Since they are missing the guidance of the Institution that Jesus labouriously created over his three years of ministry, and only have one of its created teachings and documents - the Bible - to go by, their following is like having a map, but not the translation. In the cases of the aftermath of the Restoration, or what the Reformed churches have degenerated into, their maps have not proven sufficient.
We are only missing the so-called "traditions" the RCC so strenuously push from various men and movements of the times. And, the Bible is "translated" into our English so that we can understand it. Not being a member of the "Reformed churches" that you refer to, we stick to what is revealed by God through the writings of Christ's inspired writers of the Bible. The assembly I affiliate with follows the lead of the Apostles as they taught everything that Jesus told them to. We do not add nor subtract from what is written, period.
I'd suggest a second look at the Pauline letters and especially his relationships with Timothy and some of his other subordinates. The relationship of Luke to both Peter and Paul, and Mark to Peter might also be relevant.
Thanks for the suggestion. That's exactly what we did, and we don't only read it two times, but as often as we are led by the spirit to do.
It is well recorded in the NT and in early Church history. Your website leaves little doubt as to which heresies you favour.
And, pray tell, just what are those "heresies" you think we favour? I'd like to know what they are!
Good luck - again!
The problem with Scripture-only is that you are missing the primary teachings of Christ. Jesus taught orally, and so did the early Church. Paul is the first of the NT writings that we know of, only an early draft of Matthew might have preceded it.
Not being a member of the "Reformed churches" that you refer to, we stick to what is revealed by God through the writings of Christ's inspired writers of the Bible.
While missing the teachings of the Lord himself.
The assembly I affiliate with follows the lead of the Apostles as they taught everything that Jesus told them to. We do not add nor subtract from what is written, period.
Negative. You do not follow the Didache, for instance. I will assume that you do not have the Deutercanonicals in your Bibles either.
I'd suggest a second look at the Pauline letters and especially his relationships with Timothy and some of his other subordinates. The relationship of Luke to both Peter and Paul, and Mark to Peter might also be relevant.
Thanks for the suggestion. That's exactly what we did, and we don't only read it two times, but as often as we are led by the spirit to do.
I'd suggest putting aside the Jack Daniels and reading it sober. Paul clearly outlines the growing hierarchy of the Church under himself; and so does the rest of the NT.
And, pray tell, just what are those "heresies" you think we favour? I'd like to know what they are!
The first is subordinationalism, as expressly outlined in the letters of Dickenson that you have copiously posted. After seeing that, I simply will write off whatever it is that a failed Catholic has fallen into, as so many have.