The BEST and WORST Responses to my Icons Video

[@jg7923]

I’m not against icons or religious art in of itself. I’m just against people kissing and bowing down to paintings / statues and forcing other Christians to also do so with the threat of anathema if they don’t.

[@bradleyperry1735]

There is no threat. You are either a Christian, or you’re not. You choose. The Way is open to all.

[@bairfreedom]

@@bradleyperry1735 This is one of the reasons I LOVE knowing scripture well. You ever read the book 1John? The book is a series of tests. John writes at the end that he wrote the book to show fellow believers " I write this so that you may know you are in the faith" No Catholic dogmas are in the tests and there's 10 of them! It's all about Christ and changes you should see in yourself if you are following him. No icons, no Mary, no baptism, no eucharist, no saint praying, NOTHING. It's just so much simpler than the RCC control freaks try to make it. Jesus is amazing!

[@bradleyperry1735]

@@bairfreedom Unfortunately, you don’t know the Scriptures well. While 1 John is, in fact, a commentary in the Christian life, it is not an exhaustive one. You still have some idea that the Scriptures are where Christians derive our doctrines. This is incorrect, and also not what the Scriptures teach. The Scriptures are a part of the Holy Traditions of the Church. And the Scriptures say, explicitly, that the Church is the pillar and ground of Truth. The Scriptures do not say that about themselves. Furthermore, when Saint John is writing this epistle, is he writing it to unbelievers? No. He is writing it to the Church. So this is not an exhaustive theological treatise, nor is it a liturgical guidebook. Does 1 John cover everything else found in the Scriptures? If the answer is no, then your point has been refuted. PS: I’m not Roman Catholic, so I’m not concerned with their dogmas.

[@bairfreedom]

@@bradleyperry1735 Who would you believe the church is? I believe it to be the catholicity of all confessed believers in his identity and work on the cross and putting our faith in that truth. I see that consistent theme in scripture.

[@bradleyperry1735]

@@bairfreedom That isn’t at all what the Scriptures portray. The Church is visible and has borders. There are those within, and those without. Baptism and the Eucharist have fulfilled the purposes of circumcision and the Old Testament Passover meal. The Church is not an organization of individual believers. It is the Body of Christ. This is why children can be part of the Church despite the fact that they cannot be “professing believers.” Your conception of the Church limits it to converts only. The Church is One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic. It is the Eastern Orthodox Church.

[@onepingonlyplease]

Forcing believers to kiss icons via the threat of being anathematized and dishonoring previous church saints and fathers who did not kiss icons by making it an anathema is very problematic for me.

[@protestanttoorthodox3625]

Your problem is with authority. It’s clear historically that Orthodoxy is the 1 true church.

[@matiaskoivulehto5880]

It's clear only if it is taken as granted (theologically rather than historically)

[@onepingonlyplease]

@@protestanttoorthodox3625 Thank you for responding and it has opened a door …Anathemas remind me of Old Testament times when God’s people were under a system of laws (lots of laws) and massive authority and legalism and access to God only through a religious system of laws and priests and authority figures and no real assurance of salvation and the requirement of perpetual sacrifices such as was Judaism. To me, what made the gospel such Good News was Jesus coming and fundamentally changing the religious system. When he said “my yoke is easy and my burden is light,” Jesus is calling all who were weary and burdened to come to Him for rest from the heavy burden of the system of works that the Pharisees laid on the backs of the people. It seems that it didn’t take long for a similar system to replace the legalistic, works based system after the apostles were gone. Protestants try to bring back the grace-filled, ever forgiving, easy yoke Jesus gifted us with. The anathemas seem the antithesis of Jesus’ nature and it seems the head of the church, Jesus, has been laid across the guillotine.

[@protestanttoorthodox3625]

@@onepingonlyplease Paul the apostle anathematized people who preached a different gospel than what the apostles taught.

[@protestanttoorthodox3625]

@@onepingonlyplease Your personal thoughts feelings and opinions and the way you personally interpret scripture is interesting. But if it isn’t in submission to the Church Jesus established it’s useless

[@thecatholicperspective]

I am a Catholic teen Who loves you and this channel. Apologetics Is about the Truth, but I really have fun in these dialogues and debates. It's very fascinating and exciting! Thank you

[@TruthUnites]

Glad to be connected to you, thanks for the kind words!

[@annb9029]

Reason and theology has a great discussion called Are Icons Idols and Accretions? w/ Dr. Jim Papandrea

[@thecatholicperspective]

@@annb9029 I do watch Reason and Theology. It's Amazing! Thank you for the suggestion. I missed this response

[@PeterTheRock-II]

As a Catholic I find this conversation extremely fascinating. Thank you Gavin for furthering this discussion.

[@calson814]

@@CamGaylor how about "pray for Unity"? And what is the error in the Catholic Church?

[@PeterTheRock-II]

@@CamGaylor hey, what would you consider as the most egregious error ?

[@matthiasbrandt1252]

@@calson814 where do you start?

[@matthiasbrandt1252]

@@calson814 I just read the other comments... and agree with Cameron Gaylor

[@PeterTheRock-II]

@@CamGaylor thanks for the reply, when I get time I will try looking into the sources you cited. Let us pray for unity so that the wounds and scars in the body of Christ May be healed by God's good grace and that the Church May be one. May God bless you brother and keep you safe.

[@kennylee6499]

Too often, I find that the common sense, logical view of things ends up siding with the Protestant camp and Catholics and Eastern Orthodox tend to defer to tradition, theology, and eventually justify those with the magisterium. In this case, it is plainly clear, without a doubt, that icon veneration was a historical accretion. That’s just that. The fact that this has blown up shows just how strong your argument has been, that it makes you a danger to the theology of Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy.

[@bernardoohigginsvevo2974]

Perhaps on this one matter, but I feel like most of Gavin’s arguments on other topics amount to “Why be Catholic/Orthodox when you could find most of their traditions within Protestantism?” That’s the main trouble with his formula; he tries to defend Protestantism as a whole, when it itself is an extraordinarily diverse movement. Catholics and Orthodox meanwhile have a concrete, more or less unified theology that they can readily fall back on. Ultimately, the issue with Protestantism is that it is cut off from the traditions of the early church, with most modern Protestants existing in a temporal island of sorts, where the body of Christ lives and dies with the lives of individuals, rather than spanning across time as well as space.

[@kennylee6499]

@@bernardoohigginsvevo2974 Ehh I would respond more but I think we can just agree to disagree on the unity of Protestantism. But don’t get me wrong I have a great deal of respect and admiration for Catholicism.

[@aubrey-g9d]

A danger to Catholic and or Orthodox Theology? No. A danger to those in need of the truth of Orthodox and Catholic theology on this matter? Yes. Hence the need to address it.

[@shema9172]

@@aubrey-g9d It means OT and RC lied.

[@aubrey-g9d]

@@shema9172 How have they lied? The Doctrines of the deposit of faith have all developed over time. We see the veneration of rejects to some degree in Scripture itself, both Old and New Testament. We also see the use of icons in Scripture in the Temple of God and the Tabernacle. We also see the use of the snake as an icon of Christ. We see the historic use of icons in the early Church as well as the use of relics..we also see the veneration of the saints early on..the veneration of icons developed out of this background of acceptable practice. There is nothing dishonest here. There is only a lack of understanding. The arguments put forth against the veneration of icons haven't changed anything but to better educate the uninformed on where the discussion is.

