Members of what they term "Christendom" are often said to have "partial" knowledge. They pick and choose from the clergy whose qotes support their own aryanist views, whilst they soundly trash Christendom as spritual harlots.
Interestingly, by their current definition of apostate, Charles Taze Russell should be considered apostate by them, as he was definitely AGAINST the organization of religion, and those getting baptised must pledge their allegience to "Jehovah and his visible organisation" to get saved these days.
Do the WT authors consider the early church fathers to have been apostates?
by True North 17 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
Cicatrix
-
Kenneson
To the W.T. Society the early church fathers are worthy of quoting only when they are in agreement with W.T. teaching. If they are anti-Trinitarian, that's definitely a plus. As a matter of fact, on any issue the W.T.presents , they first find and quote authors in agreement with their stance. That's supposed to make it more authoritative. Not.
-
XQsThaiPoes
Also the watchtower likes to send like minded people to heaven such as William Tendale (sic) they have been several people implied by the watchtower to be of the 144k. This opens the floodgates to anyone persecuted by the church. Since the WTS does not have a dpt to recognize saints there is no rule to say who is a true believer vs. an apostate. Some people in good standing such as Johannes Gerber (John 1:1 NWT) have fallen out of favor if they were proved to be into the occult even C.T. Russell is fading from memory. If the watchtower uniformly applied its standards associating with an apostate, occultist, or disfellowshipped person would be a conscience matter. Because boy the people the watchtower quotes sure run the gambit.
-
blondie
*** w83 9/15 p. 7 Why So Many Religions All Claiming to Be Christian? ***
Such a turn of events had been foretold by the apostle Paul, who wrote: "The time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths."?2 Timothy 4:3, 4, New International Version.
Some of these apostate teachers became what Christendom?s churches call church fathers. They are generally divided into ante-Nicene and post-Nicene fathers, the turning point being the so-called First Ecumenical Council of Nicaea, convened in that city of Asia Minor by pagan Roman Emperor Constantine in 325 C.E.
***
w83 9/15 pp. 12-13 ?Quietly Bringing in Destructive Sects? ***This apostasy was "already at work" in Paul?s day. However, it became fully revealed only after the death of Jesus? true apostles, when the "restraint" of their presence was removed. (2 Thessalonians 2:6, 7) Little by little, a clergy class began to appear. In the early second century C.E., Ignatius, "bishop" of Antioch, wrote about a three-grade hierarchy of bishops, presbyters (priests) and deacons. "The man of lawlessness" was beginning to take shape. But the "church father" who really got the clergy class organized into a hierarchy system was Cyprian, "bishop" of Carthage, North Africa, who died in 258 C.E. The authoritative Dictionnaire de Théologie Catholique states that Cyprian outlined a monarchical seven-grade hierarchy, the supreme position being occupied by the bishop. Under him were priests, deacons, subdeacons, acolytes (servers), lectors (readers) and exorcists. An eighth grade?porter, or doorkeeper?was later added in the Western, Latin, or Roman, Church, whereas the Eastern, or Greek, Church settled for a five-grade hierarchy. Thus, by the third century C.E. the composite "man of lawlessness," the apostate Christian clergy class, was fully "revealed." It has continued on down through the centuries in all the churches and sects of Christendom that have a special ministry or clerical class.
***
w01 4/15 p. 21 The Church Fathers?Advocates of Bible Truth?/The Solid Basis of Christian TruthAfter even this brief examination of the historical backdrop of the Church Fathers, as well as the origins of their teachings, it is appropriate to ask, Should a sincere Christian base his or her beliefs on the teachings of the Church Fathers? Let the Bible answer.
For one thing, Jesus Christ himself ruled out the use of the religious title "Father" when he said: "Do not call anyone your father on earth, for one is your Father, the heavenly One." (Matthew 23:9) The use of the term "Father" to designate any religious figure is unchristian and unscriptural. The written Word of God was completed about 98 C.E. with the writings of the apostle John. Thus, true Christians do not need to look to any human as the source of inspired revelation. They are careful not to ?make the word of God invalid? because of human tradition. Letting human tradition take the place of God?s Word is spiritually lethal. Jesus warned: "If . . . a blind man guides a blind man, both will fall into a pit."?Matthew 15:6, 14.
Does a Christian need any revelation besides the word of God as contained in the Bible? No. The book of Revelation cautions against adding anything to the inspired record: "If anyone makes an addition to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this scroll."?Revelation 22:18.
Christian truth is embodied in the written Word of God, the Bible. (John 17:17; 2 Timothy 3:16; 2 John 1-4) The correct understanding of it does not hinge on secular philosophy. Regarding men who tried to use human wisdom to explain divine revelation, it is fitting to repeat the apostle Paul?s questions: "Where is the wise man? Where the scribe? Where the debater of this system of things? Did not God make the wisdom of the world foolish?"?1 Corinthians 1:20.
Moreover, the true Christian congregation is "a pillar and support of the truth." (1 Timothy 3:15) Its overseers safeguard the purity of their teaching within the congregation, preventing any doctrinal pollutant from creeping in. (2 Timothy 2:15-18, 25) They keep out of the congregation ?false prophets, false teachers, and destructive sects.? (2 Peter 2:1) After the death of the apostles, the Church Fathers allowed "misleading inspired utterances and teachings of demons" to take root in the Christian congregation.?1 Timothy 4:1.
