Praying to Icons. (Jesus, funeral, Jehovah, Isaiah, Revelation)

[No*s]

Originally Posted by may

Not All Images Are Idols. God’s law not to form images (Ex 20:4, 5) did not rule out the making of all representations and statues. This is indicated by Jehovah’s later command to make two golden cherubs on the cover of the Ark and to embroider representations of cherubs on the inner tent covering of ten tent cloths for the tabernacle. as far as i know, nowhere in the bible does God aprove of worshipping images.

Of course, there were times when images became idols, although not originally intended as objects of veneration. The copper serpent that Moses formed in the wilderness came to be worshiped, and therefore faithful King Hezekiah crushed it to pieces. (Nu 21:9; 2Ki 18:1, 4) The ephod made by Judge Gideon became "a snare" to him and to his household.—Jg 8:27.

These representations, however, were not idols for worship.

Then we agree on the situation in the Old Testament. We also know that Hellenistic Judaism and before made plentiful representations in 2D art. Our belief in Orthodoxy is that icons fall under the same classification as these images in the OT. We don't worship them.

[Pilgrim of this Reality]

Just as an off note. It is interesting that all images of Jesus depict him as a person of that ethnicity: white, black, Asian. Funny, how they dont portray Him as he actually was: a sun browned, callused handed, Hebrew carpenter. He may have been the Christ but he still would have looked like a common tradesman, which of course was an important point to the world.

[No*s]

Originally Posted by Pilgrim of this Reality

Just as an off note. It is interesting that all images of Jesus depict him as a person of that ethnicity: white, black, Asian. Funny, how they dont portray Him as he actually was: a sun browned, callused handed, Hebrew carpenter. He may have been the Christ but he still would have looked like a common tradesman, which of course was an important point to the world.

Yes, that does tend to happen, and it's actually quite healthy. The icons are supposed to be a window to heaven, to draw our mind there. We do not know what Jesus looked like, unless we believe the Shroud claim (which I do). As a result, it is perfectly sound to emphasize Jesus' becoming a man in such a way that the adherants will identify with. Traditional icons even add distortions to further emphasize this isn't the real thing .

[may]

Icons

as Art?

In recent years, Orthodox icons have been collected around the world. Collectors usually regard the icon, not as a sacred religious object, but as a work of art reflecting Byzantine culture. It is not unusual to find many such religious icons decorating the home or the office of someone who claims to be an atheist.

Sincere Christians, however, do not forget the primary purpose of the icon. It is an object of worship. While Christians do not challenge the right of others to own icons, personally they do not have icons in their possession, even as collector’s items. This in harmony with the principle found at Deuteronomy 7:26, The Jerusalem Bible: "You must not bring any detestable thing [images used in worship] into your house or you, like it, will come under the ban too. You must regard them as unclean and loathsome.

[No*s]

Originally Posted by may

Icons

as Art?

In recent years, Orthodox icons have been collected around the world. Collectors usually regard the icon, not as a sacred religious object, but as a work of art reflecting Byzantine culture. It is not unusual to find many such religious icons decorating the home or the office of someone who claims to be an atheist.

Sincere Christians, however, do not forget the primary purpose of the icon. It is an object of worship. While Christians do not challenge the right of others to own icons, personally they do not have icons in their possession, even as collector’s items. This in harmony with the principle found at Deuteronomy 7:26, The Jerusalem Bible: "You must not bring any detestable thing [images used in worship] into your house or you, like it, will come under the ban too. You must regard them as unclean and loathsome.

Are you incapable of explaining why you think we worship icons, and why it is different than Old Testament images, Paul's cloth, and other such things? That is the only explanation I can find for posts that saying that the Orthodox veneration of icons is both worship and idolatry.

The distinction we make is biblical, in that it is in the Old Testament. It is Christian, in that all our evidence suggests that it has been here since the beginning. We can't put a date around which we can say "icons came into Christianity here," but we can for iconoclasm.

Remember, it is we that make the OT division on images, not those who would ban all images. There is no Scriptural support for a blanket ban on all images. You have already conceded the OT use of images, and that their veneration is not worship. So, it's rather shakey ground to quote the OT to condemn a group's practice as "worship" when you cannot defend the definition.

[Scott1]

No*s ..... it's hard to debate when your cut and paste material is lacking the right info...... nice job.

[No*s]

Originally Posted by SOGFPP

No*s ..... it's hard to debate when your cut and paste material is lacking the right info...... nice job.

Thanks .

That is precisely the problem I'm having. It's simply a proclamtion of belief (and I do think pasted) that doesn't address anything said...and thus, falls victem to the explanations already made.

[Pilgrim of this Reality]

Yes No*s, your reasoning is valid and difficult to argue (aside from the the i believe; u believe debates) I often thought and was raised in the belief that icons were idols that were worshipped. Although that is the case for some people, I see now that they are just something to help focus thoughts for most, much like reading a verse during communion or before a prayer would. Personally, I still would not feel right using such (i even dislike the idea of wearing a crucifix) but i understand the other side of the issue now. Thank you for the insight.

[Joannicius]

This is a great discussion as I fought the reasoning and came to a different understanding after months of wrestling with it before comming into the Orthodox Church eight years ago. The more difficult issue for me was the understanding of who Mary is and why she is given so much honor in the RC and the EO faiths.

The greater issue (in priciple not magnitude) which brings all of these other issues into proper understanding is to see the rightful place of the marriage of Holy Tradition (as opposed to man's tradition) and the Scriptures without separating them as was done at the reformation.

[may]

Historians

Observe That . . .

·

"It is a well-known fact that Buddhism, founded in the sixth century BCE, did not see the first image of its founder until around the first century CE."

"For centuries, the Hindu tradition was essentially aniconic [without idols or images]."

"Hinduism and Buddhism both started out aniconically and only gradually accepted images into their worship. Christianity did the same."—The Encyclopedia of Religion, by Mircea Eliade.

·

"From various Biblical accounts it is evident that the true worship of God was devoid of images. . . . In the NT [New Testament], too, the worship of alien gods and idols is prohibited."—New Catholic Encyclopedia.

· "Images were unknown in the worship of the primitive Christians."—Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, by McClintock and Strong.

· "Neither in the New Testament, nor in any genuine writings of the first age of Christianity, can any trace be discovered of the use of statues or pictures in the worship of Christians, whether public or private."—A Concise Cyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, by Elias Benjamin Sanford.

· "The early Christians would have looked with horror at the bare suggestion of placing images in the churches, and would have considered bowing down or praying before them as nothing less than idolatry."—History of the Christian Church, by John Fletcher Hurst.

· "In the early church, the making and veneration of portraits of Christ and the saints were consistently opposed."—The New Encyclopædia Britannica.

· "Although the primitive Church was not averse to art, yet it had no images of Christ."—Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge.