For all the Protestant challenges against icons, I think it comes down to a simple theory I have. They confuse veneration and worship, not because we worship icons, but because Protestants merely venerate God. This is not a challenge to anyone's faith or sincerity, but to anyone who has attended both Protestant and Orthodox worship services, it's obvious to any objective viewer that Orthodox worship provides the opportunity for a deeper relationship with and reverence for God.

@bradleyperry1735

5 ай бұрын

💯

@Aleksandr-Herman

3 ай бұрын

I came to the same conclusion. Protestants confuse veneration with worship because they merely venerate God, not worship Him.

I can't tell you how nice it is to see a channel that simply explains things from an Orthodox perspective. Debates are so untruthful and in my opinion in many ways just self serving. How refreshing to just learn the "truth" of things without having to hear any arguing! My wife and I are a few weeks away from being baptized into the church and we have only just scratched the surface in our understanding of things so having a page like this to go to is really nice! I pray this channel grows fast and that others will come to know the one true faith as well! Great video!

@Fr.JonathanIvanoff

11 ай бұрын

Thank you so very much!

Luther's last point was one I've thought about before. The Copts are those whose church in Alexandria was started by St. Mark of the gospel by the same name and they broke off quite early from the Orthodox church and yet they still have iconography, too. So, as Fr. Jonathan said, I haven't heard a cogent argument as to why the Copts have this practice if supposedly it was a later accretion and I guess I never will.

@jo134

5 ай бұрын

Why did they break off from the church?

@r4ngerr4ge32

5 ай бұрын

@@jo134there was a theological dispute between the orientals and the rest of the Church, concerning the divine and human wills of Christ. Council of Chalcedon, I believe.

The earliest surviving church in existence The Dura-Europos church in Syria has icons within it. Nuff said

@TheTransfiguredLife

11 ай бұрын

Haha let them know! ☦️

Wow, fantastic discussion of the validity of the veneration of images and icons !! Thanks so much for this excellent clarification and exposition of the the historical foundations of the Orthodox Christian faith and perspective in this regard, going back to the apostles!! Thanks so much, Luther and Fr Jonathan!!

@TheTransfiguredLife

11 ай бұрын

Thanks for tuning in! ☦

Great discussion on an important topic. I really like this channel. I'm a catechumen becoming Orthodox.

@TheTransfiguredLife

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for your kind words! Also, congrats may God continue to bless you while you're on this amazing journey! ☦️

Excellent and informative! Thank you, Fr. Jonathan and Luther! Looking forward to the next one.

@TheTransfiguredLife

11 ай бұрын

Thanks Alicia! ☦

This is really interesting. I hope you will have more like this.

@TheTransfiguredLife

7 ай бұрын

Thanks! ☦️ Any specific topic in the future you'd like us to cover?

@lovejoypeace5972

7 ай бұрын

@@TheTransfiguredLife The Monarchy of the Father/The Holy Trinity. Thanks for asking.

Great video! I think most Protestants have good intentions when they argue against iconography. They have a reverent fear of the Lord and want to be careful not to commit idolatry. But their arguments don’t hold up! Thank you for the historical references and Greek word study to support icon veneration.

@TheTransfiguredLife

11 ай бұрын

I agree! In many cases it comes from a good place. Appreciate the edifying comment!

@ThruTheUnknown

10 ай бұрын

Yes I agree and they will say it's not biblical or something the apostles did. Which may be true but there is external evidence that may not 100% correct either if one considers the shroud of Turin to authentic, which many protestants do. However they would probably just 'assume' it wasn't venerated even if authentic.

@acekoala457

10 ай бұрын

​@@ThruTheUnknown If the Shroud of Turin is the Icon Made Without Hands, which is a distinct possibility as it has mold spores from Ephesus and other places the IMWH was historically, then it's definitely not an Accretion.

@ThruTheUnknown

10 ай бұрын

@@acekoala457 Yeah although protestants might claim that the veneration of it is an accretion but it's an argument from silence.

@vsevolodtokarev

9 ай бұрын

@@ThruTheUnknown Galatians 3:1 suggests it's biblical and having to do with the apostles.

