/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

"If this seems like idolatry to you, you are not alone. On the first Sunday of Great Lent (which recently began in the Orthodox Church), we celebrate the “Triumph of Orthodoxy.” This marks the end of a long and bloody period in our history, beginning in 726, when Emperor Leo III issued an edict banning icons throughout the Byzantine Empire. Some say he did this because he was influenced by Islam (which rejects images), but few historians agree with that theory. Muslim armies were a threat to the Byzantine Empire, and one tends not to adopt the practices of one’s enemies.

Leo probably banned icons because he genuinely thought they were idols. A lot of people today would agree with him. After all, the Bible says, “Thou shalt not make unto 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 water under the earth” (Exodus 20:4). Of course, this verse does not just ban images of holy things. A poster of the solar system on a kid’s bedroom wall violates the commandment because it is an image of “heaven above.” Jesus-fish stickers are also excluded because they depict something from “the water under the earth.” Let me also add that a “graven image” is actually a statue. Thus some translations render “graven” as “carved.” So something like this would violate more than just good taste. If we are going to read the Bible in legalistic ways, then technically there is nothing wrong with kissing pictures, because Orthodox Christians reject statuary.

Of course, most Christians who oppose icons do not really have a problem with images themselves. They just don’t like the kissing part! The Second Commandment certainly condemns the act of prostrating oneself (bowing) before an image (Leviticus 26:1), and we Orthodox Christians prostrate all the time. But if prostrating before a material image is sinful, then the crowds who bowed before Jesus Christ were all idolaters. All throughout his ministry people crowded around Jesus. They wanted to reach out to touch him, and some were miraculously cured because of it (Matthew 9:20ff). This is a very human thing to do. When we see something holy, we want to touch it. We are also a bit scared to touch it (which is why the woman with the issue of blood snuck up behind Jesus). That is what “reverence” means. Modern iconoclasts might say it is fine to reverence Jesus, but we cannot reverence a picture because Jesus was God. But when the woman with the issue of blood reached out from the crowd to touch Jesus, which “part” of Jesus was she reverencing, the God “part” or the human “part”?

The Triumph of Orthodoxy celebrates the triumph over that kind of thinking. It took a while, but the controversy over images ended in 843 because enough people realized that if they could not kiss icons, then they could not be saved. I am not saying that kissing images of the saints is necessary for one’s salvation (though it wouldn’t hurt). I’m saying that if we cannot kiss images, then Christ has not come in the flesh for our salvation. The late Lutheran-turned-Orthodox historian, Jaroslav Pelikan, observed that we do not just celebrate the “Triumph of Icons” because iconoclasm was only a symptom of a larger problem: our tendency to think that God and the material world cannot touch each other. Thus some early Gnostics claimed that Jesus was a divine being that only appeared to be human, that when he walked, he did not leave footprints. Later groups (called Arians) said that Jesus was a demigod in human form. Again, they believed that the hands of God could not dirty themselves with the material creation. Thus Jesus was like an incarnate demiurge (in Plato’s philosophy), a “go-between” to mediate the infinite distance between God and creation. But if that were true, if Jesus were a demigod, then he is not really human either. Christians cannot pray to him, let alone reach out and be healed by him. They would be worshipping a creature, and that is idolatry!

>>602447

That is ultimately what ended the controversy over icons. The church realized that if we are to confess that Jesus is fully God and fully human, then we cannot say it is OK to venerate Jesus and not other material objects. After all, the woman who reached out to Jesus did not actually touch his body, just his cloak, but she was healed because through the material object, she worshipped Christ.

To put it another way, where does Jesus’ body end and the rest of the world begin? An immunologist friend recently informed me, we actually have more microbes in our bodies than human cells. What cells we have regularly replace themselves, so that our bodies are basically rebuilt twice over the average lifespan. No, we are not impermeable bags of mostly water. We sweat, we pee, we poop, and we bleed. So did Jesus.

That is why we kiss pictures in the Orthodox Church. Like the cloak of Jesus, we do not think the object as divine. Rather, we call them “windows” to heaven, because we encounter Jesus through material objects. A little boy at daycare who misses his mom may carry her picture in his pocket. Sometimes he might take it out to kiss it. He is not an idolater. He just loves his mother. The same is true of a widow woman, who carries on a conversation with her beloved, while gently stroking his tombstone. She is no more an idolater than a Christian who kisses or bows before an icon.

