Mary the Queen of Heaven

[Ronin Truth]

So, according to that person, prior to the Semiramis cult, which we can't trace back further than the first millennium BC, nobody had ever thought of worshipping a female deity?

Back to the flood and before. Reading for comprehension often works wonders. Enjoy your Chicago restaurant visit.

[erowe1]

Back to the flood and before. Reading for comprehension often works wonders. Enjoy your Chicago restaurant visit.

It would help you too. We have no evidence of any Semiramis cult until the first millennium BC.

Also, speaking of reading comprehension, in the link you just gave me, it places Semiramis after the flood, not before.

[Ronin Truth]

It would help you too. We have no evidence of any Semiramis cult until the first millennium BC.

Well, if you didn't get sidetracked by restaurant web sites you just might learn a thing or two. If Semiramis was the wife of Nimrod, then when would that be?

[erowe1]

Well, if you didn't get sidetracked by restaurant web sites you just might learn a thing or two. If Semiramis was the wife of Nimrod, then when would that be?

Oh, is that what you consider those millions of hits that come up on those google searches you link us to, sidetracks?

Yeah, me too.

If Semiramis was the wife of Nimrod, that would be after the flood, not before. The article you linked to even says that.

And then, on that point, even if the story that guy tells were true (but notice he provides absolutely no evidence for it), it would just lead right back to my earlier question. Are we supposed to believe that prior to the time of Nimrod nobody had ever thought of worshipping a female deity?

[Ronin Truth]

Oh, is that what you consider those millions of hits that come up on those google searches you link us to, sidetracks?

Yeah, me too.

If Semiramis was the wife of Nimrod, that would be after the flood, not before. The article you linked to even says that.

And then, on that point, even if the story that guy tells were true (but notice he provides absolutely no evidence for it), it would just lead right back to my earlier question. Are we supposed to believe that prior to the time of Nimrod nobody had ever thought of worshipping a female deity?

The Sumerians did, probably others did too. Crete? India? Atlantis? Mu? Lemuria?

I just think that covering a lot of turf, with only one post line is just pretty neat. Would I much prefer a rifle to a shotgun approach? Sure.

[erowe1]

The Sumerians did, probably others did too. Crete? India? Atlantis? Mu? Lemuria?

All of whom are after the flood.

But if you're saying that those predated the Semiramis cult, then how could Semiramis be the original one from which all others derived?

[Ronin Truth]

All of whom are after the flood.

But if you're saying that those predated the Semiramis cult, then how could Semiramis be the original one from which all others derived?

Not Sumer. The flood caused a human history reset to zero (pretty much). How about coughing up that Nimrod date, oh Grand Inquisitor?

[erowe1]

Not Sumer. The flood caused a human history reset to zero (pretty much). How about coughing up that Nimrod date, oh Grand Inquisitor?

Yes. Sumer too.

The article you linked talks about Nimrod, and dates him, and places him and Sumer after the flood. Are you denying that your own article does that?

[pcosmar]

Are we supposed to believe that prior to the time of Nimrod nobody had ever thought of worshipping a female deity?

Well I have no Idea of the extent of Evil before the Flood,, only that it was bad enough to cause God to wipe out all life save Noah and his family.
The first recorded history is from after the flood,, and the Sumerians.

And that female "deity" as well as other false gods were worshiped.
Do you know of any written records prior? or any record aside from Enoch?

[Ronin Truth]

Yes. Sumer too.

The article you linked talks about Nimrod, and dates him, and places him and Sumer after the flood. Are you denying that your own article does that?

Well since you just seem to want too pooh pooh the article, I'm just asking you ...... again for the date of Nimrod, O great ancient history Bible researcher and scholar.

[erowe1]

Well I have no Idea of the extent of Evil before the Flood,, only that it was bad enough to cause God to wipe out all life save Noah and his family.
The first recorded history is from after the flood,, and the Sumerians.

And that female "deity" as well as other false gods were worshiped.
Do you know of any written records prior? or any record aside from Enoch?

