Why do Mormons and Baptists deny the need for historical evidence?

[saturneptune]

Wittenbooger:

One can only conclude that anyone who would start a thread equating the Baptist and Mormon faiths is either on a mind altering substance or has brain damage. There is nothing about the two faiths that are similar.

You put a lot of your belief in historical writings instead the finished work of Christ. Since the RCC did not even exist until 500 AD, what historical writings are you referring to? Another question that comes to mind is, what good are historical writings that are false doctrine? Buddhism, Confusionism, and Shintoism have been around for thousands of years, have many historical documents, so following your logic, do you accept their faith also?

You seem to have a great desire to worship Catholic tradition and edicts that have nothing to do with Scripture. Your church, the Lutherans, along with the Episcipalians, bolted the RCC in name only. The only faith that really made the break was the Presbyterians and maybe the Methodists.

Who do you think was preserving the New Testement church from the time of the Apostles to the Reformation? It certainly was not the RCC, since they did not exist before 500 AD, not was it them afterwards, as their doctrine is a mixture of working ones way to heaven and magical chants. Since the Reformation, the preservation of the NT church has certainly not been the Lutherans, as they might as well be Catholic except for recognition of the Pope and some of the sacraments. A faith that is preserving the NT church does not baptise infants, rely on creeds, answer to a hierarchy other than Jesus Christ, and insist on closed communion. A church that does not believe salvation is by faith only is certainly not preserving the NT church.

Do you even understand Mormon theology?

Notice how the liberal Protestant spokesmen and the RCC spokesmen defend each other. There is no way one can read Scripture, compare it to the doctrine of the RCC and by extension the Lutherans, and believe either has had one day of effort in preserving the NT church.

 

[Wittenberger]

If we are to believe the Baptists and evangelicals, the true faith and doctrines of the Christian faith disappeared for almost 1,000 years! As my brother "Zenas" mentioned above God said the gates of Hell would not prevail against his Church.

The true doctrines of the faith have always been there, whether in Jerusalem, Constantinople, Rome, India or Ethiopia. Over 1,500 years, false teachings did crop up for one reason or another to obscure the true Gospel of Christ, but the essential doctrines remained, as Christ said they would.

What are these essential doctrines which God has preserved for almost 2,000 years in his one catholic (universal) church? They are these:

1. Salvation is a free gift from God. Bought and paid for every man, woman and child by the shed blood, death, and resurrection of God's Son, Jesus Christ, the second person of the Trinity.

2. This free gift of salvation is obtained through faith alone.

At times in the history of the Church some church leaders have misinterpreted the Epistle of James, and have taught that good works are necessary to assist in our salvation, such as crawling on bloody knees up church steps, entering the monastic orders, or paying for indulgences for dead ancestors. These false teachings obscured the true doctrine, but the true doctrine was still there underneath.

Martin Luther, a catholic priest, re-discovered the true meaning of justification by grace through faith and tried to reform the Church from within. The Pope in Rome booted him out of the Church, so his effort for reform had to be carried out in a new church, the Evangelical Church, otherwise known as the Lutheran Church. Although the church in Rome refused to accept the reforms of Luther, it did back track on a number of abuses such as indulgences. This occurred at the Council of Trent, the official beginning of the Roman Catholic Church.

3. In Holy Baptism our sins are forgiven and washed away as taught in Acts 2:38 and in many others verses of Scripture if read LITERALLY as God intended.

4. In Holy Communion, the Lord's Supper, Christians receive spiritual nourishment as we feed on the supernatural, Risen, body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ.

These four doctrines are central to the Christian faith. They have always been there. Look at the writings of the Church Fathers for the evidence.

Baptists and evangelicals are VERY different from Mormons. Orthodox Christians accept Baptists and evangelicals as our brother and sister Christians. We do not recognize the non-trinitarian religion of the Mormons as Christian.

However, Baptists and evangelicals use the same circular arguments to support their new, sixteenth century doctrines of non-regenerational baptism and symbolic Lord's Supper as do the Mormons:

"We know we are right, because we FEEL we are right, therefore we ARE right. The Holy Spirit tells us in an internal voice that we have the true interpretation. The truth is SO obvious if you just listen to the Holy Spirit like we do!"

Listen to the Mormon bishop in the video clip above. He says the EXACT SAME THING!