The first Sunday of Lent is a fitting start to his period of more intense fasting and prayer in the Orthodox Church. Processing with icons around the church reminds us that the path from Galilee to Golgotha is a path through matter that ultimately redeems it. So we kiss icons, and we bow before them, because, thanks to Christ, the world he entered and made a part of himself is good and holy. Thus, as St. John Damascene put it, “I do not venerate matter, I venerate the fashioner of matter, who became matter for my sake, and in matter made his abode, and through matter worked my salvation.”"

>>602448

>>602447

Not bad at all. I'll check out Jaroslav Pelikan. I've rarely been dissastified with Ortho apologetics on the internet.

There is nothing in the Bible that condones worshipping images of any kind. If a third party has to quoted to make it easier for you to rationalize this heavy sin then you ought to know it is, indeed, a heavy sin. Only because many do it doesn't make it right. Catholicism and Orthodoxy are a mixture of Christianity, Roman Paganism and Talmudic mysticism, with the least resemblance in regards to Christianity since it only shares its themes. Don't fall for it, or it will be too late. This is no different like that the charismatic movement and their speaking tongues, same kind of heresy and only work because the masses are willing to rationalize all of it.

>>602485

Like I said, I find almost everything else about Orthodoxy very appealing and intuitive. I get the idea of icons reminding us of the material existence of Christ.

I don't despise Protestantism/Baptist, but I'd like to know where was their church before Luther. I can't find real examples of proto-Protestant churches before Luther. I guess Waldensians. But between the conversion of Constantine to the 12th century, where did Christianity (as the term is used by Baptists) exist?

>>602436

Where do you live?

>>602491

Also Protty to Ortho here, veneration isn't a requirement for salvation.

>Church before protestantism

Anabaptists were so fringe they effectively didn't exist. They latched on to protestantism to assume their modern form. The faith then was divided mainly between papists and the Orthodox.

From one of Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew's books:

>In a word, icons are best understood in terms of encounter and relationships. In any case, by definition, icons are always an expression of a relational theology. Those who venerate sacred images are drawn into a relationship with the person or event that is depicted. Saint Basil clearly states that "the honor of the icon is transferred to the prototype." In order to appreciate the spiritual depth of the icon, one must first enter and participte in the living community of the Church or communion of believers. This is why icons are intimately connected to prayer and worship. The Greek word for "beauty" or "goodness" is kallos, the same word used by the Greek translation (or Septuagint version) of the Hebrew Old Testament, which describes the response of God after the creation of the world. Goodness was the divine reaction to the beauty of the world: "And God saw that the light was good (Gen. 1:4) . . . it was good (Gen 1:12, 18, 21, 25) . . . And it was so. God saw everything that he had made and, indeed, it was very good (Gen. 1:30-31)." This word kallos also contains - both etymologically and symbolically - the sense of call. Beauty is a call, beyond the here and now, to the original principle and purpose of the world.

>Therefore, the spiritual way is never disconnected from the created and material world. It includes and involves every aspect and every detail of creation, to the last speck of dust just as "to the least of our brothers and sisters" (Matt. 25:40). The presence of icons in an Orthodox church as well as in an Orthodox home underlines this conviction. And the same truth is underlined in liturgy, with the use of bread, wine, water, oil, wheat, flowers, and wood. It is not only the soul but also the body and all of created matter that are sanctified and deified. All people and all things are created and called to become "good" and "beautiful." Ultimately, the recognition of this spiritual - or iconic - dimension in everyone and everything is an essential feature of Orthodox theology and spirituality.

>Therefore, the "relative veneration and relative honor" that are attributed to creation serve to underline and can never undermine the absolute worship and glory that are reserved for the Creator. It is a matter of proper relationships, which the saints have realized and preserved through the ages for our imitation. The saints are the ones who once knew how to pray while they were living on this earth; they are now the ones who know how to intercede for the life of the world from their heavenly abode.

>>602485

Define idolatry. Be extra sure to define it in a biblical context too.

1. Idolatry is literally worshiping statues/idols as god. They would do sacrifices before it, usually in the form of blood rituals and other sorts of bad funk.

You cannot accuse the Orthodox on this point, because they do not worship an actual idol, but an icon, which is a symbol of Christ and misc. Christology.

2. Idolatry is worshiping false gods.

Well, you can't get the Orthodox here, because Jesus Christ is the true God.

