea, said: If the holy Gregory, vigilant in divine cogitation, was moved to tears at the sight of the story of Abraham, how much more shall a painting of the incarnation of our Lord Christ, who for us was made man, move the beholders to their profit and to tears?

Tarasius the most holy Patriarch said: Shall we not weep when we see an image of our crucified Lord?

The holy Synod said: We shall indeed— for in that shall be found perfectly the profundity of the abasement of the incarnate God for our sakes.

[Post nonnulla a passage is read from St. Athanasius in which he describes the miracles worked at Berytus, after which there is found the following (col. 224),]

Tarasius, the most holy Patriarch, said: But perhaps someone will say, Why do not the images which we have work miracles? To which we answer, that as the Apostle has said, signs are for those who do not believe, not for believers. For they who approached that image were unbelievers. Therefore God gave them a sign through the image, to draw them to our Christian faith. But an evil and adulterous generation that seeks after a sign and no sign shall be given it.

[After a number of other quotations, was read the Canon of the Council in Trullo as a canon of the Sixth Synod (col. 233).]

Tarasius, the most holy Patriarch said: There are certain affected with the sickness of ignorance who are scandalized by these canons [viz. of the Trullan Synod] and say, And do you really think they were adopted at the Sixth Synod? Now let all such know that the holy great Sixth Synod was assembled at Constantinople concerning those who said that there was but one energy and will in Christ. These anathematized the heretics, and having expounded the orthodox faith, they went to their homes in the fourteenth year of Constantine. But after four or five years the same fathers came together under Justinian, the son of Constantine, and set forth the before-mentioned canons. And let no one doubt concerning them. For they who subscribed under Constantine were the same as they who under Justinian signed the present chart, as can manifestly be established from the unchangeable similarity of their own handwriting. For it was right that they who had appeared at an ecumenical synod should also set forth ecclesiastical canons. They said that we should be led as (by the hand) by the venerable images to the recollection of the incarnation of Christ and of his saving death, and if by them we are led to the realization of the incarnation of Christ our God, what sort of an opinion shall we have of them who break down the venerable images?

[At the close of the Session, after a number of anathematisms had been pronounced, the following was read, to which all the bishops subscribed (col. 317).]