Read what the early Christians believed. They received the correct interpretation of the Bible from the Apostles themselves!

Don't be like the Mormons and brand all the early Church Fathers as "apostate" and throw out this valuable historical evidence of our 2,000 year old faith!

Return to the true, orthodox, Christian faith, my Baptist and evangelical brothers and sisters!

 

[Scarlett O.]

After multiple discussions with several Baptists and evangelicals on this site I have come to the conclusion that the fact that there is no historical evidence that any Christian living in the first six centuries of Christianity held the Baptist view that Baptism is an act of obedience/public profession of faith ONLY, really does not bother them. Why?

These Baptists and evangelicals state that there is no need for historical evidence to support their interpretation of the Bible because a true Christian only needs the Holy Spirit to guide them, by an inner voice, to see the real "truth" in Scripture. "The true interpretation of the Bible is so obvious!" they say.

That's strange! That is exactly what the Mormons say!

This is the problem with basing your entire belief system on an inner voice that you just know for a fact has to be the Holy Spirit: It may not be! It may just be you and your ego! It may be Satan himself talking to you in that quiet, inner voice!

Listen to how the Mormons put it in this short clip:

http://dwhamby1.wordpress.com/2008/05/05/do-mormons-have-any-evidence-of-their-claims/

Sooo ...... because we as Baptists don't practice the non-Biblical tradition of infant Baptism and because we use the Bible only coupled with the teaching of the Holy Spirit as our guide ....

.... we are satanic and a cult.

I think you would be of best use if you just removed yourself from the BB. Yuo have crossed a line that I - for one - cannot listen to. Your repetitive attempts to make us believe that infant baptism is a Biblical and God-ordained practice that bestows a promise of future salvation to the baby has not worked so you added a further component to your same argument by asserting that we are of the devil and a cult for not believing you.

I will not be conversing with you any more.

 

[Michael Wrenn]

Maybe someone should start a thread with the topic, "Why do Roman Catholics, Mormons, and Wittenberger elevate extra-biblical doctrine and practice above the scriptures?"

 

[Walter]

Maybe someone should start a thread with the topic, "Why do Roman Catholics, Mormons, and Wittenberger elevate extra-biblical doctrine and practice above the scriptures?"

Bishop, I don't believe Catholics ever elevate extra-biblical writings and practice above the scriptures. I don't believe Wittenberger advocates any writings to be above the scriptures, just that those writings Wittenberger has referenced do not back up Baptistic beliefs that were invented much further down the road than the first few centuries of Christianity. It has been asked over and over if Baptist have any historical evidence that anyone believed the way they interpret scripture on doctrines concerning baptism, Eucharist (Lord's Supper), etc. to present them. We all know they don't exists and so cannot be produced. Usually the accusation is made that the 'evil Catholics' destroyed all the evidence.

And anyway, where in the bible does it say anywhere that we should only believe the things written in the Bible? It doesn't. On the contrary, it explicitly instructs us through the apostles to “stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter” (2 Thess 2:15). And it goes on further to say “What you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also” (2 Tim. 2:2).

 

[webdog]

You are avoiding the issue, my friend: where is your proof that your interpretation of the Bible has existed since the days of the Apostles? If your answer is:

"We don't need any historical, archeological, or any other type of proof other than the Bible!"

Then you are no different than the Mormons.

Listen and watch the Mormon bishop speak in the clip on the OP of this thread. Someone asks him for proof that the golden leaflets supposedly given to Joseph Smith by the angel Moroni really exist.

The Mormon bishop has an expression on his face when he repeats this statement that says, "You fool! Don't you know that historical and archeological evidence is not necessary when dealing with matters of the Holy Spirit. Read the doctrines of the Mormons, and the Holy Spirit will show you that the Church of Latter Day Saints is the true Church of Jesus Christ."

Baptists and evangelicals do the exact same thing when orthodox Christians ask them for proof that anyone in the first six to eight centuries after Christ believed that baptism was simply an act of obedience/public profession of faith.

"We don't need any historical proof!" say the Baptists and evangelicals. The Holy Spirit tells us in our hearts that our interpretation is correct. You orthodox can't see the truth because you don't have the Holy Spirit guiding you to the truth."

