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

[Standing Up]

Then go start the church of Aneotos and preach what's clear to you, to your fellow sS brethren. I'm sure they're eager to hear the 'true' word of God as they have slowly deviated from it.


Ahh, the old "the Bible is clear enough" remark when self appoints what's not clear to self, unimportant for the rest of Christianity. I never get tired of hearing this.

You mean something like interpreting the closed east gate as meaning the ever-virgin. Definitely takes the appointed self to show the rest the clear meaning of that. If you don't see it, you're the one who's deviating.

 

[Fireinfolding]

You mean something like interpreting the closed east gate as meaning the ever-virgin. Definitely takes the appointed self to show the rest the clear meaning of that. If you don't see it, you're the one who's deviating.

East, west north or south gate, I have yet to understand how the east gate points to virginity.

 

[Christos Anesti]

You mean something like interpreting the closed east gate as meaning the ever-virgin. Definitely takes the appointed self to show the rest the clear meaning of that. If you don't see it, you're the one who's deviating.

That's known as a typological interpretation. You will see both Christ and the Apostle Paul using the typological method of exegesis for some of the statements found in the Old Testament. Now, certainly, something presented as one could be a false parallel or type but the basic idea of typological interpretation is sound. It's not as absurd as it might sound at first glance. Typology is used in the NT and continued on from there. Paul notes that certain things from the OT are a shadow of things to come and that were then manifest in regards to Christ and elements of his life and ministry. That's the basic theory behind typology.

"These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ."
Colossians 2:17

 

[Standing Up]

East, west north or south gate, I have yet to understand how the east gate points to virginity.

You need one of those infallible interpreters

 

[Christos Anesti]

East, west north or south gate, I have yet to understand how the east gate points to virginity

I doubt that is it's exclusive meaning. Verses can have more then one meaning though. There might be a moral meaning, a typological meaning pointing to something about Christ, an allegorical meaning relating to some reality in the heavens, an historical meaning, etc.. This is why seeking the guidance of the Holy Spirit and access to the collective wisdom of the Church throughout the last 2012 years can be very helpful. The later to make sure the meaning given you via an apparent Holy Spirit teaching isn't in fact a subtle form of deception or illusion. Something to help ground one to the wisdom of the great Christian combatants who lived previously. How many people do you see say "God told me" and you are convinced they really believe it but then what they say is absurd and contradictory to Scripture. That's why some grounding can be helpful. I would assume, though I can't say this from personal experience, that at higher stages of the Christian walk access to the thought of others would probably become progressively less import but in the forming stages it seems absolutely essential. "He who has himself as his guide has Satan as his guide" is an old Arabic saying that seems pretty accurate in all but the most exceptional cases.

 

[Standing Up]

That's known as a typological interpretation. You will see both Christ and the Apostle Paul using the typological manner of exegesis for some of the statements found in the Old Testament. Now, certainly, something presented as one could be a false parallel or type but the basic idea of typological interpretation is sound. It's not as absurd as it might sound at first glance. Typology is used in the NT and continued on from there. Paul notes that certain things from the OT are a shadow of things to come and that were then manifest in regards to Christ and elements of his life and ministry. That's the basic theory behind typology.

"These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ."
Colossians 2:17

I agree Paul saw allegory between Hagar and Sarah. Jesus used parable. Many use types/shadows. It's not enough to say that one bishop understood, while another bishop does not. And in the east gate example, its very speculative.

 

[fhansen]

And in the east gate example, its very speculative.

I've not heard of that as being considered an infallible interpretation, much less an article of faith for anyone.

 

[fhansen]

There's only, what, 2 of them? The first being I am infallible. Not sure the next one.

All de fide doctrines are considered to be infallible teachings of the Church. A matter such as that of the east gate wouldn't qualify.

 

[Pythons]

Their theology was wrong in many areas, there were many different interpretations of the same scriptures and in many cases they had next to NO access to bounce their ideas off of other great theological minds...So what gives? why the heavy leanings for understanding? Essentially the scriptures they used and the ones we use have remained unchanged, less some poor translations. It does not seem plausible to hang ones salvation on an early 3rds or 4th century interpretation of the same scripture we have NOW.

