Let presume the early church fathers (ECFs) have some influence on doctrines we have today.
But are we to accept the false teachings on Mary, indulgences and such the ECFs seem to advocate that contradict what the Bible has to say?
When do we take what the ECFs said and when do we discard what they said?
To me, this is where the contention starts.
“When do we take what the ECFs said and when do we discard what they said?”
Simple. If the early Christians don’t contradict the Bible, and their doctrine is useful, then go ahead and use it. If they do contradict the Bible, then do not.
Well, do you have
Christmas lights?
Music in the service?
NO music the the service?
The common version of the Nicean creed used the West?
The version of the Nicean creed in the East?
The preexistence of the soul?
The Non preexistence of the Soul?
If you go the pre Nicean fathers, you get into a variety of posistions on the Incarnation.
So the question has never been “Why don’t you believe all that the ECF’s believe?” But “Why do you believe the portions of the ECF’s that you do?” I can use the Early Church Fathers to justify just about every doctrine disputed on Free Republic’s religion forum.
If it agrees with scripture and what the apostles taught we take it but if it disagrees with scripture or the apostles didn’t teach it then we discard it completely.