Magic Puppet Theory

[Montalban]

Neither to scripture NOR tradition!

If scripture was all sufficient then there'd be no point in mentioning the heretics keep to not to tradition as well

 

[Montalban]

It is not necessary to seek the truth among others which it is easy to obtain from the Church; since, the apostles, like a rich man in the bank, lodged in her hands most copiously all things pertaining to the truth. …
Suppose there arose a dispute relative to some important question among us. Should we not have recourse to the most ancient churches, with which the apostles held constant interaction and learn from them what is certain and clear in regard to the present question? (Irenaeus, Against Heresies III:4:1, c. A.D. 185)

Conversely, although he's saying to look to the churches for teaching AND NOT THE BIBLE, he is not saying "DO NOT USE THE BIBLE"

Saying follow the bible or saying follow the church doesn't exclude the other. It's the Orthodox understanding that its scripture AND tradition that we should follow

However the selective quoting of only that which might* support one over the other is actually a dis-service to this Church Father


*-if taken out of context

 

[Standing Up]

Next paragraph

2. To which course many nations of those barbarians who believe in Christ do assent, having salvation written in their hearts by the Spirit, without paper or ink, and, carefully preserving the ancient tradition,33203320 [The uneducated barbarians must receive the Gospel on testimony. Irenæus puts apostolic traditions, genuine and uncorrupt, in this relation to the primary authority of the written word. 2 Thess. ii. 15, 2 Thess. iii. 6.] believing in one God, the Creator of heaven and earth, and all things therein, by means of Christ Jesus, the Son of God; who, because of His surpassing love towards His creation, condescended to be born of the virgin, He Himself uniting man through Himself to God, and having suffered under Pontius Pilate, and rising again, and having been received up in splendour, shall come in glory, the Saviour of those who are saved, and the Judge of those who are judged, and sending into eternal fire those who transform the truth, and despise His Father and His advent. Those who, in the absence of written documents,33213321 Literally, “without letters;” equivalent to, “without paper and ink,” a few lines previously. have believed this faith, are barbarians, so far as regards our language; but as regards doctrine, manner, and tenor of life, they are, because of faith, very wise indeed; and they do please God, ordering their conversation in all righteousness, chastity, and wisdom.

There is nothing there about the notion of supporting any tradition not directly tied to scripture. Besides we have the written record, aka, bible. Now we just need to follow the suggestions---scripture is the pillar and ground of our faith. Divine scripture for salvation. And discard non apostolic (scriptural) tradition. Just as they suggested.

 

[Montalban]

A classic case of a poor argument starts with an unreferenced text. It is also one that falls to selective replying to sources provided.

The next paragraph of what text??? I cited several and referenced them all.

The conclusion of 'he doesn't put anything in addition to scripture' is based on the translator's comment, at best, not Ireneaus himself.

However the translator simply refers to that scripture that says to standfast to teaching whether by scripture or tradition.

It also assumes the as yet unproven point; that the Orthodox church has traditions contrary to scripture.

So if we simply take a translators comments and then say that's what Irenaeus says and apply it to a theory that's not been proved here (regarding the Orthodox church and its traditions) one might begin to have a case.

But it's still missing the point of tying tradition and scripture which is the Orthodox doctrine.

If one is to believe the interjection here then it is saying that they of the same value, NOT that one should rely on scripture alone.

The last thing I cited, the next chapter has this telling title:

Chapter III.—A refutation of the heretics, from the fact that, in the various Churches, a perpetual succession of bishops was kept up.
Against Heresies Book III
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.ix.iv.iv.html

Irenaeus goes on to say

1. It is within the power of all, therefore, in every Church, who may wish to see the truth, to contemplate clearly the tradition of the apostles manifested throughout the whole world; and we are in a position to reckon up those who were by the apostles instituted bishops in the Churches

Now here emerges the problem of those selectively quoting him as an authority for they often deny apostolic succession nor do they follow bishops.

I have asked some in the past which bishop do they follow. The answer, if given is 'Christ'.

However Irenaeus is talking of a succession of bishops to another bishop. He lists bishops in one See as an example and states
"And this is most abundant proof that there is one and the same vivifying faith, which has been preserved in the Church from the apostles until now, and handed down in truth."
(Ibid.)

NOT that they relied solely on scripture!