Good point! The catacombs are evidence of the faith and practice of the earliest Christians, taught by the apostles. This is something that must be honestly looked at and provide a basis for "modern" Christians to reconsider obvious misconceptions, and thereby, open the door to the realization of the true Apostolic faith passed down from the beginning.

@333Paradigm333

3 ай бұрын

If it was taught by the apostles why is there no mention of it in the scriptures? Seems like there would be controversy from the very beginning (as many of the converted pagans would have forsaken the worship of idols etc.). It would need to be addressed since it was such a supposedly prominent prayer practice, but not one hint of a mention of this practice in scripture.

Soo good! You both are awesome and eloquent!

@TheTransfiguredLife

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for your kind words! ☦️

I’ve heard it explained that Icons are “the expressions of the Gospel in paint and wood”. All Christian’s venerate Scriptures and the Gospel, so how are Icons any different especially for Christians who for 1,550 years did t have access to a Bible and couldn’t read it even if they did? It’s almost as if some argue there was no proper Christianity between the Apostolic Age and Gutenberg’s printing press. That would make St. Chrysostom, St. Basil, St. John of Damascus, St. Ireneaus, St. Ignatius, st. Clement of Rome, Polycarp and so on, what? Responsible for the accretions? If that’s the case weren’t they also in one degree or another individually responsible for Scripture and collectively responsible in every degree for transcribing, compiling and selecting Scripture? If that’s the case wouldn’t logic demand you consider the Scripture an accretion along with every other facet of their respective Ministries. Otherwise, the inspiration of the Holy Spirit extended to them was only with respect to Scripture and not to any other aspect of their respective ministries and that just seems improbable if not just plain silly.

Great video. Keep up good work.

@TheTransfiguredLife

6 ай бұрын

Thank you! ☦️

I haven't watched yet but have loved the other content on this channel. I agree with @milleslong6549 about debates. When I was a Jehovah's Witness, I loved debating people, we were trained to do so in those days, and although I may have won a debate at someone's door, I was in serious error and wasn't seeking truth, I was seeking conflict. I really look forward to this one. Thank you!

@TheTransfiguredLife

10 ай бұрын

Thanks for tuning in! What led you out of the Jehovah Witness faith?

@jacob4047

10 ай бұрын

@@TheTransfiguredLife , I was in a position to see how a person who was the victim of sexual abuse and that person's family were threatened with disfellowshipping if the abuse was made known. This led me to talk with others who were the victims of sexual abuse in the Watchtower. This was "the thing" that caused me to question the Watchtower Governing Body's claim to authority. I bought a book called "The Gentile Times Reconsidered which examined the 1914 claim of the Watchtower from, if I recall, three lines of evidence and thoroughly dismantled that claim and therefore any claim of being God's authority. After that, I became open to consider that my thoughts about the nature of Christ, etc. could be in error. I resigned from my responsibilities in the congregation and wrote a letter of disassociation and within a year were attending a TULIP affirming congregation. After eight years of Calvinism, my family was more broken than when were in the Watchtower. I was heavily involved in street preaching and evangelism under the oversight of my local Reformed Baptist congregation and my attempt to proselytize and Orthodox Christian resulted in a friendship and ultimately an invitation to "come and see". We came, saw, and decided we were home! My wife, daughter, and myself entered the church on Pascha 2022, thank God!

@TheTransfiguredLife

10 ай бұрын

@@jacob4047 Wow powerful story. Thanks for sharing this! ☦

Something to consider as well are the icons in the catacombs. The christians in those catacombs were truly respected by Protestants, but they created Holy images that were not there originally. They are not considered idolaters in Protestantism.

@TheTransfiguredLife

11 ай бұрын

Right! Some protestants do recognize the rich tradition of images in the early church.

@OrthodoxChristianMusicProject

11 ай бұрын

Wonderful discussion. Having heard Fr Jonathan preach and teach a “few” times (😉) there is so much he has to teach us. Looking forward to the next episodes! Subscribed!! ☦️

@TheTransfiguredLife

11 ай бұрын

@@OrthodoxChristianMusicProject Lol thanks for those kind words! 😉☦️

Exodus 20:4Verse (Click for Chapter) New International Version "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.