What you call "Enoch" is a collection of several books written over the 4th-1st centuries BC. They are nowhere near as old as the Flood, or even most books of the Old Testament.

The only way it may be the case that we have records from before the Flood is if they were used as sources for the Book of Genesis, which I consider possible. And if so, then our only access to those records is via the Book of Genesis.

[erowe1]

Well since you just seem to want too pooh pooh the article, I'm just asking you ...... again for the date of Nimrod, O great ancient history Bible researcher and scholar.

Using the chronology of the Bible, and assuming that there are no gaps in the genealogies, we would come up with a date around 3000-2500 BC. That's the best I can do. We have nothing else to go on, either to attain the date of Nimrod, or to say he ever existed at all.

[pcosmar]

What you call "Enoch" is a collection of several books written over the 4th-1st centuries BC.

I do not know that,, I have read that,, but suspect that they were older.. Passed either by Oral tradition or carried by Noah and passed on through his line.
Perhaps even as the Story of Job,, Which was likely written by Moses,,

I tend to believe that they were the record of Enoch. And were recognized as such by the early Church.

[Ronin Truth]

Using the chronology of the Bible, and assuming that there are no gaps in the genealogies, we would come up with a date around 3000-2500 BC. That's the best I can do. We have nothing else to go on, either to attain the date of Nimrod, or to say he ever existed at all.

Does Bishop Ussher help, or is that what you're using?

[erowe1]

I do not know that,, I have read that,, but suspect that they were older.. Passed either by Oral tradition or carried by Noah and passed on through his line.

And yet none of the authors of any of the books of the Old Testament quoted from or mentioned this ancient work from a prophet they revered who wrote prophecies about their times?

[erowe1]

Does Bishop Ussher help, or is that what you're using?

No, I'm talking about the Bible itself, which is also what Usher used. So no, he can't provide us any more data than we already have in the Bible. You can just work your way back from the date of Solomon's Temple around 980 BC, and add up all the numbers of years the Bible gives. If that's not an accurate way to get a date for Nimrod, then we have nothing else to go on.

[Ronin Truth]

No, I'm talking about the Bible itself, which is also what Usher used. So no, he can't provide us any more data than we already have in the Bible. You can just work your way back from the date of Solomon's Temple around 980 BC, and add up all the numbers of years the Bible gives. If that's not an accurate way to get a date for Nimrod, then we have nothing else to go on.

Google says it's spelled "Ussher". I wonder if the Babylonians had any date able clay tablet records of a Nimrod rule time line.


https://www.google.com/search?q=king...gbv=2&oq=&gs_l=

[Ronin Truth]

Hmmmm? This looks pretty interesting. http://amazingbibletimeline.com/

[pcosmar]

And yet none of the authors of any of the books of the Old Testament quoted from or mentioned this ancient work from a prophet they revered who wrote prophecies about their times?

He did not write about their times.. And he is mentioned, in Genesis. And mirrored in Job. and aspects of what he wrote are throughout the Old Testament.

He expanded on things written only briefly elsewhere. And it was written not for the present generation but for a future generation. (as he introduced it)

The Book of Genesis was not written by Adam before the Flood.. The first Books of the Bible were written sometime later.

or do you reject them in entirety because of their "questionable" sources?

What is it about Enoch that you have such a problem with? I find that it fills in some gray areas,, without contradicting the rest of scripture.

[Ronin Truth]

He did not write about their times.. And he is mentioned, in Genesis. And mirrored in Job. and aspects of what he wrote are throughout the Old Testament.

He expanded on things written only briefly elsewhere. And it was written not for the present generation but for a future generation. (as he introduced it)

The Book of Genesis was not written by Adam before the Flood.. The first Books of the Bible were written sometime later.

or do you reject them in entirety because of their "questionable" sources?

What is it about Enoch that you have such a problem with? I find that it fills in some gray areas,, without contradicting the rest of scripture.

