Response to Lord of Spirits: Athanasius was an iconoclast 

Father DeJong, I promise to work harder w/ Sam on the clarity of his ideas.

Well done, Sam. We don't always agree on everything. But I know you love me and I love you.

I really enjoyed every bit of this video. Also, I personally have no problem with icons nor iconoclasm. But maybe that’s because I read Ecclesiastes once a week.

Im here for this stuff...you are educating this fresh Christian mind

1:12:25 I did a brief survey of how I understand early fathers' writings about idolatry for Yosef a while back, and a core theme that came up was that the critique is often, as it is in this Athanasius quote, targeted against the idea that they are making the image a god, and believing that a god comes and dwells in the idol, such that it can be invoked and petitioned by means of the image. Arnobius' "against the heathen" is really good reading on this. I'd suggest trying to read that from the perspective that this is what's being addressed and seeing how it sounds to you.

Sam, I’ve recently started listening to your sruff and am learning so much from you. I don’t have any emotional investment in doctrines, so maybe it’s easier for me to listen without getting activated by any of it. I just know that I don’t imagine any one of us can contain enough truth to really make it worth fighting over- I accept that my posture before God must be humility and acknowledgment of my place as a human of limited understanding. That being said, it’s in the wrestling that we break things open. This was really well done and informative. Thank you!

Another quality lecture 👏 thank you 🙏

You should do a video on the whole book of John about all of the higher level imagery, first creation-new creation, old water- new wine, temple- body of Jesus, physical well- spiritual well Please Based on your prologue idea

Have you read "Christians and Images" by Steven Bigham? If so, curious about your thoughts. He handles most of the aniconic/iconoclastic writings from the early church very handily imo

What denomination do you belong too or church do you attend? This was a really good video by the way! Thanks for sharing this amazing info!

14:00 If one (theoretically) lived in a one-story universe where spiritual and material/physical aren't divorced...things. Then everything would be iconic and Icons would just be a particularly sanctified (set apart, holy) thing. Both/and. And I would advocate for the "everything is an icon" view. We can have divine liturgies and altars and set apart things, simultaneously without denigrating and denying the Christ in all things reality.

Love the work Sam! Fr. Stephan De Young somewhere in that debate or a post-debate discussion, when talking about early christian writers on icons, said "notice none of these people have Saint in front of their name". Slightly frustrating way to dismiss people like Origen, Turtulian, ect but I was curious what your thoughts are on how to talk to EO or Catholics about why these people might be good representatives for a general christian consensus of early church teachings.

Here I am, on Divine Mercy Sunday, doing a deep dive on Athanasius, and thought I would stop by and hear what you have to say. St. Faustina, who brought about the Divine Mercy devotion, was told, by Jesus to commision a painting of him, in a form that he revealed to her, and under the painting place the words "Jesus I trust in You" must appear. The idea being that by looking at and venerating the painting, a person would be saved. This is a simplification of Divine Mercy devotion, but not much one. The interesting thing, is that JESUS HIMSELF was the one who gave St. Faustina the instructions to do this. The painting that Faustina eventually commissioned is extremely popular amongst serious Catholics, and there is a mountain of evidence that the Divine Mercy devotion has beared a tremendous amount of good fruit, especially in regards to salvation and devotion to Jesus. So, is Jesus into iconography??? If we take this account of St. Faustina at face value, it certainly seems like he is. Of course EmJay2022 rightly brings up the issue of the Shroud of Turin... I just bought a toddler I know a small library of board books for her to read and enjoy, including many of the classics like "Goodnight Moon", "Brown Bear", and "Go Dog Go!", amongst many others. "Goodnight Moon" is a well loved, and highly venerated book in the realm of children's literature. It has certainly become a very iconic book. So, by giving my toddler friend these books to love and enjoy, am I introducing the toddler to idolatry by proxy? Then we have Milton's "Paradise Lost", where Milton does something very sneaky: he shows how both Eve and Satan fell in love with their own image, when they first saw their reflections, and this self love was the key to both of their falls. We are not talking art here, but rather, the literal falling in love with your own image. So is Milton saying that both Eve and Satan are alike in idolatry of their own selves? This is a far deeper question than it first appears. Trying to draw lines and boundaries between all these things can be rather difficult, if not nearly impossible. You can look this one up: when it snows in the middle east (which it does occasionally), there are immans who forbid the western tradition of making snowmen, as it's too close to idolatry. This goes on in the present day. And then there's this troublesome passage from Romans 1: _"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse."_ So what Paul is saying is that God is mad at everyone because they utterly failed to see God in the *created things* of the earth. So here's all this "stuff", so why don't you believe in God?" All of creation as an idol??? I have no easy answer for any of these things, just wanted to bring them up as it shows just how difficult it is to draw bold lines and mark off heretical territory. As for me, the greatest idols of this age are not even created things, but IDEAS. So how does one deal with that? Again, I have no easy answers. Things were easier to discern back in the pagan/Christian transition, not so much now-a-days. Thanks so much for giving us food for thought.

44:52 you didn’t read the parenthesis. “…if the images don’t save the appearances…”

Small correction, there are 37 doctors of the Catholic Church, not 5

@43:00 Do you actually escape the material/sensory realm when you enter the noetic and intellectual realm?

@Transfigured at 1:19:10 you say that Athanasius has no doctrine of Original Sin and thinks all humans are inherently good. Is there a more direct passages like _Against the Heathen_ chapter 30 of Athanasius that would confirm this or is this a more aggregated take of his soteriology?

19:52 I've had convos with Yosef about this too. I agree with him. There were not worship/veneration distinctions yet. Or Works-grace, btw.

