HELP! - Early Church beliefs on Salvation

[Matthew24]

I have been troubled by something I have recently seen. I hope someone can shed some light on this topic for me. I will do more research on it, but obviously there is only so much time, and i hoped that one of you have done the research already. Basically, in the video it quotes church Bishops that were directly linked to the apostles. It basically states that the early church taught salvation in 2 stages...1. Grace through Faith. (which is what we cling to) 2 After conversion it describes Eternal Security as conditional. He said the apostles didn't worry about their salvation, but taught that a person can walk away basically. I immediately thought to myself this guy is a liar, and I'm still not convinced he is telling the truth, but he sounds genuine and with the amount of quotes he had it was surely troubling. Sorry i haven't figured out how to put the video anywhere but on here?  Thank you in advance for your input.

 

[OLD fashioned preacher]

I don't have time to listen due to having to go to work (won't be back for 15 hours) but I heard the first 17 minutes. In that time, he classified the RCC as the church married to the state (not exact wording but not misrepresenting his statement either), said most Christians don't hold to grace alone for salvation but then placed water baptism in the requirement for "stage one" of salvation while stating it's not "a work" (yet "receiving Christ" he classified as a work).

[Ukulelemike]

Simple: toss aside the extra biblical writings and sayings, and hold to the Bible alone. Let THAT be your guide. Churches were going wrong even while Paul was out evangelizing them, so early writers, even those connected to the Apostles, could have gone wrong within a generation or two. Sola Scriptura, Scripture Alone.

[TheSword]

I've started listening to it and unfortunately at 15 minutes in he's still not on to making his first point...I'll comb through my resources sometime this week (particularly the one's he says he's using as resources) and have a look though. However, I have to go with UM's statement that just because they were alive in the 2nd century does not necessarily make them more right. Start with the Bible and if what they say doesn't match, then they're wrong no matter who they knew during their lifetime. The pastor(s) of the church at Corinth knew Paul personally too and look what happened there...

Edited September 28, 2015 by TheSword
spelling and grammar

[Salyan]

I must confess to not knowing much about these early bishops, or what branch of the church they belonged, or what evidence may link them to the apostles. (I also confess to not being able to listen to the video yet, as I'm supposed to be at work!) Remember that the Catholic Church spent many centuries destroying the works of other - maybe the true - churches, and creating its own writings. The earlier the writing, the more likely it is to have been influenced by their heresy. But I have access to the earliest writings of the church, preserved by a reliable source that may be trusted not to include spurious writings or later editorials by heretics. It's called the New Testament.   In that text, we see already that there were teachers in the church that were changing the doctrine. The book of Galatians especially speaks to this - it was basically written to a church that had people coming in teaching that now you were saved, you had to keep the law for sanctification.

Jude 3-4
2 John 9-10
Titus 3:10-11
2 Timothy 4:14-17
Galatians 3:1-3; 5:1-9

 

[No Nicolaitans]

Not sure how much I'd want to listen to an ex-Jehovah Witness turned Anglican priest turned Mennonite/Amish/Brethren who collaborates with the Assembly of God...he might be fine, but still...

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

David Bercot was raised as a Jehovah's Witness.[5] After leaving Jehovah’s Witnesses in 1976, he began his university education. He graduated from Stephen F. Austin State University summa cum laude,[6] and he obtained his Doctor of Jurisprudence degree cum laude from Baylor University School of Law.[7]

In 1985, Bercot began an in-depth study of the early Christians who lived before the Council of Nicaea in A.D. 325. His studies started him on a spiritual pilgrimage.[8] In 1989, he wrote the book, Will the Real Heretics Please Stand Up, which sets forth some of the teachings and lifestyle of the early Christians.[9] That same year, he joined with an Assembly of God pastor to establish Scroll Publishing Company for the purpose of publishing various writings of the pre-Nicene Christians, as well as to publish other Christian books.[10]

Bercot’s studies of the early Christians brought him into contact and dialogue with three different branches of Christianity: the Anabaptists (Mennonites, Amish, Brethren),[11] the Anglican Church, and the churches of the Restoration Movement (Church of Christ, Disciples of Christ, International Church of Christ).[12] In 1985, after completing his religious studies through Cambridge University, Bercot was ordained as an Anglican priest.[13] However, he eventually left the Anglican Church and began fellowshipping with various Anabaptist churches.[14]

Today Bercot is a lecturer and author who emphasizes the simplicity of Biblical doctrine and early (ante-Nicene) Christian teaching over against what he would call the heavy and complex body of theological understandings that have built up over the centuries in churches and in academia and that have come to be thought of as orthodoxy. He is particularly notable for his deeply nonresistant understanding of Jesus's and New Testament teaching.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Bercot

 

[Matthew24]

I agree with everyone. I wonder if the Catholics tampered with their writings? I mean it seems crazy that they all were messed up. You'd think the bible would have clearly stated something about the 2 stages of salvation. It seems contradictory and pointless to say I trust in Jesus and now I'm going to try to establish my own righteousness so I won't go to hell. Honestly, it seems like it leans Church of Christ. Maybe they are the only true church! lol JK. Thank you all for the feedback.

