The "Church Fathers" Scriptural or Not

Amo2 · Monday at 12:31 PM

All emphasis in the following quoted Epistle, and those addressed in later posts examining the same, is mine.

THE EPISTLE OF POLYCARP TO THE PHILIPPIANS

POLYCARP, and the presbyters with him, to the Church of God sojourning at Philippi: Mercy to you, and peace from God Almighty, and from the Lord Jesus Christ, our Saviour, be multiplied.

CHAP. I.—PRAISE OF THE PHILIPPIANS.

I have greatly rejoiced with you in our Lord Jesus Christ, because ye have followed the example of true love [as displayed by God], and have accompanied, as became you, those who were bound in chains, the fitting ornaments of saints, and which are indeed the diadems of the true elect of God and our Lord; and because the strong root of your faith, spoken of in days long gone by, endureth even until now, and bringeth forth fruit to our Lord Jesus Christ, who for our sins suffered even unto death, [but] “whom God raised from the dead, having loosed the bands of the grave.” “In whom, though now ye see Him not, ye believe, and believing, rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory;” into which joy many desire to enter, knowing that “by grace ye are saved, not of works,” but by the will of God through Jesus Christ.

CHAP. II.—AN EXHORTATION TO VIRTUE.

“Wherefore, girding up your loins,” “serve the Lord in fear” and truth, as those who have forsaken the vain, empty talk and error of the multitude, and “believed in Him who raised up our Lord Jesus Christ from the dead, and gave Him glory,” and a throne at His right hand. To Him all things in heaven and on earth are subject. Him every spirit serves. He comes as the Judge of the living and the dead. His blood will God require of those who do not believe in Him. But He who raised Him up from the dead will raise up us also, if we do His will, and walk in His commandments, and love what He loved, keeping ourselves from all unrighteousness, covetousness, love of money, evil speaking, falsewitness; “not rendering evil for evil, or railing for railing,” or blow for blow, or cursing for cursing, but being mindful of what the Lord said in His teaching: “Judge not, that ye be not judged; forgive, and it shall be forgiven unto you; be merciful, that ye may obtain mercy; with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again; and once more, “Blessed are the poor, and those that are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of God.”

CHAP. III.—EXPRESSIONS OF PERSONAL UNWORTHINESS.

These things, brethren, I write to you concerning righteousness, not because I take anything upon myself, but because ye have invited me to do so. For neither I, nor any other such one, can come up to the wisdom of the blessed and glorified Paul. He, when among you, accurately and stedfastly taught the word of truth in the presence of those who were then alive. And when absent from you, he wrote you a letter, which, if you carefully study, you will find to be the means of building you up in that faith which has been given you, and which, being followed by hope, and preceded by love towards God, and Christ, and our neighbour, “is the mother of us all.” For if any one be inwardly possessed of these graces, he hath fulfilled the command of righteousness, since he that hath love is far from all sin.

CHAP. IV.—VARIOUS EXHORTATIONS.

“But the love of money is the root of all evils.” Knowing, therefore, that “as we brought nothing into the world, so we can carry nothing out,”2 let us arm ourselves with the armour of righteousness; and let us teach, first of all, ourselves to walk in the commandments of the Lord. Next, [teach] your wives [to walk] in the faith given to them, and in love and purity tenderly loving their own husbands in all truth, and loving all [others] equally in all chastity; and to train up their children in the knowledge and fear of God. Teach the widows to be discreet as respects the faith of the Lord, praying continually for all, being far from all slandering, evil-speaking, false-witnessing, love of money, and every kind of evil; knowing that they are the altar of God, that He clearly perceives all things, and that nothing is hid from Him, neither reasonings, nor reflections, nor any one of the secret things of the heart.

Polycarp of Smryna, “The Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians,” in The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus, ed. Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe, vol. 1, The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company, 1885), 33–34.

This Epistle immediately differentiates itself from that of Mathetes, as most of that which is written is either a direct quote of scripture, or reference to them. This man is very familiar with the scriptures, or at the very least, the writings of Paul.

As a point of interest, chapter three brings a new or different concept to our attention, apart from scriptural testimony, that I know of in any case. In referring to the faith of Paul or the New covenant I gather, to the mother of us all. According to New Testament scripture, our faith is in the Father through His Son Jesus Christ. Our profession of faith in the Father was exemplified in the faith of His Son, whose example we are admonished to follow. Which faith was and or is not of course, the mother of us all. The church of Christ symbolically represented as a women, is that of a chaste virgin, not a mother. Though the term mother church certainly developed over time, referring to being the original I suppose, it does not appear to be established by scripture.

While Gal 4:26 does refer to the Jerusalem above as the mother of us all, in relation to the child of promise and faith in that promise of course, this faith is not in regards to a Jerusalem of this earth. It is in regards to the Jerusalem above, by faith according to the promise of the believers final abode in that very Jerusalem.

Rev 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. 2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God. 4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away. 5 And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.

While the Old Testament speaks of the daughter or daughters of Jerusalem, the New Testament does not expound greatly upon this point, save one daughter in particular.

2Co 11:1 Would to God ye could bear with me a little in my folly: and indeed bear with me. 2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.

Rev 14:1 And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads. 2 And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps: 3 And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth. 4 These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb. 5 And in their mouth was found no guile: for they are without fault before the throne of God.

Who are the spiritually chaste virgins of holy scripture, but those who remained true to the authentic faith and teachings of holy scripture, the word of God. Which is why no guile was found within their mouths, they remained faithful to the truth, following the Lamb wherever He goes according to that which He teaches. This of course as verily the WORD OF GOD.

Rev 19:11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. 12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. 13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. 14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. 15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. 16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

So the true church of the faithful are the chaste virgin of Christ, to be united with the promised new Jerusalem, of which our Lord Jesus is the King forever more. The bride of Christ inhabited by the true and faithful servants of God, which shall never be corrupted as the Jerusalem of this world so often was. As the Old Testament predicted.

Zep 3:13 The remnant of Israel shall not do iniquity, nor speak lies; neither shall a deceitful tongue be found in their mouth: for they shall feed and lie down, and none shall make them afraid. 14 Sing, O daughter of Zion; shout, O Israel; be glad and rejoice with all the heart, O daughter of Jerusalem. 15 The LORD hath taken away thy judgments, he hath cast out thine enemy: the king of Israel, even the LORD, is in the midst of thee: thou shalt not see evil any more.

Zec 9:9 Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass. 10 And I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim, and the horse from Jerusalem, and the battle bow shall be cut off: and he shall speak peace unto the heathen: and his dominion shall be from sea even to sea, and from the river evento the ends of the earth.

Mic 4:6 In that day, saith the LORD, will I assemble her that halteth, and I will gather her that is driven out, and her that I have afflicted; 7 And I will make her that halted a remnant, and her that was cast far off a strong nation: and the LORD shall reign over them in mount Zion from henceforth, even for ever. 8 And thou, O tower of the flock, the strong hold of the daughter of Zion, unto thee shall it come, even the first dominion; the kingdom shall come to the daughter of Jerusalem.

Mat 6:9 After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. 10 Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven. 11 Give us this day our daily bread. 12 And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. 13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.

Amo2 · Thursday at 9:45 AM

CHAP. V.—THE DUTIES OF DEACONS, YOUTHS, AND VIRGINS.

Knowing, then, that “God is not mocked,” we ought to walk worthy of His commandment and glory. In like manner should the deacons be blameless before the face of His righteousness, as being the servants of God and Christ, and not of men. They must not be slanderers, double-tongued, or lovers of money, but temperate in all things, compassionate, industrious, walking according to the truth of the Lord, who was the servant of all. If we please Him in this present world, we shall receive also the future world, according as He has promised to us that He will raise us again from the dead, and that if we live worthily of Him, “we shall also reign together with Him,” provided only we believe. In like manner, let the young men also be blameless in all things, being especially careful to preserve purity, and keeping themselves in, as with a bridle, from every kind of evil. For it is well that they should be cut off from the lusts that are in the world, since “every lust warreth against the spirit;” and “neither fornicators, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, shall inherit the kingdom of God,” nor those who do things inconsistent and unbecoming. Wherefore, it is needful to abstain from all these things, being subject to the presbyters and deacons, as unto God and Christ. The virgins also must walk in a blameless and pure conscience.

Polycarp of Smryna, “The Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians,” in The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus, ed. Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe, vol. 1, The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company, 1885), 34.

The highlighted section of the above quote is another addition of a new nature, to any instruction given or found in holy scripture. Not even the Apostles themselves taught or declared that any should be subject to themselves, as unto God or Christ. Other “Church Fathers” later built up and expounded upon this erroneous declaration. Bishops and deacons were given special instruction for their own behavior as examples to the flock, but were never raised to the authority of God or Christ by the apostles. Paul declared that it was the man of sin, that would place himself in the temple or church of God, as though he were God. He also warned of those who would enter the church seeking followers after their own selves, misleading the flock. Such who would themselves of course make such claims, that they might lead people astray after them. Using their title and office in the church, to usurp the authority of God for themselves.

This short statement and addition to holy scripture, had disastrous results in the future. As many followed the lead of impostures over an above the clear testimony of holy scripture, unto the establishment of apostate forms of Christianity which exalted one sinful fallen human being over and above all others.

Mat 7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. 16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? 17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

Act 20:28 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. 29 For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. 30 Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.

Lukaris · Thursday at 10:49 AM

The New Testament was not precisely settled for generations although most of it was generally known. There were some writings like the Shepherd of Hermas which was thought to be scriptural and later reduced to being like a moral guide. The letter of Clement was considered scripture in some places for centuries. Then there are said to be 2 other letters Paul wrote to Corinth that are lost. So it is as much a stretch to say the early post apostolic letters are in conflict with the New Testament since they generally show the earliest witness in support of it. It was early bishops like Irenaeus in the late 2nd century who flagged catalogues of false gnostic writings under the apostles’ names so these were discarded etc. etc.

Amo2 · Friday at 9:56 AM

Lukaris said:
The New Testament was not precisely settled for generations although most of it was generally known. There were some writings like the Shepherd of Hermas which was thought to be scriptural and later reduced to being like a moral guide. The letter of Clement was considered scripture in some places for centuries. Then there are said to be 2 other letters Paul wrote to Corinth that are lost. So it is as much a stretch to say the early post apostolic letters are in conflict with the New Testament since they generally show the earliest witness in support of it. It was early bishops like Irenaeus in the late 2nd century who flagged catalogues of false gnostic writings under the apostles’ names so these were discarded etc. etc.

I have a different opinion and observations. Per the apostle Pauls following testimonies and prophetic utterances, these suggested early writings which have survived time at the hands of those who would preserve them, should reveal the unfolding of that which Paul warned of and feared for God's own in the future. Being preserved by the victors I presume, of many a faction of conflicting and competing professed Christians. One of whom finally obtained Imperial acceptance, then approval, then support, and finally rule and enforcement by imperial law. Laws which forbade the teachings, practice, and writings of many other Christians with different views or beliefs. Leading to the destruction of as many of these as possible.

That being preserved therefore if it be truly authentic, likely also being approved by the imperially established and enforced form of "Christianity". Should we therefore not consider the writings approved by this form of Christianity which sought, gained, and applied forced Christianity upon all by the powers that be of this world, Epistles to be scrutinized for biblical authenticity and or compliance?

Act 20:28 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. 29 For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. 30 Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.

Since we have these suggested writings of the suggested Church Fathers, and those of holy scripture also, shouldn't we closely compare the two before determining for ourselves really if they were truly Church Fathers or not? And if so, Fathers of which church in particular?

stevevw · Friday at 11:25 AM

Amo2 said:
The highlighted section of the above quote is another addition of a new nature, to any instruction given or found in holy scripture. Not even the Apostles themselves taught or declared that any should be subject to themselves, as unto God or Christ. Other “Church Fathers” later built up and expounded upon this erroneous declaration. Bishops and deacons were given special instruction for their own behavior as examples to the flock, but were never raised to the authority of God or Christ by the apostles. Paul declared that it was the man of sin, that would place himself in the temple or church of God, as though he were God. He also warned of those who would enter the church seeking followers after their own selves, misleading the flock. Such who would themselves of course make such claims, that they might lead people astray after them. Using their title and office in the church, to usurp the authority of God for themselves.

