Results 1 - 4 of 4
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | the Bible Alone | 2 Thess 2:15 | Robin Hass | 170861 | ||
2 Thess 2:15 So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether BY WORD OF MOUTH or by letter from us. Okay, I've checked out previous posts for this verse and have found nothing. The Bible in the aforesaid passage, and other places, teaches the Bible is not the only store-house of divine knowledge, does it not? Here are a few other Scriptures that seem to contradict the doctrine of sola scriptura: 2 Tim 2:2 The things which you have , HEARD FROM ME in the presence of many witnesses, entrust these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also. Acts 2:42 They were continually devoting themselves to the APOSTLES' TEACHING and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. This APOSTLES' TEACHING would have been oral teaching surely, none of the books of the New Testament had been written by Acts 2. 1 Thess 4:2 For you know what COMMANDMENTS we gave you by the authority of the Lord Jesus. 2 Thes 2:6 And you know what restrains him now, so that in his time he will be revealed. I mention this because the Thessalonian disciples 'know what restrains' from another source than Scripture, as this is not to be found in Scripture but in Paul's oral teaching. 1 Cor 11:34 ...The remaining matters I will arrange when I come, (or in the Amplified '...About the other matters, I will give you directions [personally] when I come.') Presumably, these remaining matters were delivered orally. 1 Cor 11:2 Now I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you. Presumably this was orally-delivered tradition. 2 Jn 1:12 Having many things to write unto you, I would not [write] with paper and ink: but I trust to come unto you, and speak face to face, that our joy may be full. A clear reference to teaching that is not paper and ink which will add completion to the disciples' joy. 3 Jn 13 I had many things to write to you, but I am not willing to write them to you with pen and ink; So is the sola scripture (Scripture alone) doctrine 'more biblical than the Bible.' Robin All I can think of in response would be 2 Tim 3:16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; Where is any reference here to i) the exclusion of Tradition ii) the SUFFICIENCY of Scripture |
||||||
2 | the Bible Alone | 2 Thess 2:15 | Lionstrong | 170914 | ||
So if we're not going to go by God's word alone, why stop at church tradition? Why not throw in the Book of Mormon and the Koran as well? If the knowledge revealed in the Word of God alone is NOT sufficient for "everything pertaining to life and godliness" (2 Pet 1:3), why not use any source? And if you appeal to the Scriptures (which can no longer be your only source of authority) to answer my question, then need I point out the contradiction? Is 8:20 To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because they have no dawn. |
||||||
3 | the Bible Alone | 2 Thess 2:15 | Robin Hass | 170916 | ||
Because Scripture teaches so in 2 Thess 2:15. Not the Book of Mormon or the Koran but 'the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter FROM US. Simple really! This is exactly what the Christian Church, East and West taught until Martin Luther introduced novelty in the 16th-century. Scripture and Ecclesiastical Tradition. A fine example of the latter being Nicea's definition of the Trinity in 325 AD. |
||||||
4 | the Bible Alone | 2 Thess 2:15 | Morant61 | 170918 | ||
Greetings Robin! I have a couple of quick questions for you my friend. The word 'tradition' is only used 13 times in the NT. Nine times it refers to the traditions of the Jews. Eight (Mt. 15:2, 3, 6; Mk. 7:3, 5, 8, 9, and 13) of these occurances are in a negative light concerning how the Jews had ignored God's commands in favor of their traditions. One of them is used in a neutral sense (Gal. 1:14). One occurance (Col. 2:8) is also used negatively of traditons of men in general. The other three (1 Cor. 11:2, 2 Thess. 2:15, and 2 Thess. 3:6) all reference the teachings passed on by Paul. So, here are my questions: 1) Where do any of these verses place tradition on equal footing with Scripture? 2) What was the content of these teachings? It may have simply been that Paul is refering to the teaching of Scripture when he speaks of these 'traditions' since they are not clearly spelled out. The best case that could be made is that Paul had a 'tradition' that was to be followed by those to whom he had taught it, but there is no command to pass this tradtion on or that anyone else other than Paul (though Paul uses a plural verb in 2 Thess. - it is not clear if the plural is a literary device or if literal who the others were) has the authority to produce binding tradition. We do know quite clearly from Scripture though that tradition can be opposed to God's word and condemned. p.s. - I agree with you concerning your example of the definition of the trinity in the Nicene Creed as a fine example of good tradtion. However, I would also note that it is grounded in Scripture. It has authority because it is grounded in Scripture. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||