Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Claud

Error was creeping into the early church right from the get go.

Paul addressed it in his letters even.

Proximity in time to the early church is no guarantee of being error free or having an extra special ability to *correctly* interpret Scripture or know what the apostles meant when they said something.

And especially 200-300 years later.

Meaningless.

Just look at what has happened to our Constitution and how it’s interpreted within that kind of time frame.

Men are subject to deception and Satan will be trying his hardest to destroy the work of God. Just because they are *big names* from long ago gives them no special ability over and above any other Spirit filled believer.

Because, spiritual matters are SPIRITUALLY discerned.

The man without the Spirit cannot understand them, just like those who even walked with Jesus. Those heard Him teach themselves were unable to understand spiritual matters any better than anyone else. no matter when they lived.


53 posted on 06/20/2017 4:36:48 AM PDT by metmom ( ...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies ]


To: metmom
Error was creeping into the early church right from the get go. Paul addressed it in his letters even.

Of course error tried to creep in. But you assume it succeeded, and you don't have a stitch of historical evidence to back that claim up. What early Christian writer ever said the whole Church fell to error? What was the error? When did it happen? Who were the main figures?

I hear these vague accusations but I never see anyone back them up with historical facts.

Proximity in time to the early church is no guarantee of being error free or having an extra special ability to *correctly* interpret Scripture or know what the apostles meant when they said something.

St Clement and St. Polycarp were taught by the Apostles themselves in person. They had a privileged position which you and I will never have. They were able to listen to a teaching and say: "No, Peter never taught that" or "Yes, John taught the same."

And you betray the fundamental weakness of your argument by saying "especially 200-300 years later."

If we are going to dismiss Ambrose and Augustine and Chrysostom for being 200-300 years later, then shouldn't I dismiss you with even more prejudice, 2000 years later? You who aren't even a native Greek or Aramaic or Hebrew speaker, who didn't grow up in the Near East or the Roman Empire where all of this stuff happened?

55 posted on 06/20/2017 6:15:03 AM PDT by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson