Scripture and Tradition

[DHK]

Indeed, and this marks the beginning of Sacred Tradition - the oral teachings and actions of the Apostles and the Apostolic Church. The only point where we differ is that this phenomenon did not cease at the end of the 1st century; there is no Scriptural authority to suggest it did and Church history shows very plainly that it didn't.

But there was no Tradition here Matt. It wasn't even the beginning of Tradition. Paul preached unto them the Word of God, not tradition. That is the reason that they could check what he said from the Word of God. Look again:

Acts 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
--They received the word--the Word of God, which Paul preached unto them.
--They searched the Scriptures, and did it daily, to verify the Scripture that Paul was preaching. They were verifying a NT message from the OT. For the gospel is found in the OT.
When Philip "attached himself to the chariot" and began to expound the Scriptures to the Ethiopian eunuch, it says that "he began at the same place (Isaiah) and preached unto him Jesus."
The gospel can be found in the OT. It can be verified by the OT. And that is what the Bereans were doing. The Ethiopian saw the need to be baptized. How much Scripture was Philip able to use. He only had the book of Isaiah, and the eunuch was convicted of this.

There was no tradition here. They both preached from the Word of God. And from there early Christians took the Word of God and preached the gospel everywhere.

Acts 8:4 Therefore they that were scattered abroad went every where preaching the word.
--This was the pattern of the NT churches.

 

[D28guy]

Agnus Dei,

"So, what was used to guide the Church some 20 years if Holy Tradition is out of the question?"

In adition to what DHK posted, I would add that during that very brief period of time they had the old testament scriptures, which have multitudes of prophetic instruction that is wonderfully applicable to New Covenant believers.

Christ took his disciples aside before His resurrection and proclaimed to them....

"And beginning at Moses, and all the prophets, He expounded to them in all the scriptures the things concerning Himself"

So, for 20 years they had the OT scriptures and could employ "sola scriptura", and once the new covenant scriptures were written and circulated they had those.

Mike

 

[BobRyan]

I, personally, believe that John Wesley's Quadrilateral was useful in this regard. He used three measures or canons to understand God's Revelation to Man...

1.) Scripture - the Holy Bible (Old and New Testaments)
2.) Tradition - the two millennia history of the Christian Church
3.) Reason - rational thinking and sensible interpretation
4.) Experience - a Christian's personal and communal journey in Christ

Nothing superseded the word of God but the other three where thought to be necessary to understand God's Word fully. Wesley saw the Quadrilateral not merely as prescriptive of how one should form their theology, but also as descriptive of how almost anyone does form theology.

In Acts 17:11 -- do the Jews listening to Paul need to wait for the RCC to give them some kind of tradition before they can test Paul's Words "Sola Scriptura"??

 

[bound]

In Acts 17:11 -- do the Jews listening to Paul need to wait for the RCC to give them some kind of tradition before they can test Paul's Words "Sola Scriptura"??

Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. - Luke 24:45-47

All the Jews had the Scriptures and yet was it their posession of them which saved or was it the the deliverance of the Gospel (Good News)? Truly Truly I tell you that before Paul delivered the Good News the Bereans yet had the Scriptures and were not saved.

And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.
- Luke 24:27

It was at the very heart of the Good News delivered by Paul a means to see our Saviour within it's pages; a treasured canon or measure pasted down from the Apostles to those who accepted and kept his teachings. Amen.

 

[D28guy]

In my post #202 up above I obviously meant to say "...before His ascension and proclaimed to them...", rather than '...before His resurrection and proclaimed to them..."

Mike

 

[Matt Black]

DHK and Mike, I'm afraid you can't get away from the fact that what Jesus, Philip and Paul did debunks the concept of sola Scriptura and reinforces the case for Tradition. Let's look at what happened in all the above three cases:-

1. The 'audience'/recipients/addressees (the disciples, Candace's treasurer and the Bereans respectively) all had access to and knowledge of (in part at least) the then-extant Scriptures (in each case the OT).

