|
|
Post by Cepha on Jun 6, 2009 14:06:30 GMT -5
Heather, your PMS must make you not make much sense either. What are you talking about? Steven, There will be many many many who will be decieved by the anti-christ....and I think it would be a smart move by satan to make the anti christ look like pictures of Jesus, since most everyone has seen them. That's just personal opinion, no scripture to back it up. Plus, he has probably already thought of that. Or, you could be being fooled right now by Satan into believing that so that when the real Jesus does come down, you won't trust Him. See that? It goes on and on and on and on. If you are a Christian, you don't have to worry. And for those that aren't, God will sort them out.  |
|
|
|
Post by alfie on Jun 6, 2009 16:47:21 GMT -5
I don't like pictures of Mary or Jesus... especially Jesus.
And when they make movies about Jesus (like the Passion of the Christ) the face of Jesus should never be shown. When The Passion of the Christ was shown in India there were reports of Indians buying the picture of the actor (Jim whatever his name is) who portrayed Jesus in order to worship him. These Indians actually thought this actor was Christ.
|
|
|
|
Post by alfie on Jun 6, 2009 17:00:41 GMT -5
Right now, I'm painting 3 different Icons. For some reason, anti-Catholics have it in their minds that Catholics are breaking one of the Commandments for having Icons. I used to be an Iconoclast, but not anymore. Yes, and I even kiss my Icon of Jesus. Please, join my Icon fanclub! God used them all the time (Angels on the Ark of The Covenant, Statues inside His Temple, Bronze Snake Idol, etc...). ;D Oh come on now! This is an entirely different matter. God is the one who told the Jews what statues and images he wanted created for the Ark of the Covenant and the Temple. It wasn't the Jews themselves deciding what they wanted to create for the Temple or Ark. God also told the Jews how he wanted the temple built, how the clothing for the priests were to be sewn and the curtain for the Holy of Holies made. After that God said not to make any statutes or images. |
|
|
|
Post by emily445455 on Jun 6, 2009 19:00:14 GMT -5
Alfie, or they just wanted something physical and they could see and touch and pray to.
|
|
|
|
Post by teresahrc on Jun 7, 2009 13:29:04 GMT -5
Is Jesus physical? Didn't the disciples see, touch and pray to him?
"Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified." (Galatians 3)
It is precisely because of the incarnation of Jesus that we can imagine what God's face looks like. If you can imagine that in your heart, there is nothing wrong with imagining it on a painting because the heart is more sacred than paper or canvas.
Take the Bible for example. We know that the paper and ink are nothing, they will be burned in the fire on the last day. Yet the word of God speaks through the ink and paper, so we(hopefully) reverence even the book itself, by honoring it and showing respect.
Icons are the same, they are paper, wood or canvas with paint etc. Those materials are meaningless in themselves, but when they are used to direct our hearts towards loving God, we honor them.
Study the development of language and you will see that all languages began as "pictographs", pictures that represented a certain sound, word or phrase. Gradually, they were simplified and evolved into the various scripts we have today (Roman, Cyrillic, Arabic etc). They are symbols, in the same way an image is a symbol. Without understanding what they mean, they are useless, and there is little difference between writing the word "Cat" and drawing a picture of a cat. In fact, there was a people group in Papua New Guinea that at the time of their first meeting with foreigners did not know how to "read" a simple line drawing. If you showed them a simple line drawing of a face, they could not understand that it was meant to be a face--they didn't even see any image at all!
Think about it. When someone says something like "Jesus died on a cross" do you not immediately, even automatically somewhere in your mind picture an image of Jesus on a cross? Do you not imagine shapes, colors and even a vague sense of darkness and pain?
And when someone speaks of the Resurrection, do you not imagine Jesus in Glory, light and perhaps even angels, and empty tomb etc.?
|
|
|
|
Post by teresahrc on Jun 7, 2009 13:34:34 GMT -5
You know what, the deceiver will twist the truth, deceive and lie no matter what. I'm not going to do or not do anything in fear of him.
