Answering Iconoclasts

[Carpathian Wolf]

It is only through willed ignorance or dishonesty that anyone can deny that icons have been in use not only by early Christians but the Jews proceeding Christ's incarnation. What is important as is with most things, is the intent behind the fact.

[Monarchist]

Well, the Protties can simply come along and argue that it doesn't matter what the earliest of Jews did; after all, they were the ones who disobeyed God first, weren't they? Protestants will never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever be satisfied with explanations of Icons. They have been bred from the very cradle, or born again into their own denomination so intensely that it will not leave their minds. Iconoclasm is part-and-parcel of being a Protestant, it seems. There are no allowances.

[Tiberios]

Iconoclasm is part-and-parcel of being a Protestant, it seems. There are no allowances.

actually I have nothing against Icons (I'm protestant). I actually think it's a shame that protestantism doesn't use them.

[removeduser_487563287433]

Apology for idolotry, m i rite?

[Carpathian Wolf]

Apology for idolotry, m i rite?

What's that thing they say in these parts? Obvious troll is obvious?

[Carpathian Wolf]

What's that thing they say in these parts? Obvious troll is obvious?

[removeduser_487563287433]

Well to be honest the fact that you're half obsessed with "answering iconoclasts" doesn't make a great statement for your self confidence on the matter.

[motiv-8]

Well to be honest the fact that you're half obsessed with "answering iconoclasts" doesn't make a great statement for your self confidence on the matter.

Especially since this matter was settled by more or less intelligent and informed men about twelve hundred years ago. This is beating the spectre of a ghost of a dead horse.

[bushbush]

Well to be honest the fact that you're half obsessed with "answering iconoclasts" doesn't make a great statement for your self confidence on the matter.

it's possible because the other christian countries (of either Catholic or Protestant) are doing so much better economically and politically than Orthodox countries that Orthodox have a sense of inferiority complex on this, especially when many Protestants (on this forum especially i have seen) have mocked Orthodox on their sect as "backward" (which is a totally incorrect view btw).

[SorelusImperion]

Especially since this matter was settled by more or less intelligent and informed men about twelve hundred years ago. This is beating the spectre of a ghost of a dead horse.

I suppose people said that to Martin Luther as well.
Just because a different generation claimed that it had settled the matter more than thousand years ago doesn't mean that the conclusion they reached was correct or that current generations agree with it.

[Carpathian Wolf]

Well to be honest the fact that you're half obsessed with "answering iconoclasts" doesn't make a great statement for your self confidence on the matter.

More like, I found an educational video I thought was interesting which you've yet to watch. How is posting up one thread "half obsessed?" I think the only half obsessed action here is your statements trolling me around trying to find some redemption from the last intellectual beatings.

Especially since this matter was settled by more or less intelligent and informed men about twelve hundred years ago. This is beating the spectre of a ghost of a dead horse.

I think that's what you're doing with a mallet made of wounded ego. If you aren't going to discuss the topic, stop spamming my thread with your crap.

[removeduser_487563287433]

an educational video

On youtube?

[Carpathian Wolf]

On youtube?

Did you watch the video? No. So what exactly is your contribution here?

[removeduser_487563287433]

Did you watch the video? No. So what exactly is your contribution here?

Of course not, I know better than to watch amateur videos on youtube made by obsessives.

[Boer]

I think that the Icon issue is a symptom of a larger conflict in the world views of Orthodox and Protestant Christians. For Orthodoxs (and Catholics) holy tradition is fundamental, so showing that the early church fathers did X is authoritative. Protestants, on the other hand, have sola scriptura. Tradition in not authoritative; all authority is in the Bible (or at least that's the claim. I think an honest examination of Protestant beliefs shows that, in practice, tradition is often used to validated a belief or practice).

An Orthodox who really intends to convince a Protestant about Icons would be forced to attempt to convince him based on, at best, conflicting pieces of scripture, some of which were shown in the video. A Protestant trying to convince an Orthodox would have little (if any) better foundation in scripture and would certainly be unable to deny the use of Icons in the early church.

As for the video, I think that it ascribes too much influence to Islam where Iconoclasts are concerned. I don't really see how Islamic thoughts were a major influence of the Protestant iconoclasts, or Protestants as a whole.

[Carpathian Wolf]

I think that the Icon issue is a symptom of a larger conflict in the world views of Orthodox and Protestant Christians. For Orthodoxs (and Catholics) holy tradition is fundamental, so showing that the early church fathers did X is authoritative. Protestants, on the other hand, have sola scriptura. Tradition in not authoritative; all authority is in the Bible (or at least that's the claim. I think an honest examination of Protestant beliefs shows that, in practice, tradition is often used to validated a belief or practice).