This short statement and addition to holy scripture, had disastrous results in the future. As many followed the lead of impostures over an above the clear testimony of holy scripture, unto the establishment of apostate forms of Christianity which exalted one sinful fallen human being over and above all others.

I don't think the church fathers meant that the bishop was like God but rather were ambassadors who stood in the church on Christs behalf.

Paul mentions this in 2 Corinthians 5:20 We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God.

Then we see the Didache which is around 70AD say something similar again.
The Didache
Whosoever, therefore, comes and teaches you all these things that have been said before, receive him. But if the teacher himself turn and teach another doctrine to the destruction of this, hear him not; but if he teach so as to increase righteousness and the knowledge of the Lord, receive him as the Lord.

But concerning the apostles and prophets, according to the decree of the Gospel, thus do. Let every apostle that comes to you be received as the Lord.

Ignatius says something similar

Chapter 6. Have respect to the bishop as to Christ Himself
For we ought to receive every one whom the Master of the house sends to be over His household, Matthew 24:45 as we would do Him that sent him. It is manifest, therefore, that we should look upon the bishop even as we would upon the Lord Himself.

Look upon as though we would Christ, making an appeal as though Christ is making the appeal or appealing on Christs behalf or recieving the one the Master sends as though it is the Master.

This is not saying the apostles or bishops are God or Christ themselves or are to be regarded as such. But that they are representing the authority of Christs words and teachings to being overseers of the church. They have been specially appointed as ambassadors to continue Christs Ministry.

Ignatius further expands on this.

“See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father" “Let all things therefore be done by you with good order in Christ. Let the laity be subject to the deacons; the deacons to the presbyters; the presbyters to the bishop; the bishop to Christ, even as He is to the Father.” (St. Ignatius: Letter to the Smyrnaeans; Ch 9)

I don't think all these independent sources got this wrong and were promoted disciples or overseers as gods. This seems to have been a universal understanding and one that was around when some disiples were still around and many witnesses.

There wuld have been objections to such an obvious falsehood. But we hear nothing as though this was understood as representing Christs authority rather than any human being a god. The other factor is that all these men died defending the teachings. They actually lived Christs example.

Lukaris · Friday at 5:16 PM

Amo2 said:
Laws which forbade the teachings, practice, and writings of many other Christians with different views or beliefs. Leading to the destruction of as many of these as possible.

Like the Gnostics? So what in a case like this? I mean this in the sense of rejecting false writings posing as scripture not physical destruction of them or persecution of misguided adherents. Unfortunately, peaceful tendencies are rare in these situations including Biblical accounts like that of King Josiah ( 2 Kings 23:1-21) while the faithful truth was good ( 2 Kings 23:21) the stamping out of heresy was tragic ( 2 Kings 23:20).

Amo2 · 2025-08-16T08:15:07-0500

stevevw said:
I don't think the church fathers meant that the bishop was like God but rather were ambassadors who stood in the church on Christs behalf.

Paul mentions this in 2 Corinthians 5:20 We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God.

Then we see the Didache which is around 70AD say something similar again.
The Didache
Whosoever, therefore, comes and teaches you all these things that have been said before, receive him. But if the teacher himself turn and teach another doctrine to the destruction of this, hear him not; but if he teach so as to increase righteousness and the knowledge of the Lord, receive him as the Lord.

But concerning the apostles and prophets, according to the decree of the Gospel, thus do. Let every apostle that comes to you be received as the Lord.

Ignatius says something similar

Chapter 6. Have respect to the bishop as to Christ Himself
For we ought to receive every one whom the Master of the house sends to be over His household, Matthew 24:45 as we would do Him that sent him. It is manifest, therefore, that we should look upon the bishop even as we would upon the Lord Himself.

Look upon as though we would Christ, making an appeal as though Christ is making the appeal or appealing on Christs behalf or recieving the one the Master sends as though it is the Master.

This is not saying the apostles or bishops are God or Christ themselves or are to be regarded as such. But that they are representing the authority of Christs words and teachings to being overseers of the church. They have been specially appointed as ambassadors to continue Christs Ministry.

Ignatius further expands on this.

“See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father" “Let all things therefore be done by you with good order in Christ. Let the laity be subject to the deacons; the deacons to the presbyters; the presbyters to the bishop; the bishop to Christ, even as He is to the Father.” (St. Ignatius: Letter to the Smyrnaeans; Ch 9)

I don't think all these independent sources got this wrong and were promoted disciples or overseers as gods. This seems to have been a universal understanding and one that was around when some disiples were still around and many witnesses.

There wuld have been objections to such an obvious falsehood. But we hear nothing as though this was understood as representing Christs authority rather than any human being a god. The other factor is that all these men died defending the teachings. They actually lived Christs example.

What Paul said was nothing like the statement we are discussing. Neither Paul or any other apostle or prophet admonished anyone ever, to look up to them as though they were God or Christ, who is Himself God. This is blasphemy, plain and simple. It reeks of what Paul warned the Thessalonians about concerning the man of sin, who would set himself up in the temple of God as though he was God. What else could telling members of Christ's church which is the New Covenant temple of God, to be subject to presbyters and deacons as unto God be, but setting these individuals up in the church or temple of God as though they were God? This principle being continually built upon over time, was the forerunner of the man of sin and antichrist.

I am well aware of Ignatius' exaltation of the bishops as unto God as I see it, having read his writings and addressed this issue many years ago already. Which was part of that which I have just stated, as I understand it. Emphasis in the following quotes is mine.

THE EPISTLE OF IGNATIUS TO THE EPHESIANS

CHAPTER 2 CONGRATULATIONS AND ENTREATIES

May I always have joy of you, if indeed I be worthy of it. It is therefore befitting that you should in every way glorify Jesus Christ, who hath glorified you, that by a unanimous obedience “ye may be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment, and may all speak the same thing concerning the same thing,” and that, being subject to the bishop and the presbytery, ye may in all respects be sanctified.