Fulfilling the divine precept of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ, our holy Fathers did not hide the light of the divine knowledge given by him to them under a bushel, but they set it upon the candlestick of most useful teaching, so that it might give light to all in the house— that is to say, to those who are born in the Catholic Church; lest perchance anyone of those who piously confess the Lord might strike his foot against the stone of heretical evil doctrine. For they expelled every error of heretics and they cut off the rotten member if it was incurably sick. And with a fan they purged the floor. And the good wheat, that is to say the word which nourishes and which makes strong the heart of man, they laid up in the granary of the Catholic Church; but throwing outside the chaff of heretical evil opinion they burned it with unquenchable fire. Therefore also this holy and ecumenical Synod, met together for the second time in this illustrious metropolis of Nice, by the will of God and at the bidding of our pious and most faithful Emperors, Irene a new Helena, and a new Constantine, her God-protected offspring, having considered by their perusal the teachings of our approved and blessed Fathers, has glorified God himself, from whom there was given to them wisdom for our instruction, and for the perfecting of the Catholic and Apostolic Church: and against those who do not believe as they did, but have attempted to overshadow the truth through their novelty, they have chanted the words of the psalm: Oh how much evil have your enemies done in your sanctuary; and have glorified themselves, saying, There is not a teacher any more, and they shall not know that we treated with guile the word of truth. But we, in all things holding the doctrines and precepts of the same our God-bearing Fathers, make proclamation with one mouth and one heart, neither adding anything, nor taking anything away from those things which have been delivered to us by them. But in these things we are strengthened, in these things we are confirmed. Thus we confess, thus we teach, just as the holy and ecumenical six Synods have decreed and ratified. We believe in one God the Father Almighty, maker of all things visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, his only-begotten Son and Word, through whom all things were made, and in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and giver of life, consubstantial and coeternal with the same Father and with his Son who has had no beginning. The unbuilt-up, indivisible, incomprehensible, and non-circumscribed Trinity; he, wholly and alone, is to be worshipped and revered with adoration; one Godhead, one Lordship, one dominion, one realm and dynasty, which without division is apportioned to the Persons, and is fitted to the essence severally. For we confess that one of the same holy and consubstantial Trinity, our Lord Jesus Christ the true God, in these last days was incarnate and made man for our salvation, and having saved our race through his saving incarnation, and passion, and resurrection, and ascension into heaven; and having delivered us from the error of idols; as also the prophet says, Not an ambassador, not an angel, but the Lord himself has saved us. Him we also follow, and adopt his voice, and cry aloud; No Synod, no power of kings, no God-hated agreement has delivered the Church from the error of the idols, as the Judaizing conciliabulum has madly dreamed, which raved against the venerable images; but the Lord of glory himself, the incarnate God, has saved us and has snatched us from idolatrous deceit. To him therefore be glory, to him be thanks, to him be eucharists, to him be praise, to him be magnificence. For his redemption and his salvation alone can perfectly save, and not that of other men who come of the earth. For he himself has fulfilled for us, upon whom the ends of the earth have come through the economy of his incarnation, the words spoken beforehand by his prophets, for he dwelt among us, and went in and out among us, and cast out the names of idols from the earth, as it was written. But we salute the voices of the Lord and of his Apostles through which we have been taught to honour in the first place her who is properly and truly the Mother of God and exalted above all the heavenly powers; also the holy and angelic powers; and the blessed and altogether lauded Apostles, and the glorious Prophets and the triumphant Martyrs which fought for Christ, and the holy and God-bearing Doctors, and all holy men; and to seek for their intercessions, as able to render us at home with the all-royal God of all, so long as we keep his commandments, and strive to live virtuously. Moreover we salute the image of the honourable and life-giving Cross, and the holy relics of the Saints; and we receive the holy and venerable images: and we salute them, and we embrace them, according to the ancient traditions of the holy Catholic Church of God, that is to say of our holy Fathers, who also received these things and established them in all the most holy Churches of God, and in every place of his dominion. These honourable and venerable images, as has been said, we honour and salute and reverently venerate: to wit, the image of the incarnation of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ, and that of our spotless Lady the all-holy Mother of God, from whom he pleased to take flesh, and to save and deliver us from all impious idolatry; also the images of the holy and incorporeal Angels, who as men appeared to the just. Likewise also the figures and effigies of the divine and all-lauded Apostles, also of the God-speaking Prophets, and of the struggling Martyrs and of holy men. So that through their representations we may be able to be led back in memory and recollection to the prototype, and have a share in the holiness of some one of them.

Thus we have learned to think of these things, and we have been strengthened by our holy Fathers, and we have been strengthened by their divinely handed down teaching. And thanks be to God for his ineffable gift, that he has not deserted us at the end nor has the rod of the ungodly come into the lot of the righteous, lest the righteous put their hands, that is to say their actual deeds, unto wickedness. But he does well unto those who are good and true of heart, as the psalmist David melodiously has sung; with whom also we sing the rest of the psalm: As for such as turn back unto their own wickedness, the Lord shall lead them forth with the evil doers; and peace shall be upon the Israel of God.

[The subscriptions follow immediately and close the acts of this session (col. 321-346).]

Session 6

(Labbe and Cossart, Concilia, Tom. VII., col. 389.)

Leo the most renowned secretary said: The holy and blessed Synod know how at the last session we examined various sayings of the God-forsaken heretics, who had brought charges against the holy and spotless Church of the Christians for the setting up of the holy images. But today we have in our hands the written blasphemy of those calumniators of the Christians, that is to say, the absurd, and easily answered, and self-convicting definition (ὅρον) of the pseudosyllogus, in all respects agreeing with the impious opinion of the God-hated heretics. But not only have we this, but also the artful and most drastic refutation thereof, which the Holy Spirit had supervised. For it was right that this definition should be made a triumph by wise contradictions, and should be torn to pieces with strong refutations. This also we submit so as to know your pleasure with regard to it.