Evidently St. Paul thought what the E.C.F.'s WOULD SAY was worth listenting to.

2 Timothy 2,2
And the things which thou hast heard of me by many witnesses, the same commend to faithful men, who shall be fit to teach others also

 

[Gnarwhal]

Evidently St. Paul thought what the E.C.F.'s WOULD SAY was worth listenting to.

2 Timothy 2,2
And the things which thou hast heard of me by many witnesses, the same commend to faithful men, who shall be fit to teach others also

That's a great verse.

 

[Christos Anesti]

The Apostles and Evangelists mentioned in the Bible like St Paul, St John, etc... are Church Fathers themselves. I would be happy to sit at their feet and I would most certainly care what they had to say. I would feel the same way about Saints of later generations who lived and breathed the same spirit of Christ and by their life showed that they could teach with authority. Saints who could teach with authority didn't all die out after the last of the original Apostles went to be with the Lord. Christianity isn't a historical relic or something past tense that can only be studied historically in the first generation of it's existence.

 

[God's Word]

Evidently St. Paul thought what the E.C.F.'s WOULD SAY was worth listenting to.

2 Timothy 2,2
And the things which thou hast heard of me by many witnesses, the same commend to faithful men, who shall be fit to teach others also

Paul also had the following to say:

Acts 20:26-31

"Wherefore I take you to record this day, that I am pure from the blood of all men. Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. Therefore, watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears."

Paul warned the church at Ephesus, night and day with tears, by the space of three years, that after his departing grievous wolves would enter amongst them, speaking perverse things and drawing away disciples after themselves. How, then, by your estimation, are we to determine whether or not the ECF's of Ephesus are to be trusted or not? Christ Himself commended the church at Ephesus for "trying them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars" (Revelation 2:2), didn't He? By what criteria, then, should we hold the ECF's accountable, especially when many of their writings contradict each other?

 

[Tzaousios]

By what criteria, then, should we hold the ECF's accountable, especially when many of their writings contradict each other?

This is repeated so much by people who are paranoid about the church fathers that it has almost become a new trope in the handbook. "Contradict each other" about what exactly? The natures and person of Christ? Christ's relationship to God the Father?

 

[Gnarwhal]

Paul also had the following to say:

Acts 20:26-31

"Wherefore I take you to record this day, that I am pure from the blood of all men. Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. Therefore, watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears."

Paul warned the church at Ephesus, night and day with tears, by the space of three years, that after his departing grievous wolves would enter amongst them, speaking perverse things and drawing away disciples after themselves. How, then, by your estimation, are we to determine whether or not the ECF's of Ephesus are to be trusted or not? Christ Himself commended the church at Ephesus for "trying them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars" (Revelation 2:2), didn't He? By what criteria, then, should we hold the ECF's accountable, especially when many of their writings contradict each other?

Do you think you're the first person in history to scrutinize the work of the Early Church Fathers?

The answer, by the way, would unequivocally be "no", and that's how I know they're not "wolves" and can be trusted. For the last 1,500-2,000 years the church fathers have been examined by others from many different perspectives yet their words still echo through the centuries and have helped build up the Christian faith.

33When they heard this, they were furious and wanted to put them to death. 34But a Pharisee named Gamaliel, a teacher of the law, who was honored by all the people, stood up in the Sanhedrin and ordered that the men be put outside for a little while. 35Then he addressed them: “Men of Israel, consider carefully what you intend to do to these men. 36Some time ago Theudas appeared, claiming to be somebody, and about four hundred men rallied to him. He was killed, all his followers were dispersed, and it all came to nothing. 37After him, Judas the Galilean appeared in the days of the census and led a band of people in revolt. He too was killed, and all his followers were scattered. 38Therefore, in the present case I advise you: Leave these men alone! Let them go! For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. 39But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God.” —Acts 5:33-39
​

The fact is that contrary to popular American evangelical belief, most of the world's Christian population does actually revere and cherish the contributions to our faith that the church fathers have made, and I think it's safe to say that Christianity's numbers have flourished since it's birth in the first century.

