@@kevinlandwaster204 Ὁδηγήτρια (Hodegetria : She who shows the way) : one of the first icons, representing The Mother of God along with Child Jesus, painted by St. Luke the Evangelist.
@@danilolquerojr. It is the Holy Tradition of the Church. If one rejects a single doctrine of Holy Tradition, he is a heretic. Sola Scriptura is heresy, because we interpret Scripture through Holy Tradition, and the Holy Scripture is parr of the Holy Tradition.
The person represented. Its sounds like using a talisman or charm for a more effective prayer, and the person? It thought we supposed to pray through Christ to the Father? Where did these odd teachings originate
This is the best explanation I've seen so far to the theology of icons. Though, I still disagree with it profoundly. Thank you very much for this video! Very educational.
The interesting question is if an iconographer makes a bad representation of Jesus on a painting (for example Jesus as a stick figure, or Jesus but painted as Lord Radoo [Henrik Möller]), does it work? Or if an icon is damaged during a restoration? Does that prevent the prayer from magically moving through the receiver to the recipient?
There are standards that an iconographer must follow for an icon generally to be regarded as legitimate. But one produced by one untrained or done poorly can still function as on if approved and/or blessed by a priest or bishop (Note: blessing of icons is not necessary and rarely done outside of the U.S.). If one is damaged (like degraded mosaics or botched restorations) can still function as icons. You can find mind for sale many reproductions of crumbling but still beautiful mosaics and frescos of ancient churches. Personal icons that get damaged or such and you want to dispose of them should be done reverently. You shouldn't just throw them in the trash, for instance. They should either be buried in a placed that won't be trampled under foot or burned and the ashes be buried likewise.
The language used may have been confusing. The icons are not magic and have no inherent power. You don’t need icons to pray to God or the saints. They act as a focus point, they teach theology, and offer a scene to reflect upon while praying. Like a picture of a loved one.
The big problem with that logic is no one knows what Jesus looked like, so your icons are a picture of some ones imagination. Also the church fathers, including Jerome the translator of the Latin Vulgate, were opposed to imagery.
Curious. Actually, when modern russians are praying to the icons, they are asking Saints themselves to help, not the God through them. Turns out, this is a heresy?
These are works of beauty, craft and skill! Do not mistake the metaphor for real thing. Zen saying"it is the finger pointing at the moon". Don't mistake the finger for the moon. The professor skillfully describes the object to be some type of bridge or portal. To destroy historical art, be it the giant Buddhas of Afghanistan, to Stonewall Jackson is to erase 2500 years of history. I would ask the professor, Are we descending into a new dark age?
The Jews praying to God through the Arc of Cherubim and Bronzed snake.you are not worshipping an object you are venerating and honoring dulia Hyperdulia.
Just read the maccabes which you protestants took out from the bible and you will see prayers through passed away saints and even prayers for the death.
@@Sendo664 no. Its reasons why no one with a brain would take them as serious as other scripture. But if you believe Jesus christ taught that to pray to Himself, draw a picture, and focus your prayer through it? Let alone other saints and angels
bro is that monastery icons of Saint Benedict? you know they are pagan syncretists who make sacrifices to actual idols. look into monastery icons. burn that thing or get it blessed if you must keep it.
Zwingli and others for the sake of saving the Word rejected all plastic art; Luther, with an equal concern for the Word, but far more conservative, would have all the arts to be the servants of the Gospel. "I am not of the opinion" said [Luther], "that through the Gospel all the arts should be banished and driven away, as some zealots want to make us believe; but I wish to see them all, especially music, in the service of Him Who gave and created them." Again he says: "I have myself heard those who oppose pictures, read from my German Bible.… But this contains many pictures of God, of the angels, of men, and of animals, especially in the Revelation of St. John, in the books of Moses, and in the book of Joshua. We therefore kindly beg these fanatics to permit us also to paint these pictures on the wall that they may be remembered and better understood, inasmuch as they can harm as little on the walls as in books. Would to God that I could persuade those who can afford it to paint the whole Bible on their houses, inside and outside, so that all might see; this would indeed be a Christian work. For I am convinced that it is God's will that we should hear and learn what He has done, especially what Christ suffered. But when I hear these things and meditate upon them, I find it impossible not to picture them in my heart. Whether I want to or not, when I hear, of Christ, a human form hanging upon a cross rises up in my heart: just as I see my natural face reflected when I look into water. Now if it is not sinful for me to have Christ's picture in my heart, why should it be sinful to have it before my eyes?"
Says the person who believe in the Church proven heresy of iconoclasm, you cannot call icons heresy, just like arians cannot call Trinitarianism heresy.
@@albabialdayaqi5885 _ Which Church you have found out that I believe?????? You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth (Exodus 20:3...). Their idols are silver and gold, the work of human hands. They have mouths, but do not speak; eyes, but do not see. They have ears, but do not hear; noses, but do not smell. They have hands, but do not feel; feet, but do not walk; and they do not make a sound in their throat. Those who make them become like them; so do all who trust in them (Psalm 115:4...). For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things (Romans 1:21...). The ironsmith takes a cutting tool and works it over the coals. He fashions it with hammers and works it with his strong arm. He becomes hungry, and his strength fails; he drinks no water and is faint. The carpenter stretches a line; he marks it out with a pencil. He shapes it with planes and marks it with a compass. He shapes it into the figure of a man, with the beauty of a man, to dwell in a house. He cuts down cedars, or he chooses a cypress tree or an oak and lets it grow strong among the trees of the forest. He plants a cedar and the rain nourishes it. Then it becomes fuel for a man. He takes a part of it and warms himself; he kindles a fire and bakes bread. Also he makes a god and worships it; he makes it an idol and falls down before it. Half of it he burns in the fire. Over the half he eats meat; he roasts it and is satisfied. Also he warms himself and says, “Aha, I am warm, I have seen the fire!” And the rest of it he makes into a god, his idol, and falls down to it and worships it. He prays to it and says, “Deliver me, for you are my god!” (Isaiah 44:12...). READ THE BIBLE and it will set you free from idolatry.
@@danvankouwenberg7234 - You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth (Exodus 20:3...).
My brother, you have no idea how close you've hit the nail :D That's one of many reasons why protestants in general are against icons. Catholicism and Orthodoxy were primarily developed by Greeks and Romans who've had little knowledge of Judaism and Judaic traditions. So, the argument actually is that icons are a development by these Christian Greeks, but if you'd go back to actual 1st-century Jews and Christians, they'd condemn it.
@@alexvig2369 I am sorry brother in Christ, but I have to correct your error. As a former protestant, void of the knowledge of church history, the same church Christ our Lord established, I found the second council of Nicaea. Having debated muslims, I realized that Protestantism, like islam, is just misinformed and doesn't know history, but rather follows immoral people who came hundreds of years after our Lord. You know this silly argument the, other brother mindlessly contributed to the Church of our God and our Lord, can be easily disproven. Yes, a statue of Zeus was a physical representation of a humanoid god, we don't believe or worship gods. We worship the True God, our Father and our Lord with His Spirit. Also notice that there is no Icon of God the father nor the Holy Spirit, but only Jesus, because Jesus became flesh and took upon Himself a created image. So no, we do not worship our God through icons, we worship our Lord who became flesh through icons, as well as venerate the people in whos lives He worked in. I would advise you to go find the church that existed during the time of the apostles, the one Christ established. Then go read what the church councils and fathers said. And by the Grace of God, He will bring you into the fullness of His faith. God bless.
@@albabialdayaqi5885 Your comment is certainly the most solid argument I've ever heard in favor of Orthodoxy and icons. Is there a source you'd suggest me to read?
@Alex Vig Thanks for your understanding, I can think of one right now, but I would advise you to do research on the second council of Nicea, it was what convinced me, aslo the books of St. John of Damascus.
I was a Jehovah’s Witness all my life until I found they removed the most important verses of the Holy Bible. Please read the book of John chapter 1 in full from the King James Bible, and understand some level of Greek for the areas which contest the Jehovah’s Witnesses view. I do not believe in the icons worship that many around the world do. I don’t think it’s biblical. I do believe Jesus is an Uncreated Being, as part of God. All things that have ever been created, were made through Jesus. John 1 confirms this. Please leave the organization called the Jehovah’s Witnesses. They believe in many things that change the person of Jesus, many things they preach are great, but I believe they are not the true church - do to the practice of false prophesies through he years of the organization and publication of the Watchtower. They also excommunicate members - which is not a practice Jesus would want. He was known to be in the company of sinners - to help them and change their lives.
@@LePeterK123 Regaurding John chapter one, the Greek there is unclear and could mean many things. On it's own it could translate: "The Word was God" "The Word was a god" "The Word was of God" or something similar, subtle but important differences. This one verse is not enough to give clarity on the matter. The king James authors were Trinitarian and do interpreted the verse in a Trinitarian way, and it could be argued that as the Witnesses are non Trinitarian that this influenced their translation of the Bible, though I find this unconvincing seeing as Wittness non-Trinitarianism long predates the New World Translation. On the other hand, the verses that relate Jesus as being an entity distinct from God are both multiple and much more clear. Take John 17:20-22 “I make request, not concerning these only, but also concerning those putting faith in me through their word, 21 so that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in union with me and I am in union with you, that they also may be in union with us, so that the world may believe that you sent me. 22 I have given them the glory that you have given me, in order that they may be one just as we are one." Explicitly stating that the unity between the Christ and the Father is the same unity as that between the Christ and the congregation, that is, not one of shared personhood. Or John 14:28 "You heard that I said to you, ‘I am going away and I am coming back to you.’ If you loved me, you would rejoice that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I am." If Jesus and Jehovah, that his, Jesus and God the Father, are the same person, how can God be greater than Jesus? Then the numerous verses speaking of Jesus as "Begotten", beggetting being a form of creation. Of course, there is a wealth of Trinitarian literature that explains how beggetting can imply not creation but a continuous, eternal pattern of sustenance, but this complex philosophy is not found in scripture. Theoretically, by all means, such a thing is not beyond the command of God, for what is? But what reason have we to go to such explanatory lengths rather than interpret beggetting as just that, the creation of a child by a parent? We would need some biblical starting point, and while the uncertainty of John 1 does not refute this, it does not support it either. There are many other points about the trinity I could reuse, doubtless you have heard them all before anyway. I will address your other concern, excommunication. Indeed, Jesus did keep company with sinners, in the hope of encouraging them to repentance and salvation, yet he also recognised that it is nessercery to reprove those breeding it. Did he not harshly criticise the Pharasies, seeing their hearts as only one with divine authority could? And have we not explicit command to practice excommunication where needed? Second John verse 10 commands us to not even greet a teacher claiming to Christian but preaching not the authentic doctrine of the Christ, giving the example of Docetists. God has always held those inside the congregation to a higher standard than those outside, this is just and proper. Under the Mosaic Law the death penalty was applied for apostasy, but pagan foreign residents were welcome. There is no hypocrisy here, different standards are applied to those under and not under a congregations covenant.
Everything that has ever existed, was made through Jesus. John chapter one is explicitly clear. Stick to that chapter and come back to me with any points from only that chapter. It’s the first chapter of the New Testament. Take it in like you have never been taught anything.
Icons are used to focus your prayer, the same way as a Komboloskini or a Rosary. Icons are also used to represent events that are found in the Scriptures, it was especially useful for illiterate people in the past to see icons.
Icons provide no conduit no door to God, Christ or the Saints. Rather they help us engage our own hearts by distracting our minds from every other influence so that we can shift gears to create prayers without distraction. This Catholic Sunday School explanation is confusing and definitely rapidly approaches the line of anathema if it doesn’t actually cross it. Bummer because I thought I was hearing at the beginning something I could actually agree with Catholicism but as usual it’s taken to far. Oh well I’ll keep an open mind.
This is the same thing for paganism, statues of Gods were never considered God (s) themselves, but merely an offering to them and a means to contemplate them. Of course, just like in Christianity, an icon may be attributed divine/miraculous powers simply because God or in the past (the Gods) gave those objects that power by communicating to man through them. I call upon fellow Christians to not view our own pagan ancestors with contempt, but to appreciate their honest attempt at worshipping the Father. The way I see is any religion reaches the Lord as long as it is sincere and honest, and recognises the father, the demiurg, which for the greeks was Zeus, all powerful, who according to the ancients decided what is good and evil, and punishment and reward for mankind.
I'm Ciprian Droma from Romania. I wish you could comment a bit more on Exodus 20:4 ... Also, If you would show me 100 pictures of your grandfather and in all of them there would be the face of a different man... I would be confused.... Where does the Bible suggest that we need a mediator ( an Icon ) between us and God??? How could a hand made picture intercede between you and God and help you, making your prayer to be heard??? in my opinion for a prayer to be heard, are other kind of conditions: 1. We know that God does not listen to sinners. He listens to the godly person who does his will John 9:31 2. Husbands, in the same way be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect as the weaker partner and as heirs with you of the gracious gift of life, so that nothing will hinder your prayers. 1 Peter 3:7. 3. Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much. James 5:16 4. You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it ( as some theologians say, "in My character, what I would ask the Father") However the point is if we ask Lord Jesus (DIRECTLY) no need for a mediator... and one last verse. Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. John 4:3 I hope you can write an answer regarding second commandment what is your view to that? Thanks! p.s By the way, I appreciate your videos very much!
I find this very interesting, however, following my...education not only on christianity but also in buddhism and islam, I can say that certain... Churches get very, very deep into technical, almost microscopic differences in order to decide upon supporting or not supporting a particular "opinion". Something that many people, including my grandfather who was a pastor did, was to read the entire bible, from genesis one, till the last chapter of revelations, all the way through the bible. Without listening to commentary on certain things, but simply reading it as we would read any other book, from front to back. You will notice how many times in the bible, it is verbally legible, that certain profits were, in other words, buried in secret, or whisked away. If you read it without commentary, or a physical person telling you "no that scripture is wrong, do not believe it, but rather believe this other version"... You might get the distinct idea, that God/Jesus were not fans of allowing the israelites to know where certain figures were buried, with the exception of jesus. Which, his location of burial was necessary, otherwise noone would have visited his grave to bear witness his resurrection. Tell me now though, do you really know where it is, or do you read scripture and on faith believe where it is? That same scripture that just gave us the idea that maybe God could not want us to know where moses was buried, so that we do not go to worship the site, could give some people the belief that they do not accept images of serapis in their household as a representation of jesus. There is therefore no sin, and no mistake on their part, to want to be an iconoclast, because they believe they may be partaking in a sin whenever they purchase or pray towards a certain imagine, of WHATEVER kind. Arguing that technically jesus still hears you and the prayer passes through the image, is like arguing the scripture where, let me paraphrase a bit, but that regardless of whether the man writing was in the depths of the ocean, or the highest mountain too, even there, God could hear him. The point said person was making is that there is no escape from god, or from communication with him. Yes, I'm sure god can hear your prayer "through" even...a golden hog, if that's what you desire to pray to, but the technicality isn't about whether he can hear you, but about whether it is right to have that image and pray to it in the first place. This reminds me of the quartodecimans, there is nowhere in scripture where it is listed as a capital sin, or act worthy of punishment, to continue worshipping your lord and savior on passover instead of easter. However, a council of men, voted, in favor of easter. So technically, according to those men, technically, easter is now preferred, however, we can vote an ape in for president of the United States, but it would not change the last 40+ presidents of our history. That is american history, however, not the bible. How many times does it say in no uncertain terms that God does not change? Or that to he who knows it is a sin, but does it anyway, to him it is sin? You are quite convinced with technical knowledge that you can pray to an image and the prayer still reaches jesus. Another man may be convinced that he is committing a sin in so doing, do to what he believes himself to represent, during that act. His belief therefore says it is sin, therefore, there is no need to "convince him" it is not, since there is no scripture saying that we must accept images of that above, or below. Does that means you can do anything then regardless of what scripture says? No, but, In trying to be technical, you have missed the entire point, which was very simply laid out in scripture. Remember the greek word plerosai and how that word can be used to say that the old covenant also never ended when christ came. Technicality can be the death of us all, or, we can study scripture, and prove ourselves to be righteous according to what we are allowed to learn in this lifetime, and be judged by that. Technicality, however, is not righteousness. That is only the vote of men, the same men who believe that there's a scripture that allowed easter, ishtar, a pagan God, to be allowed into the church. This is why people used to be punished for having their own bibles, when you study it yourself, you come to different conclusions than when a man with a degree or certification teaches it to you. To be honest, that's the way it was intended, as well.
