Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Categories 13.8K
- General Category 10.9K
- General Announcements 184
- Faith Issues 3.4K
- Coptic Orthodox Church 2.5K
- Personal Issues 1.4K
- Prayer Requests 423
- Random Issues 1.8K
- Introductions 294
- Non-Orthodox Inquiries 232
- Youth Corner 606
- Hymns 2.5K
- Hymns Discussion 2.5K
- Technicial Difficulties 368
- Technical Topics 368
Matthew 3;16
Hi,
I am reading the Bible from A-Z.
In Matthew 3:16, the bible says:
"As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and lighting on him".
The icon of the feast of the Pentecost shows the Holy Spirit as a dove.Some Eastern Orthodox Icons depict the Father as an old bearded man.But why is the Holy Spirit always depicted as a dove? I heard a reference to Noah's dove, but I am not sure if that is that correct explanation.Anyone?
I am reading the Bible from A-Z.
In Matthew 3:16, the bible says:
"As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and lighting on him".
The icon of the feast of the Pentecost shows the Holy Spirit as a dove.Some Eastern Orthodox Icons depict the Father as an old bearded man.But why is the Holy Spirit always depicted as a dove? I heard a reference to Noah's dove, but I am not sure if that is that correct explanation.Anyone?
Comments
Concerning the Eastern Orthodox depicting God the Father as an old bearded man, this may have crept in from the Latin Tradition (Roman Catholic Church), where it is accepted to depict God the Father in such a form. I recall a story of H.H. Pope Shenouda III going to a conference of sorts with other Churches. As he entered, he saw a picture depicting the Holy Trinity, with God the Father seen visibly as an old man. Before H.H. took a seat, he remarked and said that we as a Church cannot attend the conference unless the picture hanging on the wall was taken down. So they took the picture down.
God the Father did not take on a human form. So he cannot be depicted as a human being, even figuratively. "He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?" (John 14:8-9). Since Our Lord Jesus Christ became man, we can depict Him as a man.
By the way, I too am reading the Bible from A-Z. Small world huh?
I am trying to use the "read the Bible in one year" schedual.The plan combines both the Old and NT,each day two to three chapters in the Old Testament, one in the New,and a portion of the Psalms and Proverbs. I hope reading the scriptures will furnish you with much grace and blessings.
I thought the fire that appeared at the descent of the Holy Spirit was a separate and distinct occurance that revealed God's uncreated energy, whereas at the baptism of our Lord, the Holy Spirit hovered over him in the form of a dove.The dove part makes me curious.Even today,the popular real picture of St Mary of her apparition shows a bright dove over her head. I have also seen white doves accompanying the apparition of the Blessed Mother at another apparition site.I am not sure why a dove ( and not another kind of bird or animal) is chosen to depict the symbol of the most Holy? A Catholic teaching relates the symbol of the dove to the OT in Noah's story (or that turtledoves were the pure offerings etc), hence I am not quite sure,if this teaching is correct or if there is any other.
I'm not entirely sure why we cannot necessarily depict God the Father in iconography. While the Father never was incarnate, what do we make of the Ancient of Days described in Danial? Is this not a theophany of God the Father?
+ Irini nem ehmot,
I'm not entirely sure why we cannot necessarily depict God the Father in iconography. While the Father never was incarnate, what do we make of the Ancient of Days described in Danial? Is this not a theophany of God the Father?
Not entirely sure if this was a rhetorical question or not, but yes, the Ancient of Days is God. Fr. Tadros Malaty's Patristic Commentary on the Book of Daniel contains some patristic quotes on this, from page 74.
[quote author=Ηεζεκιελ link=topic=11637.msg139792#msg139792 date=1308343674]
I thought the fire that appeared at the descent of the Holy Spirit was a separate and distinct occurance that revealed God's uncreated energy, whereas at the baptism of our Lord, the Holy Spirit hovered over him in the form of a dove.The dove part makes me curious.Even today,the popular real picture of St Mary of her apparition shows a bright dove over her head. I have also seen white doves accompanying the apparition of the Blessed Mother at another apparition site.I am not sure why a dove ( and not another kind of bird or animal) is chosen to depict the symbol of the most Holy? A Catholic teaching relates the symbol of the dove to the OT in Noah's story (or that turtledoves were the pure offerings etc), hence I am not quite sure,if this teaching is correct or if there is any other.