CHAPTER 4

Wherefore it is fitting that ye also should run together in accordance with the will of the bishop who by God’s appointment rules over you. Which thing ye indeed of yourselves do, being instructed by the Spirit. For your justly-renowned presbytery, being worthy of God, is fitted as exactly to the bishop as the strings are to the harp. Thus, being joined together in concord and harmonious love, of which Jesus Christ is the Captain and Guardian, do ye, man by man, become but one choir; so that, agreeing together in concord, and obtaining a perfect unity with God, ye may indeed be one in harmonious feeling with God the Father, and His beloved Son Jesus Christ our Lord.

CHAPTER 5 THE PRAISE OF UNITY

Let no man deceive himself: if any one be not within the altar, he is deprived of the bread of God. For if the prayer of one or two possesses such power, how much more that of the bishop and the whole Church! He, therefore, that does not assemble with the Church, has even by this manifested his pride, and condemned himself. For it is written, “God resisteth the proud.” Let us be careful, then, not to set ourselves in opposition to the bishop, in order that we may be subject to God.

CHAPTER 6 HAVE RESPECT TO THE BISHOP AS TO CHRIST HIMSELF

Now the more any one sees the bishop keeping silence, the more ought he to revere him. For we ought to receive every one whom the Master of the house sends to be over His household, as we would do Him that sent him. It is manifest, therefore, that we should look upon the bishop even as we would upon the Lord Himself. And indeed Onesimus himself greatly commends your good order in God, that ye all live according to the truth, and that no sect has any dwelling-place among you. Nor, indeed, do ye hearken to any one rather than to Jesus Christ speaking in truth.

THE EPISTLE OF IGNATIUS TO THE MAGNESIANS

CHAPTER 3 HONOR YOUR YOUTHFUL BISHOP

Now it becomes you also not to treat your bishop too familiarly on account of his youth, but to yield him all reverence, having respect to the power of God the Father, as I have known even holy presbyters do, not judging rashly, from the manifest youthful appearance [of their bishop], but as being themselves prudent in God, submitting to him, or rather not to him, but to the Father of Jesus Christ, the bishop of us all. It is therefore fitting that you should, after no hypocritical fashion, obey [your bishop], in honor of Him who has willed us [so to do], since he that does not so deceives not [by such conduct] the bishop that is visible, but seeks to mock Him that is invisible. And all such conduct has reference not to man, but to God, who knows all secrets.

CHAPTER 4 SOME WICKEDLY ACT INDEPENDENTLY OF THE BISHOP

It is fitting, then, not only to be called Christians, but to be so in reality. For it is not the being called so, but the being really so, that renders a man blessed. To those who indeed talk of the bishop, but do all things without him, will He who is the true and first Bishop, and the only High Priest by nature, declare, “Why call ye Me Lord, and do not the things which I say?” For such persons seem to me not possessed of a good conscience, but to be simply dissemblers and hypocrites.

CHAPTER 7 DO NOTHING WITHOUT THE BISHOP AND PRESBYTERS

As therefore the Lord did nothing without the Father, being united to Him, neither by Himself nor by the apostles, so neither do ye anything without the bishop and presbyters. Neither endeavor that anything appear reasonable and proper to yourselves apart; but being come together into the same place, let there be one prayer, one supplication, one mind, one hope, in love and in joy undefiled. There is one Jesus Christ, than whom nothing is more excellent. Do ye therefore all run together as into one temple of God, as to one altar, as to one Jesus Christ, who came forth from one Father, and is with and has gone to one.

CHAPTER 13 BE ESTABLISHED IN FAITH AND UNITY

Study, therefore, to be established in the doctrines of the Lord and the apostles, that so all things, whatsoever ye do, may prosper both in the flesh and spirit; in faith and love; in the Son, and in the Father, and in the Spirit; in the beginning and in the end; with your most admirable bishop, and the well-compacted spiritual crown of your presbytery, and the deacons who are according to God. Be ye subject to the bishop, and to one another, as Jesus Christ to the Father, according to the flesh, and the apostles to Christ, and to the Father, and to the Spirit; that so there may be a union both fleshly and spiritual.

THE EPISTLE OF IGNATIUS TO THE TRALLIANS

CHAPTER 2 BE SUBJECT TO THE BISHOP, ETC

For, since ye are subject to the bishop as to Jesus Christ, ye appear to me to live not after the manner of men, but according to Jesus Christ, who died for us, in order, by believing in His death, ye may escape from death. It is therefore necessary that, as ye indeed do, so without the bishop ye should do nothing, but should also be subject to the presbytery, as to the apostle of Jesus Christ, who is our hope, in whom, if we live, we shall [at last] be found. It is fitting also that the deacons, as being [the ministers] of the mysteries of Jesus Christ, should in every respect be pleasing to all. For they are not ministers of meat and drink, but servants of the Church of God. They are bound, therefore, to avoid all grounds of accusation [against them], as they would do fire.

CHAPTER 3 HONOR THE DEACONS, ETC

In like manner, let all reverence the deacons as an appointment of Jesus Christ, and the bishop as Jesus Christ, who is the Son of the Father, and the presbyters as the sanhedrim of God, and assembly of the apostles. Apart from these, there is no Church. Concerning all this, I am persuaded that ye are of the same opinion. For I have received the manifestations of your love, and still have it with me, in your bishop, whose very appearance is highly instructive, and his meekness of itself a power; whom I imagine even the ungodly must reverence, seeing they are also pleased that I do not spare myself. But shall I, when permitted to write on this point, reach such a height of self-esteem, that though being a condemned man, I should issue commands to you as if I were an apostle?

CHAPTER 7 THE SAME CONTINUED

Be on your guard, [therefore, against such persons, that ye admit not of a snare for your own souls. And act so that your life shall be without offense to all men, lest ye become as “a snare upon a watch-tower, and as a net which is spread out.” For “he that does not heal himself in his own works, is the brother of him that destroys himself.” If, therefore, ye also put away conceit, arrogance, disdain, and haughtiness, it will be your privilege to be inseparably united to God, for “He is nigh unto those that fear Him.” And says He, “Upon whom will I look, but upon him that is humble and quiet, and that trembles at my words?” And do ye also reverence your bishop as Christ Himself, according as the blessed apostles have enjoined you. He that is within the altar is pure, wherefore also he is obedient to the bishop and presbyters: but he that is without is one that does anything apart from the bishop, the presbyters, and the deacons. Such a person is defiled in his conscience, and is worse than an infidel. For what is the bishop but one who beyond all others possesses all power and authority, so far as it is possible for a man to possess it, who according to his ability has been made an imitator of the Christ of God? And what is the presbytery but a sacred assembly, the counselors and assessors of the bishop? And what are the deacons but imitators of the angelic powers, fulfilling a pure and blameless ministry unto him, as the holy Stephen did to the blessed James, Timothy and Linus to Paul, Anencletus and Clement to Peter? He, therefore, that will not yield obedience to such, must needs be one utterly without God, an impious man who despises Christ, and depreciates His appointments.