I've read somewhere, somewhen that much of the Old Testament was first written down by the Levite priests/rabbis during the Babylonian Captivity.

I imagine that erowe1 will challenge or straighten that one out too.

[pcosmar]

I will stand on my guard post And station myself on the rampart; And I will keep watch to see what He will speak to me, And how I may reply when I am reproved. Then the LORD answered me and said, "Record the vision And inscribe it on tablets, That the one who reads it may run. "For the vision is yet for the appointed time; It hastens toward the goal and it will not fail. Though it tarries, wait for it; For it will certainly come, it will not delay.…

"This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: 'Write in a book all the words I have spoken to you.

For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us, so that through the endurance taught in the Scriptures and the encouragement they provide we might have hope.

"Write, therefore, what you have seen, what is now and what will take place later.

I believe that these are recorded for us..

[erowe1]

He did not write about their times..

The book of First Enoch does write about the history of Israel over the entire biblical period.

And he is mentioned, in Genesis.

But the book of 1 Enoch isn't mentioned there. Nor is it used as a source. If it really existed already and were understood by the author of Genesis to have come from the actual Enoch, then it would have been.

and aspects of what he wrote are throughout the Old Testament.

He expanded on things written only briefly elsewhere.

Yes. First Enoch expands on things written elsewhere, namely things written in the Bible. The books of the Old Testament had already been written by the time 1 Enoch was, and the authors (plural) who wrote the books that would go on to be collected and grouped together in what we today call 1 Enoch expanded on them.

What is it about Enoch that you have such a problem with? I find that it fills in some gray areas,, without contradicting the rest of scripture.

All I've said about 1 Enoch is factual information.

It wasn't written by Enoch. You don't have to have a problem with the book to know that.

I don't have a problem with it. Just like I don't have a problem with the Iliad.

[erowe1]

I wonder if the Babylonians had any date able clay tablet records of a Nimrod rule time line.

No, they don't. We have one single historical source for the existence of Nimrod. That's the Book of Genesis. Take it or leave it.

[erowe1]

I've read somewhere, somewhen that much of the Old Testament was first written down by the Levite priests/rabbis during the Babylonian Captivity.

I imagine that erowe1 will challenge or straighten that one out too.

Why should I bother trying to straighten some theory out if the only thing it has going for it is that Ronin Truth claims to have heard it somewhere somewhen?

[TER]

Even if all that were true, none of it makes bishops in general, nor Ignatius in particular, apostles. Ignatius was not an apostle. He himself said so.

He was ordained in their ministry as a leader of the Church.

Do you have any way of knowing if any given writing was divinely inspired (i.e. God breathed)?

And, once again, can you show me a source that speaks in any kind of authoritative way for the EOC, saying that the EOC teaches that some writings outside the Bible were divinely inspired?

St. Paul said "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work." (II Tim 3:16) Can you tell me which books he was referring to?

Even if that's true, continuing the apostolic ministry doesn't make them apostles.

They are not of the Twelve, but just as St. Paul wasn't, they too are in the ministry as an apostle. St. Titus, St. Jude, these where not of the Twelve, but were apostles. St. Ignatius is called an Apostolic father not only because of the time he ministered, but on account of his ministry as one sent out to spread the gospel.

It's not a given, because everything after the words "being that" is just some legend that you heard from some human being. Do you have any evidence for that claim?

Peter died in AD 64. Why do you think he would appoint someone to replace Evdovius, if Evdovius was 5 years away from dying? How could Evdovius have been the bishop of Antioch prior to AD 69 when monarchical bishops didn't even exist yet in AD 69? And how old was Ignatius in AD 64 when Peter appointed him to take over a bishopric 5 years off into the future?

St. Eudoius was one of the Seventy Apostles of Jesus. He was in his late 60's when he died. It was not a surprise that St. Ignatius would succeed him when he did, in fact, it was probably known for years prior to St. Euodius' death that he would assume the episcopy next. So the dating you make does not prove anything, though I see why you would bring it up. It is common today as well that the next Bishop who is being groomed to take over the leadership position is already known even as the current one is alive and active. This ensures a smooth and reliable transition in the transference of this important service to the Church.

