Tag Archive | urkyrka

CITAT från kyrkofäderna visar på JESU GUDOM och TREENIGHETEN

bible 6Nedan CITAT visar att kyrkofäderna alltid lärde ut att Jesus är Gud, och att treenigheten består av tre personer/ manifestationer av en och samma Gud.  De första citaten är från Lyndon Conn.

“For OUR GOD JESUS CHRIST, was, according to the appointment of God, conceived in the womb by Mary, of the seed of David, but by the Holy Ghost.” (Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians 4:9)

“…GOD HIMSELF appearing in the form of a man, for the renewal of eternal life.” (Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians 4:13)

“Continue inseparable from JESUS CHRIST OUR GOD.” (Epistle of Ignatius to the Trallians 2:4)

“For even OUR GOD; JESUS CHRIST, know that He is in the Father”. (Epistle of Ignatius to the Romans 1:13) 

Brethren, WE OUGHT SO TO THINK OF JESUS CHRIST AS OF GOD : as of the judge of the living and the dead”. (2nd Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians 1:1) 

“For Christ is King, and Priest, and GOD and Lord…” (Justin Martyr, Dialogue With Trypho, 34)

“…He preexisted as the Son of the Creator of things, BEING GOD, and that He was born a man by the Virgin.” (Justin Martyr, Dialogue With Trypho, 48)

“Now may the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the eternal High Priest Himself, THE GOD JESUS CHRIST, build you up in the faith…” (The Epistle of Polycarp to the Church at Philippi, 12)

“In order that to Christ Jesus, our Lord, and GOD, and Savior, and King…” (Irenaeus Against Heresies, 1.10.1)

“But he Jesus is himself in his own right, beyond all men who ever lived, GOD, Lord, and king eternal, and THE INCARNATE WORD, proclaimed by all the prophets, the apostles …The Scriptures would not have borne witness to these things concerning Him, if, like everyone else, He were mere man.” (Irenaeus Against Heresies 3:19.1-2) 

“For with Him were always present the Word and Wisdom, the Son and the Spirit, by whom and in whom, freely and spontaneously, He made all things, to whom also He speaks, saying, ‘Let us make man after our image and likeness'”.(Irenaeus Against Heresies, 4:10)

Irenaeus, 115-190 “The Church, though dispersed throughout the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: …one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations of God, and the advents, and the birth from a virgin, and the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the ascension into heaven in the flesh of the beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord, and His manifestation from heaven in the glory of the Father ‘to gather all things in one,’ and to raise up anew all flesh of the whole human race, in order that to Christ Jesus, our Lord, and GOD, and Savior, and King, according to the will of the invisible Father, ‘every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess; to him, and that He should execute just judgment towards all…'” (Against Heresies X.l)

Tertullian, 160-225 We define that there are two, the Father and the Son, and three with the Holy Spirit, and this number is made by the pattern of salvation... [which] brings about unity in trinity, interrelating the three, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.  They are three, not in dignity, but in degree, not in substance but in form, not in power but in kind.  They are of one substance and power, because there is one God from whom these degrees, forms and kinds devolve in the name of Father, Son and Holy Spirit.” (Adv. Prax. 23; PL 2.156-7).

“We have also as a Physician the Lord OUR GOD JESUS THE CHRIST the only-begotten Son and Word, before time began, but who afterwards became also man, of Mary the virgin.  For ‘the Word was made flesh.’ Being incorporeal, He was in the body; being impassible, He was in a passable body; being immortal, He was in a mortal body; being life, He became subject to corruption, that He might free our souls from death and corruption, and heal them, and might restore them to health, when they were diseased with ungodliness and wicked lusts.” (Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., The ante-Nicene Fathers, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975 rpt., Vol. 1, p. 52, Ephesians 7.)