CHAPTER 13 CONCLUSION

The love of the Smyrnaeans and Ephesians salutes you. Remember in your prayers the Church which is in Syria, from which also I am not worthy to receive my appellation, being the last of them. Fare ye well in Jesus Christ, while ye continue subject to the bishop, as to the command [of God], and in like manner to the presbytery. And do ye, every man, love one another with an undivided heart. Let my spirit be sanctified by yours, not only now, but also when I shall attain to God. For I am as yet exposed to danger. But the Father is faithful in Jesus Christ to fulfill both mine and your petitions: in whom may ye be found unblameable.

THE EPISTLE OF IGNATIUS TO THE PHILADELPHIANS

CHAPTER 7 I HAVE EXHORTED YOU TO UNITY

For though some would have deceived me according to the flesh, yet the Spirit, as being from God, is not deceived. For it knows both whence it comes and whither it goes, and detects the secrets [of the heart]. For, when I was among you, I cried, I spoke with a loud voice: Give heed to the bishop, and to the presbytery and deacons. Now, some suspected me of having spoken thus, as knowing beforehand the division caused by some among you. But He is my witness, for whose sake I am in bonds, that I got no intelligence from any man. But the Spirit proclaimed these words: Do nothing without the bishop; keep your bodies as the temples of God; love unity; avoid divisions; be the followers of Jesus Christ, even as He is of His Father.

THE EPISTLE OF IGNATIUS TO THE SMYRNAEANS

CHAPTER 8 LET NOTHING BE DONE WITHOUT THE BISHOP

See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid.

CHAPTER 9 HONOR THE BISHOP

Moreover, it is in accordance with reason that we should return to soberness [of conduct], and, while yet we have opportunity, exercise repentance towards God. It is well to reverence both God and the bishop. He who honors the bishop has been honored by God; he who does anything without the knowledge of the bishop, does [in reality] serve the devil. Let all things, then, abound to you through grace, for ye are worthy. Ye have refreshed me in all things, and Jesus Christ [shall refresh] you. Ye have loved me when absent as well as when present. May God recompense you, for whose sake, while ye endure all things, ye shall attain unto Him.

THE EPISTLE OF IGNATIUS TO POLYCARP

CHAPTER 6 THE DUTIES OF THE CHRISTIAN FLOCK

Give ye heed to the bishop, that God also may give heed to you. My soul be for theirs that are submissive to the bishop, to the presbyters, and to the deacons, and may my portion be along with them in God! Labor together with one another; strive in company together; run together; suffer together; sleep together; and awake together, as the stewards, and associates, and servants of God. Please ye Him under whom ye fight, and from whom ye receive your wages. Let none of you be found a deserter. Let your baptism endure as your arms; your faith as your helmet; your love as your spear; your patience as a complete panoply. Let your works be the charge assigned to you, that ye may receive a worthy recompense. Be long-suffering-, therefore, with one another, in meekness, as God is towards you. May I have joy of you for ever!

Lukaris · 2025-08-16T08:38:11-0500

Bishops are basically watchmen or overseers and, I believe, the concept of their duty is to warn the faithful of sin & need for repentance. Ezekiel was appointed by God in such a capacity ( Ezekiel 3:16-21). The Lord appointed the Apostles in, I believe, the same manner in John 20:19-23.

Amo2 · 2025-08-16T09:09:20-0500

Lukaris said:
Bishops are basically watchmen or overseers and, I believe, the concept of their duty is to warn the faithful of sin & need for repentance. Ezekiel was appointed by God in such a capacity ( Ezekiel 3:16-21). The Lord appointed the Apostles in, I believe, the same manner in John 20:19-23.

Yes, the difference of course being that God appointed those you refer to above, while later appointments of the New Covenant devolved in to appointments or selection from an increasingly divided or factional "Christianity". Which could do no real harm when such remained separate from state enforcement, and or the gross error of looking upon any other mere man, as God or Christ themselves. Both of which happened over time, with increasing views being promulgated such as those we are discussing concerning certain Church Fathers, not enforcing but beginning to promote such ideas.

A good summary of the issue of increasing power among an increasing clergy unto apostasy, may be viewed at the following, in the first chapter ode to the work which may be examined in its entirety their as well.

History of the Reformation, vol. 1

Or a more specific address of the exaltation of the Bishopric itself at the following link. Where the entire work this chapter is from may be viewed as well.

The Great Empires of Prophecy, from Babylon to the Fall of Rome

stevevw · 2025-08-16T09:39:46-0500

Amo2 said:
What Paul said was nothing like the statement we are discussing. Neither Paul or any other apostle or prophet admonished anyone ever, to look up to them as though they were God or Christ, who is Himself God. This is blasphemy, plain and simple. It reeks of what Paul warned the Thessalonians about concerning the man of sin, who would set himself up in the temple of God as though he was God.

The point was that I don't think the Didache or Ignatius were saying the overseer/bishop was God or Jesus. This is something being read into this by modern ideas I think.

I think they actually understood it as Paul described himself as an ambassador for Christ "as though God were making his appeal through us" and "on Christ’s behalf".

This is what ambassadors or messenger does. When the president sends an envoy or the kings messenger that carry the authority of the presidents or kinds words. As though the president or king is saying it themselves though not present.

Ignatius destinguishes this by using a known saying of that time when he said "He whom the master sends in His stead should be received even as the Sender Himself;"

Just like an envoy, kings messenger, or emissary who is not the actual president or king but is specially appointed to be an ambassador representing the authority of the president, king or master. Or in the case of an overseer/bishop specially ordained by the laying on of hands represents Christs authority to the church when being a shepherd and overseer.

