Reddit Reddit reviews Early Christian Writings: The Apostolic Fathers

We found 11 Reddit comments about Early Christian Writings: The Apostolic Fathers. Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.

Books
Christian Books & Bibles
Christian Church History
Christian Ministry & Church Leadership
Early Christian Writings: The Apostolic Fathers
Penguin Classics
Check price on Amazon

11 Reddit comments about Early Christian Writings: The Apostolic Fathers:

u/Ibrey · 28 pointsr/Catholicism

Mormonism and Islam claim to have the authentic teaching of Jesus, but only ours can be traced back to Jesus in history. Irenaeus of Lyons, writing in the late 2nd Century, considers the public succession of bishops going back to Jesus to be the guarantee of authentic Christian doctrine:

> 1. It is within the power of all, therefore, in every Church, who may wish to see the truth, to contemplate clearly the tradition of the apostles manifested throughout the whole world; and we are in a position to reckon up those who were by the apostles instituted bishops in the Churches, and [to demonstrate] the succession of these men to our own times; those who neither taught nor knew of anything like what these [heretics] rave about. For if the apostles had known hidden mysteries, which they were in the habit of imparting to the perfect apart and privily from the rest, they would have delivered them especially to those to whom they were also committing the Churches themselves. For they were desirous that these men should be very perfect and blameless in all things, whom also they were leaving behind as their successors, delivering up their own place of government to these men; which men, if they discharged their functions honestly, would be a great boon [to the Church], but if they should fall away, the direst calamity.

In brief, one of the most persuasive arguments to me for Catholicism over other forms of Christianity, or over non-Christian religions which claim to be the heirs to Christ's teaching, is that when you read the writings of those closest to Christ in history, they sound like Catholics; certainly more like Catholics than like members of any Protestant denomination. Protestant polemicists may charge that this or that doctrine which is Catholic dogma today is not explicitly attested until such and such a century, and it's true you don't find every last Catholic doctrine fully developed right away, but even just reading the very earliest Christian writings outside the New Testament itself, you find Catholic doctrines difficult to reconcile with Protestantism. They say that the bishop, with his priests and deacons, represents the authority of God, because of the succession of clergy instituted by Christ, and all should be united with the bishop in the Eucharist, which is a sacrifice.

Even more importantly, the New Testament itself testifies to the visible unity Christ wanted for his Church. He prayed at the Last Supper that the apostles, and all who would believe in him through their word, might all be one, so that by their unity, the whole world might see that he was sent by the Father. Paul urges that there be no divisions among us, and that we not split into factions named after their founder. The visibly united Catholic Church looks more like the Church as described in the New Testament than the multitude of Protestant denominations, even if there are not 30,000 of them as frequently claimed.

To judge between Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy in such a way is a little more difficult than between Catholicism and Protestantism. Some people here will openly tell a person thinking of converting to Catholicism or Orthodoxy that they think Orthodoxy is close enough. But, for one thing, I think it is important to maintain communion with the See of Rome, which was recognised from the first centuries as "preeminent in love" above all other sees. In the text already quoted above, Irenaeus of Lyons goes on:

> 2. Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; [we do this, I say,] by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere.

We should not necessarily draw extravagant conclusions about Irenaeus' faith in papal infallibility from this text. Irenaeus may only mean it is necessary to agree with Rome because it is necessary to agree with all of the apostolic sees, of which Rome is one. But his piling up of praises ("very great, very ancient, and universally known") and citation of Rome's double apostolic foundation do suggest he has chosen the most eminent example, and not merely an example. Theologians can argue about whether Scriptural and patristic evidence justifies the Catholic dogmas of today on the papacy, but at a basic level, it's clear Rome had an important role in the early Church, and that is more consistent with what is found today in the Catholic Church than in the Orthodox Church, which will not be associated with Rome at all.

u/iwishiwaswise · 6 pointsr/OrthodoxChristianity

One of the first things I read when I was investigating Orthodoxy was the Apostolic Fathers. These were students of the Apostles themselves. Their letters give an accurate view toward early Church structure and doctrines. Their letters read similarly to the books of the NT.