So how is any of this actual, biblical idolatry? How has Our Lord condoned it for over 2,000 years? Maybe Pastor Bob muddled the issue, confusing you?

>>602522

>veneration isn't a requirement for salvation

true. but do not discredit it entirely. christians have been venerating icons since before the new testament existed in its entirety

>>602485

> Catholicism and Orthodoxy are a mixture of Christianity, Roman Paganism and Talmudic mysticism, with the least resemblance in regards to Christianity since it only shares its themes.

lol'd

what came first, the church or the bible

>>602491

>where did Christianity (as the term is used by Baptists) exist?

Usually six feet under, for all I can say. Genuine early Christians seemed to have it pretty bad and died of martyrdom. When the church became institutionalized that's where everything went down the shitter, because governmental monarchy (of Rome) was applied as well as some old traditions of the Roman culture. It's hard to say when the Talmudic mysticism came into place also, I'd guess when crypto-Jew Rodrigo Borgia became pope.

>>602530

>Define idolatry

Already did, what you're trying to defend. Why are you so obsessed with praying to dead people? Are you all out of your mind? Only heathen prayed for/with man-made images, and God's fury and vengeance was great when Israelites did the same.

>>602535

The Bible layed out the rules for the church; and the "church" you're referring to was nothing but a Roman governmental institution under the guise of Christianity.

>>602554

>Why are you so obsessed with praying to dead people?

Because it's good to do so, this being in accordance with the scriptures, regardless whether you accept it or not.

>Only heathen prayed for/with man-made images, and God's fury and vengeance was great when Israelites did the same

If praying the Rosary for the honor of Our Lady and in worship of Our Lord brings you great offense, then it must make me blessed.

You venerate (touch and kiss) to show respect and admiration for the theological truth or person being depicted. It develops humility, the more you do it the more you get used to it. The only reason you don't like it is because of the culture you have been raised in.

>>602554

>The Bible layed out the rules for the church; and the "church" you're referring to was nothing but a Roman governmental institution under the guise of Christianity.

Not what the bible says considering Acts accounts the ministry of the Church BEFORE the bible was written.

>>602870

didn't expect this from a Prot, thanks!

>>602870

>protestant flag

>defending icons

intradesting

where are you from? what church?

>>602870

Take that flag off

>Idolatry is Idol-Latria, Latria is worship for God alone as supreme creator and author. Idolatry is usurping of God's place as creator with creation, attributing to creation something that resulted from creator.

Not a single time in scripture is idolatry defined as worshipping something as God. It is sufficient simply to worship something which is not God, for it to be idolatry. Any religious reverence toward a created thing is idolatry. For example, Revelation 22:8-9

<I, John, am the one who heard and saw these things. And when I heard and saw them, I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who showed them to me, but he said to me, “You must not do that! I am a fellow servant with you and your brothers the prophets, and with those who keep the words of this book. Worship God.”

Now, I have seen it protested, that it says John fell to worship, not to venerate, and therefore it is not relevant. But this argument is false on 2 counts, firstly it begs the question, since by this standard it would be impossible for scripture to contradict the latria-dulia distinction without first acknowledging, approving and assuming it, since for it to deny that what John was doing was worship, would be for it to take the latria-dulia distinction as valid. Secondly, it is false because John at no point claims to have taken the angel as God, but simply that he fell down to worship. Are we to suppose that, first, John consciously acknowledged this creature to be God, as if a monotheistic Jew would do that, and then second, the angel read his mind to know he was doing that, and for this reason alone told him to worship God alone?

And regarding worship shown through images, we have the example of the golden calf

<And he received the gold from their hand and fashioned it with a graving tool and made a golden calf. And they said, “These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt!” When Aaron saw this, he built an altar before it. And Aaron made a proclamation and said, “Tomorrow shall be a feast to the Lord.” And they rose up early the next day and offered burnt offerings and brought peace offerings. And the people sat down to eat and drink and rose up to play.

It is improperly translated "these are your gods", because the context reveals it to be a singular calf. Therefore they said "This is your God". Surely the Israelites were not so stupid or mad to think this thing they had just created was actually the God who had beforehand brought them out of Egypt. By this image they made of God (already a blasphemous and superstitious thing to do) they intended to offer worship to the true God. They did not believe the image itself was God, but a tool by which to worship God. And yet God calls it idolatry to offer worship to the true object through the false mode of an image, that in this act they worshipped the image, though they thought to worship only God through the image. So when one worships Mary through her image, they worship both Mary and her image.

