| First, most of those who reject the Apostle's Creed are equally likely to be picky about what they accept or reject of the New Testament, and therefore are likely to construct their own Jesus, instead of following the actual one. Second, we have the New Testament on the authority of the Church, which determined what writings were canonical (for example, omitting the Gospel of St. Thomas). Thus, the Church precedes the Bible as an authority. Third, most of the points made in the Apostle's Creed are, in fact, present as doctrine in the New Testament, including the idea that Jesus was the Son of God, that He died for our sins, and that He was resurrected and ascended into Heaven. To disavow the Apostolic Creed is practically to disavow the only Jesus we have submitted as an object of faith, ie, the one in the New Testament. Fourth, it makes sense to me that there should have been an oral tradition of catechism, as well as a broader tradition known mostly to the church leaders, out of which these creedal formulations were defined in times of controversy. Fifth, if Christ did establish the Church, why would it be allowed to stray so far so fast? |