Abrahams möte med GUD och två änglar

abraham 2Justin Martyr, 100-165 AD

” I [Justin] inquired. And Trypho said, “Certainly; but you have not proved from this that there is another God besides Him who appeared to Abraham, and who also appeared to the other patriarchs and prophets. YOU HAVE PROVED, however, that we [the Jews] were WRONG in believing that the three who were in the tent with Abraham were all angels.” I [Justin] replied again, “If I could not have proved to you from the Scriptures that ONE OF THOSE THREE IS GOD, because, as I already said, He brings messages to those to whom God the Maker of all things wishes [messages to be brought], then in regard to Him who appeared to Abraham on earth IN HUMAN FORM IN LIKE MANNER AS THE TWO ANGELS who came with Him, and WHO AS GOD EVEN BEFORE THE CREATION OF THE WORLD, it were reasonable for you to entertain the same belief as is entertained by THE WHOLE OF YOUR NATION.” “Assuredly,” he said, “for up to this moment this has been our [the Jews] belief.” … “And now have you not perceived, my friends, that one of the three, WHO IS BOTH GOD AND LORD, and ministers to Him who is in the heavens, is Lord of the two angels? For when [the angels] proceeded to Sodom, HE REMAINED BEHIND, and COMMUNED WITH ABRAHAM in the words recorded by Moses; and when He departed after the conversation, Abraham went back to his place. And when he came [to Sodom], the two angels no longer conversed with Lot, but Himself, as the Scripture makes evident; and He is the LORD who received commission from the LORD who [remains] in the heavens, i.e., the Maker of all things, to inflict upon Sodom and Gomorrah the [judgments] which the Scripture describes in these terms: ‘The Lord rained down upon Sodom and Gomorrah sulphur and fire from the Lord out of heaven.’ “(Dialogue of Justin Martyr, with Trypho, a Jew, Chapter LVI.—God Who Appeared to Moses is Distinguished from God the Father.)

Irenaeus,  115-190 AD

“Therefore neither would the Lord, nor the Holy Spirit, nor the apostles, have ever named as God, definitely and absolutely, him who was not God, unless he were truly God; nor would they have named any one in his own person Lord, except God the Father ruling over all, and His Son who has received dominion from His Father over all creation, as this passage has it: “The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit Thou at my right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool.” Here the [Scripture] represents to us the Father addressing the Son; He who gave Him the inheritance of the heathen, and subjected to Him all His enemies. Since, therefore, the Father is truly Lord, and the Son truly Lord, the Holy Spirit has fitly designated them by the title of Lord. And again, referring to the destruction of the Sodomites, the Scripture says, “Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah fire and brimstone from the LORD out of heaven.” For it here points out that the Son, who had also been talking with Abraham, had received power to judge the Sodomites for their wickedness. And this [text following] does declare the same truth: “Thy throne, O GOD; is for ever and ever; the scepter of Thy kingdom is a right scepter. Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity: therefore GOD, Thy God, hath anointed Thee.” For the Spirit designates both [of them] BY THE NAME; OF GOD — both Him who is anointed as Son, and Him who does anoint, that is, the Father.” (Irenaeus, Book 3, ch 6)

Tertullian, 160-225 AD

“That is a still grander statement [of Christ’s deity] which you will find expressly made in the Gospel: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” There was One “who was,” and there was another “with whom” He was. But I find in Scripture the name Lord also applied to them Both: “The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou on my right hand.” And Isaiah says this: “Lord, who hath believed our report, and to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed? ” Now he would most certainly have said Thine Arm, if he had not wished us to understand that the Father is Lord, and the Son also is Lord. A much more ancient testimony [of Christ’s deity] we have also in Genesis: “Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven.” Now, either deny that this is Scripture; or else (let me ask) what sort of man you are, that you do not think words ought to be taken and understood in the sense in which they are written, especially when they are not expressed in allegories and parables, but in determinate and simple declarations?” (Tertullian, Against Praxeas, Chapter XIII.

 Ignatius, 30-117 AD

“For Moses, the faithful servant of God, when he said, “The Lord thy God is one Lord,” and thus proclaimed that there was only one God, did yet forthwith confess also our Lord [Jesus] when he said, “The Lord [Jesus] rained upon Sodom and Gomorrah fire and brimstone from the Lord.” And again [he confessed a second time our Lord Jesus by saying], “And God said, Let Us make man after our image: and so God made man, after the image of God made He him.”” (The Epistle of Ignatius to the Antiochians, Chapter II.—The True Doctrine Respecting God and Christ.)

Cyprian, 200-258 AD

“In the Gospel according to John: “The Father judgeth nothing, but hath given all judgment unto the Son, that all may honour the Son as they honour the Father. He who honoureth not the Son, honoureth not the Father who hath sent Him.” Also in the seventy-first Psalm: “O GOD, give the king Thy judgment, and Thy righteousness to the king’s son, to judge Thy people in righteousness.”Also in Genesis: “And the LORD rained upon Sodom and Gomorrah sulphur, and fire from heaven from the LORD.“” (The Treatises of Cyprian, Treatise XII. Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews. Third Book., Testimonies., 33. That the Father judgeth nothing, but the Son; and that the Father is not glorified by him by whom the Son is not glorified.)

Novatian, 200–258 AD

“For who does not acknowledge that the person of the Son is second after the Father, when he reads that it was said by the Father, consequently to the Son, “Let us make man in our image and OUR likeness; “ and that after this it was related, “And God made man, in the image of God made He him? “Or when he holds in his hands: “The LORD rained upon Sodom and Gomorrah fire and brimstone from the LORD from heaven? ” (A Treatise of Novatian Concerning the Trinity, Chapter XXVI. Argument.—Moreover, Against the Sabellians He Proves that the Father is One, the Son Another.)

“Therefore the Lord overturned Sodom, that is, GOD overturned Sodom; but in the overturning of Sodom, the LORD rained fire from the LORD. And this Lord was the God seen by Abraham; and this God was the guest of Abraham, certainly seen because He was also touched. But although the Father, being invisible, was assuredly not at that time seen, He who was accustomed to be touched and seen was seen and received to hospitality. BUT THIS THE SON OF GOD, “The LORD rained from the LORD upon Sodom and Gomorrha brimstone and fire.”And this is the Word of God. And THE WORD OF GOD WAS MADE FLESH, AND DWLTH AMNG US; AND THIS IS CHRIST. IT WAS NOT THE FATHER, THEN WHO WAS A GUEST WITH ABRAHAM, BUT CHRIST. NOR WAS IT THE FATHER WHO WAS SEEN THEN; , BUT THE SON; AND CHRIST WAS SEEN. Rightly, therefore, CHRIST IS BOTH LORD AND GOD, who was not otherwise seen by Abraham, EXCEPT THAT AS GOD THE WORD He was begotten of God the Father before Abraham himself.” (A Treatise of Novatian Concerning the Trinity, Chapter XVIII. Argument.—Moreover Also, from the Fact that He Who Was Seen of Abraham is Called God; Which Cannot Be Understood of the Father, Whom No Man Hath Seen at Any Time; But of the Son in the Likeness of an Angel.)

Constitutions of the Holy Apostles

“To Him did Moses bear witness, and said: “The LORD received fire from the LORD, and rained it down.” HIM DID JACOB SEE AS A MAN, and said: “I have seen God face to face, and my soul is preserved.”HIM DID ABRAHAM ENTERTAIN, and acknowledge to be the Judge, and HIS LORD.” (Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book V. XX. A Prophetic Prediction Concerning Christ Jesus.)

1 Mos. 1:26 Gud sade: “Låt oss göra människor till VÅR AVBILD, till att vara lika OSS. De skall råda över fiskarna i havet och över fåglarna under himlen, över boskapsdjuren och över hela jorden och över alla kräldjur som rör sig på jorden.” 27 Och Gud skapade MÄNNISKAN till sin avbild, till GUDS AVBILD skapade han henne, till man och kvinna skapade han dem.image

Epistle of Barnabas, 74 AD

“For the Scripture says concerning US, while He speaks to the SON, “Let Us make man after Our image, and after Our likeness” (Epistle of Barnabas, Chapter VI.—The Sufferings of Christ, and the New Covenant, Were Announced by the Prophets.)

The Letter of Barnabas 74 AD

“And further, my brethren, if the Lord [Jesus] endured to suffer for our soul, he being the Lord of all the world, to whom God said at the foundation of the world, ‘Let us make man after our image, and after our likeness,’ understand how it was that he endured to suffer at the hand of men” (Letter of Barnabas 5)

Justin Martyr, 100-165 AD

Idén att Moses skulle mena att det var änglar som åsyftades med “till vår avbild”, är en villolära, säger Justin

“In saying, therefore, ‘as one of us, ‘[Moses] has declared that [there is a certain] number of persons associated with one another, and that they are at least two. For I would not say that the dogma of that heresy which is said to be among you (The Jews had their own heresies which supplied many things to the Christian heresies) is true, or that the teachers of it can prove that [God] spoke to angels, or that the human frame was the workmanship of angels. But this Offspring, which was truly brought forth from the Father, was with the Father before all the creatures.” (Dialogue of Justin Martyr, with Trypho, a Jew: Chapter LXII.—The Words “Let Us Make Man”)

Irenaeus, 115-190 AD

 “It was not angels, therefore, who made us, nor who formed us, neither had angels power to make an image of God, nor any one else, except the Word of the Lord, nor any Power remotely distant from the Father of all things. For God did not stand in need of these [beings], in order to the accomplishing of what He had Himself determined with Himself beforehand should be done, as if He did not possess His own hands. For with Him were always present the Word and Wisdom, the Son and the Spirit, by whom and in whom, freely and spontaneously, He made all things, to whom also He speaks, saying, “Let Us make man after Our image and likeness; ” [Gen. 1:26]” (Against Heresies 4:20:1).

