While I am not Protestant and reject sola scriptura I am even more opposed to the sort of hypocrisy which Catholic and Orthodox are engaging in on this thread. We have people here putting down Fundamentalist Protestantism and boasting of their devotion to antiquity when they do not accept all the teachings of the church fathers but only those they agree with.
Yes, the church fathers taught the real presence. They also taught that the world was created in six days. They also accepted the historicity of the events described in the "old testament." Yet here we have Catholics and Orthodox who blatantly reject the fathers' teachings on these matters condemning Fundamentalists for not accepting the fathers!
If the fathers were wrong about the Tower of Babel or the Flood of Noah being real events, then why should their teaching on anything else be considered authoritative? If science can sit in judgment on the fathers' teachings on creation, why can't it sit in judgment on all their other teachings?
Why is it all right for Catholics and Orthodox to accept the Bible criticism of nineteenth century liberal Protestantism whole cloth (in contradiction to the fathers) while it is wrong for Fundamentalist Protestants to accept the historicity of scriptural events and personages?
I wish you guys would explain this to me.
As far as I can gather, ZC, you cannot question Real Presence, whereas on the other hand, you can question the Fathers on the creation, and due to the ungodly disorientation of the world, too many Catholics and Orthodox choose the skepticism of miracles of the world over the thought of the Fathers.
ZC,
I’m sorry I have not responded to your ping yet. I am only popping in for a second. I moved 500 miles yesterday to start a new job and don’t have regular internet service yet.
I’ll get back to you as soon as I can. Have a good week!