I care not for your anti-historical attitude in your last paragraphs, for Scripture is sufficient to settle this. Deuteronomy 4 : 15 clearly prohibits images of God, because he wasn't seen in any outward shape. Jesus is God, and has been seen. End of discussion. I am not gonna pretend that the Incarnation did not happen. Of course I am also against technicalities, such as page-long comments. And yes, when one studies the bible themselves, one comes to different conclusions as per 2 Peter 3 : 16 (though I have doubts that your grandfather read the bible all the way through and not leave out 7 old testament books. I don't speculate bad intentions, but good intentions don't save, faith in Jesus does).
@@generalguy6211 I completely agree with what you said and the scripture in deuteronomy. However...we literally just watched a video where a Catholic calls anyone who takes that scripture to heart a heretic, and thus iconoclast. I know I will be seen as also a heretic, and thus a fool, regardless it must be brought up to them that A. They killed hundreds, if not thousands of people known as quartodecimans, who had continued observing passover after our saviors death. They believed quartodecimans were heretics since they did not accept replacing passover with easter. Which was decided by a council of men, regardless of class or position. Men. Catholics do not accept anyone believing literally word for word the bible, nor anyone reading it front to back as if it is a complete standalone book of itself. That is Unless of course, you are certified through each and every doctrine of theirs, to interpret, and accept things like the councils/meetings where they decided things like changing the meaning of one scripture in order to gain converts. If they want to believe what a "certified" (however possibly false that may be) person/s interpretation of the bible, I will not hang any of them on a cross and burn or stone them. I believe God will judge whether a person is a heretic. However, my point to them is that they need to be less...adamant, to call another man a heretic as well, with the understanding that their harsh and sometimes biblically incorrect doctrines have caused many people to die, as well as caused even their own church to have division. You are entirely correct, I need to include more old testament scriptures in any debate or talk of the bible/beliefs. However they will write the old testament off and say it is "beyond scope of discussion" since we are discussing new testament things such as christ, or an image of him. Sorry for the long reply, but yes, absolutely, I believe in reading and following the entire bible, old testament and new and was raised as such. After all, even the new testament says in 2nd timothy, 3:16 and 17. "All scripture is inspired by God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for instruction in righteousness. That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished into all good works." My hope is that, although it will go nowhere, one of them (catholic/jesuit priests) will read one of these comments and have an eye opening moment, where instead of trying to have indignation and hatred towards "heretics", perhaps they show compassion and love instead after thinking logically on their own intolerance and hatred. Any tolerance from a religion this guilty of intolerance is an improvement. It would at least help prevent more religious based cruelty in the future should that pop it's head up again... No certification makes it righteous for me to kill you or anyone of my own will, without actual reason. And even then, the bible instructs us to turn the other cheek in certain circumstances, which I have still not fully learned to do. Well, we can hope anyways. At the end of the day, they follow perfectly, the councils of pharisees and saduccees, and attempt to throw stones, when they too are not without sin. Love or some kind of kindness needs to be imprinted in their beliefs somewhere, since they claim to believe in Christ who spoke against pharisees. But yes I will take this correction to heart and make sure to mention more scriptures and old testament next time I comment on a biblical subject.
@@shaneflutsch2270 Thank you, for your kind words. You raised some points I want to react to, but I won't, because I couldn't do it from a place of love only out of spite and pride right now. It's just that, the Catholic Church is something dear to my heart. In a culture where anything goes, really, it called me what I am, a sinner who needs to repent, and told me about Jesus. From there on I knew, I needed Jesus and all I needed was Jesus, but I wasn't a fan of religious hierarchy so I would rather be an independent baptist or something like that. But I couldn't justify 'sola scriptura', so I had to also accept Catholicism's hierarchy as well as its gospel, and have been in love with the Church ever since then. If you could pray for me I would greatly appreciate it. God bless.
I enjoy your videos; however, I reject sola ecclesial and the Marian Dogmas. Mary clearly had other children as the Word tells us. The Pope is not a Biblically sanctioned position. Alter Christus and pulling Jesus back for propitiation of ours sins is needless and ghastly theology. Having said all of this: you are a great historian and a joy to listen to. I literally seek out your different videos. What a paradox you are to me. I enjoy you.
If Mary had other children. Don't you think when the angel came to her and told her she was going to have a child she would've mentioned her betrothal being the means by which she would have this child? Instead of contending with the Angel that she has no man?
Pastors in American evangelical churches are NOT a Biblically sanctioned position and yet they gather more money than a lot of simple, capitalist buisnesses do...so what gives? Is God just a money gatherer or does the Biblical narrative actually MEAN something? I know which I accept, do you?
it a little bit of a jump to go from Jesus being God incarnate in the flesh and being fully human and fully God to we need to pray to a piece of wood with a painting with on it. The question is why t make this jump ?
The icon isn't itself the object of worship you should actually study these issues you may be surprised. We use these commemoration of the saints and remembrance for their lives as they are sanctified by God
@@shiningdiamond5046 so why do you need it? Paul, Peter none of the apostles seem to have needed an icon to pray and commune with the Lord. Jesus our chief example of prayer did not use any such things.
@@midnightwatchman1 Do some research brother and you'll learn that icons have been around since before the 2nd temple period. Orthodoxy, which includes icons, is the direct continuation of the right worship revealed by God. Icons, incense, altar, etc are all right worship. In order to differentiate themselves from Christians, Jews abolished icons in their synagogues in the 6th century. Not to mention St. Luke painted one of the first Christian icons. God bless you.☦️🙏🏽
@@michaelangelovalerio I would say icons have been around even before the second temple proper. However, a practice existing does not mean God approves of it, God has tolerated slavery, men have multiple wives and concubines. It just means God is patient and tolerant of man. . Moses used the symbol of a snake to heal people four hundred years later God had to destroy it. Here is a big revelation though I am proud of my spiritual ancestors in the faith, but they were not perfect. They practiced some things that were plain wrong or only needed for a time. Today no Christian needs icons. You can read and write and have good information. you can pray to your God directly no icons are needed.
@@shiningdiamond5046 Then you agree with me you do not need them. You read and write and you are indwelled with the Holy Spirit and you can pray directly to Jesus. No Christian need icons in 2021
Nice misquotation, let the bible correct you. Exodus 20:2 “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. 3 “You shall have no other gods before me. 4 “You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. 5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments. According to you understanding, we should not make images of anything ever, no painting, no drawings, no pictures, and yes, no selfies. But the real interpretation is that we should not make an image AND THEN WORSHIP It, which makes sense in the context of verse 3 which states that we shall not have any gods beside God. And as you have herd, we as Orthodox believers do not worship icons, only the person (Christ) which it represents.
1. The second commandment (Ex. 20:4ff) explicitly describes what is prohibited: making an image and bowing to it. Doing that very thing but claiming the images are not really idols but "icons" and the bowing isn't really worship but "veneration" is not convincing. 2. Canon 36 of the Council of Elvira states, “Pictures are not to be placed in churches, so that they do not become objects of worship and adoration.” 3. Origin (184-254) responded to Celsus by admitting that Christians used no images; he mocked the notion that images were helpful in worship, and, citing the Second Commandment wrote, “It is in consideration of these and many other such commands, that they [Christians] not only avoid temples, altars, and images, but are ready to suffer death when it is necessary, rather than debase by any such impiety the conception which they have of the Most High God.” (Origin, Contra Celsus, Book VII, Chapter 64.) 4. Eusebius (c. AD 263 - 339) wrote that even the incarnate Christ cannot appear in an image, for "the flesh which He put on for our sake … was mingled with the glory of His divinity so that the mortal part was swallowed up by Life. . . . This was the splendor that Christ revealed in the transfiguration and which cannot be captured in human art. To depict purely the human form of Christ before its transformation, on the other hand, is to break the commandment of God and to fall into pagan error." 5. Epiphanius (inter 310-320 - 403): "I went in to pray, and found there a curtain hanging on the doors of the said church, dyed and embroidered. It bore an image either of Christ or of one of the saints; I do not rightly remember whose the image was. Seeing this, and being loath that an image of a man should be hung up in Christ's church contrary to the teaching of the Scriptures, I tore it asunder and advised the custodians of the place to use it as a winding sheet for some poor person." He goes on to tell John that such images are “contrary to our religion” and to instruct the presbyter of the church that such images are “an occasion of offense.” (Epiphanius, Letter 51, chapter 9). 6. Hence we see that the "Orthodox" church radically broke away from the tradition of the early church.
For the record, I've had an extensive conversation with yeoberry in the comment section of another video where we extensively went over his arguments, ultimately demonstrating that his points were misconstructions/misrepresentations/based on bad premises/not from Church Fathers (venerable or otherwise)/actual falsehoods, or any combination of those. Just putting that out there.
If you side with the Synod of Elvira, you would have to accept Canon 33 which mandates clerical celibacy, withholding the Eucharist from others (mentioned in numerous Canons), keeping one's baptism intact (Canon 38), the mention of an Episcopal Chair (Canon 58), and forbidding women to write letters to other women without their husband's consent (Canon 81.) Are these Canons to be kept as well?
I DON'T PRAY TO AN ICON. You are partially correct! THE ICON IS ONLY A REPESENTATION OF OF JESUS, ETC... PLEASE DON'T EVEN SAY "WHEN ONE PRAYS TO THE ICON" ONE PRAYS TO GOD, JESUS ETC. I don't want the video watches misunderstand. I AM ORTHODOX.... BROTHER JAMES 🙏🙏🙏
"You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below." Exodus 20:4 Notice the completeness of this statement ANYTHING in HEAVEN or EARTH.
the early church kept images and idols of Christ and the saints: the ten commandments did not prohibit man made idols, the OT commandments did not have verses and the first two are read together (this is the Israelite understanding); the prohibition was only on idols of other Gods as the second is read in together with the first. This is obvious as the Israelites followed God's command to make a man made idol in the temple and the Ark depicting angels and beings. God commanded for idols to be built for him in the time of the Patriarchs (Abraham, Moses, Josue etc) ; rock cairns to commentate God. These are all works of mans hands. The latter Jewish temple had images of angels and beings too. So the Ten Commandments did not prohibit making man made carvings but it is stated in context of the previous verse of not worshipping other gods; so man made carvings dedicated to our God is as old as the OT and the early church made carvings of Jesus and angels etc. In addition, the early church fathers recognised that what made Jesus's promises so great was that he became man to allow us to share in his death and resurrection; one cannot depict God in his spiritual form but one can depict him as the Son of Man. His Human nature was what made him distinct. The OT and the early church recognised that the statutes also served a teaching purpose (the dimensions of the Tabernacle was made to tell the story of God's greatness and so are the churches). This is in contrast to the fake Gods like Allah which the Muslims prohibit to be mentioned in man made articles; the Muslims had a false understanding of the OT (unlike the Jews and early Christians). The protestants in order to attack the church changed the commandments to separate verse 2 out of context and banned all statues; this obviously does not pan out in light of over 2000 years of church practices and 3000 years of OT practice.
Learning Christian cherubim to be put on the ark of the covenant, that’s an image of something in heaven, God made this command, by your logic God contradicted Himself
@@monkeymode7529 Here is a small extract, Not my own work: "God has forbidden the use of images in worship." Yet if people were to "search the scriptures" ( John 5:39), they would find the opposite is true. God forbade the "worship" of statues, but he did not forbid the "religious use" of statues. Instead, he actually commanded their use in religious contexts! It is right to warn people against the sin of idolatry when they are committing it. But calling Catholics idolaters because they have images of Christ and the saints are based on misunderstanding or ignorance of what the Bible says about the purpose and uses (both good and bad) of statues. People who oppose religious statuary forget about the many passages where the Lord commands the making of statues. For example; The Ark of the Covenant Exodus 25:18-20 "And you shall make two cherubim of gold [i.e., two gold statues of angels]; of hammered work shall you make them, on the two ends of the mercy seat. Make one cherub on the one end, and one cherub on the other end; of one piece of the mercy seat shall you make the cherubim on its two ends. The cherubim shall spread out their wings above, overshadowing the mercy seat with their wings, their faces one to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubim be." David gave Solomon the plan "for the altar of incense made of refined gold, and its weight; also his plan for the golden chariot of the cherubim that spread their wings and covered the ark of the covenant of the Lord. All this he made clear by the writing of the hand of the Lord concerning it all, all the work to be done according to the plan" (1 Chronicles 28:18-19). David's plan for the temple, which the biblical author tells us was "by the writing of the hand of the Lord concerning it all," included statues of angels. Similarly, Ezekiel 41:17-18 describes graven (carved) images in the idealized temple he was shown in a vision, for he writes, "On the walls round about in the inner room and [on] the nave were carved likenesses of cherubim." During a plague of serpents sent to punish the Israelites during the exodus, God told Moses to "make [a statue of] a fiery serpent, and set it on a pole; and every one who is bitten, when he sees it shall live. So Moses made a bronze serpent, and set it on a pole; and if a serpent bit any man, he would look at the bronze serpent and live" (Numbers 21:8-9). "
This seems to me to be disingenuous. The argument agains icons are not about making images: it’s about worshipping them. No pagan worships a piece of wood. He worships the prototype
No, the arguments made by the iconoclasts in the 8th and 9th century were against any use of images at all. It wasn’t just illegal to worship icons it was illegal to have icons. Modern Protestant arguments against iconography are from a different vein.
@@harrygarris6921 by no means all were against all images. I know this is the one picked up on the most, but it because it's the easiest to argue against.
Newsflash: you don't need a painting of Christ to get your prayers to Christ. You don't need a painting of a saint to get your prayers to Christ. Just pray to Christ. It's easy.
