Words as Icons

Creation has a sacramental purpose: it reveals God.

For from the first making of the world, those things of God which the eye is unable to see, that is, his eternal power and existence, are fully made clear, he having given the knowledge of them through the things which he has made (Rom. 1:20)

This is inherently true in things as they exist in nature. However, it becomes another matter as things pass through the hands (and lips) of humankind. We were created with something of a god-like function. In the story of Adam’s naming of the animals, God brings the animals to Adam and waits to see what name Adam will give them. Naming is not the role of creator, but it bears a similarity.

In this same manner, we take the world and fashion it, giving it shape and purpose. A tree becomes a house; a rock becomes a tool. This becomes much more complicated when what is being made consists of words. Fr. Georges Florovsky described doctrine as a “verbal icon” of Christ. The iconic nature of words makes them to be among the most important elements in all creation.

Perhaps a particularly acute aspect of words is their ability to distort and misrepresent. And so, from the earliest times, there has been a prohibition against lying. The importance of speaking the truth is emphasized repeatedly in the epistles of the New Testament, even though it might easily seem to be a minor matter of morality.

In our culture, words cascade at a never-ending pace, many of them disincarnate without reference to anything true or real. Arguments abound. Words are spoken like weapons, used for effect and not for meaning.

It is significant that Christ describes the devil as the “father of lies.” In Genesis, he speaks the world’s first lie: “God has not said…” He is the anti-logos.

The modern world has turned its attention to language. Mass communication has raised the power of the lie to new levels. Marxist theory (which holds a treasured position in many corners of our culture, particularly in academia) insists on the re-working of language as a tool for social change (and control). In this model, culture itself becomes a lie and a tool of the lie. Advertising and propaganda have long used language in this distorted manner.

Language is the gift of God, uniquely human. Within it is borne a power to reveal, indeed a power that is deeply related to the act of creation itself. In Genesis, God creates with speech. It is the means by which we pray, the primary means of communion with others. Words are physical objects, passing from our mouths to the ears of others. We touch each other with words. Speech has been made worthy to serve as a sacrifice before God.

The Tradition has also valued silence. St. Ignatius of Antioch said, “He who possesses in truth the word of Jesus can hear even its silence.” We have this from the theologian, Vladimir Lossky:

The faculty of hearing the silence of Jesus, attributed by St. ignatius to those who in truth possess His word, echoes the reiterated appeal of Christ to His hearers: “He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.” The words of Revelation have then a margin of silence which cannot be picked up by the ears of those who are outside. St. Basil moves in the same direction when he says, in his passage on the traditions: “There is also a form of silence, namely the obscurity used by the Scripture, in order to make it difficult to gain understanding of the teachings, for the profit of readers.” This silence of the Scriptures could not be detached from them: it is transmitted by the Church with the words of the Revelation, as the very condition of their reception.

This silence, the reverence for words and the truth which they reveal, is almost lost in our age. Orthodox believers (to focus on ourselves) often multiply our “words without knowledge” as part of the same cultural drive to shape and control. Our proper task is not to shape and control, but to reveal. That requires that we must first and foremost be silent until the word given to us in that silence is truly heard, perceived and incarnate within us. In truth, if you do not live what you say then you do not know what you say.

There is a practice within the tradition in which someone goes to a holy elder and “asks for a word.” That encounter is, most often, quite terse. It is not a request for an explanation, much less mere speculation. It can, indeed, be no word at all:

Abba Theophilus, the archbishop, came to Scetis one day. The brethren who were assembled said to Abba Pambo, “Say something to the archbishop, so that he may be edified.” The old man said to them, “If he is not edified by my silence, he will not be edified by my speech.”

I found this verse in Proverbs that aptly describes so much of our modern conversation:

If a wise man has an argument with a fool, the fool only rages and laughs, and there is no quiet. (Prov. 29:9)

If there is no quiet, it is certain that the word of Christ will not be heard. “He who possesses in truth the word of Jesus can hear even its silence.”

About Fr. Stephen Freeman

Fr. Stephen is a retired Archpriest of the Orthodox Church in America. He is also author of Everywhere Present: Christianity in a One-Storey Universe, and Face to Face: Knowing God Beyond Our Shame, as well as the Glory to God podcast series on Ancient Faith Radio.



Posted

in

by

Comments

44 responses to “Words as Icons”

  1. Margaret Avatar
    Margaret

    Thank you for this lucid encouragement, Fr. Stephen!

