Cloud of Witnesses Radio
Audio drama retellings of the stories of the Christian Saints, Panel Discussions, Cast Commentary, Reaction Videos, Screwtape Returns, and more!
Cloud of Witnesses Radio
Orthodox Answers to Protestant Objections | Orthodox Luigi Exclusive | Seminar Session 2
Do Orthodox Christians “worship icons”? Is Orthodoxy “works-based”?
If you’ve heard those claims and weren’t sure how to respond, this episode is your Bible-and-history reality check—clear, charitable, and straight to the point.
What Protestants Often Miss About Orthodoxy
A surprising witness: Martin Luther once described Greek Orthodox believers as “the most Christian people and the best followers of the gospel on earth.” That startling line sets the stage for a serious, Scripture-anchored look at salvation, saints, and sacred images.
1) Salvation: Moment or Journey?
Orthodoxy doesn’t deny conversion moments—it simply insists the New Testament speaks of salvation in past, present, and future (you have been saved, are being saved, will be saved). Think medicine, not just legal acquittal: sin is a sickness Christ heals, and the Church is the hospital where grace transforms us into His likeness.
2) Faith & Works: James’s Actual Argument
James 2 doesn’t pit faith against grace—it shows that living faith is energetic. “Faith without works is dead” is like a body without a soul: the works don’t earn salvation; they animate faith, revealing the life of Christ within. This is why the Fathers speak of theosis (2 Peter 1:4): by grace, believers partake of the divine nature, cooperating with God’s energies as He reshapes us.
3) Saints & Icons: Honor vs. Worship
Orthodoxy draws a bright line between veneration (honor) and worship (adoration due to God alone).
- Bowing isn’t necessarily worship. Scripture shows people bowing in honor without idolatry.
- Images aren’t automatically idols. From the cherubim over the Ark to symbolic imagery throughout Scripture, the Bible distinguishes forbidden idols from holy reminders that direct hearts to God.
- Intercession is biblical. If the “prayer of a righteous person is powerful and effective,” it remains so for those alive in Christ (Hebrews 12:1). We ask the saints to pray with us, not instead of Christ.
4) Earliest Christian Practice
Archaeology and early Christian witness show that sacred images and prayers for the departed were part of the Church’s life from the beginning—not late medieval inventions. The point isn’t art for art’s sake; it’s Christ-centered remembrance that teaches the faith to hearts, minds, and even our senses.
Why this matters
If you love Jesus, Scripture, and the unity He prayed for, you’ll want to understand how the apostolic Church held these truths together: grace-filled transformation, living faith that acts, and worship that engages the whole person. Whether you’re Protestant, Orthodox, or just curious, this conversation offers a road map through common objections toward a richer, more historic Christianity.
Join us as we walk through the texts, the Fathers, and the first centuries of the Church—and see how today’s Orthodox faith connects to the faith once delivered to the saints.
Please leave a comment with your thoughts!
Ladies and gentlemen, good afternoon, welcome back. This is the second seminar that I'm doing on answering Protestantism from an Orthodox perspective. Again, the goal of this is to provide you, as Orthodox Christians, really the tools that you have necessary to answer any Protestant objections that you may have with, maybe, your family members or your friends. Or maybe it's just you're coming from a Protestant background and you always wondered how the Orthodox answer these particular questions, or maybe you haven't dealt with Protestantism and you're wondering how an Orthodox Christian would answer these questions when they're brought up by Protestants. In this seminar, what I'm going to be going over is salvation, intercession and iconodulia.
Speaker 1:Now, we often hear from Protestants that Orthodox believe in works-based salvation. We hear that we pray to dead people. We hear that we worship icons. Now, of course, the word iconodulia actually comes from the Greek word dulia, which means veneration, and that's a very important distinction that we're going to be getting into as far as the distinction between worship and veneration, or Latria and veneration, or, excuse me, latria and Dulia. Now, before we kick it off, I want to start with a quote from Martin Luther himself, and this is found in volume 32 of Luther's works, and it says this quote the Greek Orthodox are not heretics or schismatics, but the most Christian people and the best followers of the gospel on earth. End quote. Now what's interesting about this quote and others from Martin Luther is that he really never considered the Orthodox to be heretics or to be an error on justification. He was primarily concerned with things like the papacy, things like indulgences, particularly in the Latin West, and he famously said in a debate that the truth lies with the Greeks. And so a lot of Protestants don't realize not only this aspect of the teachings of the Reformers but a lot of other aspects of the teachings of the Reformers. And so it can be difficult as we kind of go through the different objections to Orthodoxy from Protestants, because a lot of times many of them are disconnected from the original teachings of the Reformers, and so I kind of have to cover a lot of ground today as far as the different types of objections that come from Protestants.