That's provably false. Every member of the community of baptized Christians is made is a human being. The Holy Spirit baptizes, indwells, seals, convicts, and enlightens, each and every one of them. And some of these human beings say what you believe, while others don't. This has been the case throughout the entire history of the Church, from the first moment when your beliefs came into existence--some of the human beings said what you believe, and others didn't. You seem to arbitrarily pick whichever human beings you happen to agree with and say that they're the ones guided by the Holy Spirit, so they must be right. How do we know? Because they agree with TER. No appeal to the opinions of the apostles as expressed in their own writings is necessary or helpful.

I don't choose anyone because they agree with what I think erowe. That is what you are doing, picking a verse here or there which you agree with and disregarding the other things they have said because they do not fit into your theology and interpretations. I am choosing what others (namely the voice of the consensus of the Church) have already proclaimed to be the orthodox faith. You pick a verse that St. Ignatius said which you think states he isn't an apostle as being truthful but then reject the other statements he made because it doesn't fit in with your knowledge or the limited resources you have made to be the only source of information. I, on the other hand, accept what he says according to what the Church has proclaimed to be orthodox and true, even if my sensibilities or logical mind can't seem to easily get around it. Does a Church Father say something which sounds right to me? Well then I go and check if that is what the consensus of the Church has agreed with and proclaimed to be true. Does a Church Father say something which sounds wrong to me? Then I again go and check if that is what the consensus of the Church has agreed with and proclaimed to be true. Then I accept what the Church says, and not what I think. Why? Because I humble myself to the authority and teachings of saints greater then me. This is not what you do my friend. You place yourself to be the final authority on what is true (according to the knowledge you have from the resources you have). I understand that. You want your logical mind to be assured. But that is not what faith is about. An example is with regards to St. Peter appointing St. Ignatius. Your logical mind looks at dates and concludes it is impossible, but you do not have the understanding that the successor is often known for years prior to them being ordained. So what you believed was impossible is actually very possible and in fact many times the norm. Had you humbled yourself and realized that your experiences are not the final authority on truths, you could begin to gain knowledge which does not come from one's mind, but from God through humility and obedience.

[TER]

But shall I, when permitted to write on this point, reach such a height of self-esteem, that though being a condemned man, I should issue commands to you as if I were an apostle?

-Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Trallians 3


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Thank you for the quote above erowe. Now, instead of taking just the few verses, let us take some more verses around them to better understand the context...

The quote comes from this Epistle to the Trallians when he was a condemned prisoner on his way to martyrdom in Rome.

...
Chapter 2. Be subject to the bishop, etc

For, since you are subject to the bishop as to Jesus Christ, you appear to me to live not after the manner of men, but according to Jesus Christ, who died for us, in order, by believing in His death, you may escape from death. It is therefore necessary that, as you indeed do, so without the bishop you should do nothing, but should also be subject to the presbytery, as to the apostle of Jesus Christ, who is our hope, in whom, if we live, we shall [at last] be found. It is fitting also that the deacons, as being [the ministers] of the mysteries of Jesus Christ, should in every respect be pleasing to all. For they are not ministers of meat and drink, but servants of the Church of God. They are bound, therefore, to avoid all grounds of accusation [against them], as they would do fire.

Chapter 3. Honour the deacons, etc

In like manner, let all reverence the deacons as an appointment of Jesus Christ, and the bishop as Jesus Christ, who is the Son of the Father, and the presbyters as the sanhedrim of God, and assembly of the apostles. Apart from these, there is no Church. Concerning all this, I am persuaded that you are of the same opinion. For I have received the manifestation of your love, and still have it with me, in your bishop, whose very appearance is highly instructive, and his meekness of itself a power; whom I imagine even the ungodly must reverence, seeing they are also pleased that I do not spare myself. But shall I, when permitted to write on this point, reach such a height of self-esteem, that though being a condemned man, I should issue commands to you as if I were an apostle?

