Who really cares what the ECF's had to say?

[simonthezealot]

Dear Simon,

I was taken by your use of the word 'legally' and wondered about the sense in which you use it here? Legal analogies seem very much part of the Western tradition, both Catholic and non-Catholic.

Not sure why your taken by it, frequently terms such as;bearing witness, testimony, seal and promise are attached to the actions of the HS within and for us.
A great example is John 15:26-27 26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me: 27 And ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning.

where John uses a court of law description to explain how we are to use the power of the HS to face a hostile world with the gospel of Christ.
Hope that helps.

 

[Anglian]

Dear Simon,

Yes, the response is helpful. I suspect my interest was piqued because I have been reading about the different ways in which St. Augustine and John Cassian approached the idea of prevenient Grace, and was struck by the prevalence of law court analogies in the Western Tradition, and their relative absence in the Eastern Fathers. If I knew more about these things, I'm sure there is something of significance here in relations to the differences between the two Traditions as they developed in the tenth and eleventh centuries.

Peace,

Anglian

 

[Thekla]

Dear Simon,

Yes, the response is helpful. I suspect my interest was piqued because I have been reading about the different ways in which St. Augustine and John Cassian approached the idea of prevenient Grace, and was struck by the prevalence of law court analogies in the Western Tradition, and their relative absence in the Eastern Fathers. If I knew more about these things, I'm sure there is something of significance here in relations to the differences between the two Traditions as they developed in the tenth and eleventh centuries.

Peace,

Anglian

Hello, Anglian -

if you do not consider it too OT, and do not mind otherwise, perhaps you might be willing to say a bit more on the matter ?( I have just started a book of selections by St. John Cassian to consider for the Parish bookstore).

Thank-you
Thekla

 

[Secundulus]

When I had given much thought and pondered on the matter, I became convinced that these quarrels of Christians among themselves are not a matter of factual substance, but rather one of words and terms. For they all confess Christ Our Lord to be perfect God and perfect human, without any commingling, mixing, or confusion of the natures. This bipinnate 'likeness' ( Phil. 2:6-7) is termed by one party a 'nature', by another 'a hypostasis' and by yet another a 'person'. Thus I saw all the Christian communities, with their different Christological positions, as possessing a single common ground that is without any difference. Accordingly I totally eradicated any hatred from the depths of my heart, and I completely renounced disputing with anyone over confessional matters.
Jacob Bar-Hebraeus, The Dove.

This reminds me of something one of my instructors said last year in a theology class. He is a Southern Baptist Minister and holds a PhD. in Old Testament theology.

He said that at one point he began to read Roman Catholic theologians. Much to his surprise he discovered that they spoke of and worshipped exactly the same Jesus as he did. There was absolutely no difference at all.

It would be nice if the Catholics and the Protestants could come out of the 16th Century and if the Catholics and the Orthodox could come out of the 11th Century and put aside that which is not truly essential.

We all have a common enemy which is Satan in the garb of Secularism and Islam. If we had half a brain we would realize this and unite to fight the enemies of Christ rather than continually fighting within the body.

A Body that fights itself will die.

 

[beamishboy]

Dear Simon,

Yes, the response is helpful. I suspect my interest was piqued because I have been reading about the different ways in which St. Augustine and John Cassian approached the idea of prevenient Grace, and was struck by the prevalence of law court analogies in the Western Tradition, and their relative absence in the Eastern Fathers. If I knew more about these things, I'm sure there is something of significance here in relations to the differences between the two Traditions as they developed in the tenth and eleventh centuries.

Peace,

Anglian

Hi Anglian,

I find all of Simonthezealot's responses very helpful. He knows the Bible like the back of his hand and he is one great person to PM if you need help on anything relating to the faith. He also knows the words of ECFs as if he's written them himself!!!

 

[Montalban]

I am qualified to tell you that i AM a CHRISTian, and I AM SAVED...
Praise HIM!

Not all who cry "Lord! Lord" will be saved

Matthew 7:21

 

[Montalban]

He also knows the words of ECFs as if he's written them himself!!!

That's debatable. In fact I debated this. I showed where he quoted the ECFs out of context.*

He waited about a week later then asked where I had done this - because as with you, I'd reminded him he'd not addressed my post.