Tertullian,  160-225 AD

“If the number of the Trinity also offends you, as if it were not connected in the simple Unity, I ask you how it is possible for a Being who is merely and absolutely One and Singular, to speak in plural phrase, saying, “Let us make man in our own image, and after our own likeness; ” whereas He ought to have said, “Let me make man in my own image, and after my own likeness,” as being a unique and singular Being? In the following passage, however, “Behold the man is become as one of us,” He is either deceiving or amusing us in speaking plurally, if He is One only and singular. Or was it to the angels that He spoke, as the Jews interpret the passage, because these also acknowledge not the Son? Or was it because He was at once the Father, the Son, and the Spirit, that He spoke to Himself in plural terms, making Himself plural on that very account? Nay, it was because He had already His Son close at His side, as a second Person, His own Word, and a third Person also, the Spirit in the Word, that He purposely adopted the plural phrase, “Let us make; “and, “in our image; “and, “become as one of us.” (Tertullian, Against Praxeas, Chapter XII. Other Quotations from Holy Scripture Adduced in Proof of the Plurality of Persons in the Godhead.)

“Since then he is the image of the Creator (for He, when looking on Christ His Word, who was to become man, said, “Let us make man in our own image, after our likeness”), how can I possibly have another head but Him whose image I am? For if I am the image of the Creator there is no room in me for another head” (Tertullian, Book V, Elucidations, Chapter VIII.—Man the Image of the Creator, and Christ the Head of the Man.)

“In the first place, because all things were made by the Word of God, and without Him was nothing made. Now the flesh, too, had its existence from the Word of God, because of the principle, that here should be nothing without that Word. “Let us make man,” said He, before He created him, and added, “with our hand,” for the sake of his pre-eminence, that so he might not be compared with the rest of creation.” (Tertullian: On the Resurrection of the Flesh, Elucidations, Chapter V.—Some Considerations in Reply Eulogistic of the Flesh. It Was Created by God.)

Origen, 184-254 AD

“it was to Him that God said regarding the creation of man, “Let Us make man in Our image, after Our likeness.” (Origen Against Celsus, Book V, Chapter XXXVII)

Novatian, 200–258 AD

“For who does not acknowledge that the person of the Son is second after the Father, when he reads that it was said by the Father, consequently to the Son, “Let us make man in our image and our likeness; ” and that after this it was related, “And God made man, in the image of God made He him? “Or when he holds in his hands: “The Lord rained upon Sodom and Gomorrah fire and brimstone from the Lord from heaven? ” (A Treatise of Novatian Concerning the Trinity, Chapter XXVI. Argument.—Moreover, Against the Sabellians He Proves that the Father is One, the Son Another.)

Constitutions of the Holy Apostles

“the divine Scripture testifies that God said to Christ, His only-begotten, “Let us make man after our image, and after our likeness. And God made man: after the image of God made He him; male and female made He them.”(Constitutions of the Holy Apostles, Book V., VII)

Det finns enormt många fler citat i denna artikel på internet. Eller läs om Herrens Ängel som är GUD i denna artikel.

Augustinus och kyrkofädernas åsikter om Fri Vilja

De första ca 300 åren efter Jesu död

Den tidigaste kristna menade att det INTE var så att människor valde att göra det onda för att deras natur var ond/syndig, medan andra människor väljer det goda för att deras natur är god, för alla människor är av samma natur. Alla har fri vilja och kan välja mellan gott och ont. Gnostikerna satte sig emot detta och skrev till och med sina egna skrifter kända som De gnostiska skrifterna, där de använde kända namn som Maria, Thomas etc för att försöka ge stöd åt sina läror. Många av gnostikernas läror lyckades inte få fotfäste men vad gäller människans natur, fri vilja och syndens natur har falska läror tyvärr blivit accepterade och fortsätter att läras ut i våra kyrkor.