It is inherently derogatory of God to glorify a creation. One cannot glorify God that way, in fact, they can only degrade His glory by giving it to a creature, see Isaiah 42:8

<I am the LORD; that is my name; my glory I give to no other, nor my praise to carved idols.

>>602906

>iconoclasm is a Gnostic influence

The reverse is true

<Others of them employ outward marks, branding their disciples inside the lobe of the right ear. From among these also arose Marcellina, who came to Rome under [the episcopate of] Anicetus, and, holding these doctrines, she led multitudes astray. They style themselves Gnostics. They also possess images, some of them painted, and others formed from different kinds of material; while they maintain that a likeness of Christ was made by Pilate at that time when Jesus lived among them. They crown these images, and set them up along with the images of the philosophers of the world that is to say, with the images of Pythagoras, and Plato, and Aristotle, and the rest. They have also other modes of honoring these images, after the same manner of the Gentiles.

-Irenaeus, AH I:25:8

>>602941

Main argument of Irenaeus against Gnosticism is apostolic succession. Here he shows that gnostic who have no such thing, try to persuade people by claiming that image made by Pilate gives them legitmacy.

He also shows that they do not belive in incarnation, placeing Christ merly among other men of wisdom.

Better luck next time.

>>602436

If I understand correctly, you are not calling icons into question, but asking what comes of venerating them. Is that right?

If so, I'll just explain it from my own perspective. Many, if not most, cultures have persons greeting one another by physically embracing them and kissing them on the face. I can affirm it's the case in persian culture; kiss on the left cheek, then the right, then the left again. A polish parishioner told me it's the same for them.

So venerating the icon is greeting the person depicted, acknowledging them and showing love toward them.

>>602949

Do you deny the clear claim that Marcellina's Gnostics possessed and venerated images, some of the Christ?

>>602959

I don't deny them. I just explain it. They claimed to have image of Christ made by Pilate. They claimed to have legitimacy because of it. They claimed that Christ was on Pythagoras etc. level, not as a God.

>>602959

Should we also not eat food because Gnostics ate food?

>>602962

Great, so is iconoclasm a Gnostic influence? When the Gnostics venerated icons?

>>602963

>mormons eat food, anon, so it's okay to be polygamous

>>602882

typical cancerous americanized non-dom reformed background. looking for a church atm

>>602884

>Take that flag off

No, I'm as of now I'm still Protestant and so are Anglo-Catholics.

>Not a single time in scripture is idolatry defined as worshipping something as God.

I didn't say worshipped as God I said "attributing to creation something that resulted from creator." Attributing to creation that which is only attributable to the creator. Such as attributing rains to the appeasement of a statue of Ba'al when the reality is God had ordained from long ago that it would rain at that moment. Idolatry is a usurpation of God's rightful due. It is entirely different from praising worthiness(worship btw). The created/creator distinction I used is just to illustrate the distinction between what's due to God is set apart from other praise that is merited. Likewise, proper adoration and love for God is set apart from any other relation in a completely separate category; loving God incomparably more than even family, that is latria compared to dulia.

>Revelation 22:8-9

>“You must not do that! I am a fellow servant with you and your brothers the prophets, and with those who keep the words of this book. Worship God.”

> “I, Jesus, have sent my angel to testify to you about these things for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star.”

Relationally different from dulia, it seems like he mistook the angel to be God, that is The Angel of the Lord rather than an actual angel sent by Christ.

>Golden Calf

>and yet God calls it idolatry to offer worship to the true object through the false mode of an image, that in this act they worshipped the image, though they thought to worship only God through the image.

No, they depicted a false incorrect form of God in their impatience which previously he explicitly forbade them from doing; and because he had no revealed form they knew it was erroneous but did it anyway. They knew God was present with Moses and that they were to wait for Moses to return; but instead of obediently waiting as commanded they purposefully redefined God into the false god of the idol. They were acting with disobedience and insolence like through most of Exodus.

>So when one worships Mary through her image, they worship both Mary and her image.

This is retarded and erroneous. Your entire post is theological newspeak hinging on the recent redefinition of the word "worship" and not properly contextualized passages in order to conflate scriptural truth which agrees with orthodoxy.