2. However, that's not all they had: in addition to those Scriptures, they also had, of necessity, oral teaching proclaimed to them; this oral teaching was not in conflict with those Scriptures but rather complemented and explained/correctly interpreted the Scriptures.

So, three very good examples of Tradition in action during the NT period.

 

[Eliyahu]

From an Orthodox Catechumen perspective, we fast every Wednesday and Friday. We also fast before Divine Liturgy (usually after the Saturday evening meal) and we fast at certain feast days. Some are stricter than others, like the 40 day Nativity fast is less strict than the 40 day fast before Easter.

Don’t ask me to explain all the particulars regarding our fast…like meat, fish, oil, wine, as I am still learning and adjusting…As a Protestant, fasting was something we never discussed or practiced. So I’m a work in progress…


If they were Jews, which they were, I’d say they did in fact fast…Jesus spoke a lot about prayer and fasting…fasting is biblical, just as prayer is.


Before I decided to become Orthodox, I contemplated Catholicism and I didn’t see or hear as much about fasting as I do as an Orthodox. Many old Catholics that are pre-Vatican II still keep the fast, but I’m unaware of a fasting schedule other than before Easter.

In regard to Holy Tradition…Fasting is a certainly a Tradition within Orthodoxy, since fasting can be traced to the Old Testament and New Testament and I would consider that a big “T” Tradition. Now all the fish, meat, oil, wine and days we fast could be…could be a small “t” tradition, which in this case would find itself comfortable within the big “T” Tradition.

ICXC NIKA
-

I asked about the Tradition of Fasting ( or less eating of meat on Fridays) on Friday or even on Easter Friday ( Good Friday) assuming that Jesus was crucified on Friday.

I think one can hardly deny that RCC commemorate the Good Friday.

However, what if Jesus didn't die on Friday, but on Thursday because Jesus was in the tomb for 3 nights and 3 days?

It is much more likely that Jesus didn't die on Friday because he would have been in the tomb only for 37 hours if that's the case, 2 nights and 2 days.

Moreover we don't find any admonition or encouragement or commandment to keep the Good Friday in the Bible either.

There is a certain deviation between the Bible and RCC tradition, right?

 

[bound]

I asked about the Tradition of Fasting ( or less eating of meat on Fridays) on Friday or even on Easter Friday ( Good Friday) assuming that Jesus was crucified on Friday.

I think one can hardly deny that RCC commemorate the Good Friday.

However, what if Jesus didn't die on Friday, but on Thursday because Jesus was in the tomb for 3 nights and 3 days?

It is much more likely that Jesus didn't die on Friday because he would have been in the tomb only for 37 hours if that's the case, 2 nights and 2 days.

Moreover we don't find any admonition or encouragement or commandment to keep the Good Friday in the Bible either.

There is a certain deviation between the Bible and RCC tradition, right?

He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks. 7 For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself. 8 For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's. ~ Romans 14:6-8

I'm not so sure that it's all that important that one hold a memorial on the exact lunar or solar Calendar date nor on the exact day of the week as long as it is done for the glory of God. The Apostle Paul also exhorts us to not debate over such things.

One of the things that I criticize Orthodoxy over is the fact that they mandate these fasts which I don't believe to be Biblical. They should be voluntary, always and everywhere as per the Apostle Paul. Our faith is our relationship with God and although I recognize this to have elements of community we should never lose sight that it is a personal relationship.

 

[Matt Black]

I asked about the Tradition of Fasting ( or less eating of meat on Fridays) on Friday or even on Easter Friday ( Good Friday) assuming that Jesus was crucified on Friday.

I think one can hardly deny that RCC commemorate the Good Friday.


Moreover we don't find any admonition or encouragement or commandment to keep the Good Friday in the Bible either.

There is a certain deviation between the Bible and RCC tradition, right?

