Icon Veneration is CLEARLY an Accretion!

[@TruthUnites]

There is one thing about this video I take very seriously, and that is the thumbnail. Question my scholarship all you want, but you cannot deny that my thumbnail carries scholarly gravitas. ALSO: I respond to some criticism here: kzbin.infoUgkx1VMlzlE9wnLYdZpeuifApMjlrJmEVUsZ

[@TheAndreas1008]

This thumbnail is as close to a non-Scriptural infallible rule of faith we Protestants can muster up!

[@BeTheIron]

Here here. Seeing the thumbnail made me quiet myself and steel my nerves before clicking the video, seeing how deeply weighty the matter would be. (In all reality though, so excited to see your scholarly work! Watching right now!)

[@Chuck_McDon]

The thumbnail makes you look shockingly like William Lane Craig lol

[@psalm1readers]

You missed your calling in comedy! 😂

[@Presbapterian]

Are we allowed to venerate this thumbnail? 🤔🤣 Great work, Dr. Ortlund!

[@mitromney]

As a Catholic considering Protestantism for several years now, this video was very important for me. Thank you Gavin. I've been doing my best building a defensive case for my Catholic beliefs, but more and more I feel like some of Catholic doctrines are impossible to properly defend, it boils down to appeal to authority of Pope in so many issues... Veneration of images was ALWAYS a hard pill to swallow for me too. I remember being on a Retreat Mass where all participants were asked to venerate an Icon of Mary. Not even Mary herself, but very specifically, her icon, and the prayer that followed was also, very specifically, addressing and asking THE HOLY ICON to answer the prayers. I can not describe how haunting and disturbing was this event for me. I wasn't educated enough to know why what was going on was wrong, but I knew it, I felt it in my heart, in my very soul. I was watching lots of both Catholic and Protestant Apologists on this and other topics that were concerning to me for years, and your channel has been, hands down, the best content for this purpose I've ever seen. Please keep answering these hard questions Gavin. You have no idea how hard it is for us Catholics to find a way out, even if we feel in our gut that we should. These videos are very helpful.

[@theknight8524]

I converted years ago😊 May the Holy Spirit guide you!!

[@mitromney]

@@theknight8524 from what to what? Also, how did your family react?

[@Real_LiamOBryan]

I very nearly decided to become Catholic not long ago. I'm massively drawn towards the emphasis on tradition, high-church liturgy, and having a simple way to settle disputes of doctrine. What stopped me was that I couldn't get the idea out of my head, feelings, conscience, whatever one wants to call it, that Christ almost certainly would not want people anathematized and, so, removed from the Church for merely being unable to believe in, say, Mary's perpetual virginity, her assumption, or even her being immaculately conceived. There were a few other issues, but this, I think, was the biggest. How can it be Christ's Church, His body, if man can remove members from it erroneously, especially if such tradition is as authoritative as scripture?

[@mitromney]

@@Real_LiamOBryan have you ever considered other high church contexts with a structure of authority for setting disputes, but more inclusive and open? Like Anglicans or high Methodist or others? As a Catholic, by far the most powerful asset of protestantism is the freedom of choice. Catholics have no say about anything as far as their fate is concerned. We have to do and believe everything the magisterium teaches. I'm technically not even Catholic anymore for even having the doubts that I have. It's strict to the point of absurdity. It's not the "freedom in Christ" that Jesus promised us for sure.

[@Real_LiamOBryan]

@@mitromney Yes, I have. My doctrinal beliefs align very closely with conservative sorts of Methodism, and even fairly closely with conservative sorts of Anglicanism. I'm definitely not Lutheran in my beliefs. Still, being relatively close to Catholicism on some doctrines I don't feel 100% Protestant, and definitely not 100% Catholic. I believe that prayer to the saints is acceptable, that the Bishop of Rome should have a primacy of honor, that Sola Scriptura is either false or incomplete, that the dulia/latria distinction is true and useful and, therefore, that worshipping others (such as saints) is acceptable, that there is great importance--necessity even--in unity, that tradition is really important, etc. This is mostly academic for me, unless I choose Catholicism (which seems unlikely to me) or Methodism, because I only have two churches within reasonable travel distance from me, Catholic and low-church Wesleyan (which is a type of Methodist). By the way, what are your thoughts on whether Jesus would want disbelievers in Marian dogmas removed from the Church? I suppose another large issue I had is that it seems that the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, which is formal dogma (as far as I know), seems--in part--to directly contradict the writings of Ignatius, not have biblical support (which isn't massively important to me), be influenced by Greek philosophy, and ontologically subordinates The Son to The Father by removing His aseity, making His existence ab alio instead. It says that Christ is eternally (πρὸ πάντων τῶν αἰώνων/before all of the ages) begotten, but Ignatius says that The Son is begotten in the flesh and, explicitly, unbegotten in the spirit (Ephesians 7:2). Those are my two biggest issues. I would love to hear your thoughts on them, if you have any you would like to share.

[@Berkana]

Thank you for putting this together. May I request one thing? Could you put this into the format of an article with full quotes of these church fathers and citations? An hour-long video is a big ask for those I want to show this to, but this video is one of the best resources on this topic I've come across. Please turn this into an article. This need to be seen far and wide. I myself am a former Catholic, and I am deeply concerned that there seems to be a trend of Protestants who have been converted to Orthodoxy or to Catholicism. Catholics and Orthodox are far better at attacking iconoclasm/aniconism than Protestants are at defending it.

[@TruthUnites]

This will be a chapter in my forthcoming book, What It Means to be Protestant

[@choppy1356]

@@TruthUnites Great video. When will your book be available for purchase?

[@TruthUnites]

@@choppy1356 summer 2024

[@anthonynoronha8442]

@@TruthUnites Excellent video, great content with historic references, looking forward to your forthcoming book on this subhect. I am a exRoman catholic, now Born Again Christian, though family is still RC, praying for them to move away from this idolatry and legalism of RC. God bless you for imparting the truth. From: Mumbai, India.

[@dompedulla4957]

Yes Berkana totally agree. That would be a great help to Catholics like me who would wish to point out some things the good pastor may wish to change. Thanks. Thanks for the suggestion!

[@shelbyhurd]

This was beautiful. I believe your intellect is a gift from God. Thank you for all of your work. I will be looking into purchasing copies of your works. May God bless your soul, my brother in Christ. 🩷

[@JD-sj1zn]

@@shelbyhurd Peace. The intellect is indeed a gift. But Ortlund's work here and elsewhere is opposed to the consistent teaching of the Church. Please look into purchasing the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Then you will get an unbiased understanding of what the Church teaches as well as the reasons why, cross referenced with sources dating back to the infancy of the Church. Blessings.

[@JohnWuMastermind]

The first Icon painter of Mary and Jesus according to Holy tradition was Luke the evangelist who was a painter so what we orthodox do is 1st century church custom traditional and historic.. Also in ancient Christan 1st century catacombs the same evidence is there to be found..

[@charlesqbanks]

Just because a gospel writer drew a picture, does that mean we kiss and bow down to it? Scripture says "to Christ ALONE every knee shall bow and every tongue confess." Nowhere in the early 1st or 2nd centuries is there any evidence that anyone "venerated" these images, or viewed them as equal to the person or places they represent. Indeed, the followers of Christ stopped people from doing such things to themselves or to images. Heck, even angels refuse anyone bowing to them in the Bible.

[@JohnWuMastermind]

@charlesqbanks We don't worship the icons we show respect for the person it represents since it's a member of our spiritual family in heaven. Same way your grandma or a member of your fam is far away and you might kiss their picture cause u love them and miss them. Nothing more than that. We love them and respect them

[@ramichahin2]

Easily one of the best Protestant video on youtube

[@johnnyd2383]

Yet.. .it does not make Protestantism right. It serves purpose of deceiving people into Protestant heresies.

[@asafhrodriguesovidioasafh9827]

​@@johnnyd2383kkkkk kkkk the truth hurts

[@ramichahin2]

@@johnnyd2383 image veneration isn’t The Truth bro. It’s paganism.

[@johnnyd2383]

@@ramichahin2 (Col 1,15) "HE IS THE IMAGE of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation." So.. you must be runaway from the movie titled "Dumb & Dumber".

[@janpedersen4785]

@@johnnyd2383 What does that prove? All it is how Christ is the image of God. This is not the same as icon veneration as defined in Nicea II. Make a better case

[@noobitronius]

Praying for you, Gavin. This has caused quite a stir and dealing with accusations, mischaracterizations, disingenuous interpretations, and lies thrown at you is hard. Especially when in online communities like KZbin, it feels like you are outnumbered and outnumbered = you must be wrong. Be encouraged that you are doing good work, and the hasty responses that have been made to you completely mischaracterize your views and dodge the points made. Most importantly, I'm praying that you are graciously given the strength to fight off the attacks of Satan which tempt you to anger, defensiveness, and pride - may God get the glory!

[@TruthUnites]

what a wonderful prayer, thanks. Keep praying, it means a lot!

[@mangispangi]

As an orthodox who has had a big issue with kissing icons and praying to saints from childhood, I thank God for you and your videos. Look at their fruits. Look into how the priests actually conduct themselves in the orthodox countries. Look at their fruits. No one loves money more than an orthodox priest and his wife.

[@shema9172]

@@mangispangi Is like that in Orthodox countries ? Are you still orthodox ?

[@mamafortuin]

@@mangispangi there are greedy people among all sects of christianity. That’s not an argument against veneration of icons.

[@enshala6401]

@Truth Unites ah man, my husband and I had high hopes for you as a rational Protestant. Do you venerate the Bible? If so, then you are worshipping the Bible, which, by your logic, makes an idol out of it. The Word (i.e. Jesus) has existed infinitely longer than the Bible (John 1). The Bible is a gift from God, not God Himself. Similar to demonizing kissing the Bible, your demonizing kissing icons is tantamount to demonizing other gifts from God based on YOUR imperfect wisdom. It's a form of Manichaeism - a terrible heresy that causes grief among the faithful because it misrepresents who God is to His loved ones. By you proclaiming good things as bad, you make yourself into a god, and THAT is what causes you to be an anathma. Regards, Dr. Enshala

[@Sola_Scriptura_1.618]

The RCC not following the 2nd commandment made me question the Roman Catholic Church. My relationship with God has become stronger and clear since I have turned to following God's word!

[@AL_YZ]

You demand that the RCC observe the second commandment: "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above." (Actually, no one observes that. You interpret it loosely based on your own authority and even Gavin does not prohibit images as such but rather with veneration of images. Now, Muslims. THEY are really observant of that prohibition.) Yet if you are like the vast majority of protestants, you do not observe the 4th, the Sabbath. The 4th Commandment: "Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy" That is supposed to be forever hence the Jews to this day. In fact, the observance of the Sabbath is even more foundational to Judaism. Jesus Christ observed the Sabbath. You know who made the day of worship the first day of the week (Sunday) instead of the Sabbath? The Church. If the Church did not have the authority to basically cross out the 4th commandment, then you are in deep trouble. Because you know that to not observe one part is to fail to observe the entirety of the law. “For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all." (James 2:10-11) What make you of Christian Freedom which frees Christians from the strictures of the Law? You and Gavin are Judaizing.- requiring observance of a Jewish prohibition.

[@heather602]

Amen!!! Me too

[@AL_YZ]

@@heather602 Do you observe the 3rd/4th commandment? The 4th Commandment: "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy." Not Sunday. The Sabbath.

[@heather602]

@@AL_YZ I follow Jesus

[@JD-sj1zn]

Peace. How exactly does the "Church" not follow the Second(First) commandment? And the implication that you did not have God's Word or that you couldn't follow it while IN the Church makes one question in what "church" you were. And as an aside, Sola Scriptura is not taught in the Bible, (and no, not even in 2Tim). But, if you are interested in learning the answers to the questions that were not answered for you, I am here. Blessings.

[@nathanielchristian7027]

As a Protestant enquiring into Orthodoxy, the dogma surrounding icon veneration arising from the Seventh Ecumenical Council has been a significant barrier to entry. I've actually grown to admire the practice of icon veneration, and see how it could add value to a Christian's life. But I can't see myself agreeing that it is a necessity for sanctification/theosis, or that any Christian failing to venerate icons is anathema to the Church. I was initially drawn to EO because I thought it preserved the liturgy and worship that Christ taught the apostles, but I have found the arguments for 1st century icon veneration to be severely lacking. Thanks for all you do, looking forward to watching this!

[@TruthUnites]

Thank for sharing, hope the video is useful!

[@1Immanuel8]

Think hard and very carefully before you make that leap. My son and cycled through the EO church. I was excommunicated shortly after my baptism, and drove 16 hours one way to see the bishop about it. He wasn't overly concerned,. So I got my critical thinking cap back on, and soon saw EO for what it is- a remnant of the church of Constantine. Once you ask the right questions, and look for biblical answers, you will see that the EO church is a false church. Here is a simple question. How are local churches governed in the NT. By a separate priestly caste? Or by elders/ pastors? That we are adopted sons and daughters of God under the new covenant is key to understanding the differences. I have attempted to communicate with my former priests since I returned to Protestantism (I am Baptist) and have received only one response: they will only talk with me once I return to the EO church, and not otherwise. They have been good for their word. So much for the love of Christ, eh?

[@nathanielchristian7027]

@@1Immanuel8 I don't think that it's a false church - the question for me is whether it alone is the "One True Church". Out of curiosity - why were you excommunicated shortly after your baptism?

