If something isn't already clear in the New Testament, then I don't think we need to quote the 'Church Fathers' on it in order that we can be more dogmatic about it than the New Testament itself allows us to be.
If they repeat something already established in the New Testament, then there's value in their witness.
But if they purport to be clear about something not clearly established in the New Testament, then you still have to take what they write about it with a grain of salt.
I'd rather be clear about things the New Testament is clear about, and remain unclear about something if it isn't clear to me what the New Testament means by it.
If they repeat something already established in the New Testament, then there's value in their witness.
But if they purport to be clear about something not clearly established in the New Testament, then you still have to take what they write about it with a grain of salt.
I'd rather be clear about things the New Testament is clear about, and remain unclear about something if it isn't clear to me what the New Testament means by it.
No comments:
Post a Comment