Icons and religious (Christian; Catholic) Images

  • Thread starter Thread starter billcu1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

billcu1

Guest
Is it true that Peter denounced Jews who refused to revere religious images as “Heretics”? I thought we had Icons because people in the middle ages couldn’t read or write so they revered images. So basically what images was Peter referring to?
 
Have you got a Bible verse for this?
I believe what I read was trying to say tradition said this. I will see if I can find that page again. And maybe a quote. I should’ve saved it.
 
As far as I know, there is nothing by St. Peter outside of the Bible.
 
Is it true that Peter denounced Jews who refused to revere religious images as “Heretics”? I thought we had Icons because people in the middle ages couldn’t read or write so they revered images. So basically what images was Peter referring to?
The use of icons by Christians goes back to antiquity, far predating the Middle Ages. The first icon of the Mother of God is believed to have been written by St. Luke. Iconography is distinct from the religious art that became popular in the west during the late Middle Ages.

I’ve never heard of St. Peter saying anything about icons, but the Church has certainly spoken definitively about their use. The Second Council of Nicaea was convened in 787 to deal with the iconoclasm controversy. This is what the Council had to say, in part, about the purpose and use of icons in our churches:
We define that the holy icons, whether in colour, mosaic, or some other material, should be exhibited in the holy churches of God, on the sacred vessels and liturgical vestments, on the walls, furnishings, and in houses and along the roads, namely the icons of our Lord God and Saviour Jesus Christ, that of our Lady the Theotokos, those of the venerable angels and those of all saintly people. Whenever these representations are contemplated, they will cause those who look at them to commemorate and love their prototype. We define also that they should be kissed and that they are an object of veneration and honour (timitiki proskynisis), but not of real worship (latreia), which is reserved for Him Who is the subject of our faith and is proper for the divine nature. The veneration accorded to an icon is in effect transmitted to the prototype; he who venerates the icon, venerated in it the reality for which it stands.
 
Jesus himself is an image.

He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation; (Colossians 1:15)

Its now okay to have images.

-Tim-
 
The use of icons by Christians goes back to antiquity, far predating the Middle Ages. The first icon of the Mother of God is believed to have been written by St. Luke. Iconography is distinct from the religious art that became popular in the west during the late Middle Ages.

I’ve never heard of St. Peter saying anything about icons, but the Church has certainly spoken definitively about their use. The Second Council of Nicaea was convened in 787 to deal with the iconoclasm controversy. This is what the Council had to say, in part, about the purpose and use of icons in our churches:
Well for some reason I can’t find what I read. This whole idol thing makes no sense to me. The church says “pagans” or “the other guys” worshiped images. They revered as we do not worshiped. And what does a graven image have to do with spirituality? An Idol is a God that comes before God. Names like “Food”, “Drunkenness”, “Sloth” all come to mind to me. Gematria reveals a lot of this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top