@@tymon1928 Jesus never prayed to ancestors. He made Moses and Elijah appear PHYSICALLY on the mount. That's not even remotely close to what's done on vodoun.
@@dustindustindontworry-jz8dh Jesus talked to ancestors/saints i.e. Moses and Elijah and they were dead, so what's the difference? Jesus can do it but we can't? Where do you get the idea that Moses and Elijah were physically there rather than all of this being just a vision?
@@tymon1928 Either way, Jesus himself had them appear. Its not the same thing as praying to departed souls. Like, lets stop trying to pretend that your "ancestors" are appearing to you in your room when your praying to them. When everyone knows that's not the case.
Since when have pictures been telephones to heaven? That would be nice to tell something to my great grandmum, just by speaking into a photo of her. But, you know, I'm afraid that I'd actually speak to demons, and since the dead ones are dead, and can't be talked to, (go through the bible, the only mention for talking to dead ones is through a fortune teller in chronicles) that's why I believe that the only people you are reaching are demons. Why not pray to the father by the only mediator, when we sin for example? (1. John 2, 1-2)
"42 Then he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.[b]” 43 Jesus answered him, “Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise.”"Luke 23. "8 Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with Him. " Romans 6 "And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am." John 14:3 My friend, as a Christian you should believe that those who have died in Christ, are not really dead. You should look into the Catholic church's criteria in pronouncing someone a saint- only those, from whose intercession, miracles have happened here on earth (at least twice) are canonized as saints. So there are definitely examples out there of people being healed through the intercession of the saints; This is not by the saints own might, but through the grace of God, to whom the saints take our case(Just like in the old testament when Daniel offers up prayers for his people Daniel 9:1-19 ) It is not that we cannot pray directly to God, it is more that our prayers are strengthened through the intercession of others, especially the saints. We always ask each other to pray for us, see St.Paul for example: "3 Now I want to talk about some other matters. Brothers and sisters, pray for us. Pray that the Lord’s message will spread quickly. Pray that others will honor it just as you did. 2 And pray that we will be saved from sinful and evil people" 2Thess:3 So knowing that in Christ, those who have died, have not actually died and that we can indeed pray for one another, what is the fault in asking a saint to pray for us? I leave you with this "25 Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. The one who believes in me will live, even though they die; 26 and whoever lives by believing in me will never die. Do you believe this?”" John 11
Your arguments for icons are identical to the arguments pagans make for idols. The idol is a representation of their God and their prayers and partitions go through the idol to their god. It's exactly the same .
You have to pray trough a Mary or a Saint picture to get to Jesus? That's pure heresy even more than the image itself ... I like some views from orthodoxy but things like that ones are why i am still protestant
As a Catholic roman rite, we don't have to pray through Mary or a saint to get to Christ. We can pray directly. But since those who have fallen asleep in christ are still living we are asking them to pray for us the same as one would ask a living on earth too
Yorsh Peric you don’t have to go through her, but you can, and scripture shows that it is a good thing to ask someone to pray for you, in fact it is highly encouraged, so imagine how great it must be for the mother of God to pray for us
So don't worry about your beliefs because it doesn't represent them. And don't worry about anyone else's beliefs because their not your business. Be a Muslim and let everyone else be what they are. Simple...isn't it?
This is about Christianity. You are not a Christian. You stick with.your god which is not the God of the Bible. We don't do theology on the Quran. Done
where in the bible says we should we pray to icons ? where in the bible are we allowed to prayed through saints and mary ? jesus is the only mediator we need to pray to
Nice video, and as an Orthodox Christian I myself love Icons- but these paintings you have in your video are *not* Icons. They come from a company called Monastery Icons, and despite their name, they are not even Christians. They are Hindu pagans and they pray their pagan rituals over these paintings before shipping them out, and it is very dangerous spiritually to have them. Please burn them and acquire real Icons from other sources.
This is what happens when you surrender to superstition and idolatry. "Real icons" are idols and are forbidden in the second commandment (Ex. 20:4ff): “You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. 5 You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments." The early church did not tolerate icons. Council of Elvira (c. 305): Canon 36, “Pictures are not to be placed in churches, so that they do not become objects of worship and adoration.”
yeoberry First off, you are using a mistranslated Bible Verse, so you discredited yourself, and Icons were used in the Church since the beginning. Furthermore, Iconoclasm is an *officially* condemned herecy, therefore your reference of a local Council (not an Ecumenical Council, and you've used a mistranslation anyway) falls upon its own face.
Niko Delmedico : First, I didn’t use a mistranslated Bible verse. You can’t show anything wrong with that translation. You’re just lying. Then you lied about the early church. You can’t even one valid example of icons in the early church. Then you ignore what the early church explicitly taught on the subject. Next.
Niko Delmedico : 1. The second commandment (Ex. 20:4ff) explicitly describes what is prohibited: making an image and bowing to it. Doing that very thing but claiming the images are not really idols but "icons" and the bowing isn't really worship but "veneration" is not convincing. 2. Canon 36 of the Council of Elvira states, “Pictures are not to be placed in churches, so that they do not become objects of worship and adoration.” This is the accurate translation. 3. Origen(184-254) responded to Celsus by admitting that Christians used no images; he mocked the notion that images were helpful in worship, and, citing the Second Commandment wrote, “It is in consideration of these and many other such commands, that they [Christians] not only avoid temples, altars, and images, but are ready to suffer death when it is necessary, rather than debase by any such impiety the conception which they have of the Most High God.” (Origin, Contra Celsus, Book VII, Chapter 64.) 4. Eusebius (c. AD 263 - 339) wrote that even the incarnate Christ cannot appear in an image, for "the flesh which He put on for our sake … was mingled with the glory of His divinity so that the mortal part was swallowed up by Life. . . . This was the splendor that Christ revealed in the transfiguration and which cannot be captured in human art. To depict purely the human form of Christ before its transformation, on the other hand, is to break the commandment of God and to fall into pagan error." 5. Epiphanius (inter 310-320 - 403): "I went in to pray, and found there a curtain hanging on the doors of the said church, dyed and embroidered. It bore an image either of Christ or of one of the saints; I do not rightly remember whose the image was. Seeing this, and being loath that an image of a man should be hung up in Christ's church contrary to the teaching of the Scriptures, I tore it asunder and advised the custodians of the place to use it as a winding sheet for some poor person." He goes on to tell John that such images are “contrary to our religion” and to instruct the presbyter of the church that such images are “an occasion of offense.” (Epiphanius, Letter 51, chapter 9).
yeoberry You here now are simply making statements without backing them, as is expected given that you have run out of arguments. I'm Greek, you have no power here in terms of Bible Verses.
The problem with this defense of Icons is that your distinction between this and worshiping an Image is in fact how the Ancient Pagan Idolators defined what they did as well. Critics of the Bible say The Biblical Authors were showing their ignorance when they spoke as if Pagans thought The Idols actually were Gods. But The Bible describes it that way because that's what it is whether the people doing it admit that or not. The reason the Second Commandment and the First Commandment are separate is because the Second is about Making your own God, and Idolatry in the Hebrew Bible often includes doing so in the name of YHWH, the Golden Calf and Jeroboam's Idols were worshiped in the Name of YHWH and attributed. The Incarnation doesn't change anything. Jesus is the only Mediator Between Man and God, we don't need Icons or Saints. And condemnation of Idolatry still exist throughout The New Testament. There is one Image of God that is Biblically allowed, Man is The Image of God, and in Genesis 9 killing that image is the one Iconclasm YHWH condemns. But the false doctrines of Endless Torment and Annihilation make God into the True Iconclast.
Here is a small extract, Not my own work: "God has forbidden the use of images in worship." Yet if people were to "search the scriptures" ( John 5:39), they would find the opposite is true. God forbade the "worship" of statues, but he did not forbid the "religious use" of statues. Instead, he actually commanded their use in religious contexts! It is right to warn people against the sin of idolatry when they are committing it. But calling Catholics idolaters because they have images of Christ and the saints are based on misunderstanding or ignorance of what the Bible says about the purpose and uses (both good and bad) of statues. People who oppose religious statuary forget about the many passages where the Lord commands the making of statues. For example; The Ark of the Covenant Exodus 25:18-20 "And you shall make two cherubim of gold [i.e., two gold statues of angels]; of hammered work shall you make them, on the two ends of the mercy seat. Make one cherub on the one end, and one cherub on the other end; of one piece of the mercy seat shall you make the cherubim on its two ends. The cherubim shall spread out their wings above, overshadowing the mercy seat with their wings, their faces one to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubim be." David gave Solomon the plan "for the altar of incense made of refined gold, and its weight; also his plan for the golden chariot of the cherubim that spread their wings and covered the ark of the covenant of the Lord. All this he made clear by the writing of the hand of the Lord concerning it all, all the work to be done according to the plan" (1 Chronicles 28:18-19). David's plan for the temple, which the biblical author tells us was "by the writing of the hand of the Lord concerning it all," included statues of angels. Similarly, Ezekiel 41:17-18 describes graven (carved) images in the idealized temple he was shown in a vision, for he writes, "On the walls round about in the inner room and [on] the nave were carved likenesses of cherubim." During a plague of serpents sent to punish the Israelites during the exodus, God told Moses to "make [a statue of] a fiery serpent, and set it on a pole; and every one who is bitten, when he sees it shall live. So Moses made a bronze serpent, and set it on a pole; and if a serpent bit any man, he would look at the bronze serpent and live" (Numbers 21:8-9). "
@@albabialdayaqi5885 You basically say venerating images is venerating God(Or just an ordinary human being). So did the pagans. This means Christian religion is not so different from Paganism. The concept of trinity is just enough for saying this. No need to see you venerate or worship images.
@Hürriyetperver The argument of homology is weak, but it is interesting that you mention similarities that does not exist. Pagans made physical representations of gods. Christians only made representations of creation, including the human nature of Christ. Furthermore, you prove your ignorance on the Holy Trinity, which is not only attested in the Bible, but is nothing like any religion in existence. So no, sorry you are wrong and deceived. I urge you to come back to the true religion of God.
@Hürriyetperver oh and before I forget, we do not venerate God, we worship Him, venerating an object/person representing the wonders of God is in essences worshiping God alone. We ONLY WORDHIP GOD.
@@albabialdayaqi5885 First of all I'm sure that I know the Christian theology(Councils, fathers of the church etc.) as much as you know at least. And argument of homology is weak? Similiarities don't exist? Pagans made physical representations of gods and so you do. I see no difference. I understood this from this video. What are you telling about? I assume that I have competence to understand what I see. Is there any similarity stronger than that? I don't think so. And your confident demeanor that says "true religion of God" is really disgusting. Christianity is the last religion on earth that could be true. This means that you are not aware of the fairy tales which explicitly contradict with the truths in the Old Testament and this signifies you ignorance although you call me ignorant. I bet I know your book more than you.
If we look at Exodus 20, we see that it explicitly says that we shall not adore, or serve them (graven images), this is right after the prohibition of graven images. This is important because we can see THREE places in the OT that nullify that particular commandment for most of the OT and on. The first is Deut. 4:15-16, which clearly states that the reason for the prohibition is because God did not come down to them in any form, and that if they were to make images there would be risk of idolatry. The second is only five chapters after Ex 20, in Ex 25:18 we see that God says "Thou shalt make also two cherubims of beaten gold", notice the "Thou shalt" as opposed to the now nullified "Thou shalt not" five chapters before. The third is very similar to the second, so I'll just briefly mention it; it was when the brazen serpent was erected to heal the Israelites. God does not contradict himself, and the context given by Deut 4 clearly shows that this was a temporary part of the FIRST Commandment (I am the Lord thy God, thou shalt not have strange gods before me).
The serpent did not heal the Israelites. When they looked up at it on the pole as God requested, He healed them. And what happened to the bronze serpent? The people renamed it Nehushtan, worshipped it at a shrine, until King Hezekiah had the good sense to destroy it "And he did what was right in the eyes of the Lord, according to all that David his father had done. 4 He removed the high places and broke the pillars and cut down the Asherah. And he broke in pieces the bronze serpent that Moses had made, for until those days the people of Israel had made offerings to it (it was called Nehushtan). 5 He trusted in the Lord, the God of Israel, so that there was none like him among all the kings of Judah after him, nor among those who were before him" Without fail, every time there was a revival among the children of Israel, iconoclasm was a key part of it, EG Gideon, Josiah, Hezekiah, Jehophashat, Elijah etc, they destroyed the idols icons, because they will always be a hinderance and a snare that pollutes their relationship with God, and they end up worshipping the icons and idols instead of worshipping God in spirit and in truth.
Exodus 25:18-20 18 And you shall make two cherubim of gold; of hammered work shall you make them, on the two ends of the mercy seat. 19 Make one cherub on the one end, and one cherub on the other end; of one piece with the mercy seat shall you make the cherubim on its two ends. 20 The cherubim shall spread out their wings above, overshadowing the mercy seat with their wings, their faces one to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubim be.
@@LilithinMerria this is Yahweh giving instruction to a very small group of people for a very specific reason! Funny how Catholics think if Yah let’s one person do something he lets all people do it .
@@davidsinclair6249 Dude, your reasoning above and from your reply is flawed. "Do not make any image ..." Are you suggesting that all artworks, from photos to paintings are not to be made? "Yahweh giving instruction to a very small group ..." Why didn't you apply this reasoning to the commandment that forbid the use of graven images to be adored? - that is, Yahweh gave that instruction also to a small group of people?
King James Bible Thou shalt not make thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the waters beneath the earth:
Alex Mala You and Claudia are preforming one verse interpretation, you obviously do not have any idea of the context. Also, the KJV is very erroneous and King James was likely a sodomite. Do you really believe that you aren't even allowed to take family photos? If we look at Exodus 20, we see that it explicitly says that we shall not adore, or serve them, this is right after the prohibition of graven images. This is important because we can see THREE places in the OT that nullify that particular commandment for most of the OT and on. The first is Deut. 4:15-16, which clearly states that the reason for the prohibition is because God did not come down to them in any form, and that if they were to make images there would be risk of idolatry. The second is only five chapters after Ex 20, in Ex 25:18 we see that God says "Thou shalt make also two cherubims of beaten gold", notice the "Thou shalt" as opposed to the now nullified "Thou shalt not" five chapters before. The third is very similar to the second, so I'll just briefly mention it; it was when the brazen serpent was erected to heal the Israelites. God does not contradict himself, and the context given by Deut 4 clearly shows that this was a temporary part of the FIRST Commandment (I am the Lord thy God, thou shalt not have strange gods before me).
Thomas Comerford : You’re lying. The second commandment is never nullified and there is NEVER any place in the Bible where bowing to images is tolerated. "“You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. 5 You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments." (Exodus 20:4ff, ESV).
stevensonrf god made an image of himself and that is ok because god was in christ reconciling the world unto himself but god himself forbids us (who are made by him in his own image) from making an image of our creator because then we would be the creator and ruler and god of our god. Satan tried to get the god who was in christ (who created him) to bow down and worship him (satan) (something is wrong with satan's picture of god and god's son) and something is wrong with all our visual pictures (of god and his only begotten literal son) and most of our mental pictures of god and god's only begotten literal son as well!