Chapter 4. I have need of humility

I have great knowledge in God, but I restrain myself, lest, I should perish through boasting. For now it is needful for me to be the more fearful; and not give heed to those that puff me up....

...

And this will be the case with you if you are not puffed up, and continue in intimate union with Jesus Christ our God, and the bishop, and the enactments of the apostles. He that is within the altar is pure, but he that is without is not pure; that is, he who does anything apart from the bishop, and presbytery, and deacons, such a man is not pure in his conscience.

...

Continue in harmony among yourselves, and in prayer with one another; for it becomes every one of you, and especially the presbyters, to refresh the bishop, to the honour of the Father, of Jesus Christ, and of the apostles. I entreat you in love to hear me, that I may not, by having written, be a testimony against you. And also pray for me, who have need of your love, along with the mercy of God, that I may be worthy of the lot for which I am destined, and that I may not be found reprobate.( well, there goes the whole OSAS doctrine! - TER)

...

Chapter 13. Conclusion

The love of the Smyrnæans and Ephesians salutes you. Remember in your prayers the Church which is in Syria, from which also I am not worthy to receive my appellation, being the last of them. Fare well in Jesus Christ, while you continue subject to the bishop, as to the command [of God], and in like manner to the presbytery. And, every man, love one another with an undivided heart. Let my spirit be sanctified by yours, not only now, but also when I shall attain to God. For I am as yet exposed to danger. But the Father is faithful in Jesus Christ to fulfil both mine and your petitions: in whom may you be found unblameable.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++

as a note, the quote you selected from the above Epistle it is clear (at least to me) that what St. Ignatius is saying is that AT THAT TIME OF WRITING, as a prisoner who has been condemned and given limited time to write, would he from self-esteem issue commands as an Apostle? Yes, he does issues commands as an Apostle, for the entire Epistle is full of commands! Indeed, he admits he has great knowledge in God (for he was a very student of the Apostles, graced by the Holy Spirit, and perhaps even been visited by the Risen Christ Himself). There are things which he does not reveal because of his humility and because of the limited time he has left to better explain them lest the people stumble by being given meat and not knowing how to chew (this is described elsewhere in the epistle). So he does issue commands as an Apostle, but at the time of his writing, out of his humility, he checks himself and resigns to more inward repentance and meekness. This is the gist of the Epistle when read in complete form.

[Ronin Truth]

No, they don't. We have one single historical source for the existence of Nimrod. That's the Book of Genesis. Take it or leave it.

Leave it works out great. Bible is inadequate.....again.

Nimrod wasn't his name. That's just an epithet nickname meaning "rebel".

His name was Ninus. King of Babylon. Husband of Semiramis. Mentioned in the Bible?

https://www.google.com/search?q=nimr...gbv=2&oq=&gs_l=

[Ronin Truth]

Why should I bother trying to straighten some theory out if the only thing it has going for it is that Ronin Truth claims to have heard it somewhere somewhen?

Yeah, you're right. You really shouldn't bother.

[erowe1]

-Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Trallians 3


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Thank you for the quote above erowe. Now, instead of taking just the few verses, let us take some more verses around them to better understand the context...

The quote comes from this Epistle to the Trallians when he was a condemned prisoner on his way to martyrdom in Rome.

...
Chapter 2. Be subject to the bishop, etc

For, since you are subject to the bishop as to Jesus Christ, you appear to me to live not after the manner of men, but according to Jesus Christ, who died for us, in order, by believing in His death, you may escape from death. It is therefore necessary that, as you indeed do, so without the bishop you should do nothing, but should also be subject to the presbytery, as to the apostle of Jesus Christ, who is our hope, in whom, if we live, we shall [at last] be found. It is fitting also that the deacons, as being [the ministers] of the mysteries of Jesus Christ, should in every respect be pleasing to all. For they are not ministers of meat and drink, but servants of the Church of God. They are bound, therefore, to avoid all grounds of accusation [against them], as they would do fire.

