Difference between revisions of "Ante-Nicene Fathers"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(revision of new paragraph)
(further minor revision of the same paragraph, citing argument from silence taken by Protestant and Mormon apologists as evidence that a monstrous apostasy must have occurred)
Line 5: Line 5:
 
Supporters contend that the positions held by the Fathers represent Christian doctrine of the first centuries after the New Testament, and are thus presupposed by certain [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologists]] to be uncorrupted by later distortions and departures introduced by heretics and apostates.  When there was conflict about the truly catholic and orthodox interpretation of the Scriptures, theologians sought backing for their position in the writings of "the Fathers". By this they meant teachers of an earlier era who demonstrated how the apostolic scriptures were understood and applied by the apostles and their immediate successors.  
 
Supporters contend that the positions held by the Fathers represent Christian doctrine of the first centuries after the New Testament, and are thus presupposed by certain [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologists]] to be uncorrupted by later distortions and departures introduced by heretics and apostates.  When there was conflict about the truly catholic and orthodox interpretation of the Scriptures, theologians sought backing for their position in the writings of "the Fathers". By this they meant teachers of an earlier era who demonstrated how the apostolic scriptures were understood and applied by the apostles and their immediate successors.  
  
−
Critics and detractors, chiefly Protestants, anti-Catholics, Christian liberals and atheists contend that the positions held by the Fathers represent a radical corruption of pure Christian doctrine. The fact that the theology of the Ante-Nicene Fathers does not support Protestant, Fundamentalist, or Mormon doctrines, is interpreted by them as clear evidence of the beginning of a Great Apostasy immediately after the death of the last Apostles and the completion of the New Testament, by [[syncretism]] with pagan Greek and Roman philosophies, and culminating in the 4th century invention of the pseudo-Christian-Pagan Catholic Church mandated by Roman Emperor [[Constantine]] at the [[Council of Nicaea]], immediately followed by the persecution of true Christians as heretics. Evidence of this corruption and apostasy is seen by Protestant and Fundamentalist apologists in the evident contrast of the "Catholic doctrines" in the Ante-Nicene Fathers with "the pure doctrines of New Testament Christianity rediscovered by the leaders of the [[Protestant Reformation]]." The lack of any evidence of Protestant or Mormon theology in any of the extant writings of the first four centuries of Christianity by any of the known heretics and sects is seen by Catholic and Orthodox [[Christian apologetics|apologists]] as a classic example of [[circular reasoning]]. Protestant and Mormon apologists both respond that this is clear evidence of an apostasy finally resulting in a campaign of total eradication of all writings opposing the development of the authoritarian trinitarian orthodox catholic Church.
+
Critics and detractors, chiefly Protestants, anti-Catholics, Christian liberals and atheists contend that the positions held by the Fathers represent a radical corruption of pure Christian doctrine. The fact that the theology of the Ante-Nicene Fathers does not support Protestant, Fundamentalist, or Mormon doctrines, is interpreted by them as clear evidence of the beginning of a Great Apostasy immediately after the death of the last Apostles and the completion of the New Testament, by [[syncretism]] with pagan Greek and Roman philosophies, and culminating in the 4th century invention of the pseudo-Christian-Pagan Catholic Church mandated by Roman Emperor [[Constantine]] at the [[Council of Nicaea]], immediately followed by the persecution of true Christians as heretics. Evidence of this corruption and apostasy is seen by Protestant and Fundamentalist apologists in the evident contrast of the "Catholic doctrines" in the Ante-Nicene Fathers with "the pure doctrines of New Testament Christianity rediscovered by the leaders of the [[Protestant Reformation]]." The utter historical silence<ref>See [[argument from silence]]</ref> due to a total lack of any evidence of Protestant or Mormon theology in any of the extant writings of the first four centuries of Christianity by any of the known heretics and sects as evidence that a monstrous apostasy must have occurred is seen by Catholic and Orthodox [[Christian apologetics|apologists]] as a classic example of [[circular reasoning]]. Protestant and Mormon apologists both respond that this is clear evidence of an apostasy finally resulting in a campaign of total eradication of all writings opposing the development of the authoritarian trinitarian orthodox catholic Church.
  