[@bethsaari6209]

This series has been more than helpful. Faith affirming and eye-opening! My prayer is this channel grows like crazy!!! Thank you, Gavin, for the time and work you have put into these videos.

[@AppalachianPaisano]

As a traditionally minded Catholic I wanted to take a moment to personally attack you for making these videos....I kid! I used to believe largely in the stereotype that Protestants just didn't think about these topics at all, you have shown that that is not necessarily true. While I disagree with you on much, your videos have helped me to realize I must act more charitable towards other traditions and denominations, yet while being uncompromising on my Catholic faith. After exploring your channel for a little while I have certainly grown in this regard. Much appreciated and I look forward to further discussions!

[@Lotterywinnerify]

I appreciate the sentiment but I do not understand how the Church has repeatedly softened its stances on very important issues like ecumenism and tightened its stance on dubious issues like Icons.

[@AppalachianPaisano]

@@Lotterywinnerify The post Vatican II Church certainly begs these questions on ecumenism, particularly with other religions.

[@Lotterywinnerify]

Where do you find an answer?@@AppalachianPaisano

[@ronalddelavega3689]

Guy I want to be charitable towards the RCC and Orthodoxy, but my charitableness, quickly runs afoul of clear scriptural teaching and the early history of church worship. To me these are extremely serious issues that I can't compromise on, In fact I can't keep quiet about them.

[@Norbingel]

I truly appreciate this sentiment but can't see how you can pursue this charitable attitude when infallible church doctrine does (or at least indisputably, DID) not.

[@Rubberglass]

I’m a Protestant revisiting church history and traditions as I’m more mystical in my approach to the faith and feel a bit alone with my reformed friends. Your channel has been super helpful in my journey of enlightenment.

[@theproceedings4050]

If you want some mystery us Lutherans allow for that. Not all of God is explainable in the words of men. Hopefully with the Spirit and careful thought we can approach a simulacrum of the complete truth.

[@Presbapterian]

Very dense and valuable resources! We are so grateful for your ministry through this channel. May the Lord bless you and your family even greater this year 🙏 🙏 🙏

[@TruthUnites]

Thank you! Glad you find the channel helpful!

[@joshpeterson2451]

This is when the Church went down an extremely dark path in my honest opinion. Once you anathematize people for not responding the way you prefer in the presence of icons, it's hard for me to think you're anything other than the divisive person of Titus 3:10. The laypeople who obeyed Second Nicaea out of respect and ignorance were much holier than the charlatans who forced them on that of anathema.

[@johnnyd2383]

Heretics always defend heretics. That is the nature of those belonging to the same fold, in this case to the devil.

[@jayehm8075]

Gavin, I really appreciate your work. Please continue your efforts they have had a tremendous effect on me and others I know.

[@TruthUnites]

Thanks, great to hear that!

[@AsterionH]

Could you imagine Joshua instructing the Israelites to draw pictures of Moses, bow down, kiss them while praying to Moses? ... really puts things into perspective of how absurd icon veneration really is.

[@tookie36]

At that time did god incarnate into creation?

[@daMillenialTrucker]

​@@tookie36it doesn't matter, paganism is paganism

[@gaizokubanou]

@@tookie36 Then can you imagine Jesus telling his disciples into making images of Abraham, Moses and David to kiss and bow and pray to the said images?

[@rolandovelasquez135]

Great Gavin. Thanks again. So clear. The first to plead his case seems right, Until another comes and examines him. Proverbs 18:17 Great examination 👍🏼👍🏼

[@brandonclark908]

Not only do I feel like I can relate to you because I’m Baptist but I’m also obsessed with “Michael Scott”. Makes your channel that much better. Thank you for the video Dr. Ortlund!

[@MrHEMIII]

Love your channel!! You are very balanced and thorough in your responses. All while being kind and smart. I love your grace. May God richly bless you for your expression of God's grace and truth in your responses!

[@matthiasbrandt1252]

Another helpful video. Your avoidance of nastiness and not simply dismissing opposing viewpoints are commendable. I visited an Eastern Orthodox church a few times. One time Mary's "dormition" was the focus. A man bowed down on the ground to a fabric with Mary's image woven into it. Thinking back, I wish I had said " you must not do that!" like the angel in Revelation. Nobody stopped him. It boggles my mind how central icons are to these people. Thanks for all the amazing information and staying grounded in the scriptures. Keep it up and the Lord bless you!

[@hettinga359]

@ThoskaBrah …that doesn’t follow. Believing that God manifested himself in material form does not mean you must worship images of that material form.

[@matthiasbrandt1252]

A. Hettinga...... couldn't have said it better myself

[@Kdriggs15]

Veneration is definitely off-putting to protestants (I was one so I understand your sentiment) but that's because protestants don't call themselves out on the same thing often times. Many mainline reformation groups (Lutherans, Anglicans) will bow towards the cross or the altar, which is veneration. This practice goes back to the people of Israel bowing to the Ark of the Covenant, or the Temple, or kissing the piece of wood in their door way. The manner in which people have venerated things depends on where you are in the world. In the East, kissing and bowing are common place. The protestant argument is inconsistent with the historic practice of God's people to me, which follows because I am no longer protestant.

[@hettinga359]

@@Kdriggs15 it’s not really inconsistent. The Jewish people had a clear divine prohibition against religious devotion to images. The brass serpent was eventually destroyed because people were burning incense to it. We have very little in the way of ancient Jewish art because all artistic depictions were seen as a slippery slope to idolatry. Mainline Protestant denominations with a high church liturgy sometimes bow towards the communion table but that is an acknowledgment of Christ’s presence in the elements. Very few Protestants would be comfortable bowing down or kissing a picture or sculpture of Jesus or the saints. These types of acts might have made some sense in an ancient eastern context where bowing and kissing was something commonly offered to authority figures like state officials but in our modern context they are reserved almost exclusively for religious worship.

[@Kdriggs15]

@@hettinga359 First of all, I disagree with your assessment of Jewish practices prior to Christ. The Archeological evidence of Jewish places of worship points to there being images I.e Dura Europos. It’s also important to point out I’d say all apostolic churches with the exceptions of the Nestorians, venerate images and relics. Our context in the West and what we’re comfortable with doesn’t change the historic practice of Christians for two thousand years. God bless

[@natebozeman4510]

My book list keeps growing. Thank you for the amazing work as always! Also, the new mic sounds great!

[@masonchase7002]

Thanks for doing the Lord’s work Pastor Ortlund.

[@BrianLassek]

I am so grateful these things are getting talked about. It's so helpful to have dialog that points to different texts and arguments. These talks have really helped me focus on more productive areas of study and prayerfully considering these things.

[@davidlarson4647]

Thanks for your concise verbiage. I truly appreciate it when you keep things specific and non-repetitive.

[@Jackie.2025]

Thank you for this charitable and insightful video!

[@georgelulgjuraj1007]

I’ve been really really disgruntled by the lack of Protestant interaction with early church history. Gabon is doing a work that so few are willing and able to do. God blues you brother

[@divinenatureonline]

Gavin is a God send. Thank you brother. 🙏

[@paulsmallwood1484]

Thank you for your hard work in this area. It has been very helpful. The knee jerk “Protestants are always wrong” approach on the part of some Roman Catholic apologists is so counter productive. These people are not interested in advancing the dialogue.

