U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-23-2017, 06:37 PM
 
Location: Southern Oregon
15,552 posts, read 7,007,722 times
Reputation: 1604

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by nateswift View Post
I have to wonder if you actually read my post, Mike555. I certainly didn't say that Irenaeus was a universalist. I said that the REASON he posted what you cited is BECAUSE the "heresy" named was widely held in the church and OPPOSED to HIS view.


Why do YOU think he posted the polemic?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
If you are agreeing that Irenaeus's view was that of eternal punishment then why post and say 'No Mike.'

I posted the following in post #8.
''Most of the men you quoted came long after the time of Irenaeus. In Irenaeus's time, the church still held the belief handed down by the apostles that the punishment was eternal.''
To which you replied in post #9,
''No, Mike, the REASON Irenaeus addressed the concept is that it was widely held and opposed to HIS views.''
I didn't even state a reason in post #8 for you to reply ''No'' to.

Irenaeus stated that the belief of the church was that which had been handed down by the apostles. It was the belief to which he himself held as shown by his statement to that effect.
Let's take this a step at a time and hope you follow me. 1. You stated that Irenaeus presented the view of the early church. 2. I stated that the reason he published his polemic was that ER was a widespread view in the church that he was trying to demolish. 3 I asked why he would publish his polemic on the subject if it were not the case that the opposition to his views were not widespread in the church.


4. You can't seem to come up with an answer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-23-2017, 06:58 PM
 
20,301 posts, read 15,654,940 times
Reputation: 7415
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
Most of the men you quoted came long after the time of Irenaeus. In Irenaeus's time, the church majority still held the belief handed down by the apostles that the punishment was eternal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nateswift View Post
No, Mike, the REASON Irenaeus addressed the concept is that it was widely held and opposed to HIS views.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
Irenaeus was not a Universalist. His view on eternal punishment was that of the church in his day. Quoting him;
Against Heresies, Book 4, Chapter XXVIII (28), section 3;

For the sesame heretics already mentioned by us have fallen away from themselves, by accusing the Lord, in whom they say that they believe. For those points to which they call attention with regard to the God who then awarded temporal punishments to the unbelieving, and smote the Egyptians, while He saved those that were obedient; these same [facts, I say, ] shall nevertheless repeat themselves in the Lord, who judges for eternity those whom He doth judge, and lets go free for eternity those whom He does let go free: [Bolding mine]

Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies / Adversus Haereses, Book 4 (Roberts-Donaldson translation)
Irenaeus himself was saying that the punishment is eternal. But even if he had been a Universalist, his statement still holds true that the majority belief in his day was that which the apostles handed down; that the punishment is eternal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nateswift View Post
I have to wonder if you actually read my post, Mike555. I certainly didn't say that Irenaeus was a universalist. I said that the REASON he posted what you cited is BECAUSE the "heresy" named was widely held in the church and OPPOSED to HIS view.


Why do YOU think he posted the polemic?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
If you are agreeing that Irenaeus's view was that of eternal punishment then why post and say 'No Mike.'

I posted the following in post #8.
''Most of the men you quoted came long after the time of Irenaeus. In Irenaeus's time, the church still held the belief handed down by the apostles that the punishment was eternal.''
To which you replied in post #9,
''No, Mike, the REASON Irenaeus addressed the concept is that it was widely held and opposed to HIS views.''
I didn't even state a reason in post #8 for you to reply ''No'' to.

Irenaeus stated that the belief of the church was that which had been handed down by the apostles. It was the belief to which he himself held as shown by his statement to that effect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nateswift View Post
Let's take this a step at a time and hope you follow me. 1. You stated that Irenaeus presented the view of the early church. 2. I stated that the reason he published his polemic was that ER was a widespread view in the church that he was trying to demolish. 3 I asked why he would publish his polemic on the subject if it were not the case that the opposition to his views were not widespread in the church.


4. You can't seem to come up with an answer.
Irenaeus' statement was not a polemic against the belief of the early church of his day. You're stating that Irenaeus did not share the view of the early church concerning the belief that he says was handed down by the apostles. I've already posted in post #10 a quote from Irenaeus that he did share the view of the early church.

