Quote:
Originally Posted by Willy Jacks
I’ve been lurking for the last few weeks, and I’ve enjoyed reading through some of the discussions. They contain a lot of helpful information, and some very humorous things as well. However, what sparked my attention and inspired me to briefly join were the posts written by the person behind the name “Believer.” He is passionate about what he believes and this far is able to show proof to what he believes, which was not well received. With that said, I want my journey to finding the truth to be as passionate, forthright and honest, even if it hurts.
I'm discouraged by the answers given to “Believer” on the subject “The Early Church Fathers,” as the answers lack any real weight. Answers such as, “all our records were destroyed,” or “that is not what they meant when they said that,” or “the writings were changed by the Catholic heretics” are not valid answers. For one, there isn’t any proof that any records were destroyed, or that all the writings were changed by the Catholic church. By making these assertion without any proof only perpetuate a lie. Their needs to be actual proof, not unfounded information. We should not have to make stuff up in order to be right. That is clearly dishonest. Don’t misunderstand, this is not in support of “Believer” or his doctrine, as it may appear. The truth is not found behind excuses and “pet” answers.
I’m not saying that I have the answers yet, but I want to seek them out, and to do so honestly. I truly believe if the Oneness doctrine was held by the Early Church Christians the answers will be there. God Bless.
|
You are leveling some fairly general accusations here willyjack... nothing too specific in your post per-se either. I am not certain what of Believer's positions he has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. If you can show me where he has proven conclusively something that he has said, then I would like to see it.
I asked Believer a couple of very valid questions:
1. Where was the fully developed doctrine of the trinity referenced in any writing in the first three centuries of the church?
2. When, where, and by whom was the doctrine of the trinity established as the official dogma of the "real" church?
3. Who and where was the real church between the years of 400AD to 1500AD? Was it the Roman Catholics? The Greek Orthadox? African Orthadox?
Believer never answered any of these question, so I don't see where you can even suggest that he "proved" his point? The only thing he has done is reference trinitarian biased historical writings on the internet.
Back on page 12 or so of this thread, I posted a copy of several writings and church figures throughout history, from 95AD (Clement of Rome) all the way down to the 1800's of people who were monarchian and wrote in favore of the monarchian theology and/or against trinitarianism. I have yet to see any of these citations refuted. Again, how can you suggest that Believer has "proven" his point, when he really hasn't proven anything? I cited a wikipedia article that shows the monarchian and other true doctrines of the Paulicians, and what did Believer do? He goes to wikipedia and "edits" the part he disagreed with. (in the same way the Roman Catholic church has "edited" parts of history it disagrees with). Proof of editing in history? What about the "comma Johanneam"? It is an obvous "edit" in the actual text of the scriptures themselves. But thank God there are thousands of manuscripts that give us a clear picture of the actual text of the scripture. Many of the "historical" texts of the early church fathers are spurious and questionable. They are not inspired, and you cannot base doctrine on those texts. The Bible is really the only thing that can "prove" anything. If Believer is going to "prove" he is right, the only way he is going to be able to do it is from the Bible itself. History, and commentary on history, is ALWAYS subjective to the bias of the commentator...
Threaded Mode