Besides, the Bible says that every eye will see Him, and His return will be like lightening. The clouds will be rolled back like a scroll, right? So, yeah if anyone is thinking that one day Jesus will just be walking around and no one will be sure if it's Him, they would probably fall for anything. Muslims think Jesus has red hair, and they believe he's coming back too. Whatever. It doesn't have anything to do with anything.
The fact is that Jesus Christ is God and is a real human as well. Because he is real human, he does have real hair, eyes, skin, body, etc. So nothing wrong with imagining what he looks like.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ramon on Jun 7, 2009 22:37:58 GMT -5
God used them all the time (Angels on the Ark of The Covenant, Statues inside His Temple, Bronze Snake Idol, etc...). ;D Oh come on now! This is an entirely different matter. God is the one who told the Jews what statues and images he wanted created for the Ark of the Covenant and the Temple. It wasn't the Jews themselves deciding what they wanted to create for the Temple or Ark. God also told the Jews how he wanted the temple built, how the clothing for the priests were to be sewn and the curtain for the Holy of Holies made. After that God said not to make any statutes or images.No, he did not. He told them that BEFORE he commanded them to make Icons and Statues within the Holy Temple/Ark (i.e., Ex 20). And besides, what God commanded them not to do was to make images and worship them as Idols. When the Hebrews translated the Bible into Greek (The Septuagint, highly favored by Christ and the Holy Apostles), they translated "graven images" simply as "eidoloi", i.e. "idols." Furthermore the Hebrew word "pesel" is never used in reference to any of the images in the Temple. So clearly the reference here is to pagan images rather than images in general. Holy Icons and Statues was a very important part of Judaism. Nothing in Scriptures forbid Holy Icons and Statues. In fact, Holy Icons and Statues goes back to the Old Testament, and since Christianity is a extension of Judaism, the Early Church since the Apostolic Era, for the most part, did not mind Holy Icons. The whole Holy Icons debate was settle in the God-Inspired Seventh Holy Ecumenical Council in the 8th Century. In IC.XC, Ramon |
|
|
|
Post by Ramon on Jun 7, 2009 23:00:01 GMT -5
Is Jesus physical? Didn't the disciples see, touch and pray to him? "Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified." (Galatians 3) It is precisely because of the incarnation of Jesus that we can imagine what God's face looks like. If you can imagine that in your heart, there is nothing wrong with imagining it on a painting because the heart is more sacred than paper or canvas. Take the Bible for example. We know that the paper and ink are nothing, they will be burned in the fire on the last day. Yet the word of God speaks through the ink and paper, so we(hopefully) reverence even the book itself, by honoring it and showing respect. Icons are the same, they are paper, wood or canvas with paint etc. Those materials are meaningless in themselves, but when they are used to direct our hearts towards loving God, we honor them. Study the development of language and you will see that all languages began as "pictographs", pictures that represented a certain sound, word or phrase. Gradually, they were simplified and evolved into the various scripts we have today (Roman, Cyrillic, Arabic etc). They are symbols, in the same way an image is a symbol. Without understanding what they mean, they are useless, and there is little difference between writing the word "Cat" and drawing a picture of a cat. In fact, there was a people group in Papua New Guinea that at the time of their first meeting with foreigners did not know how to "read" a simple line drawing. If you showed them a simple line drawing of a face, they could not understand that it was meant to be a face--they didn't even see any image at all! Think about it. When someone says something like "Jesus died on a cross" do you not immediately, even automatically somewhere in your mind picture an image of Jesus on a cross? Do you not imagine shapes, colors and even a vague sense of darkness and pain? And when someone speaks of the Resurrection, do you not imagine Jesus in Glory, light and perhaps even angels, and empty tomb etc.? Exactly! It is also good to note that the Early Church (1st-4th Century) often will convey truth using pictures. For example, images of fishes, crosses (rare, but existed), among other images, was used by the First-Second Century Christians to symbolize Christ. Since the Church was highly persecuted during those times, Christians will paint pictures in tombs, walls, etc, to convey the Truth of there Faith. The Ichthys ("Fish", "Jesus Fish") was the most widely image used by the 1st-2nd century Christians. It was a secret image. When we Orthodox Christians kiss Holy Icons, Crosses, and even Bibles, we do not give them divine worship, as we would to God, but rather we venerate them. The Greek Church Fathers distinguish very sharply between 'honorable reverence' (timetike proskynesis), which is accorded to Icons, and 'worship' (latreia). Worship is accorded only to God. We show honor and respect to the image represented in the Icon (not the wood itself). Holy Icons lift up our minds from earthly things to the heavenly. They instruct us in matters pertaining to the Christian faith and they remind us of this faith. Before the Bible came into circulation and all could read, Holy Icons was used to instruct Christians in the faith. They "saw" (through Holy Icons) Scriptures and they "heard" (through the Divine Liturgy and other Church services) Scriptures. I believe all should read Three Treatises on the Divine Images by St. John of Damascene. It explain fully why we Eastern Orthodox Christians use Holy Icons (what we believe and do not believe concerning Holy Icons). In IC.XC, Ramon |
|
|
|
Post by teresahrc on Jun 8, 2009 9:13:37 GMT -5
I don't understand how modern day iconoclasts detest beautiful holy images, but then will sit and watch unholy (or at least stupid) images on the TV, computer, etc. Or pay big bucks for wedding photos, get posters of cute little animals for their kids bedroom (not to mention little "icons" of animals, little plastic statues of animals and people AKA toys!) and they have no problem with all that. be consistent if you are going to be an iconoclast!
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jun 8, 2009 10:26:12 GMT -5
I don't like pictures of Mary or Jesus... especially Jesus. And when they make movies about Jesus (like the Passion of the Christ) the face of Jesus should never be shown. When The Passion of the Christ was shown in India there were reports of Indians buying the picture of the actor (Jim whatever his name is) who portrayed Jesus in order to worship him. These Indians actually thought this actor was Christ. How do you know that they actually believed he was Christ? Where did you get this story from (that they wanted to worship him through his picture)?  |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jun 8, 2009 10:31:50 GMT -5
God used them all the time (Angels on the Ark of The Covenant, Statues inside His Temple, Bronze Snake Idol, etc...). ;D Oh come on now! This is an entirely different matter. God is the one who told the Jews what statues and images he wanted created for the Ark of the Covenant and the Temple. Yes. God is (according to how you define idolatry) and idolaterer. But if you accept what scripture says, it literally says "graven" images, not just the word images alone, so therefore, there is no scripture that forbids the use of images and God proved that when "after" He laid out The Law regarding that, He told His followers to use images in those instances. No, God said not to make any "graven" statues or images BEFORE that. The Commandments came before that. |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jun 8, 2009 10:37:27 GMT -5
Alfie, or they just wanted something physical and they could see and touch and pray to. It's like having pictures of one's loved ones Alfie. Just because they have them, it doesn't mean that they worship their loved ones. Alfie, do you have "images" of your loved ones? Pictures, portaits, photographs, etc... |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jun 8, 2009 10:43:55 GMT -5
Is Jesus physical? Didn't the disciples see, touch and pray to him? "Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified." (Galatians 3) It is precisely because of the incarnation of Jesus that we can imagine what God's face looks like. If you can imagine that in your heart, there is nothing wrong with imagining it on a painting because the heart is more sacred than paper or canvas. Take the Bible for example. We know that the paper and ink are nothing, they will be burned in the fire on the last day. Yet the word of God speaks through the ink and paper, so we(hopefully) reverence even the book itself, by honoring it and showing respect. Icons are the same, they are paper, wood or canvas with paint etc. Those materials are meaningless in themselves, but when they are used to direct our hearts towards loving God, we honor them. Study the development of language and you will see that all languages began as "pictographs", pictures that represented a certain sound, word or phrase. Gradually, they were simplified and evolved into the various scripts we have today (Roman, Cyrillic, Arabic etc). They are symbols, in the same way an image is a