This is the same blind "faith" that the Mormons use to convert people. We can't prove we are right by the Church Fathers or early Christian writings because they were all apostate. But see how righteous and good we are. See how much we love and speak so much about Jesus. We HAVE to be right!"

Horse hooey!

Baptists, evangelicals, and Mormons use the same circular argument to convince themselves that they have the truth. They refuse to look at historical evidence that PROVES that Joseph Smith made up his Book of Mormon and PROVES that the early Christians believed that sins were washed away in Holy Baptism and that the infants of Christians should be baptized.

Take the blinders away from your eyes, my Baptist and evangelical brothers and sisters! You have no more proof that your interpretation of the Bible is correct than Joseph Smith and Brigham Young!

I see...the Bible is not enough historic proof...you need other historic proof from non-inspired writings.

Goodbye :wavey:

 

[Michael Wrenn]

Bishop, I don't believe Catholics ever elevate extra-biblical writings and practice above the scriptures. I don't believe Wittenberger advocates any writings to be above the scriptures, just that those writings Wittenberger has referenced do not back up Baptistic beliefs that were invented much further down the road than the first few centuries of Christianity. It has been asked over and over if Baptist have any historical evidence that anyone believed the way they interpret scripture on doctrines concerning baptism, Eucharist (Lord's Supper), etc. to present them. We all know they don't exists and so cannot be produced. Usually the accusation is made that the 'evil Catholics' destroyed all the evidence.

And anyway, where in the bible does it say anywhere that we should only believe the things written in the Bible? It doesn't. On the contrary, it explicitly instructs us through the apostles to “stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter” (2 Thess 2:15). And it goes on further to say “What you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also” (2 Tim. 2:2).

The point is, I was making an extreme statement to show the foolish and unwarranted thread title, equating Baptists with Mormons.

Another point is that non-Catholics are supposed to believe in the primacy of scripture. I have shown time and again that if scriptural primacy is not adhered to, then apostolic teaching and practice is not adhered to.

It is just not true that Baptistic beliefs were invented further down the road from the apostolic church. Every Baptist belief can be defended by and affirmed by scripture. The same cannot be said for the RCC. The New Testament, being the source of our faith, is the reliable record and evidence of doctrine and must be relied on much more than any writing which came after. Abandon that principle, and you have abandoned the very foundation of the faith.

A final point: If "tradition" contradicts scripture, which do you go with? I know my answer to that.

 

[Michael Wrenn]

I see...the Bible is not enough historic proof...you need other historic proof from non-inspired writings.

Goodbye :wavey:

And that is the heart of the matter. These people are doing what they accuse the liberals of doing -- allowing extra-biblical and unbiblical teaching to determine doctrine.

 

[Wittenberger]

And that is the heart of the matter. These people are doing what they accuse the liberals of doing -- allowing extra-biblical and unbiblical teaching to determine doctrine.

When Mormons come to my front door and want to debate Scripture verses to support their Mormon doctrines, I refuse to debate them. Why?

Is it because I am afraid that they may be right? No.

I refuse to debate them because I know that if these Mormons are well trained, for every verse I use to support the doctrine of the Trinity, they will find another verse in Scripture, twist and contort it, to “prove” Mormon doctrine. If they are well trained, they will have a scriptural response for every false teaching they believe.

It’s a waste of time! I will NEVER change their minds by arguing Scripture.

But do you know what stops Mormons in their tracks? Ask them for any evidence that an angel, named Moroni, really did give golden tablets to Joseph Smith. Ask them for archeological evidence that the American Indians really are the lost Ten Tribes of Israel. Do you know what their answer will be? It will be exactly the same as this Mormon bishop:

http://dwhamby1.wordpress.com/2008/05/05/do-mormons-have-any-evidence-of-their-claims/

“Mormons don’t need historical and archeological evidence to prove they interpret Scripture correctly because they have an inner voice that tells them they are right.” Who is this inner voice…the “Holy Spirit”!

Church Fathers? Bah humbug! They were all “apostate”. They were all “Catholic” heretics. Evidence of the true “Mormons” was erased by these “catholics”. All history books were written by these “catholics”, so they cannot be trusted.

“Just listen to the Holy Spirit speaking through us!” they say. “See how much we talk about Jesus. See what nice, wonderful, caring people Mormons are! We HAVE to be right! After all, we have the Holy Spirit who guides us!”