[@saintejeannedarc9460]

I would have to say it goes both ways. That's why this channel is important, because it seeks unity among the brethren. Yes, we have quibbles w/ some traditions of Christianity, but they are still Christians. We don't claim to be perfect in all our doctrines either. For now, we see through a glass darkly.

[@enshala6401]

Suan Sonna of Intellectual Catholicism spent many weeks preparing a thoughtful answer to Gavin's Iconoclasm video. It was four hours long, and he didn't even cover the anathema part. The reason it takes so long to properly refute Gavin's attack is because high-quality research takes a tremendous amount of care. That is, Suan is very careful with his work. Contrast that with Gavin's iconoclasm video, where he made a mess of things. And I have proof. You know the word venerate? Have you ever looked it up in a dictionary? Gavin should have. Veneration: "To treat with reverence or respect." Revernce and venerate con from the same root word - to revere. You know what else comes that root? Reverend. How many pastors on the planet go by Revernd? Who accuses people of worshipping their pastor if they call him Reverend? You can't have it both ways: either Reverend and venerate are synonymous with "worship" or they aren't. We traditional Christians know the difference between veneration and worship. It's not that hard. No one thanks a block of wood for saving them. So please tell me, do Gavin and his followers care about the Truth? What if he's wrong - will he ever admit it? Would you?

[@bethl]

@@enshala6401. Any Reverend worth his salt would react in the same way angels & apostles reacted in Scripture…don’t you dare bow down before me. I don’t go to a museum & bow & kiss the incredible religious art…but I certainly appreciate it. Veneration has become much more than honoring a piece of art, & I believe you know that.

[@enshala6401]

@bethl yeah right, because Asians bowing to each other are worshipping each other. Lord have mercy, I don't know how to deal with this level of tedium. Please, if you have even a modicum of love for Jesus, step up and take on :actual: challenges rather than wasting people's time on vapid nonsense. Real spiritual warriors are on the front lines while you play armchair quarterback. Go to Church.

[@bethl]

@@enshala6401 Thanks for the suggestion. Oh wait, I do go to church & have been studying this issue for a while, as I want to understand my Orthodox friends better. There is a considerable difference between showing respect culturally (as the Asians do), & incorporating bowing, lighting candles, praying through them, etc, as part of the worship service. You also have the issue of venerating icons not in a continuous line from the early church, as Gavin Ortlund details in his videos. But I wish you all the best!

[@ryanbeaver6080]

Thank you Dr Ortlund! Cool microphone, sounds great…

[@ewene2656]

Keep fighting the good fight Gavin!

[@unionofsa]

😂

[@shema9172]

I thank God for this Gavin, we need protestant apologist.

[@shema9172]

@@BryceCarmony Because protestants are condemned by all traditional churches, we will stop when y’all remove the anathema or recognize we are real churches.

[@shema9172]

@@BryceCarmony The body of Christ is spiritual it’s not determined by a physical place, until you stop condemning us we will stop protesting against the all the traditions of men y’all added.

[@shema9172]

@@BryceCarmony The bride of Christ would never paint God the father, the bride of Christ would never sell the Papacy 3 times, neither they would murder people for not being believers, the Roman Church is the whore of Babylon.

[@elvisisacs3955]

@@BryceCarmony Jesus used the principles of Sola Scriptura when rejecting the traditions of man. The Apostles used scripture to settle disputes during the Jerusalem council. Many church fathers like Augustine and John Chrysostom used the principles of sola scriptura.

[@shema9172]

@@BryceCarmony How Jesús dealt with the Pharisees ?

[@annamaria9225]

If this much people rebutted you That proves how strong your arguments are. God bless you pastor!!

[@John_Fisher]

"If this much people rebutted you That proves how strong your arguments are." Please know that I would give this criticism to a Catholic made this same type of argument: I really don't think that this is true: Just because a lot of people felt a need to rebut a video doesn't mean that the position is a strong one. I think we could both easily find popular atheists that dozens of Christians felt a need to rebut to in video form and thousands of commenters rebutted; but we would still agree that those atheists didn't all have particularly strong arguments. I do agree with the sentiment of "God bless" to Gavin and everyone on both sides of this discussion though.

[@theosophicalwanderings7696]

@@elvisisacs3955 yep, I’ve seen several who were to the point of questioning their system over his argument

[@freda7961]

Does that follow? It doesn’t mean that the arguments are strong. But if you really want to conclude something out of that, if anything, it shows that it’s rebuttable hence the several rebuttals. Haven’t had the chance to watch them though. I think I was even just a third through Gavin’s original video too.

[@CHURCHISAWESUM]

Not necessarily. I’m Orthodox and I appreciate this discussion he’s having with Truglia, I have new respect for Ortlund though I am firmly on Craig’s side that iconodulia is more historically attested than iconoclasm, but I do appreciate this conversation. However no it is not true that the proof of a claim is verified by its level of controversy 😂

[@saintejeannedarc9460]

@@CHURCHISAWESUM It is more that the controversy of a claim is proof of its importance. If no one cared, there would be no controversy, just a meh, and move on.

[@Alexandr_Kamardin]

Brother, greetings from Russia! I wish you God bless you and your family.

[@bionicmosquito2296]

Dr. Ortlund, separate from content, on which I think you make a strong case, I have come to conclude that you win the argument on tone and humility alone. You have shaken a strongly held tree, and the tone and polemicism of some of the responses when compared to your approach demonstrate this.

[@aubrey-g9d]

Have you listened to the responses to his arguments? I don't see a difference in approach by either side. The responses are very well thought out and cordial in nature.

[@jonathanvickers3881]

That Augustine quote around 16:30 is powerful.

[@kaiserkong6587]

It does seem to be taken out of the context of being a disputation against paganism, especially considering some of St. Augustine's other quotes about imagery, such as: "The first commandment, in which we are forbidden to worship any likeness of God made by human contrivance, we are to understand as referring to the Father: this prohibition being made, not because God has no image, but because no image of Him but that One which is the same with Himself, ought to be worshipped; and this One not in His stead, but along with Him." -St. Augustine Letter 55, Ch.11 St. Augustine's perspective here seems to align with the Orthodox practice of disallowing iconography that depicts the Father, rather than Christ.

[@ScroopGroop]

@@kaiserkong6587 I don't think that is a correct understanding at all. It seems pretty clear to me Augustine is saying that the issue ISN'T that the issue is that God himself can't be depicted, but that worship itself is due only to Christ, and not images.

[@HoldToChrist]

The idea that “whatever becomes mainstream” is good should be shattered in this day and age with the rise of acceptance of LGBT.

[@HearGodsWord]

Gavin Ortlund must have them worried otherwise they wouldn't put out so many videos about his videos.

[@unionofsa]

Or he misguides many? (Just an alternate perspective)

[@HearGodsWord]

@unionofsa an alternative perspective doesn't mean a right perspective.

[@anthonym.7653]

Gavin is high on their radar as he is a protestant making intelligent and well researched arguments. Unfortunately, that is not the case for many prots.

[@ronalddelavega3689]

​​@@HearGodsWordActually if there is anything to criticize Gavin on, it's that he is way to 'understanding' an amenable deviation from Scriptural teaching is a no no and it should not be excused

[@HearGodsWord]

@@ronalddelavega3689 how should he be instead?

