Modern Arianism / Modern "Christian" Sects

  • Thread starter Thread starter ComeHome2Rome
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

ComeHome2Rome

Guest
Remnant Fellowship
Jehovah’s Witnesses
some forms of Pentecostal

These are 3 of the Modern Arianism / Modern “Christian” Sects I’ve encountered that embrace parts of Arianism in rejecting that Jesus is God & rejecting the Holy Trinity.

Remnant Fellowship & Jehovah’s Witnesses’ followers that I’ve encountered that actually referenced the historical Bishop Arian as being a “proof” that their view of Jesus and the Trinity are correct.

I don’t understand is why they accept part of what Bishop Arian did/taught, but not all of it. As a Catholic Bishop, he would have believed in the Eucharist and all the other Sacraments and in the Church, not the Bible alone, so I don’t understand how Remant Fellowship and Jehovah’s Witnesses drop that part of Bishop Arian’s actions/teachings.

Any Jehovah’s Witnesses or Remnant Fellowship members here that can explain why your churches do not believe in all the other teachings of the Catholic Church that Bishop Arius did? Why are there no “Bishops” in your churches?

Any scholarly Catholics who can tell me where I can find the “proof” that Arian was otherwise a faithful Catholic Bishop believing and teaching what Catholics throughout the centuries have believed - especially the true presence of Jesus in the Eucharist? I know that he did, I just don’t know if there may be something that I can show to disenting groups to “prove it”.
 
Most of the Restorationists (those who claim the true Church Apostatized and vanished after the first century, and has since been restored by their respective founders) are Arianists. They claim the scripture verses the prove that Christ was man as their proof. They make excuses for those that prove that He is God. They also question many things, like if there is one God, why is Christ distinct from the Father. They can’t get their heads over the Trinity. Also verses like the Father knowing the end while Christ says he doesn’t know when the end is, is what they use to make the claim that Jesus is not equal with the Father.

I base this from my dealings with the Iglesia ni Cristo.
 
ComeHome2Rome said:
…
I don’t understand is why they accept part of what Bishop Arian did/taught, but not all of it. As a Catholic Bishop, he would have believed in the Eucharist and all the other Sacraments and in the Church, not the Bible alone, so I don’t understand how Remant Fellowship and Jehovah’s Witnesses drop that part of Bishop Arian’s actions/teachings.

Any Jehovah’s Witnesses or Remnant Fellowship members here that can explain why your churches do not believe in all the other teachings of the Catholic Church that Bishop Arius did? …
Click to expand...
Hi Comehometorome.

I am one of Jehovah’s Witnesses.

It’s not that we accept part of what Arius taught – (as though it was because Arius taught it that we believe it) but that we believe what the Bible teaches above all human philosophies.

Suppose you had a history teacher who was an atheist. Would you dismiss all the accurate historical facts he taught you, because you did not agree with his belief there is no God? Surely not.
You would believe the facts about World war II and the presidents of the USA, but not his conclusion the universe made itself.

It is well known the word “trinity” does not occur in the Bible. Infact…
Jesus said: “The father is greater than I” (John 14:28), and there are countless other scriptures from the Bible that show Jesus and his father are neither the same nor equal.

Your own early Church fathers agree with this, for example:
Irenaeus: “And thus one God the Father is declared, who is above all, and through all, and in all. The Father is indeed above all, and He is the Head of Christ.”—Against Heresies, Book V, chapter 18.2.

Even the catholic encyclopedia acknowledges:
“The impression could arise that the Trinitarian dogma is in the last analysis a late 4th-century invention. In a sense, this is true . . . The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century.”—New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967), Volume 14, page 299.

So since the trinity was not believed by the early Christians, we (jehovah’s Witnesses) do not believe God is a Trinity. We go back to what Jesus and his apostles believed and taught.

Arius knew this. He believed the same. But the church over-ruled him and declared his belief heresy.

We follow the Bible. This leads us to agree what Arius concluded on this point. But, (like the hypothetical history teacher) does not mean we have to adopt all he believed.

Does that make sense?
 
Regardless said:
So since the trinity was not believed by the early Christians, we (jehovah’s Witnesses) do not believe God is a Trinity. We go back to what Jesus and his apostles believed and taught.

