Early Church Fathers on Transubstantiation

Rick Otto

The Dude Abides
Nov 19, 2002
34,112
7,406
On The Prairie
✟29,593.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Try this site:


http://socrates58.blogspot.com/

There's a lot of good stuff about Bishop White there.
Couldn't find him there, but this caught my eye from that site:
8fnlv9h.jpg

http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2006/12/hydrotherapeutic-spa-massage-health.html
Thanks, Tad. That's what I call persuasive apologetics!^_^
 
Upvote 0

simonthezealot

have you not read,what God has spoken unto you?
Apr 17, 2006
16,461
1,919
Minnesota
✟19,953.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Couldn't the same be said about the Trinity, that it was not developed until the 4th century so it is not from the apostles. I have heard the JW's use that same argument.
Not really HAP my friend, this thread is more on what the ecf's believed...As far as the Trinity goes Matthew three where the dove(holy Spirit) descends on Jesus and our Fathers voice from heaven speaks...Also Isaiah 48:16!
 
Upvote 0

Hap

Regular Member
Jan 2, 2007
318
23
Texas
✟8,068.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Not really HAP my friend, this thread is more on what the ecf's believed...As far as the Trinity goes Matthew three where the dove(holy Spirit) descends on Jesus and our Fathers voice from heaven speaks...Also Isaiah 48:16!
That was the premise of his argument or one of them, he threw out more then I could keep up with, and since he was linked to this thread my point was that it was a weak argument at best. Just because we do not find the word transubstantiation until the 11th century proves nothing.
 
Upvote 0

BBAS 64

Contributor
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
9,865
1,714
59
New England
✟512,371.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Couldn't the same be said about the Trinity, that it was not developed until the 4th century so it is not from the apostles. I have heard the JW's use that same argument.

Good Day, Hap

Umm no it is clear from chuch history the view of the trinity is /was based on Scripture, and not the blind assertion that the "church" had alway taught it.

"For we behold and see as it were in a divine spectacle exhibited to us, the notice of our God in Trinity, conveyed to us at the river Jordan. For when Jesus came and was baptized by John, the Lord by His servant (and this He did for an example of humility; for He showeth that in this same humility is righteousness fulfilled, when as John said to Him, 'I have need to be baptized of Thee, and comest Thou to me?' He answered, 'Suffer it to be so now, that all righteousness may be fulfilled'), when He was baptized then, the heavens were opened, and the Holy Spirit came down upon Him in the form of a Dove: and then a Voice from on high followed, 'This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.' Here then we have the Trinity in a certain sort distinguished. The Father in the Voice,-the Son in the Man,-the Holy Spirit in the Dove. It was only needful just to mention this, for most obvious is it to see. For the notice of the Trinity is here conveyed to us plainly and without leaving room for doubt or hesitation. For the Lord Christ Himself coming in the form of a servant to John, is doubtlessly the Son: for it cannot be said that it was the Father, or the Holy Spirit. 'Jesus,' it is said, 'cometh;' that is, the Son of God. And who hath any doubt about the Dove? or who saith, 'What is the Dove?' when the Gospel itself most plainly testifieth, 'The Holy Spirit descended upon Him in the form of a dove.' And in like manner as to that voice there can be no doubt that it is the Father's, when He saith, 'Thou art My Son.' Thus then we have the Trinity distinguished." (Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament, 2:1)

No room for doubt based on Scripture, not the "always" taught ideas of the "church"

Recomend reading:

http://www.christianbook.com/Christ...60&event=ESRCN&item_code=WW&view=details#curr

Book is endorsed by Fr. Michell Pacwa, an oppent of Mr. Whites in a few debates.

Seeing the JW's hold to an final authority outside of the Scriptures alone, I can see why you would find such arguments compelling.