[@gardengirlmary]

This is very important conversation, and interesting sources. I am very interestedin doing more reading and research about this topic. DR Ortlund, thank you so much for shining some light on the history of these traditions. They are very important to our Catholic and Orthodox brothers and sisters. I pray we would all be united in the love of Christ

[@k98killer]

I think Jonathan Pageau makes a decent case for icon veneration as an extension of the principle of the Son being the image of the Father and theosis restoring the image of God within man. I think it is a bit concerning that the Orthodox dogmatically declare it to be an apostolic tradition despite the significant evidence from the Fathers that it was not present in the early church.

[@GloriaExelcisDeo]

It isn't good though. How in the world does it logically follow that due to the incarnation occuring we must not only create, but near worship images of him and saints? There is a large, large burden of evidence to justify it that is not being met.

[@k98killer]

@@GloriaExelcisDeo tbh I'm not convinced that Jesus wasn't just a really skilled magician who did effectively the same thing as Aleister Crowley and L. Ron Hubbard, with the additional caveat of haunting Paul.

[@GloriaExelcisDeo]

@@k98killer I won't personally partake in blasphemy like that. My issues are with icon veneration. Not the Lord.

[@spiritedtoday]

We know the Bible as the final Icon for venerating the revelation of Jesus Christ. The images are weird

[@k98killer]

@@spiritedtoday the Bible is a hypersigil for politically motivated spellcasting.

[@jayv3264]

You are getting these conversations out to more and more folks. 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 Loving it!

[@curiousgeorge555]

Keep up the good work, brother!

[@haydongonzalez-dyer2727]

who would have thought that differences over Icons would be making a comeback in 2023

[@zipper778]

Around 35:13 you made a great point. I've heard people say organic as if it's always good, but clearly it's not. Some people have argued with me that marijuana is good because it's organic, and then when they hear my reply of 'and so is poison ivy' they just kind of step back and look like all of the gears in their heads have ground together and stopped. The same thing is true in this situation and I thank you for pointing that out Gavin. God Bless!

[@Ephesians-yn8ux]

This thumbnail is hilarious, love the channel Gavin

[@giruumfidaa712]

Keep up the good work. Watching this from Ethiopia

[@CamGaylor]

Gavin the fact of the matter is you are right on this issue and they are wrong. They have no solid argument because a solid argument doesn't exist.

[@OntheObjective]

I have the same mic, and I'm able to get the cleanest audio by turning the gain all the way down (counterclockwise) and by using the cardioid pattern (2nd from right). Thanks for all of your efforts and God bless!

[@TruthUnites]

Thank you, I’ve been having issues with my audio lately, so I’ll give this a try

[@noobitronius]

Here before someone clips 35:15 and says, "Gavin Ortlund compared Catholicism to CANCER." 🤣 Great response as always, Gavin.

[@noobitronius]

@YAJUNYUAN thanks, fixed

[@Glockenstein0869]

If my memory serves me correct, even Pliny the Younger (AD 61-113), writes about christians NOT venerating the local idols. And apparently this had the general public up in arms.

[@GamerDragoniteCross]

That's talking about the pagan idols. Whether Christian icons are idols or not is debated.

[@saintejeannedarc9460]

@@GamerDragoniteCross It would depend on how they are treated. I can always appreciate the artistry of beautiful stain glass, and statues and pictures of saints. In no way am I going to bow to them, kiss them, pray to them, or otherwise supplicate and ask favours from them. That is idolatry.

[@SP-td9xj]

​@@saintejeannedarc9460 what would you do if I dug up the cross of Jesus Christ? Would you not hug and kiss it? Would you not embrace it in tears?

[@-RD]

@@SP-td9xj No, but it would bring out immense emotion and love directed at Him. He lives in us, and is closer to us than even the physical cross right in front of us.

[@SP-td9xj]

@@-RD would you say it's bad if someone venerated Christ's physical cross?

[@ottovonbaden6353]

Oh, boy, I'm excited for this one.

[@TheEpicProOfMinecraf]

I've recently been going through Calvin's Institutes and it's been interesting. Calvin takes an approach that is not too far from the modern arguments. It's fascinating how old this conversation is. This likely won't end, but there is nothing new under the sun. The right thing is to continue working

[@noobitronius]

Exactly - all of these debates have been had. Read Turretin and Chemnitz next. The debate stopped with them as far as I'm concerned - their arguments still stand today. That being said, modern RCs and their Newmanite doctrinal development arguments are relatively new, and are absent in the time of the reformation... the Church's argument then was that "We look like the Fathers and believe as they did." And they made their arguments based on that. Now, this new development hypothesis is used, which completely undercuts the Roman church's appeal to history. "We look like the fathers and believe as they did, except for when we don't, then it was an organic development." It does not sound at all like the historic Catholic church.

[@TheB1nary]

What resource of Turretin have you read on this? Navigating both arguments, so appreciate any new resources.

[@noobitronius]

@bbdl2147 sir, I purposely did not use the word exactly. My point is simply that Roman Catholic arguments against protestantism today are drastically different than those in the time of the reformation and post reformation eras. They did not attempt to face the protestant charges of accretions by hiding behind claims of doctrinal development; they faced them by claiming history was on their side (a famous example is Sadoletto's letter to Geneva, although you could also go for Bellarmine or other Jesuit writers. They argue nothing like modern RC apologists.) Why are modern RC apologetics so different than those of the past, when the best protestant arguments are almost exactly as they were when Turretin and Chemnitz penned them in the 15th-16th centuries? The "unchanging, historic, one true church founded by Jesus" assertions lose their muster very quickly when RCs start allowing for drastic doctrinal development.

[@noobitronius]

@bbdl2147 as to your questions of textual variants - I have to lovingly say I find this ironic, friend. You later say that "we don't look at the Fathers as protestants look at the Bible" but that's exactly what you do here. Of course, protestantism allows and even encourages good and necessary doctrinal development, but only based on the infallible scriptures. We have no presupposition of an infallible magisterium, or any sort of infallible interpreting body - the RC ideas of papal and magisterial infallibility are read into the text, and into the Father's, not from them. Yes, the Spirit is surely alive in His guidance of His people. We are in agreement there, in a sense, but not to the extent that the Spirit keeps certain ecumenical gatherings or teaching from error - that is an idea that itself developed long after the writing of the new testament had ceased. Scripture is breathed out by God, and it is entirely sufficient to stand on its own (again, something that was taught against by the Partum Partum RCC up until only the last couple hundred of years.)

[@noobitronius]

@@TheB1nary try Institutes of Elenctic Theology, Volume Two, Eleventh topic, questions Nine and Ten

[@DavidHite]

You really nailed the thumbnail this time!

[@Real_LiamOBryan]

On your "apples and oranges" point, which is completely correct, a decent point to bring up is that a parallel case wouldn't do anything to dissolve the problem that the other side has. It's like tu quoque. How does saying that someone else has a similar problem do anything to show that the original topic isn't still a problem? It doesn't seem to me that it does. The problem of the cultic use of images, and anathemas surrounding that topic, still remains a problem for the Catholic church, even if we bite the bullet and say that--for the sake of conversation--that the canon may be problematic for Protestantism. After this, only two things remain: (1) the question of how Catholicism deals with the images problem (which must be dealt with first, since it is the topic at hand) and (2) the question of how Protestantism deals with the canon problem (which is not that difficult of a task, in my opinion (but that's a separate conversation from the topic at hand).