 

[fhansen]

Paul also had the following to say:

Acts 20:26-31

"Wherefore I take you to record this day, that I am pure from the blood of all men. Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. Therefore, watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears."

Paul warned the church at Ephesus, night and day with tears, by the space of three years, that after his departing grievous wolves would enter amongst them, speaking perverse things and drawing away disciples after themselves. How, then, by your estimation, are we to determine whether or not the ECF's of Ephesus are to be trusted or not? Christ Himself commended the church at Ephesus for "trying them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars" (Revelation 2:2), didn't He? By what criteria, then, should we hold the ECF's accountable, especially when many of their writings contradict each other?

The Church has always had that duty and obligation-to keep the faith pure. And she did so against Arianism, Nestorianism, Monotheism, et al. And early Church writings as well as ECFs were/are judged by the same standard, against the faith of the Church as passed down in conjunction with guaranteed guidance by the HS-and not everything an ECF taught or said met the grade.

 

[God's Word]

This is repeated so much by people who are paranoid about the church fathers that it has almost become a new trope in the handbook. "Contradict each other" about what exactly? The natures and person of Christ? Christ's relationship to God the Father?

Quite frankly, I couldn't care less about the writings of the ECF's, so I'm far from "paranoid" in relation to them. Anyhow, your attempted diversion aside, I trust that the controversies which arise on this forum in relation to the ECF's are hardly in relation to the nature of Christ or to His relationship to the Father. Rather, they're more in line with all sorts of "traditions"...

 

[Standing Up]

.

 

[Christos Anesti]

By what criteria, then, should we hold the ECF's accountable, especially when many of their writings contradict each other?

The question of their infallibility is a different thing all together. This was about why we should care what they have to say at all as if the writings of saintly men and women are completely worthless and not worth reading.

Individual discrimination (diakrisis) does come in to play for sure and reading (and even more importantly LIVING) the Scriptures is an important element contributing to the effectiveness of ones discrimination. Living the Liturgy and sacraments also has a refining effect on discrimination. It's also useful to admit that you don't know until you actually do know. It's ok to not know certain things.

I think a measure of humility here is important though. How many baby Christians think " I'm going to set everyone straight" based on their own idiosyncratic understanding (often misunderstanding) of Scripture. In relation to the Fathers it's a lot like a new catachumen in the early Church telling other people St Paul was all wrong in what he taught in Church yesterday and the Scripture says so.

Most of the areas of divergences among the Fathers are not so much in the realm of Dogma but rather theologuma or theological opinion. Issues that might be called "adiaphora" among certain Protestant theologians. At times apparent differences arise through imprecise language (used prior to the more stringent refining of language in response to a specific heresy) too. Despite that I'm not ruling out that there might be real errors or lapses in the quality of certain writings of the Father. I don't think anyone would claim otherwise. In the end you might not be able to perfectly escape from all subjectivity in Bible interpretation, doctrine, etc.. just by having a variety of witnesses and trustworthy sources. It does make things a lot better though and can save people from more grievous errors.

 

[Christos Anesti]

If one lived the life of a Saint to the same extent as say St Anthony of Egypt or St Seraphim of Sarov and they said "St so and so was a good man but he wasn't exactly right on this issue" I might seriously ponder the possibility. If one is just a random Christian dude using his own logic to interpret Scripture (and if there opinion wasn't supported by any of the other Fathers) I would probably let it go in one ear and out the other. I would require them to prove their spiritual authority by their life before I took it too seriously. The faith is proclaimed in Spirit and Power and not in words of human wisdom.

 

[Criada]

Mod Hat On

​

This thread has been cleaned.
Please stay on topic!
Thanks

Mod Hat Off​