Gällande “Fri vilja” erkände John Kalvin om kyrkofädernas lära “As to the Fathers, (if their authority weighs with us,) they have the term constantly in their mouths”. Han sade “The Greek fathers above others have taught the power of the human will” och “they have not been ashamed to make use of a much more arrogant expression calling man ‘free agent’ or ‘self-manager’ just as if man had a power to govern himself”. Han sade också “The Latin fathers have always retained the word ‘free will’ as if man stood yet upright”.

Om urkyrkan var så enad i flera hundra år gällande den här läran, när skedde splittringen och vem orsakade den? Svaret är ganska uppenbart när vi ser till historien. Det var inte förrän på 400-talet som gnostiska och manikeiska influenser började infiltrera kyrkan och förgiftade den med sina läror. Augustinus anslöt sig till Kyrkan och blev biskop. Han började sedan att motarbeta det som Kyrkan alltid lärt ut om fri vilja och människans natur, och lärde ut den gnostiska synen.

John Gibb och William Montgomery sade “For nearly nine years Augustine was a Manichaean Auditor. At first he was a zealous partisan who contended publicly for his new faith, and did not hesitate to ridicule the doctrines of the Church and especially the Old Testament Scriptures”.

Märkligt nog så lärde Augustinus ut Fri vilja när han först anslöt sig till Kyrkan och debatterade mot manikeerna. Han sade “We [Christians] assert the liberty of the will, whereby our actions are rendered either moral or immoral, and keep it free from every bond of necessity, on account of the righteous judgment of God”. Samt: “The religious mind confesses and maintains that we do by our free will whatsoever we know and feel to be done by us only because we will it”. Och han sade “we sin voluntarily and not by necessity”. Men när han sedan började debattera med pelagianer så gick Augustinus tyvärr tillbaka till läran om totalt fördärv som manikéerna lärde. Beausobre märkte också denna förändring och att Augustinus försvarade Fri vilja “so long as he had to do with the Manichaeans. But when he came to dispute with the Pelagians, he changed his system. Then he denied that kind of freedom which before he had defended; and, so far as I am able to judge, his sentiments no longer differed from theirs [the Manichaeans] concerning the servitude of the will. He ascribed the servitude to the corruption which original sin brought into our nature; whereas the Manichaeans ascribed it to an evil quality, eternally inherit in matter.”

Synd var nu inte längre ett etiskt problem där människan själv hanterar sina val, utan ett metafysiskt problem där människan syndar av ren nödvändighet. De som kritiserade Augustinus för att lära ut Manekeism i stället för den sunda läran blev snart förföljda och fördömda som irrlärare när Augustinianism ernått Kyrklig auktoritet. De biskopar inom kyrkan som fortsatte att lära ut vad urkyrkan alltid lärt ut om Fri vilja och synd av val i stället för nödvändighet blev då bortdragna från sina talarstolar, fick sina ägodelar konfiskerade, och blev exkommunicerade av både kyrka och stat. Liksom Kalvinismen som kom efteråt, så använde Augustinianism politiska och statliga makter för att tysta alla former av opposition så att de nya lärorna kunde spridas som en farsot utan motstånd.

Det finns stora likheter men också några skillnader mellan Augustinianism och Gnostisism. Medan gnostikerna menade att människan natur var syndfull och fördärvad och att hon inte hade fri vilja eftersom hon var skapad av en underlägsen gud, så höll Augustinus med om att människans natur var syndfull och fördärvad och att hon inte hade fri vilja men han menade att det var Gud som gjorde det så pga Adams synd. Medan gnostikerna menade att köttet var syndfullt och att Jesus därför inte var kommen i köttet så trodde Augustinus att köttets lust var syndigt och att denna synd var ärftlig eller överförd från förälder till barn genom fysisk intimitet, och att Jesus undvek denna ärftliga åkomma genom att bli född av en jungfru. Därför höll Augustinus med gnostikerna i princip. Så Augustinianism är modifierad Manikeism eller semi-gnostisim.

