“All writing is God-breathed” says St Paul to St Timothy, although some folks like to spin that to say “all scripture” (implying a Canon of which St Paul knew nothing). All writing… That’s why the verb “writing” gets applied to icons, I think. God breathed. Of course that was in a largely pre-literate culture. The monks who showed up in England with a painted image of Christ had only spoken words for the largest bunch of the people - spoken words and painted pictures.
Was watching Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon last night and notice that the Chinese seem to to cover surfaces with text and calligraphy. What for us would be a logical place to put a family portrait seems (at least in the days of the emperors) to be a place to put up text. I wondered if that text (which I could not read, of course) would be pithy sayings or wise quotations, holy texts from books or simply labels (”no swords allowed in Master’s Study”). Are these verbal icons?
Can we, now in a literate culture, construct such icons?
I’ve had a gift for a while, an image of St John Chyrsostom that was a gift from my friend, Susan. In it she combines more traditional images with textual commentary. Although you can not get the full effect in this scan, different things show up from different angles as you look at it. It has rather more depth. But it is decidedly writing and not just imagery.
Though I’m not sure I’m willing to go quite as loose as all “writing” being God-breathed according to Paul, I heartily agree with your bigger point. There is something Godly and holy when thoughts, ideas and feelings are put down on paper and are able to be transfered to another person.
I also absolutely love your icon of St John Chyrsostom with the writing overlaid. I find power when imagery and words are combined, particularly when the two come together in a way where one isn’t serving the other. An example of this is that there is illustrated poetry where the poem is definitely inspired by the image or sometimes you can tell that the image grows out of the words of the poem. But occasionally, I come across something where the two grew out of each other and each one makes the other stronger. When this happens it is a powerful (and again, holy) thing.
Have you by chance seen anything from the St. John’s Bible. It is a beautiful illuminated manuscript that is currently being finished up after years of work. The pictures in it are more than pictures, and again speak deep theology to anyone reading/looking at them. And a number of them use words along with the illustrations in a wonderful way.
Howdy and thanks for stopping by!
Click through on Susan’s link and see her St Augustine!
St Johns: Wow. Thanks for sharing that… that is stunning… although $115,000 is rather a lot to pay for a Bible :-) Maybe after the lottery!
RE: St Paul, I’m not sure to which texts he refers when he says “Pasa graphe”, although, fair enough, it seems a direct translation of a way I’ve heard some Jews refer to certain parts of the OT (although not all parts) and also some Rabbinical Writings… but the Greeks applied the same term to icons for a reason. In fact some EOs will get bent out of shape if you say “paint an icon” instead of “write an icon” although the verb is the same.
I thought St Paul knew a Canon - the compilations of the Old Testament we call the Septuagint.
Dave - my bad phrasing… you are correct and I agree. I was referring to people who make his line cover the NT canon… which wasn’t even written yet.
I agree about icons being written and I understand the concept of applying a holy flair to the writing of the icons. I also think you’re right on in stating that many try a little too hard in trying to use Paul’s words to define their scripture. So, again, I agree with you in principle completely, though I am a bit worried about where someone could take the idea that all writing in general is God-breathed. Actually, what I find more interesting in that scripture is the use of the word kai. We like to say all scripture/writing is God-breathed and useful for encouraging, instructing, etc… We say it’s God-breathed, period. And we say it’s useful for teaching, etc…, period. But what if the “and” is actually connecting God-breathed and useful. Then we’d be saying that it’s God-breathed for encouraging, etc… and it’s useful for encouraging, etc… What that then does is say that when God inspires something, it’s not just inspiried, it’s inspired to do something. Motion happens. Basically, when God breaths something results. This is a much more dynamic and meaningful way to look at this passage. And, I think it adds meaning when you look at your use of the phrase as well.
Anyway… I don’t meant to belabor the issue. And I’m glad you found the St. John’s Bible info inspiring. And thanks for welcoming me to your blog.
To take us on a slightly different angle… what if it’s read as descriptive instead of umm… edictive?
How do you define sacred writing?
Well, it’s God-breathed and useful for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.
If it’s not those things then it’s not scripture…
Interesting discussion about sacred writing, but to me it seems a little off the mark. I’d always read 2 Timothy 3:16 in connection with the verse immediately preceding it. In my opinion, the “all writings” in v. 16 is a reference to the Septuagint which had just been commended.
The scriptures which both Jews and Christians share in common have often been referred to as “the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings.” This three-fold division is the source of the acronym TaNaKh to refer to the entire collection. (Torah, Navi’im, Khetuviim)
While it’s entirely possible that St. Paul was only referring to the Writings (what modern scholars would call Wisdom literature - Psalms, Proverbs, etc.), I suspect that it is a synecdoche. It’s interesting to note that in v. 15, the reference is specifically to iera grammata, while v. 16 goes on to refer to pasa graphe.
Sitting at my keyboard thinking about this, when I saw that these hieratic letters are directly connected to salvation through faith in Christ Jesus, I was immediately reminded of the post-Resurrectional appearances recorded in Luke 24:27,44 where Christ begins to do some exegesis.
So anyway, there are some more thoughts to throw into the mix.
Hi Peter - thanks for the comment. For some reason unknown to me WordPress queued it for moderation… not as if I’d put anything from you on moderation! Eventually I’ll figure out the ins and outs of this software.
Thank you for pointing out the use of “grammata” in 2 Tim 3:15. I seem to remember from my Bible study mailing list that that was the source of the question: since he used “holy things written down” or even “priestly words” by some lights over there and “writing” here, was there a difference in the two things or was he simply using, pardon the pun, “Writer’s Licence”? It wasn’t until today - 5+ years later - that I made the connexion with the “KH” in Tanakh. It all wraps around sooner or later! (Minus the folk who wonder if this is Authentically Paul which we can’t know, of course, nor is it terribly important.)
But to pull this back to where the post was: it’s more about us using words (plus or minus images) in the way that they were being used in that movie. That was the idea that made me think. I was interested to note that although there were *words* everywhere where (on banners, in frames, painted on walls, on clothing, etc), the only image I saw was on a Wanted poster. A pylon carved with text in a shrine filled the place that would be occupied by an icon for us, for example. Again, I could not read the text - although one assumes the Chinese could (the ancients as well as the moderns seeing the movie). But the presence of text everywhere seemed somehow holy and mysterious: iconic.
OT: My guess is it’s from the 2 link limit, which throws it into moderation for verification of the links to prevent spammage. =)
It’s been a very long time since I watched the movie, and I hadn’t noticed the textuality. (In my defense, I was watching it on a computer monitor.)
I am tempted to question your assumption that we are a literate culture. I’m not saying that people don’t know how to read. I’m more interested in the question of whether people actually read any more than is strictly necessary. It’s my perception that our sources of information and entertainment are no longer “textual” in North America. We are, in this sense, a post-literate society.
The best example I’ve seen of “verbal icons” in the sense you were discussing is Arabic calligraphy. Even native speakers of Arabic have a hard time reading some of the more intricate texts, but it is textuality which literally forms the image. To take but one example you may be familiar with: the logo for the Al Jazeera news media. The logo is the noun “Al Jazeera” but it is instantly recognizable as a symbol.