The third century Roman bishop Dionysius:

"For these indeed rightly know that the Trinity is declared in the divine Scripture, but that the doctrine that there are three gods is neither taught in the Old nor in the New Testament....And if Christ is the Word, the Wisdom, and the Power,-for the divine writings tell us that Christ is these, as ye yourselves know,-assuredly these are powers of God....But why should I discourse at greater length to you about these matters, since ye are men filled with the Spirit, and especially understanding what absurd results follow from the opinion which asserts that the Son was made? The leaders of this view seem to me to have given very little heed to these things, and for that reason to have strayed absolutely, by explaining the passage otherwise than as the divine and prophetic Scripture demands....Finally, any one may read in many parts of the divine utterances that the Son is said to have been begotten, but never that He was made. From which considerations, they who dare to say that His divine and inexplicable generation was a creation, are openly convicted of thinking that which is false concerning the generation of the Lord." (Against the Sabellians, 1-2)

In Him,

Bill
 
Upvote 0

Hap

Regular Member
Jan 2, 2007
318
23
Texas
✟8,068.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Good Day, Hap

Umm no it is clear from chuch history the view of the trinity is /was based on Scripture, and not the blind assertion that the "church" had alway taught it.

"For we behold and see as it were in a divine spectacle exhibited to us, the notice of our God in Trinity, conveyed to us at the river Jordan. For when Jesus came and was baptized by John, the Lord by His servant (and this He did for an example of humility; for He showeth that in this same humility is righteousness fulfilled, when as John said to Him, 'I have need to be baptized of Thee, and comest Thou to me?' He answered, 'Suffer it to be so now, that all righteousness may be fulfilled'), when He was baptized then, the heavens were opened, and the Holy Spirit came down upon Him in the form of a Dove: and then a Voice from on high followed, 'This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.' Here then we have the Trinity in a certain sort distinguished. The Father in the Voice,-the Son in the Man,-the Holy Spirit in the Dove. It was only needful just to mention this, for most obvious is it to see. For the notice of the Trinity is here conveyed to us plainly and without leaving room for doubt or hesitation. For the Lord Christ Himself coming in the form of a servant to John, is doubtlessly the Son: for it cannot be said that it was the Father, or the Holy Spirit. 'Jesus,' it is said, 'cometh;' that is, the Son of God. And who hath any doubt about the Dove? or who saith, 'What is the Dove?' when the Gospel itself most plainly testifieth, 'The Holy Spirit descended upon Him in the form of a dove.' And in like manner as to that voice there can be no doubt that it is the Father's, when He saith, 'Thou art My Son.' Thus then we have the Trinity distinguished." (Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament, 2:1)

No room for doubt based on Scripture, not the "always" taught ideas of the "church"

Recomend reading:

http://www.christianbook.com/Christ...60&event=ESRCN&item_code=WW&view=details#curr

Book is endorsed by Fr. Michell Pacwa, an oppent of Mr. Whites in a few debates.

Seeing the JW's hold to an final authority outside of the Scriptures alone, I can see why you would find such arguments compelling.

The third century Roman bishop Dionysius:

"For these indeed rightly know that the Trinity is declared in the divine Scripture, but that the doctrine that there are three gods is neither taught in the Old nor in the New Testament....And if Christ is the Word, the Wisdom, and the Power,-for the divine writings tell us that Christ is these, as ye yourselves know,-assuredly these are powers of God....But why should I discourse at greater length to you about these matters, since ye are men filled with the Spirit, and especially understanding what absurd results follow from the opinion which asserts that the Son was made? The leaders of this view seem to me to have given very little heed to these things, and for that reason to have strayed absolutely, by explaining the passage otherwise than as the divine and prophetic Scripture demands....Finally, any one may read in many parts of the divine utterances that the Son is said to have been begotten, but never that He was made. From which considerations, they who dare to say that His divine and inexplicable generation was a creation, are openly convicted of thinking that which is false concerning the generation of the Lord." (Against the Sabellians, 1-2)

In Him,

Bill
The only point I am making is that James White argument is invalid just like the JW's argument that just because we do not find a define word to describe a doctrine at some later time in history does not disprove the concept of the doctrine.
 
