Quotes from the Church Fathers

[JM]

Calvinism Declared By The Church Fathers

TOTAL DEPRAVITY

Barnabas (A.D. 70): "Learn: before we believed in God, the habitation of our heart was corrupt and weak."

Ignatius (A.D. 110): "They that are carnal cannot do the things that are spiritual...Nor can the unbelievers do the things of belief."

Justin Martyr (A.D. 150): "Mankind by Adam fell under death, and the deception of the serpent; we are born sinners...No good thing dwells in us...For neither by nature, nor by human understanding is it possible for me to acquire the knowledge of things so great and so divine, but by the energy of the Divine Spirit...Of ourselves it is impossible to enter the kingdom of God...He has convicted us of the impossibility of our nature to obtain life...Free will has destroyed us; we who were free are become slaves and for our sin are sold...Being pressed down by our sins, we cannot move upward toward God; we are like birds who have wings, but are unable to fly."

Clement Of Alexandria (A.D. 190): "The soul cannot rise nor fly, nor be lifted up above the things that are on high, without special grace."

Origen: "Our free will...or human nature is not sufficient to seek God in any manner."

Eusebius (A.D. 330): "The liberty of our will in choosing things that are good is destroyed."

Augustine (A.D. 370): "If, therefore, they are servants of sin (2 Cor. 3:17), why do they boast of free will?...O, man! Learn from the precept what you ought to do; learn from correction, that it is your own fault you have not the power...Let human effort, which perished by Adam, here be silent, and let the grace of God reign by Jesus Christ...What God promises, we ourselves do not through free will of human nature, but He Himself does by grace within us...Men labor to find in our own will something that is our own, and not God's; how can they find it, I know not."


UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION

Clement Of Rome (A.D. 69): "Let us therefore approach Him in holiness of soul, lifting up pure and undefiled hands unto Him, with love towards our gentle and compassionate Father because He made us an elect portion unto Himself...Seeing then that we are the special elect portion of a Holy God, let us do all things that pertain unto holiness...There was given a declaration of blessedness upon them that have been elected by God through Jesus Christ our Lord...Jesus Christ is the hope of the elect..."

Barnabas (A.D. 70): "We are elected to hope, committed by God unto faith, appointed to salvation."

Ignatius: "To the predestined ones before all ages, that is, before the world began, united and elect in a true passion, by the eternal will of the Father..."

Justin Martyr: "In all these discourses I have brought all my proofs out of your own holy and prophetic writings, hoping that some of you may be found of the elect number which through the grace that comes from the Lord of Sabaoth, is left or reserved [set apart] for everlasting salvation."

Irenaeus (A.D. 198): "God hath completed the number which He before determined with Himself, all those who are written, or ordained unto eternal life...Being predestined indeed according to the love of the Father that we would belong to Him forever."

Clement Of Alexandria (A.D. 190): "Through faith the elect of God are saved. The generation of those who seek God is the elect nation, not [an earthly] place, but the congregation of the elect, which I call the Church...If every person had known the truth, they would all have leaped into the way, and there would have been no election...You are those who are chosen from among men and as those who are predestined from among men, and in His own time called, faithful, and elect, those who before the foundation of the world are known intimately by God unto faith; that is, are appointed by Him to faith, grow beyond babyhood."

Cyprian (A.D. 250): "This is therefore the predestination which we faithfully and humbly preach."

Ambrose Of Milan (A.D. 380): "In predestination the Church of God has always existed."

Augustine (A.D. 380): "Here certainly, there is no place for the vain argument of those who defend the foreknowledge of God against the grace of God, and accordingly maintain that we were elected before the foundation of the world because God foreknew that we would be good, not that He Himself would make us good. This is not the language of Him who said, 'You did not choose Me, but I chose you' (John 15:16)."


LIMITED ATONEMENT

Barnabas (A.D. 70): "[Christ speaking] I see that I shall thus offer My flesh for the sins of the new people."

Justin Martyr (A.D. 150): "He endured the sufferings for those men whose souls are [actually] purified from all iniquity...As Jacob served Laban for the cattle that were spotted, and of carious forms, so Christ served even to the cross for men of every kind, of many and various shapes, procuring them by His blood and the mystery of the cross."

Irenaeus (A.D. 180): "He came to save all, all, I say, who through Him are born again unto God, infants, and little ones, and children, and young men, and old men...Jesus is the Savior of them that believe; but the Lord of them that believe not. Wherefore, Christ is introduced in the gospel weary...promising to give His life a ransom, in the room of, many."

Tertullian (A.D. 200): "Christ died for the salvation of His people...for the church."

Cyprian (A.D. 250): "All the sheep which Christ hath sought up by His blood and sufferings are saved...Whosoever shall be found in the blood, and with the mark of Christ shall only escape...He redeemed the believers with the price of His own blood...Let him be afraid to die who is not reckoned to have any part in the cross and sufferings of Christ."

Lactantius (A.D. 320): "He was to suffer and be slain for the salvation of many people...who having suffered death for us, hath made us heirs of the everlasting kingdom, having abdicated and disinherited the people of the Jews...He stretched out His hands in the passion and measured the world, that He might at the very time show that a large people, gathered out of all languages and tribes, should come under His wings, and receive the most great and sublime sign."

Eusebius (A.D. 330): "To what 'us' does he refer, unless to them that beleive in Him? For to them that do not believe in Him, He is the author of their fire and burning. The cause of Christ's coming is the redemption of those that were to be saved by Him."

Julius (A.D. 350): "The Son of God, by the pouring out of His precious blood, redeemed His set apart ones; they are delivered by the blood of Christ."

Hilarion (A.D. 363): "He shall remain in the sight of God forever, having already taken all whom He hath redeemed to be kings of heaven, and co-heirs of eternity, delivering them as the kingdom of God to the Father."

Ambrose (A.D. 380): "Before the foundation of the world, it was God's will that Christ should suffer for our salvation...Can He damn thee, whom He hath redeemed from death, for whom He offered Himself, whose life He knows is the reward of His own death?"

Pacian (A.D. 380): "Much more, He will not allow him that is redeemed to be destroyed, nor will He cast away those whom He has redeemed with a great price."

Epiphanius (A.D. 390): "If you are redeemed...If therefore ye are bought with blood, thou are not the number of them who were bought with blood, O Manes, because thou deniest the blood...He gave His life for His own sheep."

Jerome (A.D. 390): "Christ is sacrificed for the salvation of believers...Not all are redeemed, for not all shall be saved, but the remnant...All those who are redeemed and delivered by Thy blood return to Zion, which Thou hast prepared for Thyself by Thine own blood...Christ came to redeem Zion with His blood. But lest we should think that all are Zion or every one is Zion is truly redeemed of the Lord, who are redeemed by the blood of Christ form the Church...He did not give His life for every man, but for many, that is, for those who would believe."