We also take Noah's dove to be a symbol of the Virgin Mary. Again, Fr. Tadros Malaty has written a book entitled St. Mary in the Orthodox Concept, if you do a quick search for the word "dove" there is quite a comprehensive list of the different occasions that the Coptic Church uses the dove as a symbol for St. Mary (besides numerous other symbols). There isn't much in the way of explanation though.
As for why the Holy Spirit descended in the form of a dove during the Lord's baptism, St. John Chrysostom in his Homlies on the Gospel of St. Matthew relates the following:
[quote author=St. John Chrysostom, from Homily 12 on the Gospel of St. Matthew]But why in the fashion of a dove? Gentle is that creature, and pure.
Forasmuch then as the Spirit too is “a Spirit of meekness,” He therefore
appears in this sort. And besides, He is reminding us of an ancient history.
For so, when once a common shipwreck had overtaken the whole world,
and our race was in danger of perishing, this creature appeared, and
indicated the deliverance from the tempest, and bearing an olive branch,
published the good tidings of the common calm of the whole world; all
which was a type of the things to come. For in fact the condition of men
was then much worse, and they deserved a much sorer punishment. To
prevent thy despairing, therefore, He reminds thee of that history. Because
then also, when things were desperate, there was a sort of deliverance and
reformation; but then by punishment, now, on the contrary, by grace and
an unspeakable gift. Therefore the dove also appears, not bearing an olive
branch, but pointing out to us our Deliverer from all evils, and suggesting
the gracious hopes. For not from out of an ark doth she lead one man only,
but the whole world she leads up into heaven at her appearing, and instead
of a branch of peace from an olive, she conveys the adoption to all the
world’s offspring in common.
He goes on to say much more, I would urge you to read the entirety of Homily 12 (on page 176) in order to gain the entire context.
Thank you for the link to the commentary. However, it still does not address my question. I know the Ancient of Days is God. My question is, is this not a theophany of God the Father? If this is, in fact, a description of God the Father, then would it not be possible to draw an icon of God the Father based on the description in Daniel?
The verse that comes to my mind is "No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him" (John 1:18). I don't think there would be an icon that if drawn would do God justice - God is spirit, it would be impossible to draw an icon without anthropomorphism of some sort.
If you don't think it is a theophany, that is fine. Regardless, we are given a description of the Ancient of Days. Furthermore, based on the context of the vision, it is (seemingly) clear that the Ancient of Days is God the Father, not God the Son, as God the Son is described as the 'Son of Man on a cloud' who is brought before the Ancient of Days. I've googled images of icons of the Ancient of Days and they always refer to the person as Christ. But is that accurate?
I understand the verse you've posted, and that is also the explanation given about the icon of the Ancient of Days. I guess I just don't understand why it cannot simply be an icon of God the Father, especially given the context of the vision. Here is another icon of the Trinity that I find interesting, though there are people that do not feel it is correct. I'd appreciate any insight about that as well.
Here is the icon:
Replies by +TheGodChrist+ and JG have already answered the question.
Since God created time He is above its bounds as we known of. Inside our limited human minds we'd naturally think that the Ancient of Days must look old! This is not so, because God does not change with time, He is everlasting, i.e. eternally present.
An icon is considered a window on heaven teaching about things of the Gospel and the Kingdom. Forgive me but this icon is in disagreement with the teaching of the Bible in many ways and is heretic in that it depicts the Father and the Son being separate, looking different, plus it's not showing the Holy Trinity as equal.
Anyone looking at this icon can be easily confused to think we have three gods (God forbid) instead of One God and no other. If you show it to a child or to a non Christian will it be edifying or rather harmful?
GBU
Not entirely sure if this was a rhetorical question or not, but yes, the Ancient of Days is God. Fr. Tadros Malaty's Patristic Commentary on the Book of Daniel contains some patristic quotes on this, from page 74.
[quote author=Ηεζεκιελ link=topic=11637.msg139792#msg139792 date=1308343674]
I thought the fire that appeared at the descent of the Holy Spirit was a separate and distinct occurance that revealed God's uncreated energy, whereas at the baptism of our Lord, the Holy Spirit hovered over him in the form of a dove.The dove part makes me curious.Even today,the popular real picture of St Mary of her apparition shows a bright dove over her head. I have also seen white doves accompanying the apparition of the Blessed Mother at another apparition site.I am not sure why a dove ( and not another kind of bird or animal) is chosen to depict the symbol of the most Holy? A Catholic teaching relates the symbol of the dove to the OT in Noah's story (or that turtledoves were the pure offerings etc), hence I am not quite sure,if this teaching is correct or if there is any other.
