Do Modern Christians undervalue Christian History?

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The "pillar and foundation of truthis the church."
Which no doubt Eusebius is a great part of as Doctor of Church History:

And the words, "He will wash his garments in wine, and in the blood of the grape his girdle," will shew you surely how as in a secret way He suggests His mystic Passion, in which He washed His garment and vesture with the washing wherewith He is revealed to wash away the old stains of them that believe in Him. For with the wine which was indeed the symbol of His blood, He cleanses them that are baptized into His death, and believe on His |115 blood, of their old sins, washing them away and purifying (b) their old garments and vesture, so that they, ransomed by the precious blood of the divine spiritual grapes, and with the wine from this vine, "put off the old man with his deeds, and put on the new man which is renewed into knowledge in the image of Him that created him."

The words, "His eyes are cheerful from wine, and his teeth white as milk," again I think secretly reveal the (c) mysteries of the new Covenant of our Saviour. "His eyes are cheerful from wine," seems to me to shew the gladness of the mystic wine which He gave to His disciples, when He said, "Take, drink; this is my blood that is shed for you for the remission of sins: this do in remembrance of me." And, "His teeth are white as milk," shew the brightness and purity of the sacramental food. For again, He gave Himself (d) the symbols of His divine dispensation to His disciples, when He bade them make the likeness of His own Body. For since He no more was to take pleasure in bloody sacrifices, or those ordained by Moses in the slaughter of animals of various kinds, and was to give them bread to use as the symbol of His Body, He taught the purity and brightness of such food by saying, "And his teeth are white as milk." This also another prophet has recorded, where he says, "Sacrifice and offering hast thou not required, but a body hast thou prepared for me." (Eusebius of Caesarea: Demonstratio Evangelica Book VIII.1)
http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/eusebius_de_10_book8.htm
 
Upvote 0

Mountainmike

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Nov 2, 2016
4,614
1,591
66
Northern uk
✟561,129.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
There are too many issues in all of these posts, to tackle all of them

I think You are actually agreeing with me, on the issue that led to my statement:

That we only know which are gospels and the authors by reference to such as you say Iraneus, which was the point I made,

So that the idea of considering only scripture in absence of church and fathers is a non starter in historical terms,

Without the fathers and church, there is a problem knowing which of a myriad of books are scripture. There are a lot of others that claimed apostolicity. .

The decisions did not make them inspired - it just identified them so - the power to bind and loose is to rule on what is true law and doctrine.

I think we agree on that much....

But you also appear to make the assumption that all in tradition ended in scripture. I can disprove that fairly easily both OT and NT , perhaps here is not the place. But regardless of that. One thing scripture evidently does not carry is its own meaning. Which is the reason why people disagree. Tradition carries meaning, and so scripture is not enough,



Well of course the Scriptures as Jesus and His Apostles quoted and taught from Law, Prophets and Writings TaNaKh.


Compiled and canonized? Sure. However, the apostles themselves were living breathing New Testaments. Then they wrote it down and passed it on and they were copied for all the churches.

Irenaeus explains this:

1. We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the Gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith.
Against Heresies (Book III, Chapter 1)
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103301.htm


He did in fact indicate that. Would you have the references where he states such? And would you like to provide which traditions he was referring to?


I thought tradition came first and then the Scriptures? Again, which traditions does Paul speak of here? Is there a list we can examine of 1st Century AD Christian church traditions the church catholic held to? Or are you assuming everything which is Roman Catholic today was held in the 1st century AD church?

What we do know of what they held as tradition in the 1st Century AD is actually found in the New Testament. It's why the NT authors wrote the Gospel accounts, history (Acts) and epistles.
 
Upvote 0

Ignatius the Kiwi

Dissident
Mar 2, 2013
7,024
3,749
✟287,802.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
An interesting fact from the Reformation is both Luther and Calvin made appeals to the ancient church for much of their teachings.

