Was original christianity like modern evangelicalism?

[BrianH]

You have to distinguish between what is an error of opinion and what is genuine heresy. To be looked upon as a canonized Early Church Father they must have not only been show to live a exemplary Christian life but their teachings must not contain heresy. Early Church Fathers like St Augustine did not teach imputed righteousness nor eternal security, two critical teachings which groups following Luther and Calvin must condemn a grave error.

Calling Augustine a part of “original Christianity” is like saying I am an “early American”. You are talking about 350 years later.

 

[suupah]

There is nothing in early Christian literature to support the statement you just made. In fact early in the Book of Acts, Peter preaches and several are saved and added to the church.
There is absolutely nothing to suggest that people did not become Christians at a church service.

What is supported is that they were baptized almost immediately upon accepting Christ.

 

[suupah]

Calling Augustine a part of “original Christianity” is like saying I am an “early American”. You are talking about 350 years later.

The point is that some evangelicals use Augustinian writings to dispel Catholic Doctrines. I have been told by pentecostal evangelicals that the church was pure until Augustine then Constantine stepped in an perverted it into modern day Catholicism.

 

[suupah]

No, the Bible does not support a bishop being in charge of an entire city and neither do the earliest documents.

This may be true. There were many Bishops in a city sometimes. But Bishops being in charge of a district or group of churches is both historical and biblical. It was also an authoritative office.

I don’t know of any evangelical church that has an authoritative office in the Biblical or historical sense.

 

[SyCarl]

But to be consistent they would have to anathematize Augustine on some of the same grounds they anathematize Catholics. For example Augustine believed in justification by infused grace while any Protestants true to the Reformers would have to condemn that teaching as grave heresy which they do in fact condemn Catholics for teaching.

There is at least one case where Augustine used language of imputation.

Then in another passage he says: “To him that works is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that works not, but believes in Him that justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. Even as David also describes the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputes righteousness without works, saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputes no sin.” Romans 4:4 8 And then after no long interval he observes: “Now, it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him; but for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe in Him that raised up Jesus Christ our Lord from the dead; who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.”-Augustine (On Merit and the Forgiveness of Sins, and the Baptism of Infants, Book 1 Chapter 43)

newadvent.org/fathers/15011.htm

You can also see Augustine writing in terms of double predestination.

These are the great works of the Lord, sought out according to all His pleasure, and so wisely sought out, that when the intelligent creation, both angelic and human, sinned, doing not His will but their own, He used the very will of the creature which was working in opposition to the Creator’s will as an instrument for carrying out His will, the supremely Good thus turning to good account even what is evil, to the condemnation of those whom in His justice He has predestined to punishment, and to the salvation of those whom in His mercy He has predestined to grace. .-Augustine (The Enchiridion, Chapter 100)

newadvent.org/fathers/1302.htm

He speaks of penal substitution.

Christ, though guiltless, took our punishment, that He might cancel our guilt, and do away with our punishment.-Augustine (Contra Faustum Book 14, Chapter 4)

newadvent.org/fathers/140614.htm

1. The believer in the true doctrine of the gospel will understand that Christ is not reproached by Moses when he speaks of Him as cursed, not in His divine majesty, but as hanging on the tree as our substitute, bearing our punishment, any more than He is praised by the Manichæans when they deny that He had a mortal body, so as to suffer real death. In the curse of the prophet there is praise of Christ’s humility, while in the pretended regard of the heretics there is a charge of falsehood. If, then, you deny that Christ was cursed, you must deny that He died; and then you have to meet, not Moses, but the apostles. Confess that He died, and you may also confess that He, without taking our sin, took its punishment. .-Augustine (Contra Faustum Book 14, Chapter 7)

newadvent.org/fathers/140614.htm

 

[SyCarl]

On the sufficiency and perpescuity of Scripture.

1. In all these books those who fear God and are of a meek and pious disposition seek the will of God. And in pursuing this search the first rule to be observed is, as I said, to know these books, if not yet with the understanding, still to read them so as to commit them to memory, or at least so as not to remain wholly ignorant of them. Next, those matters that are plainly laid down in them, whether rules of life or rules of faith, are to be searched into more carefully and more diligently; and the more of these a man discovers, the more capacious does his understanding become. For among the things that are plainly laid down in Scripture are to be found all matters that concern faith and the manner of life,Cto wit, hope and love, of which I have spoken in the previous book. After this, when we have made ourselves to a certain extent familiar with the language of Scripture, we may proceed to open up and investigate the obscure passages, and in doing so draw examples from the plainer expressions to throw light upon the more obscure, and use the evidence of passages about which there is no doubt to remove all hesitation in regard to the doubtful passages. And in this matter memory counts for a great deal; but if the memory be defective, no rules can supply the want.-Augustine (On Christian Doctrine, Book 2, Chapter 9, Paragraph 14)

newadvent.org/fathers/12022.htm

On what sins are mortal or venial

Now, what sins are trivial and what heinous is not a matter to be decided by man’s judgment, but by the judgment of God.-Augustine (The Enchiridion Chapter 78)

newadvent.org/fathers/1302.htm

He would seem to deny the Immaculate Conception as only Jesus was sinless.