Baptists and evangelicals, unlike Mormons, are members of Christian denominations. But they have been deceived into believing the same circular, conspiracy-laiden myth that they don’t need historical evidence to support their new, sixteenth century doctrines of symbolic baptism and symbolic Lord’s Supper.

I will debate Baptists and evangelicals on Scripture when they can prove that they have more historical evidence than the Mormons to prove their interpretation of the Bible is correct!

 

[Moriah]

Bishop, I don't believe Catholics ever elevate extra-biblical writings and practice above the scriptures. I don't believe Wittenberger advocates any writings to be above the scriptures, just that those writings Wittenberger has referenced do not back up Baptistic beliefs that were invented much further down the road than the first few centuries of Christianity.

The Catholic Church started teaching falseness one by one. It might not always have been a false religion, but it became so adding things that go against God one by one.

Signs of the cross and prayers for the dead began 300 years after Christ.

Veneration for angels and dead saints started around 375.

The worship of Mary started around 431.

Priests dressing differently started in the year 500.


The calling of the Catholic leader ‘Pope’ began in around 610.

You can see a list the complete list on this link:
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Religions/Roman%20Catholicism/catholic_heresies-a_list.htm


If the Catholics got rid of all things that go against God’s word, then they would be practicing the true Way.

It has been asked over and over if Baptist have any historical evidence that anyone believed the way they interpret scripture on doctrines concerning baptism, Eucharist (Lord's Supper), etc. to present them. We all know they don't exists and so cannot be produced. Usually the accusation is made that the 'evil Catholics' destroyed all the evidence.

What makes you think that the evidence was not destroyed with the people deemed apostate and heretic? Even when John Calvin had Michael Servetus murdered, Michael Servetus’ books were burned with him! What make you think that the Catholics did not destroy others’ books?

And anyway, where in the bible does it say anywhere that we should only believe the things written in the Bible? It doesn't. On the contrary, it explicitly instructs us through the apostles to “stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter” (2 Thess 2:15). And it goes on further to say “What you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also” (2 Tim. 2:2).

The Apostles spoke what they had written! You like to compare the Catholics tradition to that of the Apostles, but again, the Apostles tradition spoken was given by God during the laying of the foundation. The foundation is laid, and all your churches’ traditions are from man and not God.

Read hear again what Jesus thinks of your traditions.

Matthew 15:3 Jesus replied, "And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition?

Matthew 15:7 You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you: 8"'These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. 9 They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men.'" 14 Leave them; they are blind guides. If a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a pit."

 

[Michael Wrenn]

When Mormons come to my front door and want to debate Scripture verses to support their Mormon doctrines, I refuse to debate them. Why?

Is it because I am afraid that they may be right? No.

I refuse to debate them because I know that if these Mormons are well trained, for every verse I use to support the doctrine of the Trinity, they will find another verse in Scripture, twist and contort it, to “prove” Mormon doctrine. If they are well trained, they will have a scriptural response for every false teaching they believe.

It’s a waste of time! I will NEVER change their minds by arguing Scripture.

But do you know what stops Mormons in their tracks? Ask them for any evidence that an angel, named Moroni, really did give golden tablets to Joseph Smith. Ask them for archeological evidence that the American Indians really are the lost Ten Tribes of Israel. Do you know what their answer will be? It will be exactly the same as this Mormon bishop:

http://dwhamby1.wordpress.com/2008/05/05/do-mormons-have-any-evidence-of-their-claims/

“Mormons don’t need historical and archeological evidence to prove they interpret Scripture correctly because they have an inner voice that tells them they are right.” Who is this inner voice…the “Holy Spirit”!

Church Fathers? Bah humbug! They were all “apostate”. They were all “Catholic” heretics. Evidence of the true “Mormons” was erased by these “catholics”. All history books were written by these “catholics”, so they cannot be trusted.

“Just listen to the Holy Spirit speaking through us!” they say. “See how much we talk about Jesus. See what nice, wonderful, caring people Mormons are! We HAVE to be right! After all, we have the Holy Spirit who guides us!”

Baptists and evangelicals, unlike Mormons, are members of Christian denominations. But they have been deceived into believing the same circular, conspiracy-laiden myth that they don’t need historical evidence to support their new, sixteenth century doctrines of symbolic baptism and symbolic Lord’s Supper.