[@ottovonbaden6353]

Well said. The whole criticism of Dr. Ortlund's Baptist beliefs in this context is basically whataboutism on the part of his responders. Eventually, diving into the Canon and the approach to it from the other traditions would be interesting, but I have a feeling Truth Unites' plate is pretty full at present.

[@Desh282]

I’m a Russian pentacostal Christian and I’m so happy I found your channel through Ruslan KD

[@matheusdabnei5540]

Brilliant! Thank you!

Thank you Gavin. I notice some of the objections made to you might include fallacies like ad hominem, straw man and equivocation. Great responses by the way, and the thumbnail!

[@sebastienberger1112]

It's important for us Christians to remember that Who we worship is the most important thing. Debates on the hows and the whys is good but let's remind ourselves that we are already saved. Praise be to God our Father and His Son Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour and to our Helper the Holy Spirit.

[@Psychoveliatonet]

This is going to be a good one!

[@bakhtior2589]

You know it's serious the higher Dr. Ortlund's hands get

[@ottovonbaden6353]

Underrated comment.

[@JW_______]

My survey of the criticism of Gavin's icon videos is that the opponents act like he's stating that the evidence is equally stong that (1) the early church fathers [before the 7th century] do not support the iconodule/iconophile perspective; and (2) the early fathers definitively preclude the legitimacy of icon veneration. He has, from my view, definitively demonstrated statement (1), but has taken a more humble position regarding statement (2). What the early fathers put out of bounds is the 7th Ecumenical Council's condemnation of those who conscientiously refuse to venerate icons (which is an accretion), not the practice of venerating icons itself, which can still be seen as a legitimate devotional practice and development within the life of the church.

[@JohnnyHofmann]

Great video and microphone, Gavin

[@JayEhm1517]

Another banger! Great job.

[@danielsmulders9451]

I notice he didn't mention Pageau's response

[@JayEhm1517]

@@danielsmulders9451 Pageau is a sleeper Bro Danielvich Smuldersoffski, only the hypnotized can't put up with it.

[@Tiredhike]

Solid case. Dr. Ortlunds original thesis has been proven. It’s just that simple. This is reality.

[@bethsaari6209]

Which can only mean that the claim of continuity and ancient, original worship falls apart. As do many other things!

[@jimmu2008]

Not solid. For example, his take on Eusebius. The only time Eusebius is iconoclastic is in his alleged letter to Constantia. This letter only goes back to the time of the Iconoclasts. How convenient! Before that, it was unknown.

[@Tiredhike]

@@jimmu2008 Respectfully, this comes across as grasping at straws. The thesis does not hang on the minor point you brought up. Scholars (including non Protestant) more qualified than me or you attest that the letter is more than likely genuine. Either way more than just this letter was used in reference to Eusebius on this and your point really is inconsequential to the over all case. At this point, It seems many EO and RCs are looking for arguments to cause just enough doubt to continue in their own beliefs as opposed to evidence that renders Dr. Ortlunds thesis as incorrect. If you wanna throw out the letter than we need to throw out all the documents the iconodules used that happen to only appear around the time of the council as well. Thanks for your comment but Dr. Ortlunds case remains solid. God bless.

[@jimmu2008]

@@Tiredhike Eusebius's letter actually contradicts his other writings. But that's not my only objection. Gavin doesn't take seriously the argument from the incarnation, but he simply dismisses it as rhetoric. (If you're interested, please see the comments I left on the CLEARLY video a couple of days ago.) Yet, he fills his own argument with rhetoric. I don't even have time to address all the issues. But I will try to comment on other issues soon, including more on Eusebius. (And thanks for being curtious.)

[@shema9172]

@@jimmu2008 Lol, even if the letter was true is not evidence for Cultic use of images, is an invention and they needed false evidence for it.

[@saintejeannedarc9460]

I am so glad you addressed that the early scriptures were always around, even though they weren't officially canonized into the bible text we know now. Scripture often refers to scripture. There is evidence in the bible that the early epistles and letters were widely read and circulated among churches. I'd love to see an indepth video on this. I'll look to see if you already have one.

[@costa328]

Gavin, I applauded you in trying to reach RC and EO, but both these denominations have huge issues when you give the saints and Mary the same attributes that God has in where they pray to them.

[@clayw70]

Exactly!! In addition, the failure to understand that kneeling/bowing down, praying, giving praise, giving thanks, etc. are all forms of worship. That is how we worship God. Trying to get around that with word games like latria and dulia is nonsense. Glory and honor are to be given to God alone. It's okay to be grateful and remember those who came before us, but venerating them crosses the line into worship.

[@AshtonSWilson]

@Bb Dl Bad argument. Protestants worship through the ONCE FOR ALL sacrifice of Christ, and we show Him the reverence due only to God. Even if I were to grant the RCC view of re-presentation as not idolatrous (it is), this does not mean that Protestants do not worship through a sacrifice. We conclusively do, but unlike the Jews and the RCC, we do not need to continually sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins.

[@clayw70]

@bbdl2147 Doing a slight bow to another human as a form of respect is not a problem. If you bow down to that person and pray to them, then that is worship. Likewise, singing a love song to your spouse is okay. Singing is not the same as giving praise and praying to a person (alive or dead). Also, praising your children for doing good is not the same as bowing to them and praying to them. To sum up, bowing, praying, and giving praise to someone is worshipping them.

[@costa328]

@@clayw70 They don't slightly bow they kiss icons and pray to them as Gods.

[@clayw70]

@costamammis9687 Yes, I agree. I was responding to the points that were made that are not equivalent to the argument.

[@DreamcastFarm]

I love love icons…..as art. Not as objects for worship

[@nsd37]

As always, I bow down to your explanations. I just hope that you won't leave all this debating affect your personal health. In the end even a scholarly debate or non educated one ends up the same. If people will want to believe something, not even Christ can convince them otherwise. Keep up the great work and may Gods grace and guidance be upon your life, brother!

[@Adam-ue2ig]

Outstanding!

[@cypl316]

I've really appreciated your videos on this topic. I'm an evangelical, writing a PhD on Russian Orthodoxy and Russian evangelicalism. One issue that I don't think you're addressing is that evangelicals will often engage with something like icon veneration in an ad hoc way and have a 'positive spiritual experience' through it. A lot of your conversation with these RC and EO apologists has looked at icon veneration in the context of whether the RC or EO practice and theology is valid, especially in a historical sense. And that has been immensely helpful. But there is also the spiritual question. What happens when someone venerates Andrei Rublev's icon of the Trinity? It's not just a dead image to the person venerating it but in the act of veneration the image comes alive to the person in some way. What is happening in this spiritual experience? Is this God's condescension (i.e. the Holy Spirit is touching the person even though the act is dangerously close to idolatry -- not unlike the didactic role of icons)? Or is this demonic (a demon using the image of the Trinity, parading as the Holy Spirit, and trying to bind the person to this kind of idolatry)? Or is this spiritual experience just the person's own (human) spirit projecting something onto the 'dead' image? Or could all three be taking place in different times and different ways? What about other icons, like that of Mary and the saints? I don't know if it's your intention to address this issue, which is much more in the realm of phenomenology and spirituality. However, if you do have some thoughts on these questions, I think they would be very helpful.