  2. Rob Avatar
    Rob

    Beautiful, Father Stephen. As someone who has struggled to speak more than to be silent, I found this quote from George MacDonald’s Unspoken Sermons to be helpful in discerning when to speak and when not to: “How am I to know that a thing is true?’ By doing what you know to be true, and calling nothing true until you see it to be true; by shutting your mouth until the truth opens it. Are you meant to be silent? Then woe to you if you speak.”

  3. Sh. Myrna Martin Avatar
    Sh. Myrna Martin

    Glory be to God!
    Im speechless, have a blessed day.

  4. Richard Avatar
    Richard

    I have worshiped with Quakers for over 15 years. Our Liturgy IS Silence, broken only by messages we hope/believe are given us by the Spirit of God. I would venture to say that the Quaker’s silence has been felt to be quite edifying by a very high number of persons inside and outside of the world of religion.

    Yes, words are icons, just like every created thing in the Cosmos. But humans with their language and moral freedom have the capacity to turn any icon from a window through which to admire and worship God into an idol, a mirror in which to admire and worship oneself. The icon/idol distinction is reflected in the veneration/adoration distinction. The theological line is sharply drawn between the two by definition. The psychological line as felt by the worshiper is a LOT fuzzier. This risk frightened the iconoclasts and so they acted to remove it. I suspect that this admiration for silence has a hint of that old iconoclastic feeling behind it.

    But God took that very risk by creating the Cosmos and Human Freedom. So, though I worship in Silence, I also get great joy and, dare I say, edification by venerating the Icons of Creation (including many liturgies and, imaginatively not actually, even Sacraments) and through them adore God.

    As usual, Father Freeman, another fruitful post. (I’ve been reading you since before I joined the Quakers and though I’ve come close, this is my first sent response.)

  5. Dino Avatar
    Dino

    I couldn’t help but think of the ubiquitous Large Language Models like chatGPT etc as I was reading this… I am sure our Holy Fathers would regard LLMs as eloquent but spiritually (essentially) mute: rich in words, yet lacking “silence”, repentance, and lived participation in truth. They may serve as tools however, splendid ones in the right human hands, but never as ‘witnesses’!
    Besides, Truth is not ‘generated’ by fluency or argument, but revealed through a life transfigured by grace.
    Yet again, in the right human hands (those formed by prayer, obedience, and humility) the ability of these AI language tools to (for example) sift the whole body of the Fathers & Scripture in one fell swoop and offer distilled counsel could, I guess, become a genuine servant or tool serving the directions of human noetic discernment, in other words: a powerful mind (without a nous). It is only a life transfigured by grace that can reveal the truth itself, and then rightly make use of whatever powerful tools are at hand.

  6. Byron Avatar
    Byron

    Our proper task is not to shape and control, but to reveal.

    When I read this, my mind immediately saw a smirking salesman who said, “but what if it reveals something I don’t want?”. Always dangerous, revealing God….

  7. Matthew Avatar
    Matthew

    Might silence help me to better understand Jesus´parables? It appears that the parables were spoken so that those hearing them wouldn´t understand them – at least that´s my take anyway.

    How does one really hear (and then understand) what is being said in silence? Is the goal to really understand what is being revealed in silence – or is understanding the thing we are supposed to be avoiding – even with the parables for example?

  8. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Dino,
    I’m not very sanguine about the LLMs. When I think of the gospels, it is the simplest (in vocabulary and grammar) that I believe is the most beautiful and even “lofty,” that of St. John. The vocabulary of that gospel is, I was told, only 600 words. But with verbal simplicity he makes known the “Logos,” surrounding it with silence – that is itself the Fullness.

    We can make a tool of anything, I think, but we are, or can be, formed and shaped by the nature of our tools. Therein lies the danger.

  9. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Matthew,
    Patience, for one thing. It’s not mechanical – but personal. So, how do we hear? The word for “obedience” in the Greek (and in Latin as well) is built on the word for “listen.” To truly “hear” something means to encounter it and to practice it. It is through obedience in the small things (the next good thing), that we slowly acquire a greater ability to “hear” the gospel – and, ultimately, to hear the silence as well.

  10. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Byron,
    It’s why people should not engage in “spiritual” games.

  11. Dee of Sts Herman and Olga Avatar
    Dee of Sts Herman and Olga

    Father,
    I don’t have a Greek translation of the Bible yet. Sometimes the words of the Lord are terse and vailed. The vail keeps hidden the deeper words in silence.

