scottbiddle wrote:
I think this is where we agree to disagree. The Bible is the primary and sole source for authority, and it states that claim in its own language.
Where? Because I see the church as clearly called "the pillar and foundation of truth," Scott. The Bible is "the truth" and the Church provides the foundation and walls for that truth. The church gives us what holds the truth up, is what defines and fences in what the written words do and don't mean. (And back then, when the Scripture was written, it meant the one, united church as a whole, not individuals within the church; whether Eastern Orthodoxy or the Roman Catholic church is the original church is debated between the two, but it's one or the other). That's where I'm coming from.
I agree -- we can agree to disagree there. I've been on the other side, and couldn't remain. Too much inconsistency and opposing viewpoints to make other Scriptures (especially the ones about a unified, "one" church) make sense.
I do see what you're saying about the doctrine of the ever-virginity of Mary being fleshed out over time. I don't have an issue with that. Who am I to put the Holy Spirit on a deadline. It actually speaks more to me -- the church is a living organism that like an infant develops slowly over time; it's not an adult all at once. It's like the commemoration of the Resurrection. The way we celebrate Pascha developed over time in the first several centuries, but nothing we do now conflicts with what was done then, and nothing conflicts with the uninterrupted theology of the church. Back then they fasted (possibly total) for a couple of days before Pascha; within a couple of centuries, the fast was extended to almost seven weeks to align with its importance and it's also a partial fast (certain foods, not all foods). That's fine! There's nothing wrong with an organism developing. God Himself made bodies work that way. Seeing the unity of the faith around the world (and through time) dispels any issue here for me.