The prohibition against graven images is not exactly confusing. Weirdly, you can even extend the idea to the Bible itself, as the Bible, as an object representing the word of God, could easily be considered a graven image. This justification of the worship of graven images through nonsense "interpretations" is profane garbage, created to justify the temporal power of the church. The Church is engaged in heresy, not the iconoclast. Just because people like, and are easily affected by images doesn't mean you can hand wave an idea of "jesus came in the flesh and so icons are ok" into being. It couldn't be more clear that the mystery was the whole point, and that images of any kind would detract from each individuals relationship with God by relegating God to something other than literally EVERYTHING. The very idea of "sacred space" it's borderline idolatry...that God would deem something "more holy" than anything else is ludicrous, and is a human idea. Sure, people feel that way but that isn't God doing it. It is still known that the goal of all of this is to produce a feeling and understanding of the sacredness of literally everything, in every moment of life. That is what "becoming closer to God" actually means. Because God has no trouble seeing everything as sacred. Even the profane is sacred, ultimately. This Is about awakening human souls, not politics or wealth or influence.
You shall not make *for yourself* a "graven image". Those words aren't there just for dramatic pause. If God gives you the image, then it isn't making an idol for yourself. "If you have seen Me you have seen the Father, for I and the Father are one." Do you suppose that Christ was just using empty words that have no relevance to anyone outside of the eye witnesses between the Nativity and the Resurrection? Christ had explicit comments on interpretation of the Commandments ranging from Sabbath observance, adultery, covetousness, murder...where and when did He say "delete everything, no pictures?" In the end, this notion is just the teachings of man. The line of thinking that runs right through Hegel and into Marx and to the ultimate iconoclasts- those who wish to destroy the image of God that is in the human being itself through democide. Repent.
Icons are not a photo. Icons are symbols. Black people make black icons, middle eastern depict them as themselves, asians depict them as asians, native americans depict them as native americans, indians depict them as indians, yes even with cultural things like clothes, habits, traditions... You can look them up. Icons don't show the true physical image. They have a deeper theological meaning behind them.
Brother in Christ, stop forcing postmodern racial identity politics nonsense onto Christianity, you are creating schism for NO REASON, Jesus was not white nor black, He was middle eastern, the icons gets that pretty accurate.
Like our Lord and Saviour said, “let the dead bury the dead” ! The dead cannot hear or talk, Nor can they take your prayers closer up to our Lord because the Lord knows everything before you say it ,more less if you say it through somebody else. The veneration in the worship is one of the same thing, the worship of the dead with a few words and Specially the worship of Mary the earthly mother of our Lord Jesus Christ, who He is the only and only medium and way to the Father! It’s Ironic and hypocritical from the Catholic’s to do what they do and especially for example when the pope John the second kissed the Koran !? Which totally denies the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ and which is the epiphany of our faith!
Venerating an icon is showing respect for the person being represented in it. In the Eastern Mediterranean where the Christian religion originated, people kiss their friends and relatives much more often than they do in the West. We Greeks also kiss elderly peoples hands as a sign of respect. In Orthodox Christian cemeteries it is common to see grieving people kissing their relatives gravestones or photos, are they worshiping their dead relatives? No, They are simply showing respect, love and honor. In the period before the invention of the printing press most people were illiterate, the bible stories had to be presented by illustrations. It was the norm in the early centuries of Christianity to have icons as a teaching tool. Jewish law forbade the consumption of pork and a host of other things such as portraying God in art. Jews were ruled by the Mosaic Law, Christians are not. At the incarnation, God took on flesh and became human, he was seen by all who were around him. He was no longer invisible, Jesus lived with people, talked with them, had friends, worked, celebrated and mourned with them too. If photography had existed back then people would be taking pictures of him and hanging them on their walls. Early Roman Christian Catacomb churches. upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8d/Christ_with_beard.jpg c8.alamy.com/comp/BBJA39/samson-puts-the-philistines-to-rout-early-christian-painting-catacomb-BBJA39.jpg employees.oneonta.edu/farberas/arth/Images/arth212images/early_christian/painting/catacombs/Catacomb_Sts%20Peter_Marcellinus.jpg jto.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/w2-catacombs-a-20131122-870x580.jpg
See the problem here is, you're completely wrong. Veneration is not worship, it is a form of respect. Those who die in Christ are in heaven with him- just like we ask each other to pray for us, it is not too far fetched to ask for the intercession of the communion of saints. Like Daniel in the old testament, those who are holy can intercede for us to the LORD.
Icons = paganism = idolatry. Christianity went way down the road into Roman And European Paganism. History screams this simple idea. Jesus, Jews,Arabs,Muslims all monotheistic religion against it. If you are not worshipping the icon then whats the reason not to break them. The only reason is because you gave them a divine sacred touch. Hinduism too do not pray for the images or icons. They pray for the power that they represent by the icons. We all Christians,Muslims and Jews agree that Hinduism is paganism. What is the different between your logic and theirs ?
Give me one difference between your logic and the Hinduism logic. In Hinduism, the icons and images are not Gods , but a representation of God. They pray through them , they are a reminder to God. Thats what they say ! Which is exactly the same thing you are saying !
Says the person who believe in the Church proven heresy of iconoclasm, you cannot call icons heresy, just like arians cannot call Trinitarianism heresy.
Kevin Landwaster yes, because they’re part of our family in Christ, and are some of the greatest of that family, so we show them immense respect for their piety hoping to learn by their example
Here is a small extract, Not my own work: "God has forbidden the use of images in worship." Yet if people were to "search the scriptures" ( John 5:39), they would find the opposite is true. God forbade the "worship" of statues, but he did not forbid the "religious use" of statues. Instead, he actually commanded their use in religious contexts! It is right to warn people against the sin of idolatry when they are committing it. But calling Catholics idolaters because they have images of Christ and the saints are based on misunderstanding or ignorance of what the Bible says about the purpose and uses (both good and bad) of statues. People who oppose religious statuary forget about the many passages where the Lord commands the making of statues. For example; The Ark of the Covenant Exodus 25:18-20 "And you shall make two cherubim of gold [i.e., two gold statues of angels]; of hammered work shall you make them, on the two ends of the mercy seat. Make one cherub on the one end, and one cherub on the other end; of one piece of the mercy seat shall you make the cherubim on its two ends. The cherubim shall spread out their wings above, overshadowing the mercy seat with their wings, their faces one to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubim be." David gave Solomon the plan "for the altar of incense made of refined gold, and its weight; also his plan for the golden chariot of the cherubim that spread their wings and covered the ark of the covenant of the Lord. All this he made clear by the writing of the hand of the Lord concerning it all, all the work to be done according to the plan" (1 Chronicles 28:18-19). David's plan for the temple, which the biblical author tells us was "by the writing of the hand of the Lord concerning it all," included statues of angels. Similarly, Ezekiel 41:17-18 describes graven (carved) images in the idealized temple he was shown in a vision, for he writes, "On the walls round about in the inner room and [on] the nave were carved likenesses of cherubim." During a plague of serpents sent to punish the Israelites during the exodus, God told Moses to "make [a statue of] a fiery serpent, and set it on a pole; and every one who is bitten, when he sees it shall live. So Moses made a bronze serpent, and set it on a pole; and if a serpent bit any man, he would look at the bronze serpent and live" (Numbers 21:8-9).
Sometimes anti-Catholics cite Deuteronomy 5:9, where God said concerning idols, "You shall not bow down to them." Since many Catholics sometimes bow or kneel in front of statues of Jesus and the saints, anti-Catholics confuse the legitimate veneration of a sacred image with the sin of idolatry. Though bowing can be used as a posture in worship, not all bowing is worship. In Japan, people show respect by bowing in greeting (the equivalent of the Western handshake). Similarly, a person can kneel before a king without worshipping him as a god. In the same way, a Catholic who may kneel in front of a statue while praying isn't worshipping the statue or even praying to it, any more than the Protestant who kneels with a Bible in his hands when praying is worshipping the Bible or praying to it. "
Iconoclasm for the win! Get those Idols and images out and burn and destroy them - iv seen to much whoring in Israel!!! The Evil my eyes have seen - saddens my heart, how anyone could do such horrible things.
If we look at Exodus 20, we see that it explicitly says that we shall not adore, or serve them (graven images), this is right after the prohibition of graven images. This is important because we can see THREE places in the OT that nullify that particular commandment for most of the OT and on. The first is Deut. 4:15-16, which clearly states that the reason for the prohibition is because God did not come down to them in any form, and that if they were to make images there would be risk of idolatry. The second is only five chapters after Ex 20, in Ex 25:18 we see that God says "Thou shalt make also two cherubims of beaten gold", notice the "Thou shalt" as opposed to the now nullified "Thou shalt not" five chapters before. The third is very similar to the second, so I'll just briefly mention it; it was when the brazen serpent was erected to heal the Israelites. God does not contradict himself, and the context given by Deut 4 clearly shows that this was a temporary part of the FIRST Commandment (I am the Lord thy God, thou shalt not have strange gods before me).
Thomas Comerford : You’re lying. The Bible NEVER negates the second commandment (Ex 20:4ff). Your semi-pagan medieval sect tries to make void the Word of God for the sake of your tradition (Matthew 15:9) thus showing you’re false.
Your mental gymnastics to justify a wrong practice which is clearly and specifically forbiden by the Word of God is amazing. You and the entire theology on which this view is based are nevertheless completely wrong. God had a reason for forbidding this practice and no amount of human reasoning will make you right because that would mean God is wrong. I really hope you will one day come to accept God's Word as is.
God does *not* forbid this practice, and His Church (The Orthodox Church) has this practice as a pivotal centrepointe of it. Again, *worshipping* false idols is a sin, but *venerating* Icons (not idols and not false) is a blessed practice.
The Holy Fathers already know otherwise and Christ's Church literally *continues to do this practice*. Iconoclasm is a herecy and is away from Christ's Church, your claims are unfounded and have already been debunked.
Alex Mala Exodus 22 is often taken out of context, there are about 13 "thou shalt not"s, and we include the icon prohibition to be part of the first commandment. The first commandment is I am the Lord thy God Thou shalt not have strange Gods before me. If you are to make the prohibition of icons a separate commandment then you render the Ten Commandments to be repetitive. More importantly if you go to Deuteronomy 4:15-16, where God's word says that the reason for the iconic prohibition is because he did not appear to them in any form at that time. So when did this prohibition end? Well we can see that it ended only five chapters after Exodus in Exodus 25 where God commands that 2 Golden Angels be made over the Ark of the Covenant. Now God would not contradict the moral law right? So please tell me how my exegesis is incorrect based on my rebuttal to you instead of repeating what you have already said in a way that you can address my argument.
Did he really just end a talk on iconography with the line, "you get the picture"...
he just ended a video on iconoclasm with “you get the picture”
I like the idea of icons as visual representations of Scriptures !
As a non-christian I learn a lot from this gentleman
please do not lol
@@Volleyball_Chess_and_Geoguessret me guess, you are a Protestant.
@@Kristian.Stankov I am a Christian who has not yet been convinced icons were venerated from the very beginning or that they were intended to be.
Luke the evangelist created the first icon
How so?
@@kevinlandwaster204 Ὁδηγήτρια (Hodegetria : She who shows the way) : one of the first icons, representing The Mother of God along with Child Jesus, painted by St. Luke the Evangelist.
@@danilolquerojr. It is the Holy Tradition of the Church.
If one rejects a single doctrine of Holy Tradition, he is a heretic.
Sola Scriptura is heresy, because we interpret Scripture through Holy Tradition, and the Holy Scripture is parr of the Holy Tradition.
where in the bible ?
@שליח גאו_ח what are you talking about ?
Your icons are from Eastern Orthodox.
also from the eastern catholic churches...
Icons can be made in the Eastern Orthodox style in the Catholic Church - see Our Lady of Perpetual Help - but the Orthodox Church cannot do statues.
Icons are part of the tradition of the catholic church as well. Icons are just not as common in catholic churches
You didn't watch the video. The Pope put an end to the iconoclasm in the East. Next time you see an icon, thank a Pope haha.
The seventh Ecumenical council settled this issue.
@mineben256 the pope didn't even attend at the council
@@01ombladon then its not ecumenical no pentarcy
No, it didn't. And conclaves of men have no power over God.
@@brian5128 Council of Florence was ecumenical by your standard of "Pentarchy"
@@HIMYMTR yes Florence was a true binding ecumenical council I am aware
I want those icons! They are gorgeous!
This doesn’t make sense : prayer passes through pictures, 😂 i would rather pray through a cell phone
I wouldn't say through the icon to the person represented but it does give us a concrete reminder
The person represented. Its sounds like using a talisman or charm for a more effective prayer, and the person? It thought we supposed to pray through Christ to the Father? Where did these odd teachings originate
Excellent and concise presentation. Kudos!
Informative video; engaging on-camera presence. Thank you.
Thank you!! Excellent examination!!
Destroying an image of a Saint or even Jesus is like attacking the faith. Muslims do that
How can you picture God the father and Holy Spirit?
This was very helpful. Thank you for your easy to understand teachings
This is the best explanation I've seen so far to the theology of icons. Though, I still disagree with it profoundly.
Thank you very much for this video! Very educational.
ua-cam.com/video/bm2eV_anejw/v-deo.html
The interesting question is if an iconographer makes a bad representation of Jesus on a painting (for example Jesus as a stick figure, or Jesus but painted as Lord Radoo [Henrik Möller]), does it work? Or if an icon is damaged during a restoration? Does that prevent the prayer from magically moving through the receiver to the recipient?
There are standards that an iconographer must follow for an icon generally to be regarded as legitimate. But one produced by one untrained or done poorly can still function as on if approved and/or blessed by a priest or bishop (Note: blessing of icons is not necessary and rarely done outside of the U.S.).
If one is damaged (like degraded mosaics or botched restorations) can still function as icons. You can find mind for sale many reproductions of crumbling but still beautiful mosaics and frescos of ancient churches.
Personal icons that get damaged or such and you want to dispose of them should be done reverently. You shouldn't just throw them in the trash, for instance. They should either be buried in a placed that won't be trampled under foot or burned and the ashes be buried likewise.
The language used may have been confusing. The icons are not magic and have no inherent power. You don’t need icons to pray to God or the saints. They act as a focus point, they teach theology, and offer a scene to reflect upon while praying. Like a picture of a loved one.
The big problem with that logic is no one knows what Jesus looked like, so your icons are a picture of some ones imagination. Also the church fathers, including Jerome the translator of the Latin Vulgate, were opposed to imagery.
? That's like saying no one knew what Jesus said. Why does he look.the same in all the icons?
No one has his original language quotes either, but what we have is languages that convey meaning, much as pictures do.
Curious. Actually, when modern russians are praying to the icons, they are asking Saints themselves to help, not the God through them. Turns out, this is a heresy?
ROCOR catechumen here, we ask for the Saints to help us through Christ.