    What is the Greek word that is used for the bird referred to in Luke 17:37? I ask because I believe the Lord is making a vailed reference to the communion of the Eucharist: “This is my body…” which the Church consumes.

  12. Matthew Avatar
    Matthew

    Thanks so much Fr. Stephen.

    I guess one can hear the reality of woodworking and carpentry as one encounters the sawing of wood and the hammering of nails. As the would be carpenter practices his or her art, understanding of the art flows in a way it cannot by simply listening to words spoken or reading words on a page describing the entire process.

    In my personal life, I have spent probably the better part of nearly 20 years reading my way into a deeper Christian experience. I have now reached a point where I am convinced that the fullness of revelation which God really wants to give me cannot be experienced this way.

    The Church has its purpose. When I step into the Church (especially those which still stand in Western Europe) I find myself in a space that words really cannot describe – and I am thankful for that. Only the Church can give to me what the secular world and its wordy rationalizations cannot. The Church is not a useless institution which no longer has meaning in a modern world. The Church is the only living thing left that gives true meaning to the modern world, that being revelation and illumination which transcends ever so, so much.

  13. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Matthew,
    I think that most moderns fail to understand the Church’s purpose or reason for existence. Jesus didn’t write anything (His disciples did, and, even then, it was decades before they wrote anything down). What Christ gave us was the Church – a communion, and way-of-life lived in communion with other believers. It is the context for our faith – the locus of our praxis – which is then displayed in the world. I’ve have more to say in a forth-coming article.

  14. Matthew Avatar
    Matthew

    I look forward to that forth coming article Fr. Stephen.

  15. Kenneth Avatar
    Kenneth

    Many Protestant statements of belief start with “the Bible” in the first section, as the foundation of belief. But this doesn’t seem to make historical sense. It ignores the historical reality of the Church that preceded the Bible by several centuries and was already living the Christian life to the fullest and producing saints. I sometimes wonder how many Protestants have thought through this.

    I also recently noticed that a large evangelical denomination is considering “whether to adopt the Nicene Creed.” Some are proposing this as a bulwark against heresy. It’s interesting to see them trying to engage with early Christianity, but as if with something quite foreign (and they are still unlikely to adopt the Creed).

  16. Janette Reget Avatar
    Janette Reget

    The 5th Sunday in Ordinary time (catholic) first reading is from Isaiah 58. I have heard it many times, but this Sunday I heard something else too. God is saying to us “IF you remove from your midst oppression, false accusation and malicious speech: if you bestow your bread on the hungry and satisfy the afflicted; THEN light shall rise for you in the darkness, and the gloom shall become for you like midday.” I think God’s language is often phrased like this. “If my people will change their ways, then I will hear them…”

  17. Dee of Sts Herman and Olga Avatar
    Dee of Sts Herman and Olga

    Janette,
    I ask for Father’s view on what I’m about to say. The perspective that God’s interaction with us is conditional on our good behavior is not an Orthodox view. (Again I ask for Father’s correction in my comment). The “if-then” statement is about how we might condition our hearts and souls to receive the grace of God— based on our ability to receive rather than a stipulation on whether we perform good enough conduct to receive a blessing.

    Let us interpret the OT in light of Christ and the life He has given to us to do the next best thing. Knowing full well we might fail. But God willing in our failure He might bridge the inevitable gap.

    Yes feed the hungry, do not oppress others, no malicious behavior. But even if we do these things we say we have only done what we have been asked to do as servants of God.

    What might we do as sons and daughters of God? What might we do for love of Christ?

    Please forgive me I am a sinner and at best only a servant of God, God willing.

  18. Matthew Avatar
    Matthew

    Hello Kenneth.

    It´s my understanding that most Protestants don´t think the Church gave us the Bible, but rather that the Church only recognized the Bible which God had already in divine providence canonized – hence proving that the Church, in whatever formulation, plays second fiddle to the Bible. I don´t agree with this.

    Also, it is my understanding that many Protestants will admit some sort of historical communion with the early Church, but that its the medieval Church in the west which fell into heresy and which they believe is not the real Church.

    So I think Protestants have thought through these things, though the conclusions which they have drawn leave me, personally, logically and spiritually longing.