He also says "See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father". Which is talking about the type of submission Christ had to His father. This is similar to Pauls teaching in Ephesians 5:22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. Which has nothing to do with power and control over anyone.

This is an important destinction as I think it is easy to misunderstand how the early church fathers viewed this.

I think it also goes against logic. To say that during the Apostolic age that the church fathers who were disciples of the disiciples and taking over from the apostles were actually the wolves who virtually corrupted the church with an obvious false teaching under everyones noses. The same fathers who became martryers for protecting the gospel.

I think it was much later perhaps the later part of the 2nd century is when the authority of the overseers was abused to control the church.

Amo2 said:
What else could telling members of Christ's church which is the New Covenant temple of God, to be subject to presbyters and deacons as unto God be, but setting these individuals up in the church or temple of God as though they were God? This principle being continually built upon over time, was the forerunner of the man of sin and antichrist.

I don't think they are telling any members to be subject to the bishop as though they are actually God. This is a modern reading imposed on how these early figures understood this. I tried to explain this above.

Look at the Didache which is written around 70AD while some apostles and many followers were still alive and before the gospels of Mark, Luke and John and is said to be from the apostles themselves. When it says
Whosoever, therefore, comes and teaches you all these things that have been said before, receive him. if he teach so as to increase righteousness and the knowledge of the Lord, receive him as the Lord.

Do you honestly think they meant that an overseer teacher should be recieved as though he was actually Jesus Christ Himself. I don't think so from such important and central writings that all the church would have universally acknowledged and accepted.

The whole church could not have been fooled by such an obvious blasphemy. There would have been many objections especially from the Jewish Christians which was the majority of the church around the time of the destruction of the Temple. Even moreso by the non Christian Jews.

Amo2 said:
I am well aware of Ignatius' exaltation of the bishops as unto God as I see it, having read his writings and addressed this issue many years ago already. Which was part of that which I have just stated, as I understand it. Emphasis in the following quotes is mine.

I am not sure which quote you are referring to. Was this the quote I linked about the one sent by the Master. I am not sure what your conclusion was from years ago.

Are you saying Ignatius was promoting that the bishop was actually God. Or that he was specially ordained with an authority to represent God or Christ to the church as an overseer.

Lukaris · 2025-08-16T10:25:36-0500

Amo2 said:
Yes, the difference of course being that God appointed those you refer to above, while later appointments of the New Covenant devolved in to appointments or selection from an increasingly divided or factional "Christianity". Which could do no real harm when such remained separate from state enforcement, and or the gross error of looking upon any other mere man, as God or Christ themselves. Both of which happened over time, with increasing views being promulgated such as those we are discussing concerning certain Church Fathers, not enforcing but beginning to promote such ideas.

A good summary of the issue of increasing power among an increasing clergy unto apostasy, may be viewed at the following, in the first chapter ode to the work which may be examined in its entirety their as well.

History of the Reformation, vol. 1

Or a more specific address of the exaltation of the Bishopric itself at the following link. Where the entire work this chapter is from may be viewed as well.

The Great Empires of Prophecy, from Babylon to the Fall of Rome

I’ll try to look into further into what you are posting here. The clerical offices are Biblically founded how they proceeded after revelation is affected by our fallen humanity . I just want to clarify that I am posting in a way that is a counterpoint but not intended to be confrontational.

Side note about St. Ignatius of Antioch, I know in one of his letters he says that he does not speak as an apostle. I tend to think he knew that revelation had ceased when St. John said so in the book of Revelation.

Amo2 · 2025-08-16T11:14:46-0500

stevevw said:
The point was that I don't think the Didache or Ignatius were saying the overseer/bishop was God or Jesus. This is something being read into this by modern ideas I think.

I think they actually understood it as Paul described himself as an ambassador for Christ "as though God were making his appeal through us" and "on Christ’s behalf".

This is what ambassadors or messenger does. When the president sends an envoy or the kings messenger that carry the authority of the presidents or kinds words. As though the president or king is saying it themselves though not present.

Ignatius destinguishes this by using a known saying of that time when he said "He whom the master sends in His stead should be received even as the Sender Himself;"

Just like an envoy, kings messenger, or emissary who is not the actual president or king but is specially appointed to be an ambassador representing the authority of the president, king or master. Or in the case of an overseer/bishop specially ordained by the laying on of hands represents Christs authority to the church when being a shepherd and overseer.

This is an important destinction as it is easy to conflate and misrepresent how the early church fathers understood this. I think it also goes against logic I think. To say that during the Apostolic age and soon after that the church fathers who were taking over from the apostles could so soon corrupt the church with an obvious false teaching.

I think it was much later perhaps the later part of the 2nd century is when the authority of the overseers was abused to control the church.

I don't think they are telling any members to be subject to the bishop as though they are actually God. This is a modern reading imposed on how these early figures understood this. I tried to explain this above.

If it is merely a language thing as you suggest, and those who translated were wrong, it should be easy enough to point out with a further examination of the original language. Do you know this language, and can you therefore point out the discrepancies for us? If not, then why do you presume they didn't mean what they quite apparently say?

In relation to God Himself of course, no messenger from Him should be received as actually Him. Unless perhaps one does not actually correctly perceive just exactly who God is, and we are in relation to Him. I say again, no apostle or prophet of holy scripture, ever told anyone to submit to or view them as God or Christ themselves. In this teaching therefore, these suggested Church Fathers are out of line with the apostles and prophets. Whether they also considered themselves messengers or ambassadors elsewhere or not.

You may of course think and believe as you wish. Nevertheless, over the course of time certain members of the church advanced themselves to clergy over an above laity, and so on and so forth. Until finally many considered one mere man to be the visible head of the universal church. The position which belongs to the one and only Man who is God, Jesus Christ.

stevevw said:
Look at the Didache which is written around 70AD while some apostles and many followers were still alive and before the gospels of Mark, Luke and John and is said to be from the apostles themselves. When it says
Whosoever, therefore, comes and teaches you all these things that have been said before, receive him. if he teach so as to increase righteousness and the knowledge of the Lord, receive him as the Lord.

Do you honestly think they meant that an overseer teacher should be recieved as though he was Jesus Christ Himself. I don't think so from such important and central writings that all the church would have universally acknowledged and accepted.