These are works of beauty, craft and skill! Do not mistake the metaphor for real thing. Zen saying"it is the finger pointing at the moon". Don't mistake the finger for the moon. The professor skillfully describes the object to be some type of bridge or portal. To destroy historical art, be it the giant Buddhas of Afghanistan, to Stonewall Jackson is to erase 2500 years of history. I would ask the professor, Are we descending into a new dark age?
Good and right to the point!
Prayers don't pass through icons. we pray and worship God in SPIRIT!
Exactly
The Jews praying to God through the Arc of Cherubim and Bronzed snake.you are not worshipping an object you are venerating and honoring dulia Hyperdulia.
@Aidan Trinh No one cares what you think
Just read the maccabes which you protestants took out from the bible and you will see prayers through passed away saints and even prayers for the death.
@@Sendo664 no. Its reasons why no one with a brain would take them as serious as other scripture. But if you believe Jesus christ taught that to pray to Himself, draw a picture, and focus your prayer through it? Let alone other saints and angels
This is very helpful with the topic me and my group will discuss! Thank you!
bro is that monastery icons of Saint Benedict? you know they are pagan syncretists who make sacrifices to actual idols. look into monastery icons. burn that thing or get it blessed if you must keep it.
where it says to worship the ornaments of the temple idolatry does not revolve around the object but around worship(Exod 20 vs Exod 26)
Wasn’t Henry VIII responsible for iconoclasm in England ?
Zwingli and others for the sake of saving the Word rejected all plastic art; Luther, with an equal concern for the Word, but far more conservative, would have all the arts to be the servants of the Gospel.
"I am not of the opinion" said [Luther], "that through the Gospel all the arts should be banished and driven away, as some zealots want to make us believe; but I wish to see them all, especially music, in the service of Him Who gave and created them."
Again he says: "I have myself heard those who oppose pictures, read from my German Bible.… But this contains many pictures of God, of the angels, of men, and of animals, especially in the Revelation of St. John, in the books of Moses, and in the book of Joshua. We therefore kindly beg these fanatics to permit us also to paint these pictures on the wall that they may be remembered and better understood, inasmuch as they can harm as little on the walls as in books. Would to God that I could persuade those who can afford it to paint the whole Bible on their houses, inside and outside, so that all might see; this would indeed be a Christian work. For I am convinced that it is God's will that we should hear and learn what He has done, especially what Christ suffered. But when I hear these things and meditate upon them, I find it impossible not to picture them in my heart. Whether I want to or not, when I hear, of Christ, a human form hanging upon a cross rises up in my heart: just as I see my natural face reflected when I look into water. Now if it is not sinful for me to have Christ's picture in my heart, why should it be sinful to have it before my eyes?"
1:52, a good reason why Icons are permitted.
That's a good heresy.
Says the person who believe in the Church proven heresy of iconoclasm, you cannot call icons heresy, just like arians cannot call Trinitarianism heresy.
@@albabialdayaqi5885 _ Which Church you have found out that I believe??????
You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth (Exodus 20:3...).
Their idols are silver and gold,
the work of human hands.
They have mouths, but do not speak;
eyes, but do not see.
They have ears, but do not hear;
noses, but do not smell.
They have hands, but do not feel;
feet, but do not walk;
and they do not make a sound in their throat.
Those who make them become like them;
so do all who trust in them (Psalm 115:4...).
For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things (Romans 1:21...).
The ironsmith takes a cutting tool and works it over the coals. He fashions it with hammers and works it with his strong arm. He becomes hungry, and his strength fails; he drinks no water and is faint. The carpenter stretches a line; he marks it out with a pencil. He shapes it with planes and marks it with a compass. He shapes it into the figure of a man, with the beauty of a man, to dwell in a house. He cuts down cedars, or he chooses a cypress tree or an oak and lets it grow strong among the trees of the forest. He plants a cedar and the rain nourishes it. Then it becomes fuel for a man. He takes a part of it and warms himself; he kindles a fire and bakes bread. Also he makes a god and worships it; he makes it an idol and falls down before it. Half of it he burns in the fire. Over the half he eats meat; he roasts it and is satisfied. Also he warms himself and says, “Aha, I am warm, I have seen the fire!” And the rest of it he makes into a god, his idol, and falls down to it and worships it. He prays to it and says, “Deliver me, for you are my god!” (Isaiah 44:12...).
READ THE BIBLE and it will set you free from idolatry.
Yeah you got it backwards, chief. That's like being a fan of Pul McCartney's band- Wings and calling Beatles fans heretics.
@@danvankouwenberg7234 -
You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth (Exodus 20:3...).
@@celsopdacunha000 yes. It's part of the first commandment. You have a bad definition of heresy and a misunderstanding of what icons are.
Destroy all icon it heracy
Isaiah 42:8
I see the loop holes .. very good
"When you pray to the idol of Zeus, you're not worshipping the idol. You're worshipping Zeus." -Greek pagans, probably.
My brother, you have no idea how close you've hit the nail :D
That's one of many reasons why protestants in general are against icons. Catholicism and Orthodoxy were primarily developed by Greeks and Romans who've had little knowledge of Judaism and Judaic traditions. So, the argument actually is that icons are a development by these Christian Greeks, but if you'd go back to actual 1st-century Jews and Christians, they'd condemn it.
@@alexvig2369 I am sorry brother in Christ, but I have to correct your error. As a former protestant, void of the knowledge of church history, the same church Christ our Lord established, I found the second council of Nicaea. Having debated muslims, I realized that Protestantism, like islam, is just misinformed and doesn't know history, but rather follows immoral people who came hundreds of years after our Lord.
You know this silly argument the, other brother mindlessly contributed to the Church of our God and our Lord, can be easily disproven. Yes, a statue of Zeus was a physical representation of a humanoid god, we don't believe or worship gods. We worship the True God, our Father and our Lord with His Spirit. Also notice that there is no Icon of God the father nor the Holy Spirit, but only Jesus, because Jesus became flesh and took upon Himself a created image. So no, we do not worship our God through icons, we worship our Lord who became flesh through icons, as well as venerate the people in whos lives He worked in.
I would advise you to go find the church that existed during the time of the apostles, the one Christ established. Then go read what the church councils and fathers said. And by the Grace of God, He will bring you into the fullness of His faith. God bless.
@@albabialdayaqi5885 Your comment is certainly the most solid argument I've ever heard in favor of Orthodoxy and icons.
Is there a source you'd suggest me to read?
@Alex Vig Thanks for your understanding, I can think of one right now, but I would advise you to do research on the second council of Nicea, it was what convinced me, aslo the books of St. John of Damascus.
As one of Jehovah's Wittnesses, who do not pray to icons but aren't iconoclasts as such, I find your explanation very interesting.
I was a Jehovah’s Witness all my life until I found they removed the most important verses of the Holy Bible.
Please read the book of John chapter 1 in full from the King James Bible, and understand some level of Greek for the areas which contest the Jehovah’s Witnesses view.
I do not believe in the icons worship that many around the world do. I don’t think it’s biblical.
I do believe Jesus is an Uncreated Being, as part of God.
All things that have ever been created, were made through Jesus.
John 1 confirms this. Please leave the organization called the Jehovah’s Witnesses. They believe in many things that change the person of Jesus, many things they preach are great, but I believe they are not the true church - do to the practice of false prophesies through he years of the organization and publication of the Watchtower. They also excommunicate members - which is not a practice Jesus would want. He was known to be in the company of sinners - to help them and change their lives.
@@LePeterK123 Regaurding John chapter one, the Greek there is unclear and could mean many things. On it's own it could translate: "The Word was God" "The Word was a god" "The Word was of God" or something similar, subtle but important differences. This one verse is not enough to give clarity on the matter. The king James authors were Trinitarian and do interpreted the verse in a Trinitarian way, and it could be argued that as the Witnesses are non Trinitarian that this influenced their translation of the Bible, though I find this unconvincing seeing as Wittness non-Trinitarianism long predates the New World Translation.
On the other hand, the verses that relate Jesus as being an entity distinct from God are both multiple and much more clear. Take John 17:20-22 “I make request, not concerning these only, but also concerning those putting faith in me through their word, 21 so that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in union with me and I am in union with you, that they also may be in union with us, so that the world may believe that you sent me. 22 I have given them the glory that you have given me, in order that they may be one just as we are one." Explicitly stating that the unity between the Christ and the Father is the same unity as that between the Christ and the congregation, that is, not one of shared personhood.
Or John 14:28 "You heard that I said to you, ‘I am going away and I am coming back to you.’ If you loved me, you would rejoice that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I am." If Jesus and Jehovah, that his, Jesus and God the Father, are the same person, how can God be greater than Jesus?
Then the numerous verses speaking of Jesus as "Begotten", beggetting being a form of creation. Of course, there is a wealth of Trinitarian literature that explains how beggetting can imply not creation but a continuous, eternal pattern of sustenance, but this complex philosophy is not found in scripture. Theoretically, by all means, such a thing is not beyond the command of God, for what is? But what reason have we to go to such explanatory lengths rather than interpret beggetting as just that, the creation of a child by a parent? We would need some biblical starting point, and while the uncertainty of John 1 does not refute this, it does not support it either.
There are many other points about the trinity I could reuse, doubtless you have heard them all before anyway. I will address your other concern, excommunication. Indeed, Jesus did keep company with sinners, in the hope of encouraging them to repentance and salvation, yet he also recognised that it is nessercery to reprove those breeding it. Did he not harshly criticise the Pharasies, seeing their hearts as only one with divine authority could? And have we not explicit command to practice excommunication where needed? Second John verse 10 commands us to not even greet a teacher claiming to Christian but preaching not the authentic doctrine of the Christ, giving the example of Docetists. God has always held those inside the congregation to a higher standard than those outside, this is just and proper. Under the Mosaic Law the death penalty was applied for apostasy, but pagan foreign residents were welcome. There is no hypocrisy here, different standards are applied to those under and not under a congregations covenant.
Ah, needing it, not breeding it. I won't edit the original comment to avoid confusion.
@@EcclesiastesLiker-py5ts slow down. Not enough clarity?????!
Did you read the part about The Word becoming flesh???
Everything that has ever existed, was made through Jesus. John chapter one is explicitly clear.
Stick to that chapter and come back to me with any points from only that chapter. It’s the first chapter of the New Testament. Take it in like you have never been taught anything.
When the first church prayed did God said that they couldn't hear them because they needed more icons?
Andrew Chedid no, and that’s also not an argument
Icons are used to focus your prayer, the same way as a Komboloskini or a Rosary.
Icons are also used to represent events that are found in the Scriptures, it was especially useful for illiterate people in the past to see icons.
Icons provide no conduit no door to God, Christ or the Saints. Rather they help us engage our own hearts by distracting our minds from every other influence so that we can shift gears to create prayers without distraction. This Catholic Sunday School explanation is confusing and definitely rapidly approaches the line of anathema if it doesn’t actually cross it. Bummer because I thought I was hearing at the beginning something I could actually agree with Catholicism but as usual it’s taken to far. Oh well I’ll keep an open mind.
It's heresy to NOT make images?
You don't need those doors to pray to God.
Red the Bible again.
I think NOT the Father. Not in Orthodoxy.Only for RC & Protestants.
Ehm actually reformed protestants (Calvinists) also forbid the creation of Icons and its forbidden to depict God.
@@bradley6357 It depends on what you mean by "Icon" but more or less.
Aren't we all believers saints?
This is the same thing for paganism, statues of Gods were never considered God (s) themselves, but merely an offering to them and a means to contemplate them. Of course, just like in Christianity, an icon may be attributed divine/miraculous powers simply because God or in the past (the Gods) gave those objects that power by communicating to man through them. I call upon fellow Christians to not view our own pagan ancestors with contempt, but to appreciate their honest attempt at worshipping the Father. The way I see is any religion reaches the Lord as long as it is sincere and honest, and recognises the father, the demiurg, which for the greeks was Zeus, all powerful, who according to the ancients decided what is good and evil, and punishment and reward for mankind.
I'm Ciprian Droma from Romania. I wish you could comment a bit more on Exodus 20:4 ... Also, If you would show me 100 pictures of your grandfather and in all of them there would be the face of a different man... I would be confused.... Where does the Bible suggest that we need a mediator ( an Icon ) between us and God??? How could a hand made picture intercede between you and God and help you, making your prayer to be heard??? in my opinion for a prayer to be heard, are other kind of conditions: 1. We know that God does not listen to sinners. He listens to the godly person who does his will John 9:31 2. Husbands, in the same way be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect as the weaker partner and as heirs with you of the gracious gift of life, so that nothing will hinder your prayers. 1 Peter 3:7. 3. Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much. James 5:16 4. You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it ( as some theologians say, "in My character, what I would ask the Father") However the point is if we ask Lord Jesus (DIRECTLY) no need for a mediator... and one last verse. Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. John 4:3 I hope you can write an answer regarding second commandment what is your view to that? Thanks! p.s By the way, I appreciate your videos very much!
Sorry but i agree with iconoclasts.
Man should not do this.
Your prayer goes through it? I thought I saw a smirk. Is this guy for real???
I dont think the pope was at the council. Western church wasnt at most of the ecumenical councils
I find this very interesting, however, following my...education not only on christianity but also in buddhism and islam, I can say that certain...
Churches get very, very deep into technical, almost microscopic differences in order to decide upon supporting or not supporting a particular "opinion".
Something that many people, including my grandfather who was a pastor did, was to read the entire bible, from genesis one, till the last chapter of revelations, all the way through the bible.
Without listening to commentary on certain things, but simply reading it as we would read any other book, from front to back.
You will notice how many times in the bible, it is verbally legible, that certain profits were, in other words, buried in secret, or whisked away.
If you read it without commentary, or a physical person telling you "no that scripture is wrong, do not believe it, but rather believe this other version"...
You might get the distinct idea, that God/Jesus were not fans of allowing the israelites to know where certain figures were buried, with the exception of jesus.
Which, his location of burial was necessary, otherwise noone would have visited his grave to bear witness his resurrection.
Tell me now though, do you really know where it is, or do you read scripture and on faith believe where it is?
That same scripture that just gave us the idea that maybe God could not want us to know where moses was buried, so that we do not go to worship the site, could give some people the belief that they do not accept images of serapis in their household as a representation of jesus.
There is therefore no sin, and no mistake on their part, to want to be an iconoclast, because they believe they may be partaking in a sin whenever they purchase or pray towards a certain imagine, of WHATEVER kind.
Arguing that technically jesus still hears you and the prayer passes through the image, is like arguing the scripture where, let me paraphrase a bit, but that regardless of whether the man writing was in the depths of the ocean, or the highest mountain too, even there, God could hear him. The point said person was making is that there is no escape from god, or from communication with him.
Yes, I'm sure god can hear your prayer "through" even...a golden hog, if that's what you desire to pray to, but the technicality isn't about whether he can hear you, but about whether it is right to have that image and pray to it in the first place.
This reminds me of the quartodecimans, there is nowhere in scripture where it is listed as a capital sin, or act worthy of punishment, to continue worshipping your lord and savior on passover instead of easter.
However, a council of men, voted, in favor of easter.