Upvote 0

Rick Otto

The Dude Abides
Nov 19, 2002
34,112
7,406
On The Prairie
✟29,593.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Just because we do not find the word transubstantiation until the 11th century proves nothing.
It proves it took 1100 years to conjure up a word that would explain why a transmutation that depends on a literal translation, doesn't manifest literaly.
The whole scriptural tradition of eating & drinking as metaphor for spiritual communing is lost in the excitement of the adventure of participating in a powerful mystery, IMHO.

Who took my beer? Anybody seen WAngel?:D
 
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

simonthezealot

have you not read,what God has spoken unto you?
Apr 17, 2006
16,461
1,919
Minnesota
✟19,953.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Aphraahat the Persian Sage


"After having spoken thus [at the Last Supper], the Lord rose up from the place where he had made the Passover and had given his body as food and his blood as drink, and he went with his disciples to the place where he was to be arrested. But he ate of his own body and drank of his own blood, while he was pondering on the dead. With his own hands the Lord presented his own body to be eaten, and before he was crucified he gave his blood as drink" (Treatises 12:6 [A.D. 340]).
St. t can you share where this may be culled up, i've gone through all of aprahat KNOWN writings...NOTHING.
I've even put in up in the research page indicated in my signature.
 
Upvote 0

PassthePeace1

CARO CARDO SALUTIS
Jun 6, 2005
13,265
700
✟24,260.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
If none believed it was literal why would they need to speak against?

Simon,

I think you are missing their point, there is mounting historical documents of ECF supporting the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist....so if it was such a false interputation of John 6, then why don't we find historical documents from ECF, agruing against the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist? We can see from the writings that the ECFs left, their arguements against Gnosticism, Adoptionism, Arianism, Donatism, Modalism...etc....so why did they not come out and condemn the teaching of the Real Presence?

Your arguing from silence

The irony here is that you are the one arguing from the silence, not St. Therese. :)
 
Upvote 0

simonthezealot

have you not read,what God has spoken unto you?
Apr 17, 2006
16,461
1,919
Minnesota
✟19,953.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Upvote 0

simonthezealot

have you not read,what God has spoken unto you?
Apr 17, 2006
16,461
1,919
Minnesota
✟19,953.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Simon,

I think you are missing their point, there is mounting historical documents of ECF supporting the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist....so if it was such a false interputation of John 6, then why don't we find historical documents from ECF, agruing against the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist? We can see from the writings that the ECFs left, their arguements against Gnosticism, Adoptionism, Arianism, Donatism, Modalism...etc....so why did they not come out and condemn the teaching of the Real Presence?



The irony here is that you are the one arguing from the silence, not St. Therese. :)

Yep okay Pam, ST. T threw out a bunch of ECF's as support of literal (transubstantiation) real presence, the ones whom we could research and show in context have been proven that they did NOT believe in the LITERAL real presence of the 12 century and beyond as promoted by Rome.
Keep believing what you are told instead of the truth in front of you. An honest reading of scripture and an honest reading of Early Christians (as is the purpose of this thread) DOES NOT and WILL NOT support transubstantiation...
 
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

PassthePeace1

CARO CARDO SALUTIS
Jun 6, 2005
13,265
700
✟24,260.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Yep okay Pam, ST. T threw out a bunch of ECF's as support of literal (transubstantiation) real presence, the ones whom we could research and show in context have been proven that they did NOT believe in the LITERAL real presence of the 12 century and beyond as promoted by Rome.
Keep believing what you are told instead of the truth in front of you. An honest reading of scripture and an honest reading of Early Christians (as is the purpose of this thread) DOES NOT and WILL NOT support transubstantiation...

Simon, don't kid yourself....you have proven nothing...nada.
 
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