The acquaintance of the Reformed theologians with both the Greek and Latin fathers of the church needs no underlining. They ranged widely through their works. Calvin‟s writings are saturated with quotations from the patristic authors. They are his second major source after the Scriptures. No other Reformer has such a wealth of patristic references. Calvin‟s acquaintance with some patristic writings depended on Eusebius and Cassiodorus and his knowledge of church councils and canon law, but many of them he knew first hand.

That's from an introduction to a scholarly paper. Remainder of the paper here:

Church fathers on Covenant.

https://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/haddington-house-journal/05_025.pdf

While Calvin and Luther might have made appeals to the fathers a part of their own work, I don't find that common in today's Calvinists or Lutherans who focus much more on their founder than the general Patristic consensus.

It's not surprising that Lutherans talk more about Luther than Saint John Damascene.
 
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
There are too many issues in all of these posts, to tackle all of them

I think You are actually agreeing with me, on the issue that led to my statement:

Not quite. You made several statements which went unsubstantiated. Here are a few you did not respond to which sheds a lot of light on some of your assertions.

We should read and take to heart and mind those who were in the faith before us. And if not Christ Himself or His Apostles who wrote the New Testament, test it according to their words.

Meaning we test all things by the words and teachings of Jesus Christ and His Apostles. By the way, foundations and pillars uphold things and do not create the structure. Therefore, the church is to uphold something and that is Truth. The Truth is found in the very words of Christ and His teachings and the Holy Spirit inspired teachings of His Apostles. We can find this in the New Testament.

Therefore, before the church 'decided' on the New Testament, the very books which are the New Testament had no authority? If so answer this:

How did souls in 1st century AD Palestine determine a holy man in the desert crying out to repent and be baptized for the Kingdom of God has come, and an itinerate preacher from Galilee who stood in opposition to the then magisterial authority (seat of Moses) and rebuking such with Holy Scriptures, know these men were of God?

You mean the varying views of the Eucharist which the church fathers held.

For example, as often used by Roman Catholic apologists is John 6 the Bread of Life discourse in promoting transubstantiation. Yet even St Augustine did not believe this:

How then shall we worship the earth, when the Scripture says openly, You shall worship the Lord your God? Deuteronomy 6:13 Yet here it says, fall down before His footstool: and, explaining to us what His footstool is, it says, The earth is My footstool. I am in doubt; I fear to worship the earth, lest He who made the heaven and the earth condemn me; again, I fear not to worship the footstool of my Lord, because the Psalm bids me, fall down before His footstool. I ask, what is His footstool? And the Scripture tells me, the earth is My footstool. In hesitation I turn unto Christ, since I am herein seeking Himself: and I discover how the earth may be worshipped without impiety, how His footstool may be worshipped without impiety. For He took upon Him earth from earth; because flesh is from earth, and He received flesh from the flesh of Mary. And because He walked here in very flesh, and gave that very flesh to us to eat for our salvation; and no one eats that flesh, unless he has first worshipped: we have found out in what sense such a footstool of our Lord's may be worshipped, and not only that we sin not in worshipping it, but that we sin in not worshipping. But does the flesh give life? Our Lord Himself, when He was speaking in praise of this same earth, said, It is the Spirit that quickens, the flesh profits nothing....But when our Lord praised it, He was speaking of His own flesh, and He had said, Except a man eat My flesh, he shall have no life in him. John 6:54 Some disciples of His, about seventy, were offended, and said, This is an hard saying, who can hear it? And they went back, and walked no more with Him. It seemed unto them hard that He said, Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man, you have no life in you: they received it foolishly, they thought of it carnally, and imagined that the Lord would cut off parts from His body, and give unto them; and they said, This is a hard saying. It was they who were hard, not the saying; for unless they had been hard, and not meek, they would have said to themselves, He says not this without reason, but there must be some latent mystery herein. They would have remained with Him, softened, not hard: and would have learned that from Him which they who remained, when the others departed, learned. For when twelve disciples had remained with Him, on their departure, these remaining followers suggested to Him, as if in grief for the death of the former, that they were offended by His words, and turned back. But He instructed them, and says unto them, It is the Spirit that quickens, but the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. John 6:63 Understand spiritually what I have said; you are not to eat this body which you see; nor to drink that blood which they who will crucify Me shall pour forth. I have commended unto you a certain mystery; spiritually understood, it will quicken. Although it is needful that this be visibly celebrated, yet it must be spiritually understood.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1801099.htm
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Athanasius377
Upvote 0

Hawkins

Member
Supporter
Apr 27, 2005
2,559
394
Canada
✟235,114.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I was asked a friend if she knew about the Council of Nicea and the Nicene Creed and she had no idea what was that about. Have churches underestimated the Church Fathers and important events in Christianity?