[@adrummingdog2782]

@@nathanielchristian7027 I inquired into Orthodoxy for a year. The main question is if you believe it is the only One True Church, like you said. I could never believe that. I've seen the fruit of the spirit in many other churches, and claims your church is the only one is always based on very shaky epistemology at best. Just reeks of institutional propaganda to me. I'm now very happily Anglican, we take the most reasonable answer to that question.

[@truthisbeautiful7492]

You should study the history of liturgy and look at the scholarly works on Reformed worship. Then you won't be fooled by EO claims.

[@bethsaari6209]

I see Protestantism as a pursuit of the truth not a pursuit of one’s own private judgment. Protestants DO acquiesce to something: The leading of the Holy Spirit as found in the Word of God. (John 17:17)

[@comicsans1689]

Protestantism, the pursuit of truth that leads to 40,000 different conclusions...

[@Tornadospeed10]

Yes except that’s nonsense and just another way of saying “my opinion.” Ever noticed every single branch of Protestantism claims they have the holy spiritual leading them to truth but all claim different things? It’s because that’s a nonsensical claim people use to act like whatever they personally believe the text says, based on their opinion was from the Holy Spirit and therefore right

[@SP-td9xj]

With all due respect, how can that statement coexist with so many divisions, and not just on "the small things" There are major divides on eternal security, baptism, whether Catholics are Christians, etc.

[@culpepper7665]

Hard to explain the Spirit leading into thousands of denominations. Seraphim Hamilton has 4 or 5 videos, each about an hour long directly addressing this video. I recommend watching those for a DEEP dive into why Ortlund is mistaken.

[@TruthHasSpoken]

"I see Protestantism as a pursuit of the truth not a pursuit of one’s own private judgment. " Protestant is built with Sola Scriptura as its foundation, who's 16th centuries fruit was, is, and shall ever be, doctrinal chaos, confusion and division. The pursuit of truth completely elusive as it's foundation by definition is one's private, fallible and unauthoritative interpretation of scripture. Yet Christ himself made numerous promises regarding the Truth: Christ is the head of his Church (Col 1: 18) Christ''s Church is the pillar of truth (1 Tim 3: 15) Christ's Church is the bulwark of truth. (1 Tim 3: 15) Christ's Church is where the manifold wisdom of God is made known. (Eph 3: 10) *Christ PROMISED to lead it to ALL Truth.* (Jn 16: 13) Christ PROMISED that he would NEVER leave it. (Mt 28: 20) Christ PROMISED that the gates of hell would not prevail (it will not teach doctrinal error) ; (Mt 16: 18) Why not trust Christ?

[@kaseyod113]

How is this free?! So well done. I am very impressed. Thank you for laying it all out for us. Blessings, brother.

[@PatronSaintSpyridon]

The canon he quotes are from catholic post schism and not Orthodox. He’s giving a bias perspective not even from the original council. Ask yourself how many countries were invaded by Protestants and Catholics and how many cultures were decimated then ask yourself how many times the Orthodox committed such acts. You will know them by their fruits.

[@JD-sj1zn]

@@PatronSaintSpyridon Peace. Your history is a bit skewed to say the least. The Orthodox were part of the Crusades, and were responsible for the Massacre of the Latins prior to the Sack of Constantinople. The Orthodox also murdered the wife of Manuel I Komnenos, their own empress. Please... AND the Canon was set at the Council of Hippo in 393. That same canon the Catholic Church uses today. It is the Orthodox who are in schism since they are NOT in union with Peter (see Mt 16:16), and establish their own Apostolic missions and juristictions apart from Peter. I pray that one day we can be one, as Christ is One.

[@dankmartin6510]

@@JD-sj1zn The Orthodox, as Pope John Paul II stated clearly, have most dutifully kept to the authentic traditions of the Apostles - we have never been in Schism as your excommunication in 1054 was invalid, but since then your See has clearly walked away from the rest of the Church and has caused so much trouble with innovation that Protestantism is squarely your responsibility. Do not throw stones in your own glass house.

[@JD-sj1zn]

@@dankmartin6510 ?.

[@JD-sj1zn]

@@dankmartin6510 Not being in union with Peter is schism. Setting up Apostolic missions and jurisdictions apart from Peter is schism. Teaching a doctrine apart from 1000 yrs of Tradition with regard to the Keys is schismatic- the very definition of schism. Study your revered Saints who all were in union with Peter BEFORE you throw your stones, sir.

[@JohnLittle1993]

This is surely one of the most intellectually challenging videos I’ve ever seen. Committed Catholic here, and that commitment’s still standing, but Boy, we’ve got some ‘splainin’ to do.

[@JD-sj1zn]

@johnlittle1993 Peace. All explaining has been done. I refer you to Nicea II for an explanation on icons. Also- veneration does not equal worship. As the Church, we venerate the Cross of Christ. In essence, it is simply wood, with no real worldly value. However, it was what happened on that cross that makes all the difference. Similarly, the author of this post would not trample upon his Bible or burn it, not because it has great value in and of itself (it's paper and ink and maybe a hard cover), but because of what it represents. The icon of the so-called "Dark Virgin" is again made of simple materials. But it is believed to have been painted by the Disciple and Evangelist, Luke. Icons are a window as such, into the life of Christendom. THAT is why they are venerated. Through those windows, the Faithful come to know our Lord in a profound way. Stay the course. Blessings.

[@JohnLittle1993]

Hey, Bro. Thanks for writing. I actually did read Nicea II. And I actually did read the Canon where those who do not venerate icons are judged with an anathema. So, at least as far as the plain meaning of those canons is concerned, icon veneration is not optional for Catholics apparently; the legislation makes it mandatory. That process of development is a hard maneuver in my opinion, and I appreciate the resistance, even though I don’t per se judge the use of icons negatively. But maybe you can give me a pointer, because I can’t find it easily myself: since Gavin here says that Nicea II was not ratified by Rome at the time its decrees were promulgated, can you perhaps help me find the later act where it received papal confirmation? I’m interested to see if the confirmation was plenary or partial. Thanks!

[@JD-sj1zn]

@@JohnLittle1993 Peace, brother. Thank you for the comment, and you are most welcome. Remember that icon veneration is a respect and recognition of what the icon represents, which are truths of the Faith. That is the reason for the veneration. That same respect has been applied to stained glass windows and statues (and Church buildings for that matter) that depict stories of Salvation History. The idea is that just as we venerate the written Word that tells the story of Salvation History, we also venerate that SAME Holy Story depicted in Sacred Art. There really isn't a difficult concept to grasp here, as some would make it to be. In the end it comes down to believing and respecting (venerating) Salvation History as it is taught in images and Word. I will have to look into the acceptance of the Universal Church with regard to the canons. I would say that because Nicea II has not been refuted by the Church as other official gatherings of bishops (the Robber Synod comes to mind), there is at least an implicit acceptance of the Council if, in fact, there isn't an official recognition. There is more to the story for sure. Blessings.

[@IntimidatingSnail]

​@@JD-sj1znHi. When you say "all explaining has been done", do you mean that all of the guy in the video's points have been debunked? If so, where can I find all of the debunks?

[@guns4786]

@@IntimidatingSnailTrent horn has debunked this a couple of times

[@sheldonhelsley447]

Thanks!

[@nazarenehebrewassembly8325]

I am pro-orthodox but this brother is dropping bombs in this video, I am very taken back by this information. I am protestant but have been swaying more and more towards Orthodoxy over the years but I can't deny that this video is very powerful in regards to the use of icons. I do not see how this can be refuted by anyone, it is very well sourced.

[@brambes1804]

There is still a problem that even if you don’t have physical images, you always have mental images. I think the problem isn’t as simple as looking at the history seeing some things you don’t like, interpreting some texts in a very particular way and concluding it was wrong. I also think it is quite idealistic to believe art was ‘just for decorative and educational purpose’.

[@paulcimijotti]

@@brambes1804I’ve thought the same thing. Since the illiteracy rate was so high in that time. Art was used to tell the story. I don’t see why having religious art back then is proof of icon veneration

[@culpepper7665]

Seraphim Hamilton has 4 or 5 videos, each about an hour long directly addressing this video. I recommend watching those for a DEEP dive into why Ortlund is mistaken.

[@CalvaryandChristendom]

@@culpepper7665 Gavin just reponded.

[@Lotterywinnerify]

@@brambes1804 One can according to EO theology not have mental images. And from personal experience it is quite a simple thing to pray without picturing the Lord or the Heavens or anything like it. It's not idealistic. It fits the best evidence of the intention of the Christian leaders. Whether some ill-informed person decided to venerate the art as a relic of his former pagan practice is not particularly relevant.

[@philipatoz]

I really don't get it - all of this veneration of various saints and supplications made to them. When you have access to boldly approach the Creator of our Universe (Christ!), then why would we ever attempt to have our burdens met by some mere mortal underling. It's as if I have some very important issue with a company over some serious mistake they've made with my account - am I going to sort it out with some powerless young clerk behind a counter, or would I not seek out the company owner that can provide both the solution AND has the authority and ability to see that it's taken care of? With Catholics, the CC even teaches that Mary is a "co-redemptrix" with Jesus - as she supposedly operates alongside Jesus to hear and address our concerns. WHAT, does Jesus somehow need HELP in getting things done? Is He not enough or is somehow lacking? It's truly inconceivable that one wouldn't first beseech Jesus!

[@kimjensen8207]

Those are excellent reflections; we refer to the current proprietor of the universe and - the heavenly realm for - literally - Christ's sake: Jesus Christ! To the glory of His Father, to be sure. Thank you Kind regards Kim

[@Jy3pr6]

“The prayers of a righteous man avail with much.”

[@glennjapson6234]

Colossians 1:24: “Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church.”

[@maximus8722]

Yet you don’t even receive your Lord in the Eucharist, curious?

[@Draezeth]

@@glennjapson6234 This is a verse I'd never considered much, but you need to squint *really* hard to connect this to icon veneration. Paul is talking about martyrdom, and to apply it to anything else would require some clear allusions or parallels at least.

[@LPeter-gn4th]

WELP! I was seriously considering Orthodoxy, but this was extremely insightful into this issue which was ONE of the big ones preventing me from changing to it. Wow... great video, Gavin

[@bradleyperry1735]

Keep considering. I was baptized Orthodox in October after 6 years of reading and praying. It is the Church. God bless you.

[@repentantrevenant9776]

@@kevinfernandez9999 and Gavin’s response to it

[@EnigmaticMan2121]

Read St. John of Damascus writings (and the story of his life) and the writings of St. Theodore the Studite on the matter of iconography. Look up events surrounding the Hawaiian icon of the Theotokos of Iveron and Kursk root icon. The lives of the Orthodox Saints are key in helping to understand these matters. (Emphasizing the importance of the lived experience of the life of the Church in the Saints throughout history. - the Gospel lived out in the lives of the Saints.) Keep going Peter, slow and steady.

[@enshala6401]

Well, I hope you get to receive Jesus' Body and Blood one day. There really isn't anything like it. The Sacramental life is really an amazing one.

[@duckymomo7935]

@@kevinfernandez9999Trent is a joke when it comes to being a catholic apologist and being anti protestant

[@FlvAet421]

All of this. I’ve had the same feelings and thoughts but did not organize or research as well as you. Thank you.

[@sackettsnodgrass9260]

I have to admit, you make a very good argument that not only wowed but challenged my own faith. Too often do we hear from Catholics and Orthodox saying that the veneration of iconography was historical. Per your research, that is simply not the case.

[@AL_YZ]

I think the opposition to the veneration of icons is a Judaizing artefact rather than a mandate of the Christian faith because Christian Freedom dispensed with it. Many of the early Christians had that Jewish iconoclasm imbedded in their faith practice even though they were free of the Law. Compare that to how many early Christians were against doing away with the 4th Commandment, namely “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy" for obvious reasons. The Law said the observance was for eternity. Observing the Sabbath was even more foundational in Judaism than the issue of images. Christ never mentioned doing away with the Sabbath. He followed the Sabbath. Yet, the Church, which are the apostles and the believers, mandated that the that observance was not needed and the "new" day of worship was Sunday. What gall, what usurpation of power if they did not have the Lord's delegated authority. But the Church DID AND DOES HAVE Christ's delegated authority. The Church declaring the veneration of icons as licit makes official what Christian Freedom allowed all along. That the Church figures Gavin quoted retained certain Judaizing sentiments does not mean that Christian Freedom was no longer in operation. Church figures come and go, each shaped by their milieu and their outlooks stamped with the prevailing issues of the day but it is the Church that bears Christ's promise, eternally joined to Him, inseparable. It is the Church that moves through history and will do so in eternity.

[@jonathananstett784]

@@AL_YZ This is a great observation. I really think there should be freedom in Christ and conscience for this. I think it may be a mistake to mandate veneration of icons, and a mistake to disallow the veneration of icons. There are a lot of issues in Romans 12-15 about freedom of conscience that sometimes gets lost in the tradition, either through unnecessary proscription or enforced prescription. If the Protestant movement can do one thing, I hope it's not the overthrowing of tradition, but the reintroduction to freedom of conscience on some of these traditions. But if freedom of conscience swings the opposite direction into condemnation of tradition, it just is repeating similar errors.

[@AL_YZ]

@@jonathananstett784 For a Roman Catholic, Christian Freedom prevails UNTIL the Church makes a definitive declaration of dogma after which the matter is settled. For instance, prior to the canon being finalized, there was back and forth as to which books were included, even among the fathers. But after a consensus is reached within the Church, questioning the canon was no longer an option. The working out of defined doctrines within the Church is often a contentious process over centuries sometimes - like finalizing the canon. For the RC, it is not just a pope unilaterally deciding this or that. Regarding the decree to compel veneration of icons, that was a very specific response to the intense battles - theological and political - which involved the powers of the day. It really tore through the Church of the time. It was authoritative but time-bound in practice. Like the issue of the Jewish Sabbath observance I mentioned, that was settled by the Church. So no-one has compelled anyone for the longest time ever since the iconoclastic controversies were over a thousand years ago. The Church had declared that the veneration of icons is licit and that is settled. Most RC are not even aware it was part of a recognized ecumenical council.

[@AL_YZ]

​@@jonathananstett784 Fr oma Roman Catholic point of view, Christian Freedom prevails UNTIL the Church makes a definitive declaration of dogma after which the matter is settled. For instance, prior to the canon being finalized, there was back and forth as to which books were included, even among the fathers. But after a consensus is reached within the Church, questioning the canon was no longer an option. Same with the Sabbath. The working out of defined doctrines within the Church is often a contentious process over centuries sometimes - like finalizing the canon. Why so messy? Because Christ chose to deputize flesh and blood people to be His church and to teach His Word. He did not promise a new set of scriptures as a stand-alone guide that anyone can build their church around. The bible was written by the singular Church of Christ for the Church. He promised to abide with His church as it marches through history to the end of time. For the RC then, it is not just a pope unilaterally deciding this or that. So this present Pope with his problematic statements is a transient slice of time while the Church that Christ left behind is everlasting. Regarding the decree to compel veneration of icons, that was a very specific response to the intense battles - theological and political - which involved the powers of the day. It really tore through the Church of the time. It was authoritative but time-bound in practice. So no-one has compelled anyone for the longest time ever since the iconoclastic controversies were over a thousand years ago. The Church had declared that the veneration of icons is licit and the matter is settled. Most RC are not even aware it was part of a recognized ecumenical council.

[@SeanWinters]

​@@AL_YZWe could use this argument for anything though, we could argue that the church politics, elders, fathers, priests, bishops, etc. are ALL against judaizers, and that christian freedom has done away with it. Why not? We can all agree a major reason for the very first politics of the church was not meant to be permanent, otherwise it would still exist as it was(it does not). The political structure of the church has changed much since the book of Acts, even since the days of the fathers, and as seen by Paul and Peter, much of what the apostles did was to stop judaizers. So who is Rome, who is Alexandria, who is Antioch to say we have freedom to overcome the prohibition on icon veneration?

[@michellemcdermott2026]

I am a devout Catholic and attend daily Mass. I have never worshipped a statue.

[@mschmidt1645]

I know! Me either! I have never been taught to do this.

[@dittoman1995]

That's not his point he understands they don't worship the icons but he is coming from a historical standpoint on the early church father's did not approve of this practice

[@craiganderson8569]

It seems that a lot of protestants have to mis-represent or flat out lie about Catholicism. Then their followers dislike the church, not because of what the church is, but what they think it is. I guess it makes them feel justified for not being a part of the church?

[@PreciousBloodOfJesus7777]

They teach Mary was sinless. But the truth is that Jesus was the only sinless person ever and even Mary needed him for salvation.

[@PreciousBloodOfJesus7777]

@@craiganderson8569 I work with a devout catholic who believes this firmly. He was taught this by the clergy. Maybe you were not taught this and that's good but he didn't come to this conclusion by himself. Regardless, I consider you a brother in Christ and I have nothing against you. Let us worship our Lord and Savior Christ Jesus and his amazing sacrifice on this beautiful day. Peace be with you.

[@deannmiller4758]

THIS WAS AMAZING and answers so many of my questions about my greek orthodox friends practice! I appreciate it!!!

[@ArrayzableMusic]

Thorough Indeed. And deep in history. Loved this episode!

[@naispuma21]

Fascinating and clearly presented! Thanks

[@giovannivarlí]

Praying for you. I'm so saddened by how people talk to you. They want to offend you. Remember the breastplate of righteousness.

[@EricAlHarb]

Father Abraham, have mercy on me and send Lazarus, so that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool off my tongue, for I am in agony in this flame. That’s a prayer to a saint. No other to look at it. It’s in the Bible

[@EricAlHarb]

@@EmptyDisc1 Not really my point. yes it is a parable not didactic teaching. My point is that the protestant sensitivity to calling on other than God for succour or help doesnt seem to be shared by Jesus or his disciples or the jewish opponents listening to Jesus. Jesus included a detail in the story which would make a protestant cringe or have to somehow explain away as you have attempted to. Jesus didnt have to teach prayers to the saints, it was already something his audience was well familiar with hence the detail is included in His story, which is continued by the Orthodox Church. It is the protestant position that is a novelty. Honestly answer this question is there any circumstance in this life or the next (in the presence of God) in your paradigm, when I can say "Mother Mary, have mercy on me, send gabriel to assist me in my hour of suffering"? Your answer, in your paradigm would be that that is idolatry because no pleas or intercession can be directed to other than God. Well, looks like jesus and his audience dont share your sensitivities.

[@EricAlHarb]

@@EmptyDisc1 again that’s not my point. I don’t believe Jesus is teaching prayers to the saints there. That would be absurd, it’s absurd because everyone just accepted it was a thing they did. The reason we can conclude that is no one is protesting idolatry there. But a Protestant would definitely protest and say that the story is an example of idolatry.

[@EricAlHarb]

@@EmptyDisc1 if your point is that Jesus taught a blatantly false story. Then you’re delusional. A parable, a story communicates truth. Your position is that Jesus is incorporating idolatry into his story! Really? That’s where you want to go? Jesus incorporates elements that his audience is familiar with. Hence they are familiar with the idea of appealing to saints and patriarchs for succour. Something that you would categorize as idolatry. Basically the Protestant position would be that appealing for succour to other than God is idolatry. Again not a position Jesus and his followers shared. My point to put it succinctly is that the Protestant objects to appealing to Patriarchs and Saints for succour. That position is a novelty and contradicts Christs teachings.

[@EricAlHarb]

@@EmptyDisc1 and this is the problem with sola scriptura. You assume that there is no context that Jesus lived in, no culture and no basic assumptions and traditions. But we can glean this from the parable easily. They didn’t react with shock and wonder at a person appealing to a patriarch for succour. That’s because it wasn’t a shock to them. However, we know it would be a shock to a Protestant to appeal to a saint or patriarch for succour and so we can see that the Protestant position is the novelty.

[@SP-td9xj]

I've never thought of this, but wow, what a good point, thank you, from your catholic cousin lol, God bless ❤

[@mastrake]

Thank you! That was certainly a thorough job.

[@Angismit]

Hi, I was considering orthodoxy but was wary of the icons and Mary veneration. Thank you for putting this together and on KZbin. I don’t know why orthodoxy is so attractive to me but now I see that I need to stand guard against the enticement of things like it. Thanks again!

[@alyu1129]

This insistence on the second commandment is Judaizing The Judaizers were a faction of the Jewish Christians who regarded the Levitical laws of the Old Testament as still binding on Christians. They for instance, tried to enforce Jewish Sabbath and circumcision upon the Gentile converts. In Gavin's case, he tries to enforce the second commandment - his interpretation of it - on Christians. Of course Protestants totally ignore the fourth/Sabbath commandment. That doesn't work. "..whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it." James 2:10 What make you of Christian freedom? Christ freed us from the legalistic aspects of the Law but doubled down on the internal moral law.

[@kevinjypiter6445]

@Angismit Mary and icon veneration is something which troubles me also as a pro-orthodox Protestant. HOWEVER, Gavin teaches Calvinism, which means that God is a monster who condemns people to either heaven or hell for his own pleasure, and we have no ability to even alter our fate. There are ways to reconcile Mary and Icon veneration (Luke 1:48) "For behold, henceforth all generations will call me blessed", and I've never heard a Protestant call Mary blessed. But something which is irreconcilable is the predestination to either heaven or hell. Gavin is an incredibly charitable and humble man, but how anyone believes in that doctrine of devils is beyond me.

[@llcoolray3000]

​@@kevinjypiter6445God is holier than you think and man is more wicked than you think. God does not owe anyone mercy or grace. If He never saved a soul from the penalty of their sins, then He would still be just and perfect.

[@ramichahin2]

@@kevinjypiter6445 that would be a red herring: many Protestants aren’t Calvinist. We consider the Arminian Protestants brothers and sister, we don’t anathema them from the church like papists and eos do for refusing image veneration. You’re also producing a Strawman argument of Gavin’s actual position

[@jessicab1272]

@@kevinjypiter6445 I apologize on behalf of the two responders who completely dismissed your very legitimate concerns with Calvinism without bothering to directly address your points. So, as a now Presbyterian Protestant, I also took issue with this particular component of Calvinism early on, as it seems to imply, like you stated, that God has selected out only a view Christians to be saved, rejecting the rest. That would undermine the nature of God, who is all-loving and merciful. The Bible even states that it God’s will that none shall perish, yet it also refers to the followers of Christ as “predestined” and “elect.” So, how do we rectify God’s nature with Predestination? The answer is that predestination can actually co-exist with free will. This may seem like an oxymoron, but here’s why it’s not: Yes, we have been chosen by God since the beginning of time, but this is because God knew that we would choose Him. Time itself, although abstract, was created by God. Therefore, He is not bound by its constraints like we humans are. Thus, He is also not bound by the past, present, and future and can exist and operate continuously along all points of the timeline within the same instance. All that to say, when He chose us, He knew that we would choose Him. Likewise we chose Him because he chose us. I hope that makes sense, and I’d be happy to answer any additional questions that you may have.

[@pgc-68]

Superb historical and biblical overview and analysis. Thank you.

[@gianpopo2007]

Wow I'm so happy I discovered you through your recent debate with Trent Horn. I've been watching a lot of Catholics recently and have been deeply moved by the history of the church, which is (obviously) mostly Catholic. Your defense of protestantism is refreshing in the sense that there is deep rooted love but also dissent from later Catholic practices which seems was the sentiment of the original protestants toward the Catholic Church. Excited to watch more of your videos defending protestantism!

[@TruthUnites]

glad to be connected!

[@SallymaDiallo-tb1kk]

Malgré sa bonne volonté, il amalgame les idoles païennes et les représentations du Christ, de la Vierge Marie et des Saints. Dieu sait qui ces images pieuses représentent et, dans sa grande pédagogie, parce-que Il comprend le besoin humain de pouvoir voir et toucher, nous permet de prier avec ces images qui fixent notre attention sur le divin. Dieu a permis l'utisation de signes, de symboles et de sculptures: l'Arche de l'Alliance, le serpent d'airain dans le désert (préfigurant le Christ sur la croix), la croix peintes sur les portes des croyants en Egypte pour signifier à l'ange de la mort d'épargner les habitants de cette maison (les plaies d'Égypte).

[@rublar75]

The RCC hijacked the word Catholic. I don’t claim I’m Protestant, I claim I am Catholic but not Roman Catholic.

[@jonniefandango3013]

Great video, so clear and historical. I watched the voice of reason on Ruslan and the amount of hoops he had to jump through to justify catholic practises was nuts. Thanks Gavin. So glad I came across your work. God bless you and your work

[@matthew7491]

Wow. What a well compiled and well organized presentation. Excellent work!

[@TruthUnites]

Thanks for watching!

[@joseonwalking8666]

What good is organized presentation if he is wrong?

[@matthew7491]

@@joseonwalking8666 This is not a response. Just saying "wrong" is not an argument of any substance.

[@joseonwalking8666]

@@matthew7491 I'm not going to spend hours refuting the broader message in the video. Others have done that work adnausem. Something Gavin continues to dodge btw. I doubt even if I did spend the hours to collect all relevant information you'd even bother reading it.

[@benjaminwatt2436]

@@joseonwalking8666 His research is very extensive. What is he dodging? I do as in honest Christian curiosity, because i don't see it

[@antihero137]

This was incredibly educational and worth every minute. Thank you, Sir!

[@georgelulgjuraj1007]

As a Protestant Christian who has spent the past twenty five years in IFB circles, it’s nice to finally hear a Baptist call himself a Protestant.

[@TinkerersMind]

Can the same or similar argument be made for the first council of Ncia? For the trinity? Was Aireus right?

[@mikaelrosing]

no its not the same. Because the apotolic fathers in the year 120-160 believed the trinity. and the trinity is clearly in the new testament aswell as hints in the old teatament comcerning the pluarity of God and the oneness of God aswell in the shema. Soo the early church historically did believe in the trinity there is many sources both in early hymns but also the new testament, remeber the new testament most of the letters was for people tgat already knew the faith. So there is some context we may miss so read the introductions in your bible or search up logos bible app on phone or pc.

[@DavidAvery777]

You and Dr. Steven Nemes are what really helped me move from Catholicism back to Protestantism. Thank you.

[@timee3221]

Steven Nemes, who denies the personhood of the Holy Spirit?

[@DavidAvery777]

@@timee3221 I don't agree with him on the Trinity but he does make great arguments for Protestantism.

[@1984SheepDog]

@David Avery hahaha

[@DavidAvery777]

@@1984SheepDog ?

[@Qwerty-jy9mj]

Nemes isn't even a Christian anymore, it's quite regrettable.

[@isaksiemens]

As a Presbyterian thinking through my traditions beliefs on icons this was incredibly helpful thank you!

[@TruthUnites]

Glad it was helpful!

[@juandoming6688]

I know fruits of the spirit is patience. But I don't know why for the life of me I can't stand the waffling on this issue for people that were never compelled to worship these images. A wicked and adulterous generation demands a sign. Why does one have to convince oneself that they are in true worship with the aide of art and images, smells and ancient relics? That is a pagan inclination.

[@Vanpotheosis]

If you're against icons I assume you're also against having crucifixes exist. Or nativity scenes at Christmas.

[@juandoming6688]

@medotaku9360 other than being used as a sign or a symbol, what does a crucifix get its power from ans why should u pray to it?

[@thebestSteven]

@@Vanpotheosisyes. I do not approve of nativity scenes and crucifixes (and I mean crucifixes specifically, not crosses. Crucifixes being a cross with a depiction of Christ on it. I say this for those who might not know the difference).

[@Steve-wg3cr]

The most shocking thing about the Church after the conversion of Constantine is the barbaric practices used to enforce church teaching, i.e. the gouging of eyes, cutting off noses, etc. In attempting to enforce correct theology they forgot correct morality.

[@jordand5732]

Nicely said.

[@BarbaPamino]

That wasn't to correct theology it was to protect heresy.

[@thesampo]

Much of the violence was used by the effort to stamp out icons. Some historians think more Christians were killed by a “Christian“ emperor to stamp out icons.

[@bradleyperry1735]

That’s a poor misrepresentation of what was going on.

[@AryanAncap1087]

This is hands down the best video I’ve seen on the subject of icon veneration, thank you so much!

[@monicatorres4965]

This is exactly the reason why my mom converted from Catholic to Protestan before I was even born! she didn´t have all these knowledge of course, but she had the holly spirit to make her extremely uncomfortable with icon veneration. Thank you mom!

[@BarbaPamino]

There was nothing Holy about that spirit. Just a demon pushing her to worship herself. Of course she was already infested by a lot of other demons in the "catholic" church. The Holy Spirit would never push anyone to reject the relics of the Saints before you. Your protest Christ and reject the Right Worship.

[@gnomeresearch1666]

Schism is sin.

[@EpoRose1]

Icons aren’t a requirement to be a Catholic. I’m sorry your mom was probably horribly catechized.

[@Draezeth]

@@gnomeresearch1666 This is why the Catholic church should review its doctrines, rather than excommunicated those who question them.

[@malachi487]

All I see from Protestants... is the fact that they can't admit they are wrong... and thats from a Protestant who's now Catholic. Anyone who truly searches the truth and can get over themselves and open their heart to the Holy Ghost- can not remain Protestant. There were bigger Catholic bashers than Dr Ortlund who are now Catholic.

[@TJMcCarty]

Thank you for all the time it must have taken you to put together this video. Videos like this are so needed right now. So many Protestants have no roots and are falling away right now.

[@JD-sj1zn]

@TJMcCarty Peace. That is because their foundation is sand. Blessings.

[@TJMcCarty]

@@JD-sj1zn I would say their foundation is the Word of God, which is the only immovable Rock.

[@JD-sj1zn]

@@TJMcCarty Not according to that Word itself. Scripture says that the CHURCH is the bulwark and foundation of Truth. The Canon was not decided upon until the 4th century. What was the Authority in the first 4 centuries? The Church was. Who decided on the Canon of Scripture? The Church did. As Augustine, a Catholic bishop, stated, "I would not believe in Scripture, if not for the authority of the Catholic Church." As the Church, we DO believe that Scripture is the Word of God. But it is only because our Lord gave us an authoritative Church that told us it is.

[@JD-sj1zn]

@@TJMcCarty Consider looking at the Church for the first 16 centuries of Christendom, when there was only "One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church". (Nicea I, 325AD)

[@JD-sj1zn]

@@TJMcCarty Peace. Also, in your search for an accurate Bible (yes, I read your post from 3 weeks ago), consider buying the Catholic Douay-Rheims version with notes by Bishop Challoner. Blessings.

[@holmavik6756]

What is the essential difference between praying to God in front of (i) an icon of Christ (ii) a wooden cross and (iii) a church choir?

[@markoobretkovich]

The issue is praying TO those things. If you’re praying to icons, that’s idolatry. Christ is our only Mediator - He is the only One through Whom we may come to God. And because of that, we can now approach God’s throne of grace boldly (Heb. 4:16). (Caps just for emphasis, not yelling at you lol)

[@holmavik6756]

@@markoobretkovich Oh, I certainly agree on that. The reason for posting my original question is that some christians seem to believe that praying In Front an icon is equivalent to praying To the icon.

[@onmountaintime5637]

So don’t ask your friends to pray for you.

[@HVLLOW99]

​​@holmavik6756 kissing and bowing to a graven image is biblicaly idolatry. Thats what EO, OO & RCC do not just pray infront of said images. Further more early church fathers pre 600AD all stated these practices are pagan and images of Christ or apostles shouldnt evem be allowed in a Church as to avoid this very practice. Alas people never listen its okay the Lord is merciful! ✝️☦️🤲

[@birke1354]

Thank you for putting so much effort into this historical and scriptural workout. I really profit from it. May God bless you in all your work!

[@drytool]

You are making me think. Thank you for that.

[@MCNinjaDJ]

Fantastically put. Wonderfully detailed with all the important info

[@TruthUnites]

Glad it helped!

[@Adam_Wilde]

I'm still a Protestant, and have been researching Orthodox and Roman Catholicism. But this morning, I was getting ready for the day, and my puppy came into the room, so I gave my puppy a hug and kiss out of affection when he came over to me. I wonder if whether an icon is an idol or not just comes down to what is going on in the heart. But when the Orthodox Christians tell me sincerely they are showing reverence and honor to the icons which represent the saints, not worshipping the icons, I think I might be okay to take their word for it, just like how I would tell them I hugged and kissed my puppy out of affection and they believe that I'm not worshipping my puppy. I recognize this video is more scholarly than my example, but it's where my heart is at on the issue.

[@Lotterywinnerify]

That doesn't matter though. They may say they are not worshipping the icon. But the problem is they claim that if you do not show affection the icon then you are not in line with apostolic Christianity. And since both Orthodox and Catholic church claim infallibility. If therefore they are wrong about this issue being apostolic then they are wrong entirely.

[@Adam_Wilde]

@@Lotterywinnerify I can understand that. As a Protestant it is definitely concerning if I'd be anathematized for not kissing an icon.

[@JD-sj1zn]

@@Lotterywinnerify Peace. It DOES matter. Church teaching is clear on this subject. Nicea II makes it clear. The Council of Trent makes it clear. The Catechism of the Catholic Church makes it clear. Go to the source if you want to know what the source teaches. I wish you well in your journey. Blessings.

[@levigarrett5614]

Nahh just take their word for it, they aren't pelagian necromancers either, if you point these issues out they'll say "you just don't understand". They can work for it all they want and pile up filthy rags or whatever but I just believe the gospel and they hate that a sinner like me can be given the gift of eternal life and I don't have to jump thru wacky hoops or kiss idols for it. Just faith given to me by God that the gospel is true saves me and they can't stand it.

[@JD-sj1zn]

@@levigarrett5614 Peace. They're not idols, they're icons. And some sinners receive the gift of salvation as they contemplate the beauty of what lies through and beyond the icon. You can put that "filthy rag" in the proverbial pipe and smoke it. Blessings.

[@AZmom60]

I have absolutely had people confuse the issue between using art for teaching or decorating and veneration. It seems SO clear, but I can’t seem to help them see the distinction.

[@willcunningham7049]

Thanks so much for addressing this with so much documentation. I was once led astray by arguments in favor of icon veneration but I have to admit I could never fully embrace it at the heart or conscience level. Although I know that many who are in favor of icon veneration will have a comeback for everything you’ve presented and that they will ultimately appeal to the “consensus of the fathers” and to their ecclesiology, I am convinced they have erred on this subject. Thanks for speaking the truth in love.

[@TruthUnites]

Thanks Will, glad you found this useful!

[@andreaurelius45]

@@TruthUnites kzbin.info/www/bejne/bXarkHalrtiLjZo ....you don't understand what you attack.

[@michaelwhitman9937]

Gavin ortlund, thank you for the video! Should I destroy icons or statues of Jesus? I am confused of the proper Biblical stance. Should I keep a picture of Christ? I do not venerate them but it is decorative/a reminder of Christ.

[@justanotherbaptistjew5659]

@@michaelwhitman9937 If you believe they’re a 2 commandment violation, you could. If they lead you astray to worship them, destroy them as Hezekiah destroyed the Bronze Serpent (2 Kings 18:4).

[@Arvak777]

​​​@@michaelwhitman9937at's between you and God. If it starts affecting you then put them away. I grew up near a Catholic lady's house that had giant crosses everywhere and crowds would gather on Friday 13th because visions of Mary would appear to her. That's the context I have with icons and saints. To me, crosses and pictures should be considered like a flag or logo. You wouldn't set fire to your country's flag but you're not gonna build an altar to it. I personally don't want a cross in my room but on a Bible or Christian phone app, or in church is fine.

[@KirstyE3]

As a current catechumen in the EO, this helps A LOT! I havent started venerating yet, and deep down it feels 'off.' My priest said there is no hurry but I will eventually need to get there. I also question their exclusivism. Ill never be able to accept that. I think you gave me the solid reason why I wont crismate now. Thank you!!

[@alishavogel7926]

If you feel "off" that's the Holy Spirit talking to you. Listen to Him.

[@MrWesford]

Your conscience is not formed yet, that’s why it feels off. It’s proper to venerate icons. Don’t let Gavin keep you from Christ.

[@raphaelfeneje486]

​@@MrWesford Gavin is bringing back the early Christians thought! You can go and bow to graven images, however, you don't have a defence for it. Go after the flesh!

[@TruLuan]

That's a fallacy because it doesn't feel "off" for others. I can turn that around and say "It feels 'off' because Satan is trying to keep you away from the truth (Orthodox)"@@alishavogel7926

[@militemlucis6131]

@@MrWesfordman what a sad response. The word was made flesh and dwelt amongst us. Died for us, was ressurrected and left us with Commandments. But confessing with your mouth that he is Lord and believing in your heart that God raised him and following his way is not enough! Nope! Cause if you dont kiss and honor these picture you will be kept away from Christ. I am fond of the EOC but man comments like yours are foul

[@MarkAtherton-bf4pq]

I'm a new-ish Christian. When I recently came across EO I became enthralled with the idea of it being the original church and its beautiful ceremonies. But as I've been researching EO over the past month or so, I paused when I became aware of the venerations of saints. The book of Judges makes it clear that mankind has a propensity for worshipping things and other people, and makes it VERY clear this does not please the LORD! Twenty minutes into this video has cleared this all up for me (I watched the whole thing though) and has ended my romance with EO. Thank you!

[@Kingkoolaid96]

I’ve been on the same journey, and feel as though this video has served the same purpose for me as well. Thank you, Gavin, for quite literally doing The Lord’s work.

[@ssseth9321]

I did the same thing last year when I was only a few months into my walk with Christ. Now after almost 2 years, I've been regularly attending an Orthodox Parish for about a month and I love it. It's very common within the Protestant world to get hung up on the idea that since Christ is the only mediator between God and man - our spiritual lives are a individual, single-line connection between us and God. Orthodoxy sees things differently. We believe that God's grace is superabundant it flows out through the ones He has glorified - the saints, and especially through His mother, by whose obedience bore the One who would conquer death and reconcile us to God. Our worship is reserved for God alone, but we recognize that His grace pours out into those people in our lives, both those here on earth, and those who reside in the heavenly kingdom, and that we can call on them to be vessels of the grace that has it source in Him alone. Also is God not "over all, in all and through all."? (Ephesians 4)

[@BriannaNorum]

👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼

[@stefan5234]

it is not warshipping, it is veneration. You have to do more research, your understanding is lacking

[@vedinthorn]

​@@ssseth9321how does one become a vessel of unmerited favor? How can unmerited favor be carried like water or cargo? We can surely supply it to others from ourselves, but how can we carry it on behalf of another? And I would suggest Christ being our only mediator is literally what the scripture teaches. One can participate in a spiritual life with others while only having one mediator.

[@Matt-ck3pp]

Good Job Gavin! Everyone on the internet has now commented on this video.

[@enshala6401]

Yes, everyone is commenting on it because it is astonishing that in this day and age, there are still iconoclasts. Unbelievable. Why are you so excited about this? Is this your way of living boldly for Christ?

[@DeeZ36]

Thank you for the thorough historical and scholarly explanations. Very informative and respectful.

[@alecbateman4498]

Wow, after this I am seriously considering taking the Protestant reformation seriously, currently an Orthodox catechumen, I realized lately that I didn't give Protestantism an honest enough consideration so I watched this video. I had a large misconception that Protestantism had no patristic backing, thank you for this video!

[@TruthUnites]

may the Lord guide you and direct you

[@raquelc7517]

I'm Jewish now but I respect Lutheranism and Anglicanism as the middle ground of Christianity.

[@dogmalife2540]

Don't be a fool. You have the true faith and his explanation of icon veneration is wonderfully squashed by many Orthodox apologists. Do some research before being lead astray by a heretic pusher. His cult is a heretical offshoot of an even more heretical Roman church. The bible warns us of eloquent tongued pushers of false faith such as this man.