The consequences of this apostasy are evident in Christendom today. Its beliefs and practices are a far cry from Bible truth.
-
M.J.
Look at what the greatest "Apostate" in early Church history (By the WTS's estimation) is credited with:
"Athanasius, a 4th-century bishop of Alexandria and a significant theologian, delimited the canon and settled the strife between East and West. On a principle of inclusiveness, both Revelation and Hebrews (as part of the Pauline corpus) were accepted. The 27 books of the New Testament?and they only?were declared canonical. In the Greek churches there was still controversy about Revelation, but in the Latin Church, under the influence of Jerome, Athanasius' decision was accepted."
---"Biblical Literature." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2004. Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service.
6 Apr. 2004 <http://www.britannica.com/eb/article?eu=119712>.So the Nicene champion of the Trinity doctrine and violent opposer of Arianism is the same guy who made the final decision on what to include in the same book that the WT holds as the inspired word of God.
-
hillary_step
There is actually a rather simple explanation to this question :
What aligns itself with current WTS doctrine is pure and from God, whether this be science, theology, history or any other discipline, what does not is impure and from the Devil, and by definition innacurate lies.
The WTS are pimps to the whore of their history. Revisionists of the most dishonest sort.
Best regards - HS
-
M.J.
Selective quoting GALORE:
Text of "Should You Believe in the Trinity" on the right
M.J.'s comment on the left
The Catholic Encyclopedia (10a) also comments
: "In Scripture there is as yet no single term by which the Three Divine Persons are denoted together. The word [tri'as] (of which the Latin trinitas is a translation) is first found in Theophilus of Antioch about A. D. 180. . . . Shortly afterwards it appears in its Latin form of trinitas in Tertullian ." However, this is no proof in itself that Tertullian taught the Trinity.This quote comes from
The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1912, Vol. 15, p 47-49: "In Scripture there is as yet no single term by which the Three Divine Persons are denoted together. The word [tri'as] (of which the Latin trinitas is a translation) is first found in Theophilus of Antioch about A. D. 180. He speaks of "the Trinity of God [the Father], His Word and His Wisdom" ("Ad. Autol.", 11, 15, P. G., VI, 1078). The term may, of course, have been in use before his time. Shortly afterwards it appears in its Latin form of trinitas in Tertullian ." By using elipses ("?"), This quote leaves out the part where it says that Theophilus (180 AD) not only refers to the trinity BEFORE Tertullian (200 AD) but that the word Trinity itself was probably used even before Theophilus. Much early literature from that time period has been lost, but in his surviving work Theophilius used the term Trias as if it was already a term familiar to his readers. As for whether or not Tertullian taught Trinity, the fact of the matter is that Tertullian wrote about the Trinity in detail :- "[God speaks in the plural ?Let us make man in our image?] because already there was attached to Him his Son, a second person, his own Word, and a third, the Spirit in the Word....one substance in three coherent persons. He was at once the Father, the Son, and the Spirit." (Against Praxeas, ch 12)
- "Thus the connection of the Father in the Son, and of the Son in the Paraclete, produces three coherent Persons, who are yet distinct One from Another. These Three are, one essence, not one Person, as it is said, 'I and my Father are One' [John 10:30], in respect of unity of Being not singularity of number" (Against Praxeas, 25)
- "As if in this way also one were not All, in that All are of One, by unity (that is) of substance; while the mystery of the dispensation is still guarded, which distributes the Unity into a Trinity, placing in their order the three Persons ? the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost: three, however, not in condition, but in degree; not in substance, but in form; not in power, but in aspect; yet of one substance, and of one condition, and of one power, inasmuch as He is one God, from whom these degrees and forms and aspects are reckoned, under the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." (Against Praxeas, by Tertullian)
The Catholic work
Trinitas-A Theological Encyclopedia of the Holy Trinity (11) , for example, notes that some of Tertullian's words were later used by others to describe the Trinity. Then it cautions: " But hasty conclusions cannot be drawn from usage, for he does not apply the words to Trinitarian theology ."- If you look up this Catholic work, you can find the quotation used here. The author is speaking of Tertullian: "The great African fashioned the Latin language of the Trinity, and many of his words and phrases remained permanently in use: the words Trinitas and persona, the formulas ?one substance in three persons,? ?God from God, light from Light.? He uses the word substantia 400 times, as he uses consubstantialis and consubstantivus, but hasty conclusions cannot be drawn from usage, for he does not apply the words to Trinitarian theology" (underlines & italics mine) (Trinitas - A Theological Encyclopedia of the Holy Trinity, p. 208)
- We can see from the entire quote that the author is saying Tertullian did not apply the specific words substantia, consubtantialis and consubstantivus to Trinitarian theology. Yet the words & phrases, "Trinitas", "persona", "one substance in three persons", etc., were indeed used by him to describe the actual concept of the Trinity. When you read the Watchtower?s quote here, you get the impression that none of his words, not even "trinitas" ("trinity") had anything to do with trinitarian theology. From Tertullian?s many writings it is very simple to verify that exactly the opposite is true.
*** qm 199 Our Ministry ***
8
Be very careful to be accurate in all statements you make. Use evidence honestly. In quotations, do not twist the meaning of a writer or speaker or use only partial quotations to give a different thought than the person intended. -
M.J.
Sorry, the formatting of that last post came out completely wrong! But I think you can get the message...