That question boils down to whether one has to understand history of Christianity in order to be saved. The answer is no. One can be saved as long as he's calling upon the name of Jesus Christ. It's more like a minimum requirement of savability. However,

1 Corinthians 3:2 (NIV2011)
I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready.

We all need to grow up in Christ. We need to secure our salvation thus to equip ourselves. We thus need to learn more.

Ephesians 6:11,13 (NIV2011)
Put on the full armor of God, so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes.
Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand.
 
Upvote 0

Not David

I'm back!
Apr 6, 2018
7,356
5,235
25
USA
✟231,310.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
That question boils down to whether one has to understand history of Christianity in order to be saved. The answer is no. One can be saved as long as he's calling upon the name of Jesus Christ. It's more like a minimum requirement of savability. However,

1 Corinthians 3:2 (NIV2011)
I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready.

We all need to grow up in Christ. We need to secure our salvation thus to equip ourselves. We thus need to learn more.

Ephesians 6:11,13 (NIV2011)
Put on the full armor of God, so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes.
Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand.
I never said that one is saved by History. It doesn't justify ignorance tho.
 
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
While Calvin and Luther might have made appeals to the fathers a part of their own work, I don't find that common in today's Calvinists or Lutherans who focus much more on their founder than the general Patristic consensus.

It's not surprising that Lutherans talk more about Luther than Saint John Damascene.
I really have not seen that at least on this site. It seems Lutherans avoid quoting Luther and seem to distance themselves from his works.

Most Calvinists here quote Augustine and other fathers more than the Institutes.
 
Upvote 0

Tayla

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Sep 30, 2017
1,694
801
USA
✟147,315.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I was asked a friend if she knew about the Council of Nicea and the Nicene Creed and she had no idea what was that about. Have churches underestimated the Church Fathers and important events in Christianity?
The Catholic Church, the Orthodox Churches, and some others value church history. Some of the protestant churches, not so much.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Tutorman
Upvote 0

MarkRohfrietsch

Unapologetic Apologist
Supporter
Dec 8, 2007
30,381
5,250
✟816,630.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
I really have not seen that at least on this site. It seems Lutherans avoid quoting Luther and seem to distance themselves from his works.

Most Calvinists here quote Augustine and other fathers more than the Institutes.
Well, despite the name, it is Christ's Church, not Luther's. BTW, Luther quoted the Church Father's often, and so do Confessional Lutherans; we go to the source as they say. LOL.
 
  • Like
Reactions: redleghunter
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,339
26,779
Pacific Northwest
✟728,043.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
It's not surprising that Lutherans talk more about Luther than Saint John Damascene.

Luther is useful only insofar as he is in agreement with the Confessions. Luther isn't what defines Lutheranism, the Confessions do; and you are probably more likely to find Augustine quoted in the Confessions than Luther.

Of course we will refer to Luther, if it seems appropriate, and if we think it may be relevant or helpful. But as Mark said, it is Christ's Church, not Luther's Church.

Personally, here on CF, I have quoted and referred to a lot of different writers, from a lot of different backgrounds. I've probably quoted from C.S. Lewis, Hans Urs von Balthasar, and Herbert McCabe as much as I have Luther, if not more. Not to mention Isaac of Nineveh, Augustine, Athanasius, Gregory of Nazianzus, Ignatius of Antioch, and John Chrysostom. And I've referred to Theophan the Recluse and Kallistos Ware a number of times over the years. If I think there is value in what is said, I am likely to quote or refer to it.