 
The 20 Canons of the Council of Nicaea demonstrate absolutely no [[Syncretism|syncretistic]] compromise with pagan religion, as some have charged.<ref>See [http://www.christian-history.org/council-of-nicea-canons.html The Canons of the Council of Nicaea (christian-history.org)] ''The commentary by the author rejects and even condemns outright some of the canons as being Catholic, sinful, and opposed to the Bible, but most significantly he says nothing about any pagan religious beliefs being evident in any of them.''</ref> There is no evidence in any [[Exegesis|readings]] of the texts of the documents of the Council of Nicaea to support the charge that the emperor [[Constantine]] dictated to the council of bishops any change in doctrinal teaching or that he decreed or mandated any revision in any definition of Christian terms to accommodate any pagan beliefs, Roman or Greek or Babylonian.
 
The 20 Canons of the Council of Nicaea demonstrate absolutely no [[Syncretism|syncretistic]] compromise with pagan religion, as some have charged.<ref>See [http://www.christian-history.org/council-of-nicea-canons.html The Canons of the Council of Nicaea (christian-history.org)] ''The commentary by the author rejects and even condemns outright some of the canons as being Catholic, sinful, and opposed to the Bible, but most significantly he says nothing about any pagan religious beliefs being evident in any of them.''</ref> There is no evidence in any [[Exegesis|readings]] of the texts of the documents of the Council of Nicaea to support the charge that the emperor [[Constantine]] dictated to the council of bishops any change in doctrinal teaching or that he decreed or mandated any revision in any definition of Christian terms to accommodate any pagan beliefs, Roman or Greek or Babylonian.

Revision as of 18:45, September 6, 2019

The Ante-Nicene Fathers are those early Church fathers (and their associated writings) from the beginning of Christianity to the time of the creation of the Nicene Creed (the prefix "ante" means "before"). People in this category include Polycarp, Tertullian, Julius Africanus, Ignatius, Origen, and Clement.

The writings of the Ante-Nicene Fathers are the subject of controversy within Christianity.

Supporters contend that the positions held by the Fathers represent Christian doctrine of the first centuries after the New Testament, and are thus presupposed by certain Christian apologists to be uncorrupted by later distortions and departures introduced by heretics and apostates. When there was conflict about the truly catholic and orthodox interpretation of the Scriptures, theologians sought backing for their position in the writings of "the Fathers". By this they meant teachers of an earlier era who demonstrated how the apostolic scriptures were understood and applied by the apostles and their immediate successors.

Critics and detractors, chiefly Protestants, anti-Catholics, Christian liberals and atheists contend that the positions held by the Fathers represent a radical corruption of pure Christian doctrine. The fact that the theology of the Ante-Nicene Fathers does not support Protestant, Fundamentalist, or Mormon doctrines, is interpreted by them as clear evidence of the beginning of a Great Apostasy immediately after the death of the last Apostles and the completion of the New Testament, by syncretism with pagan Greek and Roman philosophies, and culminating in the 4th century invention of the pseudo-Christian-Pagan Catholic Church mandated by Roman Emperor Constantine at the Council of Nicaea, immediately followed by the persecution of true Christians as heretics. Evidence of this corruption and apostasy is seen by Protestant and Fundamentalist apologists in the evident contrast of the "Catholic doctrines" in the Ante-Nicene Fathers with "the pure doctrines of New Testament Christianity rediscovered by the leaders of the Protestant Reformation." The utter historical silence[1] due to a total lack of any evidence of Protestant or Mormon theology in any of the extant writings of the first four centuries of Christianity by any of the known heretics and sects as evidence that a monstrous apostasy must have occurred is seen by Catholic and Orthodox apologists as a classic example of circular reasoning. Protestant and Mormon apologists both respond that this is clear evidence of an apostasy finally resulting in a campaign of total eradication of all writings opposing the development of the authoritarian trinitarian orthodox catholic Church.

The 20 Canons of the Council of Nicaea demonstrate absolutely no syncretistic compromise with pagan religion, as some have charged.[2] There is no evidence in any readings of the texts of the documents of the Council of Nicaea to support the charge that the emperor Constantine dictated to the council of bishops any change in doctrinal teaching or that he decreed or mandated any revision in any definition of Christian terms to accommodate any pagan beliefs, Roman or Greek or Babylonian.

See also

References

  1. ↑ See argument from silence
  2. ↑ See The Canons of the Council of Nicaea (christian-history.org) The commentary by the author rejects and even condemns outright some of the canons as being Catholic, sinful, and opposed to the Bible, but most significantly he says nothing about any pagan religious beliefs being evident in any of them.

External links

Retrieved from "https://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Ante-Nicene_Fathers&oldid=1562011"