Arius knew this. He believed the same. But the church over-ruled him and declared his belief heresy.
Click to expand...
Sorry bro, but this is an argument from silence. The Bible also presents passages in support of the co-divinity of the Son with the Father, for example “The Father and I are one” - John 10:30. Ignatius of Antioch, who predates Irenaeus, calls Jesus God in his letter to the church in Ephesus. Irenaeus also calls Christ God in the very writing you quote. Just because these Fathers struggled with how to reconcile the two different strands of theology coming out of the NT( 1) the divinity of Christ, with 2) His being in the flesh) does not mean that they were Arians. Read the *whole *work next time.
 
ndismyhome said:
… Just because these Fathers struggled with how to reconcile the two different strands of theology coming out of the NT( 1) the divinity of Christ, with 2) His being in the flesh) does not mean that they were Arians. …
Click to expand...
I didn’t say they were Arians. I said they believed the same thing.
You seem to have the same approach as our friend who statrted the post.

You assume people will follow a particular teacher, rather than seek what is the truth.
So… “Someone who doesn’t believe Jesus is almighty God must be an Arian”, - that isn’t a true statement.
John wrote the father was “the only true God,” and Jesus “the one he sent forth” John 17:3. That doesn’t mean John was an Arian.

It is a different way of thinking I guess. I’m only just starting to understand it.
I’ve often wondered- when I ask a Catholic “but is that the truth?” why they look at me blank.
It seems they believe what the Church says over the Bible. What is “the truth” isn’t the point. It’s what their Church says that is the important thing.
Jehovahs Witness’ don’t believe things because “the WT said” or “Russel said” or “Arius said” - they will believe it because the Bible - (and therefore Jehovah) said.
 
ComeHome2Rome said:
Really? I have only heard of him refered to as a bishop like Martin Luther was a monk. Both rejected the Truth.
Click to expand...
He was a priest in the church of Alexandria.

When he was discovered teaching his theological opinion on the nature of Christ (which I doubt he developed strictly on his own) his bishop called him out on it.

There definitely were bishops who supported his position. I suppose it is possible that someone made him a bishop after the controversy began, but I have never seen that mentioned before anywhere.

What made him particularly dangerous was that he was a composer of hymns, and his ideas were spread in that way.
 
Regardless said:
It seems they believe what the Church says over the Bible. What is “the truth” isn’t the point. It’s what their Church says that is the important thing.
Jehovahs Witness’ don’t believe things because “the WT said” or “Russel said” or “Arius said” - they will believe it because the Bible - (and therefore Jehovah) said.
Click to expand...
Regardless, what came first, the community of faith, or the canon of scripture that the faith produced. St Paul stated in 1 Timothy 3:15 that the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth. Which church is it? It has to be the one Christ established in Matthew 16:18, so where did it go? Scripture never appoints itself as the final authority.

And Regardless, 40,000 denominations are claiming to be following the bible, not some man made doctrine. It’s dishonest to state that “we only believe the bible, not what Russell or WT teaches”, because all of you now believe that the understanding what a “generation” means is different than what the WTBS taught in the beginning. This is isn’t because you all reached the conclusion at the same time, it’s because the “governing body/faithful discreet slave” has and the laity followed. If that’s not what falls under “we follow the WT”, than I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn not far from Bethel…

To the OP, JW’s do have bishops of sorts. They are called “overseers”, which is what bishop means. They have elders, we call them priests/presbyters and “deacons”, they call them “ministerial servants”. Much of the structure of the WTBS is a caricature of the CC.
 
Regardless said:
It seems they believe what the Church says over the Bible. What is “the truth” isn’t the point. It’s what their Church says that is the important thing.
Jehovahs Witness’ don’t believe things because “the WT said” or “Russel said” or “Arius said” - they will believe it because the Bible - (and therefore Jehovah) said.
Click to expand...
And where do you think you got your Bible? Well, not yours, but rather the Bible as originally translated (not by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society). The New Testament was written and the canon discerned and approved by the Catholic Church. Therefore, it is the one authority that can determine its meaning. The measure as to whether or not a book was determined to be inspired by the Holy Spirit was Sacred Tradition. Scripture is only that part of Sacred Tradition committed to writing.

So yes, we listen to our Church in order to ascertain the meaning of the words contained in Sacred Scripture because our Church, as promised by Christ, has the Holy Spirit to guide it into all truth. All denominations of this original Church are in error to one degree or another as to the meaning of Scripture. As to those mentioned in the OP, they are in great error, so much so that the Catholic Church, as well as most Protestant denominations, cannot call them “Christian”.
 