  19. Matthew Avatar
    Matthew

    Dear Fr. Stephen,

    I would like to know how we should deal with any “if … then” statements we find in the Bible – especially if we say that how God works is through hidden providence and wonderous mystery. ??

  20. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Jannette, Dee, Matthew, et al
    I recall the treatment of these “if…then” (conditional) statements that were common among Evangelical Christians, and, I suppose, still are. Very commonly, they were taken from the Old Testament (I cannot think of any in the NT) and applied either to personal, or sometimes national settings in the present. In the Biblical context, they should be seen as prophetic promises within the context of the Covenant between ancient Israel and God. A very bad habit in the modern period (particularly in America) was the picturing of America as a new Israel – and then applying these covenant statements to the nation. This is simply a misapplication. America is not ancient Israel, nor is there a covenant between America and God.

    But, how are we to read these statements regarding our own use of them?

    I would be quite reluctant to take them as a specific performative promise to my self individually. Our New Covenant is in Christ, established in His death and resurrection. In Christ, the light shines on us all.

    Nonetheless, Janette, I would take the statement from Isaiah 58 and conclude that we are to “bestow our bread on the hungry and satisfy the afflicted,” which are things that are commanded us by Christ Himself. Thus, we should get on with keeping His commandments. Equally true is the fact that we should remove from our midst those things described in the same prophecy.

    But, in Christ, we discover that God “causes His rain to fall on the just and the unjust.” If we remove from our midst the wickedness of our hard hearts, then we will see and absorb better the rain that is poured out on our parched souls.

    I would think that sort of application would be appropriate in other such conditional phrases.

  21. Matthew Avatar
    Matthew

    Fr. Stephen said:

    “Nonetheless, Janette, I would take the statement from Isaiah 58 and conclude that we are to “bestow our bread on the hungry and satisfy the afflicted,” which are things that are commanded us by Christ Himself. Thus, we should get on with keeping His commandments. Equally true is the fact that we should remove from our midst those things described in the same prophecy.”

    I understand what you are saying, Fr. Stephen, as something like we should simply get on with keeping his commandments and doing the next right and good thing without getting caught up in what me might receive personally as a result of this.

    Am I on the right track?

  22. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Matthew,
    Definitely the right track. It easily becomes a sort of spiritual trap if we make our life in Christ a matter of conditional performance – particularly in the sense that IF we do A, THEN we’ll get B. Christ said, “Freely you have received, freely give.”

    Frankly, the abuse of the Old Testament in certain strains of historical, American Protestantism (which colors much of the thought among many pious people in our culture) is quite scandalous.

    You described our task well: keep the commandments of Christ, do the next right and good thing (the one that is at hand), and let God be in charge of how He works things out.

  23. Matthew Avatar
    Matthew

    Thanks Fr. Stephen

  24. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Matthew,
    There’s this:
    “If God is for us, who can be against us? He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, how shall He not with Him also freely give us all things?” Rom. 8:31-32

  25. Dee of Sts Herman and Olga Avatar
    Dee of Sts Herman and Olga

    Thank you Father and Matthew for your edifying words. I struggled to say what you both say so well.

    These are important words to take to heart as we near the time of Holy Lent.

  26. Matthew Avatar
    Matthew

    Thanks again Fr. Stephen and Dee!

  27. Matthew Avatar
    Matthew

    Speaking of Holy Lent:

    Do you have an article, Fr. Stephen, which explains how the Orthodox approach and “do” Lent?

    I struggle with Lent (especially Ash Wednesday) in the western tradition. I think I struggle because I don´t really understand the purpose of it all.

  28. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Matthew,
    Here is an article that might be of help: https://glory2godforallthings.com/2025/10/22/the-ascetic-imperative-a-matter-of-communion-2/

    I don’t have a specific article that addresses how the Orthodox approach Great Lent.

    Generally, we abstain from meat, fish, wine, dairy, and olive oil during the Fast (with some noted exceptions on certain days). That fast describes monastic rules – and they may be modified in individual cases depending on the strength, health, and benefit of the individual. This is usually done by a spiritual father or local priest.

    First, and foremost: Lenten fasting is not about some kind of Christian “kosher.” The foods we abstain from are not “unclean.” It is not a sin to eat them, even during Lent. When we stumble in our efforts to fast – it is something we would mention in confession – simply as a matter of being honest with ourselves.