Your claim that Irenaeus was trying to demolish the belief of the early church has no merit. Does the following quote sound to you like Irenaeus opposed the view of the early church?
Against Heresies, book 4, chapter Chapter XXVIII, section 1.


1. Inasmuch, then, as in both Testaments there is the same righteousness of God [displayed] when God takes vengeance, in the one case indeed typically, temporarily, and more moderately; but in the other, really, enduringly, and more rigidly: for the fire is eternal, and the wrath of God which shall be revealed from heaven from the face of our Lord (as David also says, "But the face of the Lord is against them that do evil, to cut off the remembrance of them from the earth" ), entails a heavier punishment on those who incur it,-the ciders pointed out that those men are devoid of sense, who, [arguing] from what happened to those who formerly did not obey God, do endeavour to bring in another Father, setting over against [these punishments] what great things the Lord had done at His coming to save those who received Him, taking compassion upon them; while they keep silence with regard to His judgment; and all those things which shall come upon such as have heard His words, but done them not, and that it were better for them if they had not been born, and that it shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the judgment than for that city which did not receive the word of His disciples. [Bolding mine]

http://www.earlychristianwritings.co...eus-book4.html
Irenaeus was stating his personal belief that the fire is eternal which as he said elsewhere was the belief of the church which was handed down by the apostles. See post #5.

Last edited by Mike555; 02-23-2017 at 07:44 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-23-2017, 09:47 PM
 
Location: Southern Oregon
15,552 posts, read 7,007,722 times
Reputation: 1604
Mike555, you seem to have a problem with reading comprehension. Irenaeus stated HIS view of what SOME of the early church believed but he would not have published a polemic agains ER if THAT view had not been widely held in the early church, Can you understand that at all? How else can I get you to look at that EXCEPT by asking you to tell me why YOU think Irenaeus would publish a polemic against ER?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2017, 06:36 AM
 
20,301 posts, read 15,654,940 times
Reputation: 7415
Quote:
Originally Posted by nateswift View Post
Mike555, you seem to have a problem with reading comprehension. Irenaeus stated HIS view of what SOME of the early church believed but he would not have published a polemic agains ER if THAT view had not been widely held in the early church, Can you understand that at all? How else can I get you to look at that EXCEPT by asking you to tell me why YOU think Irenaeus would publish a polemic against ER?
Perhaps you had better tell me what you mean by ER. ET refers to eternal punishment. I can't recall what the 'R' refers to in 'ER.'

Irenaeus did not state his view of what SOME of the early church believed. He stated the belief of the majority of the church of his day. The belief which he said had been passed down by the apostles. A belief which he himself held as was clearly shown by what he said.

Addendum: After submitting this post I read the posts of others who questioned what you meant by 'ER'. Your response indicates that you meant ET. As I showed you in post #19, Irenaeus shared the same belief of which he was writing about. I quoted a statement he made to that effect. I suggest you look to your own reading comprehension instead of attempting to belittle mine.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2017, 07:23 AM
 
15,029 posts, read 7,543,851 times
Reputation: 1975
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
Addendum: After submitting this post I read the posts of others who questioned what you meant by 'ER'. Your response indicates that you meant ET. As I showed you in post #19, Irenaeus shared the same belief of which he was writing about. I quoted a statement he made to that effect. I suggest you look to your own reading comprehension instead of attempting to belittle mine.
I thought it was obvious, in the context of what he said, that he meant UR.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2017, 07:46 AM
 
20,301 posts, read 15,654,940 times
Reputation: 7415
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
Perhaps you had better tell me what you mean by ER. ET refers to eternal punishment. I can't recall what the 'R' refers to in 'ER.'

Irenaeus did not state his view of what SOME of the early church believed. He stated the belief of the majority of the church of his day. The belief which he said had been passed down by the apostles. A belief which he himself held as was clearly shown by what he said.

Addendum: After submitting this post I read the posts of others who questioned what you meant by 'ER'. Your response indicates that you meant ET. As I showed you in post #19, Irenaeus shared the same belief of which he was writing about. I quoted a statement he made to that effect. I suggest you look to your own reading comprehension instead of attempting to belittle mine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pleroo View Post
I thought it was obvious, in the context of what he said, that he meant UR.
Possibly. But if so, you seem to be the only one to whom it was clear. Also, he had the opportunity in post #24 to clarify what he meant, but chose not to.