[No Nicolaitans]

I listened to it...

First warning went up early when he said something to the effect of..."Of course the scriptures are the final authority, BUT we can't discount the writings of the early church."

He quotes from people like Origen and Tertullian

Basically, the video is an hour long advertisement for Arminianism without mentioning Arminius.

Salvation is in two stages...#1 - you're saved by faith, but... #2 - you maintain (or keep) your salvation through an obedient-love relationship (works)...

Plus, on the few occasions that he does quote "Bible", he uses the RSV...

Plus, he said that all Baptists believe the same about salvation...

Plus, he seems to consider all non-Catholics as Protestants...

Plus, he seems to consider all Protestants as Evangelicals...

Plus...

...

[wretched]

I listened to it...

First warning went up early when he said something to the effect of..."Of course the scriptures are the final authority, BUT we can't discount the writings of the early church."

He quotes from people like Origen and Tertullian

Basically, the video is an hour long advertisement for Arminianism without mentioning Arminius.

Salvation is in two stages...#1 - you're saved by faith, but... #2 - you maintain (or keep) your salvation through an obedient-love relationship (works)...

Plus, on the few occasions that he does quote "Bible", he uses the RSV...

Plus, he said that all Baptists believe the same about salvation...

Plus, he seems to consider all non-Catholics as Protestants...

Plus, he seems to consider all Protestants as Evangelicals...

Plus...

...

Well....That's a stinky cologne. Glad I didn't listen to it.

[Matthew24]

Let me ask you all something else that has concerned me. To my knowledge, I don't know of anyone that believed in faith alone for salvation and eternal security like around the 1500's. Weren't most pilgrims reformed? (I guess technically reformed believe in those things?)  would it be the Anabaptist? Somebody school me in Baptist history. Maybe there wasn't any Baptist churches because the catholics killed us all? I read where in 1200 years the papacy killed 50-75 million Christians, and we think ISIS is bad.

[John81]

It's little wonder the "church fathers" and various early Christian leaders and writers don't agree on all points. As mentioned above, even as the New Testament was being written Paul and others were dealing with false teachers, those adding or subtracting from doctrine, immature Christians, prideful leaders, etc. Given all that should we expect the next generation to have managed to be in perfect unity with the Apostles teachings?

We see this event today where two dozen books may be written by Christian pastors and none of them are in 100% agreement. Even narrowed down to Online Baptist we see differing views and interpretations of some points in Scripture; and this includes differences between born again pastors here too.

In all this we need to recognize that a person, including pastors, can be born again, serving the Lord, and not be in 100% agreement on certain points without being apostates.

So, this has all been going on since the time of the Apostles, to the early church leaders, to and through all who followed up to today and will continue.

The Word of God is perfect, we humans, even though saved, are imperfect. Does anyone even among the few here on OB know everything and have all things perfectly figured out and are we all in perfect agreement on every point? No, and neither were the early church leaders, earlier Baptist leaders, or anyone else today.

[TheSword]

Let me ask you all something else that has concerned me. To my knowledge, I don't know of anyone that believed in faith alone for salvation and eternal security like around the 1500's. Weren't most pilgrims reformed? (I guess technically reformed believe in those things?)  would it be the Anabaptist? Somebody school me in Baptist history. Maybe there wasn't any Baptist churches because the catholics killed us all? I read where in 1200 years the papacy killed 50-75 million Christians, and we think ISIS is bad.

Oh my, look at all these worms you just spilled

It'd be easier to recommend a book. In short, what we call "Baptist" today has a lot of original influences but is largely an organic movement apart from the various denominations that sprang out of the Reformation. Historically, most strands can be traced back through England and the Netherlands and associated with various separatist movements. There have always been Baptists on both sides of the Calvinism line. The early Baptists  in England were divided between the General Baptists (mostly Arminian view, but not completely) and Particular Baptists (wholesale Calvinism) over the issue of general vs. particular/limited atonement.

More generally speaking, with some investigation you'll find that there have always been groups of people/churches that have held to what we know as Baptist distinctives, though maybe not all of them at once.

[Ukulelemike]

There is an excellent book called the Trail of Blood, a short history of the Baptists. Included in the book is a timeline that outlines the true churches and their beginnings from the false churches.

[Matthew24]

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Books, Tracts & Preaching/Printed Books/trail_of_blood_jm_carroll.htm

There is an excellent book called the Trail of Blood, a short history of the Baptists. Included in the book is a timeline that outlines the true churches and their beginnings from the false churches.

Thank you, looks amazing

 

[Ukulelemike]

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Books, Tracts & Preaching/Printed Books/trail_of_blood_jm_carroll.htm

Thank you, looks amazing

 

The red dots indicate godly movements, the black, those of man.