So technically, according to those men, technically, easter is now preferred, however, we can vote an ape in for president of the United States, but it would not change the last 40+ presidents of our history.
That is american history, however, not the bible.
How many times does it say in no uncertain terms that God does not change?
Or that to he who knows it is a sin, but does it anyway, to him it is sin?
You are quite convinced with technical knowledge that you can pray to an image and the prayer still reaches jesus.
Another man may be convinced that he is committing a sin in so doing, do to what he believes himself to represent, during that act. His belief therefore says it is sin, therefore, there is no need to "convince him" it is not, since there is no scripture saying that we must accept images of that above, or below.
Does that means you can do anything then regardless of what scripture says? No, but,
In trying to be technical, you have missed the entire point, which was very simply laid out in scripture.
Remember the greek word plerosai and how that word can be used to say that the old covenant also never ended when christ came.
Technicality can be the death of us all, or, we can study scripture, and prove ourselves to be righteous according to what we are allowed to learn in this lifetime, and be judged by that. Technicality, however, is not righteousness. That is only the vote of men, the same men who believe that there's a scripture that allowed easter, ishtar, a pagan God, to be allowed into the church.
This is why people used to be punished for having their own bibles, when you study it yourself, you come to different conclusions than when a man with a degree or certification teaches it to you.
To be honest, that's the way it was intended, as well.
I care not for your anti-historical attitude in your last paragraphs, for Scripture is sufficient to settle this.
Deuteronomy 4 : 15 clearly prohibits images of God, because he wasn't seen in any outward shape.
Jesus is God, and has been seen. End of discussion. I am not gonna pretend that the Incarnation did not happen.
Of course I am also against technicalities, such as page-long comments. And yes, when one studies the bible themselves, one comes to different conclusions as per 2 Peter 3 : 16 (though I have doubts that your grandfather read the bible all the way through and not leave out 7 old testament books. I don't speculate bad intentions, but good intentions don't save, faith in Jesus does).
@@generalguy6211 I completely agree with what you said and the scripture in deuteronomy.
However...we literally just watched a video where a Catholic calls anyone who takes that scripture to heart a heretic, and thus iconoclast.
I know I will be seen as also a heretic, and thus a fool, regardless it must be brought up to them that A. They killed hundreds, if not thousands of people known as quartodecimans, who had continued observing passover after our saviors death. They believed quartodecimans were heretics since they did not accept replacing passover with easter. Which was decided by a council of men, regardless of class or position. Men.
Catholics do not accept anyone believing literally word for word the bible, nor anyone reading it front to back as if it is a complete standalone book of itself.
That is Unless of course, you are certified through each and every doctrine of theirs, to interpret, and accept things like the councils/meetings where they decided things like changing the meaning of one scripture in order to gain converts.
If they want to believe what a "certified" (however possibly false that may be) person/s interpretation of the bible, I will not hang any of them on a cross and burn or stone them. I believe God will judge whether a person is a heretic.
However, my point to them is that they need to be less...adamant, to call another man a heretic as well, with the understanding that their harsh and sometimes biblically incorrect doctrines have caused many people to die, as well as caused even their own church to have division.
You are entirely correct, I need to include more old testament scriptures in any debate or talk of the bible/beliefs.
However they will write the old testament off and say it is "beyond scope of discussion" since we are discussing new testament things such as christ, or an image of him.
Sorry for the long reply, but yes, absolutely, I believe in reading and following the entire bible, old testament and new and was raised as such.
After all, even the new testament says in 2nd timothy, 3:16 and 17.
"All scripture is inspired by God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for instruction in righteousness.
That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished into all good works."
My hope is that, although it will go nowhere, one of them (catholic/jesuit priests) will read one of these comments and have an eye opening moment, where instead of trying to have indignation and hatred towards "heretics", perhaps they show compassion and love instead after thinking logically on their own intolerance and hatred.
Any tolerance from a religion this guilty of intolerance is an improvement. It would at least help prevent more religious based cruelty in the future should that pop it's head up again... No certification makes it righteous for me to kill you or anyone of my own will, without actual reason. And even then, the bible instructs us to turn the other cheek in certain circumstances, which I have still not fully learned to do.
Well, we can hope anyways.
At the end of the day, they follow perfectly, the councils of pharisees and saduccees, and attempt to throw stones, when they too are not without sin. Love or some kind of kindness needs to be imprinted in their beliefs somewhere, since they claim to believe in Christ who spoke against pharisees.
But yes I will take this correction to heart and make sure to mention more scriptures and old testament next time I comment on a biblical subject.
@@shaneflutsch2270 Thank you, for your kind words.
You raised some points I want to react to, but I won't, because I couldn't do it from a place of love only out of spite and pride right now.
It's just that, the Catholic Church is something dear to my heart. In a culture where anything goes, really, it called me what I am, a sinner who needs to repent, and told me about Jesus. From there on I knew, I needed Jesus and all I needed was Jesus, but I wasn't a fan of religious hierarchy so I would rather be an independent baptist or something like that. But I couldn't justify 'sola scriptura', so I had to also accept Catholicism's hierarchy as well as its gospel, and have been in love with the Church ever since then.
If you could pray for me I would greatly appreciate it. God bless.
@@generalguy6211 u are worshipping the Sun God, Nimrod, who also born on 25th december.. where do u think the roman empire came from?
God forbid making images of idols.
but they are not idols
They destroyed the black images, not these
Because they were Black don’t lie!
I enjoy your videos; however, I reject sola ecclesial and the Marian Dogmas. Mary clearly had other children as the Word tells us. The Pope is not a Biblically sanctioned position. Alter Christus and pulling Jesus back for propitiation of ours sins is needless and ghastly theology. Having said all of this: you are a great historian and a joy to listen to. I literally seek out your different videos. What a paradox you are to me. I enjoy you.
Holy Orthodoxy is the Way
If Mary had other children. Don't you think when the angel came to her and told her she was going to have a child she would've mentioned her betrothal being the means by which she would have this child? Instead of contending with the Angel that she has no man?
@@luke11.28apologetics they didn't have sex UNTIL Jesus was born. the bible has the word until! Then she had the other children.
Pastors in American evangelical churches are NOT a Biblically sanctioned position and yet they gather more money than a lot of simple, capitalist buisnesses do...so what gives? Is God just a money gatherer or does the Biblical narrative actually MEAN something? I know which I accept, do you?
@@michaelfisher7170 The bible is against people becoming Christians from everywhere?
it a little bit of a jump to go from Jesus being God incarnate in the flesh and being fully human and fully God to we need to pray to a piece of wood with a painting with on it. The question is why t make this jump ?
The icon isn't itself the object of worship you should actually study these issues you may be surprised. We use these commemoration of the saints and remembrance for their lives as they are sanctified by God
@@shiningdiamond5046 so why do you need it? Paul, Peter none of the apostles seem to have needed an icon to pray and commune with the Lord. Jesus our chief example of prayer did not use any such things.
@@midnightwatchman1 Do some research brother and you'll learn that icons have been around since before the 2nd temple period. Orthodoxy, which includes icons, is the direct continuation of the right worship revealed by God. Icons, incense, altar, etc are all right worship. In order to differentiate themselves from Christians, Jews abolished icons in their synagogues in the 6th century. Not to mention St. Luke painted one of the first Christian icons. God bless you.☦️🙏🏽
@@michaelangelovalerio I would say icons have been around even before the second temple proper. However, a practice existing does not mean God approves of it, God has tolerated slavery, men have multiple wives and concubines. It just means God is patient and tolerant of man. . Moses used the symbol of a snake to heal people four hundred years later God had to destroy it. Here is a big revelation though I am proud of my spiritual ancestors in the faith, but they were not perfect. They practiced some things that were plain wrong or only needed for a time. Today no Christian needs icons. You can read and write and have good information. you can pray to your God directly no icons are needed.
@@shiningdiamond5046 Then you agree with me you do not need them. You read and write and you are indwelled with the Holy Spirit and you can pray directly to Jesus. No Christian need icons in 2021
Graven images. Catholicism is all paganism
Nice misquotation, let the bible correct you.
Exodus 20:2 “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. 3 “You shall have no other gods before me. 4 “You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. 5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.
According to you understanding, we should not make images of anything ever, no painting, no drawings, no pictures, and yes, no selfies. But the real interpretation is that we should not make an image AND THEN WORSHIP It, which makes sense in the context of verse 3 which states that we shall not have any gods beside God. And as you have herd, we as Orthodox believers do not worship icons, only the person (Christ) which it represents.
Deut. 4:15-16.
1. The second commandment (Ex. 20:4ff) explicitly describes what is prohibited: making an image and bowing to it. Doing that very thing but claiming the images are not really idols but "icons" and the bowing isn't really worship but "veneration" is not convincing.
2. Canon 36 of the Council of Elvira states, “Pictures are not to be placed in churches, so that they do not become objects of worship and adoration.”
3. Origin (184-254) responded to Celsus by admitting that Christians used no images; he mocked the notion that images were helpful in worship, and, citing the Second Commandment wrote, “It is in consideration of these and many other such commands, that they [Christians] not only avoid temples, altars, and images, but are ready to suffer death when it is necessary, rather than debase by any such impiety the conception which they have of the Most High God.” (Origin, Contra Celsus, Book VII, Chapter 64.)
4. Eusebius (c. AD 263 - 339) wrote that even the incarnate Christ cannot appear in an image, for
"the flesh which He put on for our sake … was mingled with the glory of His divinity so that the mortal part was swallowed up by Life. . . . This was the splendor that Christ revealed in the transfiguration and which cannot be captured in human art. To depict purely the human form of Christ before its transformation, on the other hand, is to break the commandment of God and to fall into pagan error."
5. Epiphanius (inter 310-320 - 403): "I went in to pray, and found there a curtain hanging on the doors of the said church, dyed and embroidered. It bore an image either of Christ or of one of the saints; I do not rightly remember whose the image was. Seeing this, and being loath that an image of a man should be hung up in Christ's church contrary to the teaching of the Scriptures, I tore it asunder and advised the custodians of the place to use it as a winding sheet for some poor person."
He goes on to tell John that such images are “contrary to our religion” and to instruct the presbyter of the church that such images are “an occasion of offense.” (Epiphanius, Letter 51, chapter 9).
6. Hence we see that the "Orthodox" church radically broke away from the tradition of the early church.
For the record, I've had an extensive conversation with yeoberry in the comment section of another video where we extensively went over his arguments, ultimately demonstrating that his points were misconstructions/misrepresentations/based on bad premises/not from Church Fathers (venerable or otherwise)/actual falsehoods, or any combination of those.
Just putting that out there.
you are an iconoclast, that means you are a heretic.
0
Give me one difference between your logic and the Hinduism logic. !
If you side with the Synod of Elvira, you would have to accept Canon 33 which mandates clerical celibacy, withholding the Eucharist from others (mentioned in numerous Canons), keeping one's baptism intact (Canon 38), the mention of an Episcopal Chair (Canon 58), and forbidding women to write letters to other women without their husband's consent (Canon 81.) Are these Canons to be kept as well?
I DON'T PRAY TO AN ICON. You are partially correct! THE ICON IS ONLY A REPESENTATION OF OF JESUS, ETC... PLEASE DON'T EVEN SAY "WHEN ONE PRAYS TO THE ICON" ONE PRAYS TO GOD, JESUS ETC. I don't want the video watches misunderstand. I AM ORTHODOX.... BROTHER JAMES 🙏🙏🙏
Why do you use orthodox icons to defend catholic religion?🙂
cause catholics also use icons
"You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below." Exodus 20:4 Notice the completeness of this statement ANYTHING in HEAVEN or EARTH.
Wouldn't photos or paintings or sculptures of any kind then be prohibited?
the early church kept images and idols of Christ and the saints: the ten commandments did not prohibit man made idols, the OT commandments did not have verses and the first two are read together (this is the Israelite understanding); the prohibition was only on idols of other Gods as the second is read in together with the first.
This is obvious as the Israelites followed God's command to make a man made idol in the temple and the Ark depicting angels and beings. God commanded for idols to be built for him in the time of the Patriarchs (Abraham, Moses, Josue etc) ; rock cairns to commentate God. These are all works of mans hands. The latter Jewish temple had images of angels and beings too.
So the Ten Commandments did not prohibit making man made carvings but it is stated in context of the previous verse of not worshipping other gods; so man made carvings dedicated to our God is as old as the OT and the early church made carvings of Jesus and angels etc.
In addition, the early church fathers recognised that what made Jesus's promises so great was that he became man to allow us to share in his death and resurrection; one cannot depict God in his spiritual form but one can depict him as the Son of Man. His Human nature was what made him distinct.
The OT and the early church recognised that the statutes also served a teaching purpose (the dimensions of the Tabernacle was made to tell the story of God's greatness and so are the churches). This is in contrast to the fake Gods like Allah which the Muslims prohibit to be mentioned in man made articles; the Muslims had a false understanding of the OT (unlike the Jews and early Christians).
The protestants in order to attack the church changed the commandments to separate verse 2 out of context and banned all statues; this obviously does not pan out in light of over 2000 years of church practices and 3000 years of OT practice.
Learning Christian cherubim to be put on the ark of the covenant, that’s an image of something in heaven, God made this command, by your logic God contradicted Himself
@@monkeymode7529 Here is a small extract, Not my own work:
"God has forbidden the use of images in worship." Yet if people were to "search the scriptures" ( John 5:39), they would find the opposite is true. God forbade the "worship" of statues, but he did not forbid the "religious use" of statues.
Instead, he actually commanded their use in religious contexts!
It is right to warn people against the sin of idolatry when they are committing it.
But calling Catholics idolaters because they have images of Christ and the saints are
based on misunderstanding or ignorance of what the Bible says about the purpose
and uses (both good and bad) of statues.
People who oppose religious statuary forget about the many passages where the
Lord commands the making of statues.
For example; The Ark of the Covenant
Exodus 25:18-20
"And you shall make two cherubim of gold [i.e., two gold statues of angels]; of hammered work shall you make them, on the two ends of the mercy seat. Make one cherub on the one end, and one cherub on the other end; of one piece of the mercy seat shall you make the cherubim on its two ends. The cherubim shall spread out
their wings above, overshadowing the mercy seat with their wings, their faces one
to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubim be."
David gave Solomon the plan "for the altar of incense made of refined gold, and its
weight; also his plan for the golden chariot of the cherubim that spread their wings
and covered the ark of the covenant of the Lord. All this he made clear by the writing of the hand of the Lord concerning it all, all the work to be done according to the plan" (1 Chronicles 28:18-19). David's plan for the temple, which the biblical author tells us was "by the writing of the hand of the Lord concerning it all," included statues of angels.
Similarly, Ezekiel 41:17-18 describes graven (carved) images in the idealized
temple he was shown in a vision, for he writes, "On the walls round about in the inner room and [on] the nave were carved likenesses of cherubim."
During a plague of serpents sent to punish the Israelites during the exodus, God
told Moses to "make [a statue of] a fiery serpent, and set it on a pole; and every
one who is bitten, when he sees it shall live. So Moses made a bronze serpent, and
set it on a pole; and if a serpent bit any man, he would look at the bronze serpent
and live" (Numbers 21:8-9).