Speaker 1:So first of all I want to talk about the Protestant understanding of justification, sanctification and salvation. Now, for anyone that came from a Reformed background, they know that what the Reformed like to do is really break these up into separate categories. Justification is going to be a forensic declaring of you to be righteous at your moment of repentance or regeneration, and then sanctification is the process after that of you becoming like Christ. Now, what's interesting about these distinctions is that they don't really exist in scripture. You often see, in fact, the word sanctified is used in a past tense. St Paul frequently says you have been sanctified, we have been sanctified. We see justification used in a present tense, for example in James, chapter two, which we're going to walk through. We see the same thing with salvation. We see it used in a past tense, a present tense and a future tense. And so this attempt to sort of break these up into separate categories, I believe fails biblically, and I'm going to demonstrate that here with various passages.
Speaker 1:This is how scripture says. We're saved, it says, by believing in Christ. This is John 3.16, acts 16.31. We're saved by grace Acts 15.11 and Ephesians 2.8. We're saved by the blood of Christ Romans 5.9, hebrews 10.22. We're saved by the righteousness of Christ Romans 5.17, 2 Peter 1.1. We're saved by the declaring of our mouths. This is found in Luke 12.8, romans 10.9. By the work of the spirit this is John 3.5 and 2 Corinthians 3.6. By the coming to the knowledge of the truth this is 1 Timothy 2.4 and Hebrews 10.26.
Speaker 1:Now many Protestants stop here. All the things I just listed are effectively where Protestants stop when it comes to justification, which they equate with salvation. But the problem is, I know many Mormons, I know many Oneness Pentecostals, I know many Jehovah's Witnesses who would profess everything we just said. They would say that they are saved by believing in Christ, by his grace, by his blood, by his righteousness, by declaring with their mouths, by the work of the spirit, by coming to the knowledge of the truth. Many of them, all of them, would say that they're saved by that. But a Protestant is going to say, hang on a second. No, the Mormons, the Oneness Pentecostals, the Jehovah's Witnesses, they're not saved because they don't believe in the Trinity.
Speaker 1:Now this starts to allude to the previous topic in my other seminar about Sola Scriptura and how the Protestant really is limited to the scriptures on defining salvation requirements. But what I want to do is I want to actually continue on what scripture says about how we're saved, because it doesn't stop here. The Protestant wants to believe that this is the culmination of how we're saved, because it doesn't stop here. The Protestant wants to believe that this is the culmination of how we're saved. Now, aside from the fact that that is problematic when it comes to Mormons, jehovah's Witnesses, and one is Pentecostals, it's also problematic in the sense that the Bible does not support that view.
Speaker 1:Scripture goes on to say that we're saved by repentance Acts 2.38, 2 Peter 3.9. We're saved by baptism John 3.5, 1 Peter 3.21, titus 3.5. Now I want to point out in Titus 3.5, when it talks about how we are saved and we are regenerated by the washing of rebirth, that Greek word for washing literally means to take a bath. Now the Protestant is going to say that that has nothing to do with water baptism, which, in the context of the Greek, is, in my opinion, nonsensical. We are saved, according to John 6, by the eating of the flesh of Christ and drinking of his blood.
Speaker 1:Now I want to pause for a moment on John chapter 6, because this is another topic that is frequently brought up, not only in the context of salvation, but also the context of just really how we operate in the church and how we approach the sacraments in general. What's interesting about John chapter 6 is that as soon as Jesus gave this teaching about eating his flesh and drinking his blood, he lost many of his disciples. They walked away. This was a difficult teaching for them. I fail to see how a symbolic view of this sacrament would lead to that. Not only that, but St Paul talks about how if we eat unworthily, if we partake unworthily of the Eucharist, then that can cause you to be ill and even to die, and even to die. Now, how could that be the case if it's merely a symbol? How could it be the case that you're going to die if you partake unworthily, if it's merely a symbol?