Hello,

I was a Catholic Trinitarian for over 20 years (now 55) I began to sudy classical and koine Greek, along with Greek philosophy and Greek metaphysics and realised that the Trinity is based on Greek philosophy and its associated metaphysics, based on the concept od the “One, Nous and World Soul” and that the early apologists and individuald like Justin Martyr onwards etc were saturated with Greek thought and were Greek philosophers in their own right and they began to blend Greek ideas with biblical truth, so as to eventually produce a blended watered down version of Christianity, it became a veneer and such Greek conceptual thought is to be seen in the writings of such apologists and church fathers, if one know where to read and how to read them with a Greek mind that is, etc!

Here is a link to my blog, which has my experiences of dealing with Trinitarians! Some knowledge of Greek and Hebrew would be helpful, but not necessasry, as any technical terms and expressions are explained!
thoughts.com/search/letusreason

Please, drop me a line, in my blog with any questions, for or against!

many thanks,

letusreason
 
letusreason said:
Hello,

I was a Catholic Trinitarian for over 20 years (now 55) I began to sudy classical and koine Greek, along with Greek philosophy and Greek metaphysics and realised that the Trinity is based on Greek philosophy and its associated metaphysics, based on the concept od the “One, Nous and World Soul” and that the early apologists and individuald like Justin Martyr onwards etc were saturated with Greek thought and were Greek philosophers in their own right and they began to blend Greek ideas with biblical truth, so as to eventually produce a blended watered down version of Christianity, it became a veneer and such Greek conceptual thought is to be seen in the writings of such apologists and church fathers, if one know where to read and how to read them with a Greek mind that is, etc!

Here is a link to my blog, which has my experiences of dealing with Trinitarians! Some knowledge of Greek and Hebrew would be helpful, but not necessasry, as any technical terms and expressions are explained!
thoughts.com/search/letusreason

Please, drop me a line, in my blog with any questions, for or against!

many thanks,

letusreason
Click to expand...
Let Us Reason,

It is so easy to “prove” the Trinity from the Bible…although since the Bible was written by the Catholic Church (New Testament) & compiled by the Catholic Church (Old & New) I can understand why many Catholics may simply defer to the Catholic Church on the issue of Trias (In English Trinity) and any other issue concerning their Faith.

Here is the truth of the Trinity in the Bible:

Step One: “Let US make man in OUR image and likeness” Once male & female Persons were created they were commanded to “Be fruitful & multiply” - God created humans as family - the UNITY of Love is so strong between Man (Unique & Unrepeatable Person) & Woman (Unique & Unrepeatable Person) that 10 months later a Baby (Unique & Unrepeatable Person). God created man in 3 completely different Persons, but only One Family. (Side note: Because man is Not Eternal, the 3rd Person is not eternally created which is why most human families obedient to God’s Commandment to Be Fruitful & Multiply usually end up with more than one Person created from their Unity of Love.)

Step Two: “God Is Eternal” Has no beginning & no end. The “Alpha & Omega”.

Step Three: “God Is Love” specific type of Love Agape - unconditional Love between Persons, as opposed to “love” of things.

Enter Simple Logic: In order to be Eternal Love as the Bible reveals God to be, God would have to be Trias - Three Unique and Unrepeatable Persons.

Why?

Because God cannot be Eternal Love without two Eternal Persons to Love each other & that Unity of Love so strong that it Eternally creates another Person. God was Trinity from before the beginning of time & will remain Trinity until after the desolution of time.

Biblical. Simple.

Trias/Trinity: 3 Distinct Persons 1 God

The only way possible for God Not to be Trinity is if the Bible is not actually inspired by God because the truths within it would have to be false - either God Is Not Eternal or God Is Not Love - if it were true that God is not Trinity.

The Bible is True & God Is, Was & Always Will Be Trinity: 3 Persons 1 God!
 
T_More said:
…
And Regardless, 40,000 denominations are claiming to be following the bible,
…
Click to expand...
Yes. But how any of those 40,000 have millions of their members motivated to go out and show people from the Bible that what they teach is the truth?
Most “claim to follow the Bible” denomination people could not show you where their basic teaching are found.
Only JW’s have the knowledge to turn up on your doorstep and say: “Let me show you from the Bible the truth about this…”
You use the word “claim” very well. If they were following the Bible jesus would be using them to fullfill the prophecy he made at Matt. 24:14.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top