Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.

The Historic Faith
Sign in
Question 10
They critique the claim that “the church gave you the Bible, so the bishops can make doctrine,” and cite an Orthodox scholar saying Ignatius saw Jesus’ passion/resurrection as the “only complete revelation,” with a Christ-centered reading of Scripture handed down from the apostles—how does that challenge both Protestant individualism and Catholic/Orthodox authority-claims, and what would it change about how your group evaluates teaching, tradition, and “fresh words from God”?
Another way to ask: If Jesus’ death and resurrection are the full and final message, how does that challenge both “I decide truth on my own” and “church leaders can declare new doctrine”? What would change in how your group tests teaching, tradition, and claims of “fresh words from God”?

Direct Answer Based on their critique, the hosts reject the idea that bishops can create new doctrine, but they also resist lone-ranger Christianity; the standard is the apostolic gospel—Jesus Christ as the complete revelation—received and guarded in the church.

Support from Transcript:

  • Dean critiques the apologetic move: “the church gave you the Bible… listen to the church… the church has bishops… look at Ignatius,” calling the implied bishop-like-God authority “blasphemous.”
  • They cite Orthodox scholar John Behr: for Ignatius, “Jesus Christ, His passion and resurrection is… the only complete revelation of God.”
  • Behr’s point (as quoted): the gospel is a “Christocentric reading of Scripture… delivered by the apostles,” not ongoing new revelation.
  • David confirms broadly: early writers “are… sticking to Scripture… no one is claiming special revelation… beyond the apostles.”
  • Even Montanus is framed as not adding theology: prophecies were about “discipline,” not “new revelation… new apostle.”
Discussion Follow-ups What would change if your group tested every teaching by “what did the apostles say” rather than by charisma or institutional claims? How do you stay submitted to church order without granting leaders the right to invent doctrine?