This being the case, ever since the time when by one man sin thus entered into this world and death by sin, and so it passed through to all men, up to the end of this carnal generation and perishing world, the children of which beget and are begotten, there never has existed, nor ever will exist, a human being of whom, placed in this life of ours, it could be said that he had no sin at all, with the exception of the one Mediator, who reconciles us to our Maker through the forgiveness of sins-Augustine (On Merit and the Forgiveness of Sins, and the Baptism of Infants, Book 2 Chapter 47)

newadvent.org/fathers/15012.htm

Could Mary be said to be the Mother of God?

He was in an extraordinary manner begotten of the Father without a mother, born of a mother without a father; without a mother He was God, without a father He was man; without a mother before all time, without a father in the end of times…9. Why, then, said the Son to the mother, “Woman, what have I to do with you? mine hour is not yet come?” Our Lord Jesus Christ was both God and man. According as He was God, He had not a mother; according as He was man, He had. She was the mother, then, of His flesh, of His humanity, of the weakness which for our sakes He took upon Him.-Augustine (Tractates on John, Number 8, Paragraphs 8-9)

newadvent.org/fathers/1701008.htm

The “bread of life” discourse in John 6

1. “They said therefore unto Him, What shall we do, that we may work the works of God?” For He had said to them, “Labor not for the meat which perishes, but for that which endures unto eternal life.” “What shall we do?” they ask; by observing what, shall we be able to fulfill this precept? “Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.” This is then to eat the meat, not that which perishes, but that which endures unto eternal life. To what purpose do you make ready teeth and stomach? Believe, and you have eaten already.-Augustine (Tractates on the Gospel of John, Tractate 25, Paragraph 12)

newadvent.org/fathers/1701025.htm

Wherefore, the Lord, about to give the Holy Spirit, said that Himself was the bread that came down from heaven, exhorting us to believe in Him. For to believe in Him is to eat the living bread. He that believes eats; he is sated invisibly, because invisibly is he born again.-Augustine (Tractates on the Gospel of John. Tractate 26, Paragraph 1)

newadvent.org/fathers/1701026.htm

 

[SyCarl]

The visible and invisible church

1. The second rule is about the twofold division of the body of the Lord; but this indeed is not a suitable name, for that is really no part of the body of Christ which will not be with Him in eternity. We ought, therefore, to say that the rule is about the true and the mixed body of the Lord, or the true and the counterfeit, or some such name; because, not to speak of eternity, hypocrites cannot even now be said to be in Him, although they seem to be in His Church. And hence this rule might be designated thus: Concerning the mixed Church. Now this rule requires the reader to be on his guard when Scripture, although it has now come to address or speak of a different set of persons, seems to be addressing or speaking of the same persons as before, just as if both sets constituted one body in consequence of their being for the time united in a common participation of the sacraments.- Augustine (On Christian Doctrine, 3:32)

newadvent.org/fathers/12023.htm

The rock of Matthew 16:18

The Rock (Petra) made Peter true, for the Rock was Christ.-Augustine, (Sermons on the New Testament, Number 97, Paragraph 3)

newadvent.org/fathers/160397.htm

 

[SyCarl]

We can also look to John Chrysostom in the East.

On justification by faith alone

But after saying that “it was excluded,” he shows also, how. How then does he say it was excluded? “By what law? of works? Nay, but by the law of faith.” See he calls the faith also a law delighting to keep to the names, and so allay the seeming novelty. But what is the “law of faith?” It is, being saved by grace. Here he shows God’s power, in that He has not only saved, but has even justified, and led them to boasting, and this too without needing works, but looking for faith only.-John Chrysostom, (Homilies on Romans, Homily 7)

newadvent.org/fathers/210207.htm

What was the object of the Law and what the scope of all its enactments? Why, to make man righteous. But this it had no power to do. “For all,” it says, “have sinned:” but faith when it came accomplished it. For when a man is once a believer, he is straightway justified.-John Chrysostom, (Homilies on Romans, Homily 7)