Protestant here, are there any resources that deal with what appears to be objections to images by ante nicene fathers? I just read through Clement of Alexandria and he seems to be clearly against them.

@Fr.JonathanIvanoff

5 ай бұрын

@chrisj123165: Clement and others are often brought up, but it is clear, if context is taken, that the "images" often referred to are the statues and images of pagan deities that just happened to already be in, appeared in, the buildings used by the Christians.

@fusion9619

5 ай бұрын

I've heard of some early church fathers writing against icons, but I never bothered to remember the names because it's just obvious... You are not supposed to follow some authority mindlessly - Jesus commanded his disciples to _seek the truth._ My Bible doesn't say "submit to a truth some authorities prefer" - it says "seek." So use your head. If you let someone tell you what to think, you're not following Christ. Now, something I did back when I was investigating Orthodoxy, is I read Ezekiel - I'm sorry to admit that I never bothered to read that book, but I found a website which said that Ezekiel predicted Mary's "ever virginity," which doesn't make sense to me, so I read that book... The whole thing. Man is it repetitive... I did not find anything supporting maryology, but what I did find was an emphatic rejection of idol worship. Ezekiel is a monument to God's distaste of idolatry. The Israelites had a recurring problem - they kept falling into idol worship. How does that happen? It's not really explained, but you can figure it out - you start saying, "this image represents some aspect of God, or using this image of something close to God brings me closer to God." And it grows from there. This is basically what a Buddhist told me when I asked why she was performing rituals to a statue. I travelled around Asia and saw a fair bit of what we would describe as idol worship. They describe it in the same way the Orthodox describe their icons. They think there's power in their rituals and that something is hearing their prayers if they appeal to whatever the statue represents. I do think God hears their prayers, but after reading Ezekiel, I don't think he pays them any mind. God clearly hates idols, and God expects us to use our brains and not be reyarded. I misspelled that on purpose. So, how do you use your own brain to conclude that idol worship is dumb? Simple: Seek the truth. Ask yourself, why is God God, and you are you? Why can't you claim to be God? Besides it being blasphemous.. Well, because God knows everything and can do anything, and you don't and can't. Humility before God is the same as humility before the unknown. There are true things, but you can never know perfect truth - you can refine your understanding forever, and approach truth asymptomaticly, but you will never reach it on your own. Only the truth itself can cross that divide and bring you in. You are meant to recognize this and prostrate before both the concept of truth and the danger of the unknown. The fear of God is also the awe of God. Now, in order to navigate the unknown, we make maps - many things are maps, like a textbook is a map of a certain kind of knowledge, a blueprint can be a map of an engine, a painting is a map of an event or a feeling, etc. But the map is not the real thing. The blueprint may assist in building an engine, but you can't ride that piece of paper. A painting of a sunset may help you remember a feeling from watching a sunset, but there's no real sun or setting on that canvas. So wouldn't it be absurd to ascribe some power to a thing that's simply a teaching aide? This is how idols begin. There's some understanding that needs to be represented for it to be conveyed, but over time, people stop differentiating between the teaching aide and the truth it represents... And so, you get modern Buddhists performing rituals for golden statues, ancient Jews performing rituals to idols, Hindus with their myriad of gods, Catholics with their statues and Orthodox with their icons. If you question any of these people, they claim not to worship idols... But watch them! They do. They all ascribe power to these silly objects. They waste their time on these objects instead of drawing closer to God. How do you draw closer to God? You seek Him... To seek is to think. Also, there's nothing wrong with using art to teach. Icons are beautiful, and they should be beautiful. The problem is venerating them. "Hey, I don't need to build a motorcycle - I can just ride the blueprint! Weeeee! I'll get there eventually if I just sit on the blueprint, I'm sure of it!" Pretty dumb, right? So, having studied Orthodoxy, I'm thankful for what I now know. There's a narrow path, with temptations on either side. Orthodoxy is a test - do you pass through and see the illusion and continue on your journey of seeking the truth? Or do you stop here and submit to the teachings of people who don't want you to think and question things? To claim to know something to the extent that you no longer need to question things is to be prideful in the face of an infinite unknown - if someone is making such a claim, they don't fear God, and they are an antichrist. I wrote a heck of a lot more than I intended to... sorry for that. This is a topic that gets me going. I would definitely give credit to the Orthodox folks for one thing - they make me do my research! But use your head. God gave you everything you need to find your way through this. God bless you and your family and have a great 2024!