[@edwinshendelman2501]

These are all interesting questions. I think another interesting term that is used for Icons is "the visible Gospel." Coming from a Jewish background I struggled with Icons when I was in Churches where they were displayed. One time, though, I was in an Ukrainian Church where all the walls were literally covered with murals and Icons and as I moved my sight from mural to mural, icon to icon, it suddenly hit me that I was "seeing" the Gospel in visual form. It totally made sense for mostly non-literate cultures to imagine the Gospel this way. Interestingly, I was in a couple of Churches in Ukraine where additionally the most holy name of God (YHVH) was written iconically in Hebrew way at the top of the Churches ceiling as well. I think you are on to something by looking at Icons not just historically or even scripturally but phenomenologically and spiritually as well. What does the visual sense and imaginative faculty mean for our spirituality? kzbin.info/www/bejne/eGHHlp-Niqybb68

[@cypl316]

@@edwinshendelman2501 yes. Gavin has spoken about the didactic role of images and its not a significant jump from there to believe that the Holy Spirit can use images to give a person an experience of spiritual life/renewal/awakening. This makes most sense with narrative images of biblical stories, or icons of Christ, rather than portraits of saints, especially if the individual doesn’t know who the saint is. I think that it’s entirely possible to have a positive spiritual experience as you look on an icon of Jesus but kissing the icon is a different thing.

[@edwinshendelman2501]

@@cypl316 And I think if you are moved by a didactic use of an image as I was it is a very small move to venerate them just as people venerate the Holy Book. In Catholic and Orthodox Churches, the Bible is raised and sometimes paraded around. This also takes place in synagogues with the Torah scrolls. In Judaism the understanding is that the Torah scrolls represent the Shehina, the Presence of God, and as they parade it around the synagogue people try to touch and kiss it. This is a very stirring moment in the Jewish prayer service.

[@cypl316]

@@edwinshendelman2501 I agree entirely. But one key difference with icons is this idea that kissing an icon is an act of communication to the person depicted in the icon. So when I kiss a photo of my wife, while on a work trip, I don’t expect my wife to receive that kiss in any way. It’s veneration but it’s not communication. But by kissing an icon of Mary, a believer is communicating with Mary. I’ve read Orthodox saints saying that “when you feel that you don’t want to stop kissing the icon of Mary, that is a sign that Mary is kissing you back.” So it’s very different to kissing a Bible or the cross because these aren’t considered acts of communication with a living being.

[@edwinshendelman2501]

@@cypl316 I can't say about the Christian practice of kissing a Bible but in synagogues when the Torah scrolls are paraded with religious songs the understanding is the that the Queen, the Shehina, is parading through the synagogue so it not simply a matter of honoring the "Torah" but of actually reaching out and touching or kissing the Divine Presence.

[@Liminalplace1]

Just a simple observation as a missionary and Anthropologist. I went to Bangkok and saw the large image of the Buddha outside a shopping mall and Thais carrying incense towards the statue and making offering for their families. Then I went to Cebu, Philippines cathedral and saw Filipino Catholics carrying white candles to the images of Mary and Jesus and placing the candles as prayers to their families. Functionally it' was operating exactly the same in both cultures. I could have simply replaced the images of Jesus (Saint Nino.. brought by the explorers Magellan) and Mary with the Buddha and exchange the white candles for incense (not problem with candles or incense) and humanly the same practise was occuring. The parallel is clearly identical. That ought to caution any Catholic defense against Gavin's argument.

[@LaraChristine]

As a fellow anthropologist, I’ve noticed and thought the same!

[@DrBob-gr5ru]

The more I've studied the period of Late Antiquity, the more conspicuous the external pressure of the emerging religion of Islam plays in Church history becomes. I think further ecumenical discussion would be helped by diving into Christendom's response to Islam, not just politically, but culturally and liturgically. I think there is a massive blindspot among the various confessional camps in how they have been respectively impacted by the rise of Islam.

[@robertfrank6058]

Go on. I want to hear more about this. What specific impacts?

[@forestmoriarty2932]

Icon / Relic worship comes from Greco-Roman cultures. When Christianity became the state religion of Rome, it adopted these because Romans were used to doing it.

[@jambangoni]

Love it, thanks

[@Jim-Mc]

I'm neutral on this topic but I think it's great for Christians to discuss these things in a hopefully constructive fashion.

[@Real_LiamOBryan]

It's great that you are taking a humble, neutral, stance, but may I ask why you are neutral on the thesis that the early church was against cultic use of images when the evidence seems completely clear (so long as, as Gavin pointed out, that target point remains the focal point)? I'm not going to dispute about it. I'm just curious about other people's reasoning about the issue.

[@Jim-Mc]

@@Real_LiamOBryan I probably should have said I am neutral on whether the practice is an acceptable addition, although I am certain it was not practiced or accepted before the 6th or 7th century.

[@Real_LiamOBryan]

@Bb Dl Why do you assume that I don't believe that?

[@sawyerlake10]

Great video. Thorough!

[@pgc-68]

Thank you for an informative response to your critics.

[@Christian-ut2sp]

As another would put it, “let the church fathers be the church fathers.”

[@NP-vk8de]

That is a very good response, and applies to both Catholics and Protestants.

[@sethtipps7093]

@@NP-vk8de And Orthodox

[@sleepwalker7755]

Thank you so much this helps me in my debates.

[@marcuswilliams7448]

Did you address Jonathan Pageau's video in this? He doesn't name you directly, but refers to recent "polemical videos." I wouldn't characterize your video as polemical. Perhaps there was another out there.

[@KainL33]

What I got the most out of this was you saying Celsus with a hard C. I genuinely have no idea which way is right but it made me feel better when you made that slip.

[@jeremymead8546]

If Celsus is a Latin name then the hard C ( k sound) is correct. Latin does not have a soft C. Caesar is supposed to be pronounced more like the German title Kaiser which is actually taken from the Latin Caesar.

[@he7230]

No church ia exactly like the early church, but confessional Anglican churches are probably the closest to the early church, at least in my opinion.

[@SojournerDidimus]

29:03 The bronze serpent was an idol, at least by the time of writing of 2 Kings 18:4 where Hezekiah broke it in pieces. It certainly was *not* in Numbers 21:9 where Moses made it.

[@georgwagner937]

The thumbnail tells me that Trent Horn will be quoting James White in his opening statement in March.

[@Mek-ly3gn]

Gavin can you respond to the common responses of Jesus founded the Catholic or Orthodox church claim? I would love to hear your thoughts on that.

[@annamaria9225]

Lol i also would like to hear his responses on that.😂

[@YuGiOhDuelChannel]

Is that Mic a blue yeti?

[@yallcrazy302]

I’m with you Gavin. I don’t think icon veneration is legit.

[@Jackie.2025]

Excellent video!

[@haraldbredsdorff2699]

I mean, I am not sure how religious I am, and as far as I am, I would be a Lutheran. But I always thought the difference between a icon and a relic, is that you pray to the icon, while you pray to God through a relic. So, if you pray to a saint, that would be wrong, but if you pray to God, through a saint, that would be ok. Of course, I do not see any point in praying through a saint, when you can just pray to God.