Speaker 2:Yes, question Ben, I've got a question. A Protestant is going to say, yeah, it's all fine and well those verses you were pointing to but in fact it has to be symbolic. And my proof text for that is in Matthew, when Christ is at the last supper with his disciples. He's literally holding a glass of wine and the bread and he says this is my body and this is my blood of the new covenant. We know he wasn't being literal. Obviously that's not his body and blood, because he was sitting there with his disciples.
Speaker 1:Yeah, that's a great question. So I want to use baptism kind of as a correlation to your question, because a similar objection is often brought up with a thief on the cross and why he was not baptized. Now it's interesting when we talk about the establishment of the sacraments, because Christ himself was baptized, in similar fashion to how he administered the Last Supper, in a fashion that was akin to the Eucharist. Now, the baptism of Christ was not the sacrament of baptism, it was him consecrating water, so that the sacrament of baptism would eventually go into effect after the cross, which is why St Paul says we've been buried with Christ in baptism. And so this is why the thief on the cross was not baptized, because it hadn't gone into effect yet. Now, in similar fashion, christ is establishing the sacrament of the Eucharist at the Last Supper, and that doesn't go into effect until after the cross. Now it's interesting when we look at the Last Supper, and that doesn't go into effect until after the cross.
Speaker 1:Now it's interesting when we look at the disciples of St John, who wrote John, chapter 6. The disciple of St John named St Ignatius. He writes on this particular topic, this exact topic, and he says that in order for us to be saved, we must believe in the true flesh and blood of Christ at the Eucharist. He explicitly says that. Now I think you have to be crazy to think that St Ignatius didn't have John chapter 6 in mind when he's writing that. Now if you as a Protestant are willing to say, yeah, the disciple of the guy who wrote John chapter 6 was wrong about its interpretation, that's fine. You're welcome to do that as a Protestant. But I don't personally find that to be a feasible interpretation.
Speaker 1:Now I also want to say that a lot of high church Protestants will agree with the doctrine of the true presence at the Eucharist. But one of the ways that I like to sort of expose that they don't actually believe in the true presence is I ask them but one of the ways that I like to sort of expose that they don't actually believe in the true presence is I ask them do you worship the Eucharist? They all say no. It's against their doctrine to say they would worship the Eucharist. But if Christ is truly present at the Eucharist, then there's no reason why you wouldn't worship the Eucharist. If it's truly Christ, there's no reason why you wouldn't worship Christ. There's no reason why you wouldn't worship Christ.
Speaker 1:Now, aside from the Eucharist, of which Christ says those who partake in will receive eternal life, there are other ways in which scripture says that we are saved. Romans chapter two, verses six and seven in James 2.24, say that it's by works that we are justified, that we are saved. Now, in James chapter two, I wanna actually read this passage because it's really important. And oftentimes Protestants will say that they agree that faith produces works, but they don't want to say that those works have anything to do with salvation at all. And what we're going to see in James chapter 2 is that's just not a compatible view of scripture.
Speaker 1:James says this says but someone will say you have faith, I have works. Show me your faith without your works and I will show you my faith by my works. You believe that there is one God you do well, even the demons believe and tremble. But do you want to know, oh foolish man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham, our father, justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? Do you see that faith was working together with his works? Justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works his faith was made perfect and the scripture was fulfilled, which says Abraham believed God and it was accounted him for righteousness and he was called the friend of God. You see, then, that man is justified by works and not by faith alone. Likewise, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works and not by faith alone? Likewise, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out?
Speaker 1:Another way? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also. Now I want to point out that analogy that St James gives at the end of the passage, because this is often overlooked. He says that faith in works is akin to your body and your spirit or your soul, and he says that just as your body without your spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also. Now think about this analogy your body without your soul is dead, and what that means is your soul is actually what energizes your body. That's what energizes it, and so, if we plug that analogy into faith and works, what St James is saying is that your works are what energize your faith. Without your works, your faith is going to die, you need your works in order to energize your faith. So, as we see from this analogy, faith and works have a much more powerful relationship than just faith producing works. In fact, I would ask the Protestant where in scripture does it say that faith produces works? Rather, it says without works, your faith is dead in the same way that your body is dead without its soul.