Remigius (A.D. 850): "Since only the elect are saved, it may be accepted that Christ did not come to save all and did not die on the cross for all."

Anselm: "If you die in unbelief, Christ did not die for you."


IRRESISTBLE GRACE

Barnabas (A.D. 70): "God gives repentance to us, introducing us into the incorruptible temple."

Ignatius: "Pray for them, if so by they may repent, which is very difficult; but Jesus Christ, our true life, has the power of this."

Justin Martyr (A.D. 150): "Having sometime before convinced us of the impossibility of our nature to obtain life, hath now shown us the Savior, who is able to save them which otherwise were impossible to be saved...Free will has destroyed us; we are sold into sin."

Irenaeus (A.D. 180): "Not of ourselves, but of God, is the blessing of our salvation...Man, who was before led captive, is taken out of the power of the possessor, according to the mercy of God the Father, and restoring it, gives salvation to it by the Word; that is, by Christ; that many may experimentally learn that not of himself, but by the gift of God, he receives immortality."

Tertullian (A.D. 200): "Do you think, O men, that we should ever have been able to have understood these things in the Scriptures unless by the will of Him that wills all things, we had received grace to understand them?...But by this it is plain, that [faith] is not given to thee by God, because thou dost not ascribe it to Him alone."

Cyprian (A.D. 250): "Whatsoever is grateful is to be ascribed not to man's power, but to God's gift. It is God's, I say, all is God's that we can do. Yea, that in nothing must we glory, since nothing is ours."

Arnobius (A.D. 303): "You place the salvation of your souls in yourselves, and trust that you may be made gods by your inward endeavor, yet it is not our own power to reach things above."

Lactantius (A.D. 320): "The vistory lies in the will of God, not in thine own. To overcome is not in our power."

Athanasius (A.D. 350): "To believe is not ours, or in our power, but the Spirit's who is in us, and abides in us."

Jerome (A.D. 390): "This is the chief righteousness of man, to reckon that whatsoever power he can have, is not his own, but the Lord's who gives it...See how great is the help of God, and how frail the condition of man that we cannot by any means fulfill this, that we repent, unless the Lord first convert us...When [Jesus] says, 'No man can come to Me,' He breaks the proud liberty of free will; for man can desire nothing, and in vain he endeavors...Where is the proud boasting of free will?...We pray in vain if it is in our own will. Why should men pray for that from the Lord which they have in the power of their own free will?"

Augustine (A.D. 370): "Faith itself is to be attributed to God...Faith is made a gift. These men, however, attribute faith to free will, so grace is rendered to faith not as a gratuitous gift, but as a debt...They must cease from saying this."


PERSEVERANCE OF THE SAINTS

Clement Of Rome (A.D. 69): "It is the will of God that all whom He loves should partake of repentance, and so not perish with the unbelieving and impenitent. He has established it by His almighty will. But if any of those whom God wills should partake of the grace of repentance, should afterwards perish, where is His almighty will? And how is this matter settled and established by such a will of His?"

Clement Of Alexandria (A.D. 190): "Such a soul [of a Christian] shall never at any time be separated from God...Faith, I say, is something divine, which cannot be pulled asunder by any other worldly friendship, nor be dissolved by present fear."

Tertullian: "God forbid that we should believe that the soul of any saint should be drawn out by the devil...For what is of God is never extinguished."

Augustine: "Of these believers no one perishes, because they were all elected. And they were elected because they were called according to the purpose--the purpose, however, not their own, but God's...Obedience then is God's gift...To this, indeed, we are not able to deny, that perseverance in good, progressing even to the end, is also a great gift of God." Source: Michael Horton, Putting Amazing Back into Grace (Grand Rapids, MI Baker, 2002), Appendix.

 

[CalledOutOne]

I've actually been looking for something like this. Thanks for posting it. Haha

 

[VCViking]

Thanks for posting!

 

[JM]

For a more detailed look at the fathers and a scriptural refutation of the Arminian position look no further then Gill's Cause of God and Truth.

Gill's Archive

 

[JM]

Gill's work is priceless! It saves you time looking through the fathers for quotations on subjects dear to our Reformed/Calvinistic hearts. Using Gill I found a source for a quote in the op, looked it up in a more modern translation and post it for your edification.

Greetings from,

"Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church which is at Ephesus, in Asia, deservedly most happy, being blessed in the greatness and fullness of God the Father, and predestinated before the beginning of time, that it should be always for an enduring and unchangeable glory, being united and elected through the true passion by the will of the Father, and Jesus Christ, our God: Abundant happiness through Jesus Christ, and His undefiled grace."

 

[VCViking]

Gill's work is priceless! It saves you time looking through the fathers for quotations on subjects dear to our Reformed/Calvinistic hearts. Using Gill I found a source for a quote in the op, looked it up in a more modern translation and post it for your edification.

Greetings from,

"Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church which is at Ephesus, in Asia, deservedly most happy, being blessed in the greatness and fullness of God the Father, and predestinated before the beginning of time, that it should be always for an enduring and unchangeable glory, being united and elected through the true passion by the will of the Father, and Jesus Christ, our God: Abundant happiness through Jesus Christ, and His undefiled grace."

That's awesome!

 

[Butch5]

Calvinism Declared By The Church Fathers

TOTAL DEPRAVITY

Barnabas (A.D. 70): "Learn: before we believed in God, the habitation of our heart was corrupt and weak."

Ignatius (A.D. 110): "They that are carnal cannot do the things that are spiritual...Nor can the unbelievers do the things of belief."

Justin Martyr (A.D. 150): "Mankind by Adam fell under death, and the deception of the serpent; we are born sinners...No good thing dwells in us...For neither by nature, nor by human understanding is it possible for me to acquire the knowledge of things so great and so divine, but by the energy of the Divine Spirit...Of ourselves it is impossible to enter the kingdom of God...He has convicted us of the impossibility of our nature to obtain life...Free will has destroyed us; we who were free are become slaves and for our sin are sold...Being pressed down by our sins, we cannot move upward toward God; we are like birds who have wings, but are unable to fly."

Clement Of Alexandria (A.D. 190): "The soul cannot rise nor fly, nor be lifted up above the things that are on high, without special grace."

Origen: "Our free will...or human nature is not sufficient to seek God in any manner."

Eusebius (A.D. 330): "The liberty of our will in choosing things that are good is destroyed."