I will debate Baptists and evangelicals on Scripture when they can prove that they have more historical evidence than the Mormons to prove their interpretation of the Bible is correct!

I am done talking with you. I have tried to engage you in reasonable, civil discussion, but no more. You are a liar and have no integrity. Your latest posts prove that.

 

[Wittenberger]

Sooo ...... because we as Baptists don't practice the non-Biblical tradition of infant Baptism and because we use the Bible only coupled with the teaching of the Holy Spirit as our guide ....

.... we are satanic and a cult.

I think you would be of best use if you just removed yourself from the BB. Yuo have crossed a line that I - for one - cannot listen to. Your repetitive attempts to make us believe that infant baptism is a Biblical and God-ordained practice that bestows a promise of future salvation to the baby has not worked so you added a further component to your same argument by asserting that we are of the devil and a cult for not believing you.

I will not be conversing with you any more.

My dear Christian sister,

I am very sorry that you are offended. I am not trying to insult you or trying to win an argument just for the sake of winning.

I am trying to bring my Baptist and evangelical brothers and sisters out of their new and false teachings, and back to the true Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Someone has convinced you that all you need to do is listen to the voice inside you to know the truth. That is false doctrine! Listening to an inner voice does not guarantee that the voice you are listening to is the Holy Spirit, it may just be you, or the voice of your parents, pastor or Sunday school teacher who taught you that all you have to do is trust your inner feelings. "God will speak to you in your heart," you were told.

God doesn't give private revelations anymore. He is NOT speaking to you in an inner voice.

God speaks through His Holy Word and the only way to be sure that you are interpreting Scripture correctly is not listening to an inner voice, but comparing Scripture to what the early Christians believed.

No Christian in the first six to eight centuries of Christianity believed that Baptism and the Lord's Supper were simply symbolic acts of obedience. No one believed this!

Don't buy into unfounded cospiracy theories that the "Catholics" erased all the evidence of the true "Baptist" Christians in the first few centuries. That is the same circular, unprovable argument that the Mormons use, who unlike you, are not part of the Christian Church.

Return to the true, historically verifiable, orthodox Christian faith, my sister!

 

[Moriah]

But do you know what stops Mormons in their tracks? Ask them for any evidence that an angel, named Moroni, really did give golden tablets to Joseph Smith. Ask them for archeological evidence that the American Indians really are the lost Ten Tribes of Israel.

How ironic, for you to speak to unbiblical Mormons with your strongest unbiblical defense.

You unbiblical defense is to rely on men’s teachings that came AFTER the men of the Bible.

One scripture from the Bible is powerful and the Mormons cannot go against it is Galatians 1:8.

Joseph Smith said an angel named Moroni gave him the other testament.

 

[Zenas]

A final point: If "tradition" contradicts scripture, which do you go with? I know my answer to that.

Moot point. Tradiition never contradicts scripture and scripture never contradicts tradition. They complement each other.

 

[Wittenberger]

I see...the Bible is not enough historic proof...you need other historic proof from non-inspired writings.

Goodbye :wavey:

My dear Christian brother,

Don't put your fingers in your ears and climb back into your warm and safe "cocoon".

Inside your cocoon you can wrap the security blanket of "my inner voice tells me my interpretation of the Bible is correct. I don't need any historical evidence that any early Christians believed my doctrines.'

You, unlike Mormons, belong to a Christian denomination. You are my brother in Christ. But the truth is there if you are only willing to leave the safety of your self-made cocoon, and see that the true doctrines of the Christian faith have been in existence since the days of the Apostles, and there is ample historical evidence to prove it.

Don't follow the same "logic" as the Mormons: "I"m right because I know I'm right".

 

[Walter]

Moriah, why then were not the works of the Gnostics and the other heretics destroyed?

And since you cannot help yourself with the continuing the 'doctrinal dance', I will make some comments. The constant teaching of the Church has been that intercession of the saints is biblical. Hebrews 12 says that we are surrounded (present tense) in our race here by all the borthers and sisters who have gone before us. So, we aren't alone! It is kinda like we are in London in the Olympic Stadium and the people in the stands are former medalists in the race in which I am now competing. They know what it takes to win and they are surrounding me cheering me on.