Is icon veneration mandated by Nicea 2? It appears that if you don't salute the icons you are at risk of anathema.

@johnnyd2383

3 ай бұрын

Yup. Read list of anathemas I posted that are from 8th century and are issued to all Iconoclastic heretics.

I Would like to speak to Fr. Jonathan Did he have a cell phone? Thank you

@TheTransfiguredLife

9 ай бұрын

Yes, you certainly can please email "thetransfiguredlife@gmail.com"

"Fr.Jonathan and I supply a defense why there's no sound argumentation against icons nor their veneration and how this practice is apostolic and necessary." Well... that is just false. First, the problematic issue is not simply the presence of icons. The problem is that Nicaea 2 MANDATES their veneration under the pain of anathema. The various post-Chalcedonian ancient churches, known generally as the Eastern Orthodox and the (Roman) Catholic Churches, assert that N2 is ecumenical and its pronouncements are binding. The Protestant/Evangelical concern -- actually, the concern of any Christian who is devoted to the teachings of Christ -- is that neither Christ nor the apostles anywhere mandate such beliefs or behaviors. Such a practice was largely foreign to the first generations of Christians. The general argument is therefore as follows: - Neither Christ nor the apostles mandated the veneration of icons. - Anything not mandated by Christ or the apostles should not be mandated by the Church. - Therefore, the Church should not mandate the veneration of icons. This argument is (basically) the argument put forth by concerned Christians. The argument is both sound and valid. Rather than address this argument, you address confused people and confused arguments. Not only do we find no such teachings, but we have (at least) four examples of veneration in the New Testament. We see that veneration of Christ was acceptable (e.g., the woman anointing Christ's feet). We see also that veneration of people and angels was forbidden (e.g., the veneration of Peter in Acts, and of angels in Revelation). You assert that icon veneration is not wrong because "it isn't worship of an idol, but the reverence 'passes through' to the person." However, we see from Scripture that veneration of persons other than Christ was forbidden, so your "argument" is really more of a red herring/distraction. You provided no evidence whatsoever that Christ or the apostles mandated the veneration of icons -- that this practice is "apostolic or necessary." Can you provide any example of Christ or the apostles teaching or demonstrating that the veneration of icons is mandatory?

@TheTransfiguredLife

9 ай бұрын

Thanks for your comment! 1. The decrees of Nicaea 2 don't address you as a protestant. Your protestant church didn't exist yet. This council was a historic defense against iconoclasm and the right to have and venerate icons. You can't have your cake and eat it too by holding to some partial form of iconoclasm. This is where your protestant argument falls flat. If you take issue with Nicaea 2 you have to take the entire context of the debate into account. So unless you take issue with the veneration of icons as well as their very existence your understanding of Nicaea 2 anathemas are warped and misguided. 2. Your line of argumentation is summarized like this: •Christ and the Apostles didn't mandate icon veneration • Anything not mandated by Christ and the Apostles should not be mandated by the Church • Therefore the Church can't mandate the veneration of icons My question to you is how would you know the tradition of honoring images isn't Apostolic? Theres no way as a protestant you can prove this. You can only assert this but you have no justification for the assertion. Every criteria you could come up with will undermine your own theological position. On another note, Christ didn't command you to hold to Sola Scriptura. You hold to this man-made tradition yet there's no biblical nor historical precedence for doing so. As for the Orthodox we understand the Church is the pillar and ground of truth ( 1Tim 4:15) so we trust the teachings of the Father's as well as Nicaea 2 when it proclaims this to be apostolic and a practice from the beginning. In the OT you have Daniel clearly being venerated by King Nebuchadnezzar. You also on another occasion have Joshua fully prostrated before the ark of the covenant. This is not even the only time a person or a holy object is being venerated in scripture. This issue is bigger than kissing pictures it's about our understanding of Christology that undergirds the practice which is difficult for some Protestants to grasp because many if not all have a heterodox Christology. St.John Damascus says this practice is an oral tradition which Paul references in his epistles (2Thess 2:15). Which many Protestants have no concern for because their denomination didn't exist until the 16th century so many can't even obey Paul's command to hold fast to oral tradition found in scripture.