    Fasting is a matter of communion – we fast because Christ fasted – and the saints have fasted with Him through the ages. So, we fast, subjecting our bodies to a bit of discipline for the sake of sharpening our attention to spiritual things. Fasting should be coupled with prayer, with almsgiving, and with acts of kindness and generosity.

    If we abstain from physical food, it is in order to eat of spiritual food.

    But, if someone struggles with fastidiousness or scrupulosity, then they probably need some adjustment in the fast lest it become a mental stumbling block.

    I know of cases where a person had problems with fasting from food (they had an eating disorder). Instead, they were given a number of Psalms to be said instead.

    Start slowly. Don’t overdo. Don’t obsess. Rejoice in all things.

  29. Matthew Avatar
    Matthew

    Thanks so much Fr. Stephen.

  30. Dee of Sts Herman and Olga Avatar
    Dee of Sts Herman and Olga

    Father,
    I found it helpful to read that St Sophrony had such joyful anticipation of Great Lent that the time given over to prayer was like a feast. —spiritual bread.

  31. Simon Avatar
    Simon

    I tend to think of conditional or transactional statements in scripture along the same lines as I do Jesus’ beatitudes, “Blessed are the merciful…”, “Blessed are the meek…” He isn’t describing the currency of transaction, per se, but he is underscoring that Christian ethos is embedded among persons. As such, how we treat others matters. Breaking communion with people will break communion with God.

    However, even the metaphor of transaction can work. There’s Jesus’ parables of the talents, the unforgiving debtor, and the shrewd manager. It works as long as you keep in mind that it isn’t a formalism.

  32. Byron Avatar
    Byron

    Many Protestant statements of belief start with “the Bible” in the first section, as the foundation of belief. But this doesn’t seem to make historical sense. It ignores the historical reality of the Church that preceded the Bible by several centuries and was already living the Christian life to the fullest and producing saints. I sometimes wonder how many Protestants have thought through this.

    Kenneth, I would add to what Matthew stated (or perhaps restate it) that Protestants tend to view the scriptures as being in use prior to their being written down and/or collected by the Church. Thus scripture explains/shows how the Church worshipped and acted from the beginning of its formation. The argument goes on to state that Scripture represents the most accurate understanding of early Church worship and practice, so it is of primary importance in understanding the role of the Church (viewed through the lens of the individual believer) in the world.

    There is a lot wrong with this viewpoint, from diminishing the role of the Church in the formation of scripture to placing the Church beneath the individual in a variety of ways, when played out. It makes for a mess, to be honest, but one can also see why it appeals to Protestants so strongly (especially in the context of modern cultures). The “sense” it makes–of the Early Church being formed around the scriptures–is upside down, but it also carries a form of “logic” if one accepts the premise.

  33. Janette Adelle Reget Avatar
    Janette Adelle Reget

    Thank you, all. I think what struck me about the reading from Isaiah is simply the reminder of what could be…

  34. Matthew Avatar
    Matthew

    Thanks so much Byron. You offer up a much more comprehensive explanation than mine. I appreciate that!

    That said, what would your counter argument be to such Protestant logic?

  35. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Janette,
    With God, all things are possible…

    Blessings!

  36. simon Avatar
    simon

    The icon is seen in the pattern. The same colors that are used to create something profane can also be used to create an icon of something holy. The difference is in the pattern. Irenaeus refers to this using the metaphor of a mosaic of a king, but someone rearranges the tiles and then makes an image of a dog. Irenaeus says that heretics use plausibility to rearrange the scriptures in order to create a plausible theology. Again, the icon is in the pattern.

    I think this is one of those effects that we might use to describe sin: It disrupts the iconic pattern of the human person. And we hear this in different aspects of Orthodox life. In the Evlogetaria for the Dead we hear, “You who did fashion me of old out of nothingness, and with Your Image Divine did honor me; but because of the transgressions of Your commandments, did return me again to the earth from whence I was taken; lead me back to be refashioned into that ancient beauty of Your likeness.”

    Sin disrupts and misaligns the logoi of our being and the pattern of the likeness of God in us is confused. Then what we end up doing is narrating some self-serving story and in the process engineering pseudo-logoi to provide a grammar and vocabulary for that identity. Frequntly, these stories fall under the true-self genre. In the well-intended but woefully misguided effort to make sense of ourselves we engage in lego-blocking plausibilities together to create something coherent. Although this is almost unavoidable, it deepens the internal conflict because we will tend to defend and justify these pseudo-logoi and their the pattern, or likeness, that we now identify with as our true-self.