[@permafrost7781]

As an ex Greek Orthodoxx Christian turned Baptist Christian, all I can say is ALL GLORY TO GOD ALMIGHTY for this video. Thank you.

[@shelleyhender8537]

Hi PermaFrost77 - I really like your “name”, as I grew up in The North…but…even more so - the thumbnail of your “puppy” is precious! I have been blessed to have a Husky, Malamute, Akita, even a half wolf/husky, as well as, some precious smaller breeds like a Silky Yorkshire Terrier, Shi-Tsu, and many other pups, along with rescuing wildlife when need be! There is a special place in my heart for all glorious creatures! Have a great week!🇨🇦☺🇨🇦

[@TruthBeTold7]

You were never properly rooted or grounded in the Orthodox spiritual tradition.

[@TruthBeTold7]

@@theodosios2615 You were probably never rooted and grounded in the Orthodox spiritual tradition. The deified saints trump modern critics and academics who limit theology to a purely academic thing, but have too much of the world and devil in them.

[@dustindustindontworry-jz8dh]

@@TruthBeTold7 The apostles nor Jesus practiced or taught icon "veneration". It's not an apostolic tradition.

[@TruthBeTold7]

@@dustindustindontworry-jz8dh Their purpose was to get the Gospel message out. Orthodoxy has a different metaphysics than the western heterodox systems. I don't accept your assumption that iconography has to be explicit in the apostles. But we do know that St. Luke painted the first icon.

[@ronomgenuff]

Woah, this is beautiful Spirit led biblical based discussion... This is what I'm looking for!

[@sketchbook1]

Patient, gentle, thorough and clear.

[@aquiladavid5681]

…and incorrect.

[@sketchbook1]

@@aquiladavid5681 iconic retort.

[@andyontheinternet5777]

@@aquiladavid5681 What was he incorrect about?

[@aquiladavid5681]

​ @andyontheinternet5777 I'm too sinful and ignorant to begin to explain. St. John of Damascus wrote timeless treatises in the 8th century that eviscerated the iconoclasts of his time and do the same to the iconoclasts of today. I suggest you read his works and judge for yourself and don't let PhD's with an agenda tell you what and how to think. Just google "St John Damascene on Holy Images and Project Gutenberg"

[@aquiladavid5681]

​ @andyontheinternet5777 I'm too sinful and ignorant to explain with precision. St. John of Damascus wrote timeless treatises in the 8th century that refuted the iconoclasts of his day and does the same to the iconoclasts of today. I suggest that you read them and judge for yourself and don't let PhD's with an agenda tell you how and what to think. Search "St John Damascene on Holy Images and Project Gutenberg" and click the top result.

[@Susan_castleman]

Informative, thank you! When you wrapped it up with the Gospel, I couldn't help but say AMEN.

[@noelenliva2670]

Brubaker (author) - it's a purple coloured book

[@jimmymelonseed4068]

As a catholic, I love how everything is sacramental. We experience God in the physical world that He made for us. I can pray by watching a sunset, watching the trees, or enjoying an icon painting. God wants us to Love Him, and while He gives us some rules to do so properly, He also gives us a creative spirit and an attraction to beauty that is absolutely theologically relevant.

[@MatthewN07]

@@xuniepyro7399I mostly agree with you, but this is very uncharitable.

[@rosslewchuk9286]

Spot on and AMEN! 🎯🏆Excellently documented and gracefully delivered! Thanks for all of your hard work!🙏📖

[@windihari]

Super helpful, especially by giving us specific texts from ante-Nicean fathers. THAT's the tradition I wish to follow.

[@andrewwoods456]

Very impressive video Gavin. One of your best!

[@TruthUnites]

Thanks Andrew!

[@THISWEEKINHUMANdotcom]

I was a Protestant who became Orthodox back in 2010. After your vidoes and teachings, and my own very long study of ecclesiastical history, I have decided to leave Orthodoxy, and follow Christ according to Sacred Scripture. I am so glad that Christ used your ministry to challenge me to ask more questions and do more research...I am now what my former Church would call a heretic. Amen.

[@abrahamphilip6439]

Christanity is not hop step & jump

[@repentantrevenant9776]

The best part of Protestantism is that you can still affirm that your Orthodox friends are a part of Christ’s church! You can still believe they are saved! The Church of Christ just got much bigger for you - it now contains Orthodox, Protestant, and Catholic followers of Jesus :) And you are free to keep all of the practices, traditions, and elements of your Orthodox church that you found to be Christ-honoring and reflecting God’s goodness. Hopefully you can teach us, the rest of your Protestant brethren, some of the good things you learned in the Orthodox church that are worth sharing!

[@scopeguy]

​@@repentantrevenant9776that's incoherent when those three groups all have different and contradictory beliefs.

[@repentantrevenant9776]

@@scopeguy you don't have to agree on every piece of doctrine to be saved, or even to be in the same church. Within the Catholic or Orthodox churches there are massive disagreements over doctrine.

[@scopeguy]

@@repentantrevenant9776 sorry differences inside and between Catholic and EO are miniscule compared to the differences just between different Protestants. Catholics specifically have a magisterium that can settle disputes. Some Protestants say homosexuality is fine, or divorce is fine, or numerous other things that are pretty clearly laid out as prohibited if you're not reading the text with a bias. Also, Protestants differ on soteriology, justification, as well as ecclesiology in ways that would have been foreign to early Christians. If you can just go to another church that agrees with your beliefs, that's not a religion, that's just a social club.

[@rybojames4111]

Thankyou for this. It is alot of information. I will need to watch this a few times more.

[@jamesdownham6417]

Brilliant Gavin ! Your biblical standpoint makes all things clear .

[@ruskinick9245]

I was in Russian and venerated an Icon of the Martys and Confessors of Russian at the Moscow cathedral in 2005. An electric energy went through my body and tears flowed uncontrollably. I still do not know what it meant but, there is something special about icons.

[@HVLLOW99]

I believe the Holy Spirit touched you because of your faith in Christ and desire for him. However Icons are clearly NOT Christian practices before the year 600 AD. I've felt electric power and experienced the Holy Spirit(Glossolalia, visions, & OBEs) and im a Protestant non-denom.

[@jotink1]

There is because it's visual and brought to our senses in the present which is how we operate. This is why we need to distinguish between honouring people through an images and educational use of images from praying through an image. Images are so powerful scripture warns us regarding their use. Images and idols are the most used source for idolatry so they are dangerous things and scripture warns us about this. Icon veneration is more than giving honour to the image. Having an image in and of itself is honouring the person that is, not the issue it is praying through the image.

[@ruskinick9245]

@@jotink1 I was not worshipping the image itself, but I kissed the icon to honor the memory of the martyrs and confessors of Russia who died for their Christian faith during the communist era in Russia. The electric energy that went through my body and the tears was unexpected. In ancient times most of the population was illiterate and certainly had no access to a written bible. The icons tell the story of the Bible and honor martyrs for their Christian faith. Even in our modern times, I think they serve a purpose to tell the story of Christ and Christians. They also provide beauty as does the liturgical singing. I find fellowship and learning from Protestant denominations as well, but I think we can all benefit from understanding how the early church worship was conducted and how the Bible we know was compiled by the church at the ecumenical council.

[@ruskinick9245]

@@HVLLOW99 The image of the martyrs and confessors of Russia who died for their faith was a visual connection for me, which was the purpose of the icon being created. It is likely the Holy Spirit connected to me through my visual connection with the icon. Icons and liturgical singing are ancient ways of telling the story of the Bible and the Christian Martyrs of the past, by using beauty and a visual connection using art. I have learned much from Protestants (C.S.Lewis) and others, but I think some Protestants moved too far away from the practices of the early church.

[@jotink1]

@ruskinick9245 Protestants are not against honoring saints but that is not what icon veneration is it goes beyond that and honoring through images is only a part of a bigger picture. I hear Catholics who say Purgatory is cleansing after death but the doctrine of purgatory is much more than that. Regarding the canon and the council. As a Protestant I don't use the language of compiled but recognised which may seem the same but the implication is different. The councils that recognised the canon were local councils not ecumenical this is a key difference. The evidence for this is both the Catholic and EO canons are different. If a true ecumenical council compiled the canon using your language then both Rome and the East after 1054 would have simply used the canon decided by an ecumenical council but that is not the case. The canon was not compiled officially by a council for Catholics until Trent in 1546. Regarding illiteracy and reading the Bible and images would be helpful and this is true as an educational tool but this is not what icon veneration is. I have gone into many English Cathedrals and witness honoring saints through images and statues but this is not icon veneration. I can bow my head and honor the work of the English saint Cuthbert in Durham Cathedral but I don't kiss his image. What I feel you are doing through deduction is coming to the wrong conclusions through not fully understand the doctrine of icon veneration which goes further than honoring the saints and a simplistic view of how the different canons of today came to be.

[@daniellecox6534]

I’ve always been a Protestant that wanted to convert to Catholicism with my friends or Orthodox. But every time I started to dig deeper into it I realized I just like the sincerity of the aesthetics of those churches and the quietness of heart that they invoke when you enter them. Even the discipline of the rosary seemed like a helpful tool for my wandering mind. BUT I never converted and have realized I am as Protestant as they come. When I read the Bible and gospels Catholicism and Orthodoxy just seemed so far away from the flavor of the simple purity of the New Testament. To top it off I’m an artist and I have always struggled with the purpose of my art and Christian art and afraid of creating idol like images. I’m very wary of it and continually have to ask God why he gave me this gift and its highest purpose, how to use it for him without it becoming more than that.

[@rublar75]

Those beautiful churches are what attract a lot of people, that feeling. Smoke and mirrors.

[@truthnotlies]

​@@rublar75 Was God wrong when he required the Temple to be made beautiful? What you said makes no sense.

[@HVLLOW99]

​@@truthnotlies Absolutely nothing wrong with the house of God being beautiful but the bowing, kissing and praying to images is simply un-biblical both OT & NT.

[@truthnotlies]

@HVLLOW99 Iconoclasm was strongly mixed in with Islam, just FYI. No Catholic prays TO images btw. If you're going to make accusations, do research. Bowing or kissing is a sign of respect and reverence.

[@tpoy1274]

I see an interesting psychological parallel here to the doctrine of the Trinity. I talk to many Muslims, usually amicably, and no amount of effort explaining to them that our belief in the Trinity does not violate monotheism can alleviate their horror at what to them is plain and obvious polytheism - as well as idolatry in the worship of the man Jesus. They are unimpressed with subtle distinctions and terms like ousia, hypostasis, incarnation, etc. All that rationalizing, in their deeply intuitive estimation, just papers over pseudo-paganism, a denial of the unity of God and his exclusive right to worship. Many Protestants seem to have the same kind of experience with Christian iconography. No amount of explaining to them that our veneration of icons does not violate the right worship due to God can alleviate their horror at what to them is plain and obvious idolatry. They are unimpressed with our subtle theological distinctions or our pointing out how the Incarnation is itself an icon and changes the nature of our knowledge of God from natural reason and the O.T., etc. All that rationalizing, in their deeply intuitive estimation, just papers over pseudo-paganism and God‘s exclusive right to worship.

[@tpoy1274]

@Tennis Brah Theological and philosophical elaboration is precisely what happened in the case of sacred images. This is because the Christ Icon is not ultimately rooted in art or imagination, but in Incarnation. In the Old Testament, the rationale for the prohibition against images of a particular sort was that God had not shown himself to the Israelites. “You saw no form.” (Deuteronomy) In the New Covenant, God shows himself to the Church in the face of Christ. “If you’ve seen me you’ve seen the Father.” The Bride sees the face of the Bride Groom. She sees the form. This isn’t just a Christological matter. The telos of salvation is the vision of God himself. The Christ Icon points to the fact that God is ultimately drawing men, not just to a profound conceptualization of the truth in the abstract, as in religions like Islam or Maimonidian Judaism, but to the joy of looking at Him as he knows himself. “Then we will see face-to-face.”

[@tpoy1274]

@Tennis Brah I’m in complete agreement that there are biblical foundations for the ecclesial doctrine of the Trinity. But I don’t think that would impress a Muslim. He would just say that there is categorically no legitimate foundation for denying monotheism. So the Christian has to explain to the Muslim that however much trinitarian distinctions may seem to contradict monotheism, ultimately they don’t stand opposed to one another. And maybe even more pointedly, he would have to explain how, despite all the prohibitions against worshiping creatures in the Law, Christians can justify worshiping the man Jesus. To the Muslim this appears, and you have to grant its superficial appearance, a plain contradiction. I think this is very similar on a psychological level to the Catholic experience or the Orthodox experience of having to defend iconography to Protestants. To them the prohibition against making images of God for the purpose of worship is plainly contradicted by the Catholic/Orthodox practice of making images of God for the purpose of worship. But we would say the same thing to the Protestant that we would say to the Muslim, and frankly that the Protestant would say to the Muslim as well, which is that the Incarnation has radically changed things. We now worship a man from Nazareth. Prior to the Incarnation, that would have been idolatry. We now make images of the Holy One (because he has shown us his form) and venerate Him through them. Prior to the Incarnation, that would have been a violation of the commandment.

[@txsmiley1275]

Outstanding and informative video. Thank you for taking the time to create this content. God bless

[@symphonyofdissent]

This video is extremely thorough and well done, I really appreciated it.

[@TruthUnites]

Glad it was helpful!