In fact apostolic succession is denied by many Protestants as being biblical

Irenaeus refers to a non-biblical authority:
There is also a very powerful Epistle of Polycarp written to the Philippians, from which those who choose to do so, and are anxious about their salvation, can learn the character of his faith, and the preaching of the truth. Then, again, the Church in Ephesus, founded by Paul, and having John remaining among them permanently until the times of Trajan, is a true witness of the tradition of the apostles.
(Ibid.)

And here we see what Irenaeus means by tying scripture with tradition. For him 'scripture' is not just the Bible but the writings of other Fathers!

 

[BentBiscuit]

I hope the random quotes aren't just going to continue

"A rolling stone gathers no moss".

 

[Montalban]

"A rolling stone gathers no moss".

It doesn't make for a good discussion either - it's looks more like a blog.

 

[BentBiscuit]

It doesn't make for a good discussion either - it's looks more like a blog.

True.

I've always liked the notion of "Sola scriptura" but that may be due to my life long bias against anything RC. It's also nice to have a rallying phrase to make everyone feel comfortable.

However the assembly of our modern bibles is the result of traditional beliefs.

There has to be a place for tradition and I hope for revelation but scripture does provide for a shield against the following of charismatic personalities.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

"A rolling stone gathers no moss".

You can say that again

NKJV) Matthew 8:20 And Jesus said to him, "Foxes have holes and birds of the air [have] nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay [His] head."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Yg0Crmhiw8&feature=related

 

[Knee V]

1. We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the Gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.ix.iv.ii.html

The plan of salvation ... by the will of God handed ... to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith.

Some want other grounds and other pillars.

You never addressed my point that St Irenaeus did not say that the Scriptures were a pillar and ground of truth. Rather, he said that the Gospel is the pillar and ground of truth, and that the Scriptures were part of the proclamation of the Gospel

Irenaeus didn't say that the Scriptures are the pillar and ground of our faith. He said that those from whom they learned the plan of salvation proclaimed the Gospel to be the pillar and ground of truth. Part of that proclamation was through Scripture, by the will of God.

His point was that the Gospel is the pillar and ground of truth. He is not making commentary on Scripture.

Next paragraph

2. To which course many nations of those barbarians who believe in Christ do assent, having salvation written in their hearts by the Spirit, without paper or ink, and, carefully preserving the ancient tradition,33203320 [The uneducated barbarians must receive the Gospel on testimony. Irenæus puts apostolic traditions, genuine and uncorrupt, in this relation to the primary authority of the written word. 2 Thess. ii. 15, 2 Thess. iii. 6.] believing in one God, the Creator of heaven and earth, and all things therein, by means of Christ Jesus, the Son of God; who, because of His surpassing love towards His creation, condescended to be born of the virgin, He Himself uniting man through Himself to God, and having suffered under Pontius Pilate, and rising again, and having been received up in splendour, shall come in glory, the Saviour of those who are saved, and the Judge of those who are judged, and sending into eternal fire those who transform the truth, and despise His Father and His advent. Those who, in the absence of written documents,33213321 Literally, “without letters;” equivalent to, “without paper and ink,” a few lines previously. have believed this faith, are barbarians, so far as regards our language; but as regards doctrine, manner, and tenor of life, they are, because of faith, very wise indeed; and they do please God, ordering their conversation in all righteousness, chastity, and wisdom.

There is nothing there about the notion of supporting any tradition not directly tied to scripture. Besides we have the written record, aka, bible. Now we just need to follow the suggestions---scripture is the pillar and ground of our faith. Divine scripture for salvation. And discard non apostolic (scriptural) tradition. Just as they suggested.

Actually, he says nothing about Scripture in this passage. The point being made is that these "barbarians" believed in spite of speaking a language and being part of a culture that had no written legacy to speak of.

 

[Rick Otto]

Scripture doesn't say God is ONLY good, therefore...

 

[Rick Otto]

"A rolling stone gathers no moss".

That's tradition: no roots & it's rolling away from The Rock.

 

[Standing Up]

1. We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the Gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.ix.iv.ii.html

You never addressed my point that St Irenaeus did not say that the Scriptures were a pillar and ground of truth. Rather, he said that the Gospel is the pillar and ground of truth, and that the Scriptures were part of the proclamation of the Gospel

I've quoted Irenaeus numerous times now. He says the scriptures to be the ground and pillar of our faith. Not a ground. See the bolded part.