[@brianaalece5314]

Catholics do consider commemorative and didactic uses of images as a form of veneration. This is why we say the serpent was venerated. That sharp distinction of cultic use of images as only being described as veneration isn't present in Catholic theology. You may be less frustrated about this if you argue from the Catholic perspective of what veneration entails in order to understand better why Catholics say the serpent and relics are venerated. BTW, Jerome does describe cultic veneration of relics.

[@elvisisacs3955]

It's irrelevant that Roman Catholics may consider commemorative and didactic uses of images as veneration. The point is distinguishing certain practises and the theology surrounding it to determine if the cultic use of images is in continuity with the early church or an accretion brought in from the pagans. What's interesting is that Nicea II teaches the former while historical evidence points to it being the latter thereby undermining RC and EO epistemological claims.

[@brianaalece5314]

@@elvisisacs3955 that's not the attitude I would recommend having when dialoguing with Roman Catholics. Dismissing their theology as irrelevant won't get you anywhere in a dialogue.

[@matthiasbrandt1252]

If Catholics say the serpent was commanded to be venerated, they're wrong. It was " beheld" ....looked at....so people bitten by the serpents would live. No commemoration,. No teaching. Later the serpent was venerated and/ or worshipped with Israelites burning incense to it....and was destroyed along with other idols. Catholicism has serious errors...this is relatively minor.

[@adam7402]

Gavin Ortlund is superman for Christ!

[@wesleybasener9705]

Thank you for the thumbnails

[@dustindustindontworry-jz8dh]

Good work. I'm drawn to some orthodox teachings, but never could move forward because they venerate and worship icons. I wish their were orthodox churches that didn't practice icon veneration but just had them as art on the walls.

[@jonatasmachado7217]

Although I don't find Gavin's arguments totally convincing, given the internal connections between veneration of icons, relics and saints, I must say that he tries his best to be fair, solid and honest. He generally builds strong cases that deserve frank debate. Saint Augustine venerated relics but warned against its excesses. The same applies to icon veneration. It makes sense if one understands its true meaning and its theological limits. One thing is certain, though, the early Church's use of cultic use of icons points to the existence of a stronger apostolic basis for that practice than we might infer from reading this or that Church father. I agree that the best approach is to hold a restrictive understanding of icon veneration in order to prevent paganism and superstition.

[@DelieGirl]

Or you could conclude that the masses of pagan converts brought in more pagan-influenced practices at a grass-roots level.

[@militemlucis6131]

There is just too overkill with it. Imagine if it was just to appreciate the art and be inspired about certain stories surrounding the saints and holy figured and what not. Cool. The moment its anathema to thise who dont kiss the icons it gets a bit culty

[@dallasbrat81]

This is all good but true acolytes of orthodoxy and Catholics will say they have the right to add things because the Church is equal to Scripture and newer revelations are acceptable 🫣

[@Lambdamale.]

Can't wait to watch this

[@gardengirlmary]

I completely agree that veneration of icons and relics can become something more than veneration.

[@elvisisacs3955]

Relic veneration =\= Icon veneration Icons and relics have distinct characteristics and functions within the context of Christian worship and devotion. Icons are used as a means of devotion, worship, and inspiration. They are often painted or carved images and are considered to be a representation of the figure they depict. Relics, on the other hand, are physical objects associated with a saint or holy person, such as bones, clothing, or personal items. They are considered to be physical reminders of the saint's holiness and are often used as a means of veneration or intercession. They are not used as a representation of the saint but as a physical link to the saint. Therefore, it is not accurate to say that relics are merely icons of a different type, as they have distinct characteristics and functions that are not interchangeable. Ex. A picture of a Honda Civic is not essentially the same as a tire or a door from a Honda Civic - these aren't merely accidental differences. Relic veneration in the early Church can be traced back to the martyrs and the relics associated with them. The early Christians believed that the remains of the martyrs were imbued with a special holiness, and so they would often preserve and venerate the bones, clothing, and other personal items of the martyrs as a way to connect with their holiness and seek their intercession. This practice was also seen as a way to remember the sacrifice of the martyrs and to honor their memory. Icon veneration, on the other hand, developed from the early Church's use of art as a way to teach and instruct the faithful about the Christian faith. The use of images of Christ, the saints, and other biblical figures was seen as a way to make the teachings of the faith more accessible to the people, and the use of images was seen as a way to make the faith more tangible and real. In Eastern Orthodox Church, icons are considered to be sacramentals, which are objects that are believed to have been consecrated by a bishop or other church leader, and which are believed to have special spiritual power. Icons are also considered to be written, not painted, and are believed to be a window to the heavenly world. Through the veneration of icons, the faithful can gain spiritual benefits, such as protection, healing, or a deeper understanding of the faith. In summary, relic veneration and icon veneration are two distinct practices that have different theological foundations and are used for different purposes. Relic veneration is focused on honoring and venerating the physical remains of the saints and martyrs, while icon veneration is focused on honoring and venerating images of the saints and other holy figures as a way to connect with their holiness and gain spiritual benefits. While both practices have been used in the early Church (image veneration coming in much later) they cannot be used to support one another because they are distinct practices with different theological foundations.

[@bman5257]

I think your view of the relics is too Platonic. The relics aren’t merely “links”, “objects”, and “physical remains” of the saints. They are the saints! A human is a composite of body and soul. When we die it’s not so much we go to Heaven and our body stays here, but we go to Heaven and we stay here. Our soul goes one place our body stays another.

[@geordiewishart1683]

You have made this sound to be the superstitious practices that they are

[@pochomano]

@@elvisisacs3955 they are distinct for Protestants, for sure because of the Protestants order of theology and how disjointed they treat doctrines. Protestants for the most part start from soteriology and work there way back towards the trinity and christology. Protestants also tend to view theological truths in individual categories that may or may not overlap . This is not how theology is viewed for orthodox and if you read enough of the early church you can see how things like trinitarian theology, christology , the incarnation, ecclesiology, soteriology, etc. are all intertwined and connected. David Erhan does a great job of explaining this and why relics and icons are interconnected just as is the intercession of the saints. kzbin.info/www/bejne/rZfHeGWcfJeVmMk m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/Z4jNeHV9ipuCopI And Craig truglia does a great job of dealing with the text that Dr. Ortlund cites as well as Dr. Ortlunds methodology. kzbin.info/www/bejne/p3WQpmtphtmppNU Ultimately the main issue is normative authority and why Protestants unfortunately will always be stuck in a reforming framework. That finds themselves picking and choosing what church traditions they want to be agnostic/secular skeptics on and what they accept that goes against scholarly consensus.( like the Pauline authorship of Hebrews , and the other disputed Pauline writings by scholars) This stems from the adherence to their normative authority ( sola scriptura) which Perry Robinson deals with this issue in a simple but thorough manner. energeticprocession.wordpress.com/2017/05/25/are-you-flying-solo/ energeticprocession.wordpress.com/2017/09/20/the-wizard-of-straw/ Ultimately the Protestant methodology in finding truth is inconsistent and relies heavily on higher textual criticism in academia that aligns with their right to private judgment. Which renders themselves their own authority.