The holy Synod said: Let it be read.

John, the deacon and chancellor [of the most holy great Church of Constantinople, in Lat. only] read.

[John, the deacon, then read the orthodox refutation, and Gregory, the bishop of Neocæsarea, the Definition of the Mock Council, the one reading the heretical statement and the other the orthodox answer.]

 
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3819.htm

You could also read : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icon


Logged
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,522


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #175 on: June 24, 2013, 07:04:56 PM »

I think the first known example of Christian icon-veneration is when the apostles bowed down before Christ (Matthew 28:9), the icon of God the Father (Colossians 1:15).

There's also the Alexamenos graffito, which is a satire of a Christian venerating a cross (which has the same theological justification as venerating an icon).

I don't know if jesusisiamism accepts independent evidence as proof. (btw, at the LATEST, this grafitto dates two centuries after the Crucifixion, and might just be one century after, or even less).

Maybe jesusisiam can pitch his views here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jesus_Seminar

I can't believe you guys are using this as an example.

This is also called the "blasphemo", and was drawn by people mocking Christians worshiping their "God".

So the forum of Orthodox Christians uses art that mocked early Christians as an example to justify iconography.

I mean... guys - really?
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,522


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #176 on: June 24, 2013, 07:07:35 PM »

Quote
After the death and resurrection of Christ the new faith spread rapidly throughout the Roman world and the Near East. The stories of the Apostles and early witnesses who had seen and known Christ Himself were eagerly listened to by the converts to the new faith. Naturally, people who had seen Christ asked for descriptions of His appearance. At some point people began to create and distribute paintings of Christ. This also included his disciples and the reall martyrs of the Christian faith. The earliest images we know of was a statue of Christ which Eusebius, an important early Christian bishop, says had been set up in Caesarea-Phillipi (Paneaus) by the woman healed by Christ of an issue of blood. He also notes that in his time there were very ancient images of Peter and Paul.

However, the church was somewhat divided about images of Christ.
Eusebius refused to send the wife of Caesar Callus an image of Christ, for he thought it is idolatrous and a violation of Biblical injunctions. Some regional churches were against images as well, a local Spanish synod in 305 said images in churches were forbidden. However, the number of examples of paintings of the nativity and allegories of the Good Shepherd from around 250 AD, show how common Christian paintings had already become. The growth of images was concurrent with the development of the doctrine of the Incarnation of Christ and is closely tied to the growing awareness of this essential element of the Christian faith.

In early Christian times there were two images of Christ that were more or less standardized. One was of a young, idealized and clean shaven "hero" type. The second was the image we are familiar with today - a man in his late 20's or early 30's with long hair tied at the back, a smooth beard,