@philoalethia

9 ай бұрын

​@@TheTransfiguredLife writes: " The decrees of Nicaea 2 don't address you as a protestant. Your protestant church didn't exist yet." So, let's just stop right there before we make more ignorant assumptions and false statements. 1) I am not Protestant. 2) You seem to be suggesting that N2 applies only Christians at that time -- not those who came to be later. Obviously, that is absurd. The definitions of the Trinity, for example, were not intended to be relevant only to those living at the time of the corresponding councils and proclamations, but from then forward. You then went on to misrepresent my argument. I will make my own arguments, if you don't mind. You continue: "My question to you is how would you know the tradition of honoring images isn't Apostolic? " First, you conveniently changed the terms. I have to wonder if it was deliberate, but I will not press that. The issue is the mandated veneration of images as a condition of salvation, as clearly decreed in N2. You changed it to merely "honoring images." This is a common tactic, but let us stick to the question rather than changing the topic in the middle of the discussion. To address the actual topic and question, I know that mandated veneration of images is not apostolic because, well, I can read and, having carefully studied Scripture and history, it is clear that Christ, the apostles, and the early Church did not mandate it. Countless accounts from early Christians don't even mention it. Further, the witness of the apostles, the testimony of Scripture, and the accounts from multiple other sources show that the veneration of people or even angels was proscribed -- let alone the veneration of images. So, my question to you is (again): You provided no evidence whatsoever that Christ or the apostles mandated the veneration of icons -- that this practice is "apostolic or necessary." Can you provide any example of Christ or the apostles teaching or demonstrating that the veneration of icons is mandatory?

@TheTransfiguredLife

9 ай бұрын

​@@philoalethia​​​ 1. The Trinity definition and trying to correlate that to N2 makes absolutely no sense so I'm just going to ignore it. You really don't understand the historical context of the anathemas. In short, The anathemas of the Seventh Ecumenical Council were in the context of iconoclasts violently destroying icons, both the painted kind and the human kind. The anathema is not that you must venerate icons to be saved, but that you are separated from the Church if you refuse to venerate icons because you think such veneration is contrary to the faith. Among other things, you would be putting your personal opinion above that of the Church (e.g. the actual meaning of heresy). Protestants are already outside the visible bounds of the Church so you are trying to tell Orthodox people how to understand their own church's teaching is next-level silly. 2. "Honoring holy images" and "venerating icons" are the same thing. If you read the writings of St.John Damascus on this issue you would realize I'm using the same exact language as him in his writings on this very topic. "Icons" are "images" & "veneration" is "honor". The same principle is found in the veneration of relics which is attested undisputably within the early centuries of Christian history. It's the same exact principle. 3. Lastly, it's confusing to defend the protestant/evangelical concern or worldview yet not actually be one. Instead of defending their worldview why don't you just defend your own? If you're not protestant just claim what you are and your church perspective and we can go from there because a lot of the arguments you're making shoot you in your own foot and quite similar to a Sola Scriptura perspective which contradict scripture. The irony is your perspective is dependent on tradition to make them. To your final question, an example doesn't need to be provided from Christ in the Apostles (again, we don't hold to Sola Scriptura). It's necessary in the sense that it speaks to our Churches understanding of proper Christology/Incarnational theology and our respect for the Saints who are in union with Christ. It's Apostolic in the sense that N2 has been accepted by our Church who is led by the Holy Spirit and at that council they proclaimed this is from the Apostles. So we trust the Spirit to guide the church into all truth. This practice is held by all Apostolic churches and all the churches that were created by man around the 16th century are ironically the main ones that pushback against this practice. Which isn't surprising of course when one must reinvent the wheel based on one's private interpretation of scripture.

