How Should We Read the Church Fathers?

[reformed1689]

One of the great challenges as a Protestant is to know and understand how we came to be. The Reformation is our roots in history, but the Bible is our root in theology. Simply put, to be Protestant means you leave the man-made teachings of the Roman Catholic Church and look towards Scripture as your authority for faith and practice.

Why do I make this point when talking about the Early Church Fathers (ECF)? It is simple. Catholics tend to put an inordinate amount of weight and authority in the ECF. They do this to the point of elevating their writings to the level of Scripture. However, they will tell you that they do not do this. Yet, when shown their interpretation is incorrect Biblically, they will say, “But Origen said…” or “But Iraneus argued….” or “But Clement states…” and so on. When you simply say they are wrong, and point out the error, they will say that are we to know better than those that sat under the Apostles?

This, of course, is a logical fallacy. It is an appeal to authority. However, there is no authority there.

We do not hold that the ECF were infallible. There is nothing in Scripture to suggest that the ECF, or the church today, including the Pope, are infallible in any way (though the Catholics will try to argue that there is). So how are we to use the ECF?

The answer to this is not difficult. We should use the ECF as we use any other commentary. It is useful for study and instruction but must always be tested against the Scriptures. The Scriptures and Scriptures alone have the final say in all matters of faith and practice. The ECF did get things wrong, and often, they even contradicted each other. Scripture, on the other hand, has no contradictions. It is the perfect and holy words of God.

So while we should read the Fathers, we should not elevate their work to the level of Scripture.

How Should We Read the Early Church Fathers?

 

[Enoch111]

We should use the ECF as we use any other commentary.

That's exactly how the ECF writings should be taken. There are many good things therein, but also many serious errors. The Bible is the final authority in all matters of faith and practice. And because the traditionalist churches elevated the writings of the ECF to the level of "Holy Tradition" all the errors have remained and been promoted. But even the Apostolic Fathers never placed themselves on the level of the apostles, neither did they claim to be prophets or apostles.

 

[aspen]

One of the great challenges as a Protestant is to know and understand how we came to be. The Reformation is our roots in history, but the Bible is our root in theology. Simply put, to be Protestant means you leave the man-made teachings of the Roman Catholic Church and look towards Scripture as your authority for faith and practice.

Why do I make this point when talking about the Early Church Fathers (ECF)? It is simple. Catholics tend to put an inordinate amount of weight and authority in the ECF. They do this to the point of elevating their writings to the level of Scripture. However, they will tell you that they do not do this. Yet, when shown their interpretation is incorrect Biblically, they will say, “But Origen said…” or “But Iraneus argued….” or “But Clement states…” and so on. When you simply say they are wrong, and point out the error, they will say that are we to know better than those that sat under the Apostles?

This, of course, is a logical fallacy. It is an appeal to authority. However, there is no authority there.

We do not hold that the ECF were infallible. There is nothing in Scripture to suggest that the ECF, or the church today, including the Pope, are infallible in any way (though the Catholics will try to argue that there is). So how are we to use the ECF?

The answer to this is not difficult. We should use the ECF as we use any other commentary. It is useful for study and instruction but must always be tested against the Scriptures. The Scriptures and Scriptures alone have the final say in all matters of faith and practice. The ECF did get things wrong, and often, they even contradicted each other. Scripture, on the other hand, has no contradictions. It is the perfect and holy words of God.

So while we should read the Fathers, we should not elevate their work to the level of Scripture.

How Should We Read the Early Church Fathers?

yes......anytime the ECF shows too much of their Catholic doctrine?

It is good that you seem to recognize this - many Prots basically ignore the 1500 years between Christ and Luther.

 

[Enoch111]

It is good that you seem to recognize this - many Prots basically ignore the 1500 years between Christ and Luther.

The Catholic Church itself should have carefully examined those writings and pointed out the doctrinal errors therein. Then Luther would not have had a leg to stand on.

 

[CharismaticLady]

One of the great challenges as a Protestant is to know and understand how we came to be. The Reformation is our roots in history, but the Bible is our root in theology. Simply put, to be Protestant means you leave the man-made teachings of the Roman Catholic Church and look towards Scripture as your authority for faith and practice.

Why do I make this point when talking about the Early Church Fathers (ECF)? It is simple. Catholics tend to put an inordinate amount of weight and authority in the ECF. They do this to the point of elevating their writings to the level of Scripture. However, they will tell you that they do not do this. Yet, when shown their interpretation is incorrect Biblically, they will say, “But Origen said…” or “But Iraneus argued….” or “But Clement states…” and so on. When you simply say they are wrong, and point out the error, they will say that are we to know better than those that sat under the Apostles?

This, of course, is a logical fallacy. It is an appeal to authority. However, there is no authority there.

We do not hold that the ECF were infallible. There is nothing in Scripture to suggest that the ECF, or the church today, including the Pope, are infallible in any way (though the Catholics will try to argue that there is). So how are we to use the ECF?

The answer to this is not difficult. We should use the ECF as we use any other commentary. It is useful for study and instruction but must always be tested against the Scriptures. The Scriptures and Scriptures alone have the final say in all matters of faith and practice. The ECF did get things wrong, and often, they even contradicted each other. Scripture, on the other hand, has no contradictions. It is the perfect and holy words of God.

So while we should read the Fathers, we should not elevate their work to the level of Scripture.

How Should We Read the Early Church Fathers?

"But John Calvin says..."

cc: @Enoch111

 

[Enoch111]

"But John Calvin says..."
cc: @Enoch111

For some, John Calvin has also acquired the status of an Early Church Father. Nothing he said or wrote (according to them) is false teaching. Indeed the tenets of Calvinism are held more strongly than Bible truth by many. Just like the Catholics cling to the ECF.

 

[CharismaticLady]

For some, John Calvin has also acquired the status of an Early Church Father. Nothing he said or wrote (according to them) is false teaching. Indeed the tenets of Calvinism are held more strongly than Bible truth by many. Just like the Catholics cling to the ECF.

Did he invent T.U.L.I.P. or did someone else make that from his teachings?

 

[CharismaticLady]

For some, John Calvin has also acquired the status of an Early Church Father. Nothing he said or wrote (according to them) is false teaching. Indeed the tenets of Calvinism are held more strongly than Bible truth by many. Just like the Catholics cling to the ECF.

I like Augustine's quote of something like "Love God, then do as you like." At first glance, I gasped, but when I looked into it in context of the longer quote, it was exactly what I teach.

As I recall, I didn't much like Origin.

 

[Episkopos]

One of the great challenges as a Protestant is to know and understand how we came to be. The Reformation is our roots in history, but the Bible is our root in theology. Simply put, to be Protestant means you leave the man-made teachings of the Roman Catholic Church and look towards Scripture as your authority for faith and practice.

Why do I make this point when talking about the Early Church Fathers (ECF)? It is simple. Catholics tend to put an inordinate amount of weight and authority in the ECF. They do this to the point of elevating their writings to the level of Scripture. However, they will tell you that they do not do this. Yet, when shown their interpretation is incorrect Biblically, they will say, “But Origen said…” or “But Iraneus argued….” or “But Clement states…” and so on. When you simply say they are wrong, and point out the error, they will say that are we to know better than those that sat under the Apostles?

This, of course, is a logical fallacy. It is an appeal to authority. However, there is no authority there.

We do not hold that the ECF were infallible. There is nothing in Scripture to suggest that the ECF, or the church today, including the Pope, are infallible in any way (though the Catholics will try to argue that there is). So how are we to use the ECF?

The answer to this is not difficult. We should use the ECF as we use any other commentary. It is useful for study and instruction but must always be tested against the Scriptures. The Scriptures and Scriptures alone have the final say in all matters of faith and practice. The ECF did get things wrong, and often, they even contradicted each other. Scripture, on the other hand, has no contradictions. It is the perfect and holy words of God.

So while we should read the Fathers, we should not elevate their work to the level of Scripture.

How Should We Read the Early Church Fathers?

While the ECF are not to be taken quite on the same level as the bible itself. Yet, there is much to glean from their writings. One would be ignorant and foolish to ignore their council. But then that's where we are today...arrogant to the point of not heeding wise council.
What would be more constructive than being dismissive of what IS actual authority...is discussing what these men had to say.

An ignorant and foolish person will cling to his own ways as being better than what the most learned and wise have to say. These esteem their lack of understand as being understanding.

We have proved throughout history that the fellowship of the saints has diminished over time...to the point today where saints are as rare as hen teeth. So then just as technology moves forward with time...spiritual life and understanding has gone backwards.

It is no wonder then that the early church and it's testimony are least respected by the most ignorant of people....modern man.

And the bible itself? People have taken the time to twist the meaning of it to such an extent that the ECF would seem to be a deviation from the truth. But the reason for this is because the bible has not been understood. The ECF stand as a witness against this generation....who turn the truth into a lie.

 

[Episkopos]

Instead of taking the bible as a reliable witness of the truth ABOUT God....in modern times it has been raised up as an idol...as something that replaces God and His Spirit. Speaking anything against the bible is now seen as blasphemy...as if the bible itself was divine.....as if it was a god in it's own right.

When one commits to this kind of idolatry...any other source of truth would be seen as competitive in nature. IOW the carnal interpretation imputed to the bible becomes the idol to be worshiped. The lie is elevated as being powerful to save....just by accepting it.
Who needs a golden calf when we can elevate a book over God Himself? In the wilderness the sin of the people was to make an idol to replace God's actual presence. That is how the bible is being used today.

 

[Hidden In Him]

And the bible itself? People have taken the time to twist the meaning of it to such an extent that the ECF would seem to be a deviation from the truth. But the reason for this is because the bible has not been understood. The ECF stand as a witness against this generation....who turn the truth into a lie.

I do find that the teachings of the Ante-Nicene Fathers, especially the earliest, are of a spiritual quality far superior to anything I hear being preached today, and it's not even close. They understood clearly what the NT was communicating, and related it quite accurately. Nowadays most church leaders teach interpretations of the word that are so prostituted it is difficult to even recognize the Bible in what is being preached.

Case in point: I was watching a local preacher on TV about 3-4 weeks ago. I had never seen him preach before but I pass up the church every morning at work. Big church. The entire message was based off of an astoundingly uninformed interpretation of Colossians 3:15, which turned the whole application he was using into a bogus mess. The problem is that many today do not interpret the word in light of its actual NT context. They don't even know the true NT context, so they take these wild, out-of-context liberties with verses and passages and then tell entire congregations to apply them in ways that bear no relation to an actual NT teaching.

The early fathers did not do this, and one would do far better to read their writings than listen to what most preachers are preaching today.
Sad. But true.

 

[reformed1689]

Did he invent T.U.L.I.P. or did someone else make that from his teachings?

None of the above. TULIP came about in the 1900's and it was developed from the Canons of Dort.

 

[reformed1689]

"But John Calvin says..."

cc: @Enoch111

Here is the difference, I do point out where Calvin did not agree with Scripture. Baptism for instance.

 

[Prayer Warrior]

Instead of taking the bible as a reliable witness of the truth ABOUT God....in modern times it has been raised up as an idol...as something that replaces God and His Spirit. Speaking anything against the bible is now seen as blasphemy...as if the bible itself was divine.....as if it was a god in it's own right.

When one commits to this kind of idolatry...any other source of truth would be seen as competitive in nature. IOW the carnal interpretation imputed to the bible becomes the idol to be worshiped. The lie is elevated as being powerful to save....just by accepting it.
Who needs a golden calf when we can elevate a book over God Himself? In the wilderness the sin of the people was to make an idol to replace God's actual presence. That is how the bible is being used today.

WADR, you're talking about an extreme view of the Bible (i.e. idolizing it), but I find your view to be just as extreme the other way. I believe that the Bible is the only inspired written Word of God--the only one HE has given us. It is a Book like no other! I believe He gave it to us as a yardstick for truth--to measure everything we hear and read so that we are not led astray by false doctrine. If something clearly contradicts His written Word, I discard it. I believe that this is what the Bereans did with Paul's teaching.

However, I do not worship the Book, and I don't believe that the words recorded in the Bible are the only words God has ever spoken to man. I strongly believe that all the gifts of the Holy Spirit given to the Church and recorded in the Bible have continued to this day. This includes the gift of prophecy, word of knowledge, etc. I have seen these gifts in operation in the modern Church. God has used me to deliver messages to His people using the gift of prophecy. The Lord had me speak a prophetic word in a church assembly, and an elder confirmed that what I spoke was from God.

God speaks to me every day. EVERY day I hear His voice. If I did not hear His voice, I wouldn't have made it through some of the trials I've been through. His presence with me is THE essential ingredient in life, and it is in no way replaced by the Bible.
.

 

[Episkopos]

WADR, you're talking about an extreme view of the Bible (i.e. idolizing it), but I find your view to be just as extreme the other way. I believe that the Bible is the only inspired written Word of God--the only one HE has given us. It is a Book like no other! I believe He gave it to us as a yardstick for truth--to measure everything we hear and read so that we are not led astray by false doctrine. If something clearly contradicts His written Word, I discard it. I believe that this is what the Bereans did with Paul's teaching.

Logically...the bible was put together in the form we see today by bishops from 300 AD. The OP here is criticizing Bishops from before 100 AD.

IOW...if there was no good judgment among church fathers in the past...we would not have such a reliable witness to the truth today.

it's all about getting ideas straight to understand things in a right perspective.

I see the bible for it's worth. But a book can't replace the living God. This is what has happened. Have you never heard...now that we have the bible we don't need the Spirit?

However, I do not worship the Book, and I don't believe that the words recorded in the Bible are the only words God has ever spoken to man. I strongly believe that all the gifts of the Holy Spirit given to the Church and recorded in the Bible have continued to this day. This includes the gift of prophecy, word of knowledge, etc. I have seen these gifts in operation in the modern Church. God has used me to deliver messages to His people using the gift of prophecy. The Lord had me speak a prophetic word in a church assembly, and an elder confirmed that what I spoke was from God.

God speaks to me every day. EVERY day I hear His voice. If I did not hear His voice, I wouldn't have made it through some of the trials I've been through. His presence with me is THE essential ingredient in life, and it is in no way replaced by the Bible.

Then my admonition doesn't apply to you, personally. But you need to get out a little more and see what I'm talking about.

 

[Prayer Warrior]

I see the bible for it's worth. But a book can't replace the living God. This is what has happened. Have you never heard...now that we have the bible we don't need the Spirit?

I have heard this, and I have always disagreed with it!

 

[reformed1689]

WADR, you're talking about an extreme view of the Bible (i.e. idolizing it), but I find your view to be just as extreme the other way. I believe that the Bible is the only inspired written Word of God--the only one HE has given us. It is a Book like no other! I believe He gave it to us as a yardstick for truth--to measure everything we hear and read so that we are not led astray by false doctrine. If something clearly contradicts His written Word, I discard it. I believe that this is what the Bereans did with Paul's teaching.

However, I do not worship the Book, and I don't believe that the words recorded in the Bible are the only words God has ever spoken to man. I strongly believe that all the gifts of the Holy Spirit given to the Church and recorded in the Bible have continued to this day. This includes the gift of prophecy, word of knowledge, etc. I have seen these gifts in operation in the modern Church. God has used me to deliver messages to His people using the gift of prophecy. The Lord had me speak a prophetic word in a church assembly, and an elder confirmed that what I spoke was from God.

God speaks to me every day. EVERY day I hear His voice. If I did not hear His voice, I wouldn't have made it through some of the trials I've been through. His presence with me is THE essential ingredient in life, and it is in no way replaced by the Bible.
.

There is no new special revelation today.

 

[reformed1689]

Instead of taking the bible as a reliable witness of the truth ABOUT God....in modern times it has been raised up as an idol...as something that replaces God and His Spirit. Speaking anything against the bible is now seen as blasphemy...as if the bible itself was divine.....as if it was a god in it's own right.

When one commits to this kind of idolatry...any other source of truth would be seen as competitive in nature. IOW the carnal interpretation imputed to the bible becomes the idol to be worshiped. The lie is elevated as being powerful to save....just by accepting it.
Who needs a golden calf when we can elevate a book over God Himself? In the wilderness the sin of the people was to make an idol to replace God's actual presence. That is how the bible is being used today.

This statement explains much of the error I have seen from you on this board.

 

[Prayer Warrior]

There is no new special revelation today.

Don’t tell me. Tell the Holy Spirit. He is the One who has given me words of prophecy and knowledge, just like Paul talked about in the BIBLE.

 

[reformed1689]

Don’t tell me. Tell the Holy Spirit. He is the One who has given me words of prophecy and knowledge, just like Paul talked about in the BIBLE.

Here's the question. Is this spirit telling you something different than what is in the Bible, or reiterating something already there?