[@elvisisacs3955]

@@pochomano //That finds themselves picking and choosing what church traditions they want to be agnostic/secular skeptics on and what they accept that goes against scholarly consensus// Both EO and Roman Catholicisms picks and chooses their own church traditions in many ways. The fact you are defending iconodulia is prime example you guys also pick and choose “tradition”. Again, the point of showing that there is a scholarly consensus is that Gavin’s critiques can't be ignored as personal judgement. Roman Catholics and EO all use the scholarship to support their camp. It's not to say that everything scholars have ever put out is true. That doesn't mean we then throw out all scholarship like throwing the baby with the bath water. The difference is using discernment.

[@pochomano]

@@elvisisacs3955 my main isssue of making this critique was directly related to what I said either side consider as normative authorities and how our normative authorities bind our conscious to doctrines. This is why I said this was the main crux of the issue, and why I posted Perry Robinsons blogs discussing this. I never said to throw out all scholarship. I don’t know where you think I said this. I’m saying that as a Protestant you are more likely to change your doctrinal and fundamental beliefs based upon academic higher textual criticism than Orthodox would due to what each tradition views as their normative authority. As for icon veneration in the early church the links I posted gives ample enough evidence/arguments for them being an apostolic practice theologically, and historically. You don’t have to agree with the conclusions of the arguments but they are answered and are a part of the living tradition of the Church as we see in the 7th ecumenical council which is binding on the whole church as everyone east and west agreed. Just because Protestant reformers, and scholars century’s later disagree with the arguments and evidence. Does not change the normative authority that binds all Christians to one faith. Also it isn’t picking and choosing for an Orthodox why because the normative authority for the doctrine for the Orthodox is the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church which is lead by the Holy spirit. ancientinsights.wordpress.com/2020/12/08/the-orthodox-magisterium/ This is fundamental in the ecclesiology as well as where an individual places there vieof normative authority as to who can bind their conscious to a doctrine/teaching. Where as the Protestants fundamental normative authority is Sola Scriptura, which as Perry Robinson argues and I believe he shows quite clearly is simply “Doctrine of the Right of Private Judgment, none of the secondary authorities are superior to and can bind the conscience of the individual. They are authoritative if and only if that person assents to them, and not, if they don’t. Hence ecclesial authorities, regardless of the number are subordinated to the conscience of the individual.” - Perry Robinson. energeticprocession.wordpress.com/2017/09/20/the-wizard-of-straw/ So the argument is not that you cannot individually come to truths from scripture or Church history. It’s that when it comes time to make a decision as to what you are going to assent to doctrinally, the Protestant will only assent to it based on Doctrine of the Right of Private Judgment. Which is why a Protestant like Dr. Ortlund will side with scholarly consensus on an issue such as icon veneration, but on the issue of let’s say the authorship of Pauline epistles like Hebrews and some others, he most likely would not side with the scholarly consensus. Because his normative authority as to what binds his conscience is his right to private judgement. Any authority that he assents to is only done if it aligns with his private judgment as to whether he believes it is true or not. Please read Perry Robinsons articles on this issue as well as this book: The problem of authority in the continental reformers Book by Rupert Eric Davies Because I think this is where the inconsistency in Protestant apologetics and methodology breaks down.

[@pastorlarry1950]

The first Commandment answers all the 'questions' and 'controversies.

[@mohamedaliouat]

can you do a video about the incarnation and icons

[@JKMlive]

Why has this one topic kicked the hornets' nest?

[@tonywallens217]

It’s maybe the strongest case one could put forth against Catholicism and Orthodoxy from history.

[@bmstellar]

Nicea 2 goes against the practice of the early church and was wrong -> therefore not an infallible council -> therefore magisterium is not infallible -> therefore the emperor has no clothes -> therefore RC/EO internet polemicists are big mad. That’s what I gather.

[@tonywallens217]

@@bmstellar Your second premise doesn't follow the first. Something can be done and practiced in one century and not in others without one undermining the other.

[@bmstellar]

@@tonywallens217 Right, in this case there was clear undermining by hierarchical and ecclesiastical power and to this day we are told is infallible. Hard pass.

[@tonywallens217]

@@bmstellar which undermines which?

[@johnnyd2383]

Seventh Ecumenical Council (787 AD), Extracts from the Acts., Session I. - Anathema to those who apply the words of Holy Scripture which were spoken against idols, to the venerable images. - Anathema to those who do not salute the holy and venerable images. - Anathema to those who say that Christians have recourse to the images as to gods. - Anathema to those who call the sacred images idols.

[@gardengirlmary]

787AD- 33AD is 754 years. What would you say about the proximity to the early church there

[@johnnyd2383]

@@gardengirlmary Far better than calculation applied to you: 2024AD - 33AD is 1991 years.

[@bennywest4588]

Maybe you’ve covered this in another video, but I’d be curious about the argument for the distinction in cultic/worship practice in “dulia” vs “hyperdulia” vs “latria”… I hear this in common RC apologetics, but I’ve never heard anyone discuss the historical background for this argument. I also have never heard a defense of this understanding from scripture. Thanks and you sound great!

[@annb9029]

Reason and theology has a great discussion called Are Icons Idols and Accretions? w/ Dr. Jim Papandrea

[@PuzzlesC4M]

I’m converting from Prot to Cath, but I think I may be able to help. I don’t really like labels, and distinguishing between words like latria and dulia can be like labels if we don’t say what we mean. It’s like saying I love chocolate, and I love my family, and I love God. But obviously I’m not using love the same way all 3 times. You can also look at the heart. As a Protestant, I’m sure you understand that worship is a lot more than singing songs and saying your prayers. It’s the orientation of your heart. So just because a Protestant sees a Catholic bow before a statue, doesn’t mean he knows what’s in her heart. He doesn’t know bowing means worship anymore than if he sees her kissing her children and then accuses her of worshiping her children when she should be worshiping God. So if you’re asking if Catholicism teaches that Mary or the saints have the same worth as Jesus, the answer is no. If you read the catechism, you can see the “worship,” or worth ascribed to God is completely different than and utterly beyond the worth ascribed to anything or anyone else. He is majestic. King of kings. He is so worthy, that no one knows his name but himself. Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit! It’s a completely different attitude than we take to the saints or our children. We can compliment them and show love to them, but we don’t view them as the all-important deity that holds together the universe. At least, we’re not supposed to. Hopefully that helps.

[@michaelmalaki7176]

If you wife tells you not to kiss any woman and you tell her no I won't. Then she finds out you have been kissing other women and you tell her "Dear, I kiss you out of love and all other women i kiss out of respect". Will your wife agree to that distinction? She works drag you to counseling saying you were cheating in her and that you were disloyal to her. It's the same with veneration and worship. In Exodus 34, Aarons casts a golden calf, the Israelites say these are the gods that will lead us to the promised land. Aaron makes an Altar for the calf and identifies it as YHWH. So the Israelites think that the golden calf is YHWH. A few Verdes later YHWH tells Moses, he would destroy them for idolatry. Bottomline it doesn't matter what you think is idolatry or not? It doesn't matter what hairsplitting distinctions you make. What maters is what YHWH expects from you and what is His demands on the way you should worship him. For more on this read "what is the Golden Calf?" by Michael Hundley ( it's a scholarly article freely available online)

[@brich2542]

Gavin, you've been pretty nice. I've read the ECFs. You could have brought in Lactantius as a literal club. The harsh language from earlier works has also not been pushed.

[@jonathanguerrero5617]

Your voice sounded great! 😁