-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

thecolorsblend

If God is your Father, who is your Mother?
Supporter
Jul 1, 2013
9,199
8,425
Gotham City, New Jersey
✟308,231.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
I was asked a friend if she knew about the Council of Nicea and the Nicene Creed and she had no idea what was that about. Have churches underestimated the Church Fathers and important events in Christianity?
Traditional Christians value Church History but a lot of evangelical, un-denominational and "Bible-only" types tend not to. Sad, really.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Ignatius the Kiwi

Dissident
Mar 2, 2013
7,024
3,749
✟287,802.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Luther is useful only insofar as he is in agreement with the Confessions. Luther isn't what defines Lutheranism, the Confessions do; and you are probably more likely to find Augustine quoted in the Confessions than Luther.

Of course we will refer to Luther, if it seems appropriate, and if we think it may be relevant or helpful. But as Mark said, it is Christ's Church, not Luther's Church.

Personally, here on CF, I have quoted and referred to a lot of different writers, from a lot of different backgrounds. I've probably quoted from C.S. Lewis, Hans Urs von Balthasar, and Herbert McCabe as much as I have Luther, if not more. Not to mention Isaac of Nineveh, Augustine, Athanasius, Gregory of Nazianzus, Ignatius of Antioch, and John Chrysostom. And I've referred to Theophan the Recluse and Kallistos Ware a number of times over the years. If I think there is value in what is said, I am likely to quote or refer to it.

-CryptoLutheran

Do you think it inaccurate to suggest Lutherans as a whole have probably produced more literature regarding their literature (which has to include Luther or as you mention the Confessions) than that with regards to Patristics as a whole?

Seems to me the scholarship which focuses primarily on Patristics comes from Orthodox and Catholic writers and Publishers. The major series of Patristic translations as a whole certainty does (Ancient Christian writers, Fathers of the Church CUA, Popular Patristics).

This isn't so much a criticism, as it is my general observation from listening to Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox figures. I don't think it unfair to suggest Orthodox and Catholics put more stress on the Fathers and what they had to say when compared to Protestants, who by in large put more stress on the bible. To that regard Protestants as a whole tend to produce more commentaries on the bible than any other group which makes sense given Sola Scriptura.
 
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Do you think it inaccurate to suggest Lutherans as a whole have probably produced more literature regarding their literature (which has to include Luther or as you mention the Confessions) than that with regards to Patristics as a whole?

Seems to me the scholarship which focuses primarily on Patristics comes from Orthodox and Catholic writers and Publishers. The major series of Patristic translations as a whole certainty does (Ancient Christian writers, Fathers of the Church CUA, Popular Patristics).

This isn't so much a criticism, as it is my general observation from listening to Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox figures. I don't think it unfair to suggest Orthodox and Catholics put more stress on the Fathers and what they had to say when compared to Protestants, who by in large put more stress on the bible. To that regard Protestants as a whole tend to produce more commentaries on the bible than any other group which makes sense given Sola Scriptura.
This might prove interesting when you have the time.

https://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/haddington-house-journal/05_025.pdf
 
Upvote 0

BobRyan

Junior Member
Angels Team
Supporter
Nov 21, 2008
51,118
10,503
Georgia
✟899,782.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
I was asked a friend if she knew about the Council of Nicea and the Nicene Creed and she had no idea what was that about. Have churches underestimated the Church Fathers and important events in Christianity?

As for "undervaluing Christian history" --

Yes I think the popular tendency is to ignore the Christian struggles and the values of the faith in the NT text, the faith and doctrine of the NT writers and to ignore the lessons learned from the 1260 years of the dark ages persecution of the saints.

Ignoring even more material - the tendency to also ignore
The Westminster Confession of Faith section 19
The Baptist Confession of Faith Section 19
And even the CCC on the TEN commandments
 
Upvote 0

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,565
New Jersey
✟1,147,348.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
I tend to quote the Bible and commentaries here mostly, just because that's what most CF readers care about For myself I do a lot of reading about theology from various periods I often consult modern writers. In my tradition theological writers typically look at both early and Reformation sources. Calvin is a major authority for many liberal Reformed theologians, of course.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums