Who were the Early Church Fathers after the Apostles?

[Josho]

So a few questions. For some of you that might know Church history from around approx 96 AD and a bit after, maybe up 200 AD.

Who were the early Church fathers after the original apostles and after all the books of the Bible had been written?

Has anyone heard of any that may have met apostle John?

 

[Pisteuo]

Polycarp?

 

[Pisteuo]

After reading further I suppose Polycarp probably didn’t meet John. No evidence either way but seems unlikely.

 

[Josho]

After reading further I suppose Polycarp probably didn’t meet John. No evidence either way but seems unlikely.

Hmmm I feel like somewhere along the way a bit of history got lost after the Bible had finished being written. Or maybe they just didn't record history as much from 100AD.

 

[Pisteuo]

Yes I agree. I’ve questioned why we don’t have more history recorded from the post-apostle years. It’s almost like it was purposefully deleted it’s so scarce.

 

[Hidden In Him]

So a few questions. For some of you that might know Church history from around approx 96 AD and a bit after, maybe up 200 AD.

Who were the early Church fathers after the original apostles and after all the books of the Bible had been written?

Has anyone heard of any that may have met apostle John?

Ignatius of Antioch.

This piece here appears to be written along the same lines as what you were interested in:
Early Church Fathers | Bayshore Baptist Church

 

[Josho]

Ignatius of Antioch.

This piece here appears to be written along the same lines as what you were interested in:
Early Church Fathers | Bayshore Baptist Church

Hmmm interesting, thanks for this.

 

[Philip James]

Has anyone heard of any that may have met apostle John?

Hey Josho,

As others pointed out Clement, Ignatius and Polycarp all knew at least some of the apostles.
A good resource for early christian writings can be found here: Early Church Fathers

You will also find gnostic and other writings from that time period available on that site.

Peace!

 

[historyb]

So a few questions. For some of you that might know Church history from around approx 96 AD and a bit after, maybe up 200 AD.

Who were the early Church fathers after the original apostles and after all the books of the Bible had been written?

Has anyone heard of any that may have met apostle John?

Yes St. Iganitus was a direct Disciple of St. John the Apostle, cool stuff

Want to add some resources Early Church Fathers and Early Church Fathers - Christian Classics Ethereal Library. On Saturday I got a book of the Early Church Fathers for free and it is awesome.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Hmmm interesting, thanks for this.

Yes - the writings of Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch are very important because he was a disciples of the Apostle John.

On his way to Rome to be martyred, he wrote 7 Letters – ALL of which can be found online. In his Letter to the Smyrnaeans, he gives a window into how the 1st century Church was structured and what it believed. Without wanting to start a debate about it – it is very interesting because it goes into more detail than the NT – from a historical perspective.

Here is an excerpt:
Ignatius of Antioch
See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is administered either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude of the people also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church (Epistle to the Smyrnaeans 8 [A.D. 110]).

 

[Marymog]

So a few questions. For some of you that might know Church history from around approx 96 AD and a bit after, maybe up 200 AD.

Who were the early Church fathers after the original apostles and after all the books of the Bible had been written?

Has anyone heard of any that may have met apostle John?

Clement of Rome

 

[marks]

Yes I agree. I’ve questioned why we don’t have more history recorded from the post-apostle years. It’s almost like it was purposefully deleted it’s so scarce.

Yes, this is something I think about too. Large institutional churches have had much opportunity to remove any history and writings they may have wanted to.

I've never understood or appreciated the name, "early church fathers", for what I think should be called, "extant early commentators". They were opinions written just like all the others over the centuries, and they certainly did Not 'father' the church!

Much love!

 

[marks]

Here is an excerpt:
Ignatius of Antioch
See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is administered either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude of the people also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church (Epistle to the Smyrnaeans 8 [A.D. 110]).

How quickly it happened!

 

[BreadOfLife]

Yes I agree. I’ve questioned why we don’t have more history recorded from the post-apostle years. It’s almost like it was purposefully deleted it’s so scarce.

Yes, this is something I think about too. Large institutional churches have had much opportunity to remove any history and writings they may have wanted to.

I've never understood or appreciated the name, "early church fathers", for what I think should be called, "extant early commentators". They were opinions written just like all the others over the centuries, and they certainly did Not 'father' the church!
Much love!

WHERE do you guys get your information??

We have VOLUMES of writings from the Early Curch Fathers. I think problem is that the the both of you simply haven't looked . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

How quickly it happened!

What happened?

 

[BreadOfLife]

I've never understood or appreciated the name, "early church fathers", for what I think should be called, "extant early commentators". They were opinions written just like all the others over the centuries, and they certainly did Not 'father' the church!

Much love!

This kind of cavalier attitude toward the Early Church shows real contempt for the Holy Spirit.
It’s reminiscent of the idiocy going on all around us right now with all of the historical revisionism and iconoclasm.

If it weren’t for the Holy Spirit working through THEM – YOU wouldn’t have a Bible. You would just have a vast collection of writings that you and everybody else would be debating the canonicity of.
YOU wouldn’t have a Church.
YOU wouldn’t be able to worship without being put to death.

Don’t be so quick to dismiss these giants of the faith who carried the ball for us from the Apostolic times to the current age . . .

 

[Philip James]

I've never understood or appreciated the name, "early church fathers", for what I think should be called, "extant early commentators". They were opinions written just like all the others over the centuries, and they certainly

Clement, Polycarp and Ignatius were all bishops of the Church (Rome,Smyrna, Antioch). All martyred for the Faith by Roman persecution..
They learned these things directly from the apostles...

Peace be with you!

 

[marks]

This kind of cavalier attitude toward the Early Church shows real contempt for the Holy Spirit.

That's nonsense!

You assume I have a cavalier attitude towards the early church? That's nothing like what I've said.

Who is your Father?

 

[marks]

What happened?

Man began to lord over others.

 

[marks]

WHERE do you guys get your infirmation??

We have VOLUMES of writings from the Early Curch Fathers. I think problem is that the the both of you simply haven't looked . . .

Is that what you think? Based on what? Because I reach different conclusions than you?

Is it your assumption then that If I don't agree lockstep with you I'm ignorant?

I recognize that history is written by the winners, and lots of people have burned lots of books that they didn't agree with. I think it would be naive to assume this didn't happen with early Christian commentaries. Even if they were all in agreement with each other, and I know they are not, because I have in fact read, well, I'm reluctant to say a lot, because there is a lot of material, just the same, enough to see what I was looking at.

And even still, commentaries are just that, commentary, and opinion, and a man's teaching. They are not Scripture, should not be regarded like Scripture.

Much love!