If the prayers of a righteous man a very powerful, as it says in James 6:16, who much more those who are perfected? If I can ask my mother on earth to pray for me and know that God hears her petitions, why can't I ask the Mother of Jesus to pray for me? This is not necromancy-these souls are the living, not the dead and I'm not asking them to tell me the future. I am simply asking them to intercede for me on my behalf, just like I could ask you to intercede for me. No worship of Mary or the saints. The Church condemns that.

The prayer for intercession do not detract from God's glory, it demonstrates God's glory because we are living faithfully as brothers and sister in Him. These saints really are our older siblings in the Lord.

 

[Michael Wrenn]

Moot point. Tradiition never contradicts scripture and scripture never contradicts tradition. They complement each other.

That is foolish and untrue.

When the RC turned into a murdering machine for centuries, did that complement scripture?

Does an infallible pope complement scripture?

How many examples do you need?

 

[Moriah]

The constant teaching of the Church has been that intercession of the saints is biblical. Hebrews 12 says that we are surrounded (present tense) in our race here by all the borthers and sisters who have gone before us. So, we aren't alone! It is kinda like we are in London in the Olympic Stadium and the people in the stands are former medalists in the race in which I am now competing. They know what it takes to win and they are surrounding me cheering me on.

Of course, people live on in spirit after our physical death.

However, Catholics twist it to the veneration of people who have passed.

If the prayers of a righteous man a very powerful, as it says in James 6:16, who much more those who are perfected? If I can ask my mother on earth to pray for me and know that God hears her petitions, why can't I ask the Mother of Jesus to pray for me? This is not necromancy-these souls are the living, not the dead and I'm not asking them to tell me the future. I am simply asking them to intercede for me on my behalf, just like I could ask you to intercede for me. No worship of Mary or the saints. The Church condemns that.

You keep denying the truth. It is worship to venerate, and they are synonyms.

Catholics do not simply ask Mary to pray for them.

Catholics kneel down and PRAY TO Mary.

Catholics do not simply ask a dead “Saint” to PRAY FOR them. Catholics PRAY TO the dead “Saints.”

The prayer for intercession do not detract from God's glory, it demonstrates God's glory because we are living faithfully as brothers and sister in Him. These saints really are our older siblings in the Lord.

You are denying the Truth.

 

[Wittenberger]

I am done talking with you. I have tried to engage you in reasonable, civil discussion, but no more. You are a liar and have no integrity. Your latest posts prove that.

I don't understand why so many of you are reacting so furiously. I'm a "liar"?

I'm not questioning that you are Christians. You are my brothers and sister in Christ. But it is my Christian duty, to warn my brothers and sister of false teachings. Your beliefs in a symbolic baptism and a symbolic Lord's Supper have no historical evidence to prove that these beliefs exisited for the first six to eight centuries after Christ.

If someone, anyone believed these Baptist doctrines during that time there would have to be some evidence, somewhere of its existence. Even a writing oN a cave WALL that says, "Joe Smith was baptized today as a symbolic act of obedience/public profession of faith".

No such evidence exists! I'm not saying BaptistS are on the same level as Mormons. You are Christians, they are not.

But Baptists use the same circular, conspiracy-laden arguments to support their positions on baptism and the Lord's Supper as do the Mormons.

THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT YOUR BELIEF SYSTEM EXISTED FOR THE FIRST 600-800 YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY! PLEASE PROVE ME WRONG.

 

[DHK]

THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT YOUR BELIEF SYSTEM EXISTED FOR THE FIRST 600-800 YEARS OF CHRISTIANITY! PLEASE PROVE ME WRONG.

Why? What fruit is there in it? We know that most known heresies of the RCC and other churches come from the ECF. Why read through volumes of the same people who already are known to hold many heresies to find "truth"? That seems a bit inconsistent to me. It is doing things backwards. Truth is found in the Word of God. If your not willing to accept it then so be it.

If you are unable to stand on the Word of God, demonstrate your beliefs by the Word of God without being "shot down" what good is there. History is not our guideline. It is not our authority, and never has been. It always has been the Word of God.

Frankly I am too busy to wade through voluminous material when I am too busy preparing to preach to those whom I feed. That is what takes my time: personal Bible study, time with God, and not the reading and studying of fallible men who were instrumental in bringing error into the early churches. That is simply a waste of time.