Chapter 3. Honour the deacons, etc

In like manner, let all reverence the deacons as an appointment of Jesus Christ, and the bishop as Jesus Christ, who is the Son of the Father, and the presbyters as the sanhedrim of God, and assembly of the apostles. Apart from these, there is no Church. Concerning all this, I am persuaded that you are of the same opinion. For I have received the manifestation of your love, and still have it with me, in your bishop, whose very appearance is highly instructive, and his meekness of itself a power; whom I imagine even the ungodly must reverence, seeing they are also pleased that I do not spare myself. But shall I, when permitted to write on this point, reach such a height of self-esteem, that though being a condemned man, I should issue commands to you as if I were an apostle?

Chapter 4. I have need of humility

I have great knowledge in God, but I restrain myself, lest, I should perish through boasting. For now it is needful for me to be the more fearful; and not give heed to those that puff me up....

...

And this will be the case with you if you are not puffed up, and continue in intimate union with Jesus Christ our God, and the bishop, and the enactments of the apostles. He that is within the altar is pure, but he that is without is not pure; that is, he who does anything apart from the bishop, and presbytery, and deacons, such a man is not pure in his conscience.

...

Continue in harmony among yourselves, and in prayer with one another; for it becomes every one of you, and especially the presbyters, to refresh the bishop, to the honour of the Father, of Jesus Christ, and of the apostles. I entreat you in love to hear me, that I may not, by having written, be a testimony against you. And also pray for me, who have need of your love, along with the mercy of God, that I may be worthy of the lot for which I am destined, and that I may not be found reprobate.( well, there goes the whole OSAS doctrine! - TER)

...

Chapter 13. Conclusion

The love of the Smyrnæans and Ephesians salutes you. Remember in your prayers the Church which is in Syria, from which also I am not worthy to receive my appellation, being the last of them. Fare well in Jesus Christ, while you continue subject to the bishop, as to the command [of God], and in like manner to the presbytery. And, every man, love one another with an undivided heart. Let my spirit be sanctified by yours, not only now, but also when I shall attain to God. For I am as yet exposed to danger. But the Father is faithful in Jesus Christ to fulfil both mine and your petitions: in whom may you be found unblameable.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++

as a note, the quote you selected from the above Epistle it is clear (at least to me) that what St. Ignatius is saying is that AT THAT TIME OF WRITING, as a prisoner who has been condemned and given limited time to write, would he from self-esteem issue commands as an Apostle? Yes, he does issues commands as an Apostle, for the entire Epistle is full of commands! Indeed, he admits he has great knowledge in God (for he was a very student of the Apostles, graced by the Holy Spirit, and perhaps even been visited by the Risen Christ Himself). There are things which he does not reveal because of his humility and because of the limited time he has left to better explain them lest the people stumble by being given meat and not knowing how to chew (this is described elsewhere in the epistle). So he does issue commands as an Apostle, but at the time of his writing, out of his humility, he checks himself and resigns to more inward repentance and meekness. This is the gist of the Epistle when read in complete form.

All those verses only add more proof to my claim. Ignatius did not consider himself an apostle. Even when he uses analogies, he compares bishops (like himself) to God, and the presbytery to the apostles.

Yes, he was a leader in the church and expected those under his authority to respect it. Yes, he believed that he was carrying on the ministry of the apostles, just like he believed presbyters and other Christians were. But he was not an apostle and did not consider himself one.

I never claimed that Ignatius didn't believe he was carrying on the ministry of the apostles. I claimed that he didn't believe he was an apostle. And clearly he didn't. He unambiguously said that he was not one.

In the days of the apostles, bishops were not considered apostles (at least not apostles in the technical sense that Paul and the 12 were. And in the churches with which Ignatius was familiar 60 years later, bishops were still not considered apostles (in that technical sense).