Augustine (A.D. 370): "If, therefore, they are servants of sin (2 Cor. 3:17), why do they boast of free will?...O, man! Learn from the precept what you ought to do; learn from correction, that it is your own fault you have not the power...Let human effort, which perished by Adam, here be silent, and let the grace of God reign by Jesus Christ...What God promises, we ourselves do not through free will of human nature, but He Himself does by grace within us...Men labor to find in our own will something that is our own, and not God's; how can they find it, I know not."


UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION

Clement Of Rome (A.D. 69): "Let us therefore approach Him in holiness of soul, lifting up pure and undefiled hands unto Him, with love towards our gentle and compassionate Father because He made us an elect portion unto Himself...Seeing then that we are the special elect portion of a Holy God, let us do all things that pertain unto holiness...There was given a declaration of blessedness upon them that have been elected by God through Jesus Christ our Lord...Jesus Christ is the hope of the elect..."

Barnabas (A.D. 70): "We are elected to hope, committed by God unto faith, appointed to salvation."

Ignatius: "To the predestined ones before all ages, that is, before the world began, united and elect in a true passion, by the eternal will of the Father..."

Justin Martyr: "In all these discourses I have brought all my proofs out of your own holy and prophetic writings, hoping that some of you may be found of the elect number which through the grace that comes from the Lord of Sabaoth, is left or reserved [set apart] for everlasting salvation."

Irenaeus (A.D. 198): "God hath completed the number which He before determined with Himself, all those who are written, or ordained unto eternal life...Being predestined indeed according to the love of the Father that we would belong to Him forever."

Clement Of Alexandria (A.D. 190): "Through faith the elect of God are saved. The generation of those who seek God is the elect nation, not [an earthly] place, but the congregation of the elect, which I call the Church...If every person had known the truth, they would all have leaped into the way, and there would have been no election...You are those who are chosen from among men and as those who are predestined from among men, and in His own time called, faithful, and elect, those who before the foundation of the world are known intimately by God unto faith; that is, are appointed by Him to faith, grow beyond babyhood."

Cyprian (A.D. 250): "This is therefore the predestination which we faithfully and humbly preach."

Ambrose Of Milan (A.D. 380): "In predestination the Church of God has always existed."

Augustine (A.D. 380): "Here certainly, there is no place for the vain argument of those who defend the foreknowledge of God against the grace of God, and accordingly maintain that we were elected before the foundation of the world because God foreknew that we would be good, not that He Himself would make us good. This is not the language of Him who said, 'You did not choose Me, but I chose you' (John 15:16)."


LIMITED ATONEMENT

Barnabas (A.D. 70): "[Christ speaking] I see that I shall thus offer My flesh for the sins of the new people."

Justin Martyr (A.D. 150): "He endured the sufferings for those men whose souls are [actually] purified from all iniquity...As Jacob served Laban for the cattle that were spotted, and of carious forms, so Christ served even to the cross for men of every kind, of many and various shapes, procuring them by His blood and the mystery of the cross."

Irenaeus (A.D. 180): "He came to save all, all, I say, who through Him are born again unto God, infants, and little ones, and children, and young men, and old men...Jesus is the Savior of them that believe; but the Lord of them that believe not. Wherefore, Christ is introduced in the gospel weary...promising to give His life a ransom, in the room of, many."

Tertullian (A.D. 200): "Christ died for the salvation of His people...for the church."

Cyprian (A.D. 250): "All the sheep which Christ hath sought up by His blood and sufferings are saved...Whosoever shall be found in the blood, and with the mark of Christ shall only escape...He redeemed the believers with the price of His own blood...Let him be afraid to die who is not reckoned to have any part in the cross and sufferings of Christ."

Lactantius (A.D. 320): "He was to suffer and be slain for the salvation of many people...who having suffered death for us, hath made us heirs of the everlasting kingdom, having abdicated and disinherited the people of the Jews...He stretched out His hands in the passion and measured the world, that He might at the very time show that a large people, gathered out of all languages and tribes, should come under His wings, and receive the most great and sublime sign."

Eusebius (A.D. 330): "To what 'us' does he refer, unless to them that beleive in Him? For to them that do not believe in Him, He is the author of their fire and burning. The cause of Christ's coming is the redemption of those that were to be saved by Him."

Julius (A.D. 350): "The Son of God, by the pouring out of His precious blood, redeemed His set apart ones; they are delivered by the blood of Christ."

Hilarion (A.D. 363): "He shall remain in the sight of God forever, having already taken all whom He hath redeemed to be kings of heaven, and co-heirs of eternity, delivering them as the kingdom of God to the Father."

Ambrose (A.D. 380): "Before the foundation of the world, it was God's will that Christ should suffer for our salvation...Can He damn thee, whom He hath redeemed from death, for whom He offered Himself, whose life He knows is the reward of His own death?"

Pacian (A.D. 380): "Much more, He will not allow him that is redeemed to be destroyed, nor will He cast away those whom He has redeemed with a great price."

Epiphanius (A.D. 390): "If you are redeemed...If therefore ye are bought with blood, thou are not the number of them who were bought with blood, O Manes, because thou deniest the blood...He gave His life for His own sheep."

Jerome (A.D. 390): "Christ is sacrificed for the salvation of believers...Not all are redeemed, for not all shall be saved, but the remnant...All those who are redeemed and delivered by Thy blood return to Zion, which Thou hast prepared for Thyself by Thine own blood...Christ came to redeem Zion with His blood. But lest we should think that all are Zion or every one is Zion is truly redeemed of the Lord, who are redeemed by the blood of Christ form the Church...He did not give His life for every man, but for many, that is, for those who would believe."

Remigius (A.D. 850): "Since only the elect are saved, it may be accepted that Christ did not come to save all and did not die on the cross for all."

Anselm: "If you die in unbelief, Christ did not die for you."


IRRESISTBLE GRACE

Barnabas (A.D. 70): "God gives repentance to us, introducing us into the incorruptible temple."

Ignatius: "Pray for them, if so by they may repent, which is very difficult; but Jesus Christ, our true life, has the power of this."

Justin Martyr (A.D. 150): "Having sometime before convinced us of the impossibility of our nature to obtain life, hath now shown us the Savior, who is able to save them which otherwise were impossible to be saved...Free will has destroyed us; we are sold into sin."

Irenaeus (A.D. 180): "Not of ourselves, but of God, is the blessing of our salvation...Man, who was before led captive, is taken out of the power of the possessor, according to the mercy of God the Father, and restoring it, gives salvation to it by the Word; that is, by Christ; that many may experimentally learn that not of himself, but by the gift of God, he receives immortality."

Tertullian (A.D. 200): "Do you think, O men, that we should ever have been able to have understood these things in the Scriptures unless by the will of Him that wills all things, we had received grace to understand them?...But by this it is plain, that [faith] is not given to thee by God, because thou dost not ascribe it to Him alone."