@philoalethia

9 ай бұрын

@@TheTransfiguredLife, so... I'm going to treat you (and any other readers) like an adult. To that end, I'm simply going to ignore the various fallacies into which you enthusiastically plunge through your recent post and focus on your final paragraph. People are compelled to do such things when they have embraced errors into their minds. In doing so, they shatter their own intellects, and the only way to maintain their delusions is to continuously misrepresent other people's positions, engage in various fallacies, etc. In your final paragraph, you indirectly admit that we have no evidence whatsoever that Christ, the apostles, or the early Church promoted the veneration of icons, let alone mandated it. Further, you continue to pretend that the contra-evidence (already presented) doesn't exist. That is really all I was looking for. I don't expect you to openly admit or embrace the truth all at once. Just a small step is a good start. Best wishes.

@TheTransfiguredLife

9 ай бұрын

@@philoalethia I was expecting a response similar to this. I call it the "cope response". I love how you danced around nearly everything I mentioned to place a standard that your own worldview can't account for. That's a special kind of blindness. Best wishes to you as well!

You never directly addressed the fact that there are no pro-icon texts prior to the late 3rd or early 4th century. I have only found what "appears" to be anti-icon texts that were written prior to the above-mentioned. Please address this. Don't beat me up on this. I am an open-minded person that's only seeking truth. Please educate me and others like me who are truly trying to find God's truth. Not everyone that questions icon veneration is an iconoclast. A video on this would be greatly appreciated.

@TheTransfiguredLife

8 ай бұрын

You seem sincere we would be happy to help. The video references Eusebius saying the woman with the issue of blood in the gospels had a statue in front of her home that was venerated. This is one example of early veneration of images. This testimony would be prior to Eusebius who is a Church historian in the 4th century. I would be happy to discuss icon veneration in longer form. Send us an email and we can schedule a brief call with you on the topic.

@AccordingToScripture

8 ай бұрын

What is your email address? I didn't find it in your information.

@TheTransfiguredLife

8 ай бұрын

@@AccordingToScripture thetransfiguredlife@gmail.com

@Fr.JonathanIvanoff

5 ай бұрын

Legitimate question! I would point out that there are no complete or extant texts of Scripture, as well. There are no extant copies of the writings of some of the major figures of that era. Keep in mind that until Constantine, the armies of the Emperor were sent here and there to harass and even completely destroy Christian communities wherever they were found. So, it ** MAY ** be that these texts do not exist because they were destroyed in raids during that era. Do you think this is a legitimate argument?

@mariebo7491

3 ай бұрын

@@Fr.JonathanIvanoffI’d say no because now I’m relying on something that doesn’t exist and can’t be proven (if that’s what you mean) and I would be really reluctant if I have any doubt that I might just be committing idolatry and just doesn’t feel right personally and would much rather be abundantly cautious. But that’s just me. If it truly is like you describe and not idolatry, then no judgment from me. But would it be wrong if I chose not to? Say I wanted to convert to EO, is that expected from me? Same question in regard to how we view Mary.