The following book is by Penguin publishing, which isn't even a Christian publishing house:
https://smile.amazon.com/Early-Christian-Writings-Apostolic-Fathers/dp/0140444750/

u/IAmBCDeathOwnerOfCat · 5 pointsr/Catholicism

This is a great book to start with. It covers the subapostolic era/authors, meaning the generation directly after the apostles, those who studied under them. It's amazing to see how Catholic we were from the very beginning, especially in the letters of St. Ignatius. https://www.amazon.com/Early-Christian-Writings-Apostolic-Fathers/dp/0140444750

u/pomiluj · 3 pointsr/OrthodoxChristianity

Penguin Classics has a book called "Early Christian Writings" containing the epistles of St Ignatius of Antioch, epistles of St Barnabas, epistles of St Polycarp, Martyrdom of Polycarp, the Didache, and more. It's about $15 on amazon I think. Everything in it is from the 1st and 2nd century.

http://www.amazon.com/Early-Christian-Writings-Apostolic-Fathers/dp/0140444750

u/rahkshi_hunter · 2 pointsr/suggestmeabook

Caesar and Christ by Will Durant covers both Roman civilization and Christianity up until 325 AD. This is Vol. 3 in his acclaimed Story of Civilization series.

In terms of what people during the time period wrote about Christianity, I suggest reading the Apostolic Fathers, i.e. the influential church leaders between the apostles and the First Council of Nicea. Additionally, The History of the Church by Eusebius was written around 325 AD

u/DKowalsky2 · 1 pointr/TrueChristian

He's so readable that I can definitely recommend skipping the books about St. Augustine and just going directly to the source. As others have mentioned, Confessions. Others you may be interested in are City of God and On Grace And Free Will.

Also, as /u/Philip_Schwartzerdt mentioned, John Calvin isn't typically considered one of the Church Fathers given that his time on earth came in the 16th century. In fact, as a Catholic, we would consider him a heretic, but that's neither here nor there. :)

For other early Church Fathers books, you may want to check out this collection of writings from the early church, Against Heresies by St. Iranaeus, countering heresy in the early Church, and The First And Second Apologies by St. Justin Martyr, a convert to the faith at about 130 A.D. and who was martyred (surprise) around 165 A.D.

As you may have guessed, with me being a Catholic in the Roman Rite, that's the perspective to which my study of the early Church Fathers led me, but if you wish to get a primer on St. Irenaeus before the books come, this is a worthwhile read.

I highly encourage the study of the fathers. The whole Christian world disagrees on many parts of of Sacred Scripture, and the testimony of the fathers, especially those who were direct disciples of the Apostles, should be one of our primary sources of discerning Christian truth amid the chaos. Plainly put, there are many interpretations of Scripture which "make sense" or are feasible outside of the tradition of the Apostles, but if said interpretation is true, it should be reflected in the doctrines, beliefs, and practices of those whom the Apostles taught.

I'll pray for you as you jump into this study. Please reach out if I can be of any help!

Peace,

DK

u/DavidvonR · 1 pointr/Christianity

Sure. If you want scholarly resources on the resurrection, then I would suggest The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach by Licona. You can get it on Amazon for about $35 and it's a long read at 700+ pages.

https://www.amazon.com/Resurrection-Jesus-New-Historiographical-Approach/dp/0830827196/ref=sr_1_1?crid=3UCOAX5QZYQUY&keywords=the+resurrection+of+jesus+mike+licona&qid=1570211397&sprefix=the+resurrection+of+Jesus%2Caps%2C157&sr=8-1

Another good scholarly resource is The Case For the Resurrection of Jesus by Habermas and Licona. You can get it for about $13 dollars on Amazon.