Cyprian (A.D. 250): "Whatsoever is grateful is to be ascribed not to man's power, but to God's gift. It is God's, I say, all is God's that we can do. Yea, that in nothing must we glory, since nothing is ours."

Arnobius (A.D. 303): "You place the salvation of your souls in yourselves, and trust that you may be made gods by your inward endeavor, yet it is not our own power to reach things above."

Lactantius (A.D. 320): "The vistory lies in the will of God, not in thine own. To overcome is not in our power."

Athanasius (A.D. 350): "To believe is not ours, or in our power, but the Spirit's who is in us, and abides in us."

Jerome (A.D. 390): "This is the chief righteousness of man, to reckon that whatsoever power he can have, is not his own, but the Lord's who gives it...See how great is the help of God, and how frail the condition of man that we cannot by any means fulfill this, that we repent, unless the Lord first convert us...When [Jesus] says, 'No man can come to Me,' He breaks the proud liberty of free will; for man can desire nothing, and in vain he endeavors...Where is the proud boasting of free will?...We pray in vain if it is in our own will. Why should men pray for that from the Lord which they have in the power of their own free will?"

Augustine (A.D. 370): "Faith itself is to be attributed to God...Faith is made a gift. These men, however, attribute faith to free will, so grace is rendered to faith not as a gratuitous gift, but as a debt...They must cease from saying this."


PERSEVERANCE OF THE SAINTS

Clement Of Rome (A.D. 69): "It is the will of God that all whom He loves should partake of repentance, and so not perish with the unbelieving and impenitent. He has established it by His almighty will. But if any of those whom God wills should partake of the grace of repentance, should afterwards perish, where is His almighty will? And how is this matter settled and established by such a will of His?"

Clement Of Alexandria (A.D. 190): "Such a soul [of a Christian] shall never at any time be separated from God...Faith, I say, is something divine, which cannot be pulled asunder by any other worldly friendship, nor be dissolved by present fear."

Tertullian: "God forbid that we should believe that the soul of any saint should be drawn out by the devil...For what is of God is never extinguished."

Augustine: "Of these believers no one perishes, because they were all elected. And they were elected because they were called according to the purpose--the purpose, however, not their own, but God's...Obedience then is God's gift...To this, indeed, we are not able to deny, that perseverance in good, progressing even to the end, is also a great gift of God." Source: Michael Horton, Putting Amazing Back into Grace (Grand Rapids, MI Baker, 2002), Appendix.

You really should put these in context, I think this is kind of misleading. None of the Ante-Nicene chruch fathers held to the tulip.

 

[file13]

Well done brother!

Though I do wish it had citations with it....

 

[Butch5]

Context guys! The Ante-Nicene writers did not peach total depravity. I can post more for the rest of the tulip if necessary.

Justin Martyr A.D. 160
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1

In the beginning He made the human race with the power of thought and of choosing the truth and doing right, so that all men are without excuse before God; for they have been born rational and contemplative.
Justin Martyr,
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1

And for this [rite] we have learned from the apostles this reason. Since at our birth we were born without our own knowledge or choice, by our parents coming together, and were brought up in bad habits and wicked training; in order that we may not remain the children of necessity and of ignorance, but may become the children of choice and knowledge, and may obtain in the water the remission of sins formerly committed, there is pronounced over him who chooses to be born again, and has repented of his sins, the name of God the Father and Lord of the universe;
Justin Martyr,
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1

But yet, since He knew that it would be good, He created both angels and men free to do that which is righteous, and He appointed periods of time during which He knew it would be good for them to have the exercise of free-will; and because He likewise knew it would be good, He made general and particular judgments; each one’s freedom of will, however, being guarded.
Tatian A.D. 160
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 2

And each of these two orders of creatures was made free to act as it pleased, not having the nature of good, which again is with God alone, but is brought to perfection in men through their freedom of choice, in order that the bad man may be justly punished, having become depraved through his own fault, but the just man be deservedly praised for his virtuous deeds, since in the exercise of his free choice he refrained from transgressing the will of God. Such is the constitution of things in reference to angels and men. And the power of the Logos, having in itself a faculty to foresee future events, not as 68 fated, but as taking place by the choice of free agents, foretold from time to time the issues of things to come;
Melito A.D. 170
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 8

"There is, therefore, nothing to hinder thee from changing thy evil manner of life, because thou art a free man;
Theophilus A.D. 180
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 2

but if, on the other hand, he should turn to the things of death, disobeying God, he should himself be the cause of death to himself. For God made man free, and with power over himself.
Irenaeus A.D. 180
he Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1

nor, again, does God exercise compulsion upon any one unwilling to accept the exercise of His skill. Those persons, therefore, who have apostatized from the light given by the Father, and transgressed the law of liberty, have done so through their own fault, since they have been created free agents, and possessed of power over themselves.
Irenaeus
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1

But man, being endowed with reason, and in this respect like to God, having been made free in his will, and with power over himself, is himself the cause to himself, that sometimes he becomes wheat, and sometimes chaff. Wherefore also he shall be justly condemned, because, having been created a rational being, he lost the true rationality, and living irrationally, opposed the righteousness of God, giving himself over to every earthly spirit, and serving all lusts;
Clement of Alexandria A.D. 195
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 2

but he applies the name "children" to those who are under the law, who are terrified by fear as children are by bugbears; and "men" to us who are obedient to the Word and masters of ourselves, who have believed, and are saved by voluntary choice, and are rationally, not irrationally, frightened by terror.
Clement of Alexandria
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 2

But we, who have heard by the Scriptures that self-determining choice and refusal have been given by the Lord to men, rest in the infallible criterion of faith, manifesting a willing spirit, since we have chosen life and believe God through His voice.
Tertullian A.D. 210
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 3

This will be the power of the grace of God, more potent indeed than nature, exercising its sway over the faculty that underlies itself within us—even the freedom of our will,
Bardesan A.D. 222
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 8

"Men, on the contrary, are not governed thus; but, whilst in the matters pertaining to their bodies they preserve their nature like animals, in the matters pertaining to their minds they do that which they choose, as those who are free, and endowed with power, and as made in the likeness of God.
Origen A.D.225
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 4

since it seems a possible thing that rational natures, from whom the faculty of free-will is never taken away, may be again subjected to movements of some kind, through the special act of the Lord Himself
Origen
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 4

For a soul is always in possession of free-will, as well when it is in the body as when it is without it; and freedom of will is always directed either to good or evil.
Cyprian A.D. 250
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 5