symbol. Without understanding what they mean, they are useless, and there is little difference between writing the word "Cat" and drawing a picture of a cat. In fact, there was a people group in Papua New Guinea that at the time of their first meeting with foreigners did not know how to "read" a simple line drawing. If you showed them a simple line drawing of a face, they could not understand that it was meant to be a face--they didn't even see any image at all! Think about it. When someone says something like "Jesus died on a cross" do you not immediately, even automatically somewhere in your mind picture an image of Jesus on a cross? Do you not imagine shapes, colors and even a vague sense of darkness and pain? And when someone speaks of the Resurrection, do you not imagine Jesus in Glory, light and perhaps even angels, and empty tomb etc.? Not only that, but the documentary "The Face: Christ in art" proves that images of Jesus have been around since the first century. Here is something that few know...no physical description is actually given of Jesus while He was on earth (only in The Book of Revelations). Now, how many of you Bible literallists actually believe that Jesus has Bronze Feet? |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jun 8, 2009 10:45:41 GMT -5
You know what, the deceiver will twist the truth, deceive and lie no matter what. I'm not going to do or not do anything in fear of him. Besides, the Bible says that every eye will see Him, and His return will be like lightening. The clouds will be rolled back like a scroll, right? So, yeah if anyone is thinking that one day Jesus will just be walking around and no one will be sure if it's Him, they would probably fall for anything. Muslims think Jesus has red hair, and they believe he's coming back too. Whatever. It doesn't have anything to do with anything. The fact is that Jesus Christ is God and is a real human as well. Because he is real human, he does have real hair, eyes, skin, body, etc. So nothing wrong with imagining what he looks like. Exactly. If you're a Christian and you have faith, you don't have to worry about being deceived. If you have The Holy Spirit "in" you, then because it cannot be deceived, neither can you. |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jun 8, 2009 10:49:21 GMT -5
Oh come on now! This is an entirely different matter. God is the one who told the Jews what statues and images he wanted created for the Ark of the Covenant and the Temple. It wasn't the Jews themselves deciding what they wanted to create for the Temple or Ark. God also told the Jews how he wanted the temple built, how the clothing for the priests were to be sewn and the curtain for the Holy of Holies made. After that God said not to make any statutes or images. No, he did not. He told them that BEFORE he commanded them to make Icons and Statues within the Holy Temple/Ark (i.e., Ex 20). And besides, what God commanded them not to do was to make images and worship them as Idols. Nothing in Scriptures forbid Holy Icons and Statues. In fact, Holy Icons and Statues goes back to the Old Testament, and since Christianity is a extension of Judaism, the Early Church since the Apostolic Era, for the most part, did not mind Holy Icons. The whole Holy Icons debate was settle in the God-Inspired Seventh Holy Ecumenical Council in the 8th Century. In IC.XC, Ramon  |
|
|
|
Post by teresahrc on Jun 8, 2009 10:51:26 GMT -5
what about the bronze serpant? They looked at it and were healed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jun 8, 2009 10:58:42 GMT -5
Is Jesus physical? Didn't the disciples see, touch and pray to him? "Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified." (Galatians 3) It is precisely because of the incarnation of Jesus that we can imagine what God's face looks like. If you can imagine that in your heart, there is nothing wrong with imagining it on a painting because the heart is more sacred than paper or canvas. Take the Bible for example. We know that the paper and ink are nothing, they will be burned in the fire on the last day. Yet the word of God speaks through the ink and paper, so we(hopefully) reverence even the book itself, by honoring it and showing respect. Icons are the same, they are paper, wood or canvas with paint etc. Those materials are meaningless in themselves, but when they are used to direct our hearts towards loving God, we honor them. Study the development of language and you will see that all languages began as "pictographs", pictures that represented a certain sound, word or phrase. Gradually, they were simplified and evolved into the various scripts we have today (Roman, Cyrillic, Arabic etc). They are symbols, in the same way an image is a symbol. Without understanding what they mean, they are useless, and