De stora grundarna till den moderna kristna teologin har varit Augustinus, Luther och Kalvin. Augustinus var influerad av Manikeism och Luther och Kalvin var influerade av Augustinianskt tankesätt. Därför är det inget konstigt att Augustinus nekade till Fri vilja som Manikéerna gjorde, och Luther och Kalvin nekade till Fri vilja som Augustinus gjorde. Luther var t o m en Augustiniansk munk, och systemet med munkar och nunnor är influerat av idén att fysisk intimitet är syndigt. Luther refererade till Augustinus tretton gånger i sin bok “The Bondage of the Will” och 24 gånger i “Works of Martin Luther”. John Kalvin refererade till Augustinus tvåhundrasextiofem gånger i “Institutes on Christian Religion”Luther försvarade sin position mot Fri vilja genom att säga “Augustinus är helt och hållet på min sida”. Kalvin sade “Let us now hear Augustine in his own words, lest Calvin be charged with being opposed to all antiquity”. Men Kalvin var förstås avvikande mot alla de äldre kyrkofäderna före Augustinus.

John Kalvin sade “all ancient theologians, with the exception of Augustine, are so confused, vacillating, and contradictory on this subject, that no certainty can be obtained from their writings”. Kalvin trodde att män som Klement av Rom, Ignatius, som personligen kände apostlarna inte förstod apostlarnas epistlar medan Augustinus, som inte kände apostlarna, uppenbarligen gjorde det. Kalvin erkände: “It may, perhaps, seem that I have greatly prejudiced my own view by confessing that all of the ecclesiastical writers, with the exception of Augustine, have spoken too ambiguously or inconsistently on this subject, that no certainty is attainable from their writings”.

Reformatorerna ämnade styra tillbaka Kyrkan till den tidiga kristendomen, men kom inte längre tillbaka än till Augustinus som ju lärde irrläror. De borde ha gått tillbaka mycket längre i tiden. Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics säger “it is Augustine who gave us the Reformation. For the Reformation, inwardly considered, was just the ultimate triumph of Augustine’s doctrine the Reformation came, seeing that it was, on its theological side, a revival of Augustinianism”.

Gnostisism, Augustinianism, Lutheranism och Kalvinism har mycket gemensamt som vi kunnat läsa här. Det är på sätt och vis samma gamla gnostisism i nytt format. Andra läror bygger på dessa gnostiska tänkesätt, såsom “easy believism”, predestinationsläran, nödvändighet av andligt uppväckande, ovillkorlig försäkran om evigt liv, etc. Men ingen gnostisk idé har fått en sådan spridning och acceptans bland kyrkor världen över såsom idén att människan är född med en syndfull natur.

Augustinus: “As nothing else is done for children in baptism but their being incorporated into the church, that is, connected with the body and members of Christ, it follows, that when this is not done for them, they belong to perdition.” 

Det finns en uppsjö av citat från de gamla kyrkofäderna vad gäller stöd till att människan har en fri vilja

De exempel som finns här borde räcka för att visa att Fri vilja – och inte att människan syndar av nödvändighet pga sin natur – var den universella synen i den tidigaste kristenheten.


Vi kan läsa i Fil 4:3 att Paulus refererar till “mina medarbetare” i att sprida evangelium, och han namnger Klement vars namn “är skriven i Livets Bok”. Historieböckerna namnger denna man såsom Klement av Rom.

“It is therefore in the power of every one, since man has been made possessed of free-will, whether he shall hear us to life, or the demons to destruction.”

 Klement sade att Fri vilja gavs för att “he who is good by his own choice is really good; but he who is made good by another under necessity is not really good, because he is not what he is by his own choice“. Klement menade också att skälet till att syndare är orsaken till Guds straff för deras olydnad är att en syndare har en möjlighet att lyda Gud. Han sade “For no other reason does God punish the sinner either in the present or in the future world, except because He knows that the sinner was able to conquer but neglected to gain the victory”.

Skälet för att en syndare är straffbar för sin synd är alltså för att en syndare har en möjlighet att INTE synda. Han säger att en syndare är straffad, inte pga brist på kapacitet utan för oaktsamhet.


Ignatius var en lärljunge till aposteln Johannes och dog martyrdöden i Colosseum i Rom genom att bli uppäten av lejon. Han lärde att människan är syndare av val och inte av naturen.

