That does not agree with the patristic saying that faith is once delivered and believed everywhere and always.
that does not necessarily invalidate that understanding
It doesn't validate it either. Christianity went from being a Jewish sectarian religion to being an amalgam of a specific flavor of Judaism, Greek Pagan philosophy (Plaotnism, Stoicism, etc.), and Persian (Zoroastrian) dualism. We can say that Christianity gradually (and consensually) evolved, especially in the West, without necessairly being either valid or invalid.
It is possible that we simply understand God better (not completely, of course not, but better than the fishermen and salesmen 2000 years ago).
It's possible, but doesn't seem probable.
The fact that the Church harmonized Scripture to the extent that it has does not invalidate it. It may mean that it has been nudged towards better description than formerly.
Too much deliberate change was required to call it mere harmonization, Mark. That's why I always put "harmonize" in quotes.
As for human understanding of God, how can finite even begin to encompass the infinite? Why, if God is infinite, then the combined understanding of all humanity that ever lived, lives and will live amounts to nothing compared to what God truly is.
That does not agree with the patristic saying that faith is once delivered and believed everywhere and always.
There is a difference between understanding and faith. One does not necessarily negate, reduce or expand the other.
that does not necessarily invalidate that understanding
It doesn't validate it either. Christianity went from being a Jewish sectarian religion to being an amalgam of a specific flavor of Judaism, Greek Pagan philosophy (Plaotnism, Stoicism, etc.), and Persian (Zoroastrian) dualism. We can say that Christianity gradually (and consensually) evolved, especially in the West, without necessairly being either valid or invalid.
If the argument is that greater understanding lessens the validity of the faith, then I would differ with that. I think that the odds are that greater understanding can lead to greater faith, but not in all instances.
It is possible that we simply understand God better (not completely, of course not, but better than the fishermen and salesmen 2000 years ago).
It's possible, but doesn't seem probable.
Does the Nicene Council give evidence of greater understanding than Irenaeus, for instance? Do the Ecumenical Councils throughout the first millennium give ever increasing understanding? I submit that they do.
As for human understanding of God, how can finite even begin to encompass the infinite? Why, if God is infinite, then the combined understanding of all humanity that ever lived, lives and will live amounts to nothing compared to what God truly is.
The mathematical opposite of infinity is 1/x as x goes to infinity. However, since we have had revelation of God, we are not at the opposite of infinity. If we can increase our understanding, then it is not for naught - it is something.