[TER]

Now, let us turn our attention to what this great Apostolic Father wrote in his letter to the Ephesians. In it he mentions St. Onesimus who also was mentioned in the NT by St. Paul, for St. Onesimus became Bishop of Ephesus. So not only was St. Ignatius lived with St. John and was taught by him and was appointed to become the Bishop of Antioch, but he knew others we read about in the New Testament, being the Bishop of the great city of Antioch where the term Christian was coined was known all over the Christian world and was beloved by them all. Whosoever puts their mind above the mind of this great saint of the first century who shared the Holy Eucharist by the Apostles themselves does so because of pride. It would be better to humble oneself, acknowledge that we cannot be our own teachers, and look to the Church which Christ established and which is the pillar and foundation of the truth. Great and holy God-bearing men such as St. Ignatius are our fathers in the faith, and while they lived in different times and contended against different threats and circumstances, they have continued the ministry of the Apostles which is to defend the faith and protect and feed the faithful by the grace of God in them.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Chapter 1

I have become acquainted with your name, much-beloved in God, which you have acquired by the habit of righteousness, according to the faith and love in Jesus Christ our Saviour. Being the followers of God, and stirring up yourselves by the blood of God, you have perfectly accomplished the work which was beseeming to you. For, on hearing that I came bound from Syria for the common name and hope, trusting through your prayers to be permitted to fight with beasts at Rome, that so by martyrdom I may indeed become the disciple of Him "who gave Himself for us, an offering and sacrifice to God," [you hastened to see me ]. I received, therefore, your whole multitude in the name of God, through Onesimus, a man of inexpressible love, and your bishop in the flesh, whom I pray you by Jesus Christ to love, and that you would all seek to be like him. And blessed be He who has granted unto you, being worthy, to obtain such an excellent bishop.

Chapter 2

As to my fellow-servant Burrhus, your deacon in regard to God and blessed in all things, I beg that he may continue longer, both for your honour and that of your bishop. And Crocus also, worthy both of God and you, whom I have received as the manifestation of your love, has in all things refreshed me, as the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ shall also refresh him; together with Onesimus, and Burrhus, and Euplus, and Fronto, by means of whom, I have, as to love, beheld all of you. May I always have joy of you, if indeed I be worthy of it. It is therefore befitting that you should in every way glorify Jesus Christ, who has glorified you, that by a unanimous obedience "you may be perfectly joined together in the same mind, and in the same judgment, and may all speak the same thing concerning the same thing," and that, being subject to the bishop and the presbytery, you may in all respects be sanctified.

Chapter 3

I do not issue orders to you, as if I were some great person (again, speaking from humility - TER). For though I am bound for the name [of Christ], I am not yet perfect in Jesus Christ. For now I begin to be a disciple, and I speak to you as fellow-disciples with me. For it was needful for me to have been stirred up by you in faith, exhortation, patience, and long-suffering. But inasmuch as love suffers me not to be silent in regard to you, I have therefore taken upon me first to exhort you that you would all run together in accordance with the will of God. For even Jesus Christ, our inseparable life, is the [manifested] will of the Father; as also bishops, settled everywhere to the utmost bounds [of the earth], are so by the will of Jesus Christ.

Chapter 4

Wherefore it is fitting that you should run together in accordance with the will of your bishop, which thing also you do. For your justly renowned presbytery, worthy of God, is fitted as exactly to the bishop as the strings are to the harp. Therefore in your concord and harmonious love, Jesus Christ is sung. And man by man, become a choir, that being harmonious in love, and taking up the song of God in unison, you may with one voice sing to the Father through Jesus Christ, so that He may both hear you, and perceive by your works that you are indeed the members of His Son. It is profitable, therefore, that you should live in an unblameable unity, that thus you may always enjoy communion with God.

Chapter 5

For if I in this brief space of time, have enjoyed such fellowship with your bishop — I mean not of a mere human, but of a spiritual nature— how much more do I reckon you happy who are so joined to him as the Church is to Jesus Christ, and as Jesus Christ is to the Father, that so all things may agree in unity! Let no man deceive himself: if any one be not within the altar, he is deprived of the bread of God. For if the prayer of one or two possesses such power, how much more that of the bishop and the whole Church! He, therefore, that does not assemble with the Church, has even by this manifested his pride, and condemned himself. For it is written, "God resists the proud." Let us be careful, then, not to set ourselves in opposition to the bishop, in order that we may be subject to God.