newadvent.org/fathers/210207.htm

They said that he who kept not the Law was cursed, but he proves that he who kept it was cursed, and he who kept it not, blessed. Again, they said that he who adhered to Faith alone was cursed, but he shows that he who adhered to Faith alone, is blessed -John Chrysostom (Homilies on Galatians, Homily 3, Verse 8)

newadvent.org/fathers/23103.htm

For the Law requires not only Faith but works also, but grace saves and justifies by Faith.-John Chrysostom (Homilies on Galatians, Homily 3, Verse 12)

newadvent.org/fathers/23103.htm

For he makes a wide distinction between “commandments” and “ordinances.” He either then means “faith,” calling that an “ordinance,” (for by faith alone He saved us,) or he means “precept,” such as Christ gave, when He said, “But I say unto you, that you are not to be angry at all.”-John Chrysostom (Homilies on Ephesians, Homily 5)

newadvent.org/fathers/230105.htm

 

[SyCarl]

The sinlessness of Mary

For he makes a wide distinction between “commandments” and “ordinances.” He either then means “faith,” calling that an “ordinance,” (for by faith alone He saved us,) or he means “precept,” such as Christ gave, when He said, “But I say unto you, that you are not to be angry at all.”-John Chrysostom (Homilies on Ephesians, Homily 5)

newadvent.org/fathers/230105.htm

The rock of Matthew 16:18

You are Peter, and upon this rock will I build my Church;" Matthew 16:18 that is, on the faith of his confession.-John Chrysostom (Homilies on Matthew, Homily 54)

newadvent.org/fathers/200154.htm

On penal substitution

And what has He done? “Him that knew no sin He made to be sin, for you.” For had He achieved nothing but done only this, think how great a thing it were to give His Son for those that had outraged Him. But now He has both well achieved mighty things, and besides, has suffered Him that did no wrong to be punished for those who had done wrong. But he did not say this: but mentioned that which is far greater than this. What then is this? “Him that knew no sin,” he says, Him that was righteousness itself, “He made sin,” that is suffered as a sinner to be condemned, as one cursed to die. .-John Chrysostom, Homilies on 2 Corinthians, Homily 11, verse 21)

newadvent.org/fathers/220211.htm

The sufficiency and perpescuity of Scripture

What do I come in for, you say, if I do not hear some one discoursing? This is the ruin and destruction of all. For what need of a person to discourse? This necessity arises from our sloth. Wherefore any necessity for a homily? All things are clear and open that are in the divine Scriptures; the necessary things are all plain. -John Chrysostom, (Homilies on Second Thessalonians, 3, v. 5)

newadvent.org/fathers/23053.htm

“All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.” All what Scripture? all that sacred writing, he means, of which I was speaking. This is said of what he was discoursing of; about which he said, “From a child you have known the holy Scriptures.” All such, then, “is given by inspiration of God”; therefore, he means, do not doubt; and it is “profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.”

“For doctrine.” For thence we shall know, whether we ought to learn or to be ignorant of anything. And thence we may disprove what is false, thence we may be corrected and brought to a right mind, may be comforted and consoled, and if anything is deficient, we may have it added to us.

“That the man of God may be perfect.” For this is the exhortation of the Scripture given, that the man of God may be rendered perfect by it; without this therefore he cannot be perfect. You have the Scriptures, he says, in place of me. If you would learn anything, you may learn it from them. And if he thus wrote to Timothy, who was filled with the Spirit, how much more to us!

“Thoroughly furnished unto all good works”; not merely taking part in them, he means, but “thoroughly furnished.”-John Chrysostom (Homilies on Second Timothy, 9, 3:16-17)

newadvent.org/fathers/230709.htm

 

[sterryfamily]

Dude, you’re just like James White, cherry picking quotes from the fathers that you think support your novel ideas and ignoring the ones which don’t. The Church has always taken them all together. In balance.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

There is at least one case where Augustine used language of imputation.

You have got to be kidding me. Augustine was quoting Rom 4, that quote you put down says nothing about Augustine believing/teaching in imputation.

You can also see Augustine writing in terms of double predestination.

That quote is clear though that God uses man’s free actions in His plan. The wicked here were not predestined to hell in the sense God just felt like it but in a very real way based on their evil choices:These are the great works of the Lord, sought out according to all His pleasure, and so wisely sought out, that when the intelligent creation, both angelic and human, sinned, doing not His will but their own, He used the very will of the creature which was working in opposition to the Creator’s will as an instrument for carrying out His will … … For it would not be done did He not permit it (and of course His permission is not unwilling, but willing); nor would a Good Being permit evil to be done only that in His omnipotence He can turn evil into good.
This is in perfect harmony with Catholic teaching.