>It is inherently derogatory of God to glorify a creation.

wew lad but God glorifies us with his image and grace

>One cannot glorify God that way, in fact, they can only degrade His glory by giving it to a creature

You don't give God's glory to creation, creation possesses its own merit as created by God that can be praised in its own right.

>I am the Lord; that is my name; my glory I give to no other, nor my praise to carved idols.

>my glory I give to no other

<don't usurp my glory

>nor my praise to carved idols.

<do not attribute my dues to something else

Dulia does not usurp God's due.

Iconoclasm destroys the intimate relationship between the Communion of the Saints and God

>>602969

>Great, so is iconoclasm a Gnostic influence? When the Gnostics venerated icons?

<There is only one kind of Gnostics

Gnostics denied ethier incarnation itself or some of its consequences. One of those is that "image of invisible God" was made flesh sop that however saw him in body "saw the Father".

>>602949

>He also shows that they do not belive in incarnation, placeing Christ merly among other men of wisdom.

This part of your post is just incoherent. How would placing Christ among men who existed physically show you believe He didn't exist physically?

>>602992

>No, I'm as of now I'm still Protestant and so are Anglo-Catholics.

One is not Protestant who opposes the Protestant reformers on issues which were central to their Reformation and on which they were unanimous.

>Attributing to creation that which is only attributable to the creator. Such as attributing rains to the appeasement of a statue of Ba'al when the reality is God had ordained from long ago that it would rain at that moment

So idolatry is intellectual, and is not an action?

>It is entirely different from praising worthiness

The scriptural definition is worship of any created thing. This is a sin.

>Likewise, proper adoration and love for God is set apart from any other relation in a completely separate category; loving God incomparably more than even family, that is latria compared to dulia.

http://www.catholic.org/prayers/prayer.php?p=122

Latria or dulia?

>Relationally different from dulia, it seems like he mistook the angel to be God, that is The Angel of the Lord rather than an actual angel sent by Christ.

This is eisegesis. There is no indication that John thought it was God, but it he had to have for the latria-dulia distinction to survive. Furthermore, this is impossible. The angel did not deceptively take on Christ's form, and as God Christ has no form, so John could not have mistaken this angel whom he had never seen before for his Lord, whom he had walked with. Additionally, this ad hoc excuse ignores a previous incident in Revelation 19:10

<Then I fell down at his feet to worship him, but he said to me, “You must not do that! I am a fellow servant with you and your brothers who hold to the testimony of Jesus. Worship God.” For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

But most importantly, this explanation leaves out a point I already made. How did this angel know what John was thinking?

>but instead of obediently waiting as commanded they purposefully redefined God into the false god of the idol

They did not stop worshipping God just because Moses was gone. As I already pointed out, they knew full well this object was not the true God. The intent was to make a similitude through which to worship Him, not replace Him with a statue.

>This is retarded and erroneous

And this is not an argument

>You don't give God's glory to creation

Which glory is not rightfully God's?

>creation possesses its own merit as created by God that can be praised in its own right

Nothing but God is worthy of religious praise. See Galatians 4:8

<Formerly, when you did not know God, you were enslaved to those that by nature are not gods.

Not just "are not gods by nature", but "by nature are not gods". Now, why is God worthy of worship? Because He is God. So that which is by nature not God, is by nature unworthy of worship. Hence, all creation is by nature unworthy of religious praise, and one cannot give it such praise without sin.

><don't usurp my glory

Precisely, to glorify a creature is to usurp God's glory, I'm glad you agree.

><do not attribute my dues to something else

Sorry, you're confused. The word isn't dues, it's praise. Now, how did you define worship again?

<praising worthiness

>Iconoclasm destroys the intimate relationship between the Communion of the Saints and God

What iconoclasm destroys is a pagan, superstitious and idolatrous practice that is an affront to God and His word.

>>602955

Yeah, you're pretty close. Mostly I think I would be "LARPing" by venerating the icons. I don't know if I could convert feeling like that, or I should do it and hope I get over that.

>>603126

Often, belief follows action. I understand it'd be weird for people who come from non-kiss-greeting cultures. I think if you did it every Sunday, eventually you'd be comfortable with it.

>>603127

Thanks. So there's no problem with feeling kind of LARPy at the beginning? I still hesitate a bit in choosing my church. I'm afraid of changing my mind at a later date but I'd really like to get on with it.

>>603017

>This part of your post is just incoherent. How would placing Christ among men who existed physically show you believe He didn't exist physically?