We also take Noah's dove to be a symbol of the Virgin Mary. Again, Fr. Tadros Malaty has written a book entitled St. Mary in the Orthodox Concept, if you do a quick search for the word "dove" there is quite a comprehensive list of the different occasions that the Coptic Church uses the dove as a symbol for St. Mary (besides numerous other symbols). There isn't much in the way of explanation though.
As for why the Holy Spirit descended in the form of a dove during the Lord's baptism, St. John Chrysostom in his Homlies on the Gospel of St. Matthew relates the following:
[quote author=St. John Chrysostom, from Homily 12 on the Gospel of St. Matthew]But why in the fashion of a dove? Gentle is that creature, and pure.
Forasmuch then as the Spirit too is “a Spirit of meekness,” He therefore
appears in this sort. And besides, He is reminding us of an ancient history.
For so, when once a common shipwreck had overtaken the whole world,
and our race was in danger of perishing, this creature appeared, and
indicated the deliverance from the tempest, and bearing an olive branch,
published the good tidings of the common calm of the whole world; all
which was a type of the things to come. For in fact the condition of men
was then much worse, and they deserved a much sorer punishment. To
prevent thy despairing, therefore, He reminds thee of that history. Because
then also, when things were desperate, there was a sort of deliverance and
reformation; but then by punishment, now, on the contrary, by grace and
an unspeakable gift. Therefore the dove also appears, not bearing an olive
branch, but pointing out to us our Deliverer from all evils, and suggesting
the gracious hopes. For not from out of an ark doth she lead one man only,
but the whole world she leads up into heaven at her appearing, and instead
of a branch of peace from an olive, she conveys the adoption to all the
world’s offspring in common.
He goes on to say much more, I would urge you to read the entirety of Homily 12 (on page 176) in order to gain the entire context.
Doc,thanks for the great links. I found some detailed explanation in the homily of St John Chrysostom in reference to Noah's ark . Also today an archdeacon gave me a simple explanation that made sense to me. Doves never destroy their own nests once they built it,but others may destroy it. Likewise,the Holy Spirit dwells in us,because the body is its temple.The Holy Spirit does not destroy or hurt us, but we do it when when we do things that hurt our body we are destroying the abode for God's Spirit. Hence the simple parallelism between the Dove and the Holy Spirit.Sounds great to me.
Doc,thanks for the great links. I found some detailed explanation in the homily of St John Chrysostom in reference to Noah's ark . Also today an archdeacon gave me a simple explanation that made sense to me. Doves never destroy their own nests once they built it,but others may destroy it. Likewise,the Holy Spirit dwells in us,because the body is its temple.The Holy Spirit does not destroy or hurt us, but we do it when when we do things that hurt our body we are destroying the abode for God's Spirit. Hence the simple parallelism between the Dove and the Holy Spirit.Sounds great to me.
Thanks for that nice analogy :)
+ Irini nem ehmot,
If you don't think it is a theophany, that is fine. Regardless, we are given a description of the Ancient of Days. Furthermore, based on the context of the vision, it is (seemingly) clear that the Ancient of Days is God the Father, not God the Son, as God the Son is described as the 'Son of Man on a cloud' who is brought before the Ancient of Days. I've googled images of icons of the Ancient of Days and they always refer to the person as Christ. But is that accurate?
I found an interesting section in St. Jerome's Commentary on Daniel regarding the Ancient of Days:
[quote author= St. Jerome from Commentary on Daniel]
Verse 9. "I beheld until thrones were set up, and the Ancient of days took His seat. His garment was as white as snow, and the hair of His head was like pure wool. His throne was composed of fiery flames and its wheels were set on fire. From before His presence there issued forth a rushing, fiery stream."
