Was the Pre-Nicene Church Orthodox?

[RevelationTestament]

Nope.
No creeds.
No doctrine of the trinity.
No paid ministry.
No formal robes.

 

[gasman64]

Nope.
No creeds.
No doctrine of the trinity.
No paid ministry.
No formal robes.

What a great question. They were in my understanding home churches. Hard to be pompous with close relatives and friends who will take the opportunity to burst any pomposity out of us.

 

[Wayward Wanderer]

To my understanding the earliest christian communities were largely regional, each with their own understandings. Though it does seem like there were some common threads through their beliefs, I find it interesting that for a long time the group that became orthodox was by and large a minority. I also think that some of the traits of the orthodox church were useful for mass appeal, I have always suspected that Constantine's legalization of the church was far more a practical matter for him than a spiritual one.

I find the amount that we have learned about the early faith in the past few decades fascinating, for the longest time the voices of the early heresy hunters were what we had to go on, of course those shouting the loudest are usually the ones heard.

 

[gasman64]

To my understanding the earliest christian communities were largely regional, each with their own understandings. Though it does seem like there were some common threads through their beliefs, I find it interesting that for a long time the group that became orthodox was by and large a minority. I also think that some of the traits of the orthodox church were useful for mass appeal, I have always suspected that Constantine's legalization of the church was far more a practical matter for him than a spiritual one.

I find the amount that we have learned about the early faith in the past few decades fascinating, for the longest time the voices of the early heresy hunters were what we had to go on, of course those shouting the loudest are usually the ones heard.

There were so many christian cults at the time of Constantine, the idea of one voice and expression would have suited his roman mindset which liked a more ordered way. I think the Marcion riots in Rome forced his hand some what.

 

[RevelationTestament]

To my understanding the earliest christian communities were largely regional, each with their own understandings. Though it does seem like there were some common threads through their beliefs, I find it interesting that for a long time the group that became orthodox was by and large a minority. I also think that some of the traits of the orthodox church were useful for mass appeal, I have always suspected that Constantine's legalization of the church was far more a practical matter for him than a spiritual one.

I find the amount that we have learned about the early faith in the past few decades fascinating, for the longest time the voices of the early heresy hunters were what we had to go on, of course those shouting the loudest are usually the ones heard.

You make some good observations. The early church was converted to Christ, but Christ really hadn't settled various questions people had - how He was begotten became a question. The eastern church came to mostly believe that men could follow Christ, and literally be like Him, although how this could be done was a question of debate. You are also right that there were various sects with various ideas on the subject - monarchism, etc. While eventually, a static trinitarian view began to take hold, it seemed a definite minority at first. The Hellenistic idea of an immutable God began to take hold. But Christ was anything but immutable. His righteousness didn't change, like God, but the scriptures are full of the idea that He became the Son by the oath of His Father, and was God's inheritor, would inherit the government, would be called the everlasting Father, etc. Orthodoxy totally lost these scriptural ideas and/or depresses them, and covers up the fact that the earliest church leaders didn't really teach a trinity - even Tertullian, the one who coined "trinity" said there was a time when the Son was not the Son. By the time of Constantine, Arius was probably the most outspoken of the prior camp, but I think the bishops were eager to have Christianity accepted by the empire, and were willing to try to reach some agreement in order to make this possible. Further, I believe Constantine was feared. After all, those who opposed him had a way of disappearing - including his own brother-in-law, nephew, and wife.... Constantine painted himself as the 13th apostle in the churches he built, but still put up statues of the Roman gods in his new city of Constantinople, and still had the Roman sun god, sol invictus, on his coinage, etc. He also accepted the office of the chief roman pagan priest, Pontifex Maximus, and delegated over the Nicene Council as such rather than as a baptized Christian - being unbaptized til near his death.
Further, the Nicene creed became forced on the people by Roman law under subsequent emperors, and had to be read in the churches - hence the custom that survives til today in the churches. I think reading scriptures would be more profitable.
Peace

 

[Phantasman]

Nope.
No creeds.
No doctrine of the trinity.
No paid ministry.
No formal robes.

Creeds are of men. Trinity is a belief inspired by men.. Man should not pay for truth that was given freely. Robes only cover the outside and don't have any bearing what's inside.

They probably were.

