The Development Of Doctrine

They maintain that history first presents to us a pure Christianity in East and West, and then a corrupt; and then of course their duty is to draw the line between what is corrupt and what is pure, and to determine the dates at which the various changes from good to bad were introduced. –An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine; John Henry Newman

This is basically an argument from Church of Christ. Of which I find no real value in. John Newman is showing the falsity of the claim in the full section.  Very interesting.

Do problems in the church mean the church ceases to exist in its “pure” form? If the early church fathers were wrong on some points does this invalidate the entirety of the faith? Or more so does it prevent salvation by grace? Does our ignorance on a specific point of doctrine doom us to an eternity in hell? Only a just God can determine the answer to all the questions. The last one most specifically would be one of great concern for us. This is a good time to list a few scriptures on fearing the Lord and serving Him. I would much rather go with the ones in Deuteronomy but we could select from the Psalms also. Yes, many places I’m sure.

A reason why we want to know God more, I should say.

And what do they mean “pure” form? What do we think of the church at Corinth, Galatia, or any of the early churches we have records of. How pure are they? Is the pure Christianity a myth? Made up of broken people. Yes, I must say I like this thought pattern. Not sure if I can hold it.

I lost a few ideas in this area of interest. I had my notebook but could not capture them.