We read something similar in John's Apocalypse: (Rev. 4:2 ff.) |78 "After these things I was immediately in the Spirit, and lo, a throne was set up in heaven, and one was seated upon the throne; and He who sat upon it had the likeness of jasper and sardine stone, and there was a rainbow round about the throne like the appearance of emerald. Around the throne there were twenty-four other thrones, and upon the twenty-four thrones there sat twenty-four elders, clothed in shining garments; upon their heads was a golden crown (B), and lightning flashes issued from the throne, and voices and thunder. And in front of the throne there were seven torches of burning fire, which were the seven spirits of God. And in front of the throne lay a glassy sea like unto crystal." And so the many thrones which Daniel saw seem to me to be what John called the twenty-four thrones. And the Ancient (C) of days is the One who, according to John (p. 532) sits alone upon His throne. Likewise the Son of man, who came unto the Ancient of days, is the same as He who, according to John, is called the Lion of the tribe of Judah (Rev. 5), the Root of David, and the titles of that sort. I imagine that these thrones are the ones of which the Apostle Paul says, "Whether thrones or dominions. . ." (Col. 1:16). And in the Gospel we read, "Ye yourselves shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel" (Matt. 10:28). And God is called the One who sits and who is the Ancient of days, in order that His character as eternal Judge might be indicated. His garment is shining white like the snow, and the hair of His head is like pure wool. The Savior also, when He was transfigured on the mount and assumed the glory of His divine majesty, appeared in shining white garments (Matt. 17). And as for the fact that His hair is compared to perfectly pure wool, the even-handedness and uprightness of His judgment is shown forth, a judgment which shows no partiality in its exercise. Moreover He is described as an elderly man, in order that the ripeness of His judgment may be established. His throne consists of fiery flames, in order that sinners may tremble before the severity of the (669) torments [of hell], and also that the just may be saved, but so as by fire. The wheels of the throne are set aflame, or else it is the wheels of His chariot which are aflame. In Ezekiel also God is ushered on the scene seated in a four-horse chariot (Ez. 1), and everything pertaining to God is of a fiery consistency. In another place also a statement is made on this subject: "God |79 is a consuming fire" (Deut. 4:24), that we might know that wood, hay and stubble are going to burn up in the day of judgment. And in the Psalms we read: "Fire goeth before Him, and He shall set aflame all His enemies round about Him" (Ps. 96:3). A rushing, fiery stream proceeded from before Him in order that it might carry sinners to hell (Gehenna).
Bold is mine. From what I can gather from the above, St. Jerome seems to be implying that both the "Ancient of Days" and the "Son of Man" are referring to the Lord Christ (God the Son). He certainly doesn't suggest that this is a persona of God the Father: the explanation given for the description of the "elderly man" is so that the "ripeness of His judgement may be established." We seem to link it to God the Father because of our human tendency to attribute old age with an old appearance, which is not applicable to God who is Eternal.
[quote author= St. Jerome from Commentary on Daniel]Verses 13, 14. "And behold, there came One with the clouds of heaven like unto the Son of man."
He who was described in the dream of Nebuchadnezzar as a rock cut without hands, which also grew to be a large mountain, and which smashed the earthenware, the iron, the bronze, the silver, and the gold is now introduced as the very person of the Son of man, so as to indicate in the case of the Son of God how He took upon Himself human flesh; according to the statement which we read in the Acts of the Apostles: "Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up towards heaven? This Jesus who has been taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen Him going into heaven" (Acts 1:11).
". . .And He arrived unto the Ancient of days, and they brought Him before His presence, and He gave unto Him authority and honor and royal power."
All that is said here concerning His being brought before Almighty God and receiving authority and honor and royal power is to be understood in the light of the Apostle's statement: "Who, although He was in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God; but emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men, and was found in His condition to be as a man: He humbled Himself, becoming obedient unto death, even to the death of the cross" (Phil. 2:6-8). And if the sect of the Arians were willing to give heed to all this Scripture with a reverent mind, they would never direct against the Son of God the calumny that He is not on an equality with God.
".. .And He is the one whom all the peoples, tribes, and language-groups shall serve. His authority is an eternal authority which shall not be removed, and His kingdom shall be one that shall never be destroyed... ."
Let Porphyry answer the query of whom out of all mankind this language might apply to, or who this person might be who was so powerful as to break and smash to pieces the little horn, whom he interprets to be Antiochus? If he replies that the princes of Antiochus were defeated |81 by Judas Maccabaeus, then he must explain how Judas could be said to come with the clouds of heaven like unto the Son of man, and to be brought unto the Ancient of days, and how it could be said that authority and royal power was bestowed upon him, and that all (671) peoples and tribes and language-groups served him, and that his power is eternal and not terminated by any conclusion (p. 534).