So, I re-posted my post.

He's still not dealt with that either.

So anyway, mindlessly cheering someone might be your thing but it doesn't add to debate nor to a vastly decreasing reputation.


*-not only that I, and several others raised the issue of the ridiculous nature of his argument - offering ECFs as an 'authority' to argue that they had no authority. He didn't deal with that either.

 

[Montalban]

Just for the record here it is again. This will now be another chance Simonthezlealot has in running away from this

I didn't deal with all his quotes, it was sufficient to show that he'd misquoted one.

29th July I showed him up...

BUMP

Do you realise the silliness of appealing to the authority of Church Fathers to show that they have no authority?

Where does Ambrose say "Let us only enquire of the Scriptures"?

Again you missed the point. AT THE COUNCILE OF NICEA they declared.

It wasn't apparent of itself from the Bible

After this he's asking me where I did this.

30th July…

Your accusing me of misquoting ecf's, buck up and show it.

Ah the selective memory!

 

[beamishboy]

This reminds me of something one of my instructors said last year in a theology class. He is a Southern Baptist Minister and holds a PhD. in Old Testament theology.

He said that at one point he began to read Roman Catholic theologians. Much to his surprise he discovered that they spoke of and worshipped exactly the same Jesus as he did. There was absolutely no difference at all.

It would be nice if the Catholics and the Protestants could come out of the 16th Century and if the Catholics and the Orthodox could come out of the 11th Century and put aside that which is not truly essential.

We all have a common enemy which is Satan in the garb of Secularism and Islam. If we had half a brain we would realize this and unite to fight the enemies of Christ rather than continually fighting within the body.

A Body that fights itself will die.

I fully endorse this!!! I was already beginning to feel uneasy when I see Secundulus in this thread because I've seen how he very ably argued with Muslims. He knows quite a bit about Islam.

I actually thought all our little bickering of whether Mary had other children, or whether she was married (I just discovered in another thread that Orthodox don't believe she was ever married) - all this bickering seems a bit silly considering the fact we all believe in the same Lord. I thought what if these Muslims entered this thread and they'll laugh at us for our own in-fighting.

We should stand united against the common enemy. The Bible says it's the Holy Spirit who enables us to call Jesus "Lord". What's the exact verse? Something like "nobody calls Jesus Lord unless he's empowered by the Spirit" or words to that effect. I think it's in one of Paul's epistles.

 

[Rick Otto]

Yeah, curb your enthusiasm, kid. We have enough to deal with without you provoking jealousy as well.

 

[Rick Otto]

I think it's in one of Paul's epistles.

& I'm pretty sure I remember Jesus says it to Peter just before the controversial "upon this rock" statement.

 

[Montalban]

Yeah, curb your enthusiasm, kid. We have enough to deal with without you provoking jealousy as well.

Still avoiding debate?

 

[Rick Otto]

Avoiding insanity.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Avoiding insanity.

Hey, insanity brought me Reps so don't knock it

24th July 2008 "your new avatar represents insanity"

 

[Montalban]

Their are multiple dozens who point to scripture for its ultimate sufficiency in matters of faith....Here are a few of the MANY i can offer...
Ambrose
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf210.iv.iv.iii.vii.html?highlight=let%20us%20enquire%20of%20the%20father#highlight

"The Arians, then, say that Christ is unlike the Father; we deny it. Nay, indeed, we shrink in dread from the word. Nevertheless I would not that your sacred Majesty should trust to argument and our disputation. Let us enquire of the Scriptures, of apostles, of prophets, of Christ. In a word, let us enquire of the Father...

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf210.iv.iv.iii.xix.html?highlight=mask%20itself%20with%20dye%20or%20face%20paint#highlight

So, indeed, following the guidance of the Scriptures, our fathers [at the Council of Nicaea] declared, holding, moreover, that impious doctrines should be included in the record of their decrees, in order that the unbelief of Arius should discover itself, and not, as it were, mask itself with dye or face-paint." - Ambrose (Exposition of the Christian Faith, 1:6:43, 1:18:119)



http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf210.iv.i.ii.xxiii.html?highlight=for%20how%20can%20we%20adopt%20those%20things%20which%20we%20do%20not%20find%20in%20the%20holy%20scriptures#highlight
"For how can we adopt those things which we do not find in the holy Scriptures?"


