Not-formaly declared heretic Non-Orthodox influenced Icons

Patristic theology, and traditional teachings of Orthodoxy from the Church fathers of apostolic times to the present. All forum Rules apply. No polemics. No heated discussions. No name-calling.


Post Reply
User avatar
Liudmilla
Sr Member
Posts: 743
Joined: Thu 31 October 2002 1:56 pm

Post by Liudmilla »

Geroge:

Perhaps the reason that more people haven't responded in anyway is because not all of us are so well versed in the dogmas and theology of the church that we feel comfortable in making any statement. If there are so many hits on this thread, it may be that people were seeking to learn something here. And, anyway, just as we maybe wrong at times, so too can priest's sons be wrong sometimes too.

It's at times like these when I often feel the "lack" of imput from our resident priests....forgive me fathers, but it's true.... but then it may be that they lack the knowledge too.... forgive me for that one too,if I am assuming. But there is a lack, never-the-less. I understand the restrainsts that some are under, but a teacher should never let an opportunity go by to teach, guide or correct. If nothing less get permission.!!!

Thank you, George, for fighting the fight we are unable to fight.
Milla

Justin Kissel

Post by Justin Kissel »

So if I get involved in these discussions, people rebuke me for being a neophyte and involving myself in such weighty issues... and if I don't get involved, people rebuke me for not defending the faith. What's a country bumpkin to do? :D

User avatar
Mor Ephrem
Member
Posts: 325
Joined: Fri 8 November 2002 1:11 am
Location: New York
Contact:

Post by Mor Ephrem »

Deacon Nikolai wrote:

THE "ANCIENT OF DAYS," YAHWEH THE LORD OF GLORY WHO APPEARED TO THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL from "Forbidden Images," by Dr. George S. Gabriel, Copyright 1989, 2001.

...There is no place here for legalistic and rationalistic definitions. When Jacob said he beheld a ladder with God standing above it, the Fathers tell us he saw the Virgin through whom Yahweh the Lord of Glory was to come to earth in the flesh.

Which Fathers taught that "Yahweh the Lord of Glory" came to earth in the flesh? The Father is not incarnate. This is heresy.

User avatar
George Australia
Sr Member
Posts: 671
Joined: Sat 17 January 2004 9:26 am
Location: Down Under (Australia, not Hades)

Post by George Australia »

Mor Ephrem wrote:

Which Fathers taught that "Yahweh the Lord of Glory" came to earth in the flesh? The Father is not incarnate. This is heresy.

The Orthodox position is that Lord of Sabbaoth is Christ.
It was Christ who spoke with Moses in the Burning Bush.
It was Christ who led the Israelites out of Egypt as a Column of Fire and a Pillar of Cloud.
It was Christ who spoke with Moses on Mount Sinai and then on Mount Tabor.

"As long as it depends on Monothelitism, then Miaphysitism is nothing but a variant of Monophysitism."

User avatar
Mor Ephrem
Member
Posts: 325
Joined: Fri 8 November 2002 1:11 am
Location: New York
Contact:

Post by Mor Ephrem »

George Australia wrote:

I note that this current thread has been viewed 882 times to date. And not one person- not one- objected to an Iconographer son of an Orthodox priest saying that the Holy Trinity is actually a "Holy Quartet" because God the Son is actually "two Persons"- only one of which is dipyctable in Icons.

Not one person objected to the statement that God the Son cannot be dipycted in Icons.

Not one person objected to the statement that God the Son was not circumscribed in the flesh.

instead, I hear things such as "it's just a technicality", "it's useless theology," and "extreme polemics."
The Dogmas concerning the God Whom we worship are distorted and there is a deafening silence, but talk about trick-or-treating and everyone has an opinion.

I'll be honest about why I haven't said anything.

  1. I don't check this site daily.

  2. This thread was so big by the time I finally got around to it.

  3. I was in the middle of a crazy week of midterms, so I didn't even bother to try to read the thread, with its long posts about very particular theological concepts that I don't pretend to know well.

Now that I have read it, I still do not know what to think of it all. The position of your Church on these things is still not clear to me, as both parties have quoted various councils and fathers and each seem to make certain legitimate points. Rather than argue about the icons, I'll be happy to just venerate them and hope that, in God's mercy, my veneration of the icons passes to whomever it is who is depicted (or who I think may be depicted) in them.

I am surprised, though, that no one immediately spotted the problem with Dr. Gabriel's piece. Yahweh took flesh? That error was merely met with someone questioning who the original poster of that piece thought was correct: Saint So-and-So or Dr. Gabriel. I suppose even when you are seriously and passionately (in tbe good sense of this word) involved in such threads, you miss a heresy now and then (although, somehow, cracks on Copts and blaming them for your problems are never missed by this forum's general populace).

May God bless you all.

User avatar
Mor Ephrem
Member
Posts: 325
Joined: Fri 8 November 2002 1:11 am
Location: New York
Contact:

Post by Mor Ephrem »

Dear George,

You posted while I was posting another reply. Forgive me.

I have always associated "Yahweh" with God the Father. Is Christ "Yahweh" then?

User avatar
George Australia
Sr Member
Posts: 671
Joined: Sat 17 January 2004 9:26 am
Location: Down Under (Australia, not Hades)

Post by George Australia »

Mor Ephrem wrote:

Is Christ "Yahweh" then?

Mor Ephraem,
See, I can't even keep my mouth shut when I say I will!
Yes, Christ is "Yahweh".
"Yahweh" is an attempt to phonetcially pronounce in english the hebrew "Tetrragrammation" ("four letters") which stand for the Name of God. The letters are: Yodh, heh, vav, heh. This is the Name God revealed in the Unburning Bush to Moses which means "I AM WHO AM" or "I AM THE BEING". In Greek, this Name was translated as "EGO EIMI O OON" ("I AM THE BEING"). When the Jews accused Jesus of being possesed because He said that some would never taste death if they kept His word and of falsley claiming to be greater than Abraham who had died, Jesus replied: "Most assuredly I say to you, before Abraham I AM (Gk: "EGO EIMI") [John 8:58] And the Jews immediatley take up stones to stone Him, not only because of this claim to be God, but for even daring to pronounce God's Name. In Greek "Ego" ("I") is superfluous since "eimi" on it's own would mean "I am".
In iconography, the Greek letters: "Ο, Ω, Ν" encircle the head of Christ. This reads "O OON" ("THE BEING"), which, together with the image of Christ in the icon means that Christ is identified as "I AM THE BEING" Who revealed His Name to Moses.
The validity of the English translation of the Tetragrammation into into "Yahweh" or even more erroneous, into "Jehovah" is doubtful.
Firstly, no one can be sure how to pronounce any ancient phonemes (language sounds). We speak Greek today differently to how the ancients pronounced it.
Secondly, The Tetragrammation was not pronounced, except once a year by the High Priest on the Day of Atonement- so in fact, even most ancients never heard it. Where the Tetragrammation occured in the scriptures, the vowels of the word "Adonai"("Lord") and/or "Elohim" ("God") were written above or below it to remind the reader to substitute "Lord" or "Lord God" for the Tetragrammation. This practice continued in the English translations where LORD appears (usually capitalized).
Thridly , it is possible that "Yahweh" could be a mis-reading of the four consonants of the Tetragrammation combined with the vowels of "Adonai" interspersed.

"As long as it depends on Monothelitism, then Miaphysitism is nothing but a variant of Monophysitism."

Post Reply