"
"anything in heaven or earth"
moses made statues of angels.
aren't Angels from heaven?
Way to intense... Try decaf
This seems to me to be disingenuous. The argument agains icons are not about making images: it’s about worshipping them. No pagan worships a piece of wood. He worships the prototype
No, the arguments made by the iconoclasts in the 8th and 9th century were against any use of images at all. It wasn’t just illegal to worship icons it was illegal to have icons.
Modern Protestant arguments against iconography are from a different vein.
@@harrygarris6921 by no means all were against all images. I know this is the one picked up on the most, but it because it's the easiest to argue against.
Newsflash: you don't need a painting of Christ to get your prayers to Christ. You don't need a painting of a saint to get your prayers to Christ. Just pray to Christ. It's easy.
Nobody said that you *need* icons for Christ to hear your prayers. Have you actually studies the topic? Why are you setting up a strawman?
This is no different from VOODOO. We venerate our ancestors, orisha's and saints the exact same way as the orthodox do.
Jesus talked (or one could say prayed) to ancestors on the mount.
@@tymon1928 Jesus never prayed to ancestors. He made Moses and Elijah appear PHYSICALLY on the mount. That's not even remotely close to what's done on vodoun.
@@dustindustindontworry-jz8dh Jesus talked to ancestors/saints i.e. Moses and Elijah and they were dead, so what's the difference? Jesus can do it but we can't? Where do you get the idea that Moses and Elijah were physically there rather than all of this being just a vision?
@@tymon1928 Either way, Jesus himself had them appear. Its not the same thing as praying to departed souls. Like, lets stop trying to pretend that your "ancestors" are appearing to you in your room when your praying to them. When everyone knows that's not the case.
@@dustindustindontworry-jz8dh what has appearance anything to do with it? Are Moses and Elijah dead, how did Jesus talk to them?
Worship Lord God in spirit and Truth:)
How could you prove that Saints can pray for you??
Wow, why people keep making things so complicated.
READ YOUR BIBLE!!!
Living saints, yes, as the definition of saints is in the bible!
False about the permission of the Father to be written. Only what has been manifested to men can be written in the icon.
Since when have pictures been telephones to heaven?
That would be nice to tell something to my great grandmum, just by speaking into a photo of her.
But, you know, I'm afraid that I'd actually speak to demons, and since the dead ones are dead, and can't be talked to, (go through the bible, the only mention for talking to dead ones is through a fortune teller in chronicles) that's why I believe that the only people you are reaching are demons.
Why not pray to the father by the only mediator, when we sin for example? (1. John 2, 1-2)
"42 Then he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.[b]”
43 Jesus answered him, “Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise.”"Luke 23.
"8 Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with Him. " Romans 6
"And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am." John 14:3
My friend, as a Christian you should believe that those who have died in Christ, are not really dead. You should look into the Catholic church's criteria in pronouncing someone a saint- only those, from whose intercession, miracles have happened here on earth (at least twice) are canonized as saints. So there are definitely examples out there of people being healed through the intercession of the saints; This is not by the saints own might, but through the grace of God, to whom the saints take our case(Just like in the old testament when Daniel offers up prayers for his people Daniel 9:1-19 )
It is not that we cannot pray directly to God, it is more that our prayers are strengthened through the intercession of others, especially the saints. We always ask each other to pray for us, see St.Paul for example:
"3 Now I want to talk about some other matters. Brothers and sisters, pray for us. Pray that the Lord’s message will spread quickly. Pray that others will honor it just as you did. 2 And pray that we will be saved from sinful and evil people" 2Thess:3
So knowing that in Christ, those who have died, have not actually died and that we can indeed pray for one another, what is the fault in asking a saint to pray for us?
I leave you with this
"25 Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. The one who believes in me will live, even though they die; 26 and whoever lives by believing in me will never die. Do you believe this?”" John 11
Your arguments for icons are identical to the arguments pagans make for idols. The idol is a representation of their God and their prayers and partitions go through the idol to their god. It's exactly the same .
You have to pray trough a Mary or a Saint picture to get to Jesus? That's pure heresy even more than the image itself ... I like some views from orthodoxy but things like that ones are why i am still protestant
As a Catholic roman rite, we don't have to pray through Mary or a saint to get to Christ. We can pray directly. But since those who have fallen asleep in christ are still living we are asking them to pray for us the same as one would ask a living on earth too
It's simply like asking your mum to be on your side when convincing your dad to do something.
Catholics pray to Jesus and God. If you watch a movie about Jesus and Mary, how can you do it unless you see their images
Yorsh Peric you don’t have to go through her, but you can, and scripture shows that it is a good thing to ask someone to pray for you, in fact it is highly encouraged, so imagine how great it must be for the mother of God to pray for us
Also I find it very ironic you have the audacity to call anyone heretical considering you’re a Protestant
When Jesus Christ ask us to make God's, Holy Spirit and His pictures ???
Was the old testament Temple filled with imagery and Iconography?
Where in the bible does Jesus say to drink water everyday? HA! CHECKMATE PROTESTANT!
@@willtheperson7224 the holy ark had icons of the archangels on top of them
@@israelgirmay5110 where it says to worship the ornaments of the temple idolatry does not revolve around the object but around worship
@@alinsandulescu2323 when did we "worship" them?
Monastery icons is not christian, they are hindus
As a muslim this is blasphemous.
So don't worry about your beliefs because it doesn't represent them. And don't worry about anyone else's beliefs because their not your business. Be a Muslim and let everyone else be what they are. Simple...isn't it?
This is about Christianity. You are not a Christian. You stick with.your god which is not the God of the Bible. We don't do theology on the Quran. Done
It must be REALLY bad then lol.
where in the bible says we should we pray to icons ? where in the bible are we allowed to prayed through saints and mary ? jesus is the only mediator we need to pray to
Nice video, and as an Orthodox Christian I myself love Icons- but these paintings you have in your video are *not* Icons. They come from a company called Monastery Icons, and despite their name, they are not even Christians. They are Hindu pagans and they pray their pagan rituals over these paintings before shipping them out, and it is very dangerous spiritually to have them. Please burn them and acquire real Icons from other sources.
This is what happens when you surrender to superstition and idolatry.
"Real icons" are idols and are forbidden in the second commandment (Ex. 20:4ff): “You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. 5 You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments."
The early church did not tolerate icons. Council of Elvira (c. 305): Canon 36, “Pictures are not to be placed in churches, so that they do not become objects of worship and adoration.”
yeoberry
First off, you are using a mistranslated Bible Verse, so you discredited yourself, and Icons were used in the Church since the beginning. Furthermore, Iconoclasm is an *officially* condemned herecy, therefore your reference of a local Council (not an Ecumenical Council, and you've used a mistranslation anyway) falls upon its own face.
Niko Delmedico :
First, I didn’t use a mistranslated Bible verse. You can’t show anything wrong with that translation. You’re just lying.
Then you lied about the early church. You can’t even one valid example of icons in the early church. Then you ignore what the early church explicitly taught on the subject. Next.
Niko Delmedico :
1. The second commandment (Ex. 20:4ff) explicitly describes what is prohibited: making an image and bowing to it. Doing that very thing but claiming the images are not really idols but "icons" and the bowing isn't really worship but "veneration" is not convincing.
2. Canon 36 of the Council of Elvira states, “Pictures are not to be placed in churches, so that they do not become objects of worship and adoration.”
This is the accurate translation.
3. Origen(184-254) responded to Celsus by admitting that Christians used no images; he mocked the notion that images were helpful in worship, and, citing the Second Commandment wrote, “It is in consideration of these and many other such commands, that they [Christians] not only avoid temples, altars, and images, but are ready to suffer death when it is necessary, rather than debase by any such impiety the conception which they have of the Most High God.” (Origin, Contra Celsus, Book VII, Chapter 64.)
4. Eusebius (c. AD 263 - 339) wrote that even the incarnate Christ cannot appear in an image, for
"the flesh which He put on for our sake … was mingled with the glory of His divinity so that the mortal part was swallowed up by Life. . . . This was the splendor that Christ revealed in the transfiguration and which cannot be captured in human art. To depict purely the human form of Christ before its transformation, on the other hand, is to break the commandment of God and to fall into pagan error."
5. Epiphanius (inter 310-320 - 403): "I went in to pray, and found there a curtain hanging on the doors of the said church, dyed and embroidered. It bore an image either of Christ or of one of the saints; I do not rightly remember whose the image was. Seeing this, and being loath that an image of a man should be hung up in Christ's church contrary to the teaching of the Scriptures, I tore it asunder and advised the custodians of the place to use it as a winding sheet for some poor person."
He goes on to tell John that such images are “contrary to our religion” and to instruct the presbyter of the church that such images are “an occasion of offense.” (Epiphanius, Letter 51, chapter 9).
yeoberry
You here now are simply making statements without backing them, as is expected given that you have run out of arguments. I'm Greek, you have no power here in terms of Bible Verses.
The problem with this defense of Icons is that your distinction between this and worshiping an Image is in fact how the Ancient Pagan Idolators defined what they did as well. Critics of the Bible say The Biblical Authors were showing their ignorance when they spoke as if Pagans thought The Idols actually were Gods. But The Bible describes it that way because that's what it is whether the people doing it admit that or not.
The reason the Second Commandment and the First Commandment are separate is because the Second is about Making your own God, and Idolatry in the Hebrew Bible often includes doing so in the name of YHWH, the Golden Calf and Jeroboam's Idols were worshiped in the Name of YHWH and attributed.
The Incarnation doesn't change anything. Jesus is the only Mediator Between Man and God, we don't need Icons or Saints. And condemnation of Idolatry still exist throughout The New Testament.
There is one Image of God that is Biblically allowed, Man is The Image of God, and in Genesis 9 killing that image is the one Iconclasm YHWH condemns. But the false doctrines of Endless Torment and Annihilation make God into the True Iconclast.
Great job on calling the apostles and their disciples idolaters
Here is a small extract, Not my own work:
"God has forbidden the use of images in worship." Yet if people were to "search the scriptures" ( John 5:39), they would find the opposite is true. God forbade the "worship" of statues, but he did not forbid the "religious use" of statues.
Instead, he actually commanded their use in religious contexts!
It is right to warn people against the sin of idolatry when they are committing it.
But calling Catholics idolaters because they have images of Christ and the saints are
based on misunderstanding or ignorance of what the Bible says about the purpose
and uses (both good and bad) of statues.
People who oppose religious statuary forget about the many passages where the
Lord commands the making of statues.
For example; The Ark of the Covenant
Exodus 25:18-20
"And you shall make two cherubim of gold [i.e., two gold statues of angels]; of hammered work shall you make them, on the two ends of the mercy seat. Make one cherub on the one end, and one cherub on the other end; of one piece of the mercy seat shall you make the cherubim on its two ends. The cherubim shall spread out
their wings above, overshadowing the mercy seat with their wings, their faces one
to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubim be."
David gave Solomon the plan "for the altar of incense made of refined gold, and its
weight; also his plan for the golden chariot of the cherubim that spread their wings
and covered the ark of the covenant of the Lord. All this he made clear by the writing of the hand of the Lord concerning it all, all the work to be done according to the plan" (1 Chronicles 28:18-19). David's plan for the temple, which the biblical author tells us was "by the writing of the hand of the Lord concerning it all," included statues of angels.
Similarly, Ezekiel 41:17-18 describes graven (carved) images in the idealized
temple he was shown in a vision, for he writes, "On the walls round about in the inner room and [on] the nave were carved likenesses of cherubim."
During a plague of serpents sent to punish the Israelites during the exodus, God
told Moses to "make [a statue of] a fiery serpent, and set it on a pole; and every
one who is bitten, when he sees it shall live. So Moses made a bronze serpent, and
set it on a pole; and if a serpent bit any man, he would look at the bronze serpent
and live" (Numbers 21:8-9).
"
I am an iconoclast
How to legitimate idolatry in five minutes
Once again, stop misrepresenting us, we do not worship icons, we worship God alone.
@@albabialdayaqi5885
You basically say venerating images is venerating God(Or just an ordinary human being). So did the pagans. This means Christian religion is not so different from Paganism. The concept of trinity is just enough for saying this. No need to see you venerate or worship images.
@Hürriyetperver The argument of homology is weak, but it is interesting that you mention similarities that does not exist. Pagans made physical representations of gods. Christians only made representations of creation, including the human nature of Christ. Furthermore, you prove your ignorance on the Holy Trinity, which is not only attested in the Bible, but is nothing like any religion in existence. So no, sorry you are wrong and deceived. I urge you to come back to the true religion of God.
@Hürriyetperver oh and before I forget, we do not venerate God, we worship Him, venerating an object/person representing the wonders of God is in essences worshiping God alone. We ONLY WORDHIP GOD.
@@albabialdayaqi5885 First of all I'm sure that I know the Christian theology(Councils, fathers of the church etc.) as much as you know at least. And argument of homology is weak? Similiarities don't exist? Pagans made physical representations of gods and so you do. I see no difference. I understood this from this video. What are you telling about? I assume that I have competence to understand what I see. Is there any similarity stronger than that? I don't think so. And your confident demeanor that says "true religion of God" is really disgusting. Christianity is the last religion on earth that could be true. This means that you are not aware of the fairy tales which explicitly contradict with the truths in the Old Testament and this signifies you ignorance although you call me ignorant. I bet I know your book more than you.
YAY, GO Iconoclasm!
Hear, Hear!
>when you like denying the fullness of the incarnation
@seg idolater
If we look at Exodus 20, we see that it explicitly says that we shall not adore, or serve them (graven images), this is right after the prohibition of graven images.
This is important because we can see THREE places in the OT that nullify that particular commandment for most of the OT and on.
The first is Deut. 4:15-16, which clearly states that the reason for the prohibition is because God did not come down to them in any form, and that if they were to make images there would be risk of idolatry.
The second is only five chapters after Ex 20, in Ex 25:18 we see that God says "Thou shalt make also two cherubims of beaten gold", notice the "Thou shalt" as opposed to the now nullified "Thou shalt not" five chapters before.
The third is very similar to the second, so I'll just briefly mention it; it was when the brazen serpent was erected to heal the Israelites.
God does not contradict himself, and the context given by Deut 4 clearly shows that this was a temporary part of the FIRST Commandment (I am the Lord thy God, thou shalt not have strange gods before me).
The serpent did not heal the Israelites. When they looked up at it on the pole as God requested, He healed them.
And what happened to the bronze serpent? The people renamed it Nehushtan, worshipped it at a shrine, until King Hezekiah had the good sense to destroy it
"And he did what was right in the eyes of the Lord, according to all that David his father had done. 4 He removed the high places and broke the pillars and cut down the Asherah. And he broke in pieces the bronze serpent that Moses had made, for until those days the people of Israel had made offerings to it (it was called Nehushtan). 5 He trusted in the Lord, the God of Israel, so that there was none like him among all the kings of Judah after him, nor among those who were before him"
Without fail, every time there was a revival among the children of Israel, iconoclasm was a key part of it, EG Gideon, Josiah, Hezekiah, Jehophashat, Elijah etc, they destroyed the idols icons, because they will always be a hinderance and a snare that pollutes their relationship with God, and they end up worshipping the icons and idols instead of worshipping God in spirit and in truth.
we need to reduce God in order to better better worship. Hindus know this, but followers of the Abrahamic religions remain ignorant.
haha!