 

[Phantasman]

You make some good observations. The early church was converted to Christ, but Christ really hadn't settled various questions people had - how He was begotten became a question. The eastern church came to mostly believe that men could follow Christ, and literally be like Him, although how this could be done was a question of debate. You are also right that there were various sects with various ideas on the subject - monarchism, etc. While eventually, a static trinitarian view began to take hold, it seemed a definite minority at first. The Hellenistic idea of an immutable God began to take hold. But Christ was anything but immutable. His righteousness didn't change, like God, but the scriptures are full of the idea that He became the Son by the oath of His Father, and was God's inheritor, would inherit the government, would be called the everlasting Father, etc. Orthodoxy totally lost these scriptural ideas and/or depresses them, and covers up the fact that the earliest church leaders didn't really teach a trinity - even Tertullian, the one who coined "trinity" said there was a time when the Son was not the Son. By the time of Constantine, Arius was probably the most outspoken of the prior camp, but I think the bishops were eager to have Christianity accepted by the empire, and were willing to try to reach some agreement in order to make this possible. Further, I believe Constantine was feared. After all, those who opposed him had a way of disappearing - including his own brother-in-law, nephew, and wife.... Constantine painted himself as the 13th apostle in the churches he built, but still put up statues of the Roman gods in his new city of Constantinople, and still had the Roman sun god, sol invictus, on his coinage, etc. He also accepted the office of the chief roman pagan priest, Pontifex Maximus, and delegated over the Nicene Council as such rather than as a baptized Christian - being unbaptized til near his death.
Further, the Nicene creed became forced on the people by Roman law under subsequent emperors, and had to be read in the churches - hence the custom that survives til today in the churches. I think reading scriptures would be more profitable.
Peace

I share this. Men with power (Bishops) finally accepting a truce with Rome as long as Rome could have it's say.

 

[SilentShadow100]

Nope.
No creeds.
No doctrine of the trinity.
No paid ministry.
No formal robes.

No creeds?
Here is one:
"Yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist"-1 Corinthians 8:6



The trinity is located in John 1:1, John 10:30, John 20:28, Isaiah 9:6, John 8:58, Titus 2:13, and more.

Formal robes are something that elders wore in that region at that time. To say they didn't have them without any evidence is going against what one would expect an eastern church to have.

 

[SilentShadow100]

Creeds are of men. Trinity is a belief inspired by men.. Man should not pay for truth that was given freely. Robes only cover the outside and don't have any bearing what's inside.

They probably were.

Creeds are simply professions of one's faith.

The trinity is a belief expressed throughout the old and new testament. If you believe Jesus is your savior, you must believe he is God as Isaiah 43:11 says only God can be our savior.

The Bible expresses no doctrine of forced payment to churches in the New Testament, but it does command us to give to people as we feel necessary. Churches are not running themselves, and just like any other building, if you want a church, they need money to run it.

That doesn't make robes bad.

 

[RevelationTestament]

..................................................Bible vs Roman Creeds/Trinitarianism

Invites men to come freely (godly love)...................................Use of fear, compulsion, & persecution (adversary)
Bible - Covenant with God, Isaiah 61:6-8.........................................Roman Creeds - words from where?
"man shall live by every word of God" Luke 4:4.................... promulgated under the maximum priest of Roman gods
Rome is the Beast of Daniel 7:19-20 ................................(pontifex = builder of the way/roads) Pontifex Maximus office
and Rev 13, Rev 17 Woman on beast ...............................of Constantine and later Bishop of Rome (Roman Church)
Mystery, Babylon 1 Peter 5:13, Rev 17:5................................Babylon was beast of Dan 7:4 and head of image Dan 2

Apostles and Christians had no .................................................................. none 33 A.D - 325 A.D.
creeds for 3 centuries and were persecuted .............................approx 325 Nicea 1st Creed -required by Roman law ............................................................................................to be read in churches - persecution stops

Elohim - a plural Hebrew noun ex. Family .....................Deity(Latin) - a singular "god" idea/word from Rome & Greece
Gen 1:26 "And Eloheim said let US..............................................Rome is beast of Dan 7:19-20, Dan 2 kingdom of iron
make man in OUR image." (includes Father & Son).........................Greece is beast of Dan 7:6, Dan 2 kingdom of brass
God created the world through Jesus Christ Eph 3:9......................Persia is beast of Dan 7:5, Dan 2 kingdom of silver
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Babylon is beast of Dan 7:4, Dan 2 head of gold

Godhead Acts 17:29 KJV, Col 2:9, Ps 82:1..........................Trinity - coined by Tertullian who also said the Son had a ........................................................................................beginning - sorry Trins
https://www.lds.org/topics/godhead?lang=eng.......................... ANF03. Latin Christianity: Its Founder, Tertullian

"The Father and I are one"
Father - Most High(El Elyon) - Psalms 47:2-3, Psalms 110:1, Acts 7:55...................Father "co-equal, one substance, ............................................................. .........................................................one being" the Almighty