That the liberty of believing or of not believing is placed in free choice. In Deuteronomy: "Lo, I have set before thy face life and death, good and evil. Choose for thyself life, that thou mayest live." (Deuteronomy 13:19) Also in Isaiah: "And if ye be willing, and hear me, ye shall eat the good of the land.
Methodius A.D. 290
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 6

Because there is nothing evil by nature, but it is by use that evil things become such. So I say, says he, that man was made with a free-will, not as if there were already evil in existence, which he had the power of choosing if he wished, but on account of his capacity of obeying or disobeying God. For this was the meaning of the gift of Free Will. And man after his creation receives a commandment from God; and from this at once rises evil, for he does not obey the divine command; and this alone is evil, namely, disobedience, which had a beginning.
Amobius A.D. 305
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 6

64. But, my opponents ask, if Christ came as the Saviour of men, as you say, why does He not, with uniform benevolence, free all without exception? I reply, does not He free all alike who invites all alike? or does He thrust back or repel any one from the kindness of the Supreme who gives to all alike the power of coming to Him,—to men of high rank, to the meanest slaves, to women, to boys? To all, He says, the fountain of life is open, and no one is hindered or kept back from drinking. If you are so fastidious as to spurn the kindly offered gift, nay, more, if your wisdom is so great that you term those things which are offered by Christ ridiculous and absurd, why should He keep on inviting you, while His only duty is to make the enjoyment of His bounty depend upon your own free choice?
Disputation between Archelaus and Manes A.D. 320
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 6

This account also indicates that rational creatures have been entrusted with free-will, in virtue of which they also admit of conversions. And consequently there cannot be two unbegotten natures.
Alexander of Alexandria A.D. 324
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 6

Natural will is the free faculty of every intelligent nature as having nothing involuntary which is in respect of its essence.

 

[JM]

Butch, context is important. I don't see how your post changes anything. If anything it points out the inconsistencies in their thinking. One minute confirming total inability and the next talking about free will (without defining it, mind you).

It proves we can find "calvinism" in the early church, fragmented and in pieces. It also proves we should NOT trust the fathers completely.

The fathers in the early church are often referenced when discussing doctrine but to paraphrase Martin Luther, they quote the fathers…let them, for we have one Father which is in heaven.

Quote, The apostolic Fathers frequently mention that salvation was through the blood of Christ. Clement states: “Let us fix our eyes on the blood of Christ and understand how precious it is unto His Father, because being shed for our salvation it won for the whole world the grace of repentance” (Cor. 7; cf. Cor. 23, 49; Barnabas 5). Clement’s statement also seems to suggest unlimited atonement. Ignatius indicates it is faith in the blood of Christ that procures salvation (Smyrn. 6). Repentance is also emphasized (2 Clement 13; 19).

What else did the early church teach?
​

A prominent emphasis, however, is the necessity of works in salvation. In a lengthy discussion Clement emphasizes the importance of obedience in procuring salvation, indicating Lot was saved because of his hospitality (Cor. 11) as was Rahab (Cor. 12). Salvation also involves doing the will of the Father, keeping the flesh pure, and guarding the commandments of the Lord (2 Clement 8). Love is also necessary for entrance into the kingdom (2 Clement 9) as is the necessity of bidding farewell to worldly enjoyments and refusing evil lusts (2 Clement 16). Practicing righteousness is also essential (2 Clement 19).

Paul Enns notes very clearly;
​

These statements indicate a commendable emphasis on a godly walk, but at the same time confuse the salvation message and detract from the free grace of God. This is one of many doctrinal errors that surfaced very early in the history of Christian thought. [The Moody Handbook of Theology, page 411]

John Gill nails it right here:

The school at Alexandria, from whence came several of the Christian doctors, as Panta-nus, Clemens, Origen, &c served very much to corrupt the simplicity of the gospel; for though mended the Platonic philosophy, it marred the Christian doctrine; and laid the foundation for Arianism and Pelagianism, which in after-times to greatly disturbed the church of God. As many of the fathers of the Christian church were originally Pagans, they were better skilled in demolishing Paganism, than in building up Christianity ; and indeed they set themselves more to destroy the one, than to illustrate and confirm the other: there was a purity in their lives, but a want of clearness, accuracy, and consistence in their doctrines : it would be endless to relate how much the Christian doctrine was obscured by the heretics that rose up in the latter part of the first century, and in the second, as well as after by Sabed lians, Photinians, Samosatenians, Arians, Eutychians, Nestorians, Macedonians, Pelagians, &c. though God was pleased to raise up instruments to stop their progress, and preserve the truth, and sometimes very eminent ones; as Athanasius against the Arians, and Austin against the Pelagians. The gospel in its simplicity, through the power of divine grace attending it, made its way into the gentile world, in these first centuries, with great success; and paganism decreased before it; and which in the times of Constantine received a fatal blow in the Roman Empire; and yet by degrees pagan rites and ceremonies were introduced into the Christian church ; and what with them, and error in doctrine, and other things concurring, made way for the man of sin to appear; and that mystery of iniquity, which had been secretly working from the times of the apostles, to shew its head openly; and brought in the darkness of popery upon almost all that bore the Christian name.

 

[Butch5]

Butch, context is important. I don't see how your post changes anything. If anything it points out the inconsistencies in their thinking. One minute confirming total inability and the next talking about free will (without defining it, mind you).

It proves the utter uselessness of proof-texting. Christians are famous for proof -texting. They come up with a belief and then find passages of Scripture to support it. The "ONLY" way to understand the Scriptures is to stop proof-texting and read them in context.

It proves we can find "calvinism" in the early church, fragmented and in pieces. It also proves we should NOT trust the fathers completely.

It proves no such thing. What it proves is the statement I made above, that Christians can take a belief and find proof-texts they think support it.

The fathers in the early church are often referenced when discussing doctrine but to paraphrase Martin Luther, they quote the fathers…let them, for we have one Father which is in heaven.

So, Luther had more understanding of the gospel than those men who were taught by the apostles? Really?

Quote,

The apostolic Fathers frequently mention that salvation was through the blood of Christ. Clement states: “Let us fix our eyes on the blood of Christ and understand how precious it is unto His Father, because being shed for our salvation it won for the whole world the grace of repentance” (Cor. 7; cf. Cor. 23, 49; Barnabas 5). Clement’s statement also seems to suggest unlimited atonement. Ignatius indicates it is faith in the blood of Christ that procures salvation (Smyrn. 6). Repentance is also emphasized (2 Clement 13; 19).

There's no conflict there unless one confuses redemption and salvation.

What else did the early church teach?