 
 http://www.kurskroot.com/history_of_icons.html

Quote
The earliest surviving Christian art comes from the late 2nd to early 4th centuries on the walls of tombs belonging, most likely, to wealthy[6] Christians in the catacombs of Rome, although from literary evidence there may well have been panel icons which, like almost all classical painting, have disappeared.
Initially Jesus was represented indirectly by pictogram symbols such as the Ichthys (fish), the peacock, or an anchor (the Labarum or Chi-Rho was a later development). Later personified symbols were used, including Jonah, whose three days in the belly of the whale pre-figured the interval between Christ's death and Resurrection; Daniel in the lion's den; or Orpheus charming the animals.[7] The Tomb of the Julii has a famous but unique mosaic of Christ as Sol Invictus, a sun-god.[8] The image of "The Good Shepherd", a beardless youth in pastoral scenes collecting sheep, was the most common of these images, and was probably not understood as a portrait of the historical Jesus at this period.[9] It continues the classical Kriophoros, and in some cases may also represent the Shepherd of Hermas, a popular Christian literary work of the 2nd century.[10]
Among the earliest depictions clearly intended to directly represent Jesus himself are many showing him as a baby, usually held by his mother, especially in the Adoration of the Magi, seen as the first theophany, or display of the incarnate Christ to the world at large.[11] The oldest known portrait of Jesus, found in Syria and dated to about 235, shows him as a beardless young man of authoritative and dignified bearing. He is depicted dressed in the style of a young philosopher, with close-cropped hair and wearing a tunic and pallium – signs of good breeding in Greco-Roman society. From this, it is evident that some early Christians paid no heed to the historical context of Jesus being a Jew and visualised him solely in terms of their own social context, as a quasi-heroic figure, without supernatural attributes such as a halo (a fourth-century innovation).
From the 3rd century onwards, the first narrative scenes from the Life of Christ to be clearly seen are the Baptism of Christ, painted in a catacomb in about 200,[18] and the miracle of the Raising of Lazarus,[19] both of which can be clearly identified by the inclusion of the dove of the Holy Spirit in Baptisms, and the vertical, shroud-wrapped body of Lazarus. Other scenes remain ambiguous – an agape feast may be intended as a Last Supper, but before the development of a recognised physical appearance for Christ, and attributes such as the halo, it is impossible to tell, as tituli or captions are rarely used. There are some surviving scenes from Christ's Works of about 235 from the Dura Europos church on the Persian frontier of the Empire. During the 4th century a much greater number of scenes came to be depicted,[20] usually showing Christ as youthful, beardless and with short hair that does not reach his shoulders, although there is considerable variation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depiction_of_Jesus

Quote

Rome, Catacombs of Sts. Marcellinus and Peter – Noah in the Ark   
There are also representations of the young people of Babylonia rescued from the flames of the furnace, Susan saved from the snares of the elders, Noah who escaped the flood, and Daniel who stayed unharmed in the lions’ den.

From the New Testament, the miracles are chosen of healing (the blind man, the paralytic, the hemorrhaging woman) and resurrection (Lazarus, the widow of Naim’s son, Jairus’ daughter), but also other episodes, such as the conversation with the Samaritan woman at the well and the multiplication of the loaves.

Rome, Catacombs of St. Sebastian – Funeral inscription with symbols   
The art of the catacombs is also a symbolic art in the sense that some concepts which are difficult to express are represented in a simple way. To indicate Christ a fish is depicted; to signify the peace of heaven a dove is represented; to express firmness of faith an anchor is drawn. On the closing slabs of the loculi, symbols with different meanings are often engraved. In some cases, a tool is depicted which indicates the dead person’s trade in life. Some symbols, such as glasses, loaves of bread and amphorae, allude to the funeral meals consumed in honor of the deceased, the so-called refrigeria. Most of the symbols refer to eternal salvation, such as the dove, the palm, the peacock, the phoenix and the lamb.

Return to Index

 

Rome, Catacombs of Priscilla – Our Lady with the Prophet

The catacombs and the Mother of God. In the Roman catacombs the most ancient image is preserved of Our Lady who is depicted in a painting in the cemetery of Priscilla on the Via Salaria. The fresco, which can be dated back to the first half of the third century, depicts the Virgin with the Child on her knees in front of a prophet (perhaps Balaam or Isaiah) who is pointing to a star to refer to the messianic prediction. In the catacombs other episodes with Our Lady are also represented such as the Adoration of the Magi and scenes from the Christmas crib, but it is thought that prior to the Council of Ephesus, all these representations had a Christological and not a Mariological significance.