Chapter 6

Now the more any one sees the bishop keeping silence, the more ought he to revere him. For we ought to receive every one whom the Master of the house sends to be over His household, as we would do Him that sent him. It is manifest, therefore, that we should look upon the bishop even as we would upon the Lord Himself. And indeed Onesimus himself greatly commends your good order in God, that you all live according to the truth, and that no sect has any dwelling-place among you. Nor, indeed, do you hearken to any one rather than to Jesus Christ speaking in truth.

Chapter 7 (against the Docetists and other heretics)

For some are in the habit of carrying about the name [of Jesus Christ] in wicked guile, while yet they practise things unworthy of God, whom you must flee as you would wild beasts. For they are ravening dogs, who bite secretly, against whom you must be on your guard, inasmuch as they are men who can scarcely be cured. There is one Physician who is possessed both of flesh and spirit; both made and not made; God existing in flesh; true life in death; both of Mary and of God; first passible and then impassible— even Jesus Christ our Lord.

...

Chapter 10

And pray without ceasing in behalf of other men. For there is in them hope of repentance that they may attain to God. See, then, that they be instructed by your works, if in no other way. Be meek in response to their wrath, humble in opposition to their boasting: to their blasphemies return your prayers; in contrast to their error, be steadfast in the faith; and for their cruelty, manifest your gentleness. While we take care not to imitate their conduct, let us be found their brethren in all true kindness; and let us seek to be followers of the Lord (who ever more unjustly treated, more destitute, more condemned?), that so no plant of the devil may be found in you, but you may remain in all holiness and sobriety in Jesus Christ, both with respect to the flesh and spirit.

...

Chapter 14

None of these things is hid from you, if you perfectly possess that faith and love towards Christ Jesus which are the beginning and the end of life. For the beginning is faith, and the end is love. Now these two, being inseparably connected together, are of God, while all other things which are requisite for a holy life follow after them. No man [truly] making a profession of faith sins; nor does he that possesses love hate any one. The tree is made manifest by its fruit; so those that profess themselves to be Christians shall be recognised by their conduct. For there is not now a demand for mere profession, but that a man be found continuing in the power of faith to the end.

...

Chapter 20

If Jesus Christ shall graciously permit me through your prayers, and if it be His will, I shall, in a second little work which I will write to you, make further manifest to you [the nature of] the dispensation of which I have begun [to treat], with respect to the new man, Jesus Christ, in His faith and in His love, in His suffering and in His resurrection. Especially [will I do this ] if the Lord make known to me that you come together man by man in common through grace, individually, in one faith, and in Jesus Christ, who was of the seed of David according to the flesh, being both the Son of man and the Son of God, so that you obey the bishop and the presbytery with an undivided mind, breaking one and the same bread, which is the medicine of immortality, and the antidote to prevent us from dying, but [which causes] that we should live for ever in Jesus Christ. (the Holy Eucharist he describes as the 'medicine of immortality'- TER)

Chapter 21

My soul be for yours and theirs whom, for the honour of God, you have sent to Smyrna; whence also I write to you, giving thanks unto the Lord, and loving Polycarp even as I do you. Remember me, as Jesus Christ also remembered you. Pray for the Church which is in Syria, whence I am led bound to Rome, being the last of the faithful who are there, even as I have been thought worthy to be chosen to show forth the honour of God. Farewell in God the Father, and in Jesus Christ, our common hope.

++++++++++++++++++++++++

The entire letter can be found here and any faithful and true seeker of Christ should read it in its entirity to learn from this great Saint of the first century, loved by the Apostles, chosen to continue their ministry of defending the truths against the heretics and protecting and feeding the flock in Antioch.