49:22 Feel like I love this Plontinus quote.

I saw the transfigured life channel mention of you. I noticed how Ortlund didn't address the question posed by Father Stephen about how using sola scripture, as demonstrated by you, could not only undermine Nicaea 2 (which Ortland opposes based on scripture) but also Nicaea 1 (which Ortlund supports based on scripture).

Interesting you use Ortlund. Isn't Nicaea 1 accretional according your viewpoint?

I'm curious about your opinion here because we will disagree. However, I want to see, since you brought up Neoplatonism and middle Platonism-the response from something like an Aristotelian communal ontology. I know a guy, the economancer, who posted a video on the relationality of icons and their necessity based on communal ontology. I'd like to see you respond to that

47:00 would this be Gnosticism and anti-incarnational?

Post Nicene Christology was political. Emperor vs Crown Prince in Christian Empire.

54:40 This descent of the souls into bodies... Is it like, "who, *without change*, became Man and was crucified..."? Thinking of these things in a "before and after" way is not right, seems to me.

I think you could have a good convo with cooper about this topic. He does say that "John of Damascus is basically right, but i still dont know about veneration" ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-yeoiz457HzU.htmlsi=Yyz9vp_9JIGVWFui at 10:22. JD right but 7th EC wrong is a pretty unique position! But doesnt go on about this idea unfortunately. Obvviously I think John of Damascus is right too but get really frustrated with how the 7th EC is defended, I think most people do it wrong.

@53:30 Souls falling. Close to my historical tradition

1:03:10 Plotinus was a naturist, confirmed :). This is the gnostic proclivity, right? Mind (human will) over matter. In the revolutionary act of removing the garnments of skin, one can overcome or transcend the feelings of shame. However, in the absence of the covering of God's glory, you're only managing to transcend your conscience because shame is there to remind us that we are all sinners.

Ooh, Fr. Stephen is getting post-James White debate Sam. My condolences to the priest... I'd say that I'm fairly iconoclastic, I think as a Unitarian you'd have to be, but, man, when I look at the image on the shroud of Turin, it captivates me unlike any other image I've ever seen, and as somewhat of an aesthete, I've seen many beautiful works in person. So, I don't really know what that means. Is it veneration? All I know is that I'm looking at the face of my savior. Would an image commissioned by God himself be exempt from the charge of idolatry? Sam, I know I mentioned it before, but annoying does get results (Lk 18:1-8). I still maintain that a conversation about the shroud would bring a good amount of non-Unitarian Christians to your channel in a welcoming, non-antagonistic sort of way (unlike your latest Ortlund video). There's a rising interest in the field of Sindonology in the mainstream as new evidence emerges, so why not get in on that action? Also, I believe it's an opportunity to bridge the gap between the iconoclasts and the Orthodox, for, of course, the eventual goal of unitarian Jesus smuggling :)

26:28 - From my own experience, I was hesitant to touch Unitarianism with a 10 foot pole because I could only see it as something that denigrated the lord Jesus. They nervous chuckle when anyone mentions it for that reason. They see you as someone that is basically trampling on their savior. This is to say that they are not aware that Jesus is exulted in Unitarianism, perhaps even MORE exulted than in Trinitarianism. More emphasis on this could help them to not see you as a leper.

Who is this "intelligent person" that they keep talking about?

Tradition and apocalypse or Neo...whatever. Even if the Church or Fathers were (whatever that means) iconoclasts, they were wrong. imo.

Do you have a video delving into the nuance of when a pagan does something vs when a Christian does something? Like when the bible condemns pagan worship, it’s not the worship that the bible condemns so much as which god you worship, right? Surely the same logic could somewhat map onto icons? Very interesting topic.

To provide some context for why protestant trinitarians are afraid of you: 1) Trinitarian protestants feel that they have lost many followers because of Darwin and secularization in the western world. 2) When trinitarian protestants see sunny mosques filled to the Max in Europe while protestant churches stand empty they are under the impression that converting muslims to trinitarian Christianity would revive Christendom in the Western World and nullify Darwin’s legacy. 3) According to these protestant trinitarians your christology does not have a converting effect on muslims but rather confirms their beliefs and hence stands in the way of this mass revival of Christendom in the Western World by covincing muslims of the trinity. If you have followed the work of dr Jay Smith this you should be quit self evident.

26:27 THIS: "Why is it that these Protestant RU-vidrs are...hesitant to talk to me?" What's different btw them and PVK? Yep. That's the question. Reaching down vs. reaching up. imo.

I just want to add that two things that I’ve never been able to figure out is how the Catholics and orthodox folk got such a rigid view on communion and icons.

I think you're part of the fold Sam. PVK has his opinions and that's all they are. You're not an odd sheep, and he has jokingly called you a heretic in the past, as others have a habit of doing. Not helpful IMO. You and De Young will make good conversationalist. He tore down one of my icons (David Bentley Hart), which stung a bit, but I need perspective :) I'm a protestant, but I get icons and iconography. They dont bother me in the least. At times, I look at the mountains, I process nature in various ways, which evokes feelings and veneration such that I thank God, and I pray to God. I believe icons may serve a similar purpose ... pointing to Christ. I believe incarnational Christianity, our Creator becoming flesh, a material body, helps me to process bodies, both material and spiritual. It seems spirit and matter shouldn't really be separated. The Lord of Spirits show is really good at helping me escape my Platonism. I'm not sure why folks go after iconography. It inspires me at any rate. You do good work Sam. I've been helped by your intellect. You and De Young are both blessings.

So Athanasius had no idea of grace.

Sam, are you an iconoclast?

I miss John Behr. He's my favorite of the Orthodox clergy.