Replies

Re: Scripture is never wrong.

That's what Arius said too, and were it not for Athanasius we'd all be Bible Believing Arians today.

That is funny, but I seriously doubt that the "Bible Christians" know who either of those two men are.

Wrong AGAIN! Plenty of us know who those guys were. And I doubt we would be Arians today even IF Athanasius wasn't around. The truth doesn't change and God revealed the truth about the Deity of Jesus Christ all throughout the Bible. We also know that Athanasius had the BETTER Scriptural argument than Arius and was why Arius' ideas about the Deity of Jesus were eventually called heresy. It was because of Athanasius' thorough knowledge of the Old and New Testaments that he was able to prevail and the doctrine of the Trinity was established as a tenet of the Orthodox Christian faith.

What some may not know is that Arius' Christology was NOT a novel view. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athanasius_of_Alexandria, we learn:

In about 319, when Athanasius was a deacon, a presbyter named Arius came into a direct conflict with Alexander of Alexandria. It appears that Arius reproached Alexander for what he felt were misguided or heretical teachings being taught by the bishop.[12] Arius’ theological views appear to have been firmly rooted in Alexandrian Christianity, and his Christological views were certainly not radical at all.[13] He embraced a subordinationist Christology (that Christ was the divine Son( Logos ) of God made not begotten ), heavily influenced by Alexandrian thinkers like Origen,[14] which was a common Christological view in Alexandria at the time.[15] Support for Arius from powerful bishops like Eusebius of Caesarea[16] and Eusebius of Nicomedia,[17] further illustrate how Arius' subordinationist Christology was shared by other Christians in the Empire. Arius was subsequently excommunicated by Alexander, and he would begin to elicit the support of many bishops who agreed with his position.

It sounds to me like Athanasius WAS a "Biblical Christian" which was how he proved the doctrine of the Trinity. He suffered persecution and numerous exiles because of it. It appears that there was no prevailing or "official" Roman Catholic dogma at that time on this subject and was why the First Council of Nicea was convened. So much for Rome's universal authority in those first centuries.

I'm sorry, "Mea Scriptura" christians are not allowed to Wikipedia for two reasons: 1) It is not the Bible and is not found in there.

2) Metmom has stated on several occasions, word to the effect; That is the one that can be edited on line.

I personally have no problem with Wikipedia, it is some of your non-Catholic cohorts that take exception with it.

And I doubt we would be Arians today even IF Athanasius wasn't around.

Perhaps not, but then again perhaps so. Arianism is still around us in the JWs and we've got at least one Arian on the RF, although I can't remember who he is... he doesn't run around shouting "OH look I'm an Arian booga-booga-booga" but he's an Arian.

Did Athanasius defend his Christology from Scripture alone?