Son - Holy One of Israel - Isaiah 54:5 KJV, Acts 13:35....................Son "co-equal, co-substantial, one being"
Son of the Most High, servant - Isaiah 42:1, 6, 8, .................................... Son of the Almighty God
"Enough Breast" (El Shaddai) - Rev 1:8, 4:8, Jn 8:58, Gen 17:1 ...................per Apostles Creed and others
"The Father is greater than I."
"Who hath seen me, hath seen the Father."
"Whatsoever the Father doeth the Son doeth likewise." "I am the way." Jn 14:6
Inheritor - now on right hand, but will sit in Father's stead & be called Father .......... immutable - Son forever ................................................................................................Platonic/Aristotlian(Greece again) concept
Isaiah 9:6, "inheritor of my mountains" Isaiah 65:9; Heb 1:4.......................but already "co-equal"; denies ...........................................................................................................inheritance; enemy to Christ
Under the Hebraic law, the firstborn or begotten inherited all his father had.

only begotten .................................................. ........................325 creed - "begotten before all worlds"
Heb 7:28 Oath of the Father - .........................................................under Bishop of Rome as Pontifex maximus
"Thou art my Son, this day I have begotten thee." ............................... became "eternally begotten"

John 15:16 Pray/ask the Father in the name of Jesus Christ .......................... Pray to Son or Mary

Holy Ghost ...................................................................................... Holy Ghost - not declared
Matt 12:32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, ...... co-substantial in Nicean Creed - oops!
it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, .............Constantinople 381 A.D.- ................................................................................................declared as co-equal & one substance
it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come............... with the Son ...............................................................................................................(blasphemy against HG?)

Baptize in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.
Descended upon Jesus in form of dove in River Jordan ...............sprinkle sinless infants with "holy water" salted ...............................................................................................like in pagan roman holy water

Prophets/Apostles/Bishops, etc.....................................vicarius filii dei (666) in Donation of Constantine until ruled ........................................................................................a fake (fallible?)
. . . .. .. .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . .. .. . . . .. . . . . . .. .. . . .tiaras destroyed by Napoleon
Jesus: "call no man Father" Matt 23:9....................................."pope" from popa or literally daddy, father; "holy father"
John 14:30 Hereafter I will not talk much with you: .............. dark ages, inquisitions, crusades against "heretics"
for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me. ...........who made claim to Jesus' name
"You shall know them by their fruits" Matt 7:15-16

John 8:32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.......Truth suppression, fabrications John 8:44
Gen 3:3,22.......................................................................................Gen 3:1,4,5
Acts 3:20 And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you:
21 Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution[restoration] of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.
Josh 24:15 And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, ... but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.
"The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints." Ephesians 1:18.
AMEN

Gen 3:24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

The Matt 28:30 Church




Copyright RevelationTestament.net - license granted for one copy, no reproduction

 

[RevelationTestament]

will repost

 

[Phantasman]

Creeds are simply professions of one's faith.

I disagree, definition:
"A creed is a statement of belief, in particular a statement of faith that describes the beliefs shared by a religious community" WIKI

The trinity is a belief expressed throughout the old and new testament. If you believe Jesus is your savior, you must believe he is God as Isaiah 43:11 says only God can be our savior.

The word or idea never came into existence until 100 years after the death of Christ. Tertullian was the first to use the term Trinitarian:

"He is perhaps most famous for being the oldest extant Latin writer to use the term Trinity (Latin, trinitas),[5] and giving the oldest extant formal exposition of a Trinitarian theology. WIKI

The Bible expresses no doctrine of forced payment to churches in the New Testament, but it does command us to give to people as we feel necessary. Churches are not running themselves, and just like any other building, if you want a church, they need money to run it.

It says "when you give to least of these, you have given unto me". I don't consider the church in that definition. The Rotherham Bible uses "assemblies" instead of church. A church is not a building, or organization that requires money, but assembled believers of one mind with Christ.

That doesn't make robes bad

Only when they are used for more than clothing, like adornments dictating power.

 

[Heterodoxus]

The title of this thread asks:

Was the Pre-Nicene Church Orthodox?

Prof. Bart Ehrman refers to the pre-Nicene Christian churches as "proto-orthodox". That says to me that several generations of converts from Orthodox Judaism:

1. brought their theological baggage with them into pre-Nicene (proto-Orthodox) Christianity;
2. imposed it upon the gospel message of Jesus and other early, non-Orthodox, Christian teachings and practices, and
3. spun developing Christianity to conform with the theology of Judaism to form Judeo-Christianity (i.e., Christianity as influenced by Judaism).