“If anyone is truly religious, he is a man of God; but if he is irreligious, he is a man of the devil, made such, not by nature, but by his own choice.”  (The Epistle of Ignatius to the Magnesians chap 5 (Long Version)

“There is set before us life upon our observance [of God’s precepts], but death as the result of disobedience, and every one, according to the choice he makes, shall go to his own place, let us flee from death, and make choice of life.” (The Epistle of Ignatius to the Magnesians chap 5, Long Version)


Aposteln Johannes hade även en apostel som heter Polycarpos. Polycarpos var biskop i Smyrna när Uppenbarelseboken skrevs. Kyrkan i Smyrna var en av de kyrkor i Uppenbarelseboken som Jesus inte hade någon kritik till (Upp. 2:8-11). Polycarpos var en personlig vän med Ignatius och även han dog martyrdöden i Colosseum liksom Ignatius. Polycarpos hade en trogen lärljunge som heter Irenaeus. Han vederlade gnostikerna genom att säga:

“Men are possessed with free will, and endowed with the faculty of making a choice. It is not true, therefore, that some are by nature good, and others bad.” (Against Heresies, Book IV, Chapter XXXVII)

“Man is endowed with the faculty of distinguishing good and evil; so that, without compulsion, he has the power, by his own will and choice, to perform God’s commandments.” (Against Heresies, Book IV, Chapter XXXIX)

“Man is possessed of free will from the beginning, and God is possessed of free will (in whom likeness man was created)”. Irenaeus (A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs by David Bercot, p. 287, Published by Hendrickson Publishers)

“This expression, ‘How often would I have gathered thy children together, and thou wouldst not,’ set forth the ancient law of human liberty, because God made man a free agent from the beginning, possessing his own soul to obey the behests of God voluntarily, and not by compulsion of God.” (The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume One, Published by BRCCD, p. 1117)

“Forasmuch as all men are of the same nature, having power to hold and to do that which is good, and having power again to lose it, and not to do what is right; before men of sense, (and how much more before God!) some are justly accused, and receive condign punishment, because they refuse what is just and right”. Och “Those who do not do it [good] will receive the just judgment of God, because they had not worked good when they had it in their power to do so. But if some had been made by nature bad, and others good, these latter would not be deserving of praise for being good, for they were created that way, nor would the former be reprehensible, for that is how they were made. However, all men are of the same nature. They are all able to hold fast and to go what is good. On the other hand, they have the power to cast good from them and not to do it”.


Justin Martyren var en evangelist och arbetade intensivt för Herren tills han också dog martyrdöden i Rom.

“We have learned from the prophets, and we hold it to be true, that punishment, chastisement, and rewards are rendered according to the merit of each man’s actions. Otherwise, if all things happen by fate, then nothing is our own power. For if it is predestined that one man be good and another man evil, then the first is not deserving of praise and the other to be blamed. Unless humans have the power of avoiding evil and choosing good by free choice, they are not accountable for their actions ‘whatever they may be’ for neither would a man be worthy of praise if he did not himself choose the good, but was merely created for that end. Likewise, if a man were created evil, he would not deserve punishment, since he was not evil of himself, being unable to do anything else than what he was made for.” Justin Martyr (First Apology Chap. 43)


Tertullianus var en annan kyrkoledare och apologist och är känd för sin textskrivarproduktivitet.

“No reward can be justly bestowed, no punishment can be justly inflicted, upon him who is good or bad by necessity, and not by his own choice.”  Tertullian (Doctrine of the Will by Asa Mahan, p. 61, Published by Truth in Heart)


Metodius var en kristen martyr som levde nära slutet av trehundratalet.

 “Those [pagans] who decide that man does not have free will, but say that he is governed by the unavoidable necessities of fate, are guilty of impiety toward God Himself, making Him out to be the cause and author of human evils.” Methodius (The Banquet of the Ten Virgins discourse 8, chap. 16)

“The Divine Being is not by nature implicated in evils. Therefore our birth is not the cause of these things”. Methodius (The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume Six, Published by BRCCD, p. 696)

“possessing free will, and not by nature evil” Methodius (The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume Six, Published by BRCCD, p 698)

“There is nothing evil by nature, but it is by use that evil things become such. So I say, says he, that man was made with free-will, not as if there were already evil in existence, which he had the power of choosing if he wished, but on account of his capacity of obeying or disobeying God. For this was the meaning of the gift of free will? and this alone is evil, namely, disobedience”. Methodius (The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume Six, Published by BRCCD, p. 746)

“God did not make evil, nor is He at all in any way the author of evil; but whatever failed to keep the law, which He in all justice ordained, after being made by Him with the faculty of free-will, for the purpose of guarding and keeping it, is called evil. Now it is the gravest fault to disobey God, by overstepping the bounds of that righteousness which is consistent with free-will”. Methodius (The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume Six, Published by BRCCD, p. 750)


Eusebiusius var en biskop och anses vara “Kyrkohistoriens Fader” pga sina många texter om densamma. Han skrev: “On the Life of Pamphilus”, “Chronicle of Universal History”, och “On the Martyrs”.