The whole church could not have been fooled by such an obvious blasphemy. There would have been many objections especially from the Jewish Christians which was the majority of the church around the time of the destruction of the Temple.

I am not sure which quote you are referring to. Was this the quote I linked about the one sent by the Master. I am not sure what your conclusion was from years ago.

Are you saying Ignatius was promoting that the bishop was actually God. Or that he was specially ordained with an authority to represent God or Christ to the church as an overseer.

First, it would be nice to give references for your quotes, that they may be examined by those involved in the issue being discussed. Second, professed Christinas did not likely universally accept any of the writings we are examining. To the contrary, divisions began during the days of the apostles themsleves, which they had to address and resolve as far as possible. These divisions grew so great even among the eventual "clergy" we are discussing to the point of mob violence and murder, each of their followers no doubt looking upon them as God or Christ apparently, and therefore fighting for the same. You may choose to believe no one really meant what their words simply state, nevertheless they did write them, and people did later act accordingly. Even therefore deploying force concerning the observance of what they believed. A prerogative which even God and Christ have and do not exercise.

For this reason, I see the danger in declaring such, and followers then believing it to be so. In that Paul even warned of those coming seeking followers of themselves, who would and did want nothing more than for their followers to view them as God or Christ themselves. Which is now an unfortunate and dark part of the history of "Christianity". Referred to as the dark ages.

Neither of us knows the exact nature, purpose, intent, or motive of those who wrote the words we are discussing. We both see that they wrote them, we just have different opinions regarding what might have actually been meant by them, or the dangers they might possibly and or did represent. I think the departure from or addition to scripture they represent, was a step in the wrong direction with lingering and increasing affect. You do not. So be it.

Amo2 · 2025-08-16T11:38:52-0500

Lukaris said:
I’ll try to look into further into what you are posting here. The clerical offices are Biblically founded how they proceeded after revelation is affected by our fallen humanity . I just want to clarify that I am posting in a way that is a counterpoint but not intended to be confrontational.

Side note about St. Ignatius of Antioch, I know in one of his letters he says that he does not speak as an apostle. I tend to think he knew that revelation had ceased when St. John said so in the book of Revelation.

I don't mind a little confrontation, by those especially who may believe they are introducing me to truth which might deliver me from deception. Insults, ridicule, and derogation are of course of no true enlightening value, but on perhaps very few and unusual occasions. They all make for poor argument, or last ditch efforts to devalue those contesting one's own points. Thank you though, for such consideration.

Daniel Carlton · 2025-08-16T13:36:31-0500

One thing all the early church fathers condemned unanimously was idolatry.

So a problem for popery and eastern pelagians.

Amo2 · 2025-08-16T18:02:53-0500

Glad to hear this is so. Of course many will define idolatry in different ways.

Amo2 · 2025-08-16T18:06:16-0500

CHAP. VI.—THE DUTIES OF PRESBYTERS AND OTHERS.

And let the presbyters be compassionate and merciful to all, bringing back those that wander, visiting all the sick, and not neglecting the widow, the orphan, or the poor, but always “providing for that which is becoming in the sight of God and man;” abstaining from all wrath, respect of persons, and unjust judgment; keeping far off from all covetousness, not quickly crediting [an evil report] against any one, not severe in judgment, as knowing that we are all under a debt of sin. If then we entreat the Lord to forgive us, we ought also ourselves to forgive; for we are before the eyes of our Lord and God, and “we must all appear at the judgment-seat of Christ, and must every one give an account of himself.” Let us then serve Him in fear, and with all reverence, even as He Himself has commanded us, and as the apostles who preached the Gospel unto us, and the prophets who proclaimed beforehand the coming of the Lord [have alike taught us]. Let us be zealous in the pursuit of that which is good, keeping ourselves from causes of offence, from false brethren, and from those who in hypocrisy bear the name of the Lord, and draw away vain men into error.

Polycarp of Smryna, “The Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians,” in The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus, ed. Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe, vol. 1, The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company, 1885), 34.

Good scriptural advice. Which if followed, would have prevented the wolves and such as were seeking followers after themselves, from teaching perverse things and leading people away with them. Nevertheless, the extra biblical teaching and or idea addressed in the previous chapter, did eventually lead to that which our Lord and Paul predicted.

stevevw · 2025-08-17T03:21:54-0500

Amo2 said:
If it is merely a language thing as you suggest, and those who translated were wrong, it should be easy enough to point out with a further examination of the original language. Do you know this language, and can you therefore point out the discrepancies for us? If not, then why do you presume they didn't mean what they quite apparently say?

In relation to God Himself of course, no messenger from Him should be received as actually Him. Unless perhaps one does not actually correctly perceive just exactly who God is, and we are in relation to Him. I say again, no apostle or prophet of holy scripture, ever told anyone to submit to or view them as God or Christ themselves. In this teaching therefore, these suggested Church Fathers are out of line with the apostles and prophets. Whether they also considered themselves messengers or ambassadors elsewhere or not.

You may of course think and believe as you wish. Nevertheless, over the course of time certain members of the church advanced themselves to clergy over an above laity, and so on and so forth. Until finally many considered one mere man to be the visible head of the universal church. The position which belongs to the one and only Man who is God, Jesus Christ.

It seems everything is based on language meanings which in itself is a dubious basis to determine what someone meant as it changes so often. Especially considering how meanings are changing today in a postmodernist world where the narrative itself is considered the true meaning.

In my debates on this some have defined language such as the word 'submission' itself to mean control and abuse no matter what context based on a egalitarian worldview. So language and word meanings can be conflated to mean something entirely different to the original meaning.

There is much language in the new testament that would appear to the modern ear to mean controlling and abusive and yet I don't think this was at all the meaning in context. For example

Hebrews 13:17
Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account.
Ephesians 5:24
Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands.
1 Peter 2:13
Be subject for the Lord's sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme,

It seems Paul is teaching the church to be subject to a lot of things that today many would say is controlling. It seems submission was a central aspect of being a Christian. Peter even suggests that we should be subject like Christ even when the master is unjust. This would be regarded as promoting abuse today.

So if its a matter of language I don't think this helps by using modern hermeneutics.