I think you'll find that most Christians commemorate or 'mark' Good Friday in some way, not just the RCC

 

[Eliyahu]

I think you'll find that most Christians commemorate or 'mark' Good Friday in some way, not just the RCC

7 billion people cannot create a new truth if they contradict the Truth of God !

You are trying to change the Truth of God by the number of human race !

 

[Matt Black]

I've no idea what you're talking about. No-one's contradicting Scripture as far as I know, certainly not 7 billion people.

 

[Eliyahu]

He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks. 7 For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself. 8 For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's. ~ Romans 14:6-8

I'm not so sure that it's all that important that one hold a memorial on the exact lunar or solar Calendar date nor on the exact day of the week as long as it is done for the glory of God. The Apostle Paul also exhorts us to not debate over such things.

One of the things that I criticize Orthodoxy over is the fact that they mandate these fasts which I don't believe to be Biblical. They should be voluntary, always and everywhere as per the Apostle Paul. Our faith is our relationship with God and although I recognize this to have elements of community we should never lose sight that it is a personal relationship.

We have another verses which is closer to this point.
Col 2:
18 Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, 19 And not holding the Head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God. 20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, 21 (Touch not; taste not; handle not; 22 Which all are to perish with the using after the commandments and doctrines of men? 23 Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body; not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh.



Many false religion create new rules and regulations which are not found in the Bible, in the name of Holy Tradition, or sometimes, they claim that they received a new revelation as Mormons do today.

That's why we must see the difference between the Written Bible and the traditions which contradict the Bible.

 

[Eliyahu]

I've no idea what you're talking about. No-one's contradicting Scripture as far as I know, certainly not 7 billion people.

That's why you cannot get out of the ditch and mire of Catholic theology.

7 billion cannot make Truth, but all of them were born as sinners. Truth doesn't lie in the majority. Read Mt 7:13-23.

 

[Matt Black]

You're still making no sense...

 

[DHK]

I've no idea what you're talking about. No-one's contradicting Scripture as far as I know, certainly not 7 billion people.

The thread is about Scripture and Tradition. I am not sure why Eliyahu chose the number 7 billion as that number is approaching the population of our earth, and not all fall under the umbrella of Christendom.
However speaking in the realm of Christendom he was speaking of tradition and the RCC (and its affiliates). Here was a statement that was made:

Originally Posted by Eliyahu
I asked about the Tradition of Fasting ( or less eating of meat on Fridays) on Friday or even on Easter Friday ( Good Friday) assuming that Jesus was crucified on Friday.

I think one can hardly deny that RCC commemorate the Good Friday.

However, what if Jesus didn't die on Friday, but on Thursday because Jesus was in the tomb for 3 nights and 3 days?

It is much more likely that Jesus didn't die on Friday because he would have been in the tomb only for 37 hours if that's the case, 2 nights and 2 days.

Moreover we don't find any admonition or encouragement or commandment to keep the Good Friday in the Bible either.

There is a certain deviation between the Bible and RCC tradition, right?

Thus the practice of fasting, and even the practice of "keeping Good Friday" are both RCC traditions that cannot be substantiated from the Bible.
The Scriptures do not support fasting before the death of Christ.
The Scriptures are not even clear on whether or not Christ died on Friday.
But since it is the RCC that keeps these as traditions then they are traditions and Scripture that is adhered. The point that I think is being made (in spite of the exagerrated 7 billion), is that the majority is not always right.

 

[BobRyan]

Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. - Luke 24:45-47

All the Jews had the Scriptures and yet was it their posession of them which saved or was it the the deliverance of the Gospel (Good News)? Truly Truly I tell you that before Paul delivered the Good News the Bereans yet had the Scriptures and were not saved.

The Jews of Heb 11 are stated to be "saved" in fact in the case of Enoch and Elijah - taken to heaven without seeing death.

Christ delcared to Jews BEFORE the Cross "your sins are forgiven".

