Christians from the west were not the only ones with doctrinal differences. Eastern Christianity also had its fair share of theological controversy—one in particular being the misuse of images.THE MISUSE OF IMAGES
In the early church, there seems to have been little to no objection to the use of images because the early places of worship were decorated with paintings. It was not until much later that several bishops preached against the misuse of images for the purpose of worship. This was a divisive issue, which divided the iconoclasts—destroyer of images—and iconodules—worshippers of images.
The iconoclasts position was obvious. They strongly opposed the veneration of icons, believing that their position was covered biblically from Exodus 20:4 that says, “You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them.” Their convictions led to the destruction of many images. Historians Michael Price and Michael Collins reported, “In 726, Leo ordered a great icon of Christ that hung over the gates of Constantinople to be smashed to the ground. He followed this with orders to destroy all the images of Christ and the saints in the churches” (98).
These acts were not only enforced by the iconoclasts of the 8th century, but also by the reformers of the 16th Century who held similar convictions. Because they wanted only the Word of God to direct their worship, their churches were free from any and every image imaginable.
The position of the iconodules, however, was that because Jesus was truly human, and in him God had become visible, how could one object to worshiping representations of him? They would probably use Colossians 1:15 as a proof text that says that Jesus is the “image of the invisible God.”
In 787 there was a second council that met in Nicea about the use of images. The council decided that the use of images in the church are permissible, but insisted that these images be honored rather than worshipped. This council was more concerned with protecting non-biblical church tradition than being guided and directed by what Scripture says on the issue. In their public critique of those who were opposed to the misuse of holy images, the council affirmed, “If anyone rejects any written or unwritten tradition of the church, let him be (cursed).”
CONCLUSION
There is no question that images are presently used during Worship Services on a weekly basis in most churches. The question we must ask, then is—“Are these images being misused?” The Bishops who first took issue with this practice did not object to the images themselves, but were against one being dependent upon them for worship.
If God wanted our worship to be assisted by an image or by something other than His word (for example, a cross, a painting, a song, a play etc.), he would have told us in His word that the use of these things are permissible. He, however, did not. In fact His word speaks against this activity. Once again, Exodus 20:4 says, “You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them.”
Worship is a sacred and holy act. When we are dependent upon these things to assist us in worshipping God, we prove that we regard them as sacred and holy. My prayer is that you would use the Bible to assist you in Worship. May your worship be done the way God intended—“In Spirit and in truth” (Jn. 4:24).
Price, Matthew and Michael Collins. The Story of Christianity: 2,000 Years of Faith. Wheaton: Tyndale House Publishers. 1999. 98.