As to the language of the Didache, Clement and Ignatius I think like other language of that time such as 'obeying and submitting, to others I don't think they understood the analogy that the overseer was actually God or Christ or controlling.

But was a reflection of the relationship as Christ obeying and submitting to God. There is no way that in Christ subitting and obeying God that this was a controlling relationship. Likewise the same for the reflections of this in the relationships within marriage and the church.

Amo2 said:
First, it would be nice to give references for your quotes, that they may be examined by those involved in the issue being discussed.

I think the reference by Peter to Sarah calling Abraham lord is a good example.1 Peter 3:5-6 For this is how the holy women who hoped in God used to adorn themselves, by submitting to their own husbands, like Sarah, who obeyed Abraham and called him her lord.

This sounds to the moden ear that Peter is calling Abraham God. But its a reflection of this relationship like Christ to the Father and is pleasing to God.

There are others mentioned. For example the husband is head of the wife like Christ is head of His church. Or Ephesians 5:22-24 Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. As the church is subject to Christ, so let wives also be subject in everything to their husbands.

To the modern ear this seems like Paul is saying the husband is like the lord and a wife should treat the husband as Christ. It is also more or less the same language the Didache (receive him as the Lord) and Ignatius "See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father"

1 Corinthians 11:3 But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God. Verse 7 For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God,

This could certainly be taken to mean husbands are like God, the image and glory of God to be head over the wife. This seems to reflect Ignatius's analogy of the bishop representing God to the church. To be the image and glory of God. Like Peter refers to Sarah calling Abraham lord.

Romans 13:1-2
Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.

This seems to be saying the same thing that an elder who may rule represents Gods institution and we should submit and obey otherwise we incur judgement.

Titus 3:1
Remind them to be submissive to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work,
Paul is passing on the authority of the overseer to continue as Paul did.

To the modern ear this could mean the husband is the same as Christ. But this was not the meaning and yet to the modern ear this is understood as control and abuse.

I think this verse sums up the destinction between what I think the disciples and early fathers are understanding and modern day worldviews. That the authority the diciples and overseer/elders were using to shepherd and lead the church was not their authority but Christs. Just like an ambassador is using the authority of the president or king or Master and not his own.
John 7:17
If anyone's will is to do God's will, he will know whether the teaching is from God or whether I am speaking on my own authority.

Amo2 said:
Second, professed Christinas did not likely universally accept any of the writings we are examining. To the contrary, divisions began during the days of the apostles themsleves, which they had to address and resolve as far as possible.

Ok the disciples, elders and chief priests had to determine disputes over the law and Christs teachings applied. For which the disciples had authority being appointed by Christ specificially to build the church and feed the sheep.

It is this authority to have oversight for the church is what I am referring to. Did this authority disappear. Was it still active in the early church. Regardless of the right and wrong of the issues to be determined was there any authority the overseer/elders had in determining these issues.

I agree there were disputes and all sorts of ideologies surrounding the early church. Even moreso for some sort of authority above all the white noise of competing doctrines to guide the Christian community. Did Christ not establish this from the start. Or did he leave His church unprotected.

Amo2 said:
These divisions grew so great even among the eventual "clergy" we are discussing to the point of mob violence and murder, each of their followers no doubt looking upon them as God or Christ apparently, and therefore fighting for the same. You may choose to believe no one really meant what their words simply state, nevertheless they did write them, and people did later act accordingly. Even therefore deploying force concerning the observance of what they believed. A prerogative which even God and Christ have and do not exercise.

I think this goes back to the hermeneutics. As mentioned today some see just the word 'submission or obeying' someone as control. To the early church this was actually a sign or being meek and Christlike and was following the pattern Christ had infused into Christianity.

So at least for the early church before it was corrupted to the point it was overtaken these church fathers like Clement and Ignatius were carrying on what their contemproraries had taught them and witnessed being lived out in the community. They were already like Peter and Paul and John and were not the wolves.

This would be more or less laying the blame for such blasphemy on the laps of the apostles as these fathers were taught by them. That they actually installed wolves instead of overseers. Or that they were decieved while on their watch and they said nothing. That the apostles even promoted this themselves in the Didache.

Amo2 said:
For this reason, I see the danger in declaring such, and followers then believing it to be so. In that Paul even warned of those coming seeking followers of themselves, who would and did want nothing more than for their followers to view them as God or Christ themselves. Which is now an unfortunate and dark part of the history of "Christianity". Referred to as the dark ages.

Yes I agree and this came later. In fact the further the church got away from the realness of the events around Christ and the disciples afterwards the more it drifted away. As though like how nations forget the horrors of war and lose their resolve.

In some ways this was inevitable due to our fallen nature.

I don't this negates that the church needs some sort of leaders with an authority t be able to overseer the church. I think this was the original intention. Paul tells Timothy and Titus to teach, correct and even rebuke for the deification of the church.

Otherwise what is the use of the overseers.

Amo2 said:
Neither of us knows the exact nature, purpose, intent, or motive of those who wrote the words we are discussing. We both see that they wrote them, we just have different opinions regarding what might have actually been meant by them, or the dangers they might possibly and or did represent. I think the departure from or addition to scripture they represent, was a step in the wrong direction with lingering and increasing affect. You do not. So be it.

That is one fact we know is true today that there is much division over what these scriptures mean. Which seems a long way from a unified church in mind and spirit.

But I think for the most part everyone wants the same thing. I think there is some sort of need for overseers so long as they are properly qualified in the first place. As it seems almost anyone can fill the role today.

There seems a need like in the early church for there to be some authority to sort out disputes. Though also with the consent and agreement of the church.

There also is the need to to not assume authority is automatic and have checks and balances. Paul says that even an overseer can be corrupted but also that there needs to be two or more witnesses as some may bring false accusations.

I think there can be such an authority that is both able to overseer the church and yet be like a servant of the church and people. In fact this is the prime qualification.

I think everything we need to know for the church community is in the scriptures. Christ would not have given part teachings or unclear teachings and entrusted to the apostles to continue to establish the foundation for the church.

The "Church Fathers" Scriptural or Not

Active Member

Active Member

Orthodox Christian

Active Member

inquisitive

Orthodox Christian

Active Member

Orthodox Christian

Active Member

inquisitive

Orthodox Christian

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

inquisitive

Similar threads