Are we to believe what Fathers of the Church taught?

[polonius]

In addition to gospels and epistles, the church has number of “Fathers of the Church� many of which are claimed to be saints too.

Is what they claim supposed to be “God breathed,� too?

[polonius]

“Our earliest Greek text of these -which are found in many forms- is that given by Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical History (i. 13), extracted, as he says, by him from the archives of Edessa relating to Abgar and translated from Syriac word for word�
A copy of a letter written by Abgarus the toparch to Jesus, and sent to him by means of Ananias the runner, to Jerusalem.

“ But concerning that which thou hast written to me, to come unto thee; it must needs be that I fulfil all things for the which I was sent here, and after fulfilling them should then be taken up unto him that sent me.�

“And when I am taken up, I will send thee one of my disciples, to heal thine affliction and give life to thee and them that are with thee.�

Apparently, Jesus didn’t make house calls! But he sent someone who did.
Is this a historical of fictional writing?

[ttruscott]

In addition to gospels and epistles, the church has number of “Fathers of the Church� many of which are claimed to be saints too.

Is what they claim supposed to be “God breathed,� too?

I don't think so since they were imbued with Platonian and Aristotlean Greek wisdom non-sense...

[marco]

In addition to gospels and epistles, the church has number of “Fathers of the Church� many of which are claimed to be saints too.

Is what they claim supposed to be “God breathed,� too?

Depends which team you are on, Polonius. If we accept that some Christians perform brilliantly in carrying out Christ's message then it is believed that the light of Christ shines through what they say and do.

But let's take the word of Matthew 5:16


" In the same way, let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven. "

[Jack]

[Replying to polonius.advice]

The Catholic Church does not consider the writing of the early church fathers inspired, but it does consider it a reliable source of history. These early writings contain a glimpse of what the early church was like, early heresy and the very names of the heretics that opposed church teaching. There is bible commentary, sermons, structure of the Sunday church service. A lot of these writings are from the first and second centuries. So many of these writings are from people that learned about Jesus directly from the original Apostles. Closer to the well spring before the water got muddied up.

[brianbbs67]

To the OP, yes. They all can be considered , just as the letters of the NT are. Some are way out there. "The gospel of the holy twelve " comes to mind. But, Peter's gospel, the Gospel of the Hebrews and His "Apocalyse", seem to be exclude for no reason. Also the Gospel of Thomas. For that matter, Polycarp should be read also. His Epistle to Phillipians, is a great read. His student Iraneous, is anothter to consider.

http://bibletranslation.ws/down/Polycar ... ppians.pdf

[marco]

A lot of these writings are from the first and second centuries. So many of these writings are from people that learned about Jesus directly from the original Apostles. Closer to the well spring before the water got muddied up.

But even someone like Tertullian, a devout believer, was himself accused of heresy. In the early centuries there were many theories and as many heresies, so probably more muddled water than after Church Councils put things right, as they saw it.

[The Tanager]

To the OP, yes. They all can be considered , just as the letters of the NT are. Some are way out there. "The gospel of the holy twelve " comes to mind. But, Peter's gospel, the Gospel of the Hebrews and His "Apocalyse", seem to be exclude for no reason. Also the Gospel of Thomas. For that matter, Polycarp should be read also. His Epistle to Phillipians, is a great read. His student Iraneous, is anothter to consider.

http://bibletranslation.ws/down/Polycar ... ppians.pdf

My understanding is that they were excluded for reasons. Either the authorship was contested or too far removed from the Apostles or they were written too late or they were not accepted by a wide enough circle of Christians. They could still be seen as helpful and reliable without affording it the level of God-breathed Scripture.

[polonius]

A lot of these writings are from the first and second centuries. So many of these writings are from people that learned about Jesus directly from the original Apostles. Closer to the well spring before the water got muddied up.

But even someone like Tertullian, a devout believer, was himself accused of heresy. In the early centuries there were many theories and as many heresies, so probably more muddled water than after Church Councils put things right, as they saw it.

QUESTION:

Didn't Tertullian eventually leave the Catholic Church?

[Jack]

[Replying to polonius.advice]

Yes he did. He joined a heretical group that believed private revelation trumps scripture, then he made up his own sect. Same thing happening today. I believe they where heavily based on Johns writings, they believed the end was soon and prophesized when it would happen, it didn't happen. Same thing happening today.