Return to Index

 

Rome, Catacombs of Priscilla – The Good Shepherd

The Good Shepherd in the catacombs. One of the images represented the most in the art of the catacombs is the Good Shepherd. While the model is taken from pagan culture, it immediately takes on a Christological significance inspired by the parable of the lost sheep. Christ is thus represented as a humble shepherd with a lamb on his shoulders as he watches over his little flock that is sometimes made up of only two sheep placed at his sides.
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_commissions/archeo/inglese/documents/rc_com_archeo_doc_20011010_cataccrist_en.html#Arte

Quote
The Catacombs of Rome (Italian: Catacombe di Roma) are ancient catacombs, underground burial places under Rome, Italy, of which there are at least forty, some discovered only in recent decades. Though most famous for Christian burials, either in separate catacombs or mixed together, they began in the 2nd century,[1] much as a response to overcrowding and shortage of land. Many scholars have written that catacombs came about to help persecuted Christians to bury their dead secretly. The soft volcanic tuff rock under Rome is highly suitable for tunnelling, as it is softer when first exposed to air, hardening afterwards. Many have kilometres of tunnels, in up to four storeys (or layers).
The Christian catacombs are extremely important for the art history of early Christian art, as they contain the great majority of examples from before about 400 AD, in fresco and sculpture.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catacombs_of_Rome

So no icons from the 1st or 2nd century, no writings about venerating icons in the 1st or 2nd century, but all came 3rd or later.   But they are a tremendous part of the EO faith, involved in practically every form of EO worship.
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,522


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #177 on: June 24, 2013, 07:09:34 PM »

Why are you so infatuated with first and second century Christianity?

At a guess, because we have so little from that time, that it allows one to claim authenticity and authority for one's own personal interpretations and pet beliefs.

I disagree, we have a ton from that time.  Lot's of writings.  Lot's of history.  Lot's of artifacts.
If I have pet beliefs, why are my beliefs written about in the scriptures, documented from early Christianity, whereas iconography is not.    I mean, let's really consider who has a pet belief.
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,522


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #178 on: June 24, 2013, 07:15:31 PM »

Refuted no.  Murdered and excommunicated, yes.

The Iconodules weren't refuted but murdered and excommunicated.

He was speaking of iconoclasts and comparing me to one.  Iconoclasts were murdered by iconodules.
You are an iconoclast.

Quote
I mostly focus on 1st and 2nd century Christianity
Other than the parts you dont like.

PP

I just don't kiss paint and wood while saying "beam it up St. Peter".

And certainly I accept the 1st and 2nd Century stuff.  Why else do I ask for it so much?  Odd thing is, and the harsh reality, there were no icons used by the earliest Christians, or writings about icons.

Would love to see one writing from St. Polycarp stating "Veneration of images (or icons) will raise your kiss the that depicted in the image".    (or similar statement)

Nothing of the sort exists in early Christian writings....   Gah, and to think, this man worshiped on the Sabbath AND practiced the Jewish feasts.....  He's a saint too, but by EO canon, anathema.... Irony at its best.... You really can't make this stuff up.

There were no icons in use, nor venerated artificial images in the earliest Christian church.
Why are you so infatuated with first and second century Christianity?

Thank you for asking.

It's because at that time the church message was spread.  The original apostles most likely already deceased.      The 2nd century Christians would have adopted teachings and practices from the apostles themselves, without too many years going by for distortion. 

Also it's to not always be accused of "sola scriptura", as the scriptures were written by the 2nd century.  This is important as "sola scriptura" is a trigger for making it easy to shun somebody's point off.   The 2nd century Christians were truly a church, which practiced many things that the EO faith did not.   As stated in prior posts, St. Polycarp worshiped on the Sabbath, held the Jewish feasts, all now which are banned via canon.   I do this to try to look past many men who have been in charge for a long time.   God Bless.   

Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
Brigidsboy
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Armenian
Posts: 343



« Reply #179 on: June 24, 2013, 07:18:48 PM »

Please cite a source for the worship practices of Saint Polycarp. Thank You.
Logged

"I don't think I've ever eaten anything Armenian I didn't like.  I even drink my non-Armenian coffee out of a St Nersess Seminary coffee mug because it is better that way." --Mor Ephrem
Tags: icons 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 »   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.266 seconds with 73 queries.