An Orthodox who really intends to convince a Protestant about Icons would be forced to attempt to convince him based on, at best, conflicting pieces of scripture, some of which were shown in the video. A Protestant trying to convince an Orthodox would have little (if any) better foundation in scripture and would certainly be unable to deny the use of Icons in the early church.

As for the video, I think that it ascribes too much influence to Islam where Iconoclasts are concerned. I don't really see how Islamic thoughts were a major influence of the Protestant iconoclasts, or Protestants as a whole.

I think the biggest issue with sola scriptura is that the bible directly contradicts it where it says to follow tradition written AND spoken. Also the protestant bible in its incomplete form that it is (not having Maccabees) runs into another issue. Maccabees is the only book which mentions Hanukkah and the NT mentions it. Christ himself I believe does so. So either Christ contradicts sola scriptura directly himself by using something outside of the bible (in the incomplete format the protestants have) or protestants must admit that their bible is incomplete.

[Boer]

I think the biggest issue with sola scriptura is that the bible directly contradicts it where it says to follow tradition written AND spoken. Also the protestant bible in its incomplete form that it is (not having Maccabees) runs into another issue. Maccabees is the only book which mentions Hanukkah and the NT mentions it. Christ himself I believe does so. So either Christ contradicts sola scriptura directly himself by using something outside of the bible (in the incomplete format the protestants have) or protestants must admit that their bible is incomplete.

The bible has passages that seem to support and contradict sola scriptura (off the top of my head I come up with Revelation 22:18-9 and Deuteronomy 4:2, although it certainly could be argued that these refer only the revelations they are part of (especially since the Bible did not yet exist as such) vs Joel 2:28).

Could you point out the text you were referring to.

As to which books should be considered canonical, that could open up a whole new discussion [especially with my quasi-heretical view] that would hopelessly derail the topic of this thread.

[Carpathian Wolf]

The strong reaction you are giving me would beg to differ.

Would beg to differ what? You haven't watched the video and here you are still typing. About what? About how the video has no good information. But wait how do you know?

Why is there so much agression ? Sure the first few posts seem to be a little self-rightous but is within an acceptable limit. I am not sure wether this thread has much potential for a civil discussion but making smart-ass remarks and sneering at each other doesn't help and there is absolutely need for it.

I have no idea why some feel the need to troll =/

On the other hand they deserve it and it's funny.

The bible has passages that seem to support and contradict sola scriptura (off the top of my head I come up with Revelation 22:18-9 and Deuteronomy 4:2, although it certainly could be argued that these refer only the revelations they are part of (especially since the Bible did not yet exist as such) vs Joel 2:28).

Could you point out the text you were referring to.

As to which books should be considered canonical, that could open up a whole new discussion [especially with my quasi-heretical view] that would hopelessly derail the topic of this thread.

For revelations 22:18-9 logically I can only conclude that it refers to the book of Revelations. But even if it did refer to the bible itself it still depends on the interpretation and who you follow.

As for Deuteronomy 4:2 again I don't think it supports sola scriptura considering the bible says to follow the traditions written down and passed down by mouth. Since that's a command I would say Deuteronomy 4:2 demolishes sola scriptura.

John 10:22-39 is where Christ went at the temple for Hanukkah.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanukka...of_the_holiday

We can discuss which books are considered canonical if you want. I don't mind at all. As long as we're respectful and have a conversation I don't care if we go from Icons to sola scriptura to the bible to persian poetry.

[Boer]

I was actually more interested in the texts that say to follow traditions. I'm certain that they are there, I simply cannot come up with any off the top of my head and have not taken the time to search for them. The few I seem to recall appear to be more focused (specific about the tradition described near by) and I'm not sure it would be right to use those texts to support following all tradition, including ones not created when the texts were written, especially when most Jewish tradition has been abandoned by Christians.

John 10:22-39 is where Christ went at the temple for Hanukkah.

I'm not sure that Christ going to the temple for Hanukkah gives support to Maccabees any more than his following other Jewish customs give support for their use.

We can discuss which books are considered canonical if you want. I don't mind at all. As long as we're respectful and have a conversation I don't care if we go from Icons to sola scriptura to the bible to persian poetry.

I would not mind discussion canonical issues with you, for I have found you to be calm and rational about a subject that could easily get heated and degenerate into pointless religion bashing. However, I think a new thread might be more appropriate if only to allow other people to find it easier.

[Viking Prince]

Personal references are against the rules gentle members. Please stay with the topic and then I will not need to moderate this thead again. -- VP