“The Creator of all things has impressed a natural law upon the soul of every man, as an assistant and ally in his conduct, pointing out to him the right way by this law; but, by the free liberty with which he is endowed, making the choice of what is best worthy of praise and acceptance, because he has acted rightly, not by force, but from his own free-will, when he had it in his power to act otherwise, As, again, making him who chooses what is worst, deserving of blame and punishment, as having by his own motion neglected the natural law, and becoming the origin and fountain of wickedness, and misusing himself, not from any extraneous necessity, but from free will and judgment. The fault is in him who chooses, not in God. For God is has not made nature or the substance of the soul bad; for he who is good can make nothing but what is good. Everything is good which is according to nature. Every rational soul has naturally a good free-will, formed for the choice of what is good. But when a man acts wrongly, nature is not to be blamed; for what is wrong, takes place not according to nature, but contrary to nature, it being the work of choice, and not of nature!” Eusebius (The Christian Examiner, Volume One, Published by James Miller, 1824 Edition, p. 66)

“The devil in his oracles hangs all things upon fate, and taking away that which is in our power, and arises from self-motion of free will? brings this also into bondage to necessity” Eusebius (The Cause of God and Truth by John Gill, 1838 Edition, p. 502)


“What is plainer than that the ancient divines, for three hundred years after Christ, those at least who flourished before St. Augustine, maintained the liberty of our will, or an indifference to two contrary things, free from all internal and external necessity!” Episcopius (An Equal Check to Pharisaism and Antinomianism by John Fletcher, Volume Two, p. 209, Published by Carlton & Porter)

Pelagius, som är historiskt känd för att ha lärt ut fri vilja under samma tid som Augustinus levde, var i harmoni med urkyrkan med sin åsikt.

“In all there is free-will equally by nature”. 


“The Scriptures emphasize the freedom of the will. They condemn those who sin, and approve those who do right. We are responsible for being bad and worthy of being cast outside. For it is not the nature in us that is the cause of the evil; rather, it is the voluntary choice that works evil”. Han sade också “the heretics introduce the doctrine of different natures”. Origen (A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs by David Bercot, p. 289, Published by Hendrickson Publishers)

“the heretics introduce the doctrine of different natures.” Origen (A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs by David Bercot, p. 291, Published by Hendrickson Publishers)

Augustinus bön till Maria:

“Blessed Virgin Mary, who can worthily repay you with praise and thanksgiving for having rescued a fallen world by your generous consent? What songs of praise can our weak human nature offer in your honor, since it was through you that it has found the way to salvation? Accept then such poor thanks as we have to offer, unequal though they be to your merits. Receive our gratitude and obtain by your prayers the pardon of our sins. Take our prayers into the sanctuary of heaven and enable them to bring about our peace with God. May the sins we penitently bring before Almighty God through you be pardoned. May what we beg with confidence be granted through you. Take our offerings and grant our request; obtain pardon for what we fear, for you are the only hope of sinners. We hope to obtain the forgiveness of our sins through you. Blessed Lady, in you is our hope of reward. Holy Mary, help the miserable, strengthen the discouraged, comfort the sorrowful, pray for your people, plead for the clergy, intercede for all women consecrated to God. May all who venerate you, feel now your help and protection. Be ready to help us when we pray, and bring back to us the answers to our prayers. Make it your continual care to pray for the People of God, for you were blessed by God and were made worthy to bear the Redeemer of the world, Who lives and reigns forever.” (Saint Augustine year 430 Dictionary of Mary Catholic Book Publishing Co.: New Jersey, 1997, 1985, p. 531.)

(Denna artikel är till vissa delar översatt från en artikel av Jesse Morell, från boken “The Natural Ability of Man: A Study On Free Will & Human Nature”. Där kan man läsa fotnoter till citaten jag nämnde ovan, och du kan även läsa artikeln och fotnoter i länken: http://openairoutreach.wordpress.com/2011/04/04/did-augustine-corrupt-the-church-with-gnostic-doctrine/)