- May 28, 2018
- 13,134
- 5,678
- 68
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Reformed
- Marital Status
- Widowed
Seems to me that argument assumes that the early church had everything right, (and that, without the whole Bible available).Here's an easy one: At some point in the first hour, Mr. Dyer says the NT wasn't even canonized until the late 4th century (and Revelation wasn't included for another couple hundred years after that), so how could the early Church have been a 'Sola Scriptura' church if some churches had A,B,C scriptures while others had X,Y,Z scriptures. It wasn't until several councils after the first Nicaea that scriptures A,B,C were deemed authentic along with X,Y,Z scriptures along with 21 other epistles. So, that essentially cancels out that the Ordo Theologae comes from the scriptures alone.
To my mind, when we are told the early church is a pattern, it doesn't mean we shouldn't deviate from the pattern, where Scripture and use require it. The early church didn't get everything right, even for their day, I expect.
But if EO doesn't believe in the authority of scripture, what is the point of the thread? I don't mean to be talking out of turn --reprimands are welcom.
Upvote
0