Incarnation is not "being in flesh" for that would mean that all human beings were incarnation. Incarnation means "becoming flesh".

Gnostics believed that Christ existed. But they believed that he was just another Plato. Or worse, that Plato was Christ before Christ.

Also, since you attack Salve Regina, it is Dulia i.e. we honor her who was honored by angels and we pray to her so she can pray that we make it to the end.

>>603017

>They did not stop worshipping God just because Moses was gone. As I already pointed out, they knew full well this object was not the true God. The intent was to make a similitude through which to worship Him, not replace Him with a statue.

Right, which they were explicitly told not to as they didn't have a revealed form with which to depict him. How is blasphemously depicting the true God in a false form due to no revealed form even comparable to the true depictions of revealed forms which even God himself has commissioned like on the Ark? It's not, if you accept distinctly different things as the same thing you are deluded. Your argument is false if the icon-equivalence with the golden calf if were assumed to be true regardless of the fact that the golden calf was the form of a pagan god and was literal idol worship which you assert it wasn't. It WAS syncretic idol worship but even if it were just an icon it would have been a false depiction, thus blasphemous for redefining God himself, which could no longer be the True unchanging God.

>And this is not an argument

You have no argument, your assertions hinge on conflating distinctly different qualities and misrepresenting the relational aspects which they determine, and hinging it on the re-definition of "worship". You're incapable of discussion because you refuse concise categorization of the discussed distinctions. Reminds me of po-mo trash like deconstructionism.

>Which glory is not rightfully God's?

Honoring the merit of explicit qualities possessed by a creature as created by God, does not rob God of his place above that honor.

>Sorry, you're confused. The word isn't dues, it's praise. Now, how did you define worship again?

You don't read too well. I emphasized that passage specifies twice to not give the glory and praise that is due to him to something else. That would be latria which is demonstrably categorically entirely separate from dulia. Worship is honoring that which is worthy, God is worthy in incomparable ways to the worthiness of created merits which honor God as creator. It is idolatry to honor worthiness that can only be attributed to God, to a creation, it is usurping his rightful due.

>>602436

>I really love X, but I can't do Y

>Will X change to suit my non-Y needs?

If you have to ask, the answer is always "No."

>>603130

Keep praying. God will lead you.

it's funny how protestants don't understand catholic/orthodox arguments, but catholic/orthodox posters usually understand the protestant argument

>>602448

amazing explanation. you have truly blown my mind. may god's peace be upon you!!!

>>602528

this is extremely woke (and also very Platonic)

>>602554

Saints aren't dead. People who have "died" on earth and are in the presence of God are alive. They are truly alive in a way that is far beyond life on this earth. You are falsely equating life in the flesh with life in the spirit, which is exactly what the Pharisees did. The saints are truly alive, because they did not die to sin.

I know you're not gonna listen to this, though. Protestants never listen to this.

>>604506

And up is down

>>604511

>I know you're not gonna listen to this, though. Protestants never listen to this.

diddums for you

All you've done is made a statement and appealed to "I'm right because I'm saying I'm right"

#notAnArgument

Why would we be convinced by your appeal to self-enlightenment?

>>604647

I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. I and the Father are one.

John 10:28-30 | NIV |

For those who find me find life

and receive favor from the Lord.

Proverbs 8:35 | NIV |

And the God of all grace, who called you to his eternal glory in Christ, after you have suffered a little while, will himself restore you and make you strong, firm and steadfast.

1 Peter 5:10 | NIV |

The world and its desires pass away, but whoever does the will of God lives forever.

1 John 2:17 | NIV |

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

John 3:16 | NIV |

So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen, since what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal.

2 Corinthians 4:18 | NIV |

For our light and momentary troubles are achieving for us an eternal glory that far outweighs them all.

2 Corinthians 4:17 | NIV |

I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life.

1 John 5:13 | NIV |

Search me, God, and know my heart;

test me and know my anxious thoughts.

See if there is any offensive way in me,

and lead me in the way everlasting.

Psalm 139:23-24 | NIV |

For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Romans 6:23 | NIV |

Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on them.

John 3:36 | NIV |

Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.

Matthew 7:13-14 | NIV |

Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.

John 17:3 | NIV |

Fight the good fight of the faith. Take hold of the eternal life to which you were called when you made your good confession in the presence of many witnesses.

1 Timothy 6:12 | NIV |

And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Look! God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. ‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.”