Next sentence:
"For it is unlawful to assert that they preached before they possessed “perfect knowledge,” as some do even venture to say, boasting themselves as improvers of the apostles."

See the context? People try to improve on the apostolic writing (scripture). But no, scripture is the ground/pillar of our faith.

 

[brinny]

You can say that again

NKJV) Matthew 8:20 And Jesus said to him, "Foxes have holes and birds of the air [have] nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay [His] head."

The Temptations - Papa was a Rolling Stone ORIGINAL FULL VERSION - YouTube

Awesome! Great verse, by the way

 

[Standing Up]

Actually, he says nothing about Scripture in this passage. The point being made is that these "barbarians" believed in spite of speaking a language and being part of a culture that had no written legacy to speak of.

But that is not to say we don't have the written scripture.

 

[Knee V]

I've quoted Irenaeus numerous times now. He says the scriptures to be the ground and pillar of our faith. Not a ground. See the bolded part.

Next sentence:
"For it is unlawful to assert that they preached before they possessed “perfect knowledge,” as some do even venture to say, boasting themselves as improvers of the apostles."

See the context? People try to improve on the apostolic writing (scripture). But no, scripture is the ground/pillar of our faith.

You've quoted St Irenaeus, but he doesn't say what you think he says. I've pointed that out, but you don't address my points, but re-quote St Irenaeus and say that he backs your point of view.

St Irenaeus doesn't support your point of view. Re-quoting him won't help. Please address the counter-points made to your arguments.

 

[Knee V]

But that is not to say we don't have the written scripture.

Sure, but that's beyond the scope of what St Irenaeus is saying. He says nothing about Scripture in the quote you provided. He says that uncultured barbarians possess the faith just as much as anyone else.

 

[Standing Up]

1. We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the Gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.ix.iv.ii.html

You've quoted St Irenaeus, but he doesn't say what you think he says. I've pointed that out, but you don't address my points, but re-quote St Irenaeus and say that he backs your point of view.

St Irenaeus doesn't support your point of view. Re-quoting him won't help. Please address the counter-points made to your arguments.

See the bolded part? Now show us where he says the gospel is the ground and pillar of our faith.

 

[Knee V]

1. We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the Gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.ix.iv.ii.html




See the bolded part? Now show us where he says the gospel is the ground and pillar of our faith.

I did, but I'll do it again differently.

I'll use a different example. "I am eating chicken and rice, which, as I said to my wife, is my favorite dish." What you have essentially done with the quote by St Irenaeus is "wife, is my favorite dish". If I were to bold that sentence to demonstrate what the thrust of that sentence is, I would do it as follows:
"I am eating chicken and rice, which, as I said to my wife, is my favorite dish."

In the quote from St Irenaeus we run into a similar situation with respect to the overall point of the sentence and the various amplifying phrases in it.

We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the Gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith.

Prepositional phrases (such as "in public", "by the will of God", "in the Scriptures") do not add to nor detract from the point of a sentence. They provide some amplifying information and perhaps some background or context, but they do not "make the point". The portion that mentions the Scriptures is part of a prepositional phrase and is not in the same thought as "to be the ground and pillar of our faith". St Irenaeus' point is that the Gospel is the ground and pillar of our faith, and the parts about "in public" and "in the Scriptures" are not part of that thought and only serve to provide some context for his statement.

 

[SolomonVII]

Many churches have wonderful traditions. But the traditions for the most part vary according to the particular rite, history and location of that church.

The traditions themselves are for the most part a reflection of the Scripture that they have developed around
For example in the medieval churches of Western Europe, there developed the tradition of picturing the three wise men—the first Christians in many senses—as being of Oriental, African and Caucasian descent, or as a young man, a man in his old age, or a man in his prime.

The bible itself is non-specific of the racial characteristics of the wise men from the east, but the tradition itself brings out a central truth the Incarnate Christ was a gift to all of mankind.
Scripture itself has primacy, and all that is necessary for salvation exists in written form in the Bible.

Traditions add color and beauty and help elucidate and otherwise graphically reveal the fuller meaning of what Scripture sketches out for us.

Traditions themselves vary according to the characteristics of the community that they serve. Scripture is the constant and serves as the basis for any tradition.

 

[SolomonVII]

Gospel...by the will of God...in Scriptures------>the ground and pillar or our faith.
I don't think that SU would disagree, since this is the point he was making.

Scrip(Gospel)tures.