Did the ECFs really know/understand the Scriptures better?

[Anglian]

Dear Calluna,

An interesting Protestant view we see no sign of before the 1500s. It would be even more interesting to have some of the sources for it. Having just finished reading the work of the that new atheist, Bart Ehrman, it doesn't even square with his views.

They made no claim to be fathers - that was a word first used of them by Protestant Anglicans in the 1600s. Your claim they were not Christian might be more convincing with a little backing; do you mean all of them? Ah, but if I remember, I don't think you believe in the Trinity, which has been taken as a canon of being a Christian for most Christians for most of the history of the Faith. If you do, fair enough, if not, then your standpoint to judge what is and is not truly Christian is not one likely to be accepted by most Christians - especially those whose Church did recognise what is and is not Scripture.

By whose authority do you speak these things?

Peace be upon this house,

Anglian

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Sorry, forgot about that detail.

This word 'Fathers' is itself the language of rebels. They weren't fathers, they weren't Christians, they weren't early. They were johnny-come-latelys, much, much too lately. How can they be regarded seriously? It takes Christians today approx. 0.000002 seconds to recognise the Master's Voice (though it took longer with the KJV). It took these 'Fathers' 400 years to work out what was Scripture and what was not! (And then they got it wrong. )

I use the KJV as a decoration piece on the mantel of my fireplace

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=7262264

Too many referees can spoil the "Game"

http://www.scripture4all.org/

1 John 2:1 My little children, these-things I am writing to ye, that no ye may be sinning: and if-ever any may be sinning, an advocate/para-klhton <3875> we are having toward the Father, Jesus Christ, just-one,

3875. parakletos par-ak'-lay-tos an intercessor, consoler:--advocate, comforter.
2822. kletos klay-tos' from the same as 2821; invited, i.e. appointed, or (specially), a saint:--called.

quote Muslim: Whereas, the "Holy Spirit" was always & already present right? So, how could Jesus(p) say; "but if I go, I will send Holy Spirit"?!!!!
&#8230;Very illogical.
Mughammed(p) is this paraclete. Sorry guys.

 

[MrPolo]

LLOJ, where do you copy and paste your Scripture from? I always have trouble reading the passages because of the codes/colours/random Greek words inserted into one long sentence.

If I am not mistaken, he uses http://scripture4all.org/ and it is indeed difficult to read in that format.

Usually for my Greek, I prefer http://net.bible.org/home.php because of the cool "rollover" effects when you search a single verse.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

If I am not mistaken, he uses http://scripture4all.org/ and it is indeed difficult to read in that format.

Usually for my Greek, I prefer http://net.bible.org/home.php because of the cool "rollover" effects when you search a single verse.

Hi. I actually use the 3 greek texts on the Olivetree site which I am going to use to translate the Gospel of John when I am finished with Revelation and the Lord willing, the book of Romans. The interlinear helps because it has the hebrew/greek parsed and the order of which the texts are in. Just another Tool.

http://www.olivetree.com/cgi-bin/EnglishBible.htm

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=7244228

Revelation 4:1 After these I looked and Behold! A door having opened in the heaven, and the sound, the first which I hear, as of trumpet talking with me saying: "Ascend! hence and I shall be showing to thee which-things is binding to be becoming after these".

TexRec) Revelation 4:1 meta tauta eidon kai idou qura hnewgmenh en tw ouranw kai h fwnh h prwth hn hkousa wV salpiggoV laloushV met emou legousa anaba wde kai deixw soi a dei genesqai meta tauta

ByzMaj) Revelation 4:1 meta tauta eidon kai idou qura anewgmenh en tw ouranw kai h fwnh h prwth hn hkousa wV salpiggoV laloushV met emou legousa anaba wde kai deixw soi a dei genesqai meta tauta

W-H) Revelation 4:1 meta tauta eidon kai idou qura hnewgmenh en tw ouranw kai h fwnh h prwth hn hkousa wV salpiggoV laloushV met emou legwn anaba wde kai deixw soi a dei genesqai meta tauta

 

[MrPolo]

http://www.olivetree.com/cgi-bin/EnglishBible.htm

Oooo...this site has the Douay-Rheims!

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Oooo...this site has the Douay-Rheims!

If you set it for multi-translation, you can pick specific version of verses to show up along with the greek text. I have been using it for about 4 yrs now and have it up 24/7

Hmm. I notice the W-H MS leaves out this verse and since the ISA interlinear uses it, it is also missing. Interesting.

(Douay-Rheims) John 5:4 And an angel of the Lord descended at certain times into the pond and the water was moved. And he that went down first into the pond after the motion of the water was made whole of whatsoever infirmity he lay under.

Textus Rec.) John 5:4 aggeloV gar kata kairon katebainen en th kolumbhqra kai etarassen to udwr o oun prwtoV embaV meta thn tarachn tou udatoV ugihV egineto w dhpote kateiceto noshmati

Byz./Maj.) John 5:4 aggeloV gar kata kairon katebainen en th kolumbhqra kai etarassen to udwr o oun prwtoV embaV meta thn tarachn tou udatoV ugihV egineto w dhpote kateiceto noshmati

(Greek NT - W-H ) John 5:4

 

[Xpycoctomos]

Well, we certainly don't deny that education can be a good thing in regards to biblical studies. It's just low on the list of priorities as far when it comes to "understanding" them.

Hmmm. A Divine book such as the Bible being low on the list of priorities? Never figured that.

Sorry, I didn't realize you were quoting me here. If you re-read my post... heck, if you re-read the very phrase you quoted of me (above) you will see that I never said that the BIBLE was low on a list of prioroties. I didn't even say anything close to that at all.

I said and education is low on the list of priorities when it comes to understing them (i.e. The Scriptures).

So, I hope you can plainly see that you simply misread what I wrote. It's no big deal to misread, but your accusation was quite serious (that the Scriptures were a low priority???) and I was saddened to see that you even thought that was a possibility given my faith icon and the positive and (what I thought were/hope are) sincere interactions with other Orthodox in the past.

Xpy

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Sorry, I didn't realize you were quoting me here. If you re-read my post... heck, if you re-read the very phrase you quoted of me (above) you will see that I never said that the BIBLE was low on a list of prioroties. I didn't even say anything close to that at all.

I said and education is low on the list of priorities when it comes to understing them (i.e. The Scriptures).

So, I hope you can plainly see that you simply misread what I wrote. It's no big deal to misread, but your accusation was quite serious (that the Scriptures were a low priority???) and I was saddened to see that you even thought that was a possibility given my faith icon and the positive and (what I thought were/hope are) sincere interactions with other Orthodox in the past.

Xpy

Ok. Thanks for the clarification. Peace.

 

[simonthezealot]

The early Christians were as diverse and across the board as the Christians on this thread...
UNANIMOUS consent is a falsehood...Their is NO such thing...Except in the essentials of the faith ie. the apostles creed.

 

[Anglian]

Dear Simon,

You are quite right about there being a degree of diversity. If we look at two of the the earliest surviving codices of Scripture, the fifth century Codex Alexandrinus includes 1 Clement amongst the rest of the Scriptures as we have them. The other ancient surviving text, the Codex Sinaiticus includes The Epistle of Barnabas as well as The Shepherd of Hermas, yet the NT you and I accept was the one canonised - that would be 'edited', by the Church.

Today's question for Sola Scriptura fans is why (if you do) you accept the version canonised by the Church rather than what is in the earliest surviving Scriptura. There'd be more diversity that way - and you guys could stop telling us how to read the book the Church edited. Just a thought

Peace,

Anglian

 

[simonthezealot]

Dear Simon,

You are quite right about there being a degree of diversity.

Thanks we do know only God's truth ultimately prevails.

 

[calluna]

The early Christians were as diverse and across the board as the Christians on this thread.

The post-apostolic false Christians were diverse. The church is always of one mind about everything of importance. That is what frightens the false ones, of which there is a vast abundance, particularly in the USA. English-speaking 'Christian' boards are plagued with them.

the essentials of the faith ie. the apostles creed.

The devil recites that with relish.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

[/b]
The post-apostolic false Christians were diverse. The church is always of one mind about everything of importance. That is what frightens the false ones, of which there is a vast abundance, particularly in the USA. English-speaking 'Christian' boards are plagued with them.


The devil recites that with relish.

Possible. I put a link to this thread over here as we were discussing how difficult it is to debate the Bible with non-Christians when even Christ-ianity itself is divided on it. This is a great thread btw

[you must spread some reputation around before giving it to calluna again!]

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=7262267
CF to close debate forums, "CF probably won't be much "fun"" for non-Christians

 

[Anglian]

Dear Simon,

Thank you for citing this in your signature.

It is the very reason we must accept the writings of the apostles and their disciples as our final authority, not on a church which based its authority on something NO early CHRISTian writers from the first few hundred years even believed.

Here's something on an Orthodox understanding of 'tradition', and I wonder how well (or if) it goes with your comment, with which I find myself in agreement.