He speaks of penal substitution.

You posted these before and I clearly showed you you were taking them out of context. Augustine was writing against people who didnt think Jesus really died on the cross and it is clear from the context which I pointed out elsewhere he is not talking about the effects of the atonement but rather his focus is on the fact Jesus really died.

On the sufficiency and perpescuity of Scripture.

There is nothing wrong with what he says, the REAL problem here is that in that same section Augustine explicitly includes the Deutero-Canonical books as Scripture. This is selective citation at its finest.

On what sins are mortal or venial

LOL, you quoted a single sentence, apparently trying to show Augustine saw no difference between mortal and venial sins. That is downright dishonest work for what he means by “God decides” is that man’s opinion doesnt determine what grave and minor sin is but rather the Church and Scriptures!

He would seem to deny the Immaculate Conception as only Jesus was sinless.

There is a famous passage where Augustine explicitly teaches Mary likely was preserved from all sin. I dont have it off the top of my head but it can be easily googled.

Could Mary be said to be the Mother of God?

That is a false argument because all Augustine is concerned with is that She was not the mother of His Divine nature. She gave birth to a person, Jesus. He was fully God and fully man, to make the claim She was not mother of God the Son is the heresy of Nestorianism.

The “bread of life” discourse in John 6

In the next chapter Augustine clearly makes many references to “the Sacrament” and “altar” including:The sacrament of this thing, namely, of the unity of the body and blood of Christ, is prepared on the Lord’s table in some places daily, in some places at certain intervals of days, and from the Lord’s table it is taken, by some to life, by some to destruction: but the thing itself, of which it is the sacrament, is for every man to life, for no man to destruction, whosoever shall have been a partaker thereof.
He clearly links Jn 6 with the Eucharist, also there is a famous Psalm he comments on (Ps 34 I think) where it says “Taste and see, the Lord is good” and he says clearly this is the Eucharist and quotes from Jn 6.

The visible and invisible church

He is talking about the fact there are true and false Christians, basically tares among the wheat. He is not talking about the Protestant “invisible” church where there is no visible hierarchy and everyman for them self. The Catholic Church agrees with Augustine’s claims.

The rock of Matthew 16:18

That quote says nothing about Peter not being an authority or “Rock” but that Peter derived his power/authority from Jesus.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

We can also look to John Chrysostom in the East.

On justification by faith alone

I dont see him advocating imputation in those quotes though, so you dont have a case, in fact from the first source I saw quotes like this:“To declare His righteousness.” What is declaring of righteousness? Like the declaring of His riches, not only for Him to be rich Himself, but also to make others rich, or of life, not only that He is Himself living, but also that He makes the dead to live; and of His power, not only that He is Himself powerful, but also that He makes the feeble powerful. So also is the declaring of His righteousness not only that He is Himself righteous, but that He does also make them that are filled with the putrefying sores (κατασαπέντας ) of sin suddenly righteous.
This sounds like infusion of grace to me.

The sinlessness of Mary

That quote says nothing of Mary so either you are desperate or cutting and pasting, or both.

The rock of Matthew 16:18

There is nothing wrong with what he said. There are other quotes out there where St Chrysostom speaks of Peter as head/leader.

On penal substitution

Some of what he says does sound like penal substitution but other things dont. I would have to look into it more.

The sufficiency and perpescuity of Scripture

He said that in a limited sense commenting on a passage where Paul said “Remember ye not, that when I was yet with you, I told you these things?” As for “sufficiency” he comments about the next chapter:Ver. 15. “So then, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word, or by Epistle of ours.”

Hence it is manifest, that they did not deliver all things by Epistle, but many things also unwritten, and in like manner both the one and the other are worthy of credit. Therefore let us think the tradition of the Church also worthy of credit. It is a tradition, seek no farther. Here he shows that there were many who were shaken.
His comments on 2 Tim 3:16 I see nothing wrong with.

Out of all the quotes you provided for Augustine and Chrysostom I would say only a few raised any objection by me. Others didnt support your claim at all.

 

[revelations]

Well you know, as the great St. Peter once wrote in his life works on the subject of [insert beef with dogma here],
*
“…] the …]”*

so there! See, I was right!

-revelations

 

[East_and_West]

Dude, you’re just like James White, cherry picking quotes from the fathers that you think support your novel ideas and ignoring the ones which don’t. The Church has always taken them all together. In balance.

He’s not just cherry picking. He also misunderstand the Fathers. They often ascribe multiple meanings to one passage of scripture because the scriptures have depth to them. Yes, Christ established the Church on the faith of Peter’s confession but estabilishes it on that faith in the PERSON of PETER. That’s why his name is Peter.