Revelation 21:3-4 | NIV |

“But whoever drinks the water I give them will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give them will become in them a spring of water welling up to eternal life.”

John 4:14 | NIV |

>>604647

>>606264

I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us.

Romans 8:18 | NIV |

“I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty.”

Revelation 1:8 | NIV |

Whoever finds their life will lose it, and whoever loses their life for my sake will find it.

Matthew 10:39 | NIV |

But for that very reason I was shown mercy so that in me, the worst of sinners, Christ Jesus might display his immense patience as an example for those who would believe in him and receive eternal life.

1 Timothy 1:16 | NIV |

For the Lord loves the just

and will not forsake his faithful ones.

Wrongdoers will be completely destroyed;

the offspring of the wicked will perish.

Psalm 37:28 | NIV |

Whoever sows to please their flesh, from the flesh will reap destruction; whoever sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.

Galatians 6:8 | NIV |

Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you. For on him God the Father has placed his seal of approval.

John 6:27 | NIV |

Therefore he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them.

Hebrews 7:25 | NIV |

So that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign Lord. Repent and live!

Ezekiel 18:32 | NIV |

Whoever keeps commandments keeps their life,

but whoever shows contempt for their ways will die.

Proverbs 19:16 | NIV |

And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.

1 John 5:11 | NIV |

Here is a trustworthy saying:

If we died with him,

we will also live with him.

2 Timothy 2:11 | NIV |

I will exalt you, my God the King;

I will praise your name for ever and ever.

Psalm 145:1 | NIV |

However, do not rejoice that the spirits submit to you, but rejoice that your names are written in heaven.

Luke 10:20 | NIV |

‘Never again will they hunger;

never again will they thirst.

The sun will not beat down on them,’

nor any scorching heat.

For the Lamb at the center of the throne

will be their shepherd;

‘he will lead them to springs of living water.’

‘And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes.’

Revelation 7:16-17 | NIV |

Everyone who competes in the games goes into strict training. They do it to get a crown that will not last, but we do it to get a crown that will last forever.

1 Corinthians 9:25 | NIV |

We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true by being in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.

1 John 5:20 | NIV |

And, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him.

Hebrews 5:9 | NIV |

“Truly I tell you,” Jesus replied, “no one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for me and the gospel will fail to receive a hundred times as much in this present age: homes, brothers, sisters, mothers, children and fields—along with persecutions—and in the age to come eternal life.”

Mark 10:29-30 | NIV |

But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the benefit you reap leads to holiness, and the result is eternal life.

Romans 6:22 | NIV |

But you, dear friends, by building yourselves up in your most holy faith and praying in the Holy Spirit, keep yourselves in God’s love as you wait for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to bring you to eternal life.

Jude 1:20-21 | NIV |

so do the saints die or nah

>>602436

> I understand the arguments for why it's not idol worship but I don't see for myself a purpose in venerating them (touching, kissing). Can I get around this somehow?

just dont do it

>>602436

Hmm, showing respect to a physical object that is a symbol representing something holy.

Would any protestant you know be willing to take a shit and then wipe his ass with pages from his bible? I mean, it's just a lousy fucking book made of paper, it's purely physical, it's not worthy of any respect being paid to it for itself. You can get another one; you can get a KJV version out of copyright for $1 at Dollar General.

If you can't imagine a protestant doing something like this to their bible, then you're starting to understand that everyone who has any religious sense in their body has something that they view as an icon, a symbol, which represents something "holy," or "set aside to the Lord." As such, they view such objects with respect. The object is a reminder, and the act of treating it with respect, especially during an act of worship, is commonplace, even with prots. They'll typically have their Bible in a special place in the house, and will treat it with respect when reading it, as opposed to casually thumbing through it while eating cereal at the breakfast table as if it were a newspaper.

I'll also add that the idea that material objects can have spiritual meaning and power is, itself, Biblical. Elijah's mantle, for example, in the hands of Elisha, could part the waters of the Jordan.

>>607547

i used to go to a prot bible study and the dude threw a bible around and stepped on it to prove some point

>>607671

Just a thought. Try going back to the prot bible study. Walk up to the big wooden cross they probably have mounted on the wall, cross yourself, and venerate it.

Do you wonder, like I do, whether the pastorbro will smear poop on the cross to 'prove a point'?

>>607723

dude made fun of me for having an icon braclet of jesus bc "he wasn't that color" lol what do you mean