Three hundred and thirty-eight bishops attended the council, endorsing Constantine V's
iconoclast position. The bishops maintained that the worship of images became widespread after the
Third Council of Constantinople of 680–681. They argued that pictorial representation of God is impossible, because an icon of Christ either depicts his humanity alone or confuses his humanity and divinity; which they rule to be
Nestorianism and
monophysitism respectively. They also considered the only true image of Christ to be the
Eucharist. The
bishops declared that "the unlawful art of painting living creatures blasphemed the fundamental doctrine of our salvation—namely, the
Incarnation of Christ, and contradicted the six holy synods. [...] If anyone shall endeavour to represent the forms of the
Saints in lifeless pictures with material colours which are of no value (for this notion is vain and introduced by the
devil), and does not rather represent their virtues as living images in himself, etc. [...] let him be
anathema". These
Christological arguments represent a development from the arguments of earlier iconoclasts, who appealed to the
biblical condemnation of the production of images in the
Second Commandment. Similar pronouncements on the issue of religious images had been made in the
Synod of Elvira () whose
Canon 36 states: "
Pictures are not to be placed in churches, so that they do not become objects of worship and adoration". If understood this way, it is the earliest such prohibition known. The council represents a moderate party of iconoclasts which affirmed the
intercession of saints and
Mary, mother of Jesus, as evidenced by one of its
anathemas against the one who "does not ask for [the prayers of Mary and the saints] as having the freedom to intercede on behalf of the world according to the tradition of the church". It is debated among scholars whether Constantine remained faithful to the moderate position or later shifted to the radical view in which the intercession of Mary and saints was denied on the grounds of '
soul-sleep'. This view is reported by later iconodule sources who may have exaggerated for polemical purposes, thus their reliability is questioned in modern scholarship. ==Reception==