​

A prominent emphasis, however, is the necessity of works in salvation. In a lengthy discussion Clement emphasizes the importance of obedience in procuring salvation, indicating Lot was saved because of his hospitality (Cor. 11) as was Rahab (Cor. 12). Salvation also involves doing the will of the Father, keeping the flesh pure, and guarding the commandments of the Lord (2 Clement 8). Love is also necessary for entrance into the kingdom (2 Clement 9) as is the necessity of bidding farewell to worldly enjoyments and refusing evil lusts (2 Clement 16). Practicing righteousness is also essential (2 Clement 19).

OK, what's the problem here? I know your doctrine forces you to reject this but what he said is found in the Scriptures. The idea that works play no role in salvation came from Luther's misunderstanding of the apostle Paul's writings. That's one of the things that makes his comment about the fathers so ironic. He claims they didn't understand when in fact it is he who didn't understand.

Paul Enns notes very clearly;

​

These statements indicate a commendable emphasis on a godly walk, but at the same time confuse the salvation message and detract from the free grace of God. This is one of many doctrinal errors that surfaced very early in the history of Christian thought. [The Moody Handbook of Theology, page 411]

The doctrinal error isn't in the early writers, it's in these modern writers.

John Gill nails it right here:

The school at Alexandria, from whence came several of the Christian doctors, as Panta-nus, Clemens, Origen, &c served very much to corrupt the simplicity of the gospel; for though mended the Platonic philosophy, it marred the Christian doctrine; and laid the foundation for Arianism and Pelagianism, which in after-times to greatly disturbed the church of God. As many of the fathers of the Christian church were originally Pagans, they were better skilled in demolishing Paganism, than in building up Christianity ; and indeed they set themselves more to destroy the one, than to illustrate and confirm the other: there was a purity in their lives, but a want of clearness, accuracy, and consistence in their doctrines : it would be endless to relate how much the Christian doctrine was obscured by the heretics that rose up in the latter part of the first century, and in the second, as well as after by Sabed lians, Photinians, Samosatenians, Arians, Eutychians, Nestorians, Macedonians, Pelagians, &c. though God was pleased to raise up instruments to stop their progress, and preserve the truth, and sometimes very eminent ones; as Athanasius against the Arians, and Austin against the Pelagians. The gospel in its simplicity, through the power of divine grace attending it, made its way into the gentile world, in these first centuries, with great success; and paganism decreased before it; and which in the times of Constantine received a fatal blow in the Roman Empire; and yet by degrees pagan rites and ceremonies were introduced into the Christian church ; and what with them, and error in doctrine, and other things concurring, made way for the man of sin to appear; and that mystery of iniquity, which had been secretly working from the times of the apostles, to shew its head openly; and brought in the darkness of popery upon almost all that bore the Christian name.

Gill? I don't think he had any better an understanding of the Scriptures than did Luther. To think that Luther and Gill had a better understanding of the gospel then the men who were with the apostles is to me, ridiculous. I mean come on, they didn't have a proper understanding of the atonement.

 

[JM]

It proves the utter uselessness of proof-texting. Christians are famous for proof -texting. They come up with a belief and then find passages of Scripture to support it. The "ONLY" way to understand the Scriptures is to stop proof-texting and read them in context.

Be careful, that sword cuts both ways. You responded with "proof-texting" to supposedly prove your point, which you admit is "utter uselessness" after doing so.

It proves no such thing. What it proves is the statement I made above, that Christians can take a belief and find proof-texts they think support it.

Please, you are now being as inconsistent as the fathers.

So, Luther had more understanding of the gospel than those men who were taught by the apostles? Really?

He had the benefit of hundreds of years of church history. He had the benefit of a complete canon. Really.

His insights were so powerful they have swayed the Roman Catholic church to shift from their pronouncements at Trent to what we now find in their modern catechisms. Didn't the Pope recently talk about removing the anathema from Luther? lol

There's no conflict there unless one confuses redemption and salvation.

Huh, you are confused. Especially since you are not in the right forum to be arguing this point.

OK, what's the problem here? I know your doctrine forces you to reject this but what he said is found in the Scriptures.

No problem at all. I was giving context to the quote that followed.

The idea that works play no role in salvation came from Luther's misunderstanding of the apostle Paul's writings. That's one of the things that makes his comment about the fathers so ironic. He claims they didn't understand when in fact it is he who didn't understand.

Actually, you have misunderstood Luther's teaching on the subject. It is a common saying among the Lutherans and Reformed that salvation is by grace alone but grace is never alone. Let's face it, we cannot rely on the early church for doctrine, you made that very, very clear.

The doctrinal error isn't in the early writers, it's in these modern writers.

To make such a blanket statement shows some ignorance on your part. They were mightily inconsistent.

Gill? I don't think he had any better an understanding of the Scriptures than did Luther. To think that Luther and Gill had a better understanding of the gospel then the men who were with the apostles is to me, ridiculous. I mean come on, they didn't have a proper understanding of the atonement.

You are cherry picking, proof-texing the fathers to showcase your doctrine. You already admit that it is utter uselessness to do so. Nice try.

You can make them say anything...

jm

 

[Butch5]

Be careful, that sword cuts both ways. You responded with "proof-texting" to supposedly prove your point, which you admit is "utter uselessness" after doing so.

Please, you are now being as inconsistent as the fathers.

He had the benefit of hundreds of years of church history. He had the benefit of a complete canon. Really.

His insights were so powerful they have swayed the Roman Catholic church to shift from their pronouncements at Trent to what we now find in their modern catechisms. Didn't the Pope recently talk about removing the anathema from Luther? lol

Huh, you are confused. Especially since you are not in the right forum to be arguing this point.

No problem at all. I was giving context to the quote that followed.

Actually, you have misunderstood Luther's teaching on the subject. It is a common saying among the Lutherans and Reformed that salvation is by grace alone but grace is never alone. Let's face it, we cannot rely on the early church for doctrine, you made that very, very clear.

To make such a blanket statement shows some ignorance on your part. They were mightily inconsistent.

You are cherry picking, proof-texing the fathers to showcase your doctrine. You already admit that it is utter uselessness to do so. Nice try.

You can make them say anything...

jm

That was my point! You can make them say anything just as you can do with the Scriptures. That's why it is imperative to read in context and not proof-text.

Proof-texting is the reason there are over 19,000 sects and denominations within Protestant Christianity. Anyone who reads Justin or Irenaeus can easily see what they believed when the read them in context. I mean I can argue that a person is saved by hope by proof-texting the Scriptures. If Christians would read the Scriptures in context and spend a little time to learn the historical background of the New Testament, the vast majority would be in agreement.