[@enshala6401]

Except for the part where Ortland demonstrates his ignorance of how doctrinal development works. Is he trying to say "Bad Catholics! You can't even use your own model correctly! " or is it more like, "Bad Catholics! You aren't adhering to Luther's Sacred Tradition of Sola Scriptura! " I mean, which is it? In conflating the two, he produced a nonsensical mess. Does he REALLY want to cite Origen for Christian wisdom apart from the Magisterium? Did you know that Origen removed his own family jewels because he took literally Jesus' admonition to pluck out an eye if it offends thee? There is so much to address... Honestly, this video is sloppy.

[@batmanfan7506]

@@enshala6401 I think he’s representing how much OE and ROC simply justify idol worship very clearly. If you can’t see this, I’d encourage you to really let down your ego and pray about this.

[@enshala6401]

@@batmanfan7506 I have studied, prayed, and reflected for decades on the Christian faith, and though I always need to pray more for the big challenges going on in my life, the subject of icons is most definitely not one of them. I am Palestinian, and icons are part of our culture, so iconoclasts are virtually racist to me. It's so unbelievably ignorant. We don't pray to a block of wood, and you guys representing it as such is really wrong. I don't understand how anyone can be so daft. Maybe you should pray about it yourself....? I mean, how would you feel if someone accused you of idolatry for your Bible worship?

[@batmanfan7506]

@@enshala6401 you’re reaching real hard on that one haha

[@sergioayala4379]

Early Church Fathers On The Veneration of Icons Excerpt from “The Martyrdom of Polycarp” (69-155AD) (worship vs. veneration) 1 But the jealous and envious evil one who resists the family of the righteous, when he saw the greatness of his martyrdom, and his blameless career from the beginning, and that he was crowned with the crown of immortality, and had carried off the unspeakable prize, took care that not even his poor body should be taken away by us, though many desired to do so, and to have fellowship with his holy flesh. 2 Therefore he put forward Niketas, the father of Herod, and the brother of Alce, to ask the Governor not to give his body, “Lest,” he said, “they leave the crucified one and begin to worship this man.” And they said this owing to the suggestions and pressure of the Jews, who also watched when we were going to take it from the fire, for they do not know that we shall not ever be able either to abandon Christ, who suffered for the salvation of those who are being saved in the whole world, the innocent for sinners, or to worship any other. 3 For him we worship as the Son of God, but the martyrs we love as disciples and imitators of the Lord; and rightly, because of their unsurpassable affection toward their own King and Teacher. God grant that we too may be their companions and fellow-disciples. When therefore the centurion saw the contentiousness caused by the Jews, he put the body in the midst, as was their custom, and burnt it. 2 Thus we, at last, took up his bones, more precious than precious stones, and finer than gold, and put them where it was meet. 3 There the Lord will permit us to come together according to our power in gladness and joy, and celebrate the birthday of his martyrdom, both in memory of those who have already contested, and for the practice and training of those whose fate it shall be. (Kirsopp Lake translation;17:1 - 18:3). Eusebius Pamphili (of Ceasarea) (263-339AD): “Even now the inhabitants of those regions near where Abraham worshipped those who appeared to him honor it as a holy place. Indeed, the oak tree is still to be seen there, and there is a picture of those whom Abraham entertained reclining at table.”[8] St. Athanasius the Great of Alexandria (296-373AD): “We the faithful do not worship images as gods, as did the heathen Greeks-God forbid!-but our only purpose and desire is to see in the image a reflection of the facial form of the beloved. Therefore if the image should be obliterated, we would throw it into the fire as so much scrap lumber. Just as when Jacob was about to die, he bowed down before the point of Joseph’s staff, not honoring the staff but its owner, so also the faithful do not embrace images for their own sake, but kiss them as we often embrace our children or our parents, to show the affection in our hearts.”[9] St. Basil the Great (330-379AD) “Now arise, you renowned painters of the champions’ [martyrs] brave deeds, who by your exalted art make images of the General [Christ]. My praise for the crowned champion is dull compared with the wisdom which inspires your brush with its radiant colors….As I look at the detail in your painting of his struggle, I see his hand among the flames; your image has made his victory even more brilliant for me”[10] * * * “The image of the emperor is also called the emperor, yet there are not two emperors…for the honor given to the image is transferred to the prototype. Therefore, the One [Christ] whom the image materially represents is He who is Son by nature.”[11] * * * “Both painters of words and painters of pictures illustrate valor in battle; the former by the art of rhetoric; the latter by clever use of the brush, and both encourage everyone to be brave. A spoken account edifies the ear, while a silent picture induces imitation.”[12] St. Gregory of Nyssa (335-395AD): “Then the father [Abraham] proceeds to bind his son [Isaac]. I have often seen paintings of this touching scene, and could not refrain from shedding tears, so vivid was the scene reproduced by the artist.”[13] St. Ambrose of Milan (330-397AD): “…but I was caught up into ecstasy during which a face was revealed to me, which resembled the blessed apostle Paul, the same face which was painted on the icon which showed him teaching so wisely….”[14] St. John Chrysostom (347-407AD): “And I love this image molded in wax, of him [David] who was full of righteousness. For I see the angel in the icon fighting the barbarian horde….Not only do you long to call fervently upon his [Christ’s] holy name; but also to look upon the image of his bodily form. What you do with his name you also accomplish with his image. For everyone rejoices to put his image everywhere, on rings, goblets, dishes, and on bedroom walls….”[15] * * * “For an image, inasmuch as it is an image, ought to be treated by us in the same fashion as the likeness it represents.”[16]

[@markmartinez7715]

Fantastic. Literally no responses from these over-zealous Protestants who think they've found their champion in a bunch of emotional fallacious argumentation from Dr. Ortlund. He hasn't debated a single notable apologist from either side of the world.

[@user12jshf245]

He’s had several debates with Trent Horn

[@premodernprejudices3027]

​@@user12jshf245, Horn is a Roman Catholic. Roman Catholics, while their church recognizes the 7th Ecumenical Council, really have no personal place for icons in their piety. So, that Ortlund debated Horn is not all that significant regarding this issue.

[@jimkazetsky5897]

As someone strongly considering Orthodoxy I'd love to see if any Protestants have any rebuttals to this comment. Because it seems like this comment shuts down a large claim of this video.

[@ruskinick9245]

Perfect response to this video criticizing icons. Thanks

[@aurelgodoroja4012]

@TruthUnites In Orthodox theology, icons are not just a window from image to prototype, a window to the divine, and a reflection of the divine in our world, but they are actually a grace-filled presence of God in matter, in this case, the icon. Because if we only reduce the icon to a window, without emphasizing the special presence of God by His grace, the same dilemma would arise as in the Eucharist. I will make an analogy: just as wine and bread are gifts that people bring, but which truly become the Body and Blood of Christ while retaining their qualities of wine and bread; similarly, the icon is initially a painted wooden panel by an iconographer, and the painting is in this sense a form of prayer offered to God, a gift offered to God that first attracts the grace of God by virtue of the "prayer" (pious painting) of the iconographer, and then by virtue of each believer who prays before the icon. An icon is made in the style of painting without perspective, it is not three-dimensional or a statue because it does not reduce the image to something from this world and it is not interpreted in a pagan way, such as that God is in the statue or that the statue is actually a god. The intention here is to make a distinction between something with a three-dimensional form and something "formless" (two-dimensional, without perspective) that leads to something of another order, divine. There is a contrast between perspective/three-dimensional and without perspective which actually wants to show the difference between human and divine, between visible and invisible. Specifically, the choice of the style without perspective unites the visible with the invisible, the human with the divine. He mentions that he separates the didactic purpose from the prayer purpose through the icon and that the didactic purpose is only about presenting the Gospel in a painted form, but here he overlooks that the didactic purpose and the window to the other world interweave, because the icon has a didactic role in terms of prayer. The image leads you to think about the prototype, but being also a grace-filled presence, it transforms God's presence from transcendent to immanent, it brings God closer to the soul of man, then being without perspective, it does not allow you to be "enchanted" by forms, the "worldly" of the painting, it does not "steal" your mind towards the transient, but it's the perfect "dose" of image that directs your mind from the visible to the invisible. The historical development that he presents is not entirely impartial, in my opinion. He does not present the historical context of the development of the cult of icons very accurately. Initially, I present some stages/aspects (as I see them): 1) opposition between paganism and Christianity, 2) opposition between the plebeians and the elite, 3) opposition between Platonism and incarnate Christianity, 4) natural development towards the cult of icons vs stagnation in puritanism. It should be understood that in the initial phase, the Church Fathers opposed images because in the pagan world, images and statues were objects of worship in the sense that the statue was considered a god, and that people worshiped creatures, idols that were not God and that all these statues attempted to represent an invisible God. Pagans anthropomorphized the God of the ages (unincarnate), but He is invisible and not a creature. In this sense, the Church Fathers opposed images, so that the converts would not fall/return to paganism, so it was also a didactic purpose of opposing images. In the examples given by some fathers, they went to exaggerated arguments against images, or in the Old Testament itself, the temple was full of symbols, there were cherubims on the Ark of the Covenant. On the other hand, the people, the plebeians, used images. It is clear that the representation of some biblical scenes such as the Good Shepherd and the lamb, etc. were an expression of devotion of the believers, usually the simple and the converts from paganism. These images are found in catacombs rather than in churches. And the question is why? Because in churches, power was usually held by the elite, theologians, scholars who opposed images; and in catacombs it was the plebeians who used images. And even though the theologians opposed images, especially in the way they were understood by the pagans, as an anthropomorphization of an invisible God, what they did not understand was the transformed baggage of the converts. The converts transferred the cult of images from paganism to Christianity, but it should be understood that not all of them transferred it foolishly in the sense of anthropomorphizing God, the cult was adapted to Christian understanding, which the theologians could not necessarily understand. Theologians did not appreciate or understand the metamorphosed approach of the converted pagans. And even though he says about the empress who sought an image, this implies that icons were rare, which was probably the case, at least in the higher circles, this does not necessarily exclude the spread of images in certain areas. Let's take the example of catacombs, or synagogues and 2nd-3rd century church in Dura Europos, they abound with images. So it seems that in some places Christian painting was quite widespread. He also mentions the legend of King Abgar, the letter between Christ and Abgar seems quite true, but even if the legend of the icon is not true and is not mentioned by Eusebius, already at the end of the 4th century - beginning of the 5th century, the interpolation of painting/icon appears in "The Doctrine of Addai". It is clear that as the opposition to paganism disappears because it is no longer relevant, there are fewer and fewer pagans, the opposition to the use of images in worship gradually disappears and the use of images becomes more widespread, no longer being the pagan danger so relevant. Another point is that the doctrine of icons could only be established after the disappearance of pagan religions, the spread of Christianity, and the clarification of the two natures, wills and works in Christ. Until the Iconodulie, Christology was clarified. In this sense, the doctrine of icons could only be definitively clarified after the Christological disputes, that's why I say that it is a natural development of theology. In Protestant theology, there is not much room for a distinction between veneration and honor and that these are not the same as the worship of God, or the distinction is clear in the mind of an Orthodox Christian.

[@aurelgodoroja4012]

@TruthUnites Now let's move on to biblical exegesis: The bronze serpent destroyed by Hezekiah. It is very clear why the bronze serpent was destroyed, namely because the people worshiped the bronze serpent, worship that is due only to God. In the Old Testament, burning incense was part of the worship of God and was burned on the golden altar in the Tabernacle, so burning incense represented worship, which is due only to God. So instead of honoring it as an object through which God showed his mercy, they brought the bronze serpent burning incense (a cultic act of worship of God), which was not appropriate. It should be noted that they kept the bronze serpent as a special object and no one had a problem until it was considered a kind of god (and given a name), it was not destroyed until then, they had some honor for the object itself yet. The prostration in Joshua 3:15, he reduces it to a specific context, such as war or something and that in fact it was towards God himself the prostration. Nobody denies that it was towards God, it is obvious that you don't actually worship the Ark, but the Ark was considered the throne of God and where the glory of God was shown, that's why they prostrated there. Let's take the context of the Old Testament, God is present everywhere and is invisible, theoretically you can prostrate anywhere, however it is very logical that you usually worship Him where He is has a special presence, that is in front of the Ark. The same is true in the New Testament, it is more appropriate to bow to the ground in certain contexts, in the church, at home within your intimacy, in front of an icon that represents the Savior. Because if we reduce it to the fact that God is invisible, then we should not prostrate anywhere, it is fitting to prostrate in the presence of objects that remind us of God and especially if it is as the Orthodox see it that the icon is a special presence of God's grace. In Deuteronomy 4:15-19 and Exodus 20, to understand the problem of the prohibition of idols and the representation of God in the Old Testament, we must establish the reasons for the prohibition: - not to have other gods - prohibition that God is one and only He must be worshipped - not to make any carved image or any likeness of what is in heaven above, or on the earth beneath, or in the water under the earth, or to bow down to them or serve them, because God does not resemble creatures, He is altogether different, God is uncreated, spirit and invisible, and nothing in this world can truly represent Him, if we would have represented him, we would have anthropomorphized him and reduced him to a creature, plus that we would have been able to replace him with this idol. However, it was permissible to represent something from heaven such as the cherubim on the Ark of the Covenant or the temple as a projection of the world from heaven only at the indication and revelation of God. In the New Testament, all these reasons are no longer valid: - God is One but revealed in 3 Persons - God incarnates and becomes man and thus already has a human appearance - God reveals himself in this world through Jesus Christ, the image of the Father, we see the Father through Christ, whoever has seen me has seen the Father Taking into account the reasons for the prohibition, not only the prohibition itself, we observe that these reasons no longer have a purpose in the New Testament, God remains invisible and one, but is revealed as visible and triune. Then about the parallel of name/icon. In Exodus, there is a prohibition against taking the name of God in van and praising His Name is advised. The name of God is a revelation of God about Himself and is a conceptual/rational/verbal/(meta)linguistic icon about Him and His qualities, then His Name spoken is a call/attraction/blessing of His Essence. In Jewish theology and antiquity, there was the idea that the name encompasses the person it denotes and the power of that person. Similarly, God reveals himself in the world through the Person of His Son, who is the image and revelation of the Father in the world, then the icon is the artistic representation of the Son on wood. Similarly, as the Name is a kind of energy that unites the one who calls the Name with the One who is called, so the icon is a haric presence of the One represented on it, it uniting the one who prays with the One on the icon to which he prays. Interestingly, it did not mention at all about the worship of the Cross. Let's appeal to a parallel, 1. the revelation of God in the OT at the burning bush where the ground on which one walks is considered holy by virtue of the special presence of God there, and 2. the supreme act of self-sacrificial love that reveals God's character. 1. I am who I am and 2. I am the one who saves. Just as the ground becomes holy even if the discovery of God at the burning bush is not as "great" as that on the cross, so the cross is sanctified by the fact that God sacrificed himself for us on it, the supreme act (eternal nature) of Christ raises the cross from object of ridicule and torture to object of worship. Specifically, by the nature of the supreme act, it becomes worthy of worship. And finally if we praise God in literature and music, why could we not praise him in picture?