Tradition is that which is handed on. The Lord's message was initially handed on orally. He told those who listened to Him, and He commissioned the Apostles to carry the word on - including St. Paul. Where do we find that word now, since all who heard it are in repose?

We find it in the writings of the Apostolic and sub-Apostolic era. One of the oldest extant copies of the Scriptures, the fifth century Codex Alexandrinus includes 1 Clement amongst the rest of the Scriptures as we have them. The other ancient surviving text, the Codex Sinaiticus includes The Epistle of Barnabas as well as The Shepherd of Hermas, so we can see that the early Church did not make the same distinction we came to between what was and was not canonical.

This decision was reached, on the basis of the traditions received, by the early Councils. So, the Holy Scriptures themselves are an essential element of how we receive that tradition. But if we accept the canon of the Church, we also accept those books it found edifying - the Apostolic Fathers, as good for our spiritual growth. In addition, we read the early Church Fathers, whose writings also form part of the tradition of hearing and reading the word of God.

Another major source of tradition is the Liturgy of the Church; in our doxologies we express our beliefs, and in the Eucharist we encounter the Truth of the Risen Lord. Anyone who really wants to see tradition in action just needs pop into an Orthodox Church.

Is that very far from what you are saying?

Peace,

Anglian

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Here's something on an Orthodox understanding of 'tradition', and I wonder how well (or if) it goes with your comment, with which I find myself in agreement.

Response copied to post #56 so I deleted this one.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Greeting Anglian. And that comes from the oral traditions of the ECF's?
What do you make of this Greek word used for "clement". It almost doesn't appear to be a "name" of a person but a "nature" of somebody. I may start a thread on this. Thoughts?

http://www.scripture4all.org/

Philippians 4:3 And I intreat thee also, true yokefellow, help those women which laboured with me in the glad tidings, with Clement/klh-mentoV <2815> also, and with other my fellowlabourers, whose names are in the book of life.

Reve 17:14 These with the lamb-kin shall be battling, and the lamb-kin shall be conquering them. That Lord of Lords He is, and King of Kings. And the-ones with Him called-ones/klhtoi <2822> and chosen-ones and faithful-ones

Hmm. That reminded me of this thread on the NCR started by a Muslim concerning the "parakletos".

The same greek root word for "called" is also used in it.

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=47956658#post47956658
a comforter means the Holy spirit or a prophet??

1 John 2:1 My little children, these-things I am writing to ye, that no ye may be sinning: and if-ever any may be sining, an advocate/para-klhton <3875> we are having toward the Father, Jesus Christ, just-one,

http://www.eliyah.com/lexicon.html

3875. para-kletos par-ak'-lay-tos an intercessor, consoler:--advocate, comforter.
3844. para par-ah' a primary preposition; properly, near; i.e. (with genitive case) from beside (literally or figuratively), (with dative case) at (or in) the vicinity of (objectively or subjectively),
2822. kletos klay-tos' from the same as 2821; invited, i.e. appointed, or (specially), a saint:--called.

 

[Anglian]

Dear LLOJ,

I wish I could take your view on Latin when it came to discussing things with Muslims - but that's a mite difficult in the Coptic Church.

I hope that my words about 'tradition' helped you see what it means to us - and how much Holy Scripture is integral to everything. But if we were going by the book alone, we might have to add 1 Clement if we were going by the oldest book; fortunately, Holy Tradition has helped us discern that whilst Clement may be read for edification (try him if you haven't), he does not speak with the authority of an Apostle.

peace,

Anglian

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Dear LLOJ,

I wish I could take your view on Latin when it came to discussing things with Muslims - but that's a mite difficult in the Coptic Church.

I thought the Coptic church used Greek as the whole NT/NC is in Greek, not the dead language of Latin?

Mark 7:23 all these the wicked things inside is going-out/ek-poreuetai <1607> (5736), and is contaminating the man.

Reve 16:14 For they are spirits of demons doing signs which is going-out/ek-poreuesqai <1607> (5738) on the kings of the land, and the being-homed, whole, to-be-together-assembling/sunagagein <4863> (5629) them into the battle of the Day, that the Great of the God the Almighty.

 

[simonthezealot]

[/b]
The post-apostolic false Christians were diverse. The church is always of one mind about everything of importance. That is what frightens the false ones, of which there is a vast abundance, particularly in the USA. English-speaking 'Christian' boards are plagued with them.


The devil recites that with relish.

succinct

 

[Anglian]

Dear LLOJ,

We use, oddly enough, Coptic, which, as you know, is the language many of the earliest Scriptures are written in; we also use Greek, of course, and Arabic; heck, we even use English when necessary

Peace,

Anglian