 

[JM]

"The church fathers have written big works on the virtues without prating; even a scholarly treatise cannot exhaust the profundity of one virtue. For true devotion, however, it is not necessary to read the excellent works of the church fathers, but only to understand the one basic rule of the Bible." - John Calvin

Keep in mind you are arguing a non-Reformed view in the Reformed forum, rather poorly, but that is the case. I started this thread, not to create a polemic, but to edify. We refer to the scriptures to settle all matters of faith. If we see scriptural teaching among the fathers we applaud them but even they are judged by the word of God. Gill's statement is good and points out the flaw of appealing the fathers for doctrine.

A good statement of the biblical doctrine of scripture can be found in a tabular comparison of the Westminster and London Baptist Confession below.

Tabular Comparison of 1646 WCF and 1689 LBCF

The Reformed view I posted above will be restated by William Cunningham who wrote:

"The substance of the matter is this: The apostolical fathers generally use the language of the Scriptures upon these subjects, while they scarcely make any statements which afford us materials for deciding in what precise sense they understood them. They leave the matter very much where Scripture leaves it, and where, but for the rise of errors needing to be contradicted and opposed, it might still have been left. He who sees Augustinian or Calvinistic doctrines clearly and explicitly taught in the Bible, will have no difficulty in seeing also plain traces of them at least in the works of the apostolic fathers; and he who can pervert the statements of Scripture into an anti-Calvinistic sense, may, by the same process, and with equal ease, distort the apostolic fathers." - HISTORICAL THEOLOGY, VOLUME 1, p.180

 

[Butch5]

"The church fathers have written big works on the virtues without prating; even a scholarly treatise cannot exhaust the profundity of one virtue. For true devotion, however, it is not necessary to read the excellent works of the church fathers, but only to understand the one basic rule of the Bible." - John Calvin

It's a logical fallacy to quote Calvin as if he was a source of truth. Calvin's opinion is of no greater value than that of the fathers. In my opinion it's much less.

Keep in mind you are arguing a non-Reformed view in the Reformed forum, rather poorly, but that is the case. I started this thread, not to create a polemic, but to edify. We refer to the scriptures to settle all matters of faith. If we see scriptural teaching among the fathers we applaud them but even they are judged by the word of God. Gill's statement is good and points out the flaw of appealing the fathers for doctrine.

Exactly what doctrine is it that I am arguing? I've not put one forth. However, it's ironic that Gill should make such a statement with the fact that you have been quoting Reformers.

I simply pointed out that proof-texting the fathers does not support Calvinism or show that they supported it.

A good statement of the biblical doctrine of scripture can be found in a tabular comparison of the Westminster and London Baptist Confession below.

Tabular Comparison of 1646 WCF and 1689 LBCF

Why exactly would I need that to get a good statement of Biblical doctrine. Can't I simply get it from the Scriptures?

The Reformed view I posted above will be restated by William Cunningham who wrote:

"The substance of the matter is this: The apostolical fathers generally use the language of the Scriptures upon these subjects, while they scarcely make any statements which afford us materials for deciding in what precise sense they understood them. They leave the matter very much where Scripture leaves it, and where, but for the rise of errors needing to be contradicted and opposed, it might still have been left. He who sees Augustinian or Calvinistic doctrines clearly and explicitly taught in the Bible, will have no difficulty in seeing also plain traces of them at least in the works of the apostolic fathers; and he who can pervert the statements of Scripture into an anti-Calvinistic sense, may, by the same process, and with equal ease, distort the apostolic fathers." - HISTORICAL THEOLOGY, VOLUME 1, p.180

Again, another Reformer quote. I beg to differ the Apostolic fathers don't leave us wondering about what they believe. All one needs to do is read them in context. I suspect the author says that because when understood in context they don't agree with his doctrine.

I find it amazing how these Reformers that you've posted keep saying how the fathers were in error. It's as if they think they've somehow come to a greater understanding than the fathers. The fact that they find themselves in disagreement with the fathers should send up read flags since it is highly probably that those who were with the apostles are much more likely to have a proper understanding of the apostolic teaching than the Reformers

 

[VCViking]

Christians are famous for proof -texting. They come up with... that Christians can take a belief and find proof-texts they think support it.

Are you not a Christian?

 

[JM]

It's a logical fallacy to quote Calvin as if he was a source of truth. Calvin's opinion is of no greater value than that of the fathers. In my opinion it's much less.

Which fallacy? Appealing to authority? Who is your authority? Oh, can't appeal to that authority because it would be circular...nice. Appealing to your own opinion, priceless.

Exactly what doctrine is it that I am arguing? I've not put one forth.

Your view of the church fathers, Protestantism and the scriptures.

However, it's ironic that Gill should make such a statement with the fact that you have been quoting Reformers.

For those just tuning in here's the comment from Gill:

"The school at Alexandria, from whence came several of the Christian doctors, as Panta-nus, Clemens, Origen, &c served very much to corrupt the simplicity of the gospel; for though mended the Platonic philosophy, it marred the Christian doctrine; and laid the foundation for Arianism and Pelagianism, which in after-times to greatly disturbed the church of God. As many of the fathers of the Christian church were originally Pagans, they were better skilled in demolishing Paganism, than in building up Christianity ; and indeed they set themselves more to destroy the one, than to illustrate and confirm the other: there was a purity in their lives, but a want of clearness, accuracy, and consistence in their doctrines : it would be endless to relate how much the Christian doctrine was obscured by the heretics that rose up in the latter part of the first century, and in the second, as well as after by Sabed lians, Photinians, Samosatenians, Arians, Eutychians, Nestorians, Macedonians, Pelagians, &c. though God was pleased to raise up instruments to stop their progress, and preserve the truth, and sometimes very eminent ones; as Athanasius against the Arians, and Austin against the Pelagians. The gospel in its simplicity, through the power of divine grace attending it, made its way into the gentile world, in these first centuries, with great success; and paganism decreased before it; and which in the times of Constantine received a fatal blow in the Roman Empire; and yet by degrees pagan rites and ceremonies were introduced into the Christian church ; and what with them, and error in doctrine, and other things concurring, made way for the man of sin to appear; and that mystery of iniquity, which had been secretly working from the times of the apostles, to shew its head openly; and brought in the darkness of popery upon almost all that bore the Christian name."

Please note that Gill rightly acknowledges the fathers and their important place in church history. I quote the Reformers in this Reformed forum in the same manner.

I simply pointed out that proof-texting the fathers does not support Calvinism or show that they supported it.

What you call Calvinism is a systemized theology from scripture and not the fathers. So yah, we find elements of Calvinism in the fathers along with error.

Why exactly would I need that to get a good statement of Biblical doctrine. Can't I simply get it from the Scriptures?

Such a post modernist! If I ask you what you believe about the Bible you would tell me, make a confession of faith so to speak and as we can see already from what you posted you will not "simply get it from the scriptures."