[@melroycorrea7720]

Well written and profoundly theological👍I hope Gavin gets to read your post.

[@tedvalis6071]

@@melroycorrea7720 It's not only well written; it is profound theologically because it is Orthodox. Gavin is NOT an Orthodox Christian. He does NOT believe in the same God we do. I don't know what god Protestants and Catholics believe in but it's certainly not the same as ours. By definition they are NOT Christian no matter how much they think they are. Therefore, Gavin should not be analyzing and explaining Icon veneration.

[@Forerunner42]

To me, the very fact that the earliest church fathers placed no expectations on themselves or their flock to venerate icons tells me that it's a later development that would have been absolutely foreign to the apostles, and even Christ himself. That tells me all I need to know. It's an accretion and should not be used to anathematize anyone. If someone else wants to venerate icons, I say sure, do what you want. I personally think it does little for you, and if anything, it gets in the way from true communion with the Spirit of God. But I won't fight anyone over it. I will, however, argue with someone who wants to claim that icon veneration goes back to the apostolic deposit. It's so clearly and unequivocally NOT an apostolic deposit.

[@PhilAlumb]

​@@Forerunner42...You make some excellent, common sense points.

[@Hugo-kx5sy]

BRILLIANT!

[@Heiserton]

Intercession role, not mediatory. That is an incredibly distinct difference. There is only one mediator, that is God. You pray with saints, not through and not to. With.

[@NoQuestionsAskedd]

Tovia Singer made me hate Protestants who use Old Testament to attack the original Church traditions

[@JScholastic]

Thank-you Gavin as a Protestant considering Orthodoxy for a while now. I've recently started looking more deeper into this subject it makes 0 sense when regarding scripture. Godbless you and your family ❤

[@πατριχορ]

What do you mean?

[@JScholastic]

@@πατριχορ read what I put

[@olivegrove-gl3tw]

same. honestly, I could never imagine paul ever kissing a painting of moses

[@johnathanrhoades7751]

Make sure you give John of Damascus’s letters on iconography a read before just dismissing the biblical basis thereof.

[@Jamie-Russell-CME]

This overview of examples of early church interaction was brilliant and enlightening in bringing forth truth. a must watch for all Christians.

[@ericnelson3021]

Christ is Risen! ☦️

[@TruthBeTold7]

I am going to recommend these books, which influenced me in my conversion to Orthodoxy: 1. Scripture and Tradition, by Archbishop Chrysostomos; 2. Bible, Church and Tradition, by Fr. Georges Florovsky; 3. A Man is His Faith, by Fr. Alexey Young; 4. The Great Divide, by Fr. Alexey Young; 6. Christianity or the Church?, by Ilarian Troitsky; 7. Sola Scriptura - In the Vanity of Their Minds, by Fr. John Whiteford; 8.The Spirit of Eastern Christendom, by Jaroslv Pelikan. (He was a great Lutheran Church historian who converted to Orthodoxy before he died).

[@r4ngerr4ge32]

If I may, I would also add: “Rock and Sand” by Archbishop Josiah Trenham “The Truth of Our Faith” Volumes 1&2 by Elder Cleopa of Romania.

[@blackwater642]

Thank you so much for this video!

[@lucianbane2170]

totally mind-blowing. I did not know this and it surely helps give damning weight to this argument

[@MrHEMIII]

Beautiful work Gavin!!

[@DanielApologetics]

Added to favorites. Well done!

[@Beefcake1982]

Thank you for this excellent and thorough explanation!

[@Gondor149]

Just wanted to say this has been a great channel. It has caused me to question why I believe what I believe. At the outset this is a scary thing it has caused me to look deeper at church history, the Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, and the reformation. It is all so much deeper and more complicated than I ever thought.

[@TruthUnites]

glad its been helpful and thanks for having an open mind and heart!

[@carolynschuster291]

read what I wrote. Funny, Im the opposite

[@duckymomo7935]

It turns out the RCC and EO are being ahistorical interesting; they traditions are in fact hardly apostolic and had to “develop” and more often than not unbiblical

[@GadierCasiano]

Definitely can relate to this!!! blessings

[@Draezeth]

@@BryceCarmony Where did Jesus say that?

[@daledalesson7061]

Thank you Dr Ortlund, a remarkable and useful video!

[@giannihatzianmevris1861]

Ex Orthodox here, thanks for your insightful information 👍 👏 👌

[@aericabison23]

I am a Protestant believer who makes pictures of Christ and the saints. I have often been told throughout my life that it’s wrong of me to make pictures like these mainly because of how Catholics and other “traditional” Christians treat such images. I never felt the temptation to bow down to my work or worship it. I know my pictures aren’t the real Jesus or saints, but representations of my interpretation of what I learn in the Bible. These pictures often help me remember important truths in Scripture. I have filled a shelf in my room with paper cutouts showing the life of Jesus Christ. They’re one of the first things I see every morning. I have seen guests’ jaws drop when they see the cutouts. It’s honestly amazing what God’s gifts can do. I can appreciate artwork as artwork, but if someone asks me to bow down to an icon of any biblical character, I would leave the place. That’s not for Christians to do. If people make artwork of Jesus and the saints for the purpose of veneration, I think they should stop, repent and never make such things again. I do acknowledge how frequent the temptation to idolatry is, but from my personal experience, it seems to me that most people’s idols are *themselves* . They idolise their own tastes, things that make them happy. This is why the command is given to deny the self, stay away from idols (after talking a lot about how friendship with the world is enmity with God), &c. I understand that idolatry in the NT has a broader scope than simply making portraits of funny characters and performing rituals/showing respect to them. Unfortunately, many who claim to be Christians do not seem to see the flaw in their logic about the distinction between bowing down to God and bowing down to pictures of who is supposed to be God or one of His servants. I think it’s okay to have pictures of Jesus in your home as decoration (like during Christmas when we make a Nativity scene) or reminders of Scripture, but it’s definitely wrong to do what our Catholic and Orthodox friends are doing with pictures.

[@mschmidt1645]

I’m sure your art is beautiful. I agree with you 100% about the worshipping of oneself. I don’t know anyone that worships statues, but I sure know a lot who worship themselves.

[@ZachFish-]

How can you hold to his view but still make images? Wondering how that is?

[@woozyjoe4703]

I was recently blessed as a Catechumen and immediately afterwards I had a meeting with the Priest. He told me I'd be leaving the church that day with a handful of Icons and that I had to venerate them as I prayed. When I told him I wasn't comfortable doing that he got quite prickly and told me it wasn't optional. Prior to this he'd said the only requirement for becoming a Catechumen was a desire to be part of Christ's Church ( which I have ) It doesn't seem like there just paint and wood to me. I obviously have a deep interest in Orthodoxy but the icon thing really puts me off. The compulsory element is so obviously an innovation and political response by the Byzantine state, that it negates the idea that they are the original "one true Church" I suspect your video, which was extremely timely for me, will have raised a few hackles because I doubt many Orthodoxy have ever thought about it or if they have, are guilty of such an enormous feat of rationalisation and denial, that they will respond harshly to this threat

[@nyart66]

Did you ask him if this is common practice for all priests to do this? It could be something he does but it could also be commonplace. Honestly either situation really creeps me out. I’m sorry. I hope the Lord guides you. Don’t feel guilt or ashamed by anyone

[@TheologyNerd777]

Hey brother. I spent countless hours studying the early church fathers/doctrines and the EOC. I have taken 5 catechumen classes online and was very close myself. I attended Antiochian, Greek, and Coptic Orthodox churches. Please prayerfully consider reading Disillusioned: Why I Left the Eastern Orthodox Priesthood and Church by recently former EO priest Josua Schooping. You puts the truth out there. You need to know what you are really signing up for. It is not the apostolic deposit of faith. I would be happy to chat with you any time.

[@wonderingpilgrim]

@woozyjoe4703 Thank you for sharing this. Can you imagine Peter's follow up statement to " repent and be baptized" being, "and here are some icons you must venerate"?

[@woozyjoe4703]

To be clear, the Priest wasn't being unpleasant and he is a genuinely loving and kind man, but he was pretty immovable on the icon issue. I also spoke with another Priest who was much more relaxed about it and was advising me to take my time with everything and pray for God's guidance, which I am doing. I find so many loving people in Orthodoxy, I love the Liturgy, I love the incense, I love a lot of the rituals, and I love the depth of so much of their theology it attracts me enormously, but the icons, as well as a lot of the Theotokos ideas, are the things I find really hard to ignore. Honestly, I was trying to put them to the back of my mind and telling myself that they were just details I could leave alone but this video has really put it into perspective. I need to wait for what comes. So grateful for the work Gavin does on here.

[@TheologyNerd777]

@@woozyjoe4703 The things that you love about the Orthodox church are found in a "high" Anglican church ACNA (Anglican Church North America) without the innovations and idolatry that have been added over the centuries. They are a "reformed" and "purified" catholic and apostolic church. There is a reason that you are uncomfortable with certain things in the EO churches, as I was as well. The believe that check you feel in your gut is the Holy Spirit. Please slow down, pray, research and reach out if you'd like to discuss.

[@goodquestion7915]

@TruthUnites thank you for this video. It's very informative.

[@Jackie.2025]

Thanks for the video! You presented it very charitable and truthful. That’s true, this alone will make one Protestant!

[@georgwagner937]

I don't think this video will make a person protestant. A person that does not think the Bible is infallible or even correct, will not suddenly think: Oh, icon veneration is an accretion, I should be a protestant Christian. I agree with Trent Horn on that point. For protestantism to be true Protestant claims need to be proven, disproving catholic/orthodox claims does not do that.

[@manxydom9879]

@@georgwagner937Protestantism doesn’t have to be proven true, all it does is rely on the Bible. All we care about is that the Bible is true. And yeah, that can definitely cause differences in belief and practice, but not in orthodox beliefs - those are not “Christian.” But if we disprove Catholicism / Orthodoxy, that is, any of the “infallible” portions, the whole point of authority falls. Therefore, the church is not the only authority. And those who disagree with the authority are… drum roll… protesters. Or, Protestants. So if you want to be a Christian, but reject the Catholic / Orthodox views, you can easily be a Protestant. Anyways, I am not against Catholic / Orthodox Christians. But I don’t think their authority as the only church (not necessarily “true,” - I think all three branches are true) is accurate.

[@Tornadospeed10]

@@manxydom9879if orthodoxy isn’t true than Christianity isn’t. I’m sorry but that’s just the truth.

[@manxydom9879]

@@Tornadospeed10Asserting that if orthodoxy is false means that Christianity is false is just that - an assertion. Anyways, I never said orthodoxy or the Orthodox Church wasn’t true. I think it is. I don’t think it is infallible in every aspect though. For example, the assumption of Mary could have never happened, and the Orthodox Church would still be true. Fallible men stating that something is true when it isn’t doesn’t stop the scripture from remaining true. I’m not saying all traditions outside the Bible are false, but I think some are false.

[@anwingm]

@@Tornadospeed10 As a former oriental orthodox from the cradle for 4 decades and presently baptist, I find your claims laughable :D

[@matthewmeyer3483]

Gavin! Tremendous work on putting this video together. You have challenged and given me (an orthodox Inquirer) much to think about. I would be very interested in listening in on a conversation between you and Jonathan Pageau about the symbolism and use of Iconography. From watching him speak on the matter, I feel that I have learned that the reason for appealing to the saints for forgiveness and other matters, as opposed to directly receiving from the hands of God is because of the participatory nature of God's Kingdom. It is not that we need their mediation but that Saints are welcomed to participate in "the divine council" and other roles as an act of God's love. In this way, love ascends up and back down the hierarchy in a beautiful harmonious fashion that unites Heaven and Earth. Veneration of the Icon allows us to enter this reality and one that is more truly understood through experience. I have found this idea of "participation" most powerfully expressed in the theme of the Son of Man, Genesis, and the biblical narrative as a whole. To be honest the info presented here is causing much cognitive dissonance and doubt. I have many experiences that tell me that venerating icons is a beautiful thing but cannot deny the alarming info presented here. In moments like this I find the only thing I can turn to is Christ in prayer. Should I set my home icon of Christ and the saints aside despite it helping orient my life around Him? I don't know the answer to that. I have been telling myself that the fruits of the spirit would be my litmus test for truth. In other words, has God made me more like him or less through communing with the saints? I am still waiting to see. Perhaps Idolatry has more to do with the heart then the action. I pray for discernment and ask that you would pray for me too. Thank you for your faithfulness.

[@TruthUnites]

Thanks Matthew, may the Lord guide you and direct you!

[@benjaminread5287]

Yes, I too would love to see a discussion between Ortland and Pageau!

[@joseortegabeede8233]

You don’t need to remove the icons in your home, religious art can Be greatly edifying. The difference is whether we use art for devotion or for actual worship and for the liturgy

[@valerietucker7340]

Hi Matthew! If I may add to the conversation. Even God Himself commanded images to be made - the statues of cherubim that go on either side of the tabernacle and the bronze serpent (which when people looked at it, they were healed from their snake bites) to name a couple. God made us to be body AND spirit, not just spirit. As such, the LORD comes to us in both spiritual and physical ways. Think of Jesus - He healed by His Word, and by mixing His saliva with dirt and putting it on a man's eyes. He gave large crowds bread and fish to keep them sustained. A woman was healed through touching the tassel of His cloak. He physically died on the Cross for us. He instituted the Eucharist - we get to actually receive the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus, truly Present in the Eucharist, into our bodies. Wow! What an amazing gift. God made us with bodies, and He declared it very good. Our bodies are not bad. Images are not banned - graven images are. Looking at/having an image of Jesus is not only not harmful, it's powerful and beautiful! I encourage you to look into the Catholic Faith - good resources can be found on Ascension Presents (KZbin, the Ascension App) and Catholic Answers (website and KZbin). God bless! - A Catholic Christian

[@user-jy5qm8nc9m]

You forgot to mention that once people started praying to the bronze serpent the king destroyed it and God praised it....

[@curtisbrookegreenwood6866]

Gavin, I love the manner in which you speak, and I must add, I really did enjoy hearing you speak with an extra tone of boldness in this video. It was great. Keep up the good work. These videos are always worth listening to.

[@GEN512X]

Thankful for God's providential hand in the reformation of His Church; where His word is freed to accomplish His will - not the will of Idolaters/Venerators (same thing).

[@JonathanPageau]

Everyone is telling me come watch this video. Hmm. There are many funny things and approaches here. The scholarly approach is surprising, because I have heard so many scholars tell us that the divinity of Christ, homoousion, that the Trinity is a similar form of accretion. In the same way, we are told that this or that book is a "late addition" to the Bible, etc. So much of this is irrelevant in my estimation, the question is the story of revelation itself. Why is the image not available to being a place of the revelation of God? What is the reason for the 2nd commandment? That is the question that should be asked. Then, the proposition that there is no scriptural distinction between strict worship, and lower kind of veneration is difficult to stomach. Are we to believe that the Hebrews were worshiping the name of God at the same level as God himself? The praising of the name is important because God revealed his name to us, and so the praising of the image becomes important for the same reason. This is not just "something that happened" but the form of revelation itself, moving in ever increasing power from heaven to earth. Whether this truth became clear to Christian in year 1 or year 700 is irrelevant.

[@TruthUnites]

Hi Jonathan! Nice to hear from you. Hope to interact further some time. Briefly, I would disagree that the divinity of Christ, Trinity, etc. are comparable to icon veneration in their development. The divinity of Christ is a theme or motif of the New Testament. He is frequently worshiped, explicitly declared God in the epistles, crucified for blasphemy in the gospels, acts with divine authority, etc. The development in understanding of both Christology and Trinity stems from this foundation. This is in contrast to icon veneration, which I showed not merely from the scholarship but also from historical evidence is opposed by the early Christians. Also, to clarify, I did not deny the distinction between worship and veneration as such. See 1:01:11. Thanks for commenting and perhaps we can talk on another occasion about some of your other points and the larger differences.

[@graceuhmhilton6499]

Would LOVE to see you guys have a conversation!!!

[@SeanWinters]

If later Christians can come up with new ideas, which you seem to be suggesting of the Trinity, then why are Baptists and Pentecostals incorrect? Beyond being outside of the "apostolic succession"?

[@LPeter-gn4th]

This was so thorough for an *hour video I'm so impressed

[@theknight8524]

Watch his interview with ex Orthodox priest

[@LPeter-gn4th]

@@theknight8524 I did! It was his first-ever video I watched

[@ProfYaffle]

This is so good. And the time stamps so helpful

[@culpepper7665]

Seraphim Hamilton has 4 or 5 videos, each about an hour long directly addressing this video. I recommend watching those for a DEEP dive into why Ortlund is mistaken.

[@g.williams2047]

Silence pagan.

[@culpepper7665]

@@g.williams2047 🙄

[@soteriology400]

Appreciate all you do Gavin! 👍

[@SimpleAmadeus]

You say that it is not valid to make a distinction between worshiping and venerating. Ironically, you even use kissing as an example for comparison. Later on, you say that kissing(!) the bible is fine, because that is just respecting and honoring it, which is different from venerating (which you made synonymous with worshiping). This is the exact same argument. It is literally identical. Venerating means to treat with respect. Why is it okay when you do it? In those days, there was no printing press. These icons were effectively their bibles. Your rhetoric is not consistent.

[@SP-td9xj]

Furthermore in many of his quotes of church fathers they're talking about worship of images, which the Catholic and orthodox both oppose in the first place

[@sjappiyah4071]

Amazing work here. This is an excellent resource on this topic. Thank you

[@TruthUnites]

Glad it was helpful!

[@culpepper7665]

Seraphim Hamilton has 4 or 5 videos, each about an hour long directly addressing this video. I recommend watching those for a DEEP dive into why Ortlund is mistaken.

[@sjappiyah4071]

@@culpepper7665 This is the problem with orthodox & catholic response videos , y’all take 5 hours to respond to a 1 hour video and spend most of the 5 hours on red herrings lol

[@imaboss6244]

What an awesome video. I knew next to nothing about this topic yesterday and now I feel like I know so much, yet I’ve barely scratched the surface of how much knowledge there is on the topic. I feel like so much knowledge is knowing what you don’t know

[@thecatalysm5658]

This video is super well done. Excellent and accurate work.

[@chelseabradham3889]

@TruthUnites I'm going to go through the video point by point, section by section. First of all, the term Icon as understood by the church is derived from the Greek Ekon, which yes means image but a more precise translation of what is meant by it in this context would actually be Likeness. Icons don't always depict one figure, nor is the figure necessarily the focus of the Icon, many depict multiple people and still many others depict events from scripture or from church history. Mary, for example, at least in Orthodox Iconography is almost never depicted by herself, she's almost always with Christ, holding Christ, pregnant with Christ with it painted so that Christ is visible in her womb etc. This is very much by design, there's a point that the Iconographers are communicated by doing that and it's the fact that Mary, while of paramount importance both for the example of her life and for her pivotal role in the gospel, is only important because she leads us straight to her Son. It is also important to understand that Icons are not mere images nor are they limited to paintings, mosaics, and Statues. All who worship Christ should be constantly striving to be living Icons of Christ showing His likeness to the rest of the world by the way we live and the way we treat those around us. To call an Icon an image and limit them to wood, paint, or stone presents a limited understanding and a misleading picture of how Icons are understood in the church. To be honest, researching enough to respond to the timing of when Icons came on the scene is really above my capabilities right at this moment but I will just point 1 thing out regarding the ancient examples of Icons dating back to the Ante Nicene period. The ones we have, are those that survived 2,000 years. That does not mean they were the earliest to be created or used, there may have been Icons earlier than we think that were either destroyed or rendered unrecognizable as such by the ravages of time or by the iconoclasts who did destroy Icons. One of the reasons many of the oldest we have are in western territories is because the controversy that led up to Nicaea II was so prevalent in the east. Icons were actually banned in Constantinople for decades during that period and many Icons of unknown age were destroyed during that time. My point isn't that Icons were absolutely being used all the way back to the beginning or were being used in the same way that they are now, my point is that we would do well to remember the limitations and incomplete nature of the evidence we have. As for the distinction between bowing down to images to worship them or to venerate them, of course this would not be seen in the Old Testament, because at the time, there aren't any actually Holy things that man could correctly make an image of, there are no "Icons" as we understand them in a religious context now. during the Old Testament period. The verse you referenced even makes note of this fact, saying that they didn't see an image when God spoke to them in the fire. they don't have the first clue how to make an actual Icon of God because they don't have any idea what one would even look like. The only images that exist at that time are idols, the difference is that an Icon is a likeness or image of that which is true. An idol is an imagined representation of that which is (at best unseen and at worst completely false). If followers of the God of Israel in the Old Testament period were forbidden from making and using all religious art, why does God follow that commandment up a little bit later by commanding them to adorn the Ark of the Covenant, the tabernacle, and later the Temple itself, with so much imagery? The connection between Icons and the incarnation is this, Jesus, being both fully human and fully divine, is Himself in a way, a living Likeness of God the Father, one that, at least for a while, mankind could see, hear, touch, and converse with. This, in effect, meant that God was no-longer unseen and therefore an Icon, not an Idol, but a true Likeness of God could at last be made. As for the concern about when the line gets crossed in the human heart, I won't deny that it's a fine line and that is exactly why a correct understanding of the line between veneration and worship, the line between Holy created beings (God vs angels, saints etc), and the theology of what it means to venerate and who and what is being venerated, must be a thorough and repeated part of catechesis for all those who venerate the Saints, Angels, Prophets, and indeed Christ Himself through the use of Icons. That said, to say that just because the practice can become warped and dangerous when incorrectly understood that no one should engage in what can actually be a fruitful and humbling part of devotional practice would be like saying the Eucharistic wine should be replaced with water just in case someone in attendance is so easily tempted to alcohol abuse that the spoonful offered from the chalice to each worthy recipient would be enough to set them off. Sincerely, your Friendly Neighborhood Orthodox layperson

[@bellingdog]

I agree with you, except for the Hebrews bowing down before Icons in the OT. They bowed down before the Ark of the Covenant, a typology of the Theotokos (Mother Mary). They even created images of Divine things, the Cherubims on the Ark of the Covenant. In I Samuel 5, we see that even the statue of the Philistine god Dagon falls down before the Ark of the Covenant. The Ark of the Covenant is to have the Presence of God inside, just as Mary has God in her womb, and now all of the Saints have God inside by Grace (theosis). Thus, the icons are like arks of the Covenant. Thus, iconoclasts not only go against the Ancient Church, but against the Faith handed down to us through the Jews.

[@repentantrevenant9776]

The main issue is what Gavin addressed in the video - that the veneration of icons is considered a theological necessity, despite the fact that it was universally opposed just a few centuries earlier. It’s the prime example of the Church claiming authority and tradition when in fact what they are introducing as doctrine is a novelty and an accretion.

[@harrygarris6921]

@@repentantrevenant9776 No, it wasn't brand new doctrine. The idea of a physical space/thing representing the holiness of a departed saint was not a novelty in the early church. Rather than gathering in temples, which were illegal for Christians to have at the time, they gathered around the graves and tombs of the early martyrs and held their liturgies there. Even during the lifetime of the apostles Christians had already recognized that was something unique and special about the bones of a man or woman who had been martyred for Christ as opposed to gathering and holding liturgy in a field or forest or something like that. Also you have to understand the audience that early church fathers like Clement of Alexandria were writing to. They lived in a pagan world and shared their faith with pagans. In other words, people who only understood religious imagery in the sense of an icon of a pagan god that you DID offer full worship/adoration to. This is why you see the strong language against the worship of images. It is not because they didn't yet have a theological difference between worship and veneration at that point. They had the old testament after all.

[@gwj1961]

In the second giving of the Law in Deut, God explicitly says that you are to make no image of him since when you looked into the fire (at Mt. Sinai), you saw no image. This, of course, now means that since we have an image, the prohibition is removed. The other thing, worship has numerous levels of meaning in English (in the Anglican wedding service: "with my body I thee worship", and judges in England for years have been known as "your worship".

[@Jy3pr6]

@@repentantrevenant9776 Veneration of icons is just the outward expression of the inward veneration of God’s work in the life of the Saints. If it isn’t an act of idolatry for Asians to bow to each other, or Europeans to kiss each other, or for a grieving wife to kiss a picture of her husband, why would it be in the case of those who became radiant vessels of the Holy Spirit? The ultimate logic of why the 7th Ecumenical Council and the Orthodox Church today have for considering this practice necessary, is the same logic Protestants use to explain the Biblical verses that clearly state the necessity of works for salvation. It’s not that the act in itself saves you, but there is no way to explain how a person could have repented without the fruits of repentance, there’s no way someone truly loves God without expressing that love in actions, and there’s no way they can truly love God and fail to express love to those people through whom His presence most shined in the world.

[@Womb_to_Tomb_Apologetics]

Wow! What a comprehensive and incredible compilation of evidence and arguments. This was very thought-provoking. 🤔