Speaker 1:Now I want to move on to the Orthodox view of salvation, particularly in the context of the fact that we have been saved, we're being saved and we will be saved. Romans 8.24 says we have been saved. 1 Corinthians 1.18 says we are being saved. Romans 5.9 says we hope to be saved. Now, throughout scripture we see this. We see salvation being used in a past tense, a present tense and a future tense. So when a Protestant asks me how do you know you're saved or are you saved, I ask them what they mean by that. Because if you mean, have I been saved? Yes, I have been saved, but I also am being saved and I will be saved. It's similar to if I were to walk across the street right now and be hit by a car and we're unresponsive, and someone comes by and administers CPR to me while someone else calls 911 and an ambulance comes and picks me up and I'm on the way to the hospital in the ambulance. Now, it's true that I was saved by the person who administered CPR, I am being saved by the ambulance and I will be saved by the surgeons on that table. That is true in all three contexts and in very similar fashion, this is true for our eternal salvation.
Speaker 1:Now, comparing this to earlier what we talked about, the Protestant view, where it's very, very specific boxes that justification goes into, and then sanctification and salvation is often equated with justification. This is just not the language in Scripture. Instead, we see this process. Now the Orthodox view of salvation, as many of you know, is that of theosis, which we see in 2 Peter 1.4,. When St Peter talks about us partaking in the divine nature. In John, chapter 17,. When Jesus says he's going to share his glory with his creation, in Colossians 1.29, it says this St Paul says to this end, I also labor, striving according to his energeia, which works in me mightily. Now, for any Protestant who rejects the doctrines of the energies, I would ask them why are they rejecting scripture? The doctrine of the energies is all throughout scripture God's energies that we are cooperating with. Now I like to explain theosis in this way Imagine a blacksmith who puts an iron on scorching hot coals.
Speaker 1:After a matter of time, the iron would be as hot as the coals themselves. Although it remains an iron Now, it has a property of the coals because it's been on those coals for so long. In similar fashion, when we are exposed to God's energies for long periods of time, we are actually going to soak up the things that, the same properties that God has, and this is what we see in 2 Peter 1.4, when he talks about us partaking in the divine nature. Now many accuse us of workspace salvation.
Speaker 1:So I want to give a story from St Amphilochius, who was the Bishop of Iconium and also wasa cousin of St Gregory the theologian. He tells a story of a man who had been continuing to fall into sexual sin, despite constant repentance and struggle. Over and over again, he kept falling into this sin, despite struggling and struggling and struggling against it. And the story goes that the devil was there accusing him, accusing him of this sin, damning him to hell over this sin. And the Lord Jesus responds to the devil in this story. He says this can you offer up enough sins that by them you can tilt the balance of justice against the precious blood which I shed on the cross for this man. Behold my murder and death which I endured for the forgiveness of his sins.
Speaker 1:I would encourage any of you that are presented by a Protestant with this idea that we believe in works-based salvation. I would encourage you to present this story to them to show what our true view is on salvation. Theosis is not workspace salvation. It is completely dependent on the grace of God that has been infused into us. However, 1 Corinthians 3.9 says we are God's synergists. That is the Greek synergeia. We are cooperating with God's energies. We must cooperate with his energies in order to accomplish his will, which is the salvation of all mankind, as we see in 1st Timothy 2.4 and 2nd Peter 3.9.
Speaker 1:A Protestant recently asked me about the Orthodox view of penance and I had to give him a long-winded answer on this, because it goes into the differences in the view of sin in the East and West. In the West, what we often see with salvation is we see a courtroom and in that sense we see sin being treated as a crime to be punished. In the East, we see sin as a sickness that needs to be healed. And so when we talk about something like penance, as we do with any of the sacraments, they are medicine, they are a healing for our sick soul that has been made ill from sin. You know our priest here, father John. He often says that when he gives penance to someone who sinned against somebody else, the penance he gives is to go and reconcile with that person. He gives is to go and reconcile with that person. So this penance is something that is, it is directly correlated to that particular sin in order to heal your soul, in order to heal your soul by the grace of God.