Again, another Reformer quote. I beg to differ the Apostolic fathers don't leave us wondering about what they believe. All one needs to do is read them in context. I suspect the author says that because when understood in context they don't agree with his doctrine.

Remember this, "It proves the utter uselessness of proof-texting. Christians are famous for proof -texting. They come up with a belief and then find passages of Scripture to support it. The "ONLY" way to understand the Scriptures is to stop proof-texting and read them in context."

Now apply that to your own statement about the fathers. You can beg to differ all you like because it is "utter uselessness" and you'll only proof-text...if you are a Christian.

I find it amazing how these Reformers that you've posted keep saying how the fathers were in error. It's as if they think they've somehow come to a greater understanding than the fathers.

Clearly, from the quotations I provided and those found in Luther, Calvin and Gill's works you can see the fathers often wrote contrary things. Their traditions contradicted each other and that is why we see a move in the early church to appeal to scripture to settle disputes. Ignatius, Polycarp, Clement, the Didache, Barnabus, Irenaeus (knew Polycarp who was a disciple of the apostle John), Tertullian, etc. all appealed to scripture! They defend the faith from scripture as we do now. The scriptures are a reliable snap shot of history, God breathed and preserved.

The fact that they find themselves in disagreement with the fathers should send up read flags since it is highly probably that those who were with the apostles are much more likely to have a proper understanding of the apostolic teaching than the Reformers

Remember the warning you gave all of us dolts, "It proves the utter uselessness of proof-texting. Christians are famous for proof -texting. They come up with a belief and then find passages of Scripture to support it. The "ONLY" way to understand the Scriptures is to stop proof-texting and read them in context."

You are simply ignoring the witness of scripture and church history. You are proof-texting.

 

[Butch5]

Are you not a Christian?

Yes, I am.

 

[Butch5]

Which fallacy? Appealing to authority? Who is your authority? Oh, can't appeal to that authority because it would be circular...nice. Appealing to your own opinion, priceless.

I've not appealed to any authority. You are the one appealing to others, the Reformers.

Your view of the church fathers, Protestantism and the scriptures.

I've not given my view. I simply pointed out that proof-texting doesn't prove anything.

For those just tuning in here's the comment from Gill:

"The school at Alexandria, from whence came several of the Christian doctors, as Panta-nus, Clemens, Origen, &c served very much to corrupt the simplicity of the gospel; for though mended the Platonic philosophy, it marred the Christian doctrine; and laid the foundation for Arianism and Pelagianism, which in after-times to greatly disturbed the church of God. As many of the fathers of the Christian church were originally Pagans, they were better skilled in demolishing Paganism, than in building up Christianity ; and indeed they set themselves more to destroy the one, than to illustrate and confirm the other: there was a purity in their lives, but a want of clearness, accuracy, and consistence in their doctrines : it would be endless to relate how much the Christian doctrine was obscured by the heretics that rose up in the latter part of the first century, and in the second, as well as after by Sabed lians, Photinians, Samosatenians, Arians, Eutychians, Nestorians, Macedonians, Pelagians, &c. though God was pleased to raise up instruments to stop their progress, and preserve the truth, and sometimes very eminent ones; as Athanasius against the Arians, and Austin against the Pelagians. The gospel in its simplicity, through the power of divine grace attending it, made its way into the gentile world, in these first centuries, with great success; and paganism decreased before it; and which in the times of Constantine received a fatal blow in the Roman Empire; and yet by degrees pagan rites and ceremonies were introduced into the Christian church ; and what with them, and error in doctrine, and other things concurring, made way for the man of sin to appear; and that mystery of iniquity, which had been secretly working from the times of the apostles, to shew its head openly; and brought in the darkness of popery upon almost all that bore the Christian name."

Please note that Gill rightly acknowledges the fathers and their important place in church history. I quote the Reformers in this Reformed forum in the same manner.

How exactly did he rightly acknowledge them?

What you call Calvinism is a systemized theology from scripture and not the fathers. So yah, we find elements of Calvinism in the fathers along with error.

No, Calvinism is a systematized theology from inference.

Such a post modernist! If I ask you what you believe about the Bible you would tell me, make a confession of faith so to speak and as we can see already from what you posted you will not "simply get it from the scriptures."

So, you know what I think? I'm beginning to understand the Reformers

Remember this, "It proves the utter uselessness of proof-texting. Christians are famous for proof -texting. They come up with a belief and then find passages of Scripture to support it. The "ONLY" way to understand the Scriptures is to stop proof-texting and read them in context."

Now apply that to your own statement about the fathers. You can beg to differ all you like because it is "utter uselessness" and you'll only proof-text...if you are a Christian.

I don't have to proof-text, I can just read them in context.

Clearly, from the quotations I provided and those found in Luther, Calvin and Gill's works you can see the fathers often wrote contrary things. Their traditions contradicted each other and that is why we see a move in the early church to appeal to scripture to settle disputes. Ignatius, Polycarp, Clement, the Didache, Barnabus, Irenaeus (knew Polycarp who was a disciple of the apostle John), Tertullian, etc. all appealed to scripture! They defend the faith from scripture as we do now. The scriptures are a reliable snap shot of history, God breathed and preserved.

There's a big difference. Ignatius, Polycarp, and Clement were actually with the apostles. You say you defend the faith from the Scriptures, but, in reality you are defending the faith from your understanding of the Scriptures. You, however, were not trained by an apostle, Ignatius, Polycarp and Clement were. So, if you understand the Scriptures incorrectly then you're not really defending the Scriptures, correct?

Remember the warning you gave all of us dolts, "It proves the utter uselessness of proof-texting. Christians are famous for proof -texting. They come up with a belief and then find passages of Scripture to support it. The "ONLY" way to understand the Scriptures is to stop proof-texting and read them in context."

You are simply ignoring the witness of scripture and church history. You are proof-texting.

I didn't call anyone names. I'm not ignoring the witness of Scripture or church history and I can't be proof-texting because put forth any doctrine.

 

[Faith.Man]

Gill's work is priceless! It saves you time looking through the fathers for quotations on subjects dear to our Reformed/Calvinistic hearts. Using Gill I found a source for a quote in the op, looked it up in a more modern translation and post it for your edification.

Greetings from,

"Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church which is at Ephesus, in Asia, deservedly most happy, being blessed in the greatness and fullness of God the Father, and predestinated before the beginning of time, that it should be always for an enduring and unchangeable glory, being united and elected through the true passion by the will of the Father, and Jesus Christ, our God: Abundant happiness through Jesus Christ, and His undefiled grace."

Thank you, this is great. Is it just me or does Ignatius sound like he could have been a contemporary of Paul?