there is little difference between writing the word "Cat" and drawing a picture of a cat. In fact, there was a people group in Papua New Guinea that at the time of their first meeting with foreigners did not know how to "read" a simple line drawing. If you showed them a simple line drawing of a face, they could not understand that it was meant to be a face--they didn't even see any image at all! Think about it. When someone says something like "Jesus died on a cross" do you not immediately, even automatically somewhere in your mind picture an image of Jesus on a cross? Do you not imagine shapes, colors and even a vague sense of darkness and pain? And when someone speaks of the Resurrection, do you not imagine Jesus in Glory, light and perhaps even angels, and empty tomb etc.? Exactly! It is also good to note that the Early Church (1st-4th Century) often will convey truth using pictures. For example, images of fishes, crosses (rare, but existed), among other images, was used by the First-Second Century Christians to symbolize Christ. Since the Church was highly persecuted during those times, Christians will paint pictures in tombs, walls, etc, to convey the Truth of there Faith. The Ichthys ("Fish", "Jesus Fish") was the most widely image used by the 1st-2nd century Christians. It was a secret image. When we Orthodox Christians kiss Holy Icons, Crosses, and even Bibles, we do not give them divine worship, as we would to God, but rather we venerate them. The Greek Church Fathers distinguish very sharply between 'honorable reverence' (timetike proskynesis), which is accorded to Icons, and 'worship' (latreia). Worship is accorded only to God. We show honor and respect to the image represented in the Icon (not the wood itself). Holy Icons lift up our minds from earthly things to the heavenly. They instruct us in matters pertaining to the Christian faith and they remind us of this faith. Before the Bible came into circulation and all could read, Holy Icons was used to instruct Christians in the faith. They "saw" (through Holy Icons) Scriptures and they "heard" (through the Divine Liturgy and other Church services) Scriptures. I believe all should read Three Treatises on the Divine Images by St. John of Damascene. It explain fully why we Eastern Orthodox Christians use Holy Icons (what we believe and do not believe concerning Holy Icons). In IC.XC, Ramon Protestants are soooo Pharisitical. Have you guys noticed that? They reject The Christian Old Testament and prefer to use The Pharisees Old Testament. They see evil where there is good. For example, when The Church had works of art done so that those who were illiterate (which back then was the overwhelming majority of the world), they see wrong here. When The Church staunchly stomped out heretical Christian sects, they call those sects "true Christians". That's just what The Pharisees did. Where Jesus did undeniable good, The Pharisees would say that He was doing evil. It must be really hard being a non-Catholic Christian. All the NCC's I see on The Coming Home Network in EWTN all say the same thing. Once they decided to wipe out "man-made" religions and to stick strickly to scripture, it took them right to the universal Christian Church. Think about it, if all NCC's did that (studied scripture on their own and didn't take their teachings from man-made religions/sects outside of the universal Church), they'd have a far easier time being able to read scripture. That's why they stay divided amongst themselves...their churches (which are built upon sand [aka "man" which is made of soil]) never stand up to the winds and their foundations get washed away. But the House built upon Cepha...(look up what "Cepha" literally means and then see "who" is named "Cepha" in scripture!) is still standing 2,000 years later. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jun 8, 2009 11:02:38 GMT -5
I don't understand how modern day iconoclasts detest beautiful holy images, but then will sit and watch unholy (or at least stupid) images on the TV, computer, etc. Or pay big bucks for wedding photos, get posters of cute little animals for their kids bedroom (not to mention little "icons" of animals, little plastic statues of animals and people AKA toys!) and they have no problem with all that. be consistent if you are going to be an iconoclast! It's "replacement theology" of images. It's ok to have images of "man", but not of "holy" ones.  |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Jun 8, 2009 11:09:24 GMT -5
what about the bronze serpant? They looked at it and were healed. That's one of those "that don't count" things that happened in The Bible that aren't pertinent to today's Christianity. |
|
|
|
Post by teresahrc on Jun 8, 2009 12:38:31 GMT -5
What about the Jesus Film?
|
|