Last edited by Mike555; 02-24-2017 at 07:57 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2017, 10:45 AM
 
Location: Southern Oregon
15,552 posts, read 7,007,722 times
Reputation: 1604
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
Irenaeus did not state his view of what SOME of the early church believed. He stated the belief of the majority of the church of his day. The belief which he said had been passed down by the apostles. A belief which he himself held as was clearly shown by what he said.

Addendum: After submitting this post I read the posts of others who questioned what you meant by 'ER'. Your response indicates that you meant ET. As I showed you in post #19, Irenaeus shared the same belief of which he was writing about. I quoted a statement he made to that effect. I suggest you look to your own reading comprehension instead of attempting to belittle mine.
I apologize for confusing you even further with my missed abbreviation, I thought it was obvious in context that I was referring to universal redemption,


YOU state that Irenaeus gave "Majority" view but you have no way of knowing that. It is at least an improvement on your original statement that it was the view of the church. I was trying to make you see that in order for Irenaeus to write about what he considered heresy, that view had to be at least present and fairly widespread in the formal church. That you now claim it is only a majority view is at least an improvement.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2017, 01:22 PM
 
20,301 posts, read 15,654,940 times
Reputation: 7415
Quote:
Originally Posted by nateswift View Post
I apologize for confusing you even further with my missed abbreviation, I thought it was obvious in context that I was referring to universal redemption,


YOU state that Irenaeus gave "Majority" view but you have no way of knowing that. It is at least an improvement on your original statement that it was the view of the church. I was trying to make you see that in order for Irenaeus to write about what he considered heresy, that view had to be at least present and fairly widespread in the formal church. That you now claim it is only a majority view is at least an improvement.
As I said, the language Irenaeus used does not lend itself to a minority view.

From post #5,
Against Heresies, book 1, chapter 10, section 1.

Chapter X.-Unity of the Faith of the Church Throughout the Whole World.

1. The Church, though dispersed through our the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: [She believes} . . . [Bolded mine]

Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies / Adversus Haereses, Book 1 (Roberts-Donaldson translation)
That language very clearly speaks of a majority belief within the church of Irenaeus's time. He doesn't say some in the church, he says the church. And while that doesn't necessarily mean everyone without exception, it very clearly refers to the general belief of the church.

The fact that Irenaeus wrote about heresy doesn't mean the heresy that he addressed was the dominant view.

Last edited by Mike555; 02-24-2017 at 02:01 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2017, 02:25 PM
 
Location: Southern Oregon
15,552 posts, read 7,007,722 times
Reputation: 1604
"The fact that Irenaeus wrote about heresy doesn't mean the heresy that he addressed was the dominant view."


No, it doesn't, any more than it means that his view was correct.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-24-2017, 02:33 PM
 
20,301 posts, read 15,654,940 times
Reputation: 7415
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555 View Post
As I said, the language Irenaeus used does not lend itself to a minority view.

From post #5,
Against Heresies, book 1, chapter 10, section 1.

Chapter X.-Unity of the Faith of the Church Throughout the Whole World.

1. The Church, though dispersed through our the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: [She believes} . . . [Bolded mine]

Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies / Adversus Haereses, Book 1 (Roberts-Donaldson translation)
That language very clearly speaks of a majority belief within the church of Irenaeus's time. He doesn't say some in the church, he says the church. And while that doesn't necessarily mean everyone without exception, it very clearly refers to the general belief of the church.

The fact that Irenaeus wrote about heresy doesn't mean the heresy that he addressed was the dominant view.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nateswift View Post
"The fact that Irenaeus wrote about heresy doesn't mean the heresy that he addressed was the dominant view."


No, it doesn't, any more than it means that his view was correct.
The OP made a false statement which I addressed. He said, ''Until the time of Augustine most Christians believed in the salvation of everyone.'' Irenaeus refutes that statement and says that the belief of the church 'of his time' was handed down by the apostles. You may not have any regard for the teaching of the apostles, but I do. And now I will leave this thread for you people to argue Universalism versus eternal punishment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top