Post-Nicene, the like-minded and pro-Orthodox "church fathers" and other churchmen chose (under threat of excommunication or death, and for whatever other reasons) to perpetuate pre-Nicene (proto-Orthodox) Jewish-Christianity via their corrupted and preferred version of Orthodox Judeo-Christian dogma.

And so it goes . . . . .

 

[SilentShadow100]

I disagree, definition:
"A creed is a statement of belief, in particular a statement of faith that describes the beliefs shared by a religious community" WIKI

A creed is simply a statement of one's beliefs. Your definition states that it is the beliefs that are shared, not the creed.

The word or idea never came into existence until 100 years after the death of Christ. Tertullian was the first to use the term Trinitarian:

"He is perhaps most famous for being the oldest extant Latin writer to use the term Trinity (Latin, trinitas),[5] and giving the oldest extant formal exposition of a Trinitarian theology. WIKI

Just because the term doesn't appear doesn't mean the concept isn't there. The term "Christian" did not exist until Antioch, but Christianity existed long before that.

It says "when you give to least of these, you have given unto me". I don't consider the church in that definition. The Rotherham Bible uses "assemblies" instead of church. A church is not a building, or organization that requires money, but assembled believers of one mind with Christ.

That is only one of the many places the Bible talks about giving.

The Church is a family, but we can worship in churches, which are buildings that require money. In New Jerusalem, there is a temple. Why should we not build to God? He commanded it in the Old Testament and there will be one in eternity. Why not have them here today?

Only when they are used for more than clothing, like adornments dictating power.

God commanded the high priest of Israel to wear a special outfit.

It is beneficial to designate elders of the church with a robe so that they can be identified easily if someone needs help.

 

[RevelationTestament]

The title of this thread asks:Prof. Bart Ehrman refers to the pre-Nicene Christian churches as "proto-orthodox". That says to me that several generations of converts from Orthodox Judaism:

1. brought their theological baggage with them into pre-Nicene (proto-Orthodox) Christianity;
2. imposed it upon the gospel message of Jesus and other early, non-Orthodox, Christian teachings and practices, and
3. spun developing Christianity to conform with the theology of Judaism to form Judeo-Christianity (i.e., Christianity as influenced by Judaism).

Post-Nicene, the like-minded and pro-Orthodox "church fathers" and other churchmen chose (under threat of excommunication or death, and for whatever other reasons) to perpetuate pre-Nicene (proto-Orthodox) Jewish-Christianity via their corrupted and preferred version of Orthodox Judeo-Christian dogma.

And so it goes . . . . .

Hi Heterodoxus
I find your 2 cents interesting, but not very detailed.

Post-Nicene, the like-minded and pro-Orthodox "church fathers" and other churchmen chose (under threat of excommunication or death, and for whatever other reasons) to perpetuate pre-Nicene (proto-Orthodox) Jewish-Christianity

Can you be more specific? What threat of excommunication or death are you talking about?
Thanks

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

No creeds?
Here is one:
"Yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist"-1 Corinthians 8:6

An excellent choice of scripture.

The trinity is located in John 1:1,

No. There is no F/S/HS, and no Trinity formulation. The Logos was with and was God. That's not Trinity, though Trinity includes a concept of that. Attempted inference and deduction.

John 10:30,

No, again. I and my Father are one is not inherently Trinity. There are no three hypostases/one ousia here. Attempted inference and deduction.

John 20:28,

No, yet again. The declarative by Thomas of the Deity of Christ is still not Trinity. Attempted inference and deduction.

Isaiah 9:6,

No. More rampant presuppositional apologetic statements. Attempted inference and deduction.

John 8:58,

No. Just a reference that indicates pre-existence as the I Am. No Trinity here, either. More and more attempted inference and deduction.

Titus 2:13,

No. Another reference to the Deity of Christ, but no Trinity here, either. Continued attempted inference and deduction.

and more.

And the "more" will be presuppositional that all potential references to the Deity of Christ and other components will and must automatically assert a formulated Trinity doctrine that God is three hypostases/one ousia.

What actual exegesis can you present that God is three hypostases/one ousia? THAT's Trinity doctrine; not a series of proof-texting that is presumed to affirm such a doctrine.

Formal robes are something that elders wore in that region at that time. To say they didn't have them without any evidence is going against what one would expect an eastern church to have.

Robes are irrelevant. I'll not address them in the subject matter.

Creeds are simply professions of one's faith.

The trinity is a belief expressed throughout the old and new testament.