Speaker 2:So, ben, you know, I appreciate you know your analogy about. You know someone who gets hit by a car and there's CPR and then the ambulance and this process of salvation. But I'm sorry that just doesn't line up with the clear passages in Romans and Ephesians that say very clearly we were elected, we were chosen before the foundations of the world to be conformed as sons to God. In other words, we have been chosen by God and therefore it's already predestined that you would end up saved by that physician who's doing the surgery on you.
Speaker 1:Ultimately, this is a good question and it really addresses the topic of predestination. The topic of predestination, of course, is a biblical concept, just not the Calvinist understanding of it that entails unconditional election. It's interesting when St Paul is talking about vessels in Romans, chapter 9, he talks about them being predestined before the foundation of the world, but then when we go to 2 Timothy, chapter 2, we see him using the same verbiage about vessels of common use and vessels for special purposes, and what he talks about is that these vessels for common use can always repent. He uses them as an example of vessels that were once for common use and repented and now were granted to be special purposes. We see the same thing in Jeremiah, chapter 18, where the same word vessels is used where nations who had been predestined for that which is evil, they repent from their evil and turn to God. We also understand that these passages are about general bodies of people and not necessarily about individuals. Now think of it like this An airplane is predestined to take off at a certain time, but it's not necessarily predestined who is going to be on that airplane.
Speaker 1:One of the proof texts I would go to justify this is also found in Jeremiah, where it talks about how God has divorced Israel. Now I ask the Protestant who presents this objection? I say is it the case that every single Israelite was divorced by God at that time, or is Jeremiah talking about a general truth that applies to the body of Israel? You can think about predestination in similar fashion. It is the case that the church has been predestined as the vessel of salvation since before the foundation of the world. That is true. That vessel is leaving for salvation, but who is on that vessel is not necessarily predestined. And on this particular topic of Calvinism, I personally really struggled with several passages as a Calvinist, specifically 1 Timothy 2.4 and 2 Peter 3.9, that say that God desires for the salvation of all mankind. As a Calvinist, how can I say that it could be the case that God desires something that he does not accomplish? As a Calvinist, this is impossible to answer.
Speaker 1:Now I want to move on to the doctrine of faith alone, or sola fide, and a proof text that is often referenced on this topic. Romans 4.5 says but to him who does not work but believes on him, who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness. Now, at face value, this seems cut and dry, even if I don't do any works, I'm still saved by faith, right? Let's look at the context of the passage. St Paul is going over the case study of Abraham. Now, what is it that Abraham lacked? Abraham did not have the Mosaic law. He did not have works of the Mosaic law. We know Abraham did works because St Paul here is quoting from Genesis chapter 15, not Genesis chapter 12, where Abraham receives his initial call. 12, where Abraham receives his initial call. He did many good works from Genesis 12 to Genesis 15.
Speaker 1:Let's back up to Romans, chapter 3, to another common proof text for sola fide that will actually help refute it in Romans 4.5. Verses 28 through 29 in chapter 3 say Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from deeds of the law, or is he the God of the Jews only? Is he not also the God of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also. In other words, st Paul's distinction here is not between faith and works, it's faith and the Mosaic law, which is why he says Is God only the God of the Jews and not the God of the Gentiles? It's faith and the Mosaic law, which is why he says Romans 3, 28-29 makes absolutely no sense if we are merely talking about works in general, st Paul is writing to Jews and Gentiles of the Roman church to remind them that they are both children of Abraham, which is why he states and we have received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while still uncircumcised that he might be the father of all those who believe, though they are uncircumcised, that righteousness might be imputed to them also, and the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision but who also walk in the steps of the faith which our father Abraham had while still uncircumcised. So what is the proper exegesis of Romans 4.5? The verse again is this but to him who does not work but believes on him, who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness. This is the proper exegesis. To him who does not work the Mosaic law, but believes on him, who justifies the ungodly, christ, his faith, the faith of Abraham, one that still does good works, is accounted for righteousness.
Speaker 1:Now I want to move on to some of the big Protestant objections to orthodoxy, specifically saint intercession and icon veneration. I'm going to do so using four points found in scripture itself. Point one bowing is not necessarily worship. Point two statues and images are not inherently violations of the second commandment. Point three intercession of someone more righteous than you is effective. And point four the reposed saints are alive and consciously with Christ and able to pray. The first point bowing is not necessarily worship.
