Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Paul of Tarsus referred to Jesus as the "image of the invisible God" (Colossians 1:15). [21] Theologians such as John of Damascus argued that the connection between Jesus' incarnation and the use of images is so strong that to reject or prohibit the use of images is tantamount to denying the Incarnation of Jesus.
The Person of Jesus was thought to reveal not only the Word of God (1Jn 1:1–4), but the image of God . Pre-Christian scriptures defined idolatry as worshipping of false gods. Church leaders defended images of Christ on the basis that they were representations of the true incarnation of God and clarified the relationship between an image and ...
Most Christians believe that Jesus was both human and the Son of God. While there have been theological debate over the nature of Jesus, Trinitarian Christians generally believe that Jesus is God incarnate, God the Son, and "true God and true man" (or both fully divine and fully human). Jesus, having become fully human in all respects, suffered ...
Earlier this year a picture re-emerged that showed what Jesus might have looked like as a kid. Detectives took the Turin Shroud, believed to show Jesus' image, and created a photo-fit image from ...
Incised sarcophagus slab with the Adoration of the Magi from the Catacombs of Rome, 3rd century.Plaster cast with added colour. Except for Jesus wearing tzitzit—the tassels on a tallit—in Matthew 14:36 [9] and Luke 8:43–44, [10] there is no physical description of Jesus contained in any of the canonical Gospels.
In John 3, Jesus refers to the same serpent, saying that he must be lifted up in the same way that the serpent was. John of Damascus also regarded the brazen serpent as an icon. Further, Jesus Christ himself is called the "image of the invisible God" in Colossians 1:15, [46] and is therefore in one sense an icon.
The simple belief that images were idolatrous appears to have been their main motive; reference was made to the prohibitions on the worship of graven images in the Mosaic Law, and aniconic statements by the Church Fathers, some of which may now be lost. One theological issue revolved around the two natures of Jesus. Iconoclasts believed that ...
But images of God the Father were not directly addressed in Constantinople in 869. A list of permitted icons was enumerated at this Council, but images of God the Father were not among them. [17] However, the general acceptance of icons and holy images began to create an atmosphere in which God the Father could be depicted. [citation needed]