 

[mozart-250]

Dude, you’re just like James White, cherry picking quotes from the fathers that you think support your novel ideas and ignoring the ones which don’t. The Church has always taken them all together. In balance.

How do I know he’s cherry picking and not y’all.

 

[SyCarl]

I dont see him advocating imputation in those quotes though, so you dont have a case, in fact from the first source I saw quotes like this:“To declare His righteousness.” What is declaring of righteousness? Like the declaring of His riches, not only for Him to be rich Himself, but also to make others rich, or of life, not only that He is Himself living, but also that He makes the dead to live; and of His power, not only that He is Himself powerful, but also that He makes the feeble powerful. So also is the declaring of His righteousness not only that He is Himself righteous, but that He does also make them that are filled with the putrefying sores (κατασαπέντας ) of sin suddenly righteous.
This sounds like infusion of grace to me.

That quote says nothing of Mary so either you are desperate or cutting and pasting, or both.

There is nothing wrong with what he said. There are other quotes out there where St Chrysostom speaks of Peter as head/leader.

Some of what he says does sound like penal substitution but other things dont. I would have to look into it more.

He said that in a limited sense commenting on a passage where Paul said “Remember ye not, that when I was yet with you, I told you these things?” As for “sufficiency” he comments about the next chapter:Ver. 15. “So then, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word, or by Epistle of ours.”

Hence it is manifest, that they did not deliver all things by Epistle, but many things also unwritten, and in like manner both the one and the other are worthy of credit. Therefore let us think the tradition of the Church also worthy of credit. It is a tradition, seek no farther. Here he shows that there were many who were shaken.
His comments on 2 Tim 3:16 I see nothing wrong with.

Out of all the quotes you provided for Augustine and Chrysostom I would say only a few raised any objection by me. Others didnt support your claim at all.

In one of my earlier posts I indicated that the early church fathers can be inconsistent depending why and about what they are writing. More than 1500 years after the fact we cannot really say what they may truly thought about something. I am merely refuting the claims so often made that these ideas had never been expressed by anyone before the Reformation.

With respect to infused grace, I think that you must misunderstand Protestant teaching. Protestants generally deny that righteousness is imputed to us simply because true righteousness in God’s eyes is perfection and we do not become perfect in this life time. That is why with respect to justification it is viewed as imputation of righteousness.

However salvation also includes regeneration and that is where the infusion takes place. We are given or infused with a new nature that allows us to want to be truly righteous and to do things pleasing to God. We still have to struggle against sin and can sin which means that we are not actually righteous.

For the Law, since it has only a shadow of the good things to come and not the very form of things, can never, by the same sacrifices which they offer continually year by year, make perfect those who draw near. Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, because the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have had consciousness of sins?
(Hebrews 10:1-2 NASB)

While this passage is dealing with the Old Testament sacrificies and cleansing, it clearly indicates that if we had truly been made perfect, which is what God requires for righteousness, we would not be aware of sin.

 

[Ne_OrangeKnight]

Justin Martyr wrote around 150 A.D., shedding light on practices of Christian worship.

And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things.

Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons.

And also,

Having ended the prayers, we salute one another with a kiss. There is then brought to the president of the brethren bread and a cup of wine mixed with water; and he taking them, gives praise and glory to the Father of the universe, through the name of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, and offers thanks at considerable length for our being counted worthy to receive these things at His hands.

And when he has concluded the prayers and thanksgivings, all the people present express their assent by saying Amen. This word Amen answers in the Hebrew language to γEνοιτο (so be it).

And when the president has given thanks, and all the people have expressed their assent, those who are called by us deacons give to each of those present to partake of the bread and wine mixed with water over which the thanksgiving was pronounced, and to those who are absent they carry away a portion.

Now, call me crazy, but I’m pretty clearly seeing the Liturgy of the Mass in there.

Taken from here, for those interested.

Sam, the Neon Orange Knight

 

[SyCarl]

Justin Martyr wrote around 150 A.D., shedding light on practices of Christian worship.

And also,

Now, call me crazy, but I’m pretty clearly seeing the Liturgy of the Mass in there.

Taken from here, for those interested.

Sam, the Neon Orange Knight

I can see the liturgy of most Proteetant communion services as well.

 

[revelations]

Because the protestants were derived from the Catholic faith for the first 100 or so years when all the priests were ordained but excommunicated. Naturally they kept on doing what they did best. Then they started dying off and things started changing.

 

[sandmountainsli]

I can see the liturgy of most Proteetant communion services as well.

As can I.
WP