Speaker 1:Revelation 3.9 says Indeed, I will make those of the synagogue of Satan who say they are Jews and are not but lie, indeed, I will make them come and prostrate before your feet and to know that I have loved you. Now, who is speaking here in Revelation 3? It's the Lord, god himself, and he is commanding those of the synagogue of Satan to prostrate before the feet of saints. How can it be the case that bowing before saints is idolatry if God himself is commanding it here in Revelation 3? Joshua 7, 6 says this. Then Joshua tore his clothes and fell to the earth on his face before the ark of the Lord. Until the evening, he and the elders of Israel, and they put dust on their heads. Now Protestants respond to this by saying that God was uniquely present in the ark, which, ironically, is exactly what we say about the icons. We say when we are honoring an icon, we are not honoring the wood itself, but rather what it represents. We see the icon as a window into heaven, very similarly to what the Protestants say about Joshua 7. We also see in other passages, such as 1 Samuel 25, when bowing is done in a non-worshipful way. 1 Samuel 25, 23 says now when Abigail saw David, she dismounted quickly from the donkey, fell on her face before David and bowed to the ground. So it's very obvious that in scripture bowing is not necessarily worship.
Speaker 1:The second point statues and images are not inherently violations of the second commandment. In fact, that commandment is very clearly regarding images of false gods. Exodus 25, 18 through 20 says this and you shall make two cherubim of gold, of hammered work. You shall make them on the two ends of the mercy seat. Make one cherub on one end and one cherub on the other end, on the two ends of the mercy seat. Make one cherub on one end and one cherub on the other end Of one piece with the mercy seat, shall you make the cherubim on its two ends. The cherubim shall spread out their wings above, overshadowing the mercy seat, with their wings, their faces one to one another, toward the mercy seat. Shall the faces of the cherubim be there, will I meet you? And from above the mercy seat from between the two cherubim. So we see here that not only are images, statues, commanded to be made, but they're made adjacent to the mercy seat, which means they had a role in the form of worship in the Old Testament. How can it possibly be that images and statues are inherently violations of the second commandment when God commands them to be built in the temple?
Speaker 1:Galatians 3.1 says O foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you that you should not obey the truth? Now, what's interesting about this verse is that St Paul is writing to a church in Asia Minor decades after the crucifixion. It is almost certain that there was nobody in this church that was actually witnesses of the crucifixion. Rather, he is almost certainly of the crucifixion Rather, he is almost certainly referencing a crucifix, which is why the Greek word being used here is prografo, which literally means a portrait Point.
Speaker 1:Number three, intercession of someone more righteous than you, is effective. Job, chapter 42, verses 7 through 8, says as my servant Job has Now, therefore, take for yourselves seven bulls and seven rams, go to my servant Job and offer up for yourselves a burnt offering, and my servant Job shall pray for you, for I will accept him lest I deal with you according to your folly, because you have not spoken to me what is right, as my servant Job has. So God here accepts the sacrifice of those who are evil and wicked, because Job offers the sacrifice on their behalf. James 5, 14 through 16 says is anyone among you sick, let him call for the elders of the church, let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer of the faith will save the sick and the Lord will raise him up, and if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven. Confess your trespasses to one another and pray for one another that you may be healed. The effective, fervent prayer of a righteous man avails much. So what James says here is that if someone is sick, if someone has committed sins, let him brought to be prayed for by the elders, let him confess his trespasses, and then his sins will be forgiven and he will be healed because those who are more righteous than him are praying for him. Point four the reposed saints are alive and consciously with Christ and able to pray.
Speaker 1:Revelation 20, verses 40 through 6, says this and I saw thrones and they sat on them and judgment was committed to them. Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus, for the word of God, who had not worshipped the beast or his image, who had not received his mark on their foreheads or on their heads, and they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. But the rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. Over such, the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ and shall reign with him for a thousand years. Now, as Orthodox we believe this thousand years is right now. Christ is currently reigning. So what this means is that those that experienced the first resurrection, the saints, who are called blessed here in this passage, are currently reigning with Christ and the second death has no power over them.
Speaker 1:Revelation 6, 9 through 10 says when he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the testimony which they held, and they cried with a loud voice saying how long, o Lord, true and holy, until you judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell on the earth. Now, how can it be the case that the saints are sleeping when they're here in Revelation, praying to God as we speak? So, as we can see from these four biblical concepts, bowing is not necessarily worship. Statues, images are not inherently violations of the second commandment. Intercession of someone more righteous than you is effective and the reposed saints are alive and consciously with Christ and able to pray. In fact, st Paul even says to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord in second Corinthians.