Do not make any image of things in Heaven OR EARTH!!! That means even making an image of a human ,,, Jesus the man
Exodus 25:18-20
18 And you shall make two cherubim of gold; of hammered work shall you make them, on the two ends of the mercy seat. 19 Make one cherub on the one end, and one cherub on the other end; of one piece with the mercy seat shall you make the cherubim on its two ends. 20 The cherubim shall spread out their wings above, overshadowing the mercy seat with their wings, their faces one to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubim be.
@@LilithinMerria this is Yahweh giving instruction to a very small group of people for a very specific reason! Funny how Catholics think if Yah let’s one person do something he lets all people do it .
@@davidsinclair6249 Dude, your reasoning above and from your reply is flawed. "Do not make any image ..." Are you suggesting that all artworks, from photos to paintings are not to be made? "Yahweh giving instruction to a very small group ..." Why didn't you apply this reasoning to the commandment that forbid the use of graven images to be adored? - that is, Yahweh gave that instruction also to a small group of people?
@@LilithinMerria do you have the ark ? Or maybe you are a King ?
@@davidsinclair6249 Not to be rude but I am pretty much sure you are now wasting my time. Have a nice day brother. May God bless you.
King James Bible
Thou shalt not make thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the waters beneath the earth:
Exactly. NO images.
Alex Mala
You and Claudia are preforming one verse interpretation, you obviously do not have any idea of the context. Also, the KJV is very erroneous and King James was likely a sodomite. Do you really believe that you aren't even allowed to take family photos?
If we look at Exodus 20, we see that it explicitly says that we shall not adore, or serve them, this is right after the prohibition of graven images.
This is important because we can see THREE places in the OT that nullify that particular commandment for most of the OT and on.
The first is Deut. 4:15-16, which clearly states that the reason for the prohibition is because God did not come down to them in any form, and that if they were to make images there would be risk of idolatry.
The second is only five chapters after Ex 20, in Ex 25:18 we see that God says "Thou shalt make also two cherubims of beaten gold", notice the "Thou shalt" as opposed to the now nullified "Thou shalt not" five chapters before.
The third is very similar to the second, so I'll just briefly mention it; it was when the brazen serpent was erected to heal the Israelites.
God does not contradict himself, and the context given by Deut 4 clearly shows that this was a temporary part of the FIRST Commandment (I am the Lord thy God, thou shalt not have strange gods before me).
Thomas Comerford :
You’re lying. The second commandment is never nullified and there is NEVER any place in the Bible where bowing to images is tolerated.
"“You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. 5 You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments." (Exodus 20:4ff, ESV).
Christ is the "image" of the invisible God, Guess we need to throw Him out as well?
stevensonrf god made an image of himself and that is ok because god was in christ reconciling the world unto himself but god himself forbids us (who are made by him in his own image) from making an image of our creator because then we would be the creator and ruler and god of our god. Satan tried to get the god who was in christ (who created him) to bow down and worship him (satan) (something is wrong with satan's picture of god and god's son) and something is wrong with all our visual pictures (of god and his only begotten literal son) and most of our mental pictures of god and god's only begotten literal son as well!
The prohibition against graven images is not exactly confusing. Weirdly, you can even extend the idea to the Bible itself, as the Bible, as an object representing the word of God, could easily be considered a graven image.
This justification of the worship of graven images through nonsense "interpretations" is profane garbage, created to justify the temporal power of the church.
The Church is engaged in heresy, not the iconoclast.
Just because people like, and are easily affected by images doesn't mean you can hand wave an idea of "jesus came in the flesh and so icons are ok" into being.
It couldn't be more clear that the mystery was the whole point, and that images of any kind would detract from each individuals relationship with God by relegating God to something other than literally EVERYTHING. The very idea of "sacred space" it's borderline idolatry...that God would deem something "more holy" than anything else is ludicrous, and is a human idea. Sure, people feel that way but that isn't God doing it.
It is still known that the goal of all of this is to produce a feeling and understanding of the sacredness of literally everything, in every moment of life. That is what "becoming closer to God" actually means. Because God has no trouble seeing everything as sacred.
Even the profane is sacred, ultimately. This Is about awakening human souls, not politics or wealth or influence.
You shall not make *for yourself* a "graven image". Those words aren't there just for dramatic pause. If God gives you the image, then it isn't making an idol for yourself. "If you have seen Me you have seen the Father, for I and the Father are one." Do you suppose that Christ was just using empty words that have no relevance to anyone outside of the eye witnesses between the Nativity and the Resurrection? Christ had explicit comments on interpretation of the Commandments ranging from Sabbath observance, adultery, covetousness, murder...where and when did He say "delete everything, no pictures?"
In the end, this notion is just the teachings of man. The line of thinking that runs right through Hegel and into Marx and to the ultimate iconoclasts- those who wish to destroy the image of God that is in the human being itself through democide. Repent.
The original paintings were not white this man is not truthful
wat?
Icons are not a photo. Icons are symbols. Black people make black icons, middle eastern depict them as themselves, asians depict them as asians, native americans depict them as native americans, indians depict them as indians, yes even with cultural things like clothes, habits, traditions... You can look them up. Icons don't show the true physical image. They have a deeper theological meaning behind them.
@@j.k.6865 Well said
Brother in Christ, stop forcing postmodern racial identity politics nonsense onto Christianity, you are creating schism for NO REASON, Jesus was not white nor black, He was middle eastern, the icons gets that pretty accurate.
Like our Lord and Saviour said, “let the dead bury the dead” ! The dead cannot hear or talk, Nor can they take your prayers closer up to our Lord because the Lord knows everything before you say it ,more less if you say it through somebody else. The veneration in the worship is one of the same thing, the worship of the dead with a few words and Specially the worship of Mary the earthly mother of our Lord Jesus Christ, who He is the only and only medium and way to the Father!
It’s Ironic and hypocritical from the Catholic’s to do what they do and especially for example when the pope John the second kissed the Koran !? Which totally denies the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ and which is the epiphany of our faith!
Venerating an icon is showing respect for the person being represented in it. In the Eastern Mediterranean where the Christian religion originated, people kiss their friends and relatives much more often than they do in the West.
We Greeks also kiss elderly peoples hands as a sign of respect. In Orthodox Christian cemeteries it is common to see grieving people kissing their relatives gravestones or photos, are they worshiping their dead relatives? No, They are simply showing respect, love and honor.
In the period before the invention of the printing press most people were illiterate, the bible stories had to be presented by illustrations. It was the norm in the early centuries of Christianity to have icons as a teaching tool.
Jewish law forbade the consumption of pork and a host of other things such as portraying God in art. Jews were ruled by the Mosaic Law, Christians are not.
At the incarnation, God took on flesh and became human, he was seen by all who were around him. He was no longer invisible, Jesus lived with people, talked with them, had friends, worked, celebrated and mourned with them too.
If photography had existed back then people would be taking pictures of him and hanging them on their walls.
Early Roman Christian Catacomb churches.
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8d/Christ_with_beard.jpg
c8.alamy.com/comp/BBJA39/samson-puts-the-philistines-to-rout-early-christian-painting-catacomb-BBJA39.jpg
employees.oneonta.edu/farberas/arth/Images/arth212images/early_christian/painting/catacombs/Catacomb_Sts%20Peter_Marcellinus.jpg
jto.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/w2-catacombs-a-20131122-870x580.jpg
Jesus also spoke to Moses and Elijah on Mt. Tabor....and they were very much alive. Matthew 17:1
See the problem here is, you're completely wrong. Veneration is not worship, it is a form of respect. Those who die in Christ are in heaven with him- just like we ask each other to pray for us, it is not too far fetched to ask for the intercession of the communion of saints. Like Daniel in the old testament, those who are holy can intercede for us to the LORD.
Icons = paganism = idolatry.
Christianity went way down the road into Roman And European Paganism. History screams this simple idea. Jesus, Jews,Arabs,Muslims all monotheistic religion against it.
If you are not worshipping the icon then whats the reason not to break them. The only reason is because you gave them a divine sacred touch.
Hinduism too do not pray for the images or icons. They pray for the power that they represent by the icons. We all Christians,Muslims and Jews agree that Hinduism is paganism.
What is the different between your logic and theirs ?
Give me one difference between your logic and the Hinduism logic. In Hinduism, the icons and images are not Gods , but a representation of God. They pray through them , they are a reminder to God. Thats what they say ! Which is exactly the same thing you are saying !
Says the person who believe in the Church proven heresy of iconoclasm, you cannot call icons heresy, just like arians cannot call Trinitarianism heresy.
I've personally seen Catholics kneel to, bow before, and kiss images not only of Christ but of saints and icons. This is idolatry.
Kevin Landwaster yes, because they’re part of our family in Christ, and are some of the greatest of that family, so we show them immense respect for their piety hoping to learn by their example
Here is a small extract, Not my own work:
"God has forbidden the use of images in worship." Yet if people were to "search the scriptures" ( John 5:39), they would find the opposite is true. God forbade the "worship" of statues, but he did not forbid the "religious use" of statues.
Instead, he actually commanded their use in religious contexts!
It is right to warn people against the sin of idolatry when they are committing it.
But calling Catholics idolaters because they have images of Christ and the saints are
based on misunderstanding or ignorance of what the Bible says about the purpose
and uses (both good and bad) of statues.
People who oppose religious statuary forget about the many passages where the
Lord commands the making of statues.
For example; The Ark of the Covenant
Exodus 25:18-20
"And you shall make two cherubim of gold [i.e., two gold statues of angels]; of hammered work shall you make them, on the two ends of the mercy seat. Make one cherub on the one end, and one cherub on the other end; of one piece of the mercy seat shall you make the cherubim on its two ends. The cherubim shall spread out
their wings above, overshadowing the mercy seat with their wings, their faces one
to another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubim be."
David gave Solomon the plan "for the altar of incense made of refined gold, and its
weight; also his plan for the golden chariot of the cherubim that spread their wings
and covered the ark of the covenant of the Lord. All this he made clear by the writing of the hand of the Lord concerning it all, all the work to be done according to the plan" (1 Chronicles 28:18-19). David's plan for the temple, which the biblical author tells us was "by the writing of the hand of the Lord concerning it all," included statues of angels.
Similarly, Ezekiel 41:17-18 describes graven (carved) images in the idealized
temple he was shown in a vision, for he writes, "On the walls round about in the inner room and [on] the nave were carved likenesses of cherubim."
During a plague of serpents sent to punish the Israelites during the exodus, God
told Moses to "make [a statue of] a fiery serpent, and set it on a pole; and every
one who is bitten, when he sees it shall live. So Moses made a bronze serpent, and
set it on a pole; and if a serpent bit any man, he would look at the bronze serpent
and live" (Numbers 21:8-9).
Sometimes anti-Catholics cite Deuteronomy 5:9, where God said concerning idols,
"You shall not bow down to them." Since many Catholics sometimes bow or kneel
in front of statues of Jesus and the saints, anti-Catholics confuse the legitimate
veneration of a sacred image with the sin of idolatry.
Though bowing can be used as a posture in worship, not all bowing is worship. In
Japan, people show respect by bowing in greeting (the equivalent of the Western
handshake). Similarly, a person can kneel before a king without worshipping him
as a god. In the same way, a Catholic who may kneel in front of a statue while
praying isn't worshipping the statue or even praying to it, any more than the
Protestant who kneels with a Bible in his hands when praying is worshipping the
Bible or praying to it.
"
@@monkeymode7529 The "family" argument. It's not biblical, but it is an argument conjured up from the minds of men.
iconophile
Iconoclasm for the win! Get those Idols and images out and burn and destroy them - iv seen to much whoring in Israel!!!
The Evil my eyes have seen - saddens my heart, how anyone could do such horrible things.
Anders Erichsen
"Burn and destroy them" you say. That's the same mentality as ISIS. You religious fanatics need to be tamed.
@70 ad wats wrong? idols are heresy, we dont kiss idols like you, isis kills people, we break idols, lot of difference
If we look at Exodus 20, we see that it explicitly says that we shall not adore, or serve them (graven images), this is right after the prohibition of graven images.
This is important because we can see THREE places in the OT that nullify that particular commandment for most of the OT and on.
The first is Deut. 4:15-16, which clearly states that the reason for the prohibition is because God did not come down to them in any form, and that if they were to make images there would be risk of idolatry.
The second is only five chapters after Ex 20, in Ex 25:18 we see that God says "Thou shalt make also two cherubims of beaten gold", notice the "Thou shalt" as opposed to the now nullified "Thou shalt not" five chapters before.
The third is very similar to the second, so I'll just briefly mention it; it was when the brazen serpent was erected to heal the Israelites.
God does not contradict himself, and the context given by Deut 4 clearly shows that this was a temporary part of the FIRST Commandment (I am the Lord thy God, thou shalt not have strange gods before me).
Thomas Comerford :
You’re lying. The Bible NEVER negates the second commandment (Ex 20:4ff). Your semi-pagan medieval sect tries to make void the Word of God for the sake of your tradition (Matthew 15:9) thus showing you’re false.
Remember when god instructed Moses to create angels on the ark!?
Your mental gymnastics to justify a wrong practice which is clearly and specifically forbiden by the Word of God is amazing. You and the entire theology on which this view is based are nevertheless completely wrong. God had a reason for forbidding this practice and no amount of human reasoning will make you right because that would mean God is wrong. I really hope you will one day come to accept God's Word as is.
God does *not* forbid this practice, and His Church (The Orthodox Church) has this practice as a pivotal centrepointe of it. Again, *worshipping* false idols is a sin, but *venerating* Icons (not idols and not false) is a blessed practice.
+Niko Delmedico Sorry Niko. He does. Read carefully Exodus 20:4. God tells us not to make ANY images.
The Holy Fathers already know otherwise and Christ's Church literally *continues to do this practice*. Iconoclasm is a herecy and is away from Christ's Church, your claims are unfounded and have already been debunked.
Alex Mala Exodus 22 is often taken out of context, there are about 13 "thou shalt not"s, and we include the icon prohibition to be part of the first commandment. The first commandment is I am the Lord thy God Thou shalt not have strange Gods before me. If you are to make the prohibition of icons a separate commandment then you render the Ten Commandments to be repetitive.
More importantly if you go to Deuteronomy 4:15-16, where God's word says that the reason for the iconic prohibition is because he did not appear to them in any form at that time.
So when did this prohibition end? Well we can see that it ended only five chapters after Exodus in Exodus 25 where God commands that 2 Golden Angels be made over the Ark of the Covenant. Now God would not contradict the moral law right? So please tell me how my exegesis is incorrect based on my rebuttal to you instead of repeating what you have already said in a way that you can address my argument.
Sorry I mean Exodus 20 in the stead of Exodus 22.