These are the rest of the relevant quotes. What are your impressions?
Thank you for that commentary by St. Jerome. It was certainly very insightful. That being said, I'm not entirely sure that St. Jerome is saying that the Ancient of Days is the second Person of the Trinity. I have noticed among the Apostles, when they write, that when they speak of God, they are referring to God the Father. When they wish to speak of God the Son, they often say 'Lord Jesus Christ' or 'Christ Jesus'. Take, for instance, this passage from St. Paul's first epistle to the Corinthians: 'I thank my God always concerning you, for the grace of God, which was given to you in Christ Jesus, that in everything you were enriched in Him, in all utterance and all knowledge, even as the testimony of the Christ was confirmed in you, so as to not lack in even one gift of grace, while ye eagerly await the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ, Who shall also confirm you unto the end, that ye may be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. Faithful is God, by Whom ye were called into the communion of His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.'
The author of Hebrews begins saying, 'God, Who of old, in many parts and in many wasy, spoke to the fathers through the prophets, did in these last of days speak to us through the Son, Whom He appointed heir of all thing, by Whom also He made the ages...' (Heb. 1)
Note the bolded section. Clearly God is referring to the Father. That seems to be the trend, to refer to the Father as God, and the Son as Christ Jesus and the Holy Spirit as the Holy Spirit. As such, when St. Jerome says that the Ancient of Days is God, could it not be taken to mean that the Ancient of Days is the Father?
I appreciate the similarities drawn between the Ancient of Days in Daniel's vision and that of St. John's vision. However, I can't help feel that they are still different. Daniel's vision is a pre-incarnation vision clearly distinguishing the Ancient of Days from the Son of man, whereas St. John's vision is a post-incarnation one. In Daniel's vision, the Son of man is brought before the Ancient of Days and 'He (i.e. the Ancient of Days (God the Father) gave unto Him (i.e. the Son of man (God the Son) authority and honor and royal power.'
This is as Christ Himself says, 'All things have been committed to me by my Father.' (Matt. 11:27); 'All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.' (Matt. 28:18) and 'Jesus knew that the Father had put all things under his power, and that he had come from God and was returning to God;' (John 13:3).
And St. Paul says, 'For even as in Adam all die, so also in then Christ shall all be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then those who belong to Christ at His coming. Then cometh the end, whenever He should deliver up the kingdom to God and Father, whenever He should abolish all rule and all authority and power. For it is necessary for Him to reign, until He should put all the enemies under His feet. Death, the last enemy, is to be abolished; for, 'He put in subjection all things under His feet.' But whenever He should say 'all things have been put in subjection,' it is manifest that it is except the One Who put all things in subjection to Him. And whenever all things should be put in subjection to Him, then the Son also Himself shall be put in subjection to the One Who put all thins in subjection to Him, that God may be all in all.' (1Cor. 15)
And again, St. Paul says, 'On this account I also, having heard of the faith among you in the Lord Jesus and the love which is toward all the saints, cease not giving thanks on behalf of you, making mention of you at the time of my prayers, in order that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of the glory, may give to you the Spirit of wisdom and revelation, in the full knowledge of Him, having the eyes of your heart enlightened that ye may know what is the hope of His calling, and what is the wealth of the glory of His inheritance in the saints, and what is the surpassing greatness of His power toward us who believe according to the energy of the might of His strength, which He energized in the Christ, after He raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His right Hand in the heavenlies, above every principality and authority and power and lordship, and every name which is named, not only in this age, but also in the coming one. And He put in subjection all things under His feet, and gave Him to be head over all things to the Church, which is His body, the fullness of Him who filleth all things in all.' (Eph. 1)
Do you see what I'm saying? Based on the context, the Ancient of Days seems (to me at least) be referring to God the Father. And not because of the white hair and what not that would imply He is somehow 'older'. I'm well aware that is just merely imagery and symbolism.
Note further in St. Jerome's commentary the following: Note the bolded section. Even St. Jerome refers to God the Father simply as [Almighty] God. What are your thoughts?
[quote author= St. Jerome]"And if the sect of the Arians were willing to give heed to all this Scripture with a reverent mind, they would never direct against the Son of God the calumny that He is not on an equality with God.
when linked with the Ancient of Days giving the Son of Man "authority, honour and royal power etc." puts it beyond doubt in my mind.