https://www.amazon.com/Case-Resurrection-Jesus-Gary-Habermas/dp/0825427886/ref=pd_sbs_14_1/140-8576167-7556334?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=0825427886&pd_rd_r=decfba9d-109a-4324-99c9-ba4523d42796&pd_rd_w=TIA6v&pd_rd_wg=EeKYx&pf_rd_p=d66372fe-68a6-48a3-90ec-41d7f64212be&pf_rd_r=WW1HBRRY8K7JV6EPDW3P&psc=1&refRID=WW1HBRRY8K7JV6EPDW3P

I would also suggest getting a general overview of the New Testament. Bart Ehrman is probably the world's leading skeptical scholar of the New Testament. His book on the New Testament, The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the New Testament Writings, is a great resource and can be bought on Amazon for around $6.

https://www.amazon.com/New-Testament-Historical-Introduction-Christian/dp/0195126394/ref=sr_1_6?keywords=introduction+to+new+testament+ehrman&qid=1570211027&sr=8-6

Other books that I would strongly recommend would be:

Early Christian Writings. A short read at 200 pages. A catalog of some of the earliest Christian writings outside the New Testament. You can get it for $3 on Amazon.

https://www.amazon.com/Early-Christian-Writings-Apostolic-Fathers/dp/0140444750/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=early+christian+writings&qid=1570212985&s=books&sr=1-1

The New Testament: Its Background, Growth and Content Bruce Metzger was one of the leading New Testament scholars of the 20th century. You can get it for $20.

https://www.amazon.com/New-Testament-Background-Growth-Content/dp/1426772491/ref=pd_sbs_14_5/140-8576167-7556334?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=1426772491&pd_rd_r=d83ca7e7-e9be-4da7-b3e8-3e5b6e143a27&pd_rd_w=AUNpT&pd_rd_wg=VLsLw&pf_rd_p=d66372fe-68a6-48a3-90ec-41d7f64212be&pf_rd_r=RESQKSAY5XYMKZ939JS7&psc=1&refRID=RESQKSAY5XYMKZ939JS7

The Fate of the Apostles, by McDowell. An in-depth study of how reliable the martyrdom accounts of the apostles are. A little bit pricey at $35-40.

https://www.amazon.com/Fate-Apostles-Sean-McDowell/dp/1138549134/ref=sr_1_1?crid=JBDB9MJMOVL8&keywords=the+fate+of+the+apostles&qid=1570212064&s=books&sprefix=the+fate+of+the+ap%2Cstripbooks%2C167&sr=1-1

Ecclesiastical History, by Eusebius, a 3rd century historian. Eusebius documents the history of Christianity from Jesus to about the 3rd century. You can get it for $10.

https://www.amazon.com/New-Testament-Background-Growth-Content/dp/1426772491/ref=pd_sbs_14_5/140-8576167-7556334?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=1426772491&pd_rd_r=d83ca7e7-e9be-4da7-b3e8-3e5b6e143a27&pd_rd_w=AUNpT&pd_rd_wg=VLsLw&pf_rd_p=d66372fe-68a6-48a3-90ec-41d7f64212be&pf_rd_r=RESQKSAY5XYMKZ939JS7&psc=1&refRID=RESQKSAY5XYMKZ939JS7

u/Bradn085 · 1 pointr/Christianity

>We do not stand alone. We have the shared and consistent apostolic confession as passed down through the generations.

- exactly what our Lutheran friend said. So look at the early church fathers and read what they said from their own mouths. Just follow it from the ground up through the 21st century.


I would start here: Early Church Writings - 2nd Century Church

Go mid-way here: Church Fathers 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th Century,

6th century to 16th century here: Later Centuries / Renaissance + Not What Luther Thought of the Gospel

End here: Final Centuries - The Church's Designated Sr. Pastor Sums it Up for You

Just follow the Church's confessions, including its confessions through the Protestant heresies, and just make it to the end. Very simple. It's crisp when others don't throw in heresies in the middle to confuse you.