Augustine
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf108.ii.XXXVII.1.html?highlight=every%20sickness%20of%20the%20soul%20hath%20in%20scripture%20its%20proper%20remedy.#highlight
"Every sickness of the soul hath in Scripture its proper remedy." - Augustine (Expositions on the Psalms, 37:2)
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf104.iv.ix.xiii.html?highlight=the%20innumerable%20books%20that%20have%20been%20written%20latterly#highlight

In the innumerable books that have been written latterly we may sometimes find the same truth as in Scripture, but there is not the same authority. Scripture has a sacredness peculiar to itself." - Augustine (Reply to Faustus the Manichaean, 11:5)

Here's another example of your false use of quotes...

" 102. Men of the world give many further rules about the way to speak, which I think we may pass over; as, for instance, the way jesting should be conducted. or though at times jests may be proper and pleasant, yet they are unsuited to the clerical life. For how can we adopt those things which we do not find in the holy Scriptures?"
Ambrose
On the Duties of the Clergy
Book I.
Chapter XXIII.

He's talking about jests, specifically, asking "how can we adopt those, when they're not found in Scriptures?"

IF this was a defence of sola-scriptura then why does it itself contain quotes to other references other than scripture as backing up points he's making? This is a guide for the clergy of a church you reject, made by an authority you reject. He's telling them how to behave.

 

[Montalban]

Avoiding insanity.

You mean you're coming to the church Jesus founded? Excellent. Welcome brother

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

You mean you're coming to the church Jesus founded? Excellent. Welcome brother

I can't afford a plane ticket there at the moment

 

[Montalban]

I can't afford a plane ticket there at the moment

You need to be less obsessed with the Roman Catholic church (I'm not Catholic)*

I pray that you to can avoid more insanity.



*-there's surely a whole study paper here in why Protestants can not read the words "I'm not Catholic".

 

[Ramon96]

Here's another example of your false use of quotes...

" 102. Men of the world give many further rules about the way to speak, which I think we may pass over; as, for instance, the way jesting should be conducted. or though at times jests may be proper and pleasant, yet they are unsuited to the clerical life. For how can we adopt those things which we do not find in the holy Scriptures?"
Ambrose
On the Duties of the Clergy
Book I.
Chapter XXIII.

He's talking about jests, specifically, asking "how can we adopt those, when they're not found in Scriptures?"

IF this was a defence of sola-scriptura then why does it itself contain quotes to other references other than scripture as backing up points he's making? This is a guide for the clergy of a church you reject, made by an authority you reject. He's telling them how to behave.

Montalban,

Please realize that when Protestants try to use the Early Church Fathers to prove Sola-Scriptura, they actually cherry-pick quotes from Fathers, take quotation out of context or more importantly, leave important information out of there suppose quotation that will lead one to the correct context of the quote.

I have dealt with Protestants like Simon who use the ECF to prove Sola-Scriptura, but after researching the suppose quotation of these Fathers, they leave important information out on purpose or ignore what they said in there other writings to better understand what the Father said. The Protestant that I had a debate with didn't really study the writings of Fathers, they simply "copy and paste" from a Anti-Catholic website to prove Sola-Scriptura.

This is the only way Protestants can use the ECF to prove there point.

Blessings,
Ramon

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

You need to be less obsessed with the Roman Catholic church (I'm not Catholic)*

I pray that you to can avoid more insanity.



*-there's surely a whole study paper here in why Protestants can not read the words "I'm not Catholic".

When I want insanity, I go to the GA and GT boards

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=7267954
A discussion of the new forum specific guidelines.

What TPTB fail to understand is that apologetics is a rough and tumble business and always has been. Read the Dialog with Trypho. Read the Justin Martyr's First Apology. Read Irenaeus. It is about disagreement and dispute.

Sure, we can enforce some rules of form and courtesy, but as long as there is an apologetics forum here, there will be confict. It's not apologetics if you're not arguing.

And life is not a Chick Tract--people are not convinced by a few well-placed bon mots. The Roman Road is a joke. Pascal's Wager is a loser. Shouting out a couple of verses from Revelations is not apologetics. Heck, it isn't even evangelism.