Speaker 1:It's very clear from these four biblical points that what we do when we're venerating icons, when we're asking the saints for inter, has no violation found in Scripture. In fact, the doctrine of the Second Council of Nicaea is found in Scripture itself. Finally, I want to move on to icons found in the early church. Now we often hear this objection from Protestants that icons were prohibited until the Se council, the second council of Nicaea in the eighth century. Now, it's not the case that icons were prohibited until the seventh council. If that was the case, then it wouldn't be apostolic tradition as we believe in the Orthodox church. It's the case, rather, that when they're addressing the council, the second council of Nicaea, they're addressing it because it's been called into question.
Speaker 1:There was the iconoclast controversy at that time. The emperor believed that he could win over the Muslims and the Jews if he got rid of all the icons, and so that's why they had to call the council, not because they were inventing a new doctrine, but rather because the doctrine that had always been present in the church was being tampered with by the emperor. In fact, we see in the Roman catacombs dated from the first to third century that not only did they have icons, but they had intercessory prayers written below the icons. St Dionysius, the Arapagite, who was a disciple of St Paul and explicitly mentioned in the book of Acts, says veneration of icons is necessary. He says from the most sacred pictures. It is not possible for our mind to be raised to that immaterial representation and contemplation of the heavenly hierarchies without using material guidance suitable to itself. This is found in Celestial Hierarchy 133.
Speaker 1:Now, for a long time, protestants have been calling into question the writings of St Dionysius, saying that it's inauthentic. However, there's been recent attestation to its authenticity. In fact, there's been a peer-reviewed paper that's been published last year arguing for its authenticity. As we see time and time again with scholarship, oftentimes scholarship is catching up to that which the church has always been saying, which is why I believe we're going to continue to find older and older icons. We saw this, for example, with the presence of a synagogue in Nazareth. We were told for the longest time that there was no synagogue in Nazareth, and we were jokes for believing that there was. And then, of course, recently, in the last several decades, they found a synagogue in Nazareth. In the last several decades, they found a synagogue in Nazareth. So oftentimes we see that scholarship is catching up to that which tradition has been always saying, which is what we're starting to see with icons.
Speaker 1:We discovered not too long ago the Dura Europa's church and synagogue dated to 256 AD, and it is completely decked out in icons. So, as we can see, there is sufficient evidence for early icons, even in the anti-Nicene era. There is sufficient evidence for early icons even in the Antinicene era, which is incredibly impressive, given the fact that the Emperor Diocletian was persecuting brutally the Christians at that time and yet we were still able to produce icons. In fact, we know from tradition that St Luke authored the first icon of the Theotokos, that St Luke authored the first icon of the Theotokos. For anyone interested in learning more about early icons in the church, I recommend Michael Garten's book called Early Icons.
Speaker 1:So, ladies and gentlemen, today what we've talked about is really the Orthodox doctrine of salvation, the Orthodox doctrine of intercession of saints and of icon veneration, and what we're addressing is these common objections that we hear from Protestants. We often hear, like I said, that we worship images or that we pray to dead people or that we believe in workspace salvation, but what I've demonstrated is that all our views on intercession, on icon veneration and on salvation itself are found in scripture. We can answer these Protestant objections in scripture itself. Finally, if you are an Orthodox Christian who wants to learn more about answering Protestant objections, or you're a Protestant who is interested in learning more about Orthodoxy, I highly, highly, highly recommend the book the Religion of the Apostles by Father Stephen DeYoung.
Speaker 1:The reason why this book is so important is because it lays the entire groundwork for what we believe as Orthodox Christians, specifically the continuity that we have with the first century Christians. The point that Father Stephen DeYoung makes in that book is that the early Christians did not see themselves as converts to a new religion. Rather, what they realized is that they were in the Messianic era of the Jewish faith, and by Jewish faith, of course, I mean the Old Testament, israelites. So I highly recommend that everyone read that book so you can understand the groundwork, the foundation that all of Orthodox theology is built on. So thank you for tuning in. I hope you found this helpful and God bless.