This is terrible. I'm stopping at 30 minutes in because if you haven't correctly answered the question in that amount of time, I don't think you will. So, if any of you are willing to read this, I will correct this garbage: Take a second and ask yourself why Jesus said, "if you abide in the word, and you are truly my disciples, the truth will set you free." Why the focus on truth? Before I understood what Jesus said and became a Christian, I focused on the truth. That's part of the journey, but it was more than that... the group I was/am a part of has a phrase that we repeat nearly every day : "the map is not the territory." It means something very close to the allegory of Plato's Cave - don't focus on the images that are a mere imperfect version of the real thing. Can you ever know the real thing? This is basically the often misquoted Pontius Pilate asking, "what is the truth?" (Misquoted because every Christian I've heard talk about it just omits the context - but the irreverent attitude usually implied is similar). Can you ever know the truth? No matter how perfectly predictive your equations are, can you know that you really have the true equation to fully describe reality? No... the answer is No, and to bear witness to the truth is either something impossible for humans or it is an attitude of humility before the incomprehensible magnitude of the unknown. Or both. This is part of the fear of God - fear and be in awe of the meaning of truth. Are icons truth? No, they're art. If they give you comfort, then great, art can do that. But if you pray to them and kiss them and ascribe a belief of power to them, then you are confusing the map with the territory. The are not truth. They are imperfect, as we are, and as all material things are. I don't mean that last part in a gnostic way, btw. Even if you found a material thing that had some kind of power, you should still not worship it, because it's still not the real thing. I know the guys in the video said they don't worship icons, but what exactly does worship mean? How could praying to something not be worship? How could kissing something not be worship? The map is not the territory. If you perform rituals to some art, that's the same as putting a map on the ground and walking on it and thinking you're going to arrive at some far off destination. It's nonsense. That's why idol worship is unacceptable. You say icons aren't idols, but the reasoning and mistakes that make idolatry wrong are the same reasons and mistakes.

@TheTransfiguredLife

9 ай бұрын

I asked Fr.Jonathan to respond to your comment but he wasn't interested since you admitted to not completing the video yet felt comfortable writing us such a lengthy comment. Imagine if we respond to your unnecessarily wordy comment without even reading all of it. The question: Is the veneration of icons forbidden? We answered that in the video. But in short there's no commandment against it. In the OT we see Joshua bowing before the Ark of the Lord (Joshua 7:6)." So if it were forbidden than this Man of God would be doing what's forbidden. We also mention through out history there's been cases of veneration of holy objects and images. The veneration of relics have the same principle as the veneration of icons yet this was a practice of the early christians. There's veneration found in scripture is directed towards people as well. So if this is considered worship you would have a problem with scripture. Also, we don't pray to art nor do we merely kiss art. The honor is for the person that's displayed on the image not the image itself. In the same way if you kiss a picture of your spouse or throw a flower in a casket with image near the casket it's meant for the person represented not the pictures itself We also went over the Greek in the video and explained the difference between latria and dulia. And how one is offered to the saints and the other is reserved for God alone. "Then David said to all the assembly, “Now bless the Lord your God.” So all the assembly blessed the Lord God of their fathers, and bowed their heads and prostrated themselves before the Lord and the king." -1 Chron 29:20 In the scripture above you have an example of the people of God bowing to God "AND" King David! So this would be a dilemma for your position. Which would force the protestant position to admit that you can venerate someone distinctly from worshipping them. So if you going to say it's forbidden you should provide actual evidence for your claim. Because we have biblical backing and historical backing. Lastly, if you wish to dialogue further complete the video. If not we aren't interested in giving a class in the comment sections on icons.

@fusion9619

9 ай бұрын

​@@TheTransfiguredLifedude... I'm not Jewish and I'm not protestant, although I may yet choose protestantism. Examples from the old testament are a curiosity, not direction for Christians. History and context are nice, but if you want to follow old testament laws or traditions, there are synagogues all over the place. I really should thank you. You probably saved me a HUGE headache if I had gone into an Orthodox church, as I was planning to, and found out you guys are like this the hard way. The Orthodox church made a mistake, and when people tried to correct it, the wrong side won. History is messy.

@TheTransfiguredLife

9 ай бұрын

@@fusion9619 That's your choice and you'll have to live with that choice.

@bad_covfefe

9 ай бұрын

​@fusion9619 your entire opinion is just a new idea invented in the last few decades. Since that is the case, how can your beliefs be the faith once and for all delivered to the saints? The early church would not agree that the OT stories are "curiosities," they would affirm that they are indeed examples.

@fusion9619

9 ай бұрын

@@bad_covfefe they are mostly examples of what not to do. Protestantism's major triumph is that it is liberated from the accretions of Judaism - it is also liberated from the accretions of Byzantine Christianity, which is likewise a strength. My argument is not my own - it is the same argument made by platonists and early Christians. Your idolatry is an accretion. I'm not the first to correct it, and your persistence in this sin is founded on ego.