    This is why fasting is important because it erodes the story that conflicts with our God-given logoi and allows the logoi to naturally move back into alignment.

  37. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    You’re describing, in pseudo-logoi terms, the process that “toxic shame” creates – or certainly something quite similar. I’ve not seen it described in terms of pseudo-logoi, but I understand the reasoning you’re using.

    Do you have a source that describes sin as disrupting the iconic pattern of the human person? I’d love to see it, if so.

    My own thinking is that, since the logoi of our being is God-given and even, God Himself in some manner, that “disrupting” it would not be disrupting the logoi themselves but disrupting the connection or patterning on our side of things.

    Nonetheless, understanding fasting/asceticism as a re-patterning, or a restoration “according to the image” – is a good understanding.

  38. Simon Avatar
    Simon

    Father Stephen, what you wrote helps me clarify what I was trying to express: it is not that the logoi themselves are disrupted, but that their ordering and manifestation in us becomes disordered.

    I was thinking of Irenaeus’ image of the mosaic how the same tiles can be rearranged to produce a different image from the one originally intended. Likewise, the same words of Scripture can be reassembled to suggest a meaning foreign to the apostolic faith. The material remains true; the pattern becomes distorted.

    I was using that as a metaphor for the human person. The faculties, desires, and capacities that belong to our nature remain good in themselves. But when they are rearranged through self-will, they no longer display the intended image clearly. I wondered whether the individual “tiles” of that mosaic might serve as an analogy for the logoi of our being–stable and given, yet capable of being expressed in a distorted pattern through our mode of existence.

    It may be that I have pressed the metaphor too far and confused imagery with metaphysics. If so, I’m grateful for the correction. What I was trying to articulate is that the distortion occurs in the patterning of our lived expression, not in the divine intention itself.

  39. Fr. Stephen Avatar

    Simon,
    This is helpful. And it’s fine.

  40. Byron Avatar
    Byron

    Matthew,

    I used to consider counter-arguments but I no longer think they are helpful. Since the two sides in the discussion/argument (Orthodox and Protestant) are coming from such firmly oppositional points, I realized that there is no real commonality for discussion.

    I would say the best approach is to allow them to present their views and then to present the Orthodox view, with some emphasis on the Church and Her authority (which I find Protestants vehemently deny) and role in forming the scriptures. In that way, there would be clarity in the differences of the views, but no real arguing. Just my thoughts.

  41. Dee of Sts Herman and Olga Avatar
    Dee of Sts Herman and Olga

    Byron,
    I agree with you. Arguing as far as I’ve been taught is not the Orthodox way to proselytize. It’s how we live, love, and give. And similarly, I’ve heard the Orthodox way is to woo. Argumentation suggests that salvation rests on philosophy or psychology rather than on the life lived and the heart that dwells in Christ. As far as the Orthodox Church is portrayed, it is so foreign to Protestant America, that as far as I know, it takes a long time to marinate (as Father Stephen describes it) in the life and ethos of the Church before it becomes a place for communion with Christ and Orthodox Christians. Even still, some never get over the overtones of the East, hence, now we have Western Rite Orthodoxy in the USA.

  42. Matthew Avatar
    Matthew

    Thanks Byron and Dee.

    I wasn´t suggesting a counter argument in an apologetic or even a debate kind of way. I too no longer believe this is the best way to move forward. I was only wondering what Byron might offer up (if asked by a Protestant for example) about the Church and the formation of the Bible from an Orthodox perspective.

    This comment section is not in any way argumentative, but it does offer up arguments in favor of the Orthodox way of seeing and doing things. This is the kind of argumentation, or explaining, I am suggesting. I am rather confident there are Protestants reading our comments here who might greatly benefit from our explanations.

  43. Dee of Sts Herman and Olga Avatar
    Dee of Sts Herman and Olga

    Matthew, beloved brother,
    I should add that while we might not argue to proselytise, we’re notorious for arguing amongst ourselves!

  44. Matthew Avatar
    Matthew

    Thanks Dee. I appreciate your words.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Subscribe to blog via email

Support the work

Your generous support for Glory to God for All Things will help maintain and expand the work of Fr. Stephen. This ministry continues to grow and your help is important. Thank you for your prayers and encouragement!


Latest Comments


Read my books

Everywhere Present by Stephen Freeman

Listen to my podcast



Categories


Archives