The idea that Jews had scripture that was "insufficient" to inform them and allow doctrine to be tested is explicitly refuted in Acts 17:11 where they "Study the scripture daily to SEE IF THOSE Things spoken to them by Paul WERE SO"

But more importantly as Paul tells Timothy in 2Tim3 -- his study of the scriptures from a child was a study of that that DOES provide the path to salvation - for it is ONE God and ONE Word of God that leads us to salvation.

The fact that someone preaches from those scriptures in OT times, pre-cross times or even POST cross times does NOT convey an "insufficiency of scripture" as we see in Acts 17:11 they themselves are able to evaluate Paul "Sola Scriptura"

in Christ,

Bob

 

[bound]

The Jews of Heb 11 are stated to be "saved" in fact in the case of Enoch and Elijah - taken to heaven without seeing death.

Christ delcared to Jews BEFORE the Cross "your sins are forgiven".

The idea that Jews had scripture that was "insufficient" to inform them and allow doctrine to be tested is explicitly refuted in Acts 17:11 where they "Study the scripture daily to SEE IF THOSE Things spoken to them by Paul WERE SO"

But more importantly as Paul tells Timothy in 2Tim3 -- his study of the scriptures from a child was a study of that that DOES provide the path to salvation - for it is ONE God and ONE Word of God that leads us to salvation.

The fact that someone preaches from those scriptures in OT times, pre-cross times or even POST cross times does NOT convey an "insufficiency of scripture" as we see in Acts 17:11 they themselves are able to evaluate Paul "Sola Scriptura"

If we look at Acts 17:2-3 we can see what is going on between Paul and the Jews.

And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures, Opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead; and that this Jesus, whom I preach unto you, is Christ. ~ Act 17:2-3

Paul was attempting to establish the Christian Exegesis which reveals the truth of the Christ Jesus. This is something that they did not have. Again, the Scriptures without the Exegesis taught by the Spirit is a dead letter. The Scriptures are is not inherently salvific, Christ is. Establishing Jesus as the Christ through the Scriptures was a necessary part of preaching the Gospel especially to the Jews who had an established tradition with the Scriptures, be it guiding them to acceptance of Jesus as the Christ or not.

The Bereans are Christians but simply Jews who were receptive to Paul's teaching and knowledgeable of the prophecies which foretold of His coming. I do see in this any evidence of a particular Sola Scriptura doctrine but just one of many examples of Paul reasoning with the Jews concerning Jesus as the Christ in the prophecies foretold in Jewish Scripture. Throughout Acts 17 and 18 we see Paul repeating this same custom during the Sabbath of the Jews.

With regard to your assertion concerning Timothy... I don't refute that the Scriptures are an aid but the presence of the Spirit within is a necessary prerequisite.

 

[Matt Black]

But more importantly as Paul tells Timothy in 2Tim3 -- his study of the scriptures from a child was a study of that that DOES provide the path to salvation - for it is ONE God and ONE Word of God that leads us to salvation.

Interesting that you bring up 2 Tim 3 - vs 10-17 in particular demonstrate the complementarity of Scripture and Tradition. Most of us are familiar with vs 15-17 in support of Scripture but Paul (vs 10&14) also refers to his Apostolic teaching and the fact that Timothy has learned things from others (presumably including Paul)

 

[Darron Steele]

Tradition is not mentioned in 2 Timothy 3:10-7 that I can see.

2 Timothy 3:15-7 describes Scripture as:

"sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for |doctrine|, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness: so that the| person who serves God| may be complete, | entirely instructed for all good work.”*​

The Scriptures are able to make people believers of Jesus Christ -- they just have to be used.

This passage states that they are given by God "so that the person who serves God may be complete, entirely instructed for all good work." They are sufficient to make us "entirely instructed" in what God wants us to do.
____
*ESV|KJV, NKJV|NBV|ICB|ASV|RVR 1909 “enteramente instruído para toda buena obra” translated.

 

[Matt Black]

The word paradoseis is not explicitly mentioned, no, but the concept is clearly there: the idea of oral teaching outwith the written Scriptures.