No. The Trinity is presupposed via attempted inference and deduction in all contexts. There is no Trinity in the whole of scripture. It was formulated by the prolonged process of the dialectic consensus of men. Much of it was the same attempted inference and deduction you have exhibited that is erroneous.

If you believe Jesus is your savior, you must believe he is God as Isaiah 43:11 says only God can be our savior.

Deity of Christ does NOT equal Trinity. Trinity doctrine doesn't have exclusive rights to the Deity of Christ. In fact, Trinity doctrine dilutes and diminishes the Deity of Christ. (But that's another sub-topic.)

The Bible expresses no doctrine of forced payment to churches in the New Testament, but it does command us to give to people as we feel necessary. Churches are not running themselves, and just like any other building, if you want a church, they need money to run it.

That doesn't make robes bad.

I'll leave all the money and robe controversy to you and others. All I'm concerned with is the central truth of scripture regarding God's nature and constitution; and God is NOT a Trinity as three hypostases/one ousia.

God as a Trinity is too impotent and immanent to have created ALL. Trinity is scripturally impossible and cannot account for the totality of creation. (But neither can any of the other historical competing God-models of Theology Proper.)

 

[Soulgazer]

Was the Pre-Nicene Church Orthodox?
The "orthodoxy" changed continually until solidified under Roman law. The largest pre-Constantine Christian movement was Marcionite Christian. They all but vanished by the sixth century, but were the "orthodoxy" of their day.

As to their belief, it would be non trinitarian.

Their creed was "Jesus Christ and none else revealed a new God, who, in the Old world and in the Old time and under the Old God was unknown and unheard of ; Whom is accounted by no one through long centuries back, and ancient in men's very ignorance of Him - even in ancient names He was unknown and concealed. He had remained unknown by any works from the beginning. Even the creator was unaware of the Supreme God being above himself, Who, although He did not manifest Himself from the beginning and by means of the creation, has yet revealed Himself in Christ Jesus."

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

The title of this thread asks:Prof. Bart Ehrman refers to the pre-Nicene Christian churches as "proto-orthodox". That says to me that several generations of converts from Orthodox Judaism:

1. brought their theological baggage with them into pre-Nicene (proto-Orthodox) Christianity;
2. imposed it upon the gospel message of Jesus and other early, non-Orthodox, Christian teachings and practices, and
3. spun developing Christianity to conform with the theology of Judaism to form Judeo-Christianity (i.e., Christianity as influenced by Judaism).

Post-Nicene, the like-minded and pro-Orthodox "church fathers" and other churchmen chose (under threat of excommunication or death, and for whatever other reasons) to perpetuate pre-Nicene (proto-Orthodox) Jewish-Christianity via their corrupted and preferred version of Orthodox Judeo-Christian dogma.

And so it goes . . . . .

It would be interesting to know a summary type doctrinal statement (or some such) of your overall belief regarding Theology Proper.

 

[RevelationTestament]

When I began studying church history, I found an interesting tidbit I didn't know.
The early Christian leader Justin Martyr (AD 100–ca.165) wrote the following in chapter 67 of his First Apology:

And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons. And they who are well to do, and willing, give what each thinks fit (2 Corinthians 9:7); and what is collected is deposited with the president (1 Corinthians 16:2), who succors the orphans and widows and those who, through sickness or any other cause, are in want, and those who are in bonds and the strangers sojourning among us, and in a word takes care of all who are in need. But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter (Genesis 1:3-5), made the world; and Jesus Christ our Savior on the same day rose from the dead (Mark 16:2, 16:9). For He was crucified on the day before that of Saturn (Saturday); and on the day after that of Saturn, which is the day of the Sun, having appeared to His apostles and disciples, He taught them these things, which we have submitted to you also for your consideration.

Source: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf0....ii.lxvii.html

There are more than one thing that has been eye opening for me as an LDS convert. Besides our quorums each being organized with a president, and the entire church being led by a president. Each priesthood office is also begun by being "set apart." The English word "holy" is translated from the Hebrew which the Jews tend to translate as "Set apart." Woe! When I learned that I was blown away. The little things start adding up about the structure of the LDS church. Our local congregations are also organized into "wards."
Acts 12:10 When they were past the first and the second ward, they came unto the iron gate that leadeth unto the city; which opened to them of his own accord: and they went out, and passed on through one street; and forthwith the angel departed from him.

So it seems the early church was divided into geographical units. The churches of today let people go wherever they choose.

 

[Xpistis sopheiaX]

Even if we reject Orthodox Christianity as not reflecting what Christianity truly should be, there is still no unified Christianity to return to. Christianity was never a completely unified religion, and it probably never be until the "apocalypse" whatever that might entail.