- Jan 25, 2009
- 19,769
- 1,429
- Faith
- Oriental Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Others
May the lurker notice where the individual has been unable to actually deal with the scriptures or the history of the Apostles and the Bishops in the early Church - this tends to happen when people neither know Church history or have any real concern for it.Here let me help. List 3 oral traditions extant in Paul's time to which we should abide. Please do not quote scripture. Once you list them, then tie them to apostles as Irenaeus requested.
1) [enter 1 oral tradition here from 2000 years ago]
2) [enter #2]
3) [enter #3]
Please don't refer to posts that do not answer this simple question. Just replace the brackets with your 1 sentence words. Please.
But on the subject as noted earlier:
Spell out exactly the oral traditions extant in Paul's time about which we should abide.
Gxg (G²);66295985 said:And as said before, it was already addressed earlier - if you cannot choose to deal squarely with the information, you need to quit protesting as if you were able to (or concerned to begin with).
Again, Cherry picking and arguing selectively doesn't change where you already avoided several points where oral traditions were present in Paul's time that the Church continued. And thus far, you've yet to deal with Scripture - or the early Church. For as said before, several were already noted earlier - and it was addressed in #731 - It was also addressed in #748 ...and even further back in #35. Again, It was laid out plainly here - and it was also dealt with earlier here (as well as here)- if one really wants to deal with it, they can deal with it there - or go to From Shadow to Reality - Ancient Christian Worship. Other Jewish Christians have long noted the same reality as it concerns Oral Traditions - as mentioned before with others like Father James Bernstein and other Jewish Christians who came into Liturgical camps (more in A Brief History of Jewish Conversion | The Groom's Family ) and Ancient Christianity because of seeing the culture they were told to honor being more than present..
Fr James Bernstein on: Beauty in Orthodox Worship - YouTube
The Jewish Roots of Orthodox Christian Worship - Fr. A.J. Bernstein - YouTube:
Fr. James Bernstein lecture: "Disciple of Christ" - YouTube
If you cannot even address 2-3 traditions present in the Church orally that were present in the time of the Apostles (and not just Paul), then you don't really have any room to be talking on the subject - and to continue speaking on the issue while avoiding what others note is to promote willful falsehood on what others have stated. A bad choice on your part if choosing to to do - but it is what it is and enough has already been given for any excuses from yourself to fly on why you cannot address what St. Paul said on tradition or what the history of the Church said.
Until what was addressed is actually noted rather than avoided (and enough reference has been given on the matter), it is rather evident that there is not concern for real answers. And as said before, one needs to cease immediately with any false claims of others not addressing questions when they were already tackled. To do so would be a matter of bearing false testimony - and to insist on doing so after others have said to quit making reference until able to deal with the answers is within the realm of flamming..
e.
When you do that, now tie them back to apostles (per Irenaeu).
When you do that, now tie them back to apostles (per Irenaeus)
And as noted already, for the sake of the lurker, there was direct misquoting on Irenaeus and the whole of his teachings earlier - regardless of any attempts to dodge it in order to make things up as one goes go along, as was noted earlier:
Well, here is Irenaeus on Tradition AND Scripture side by side:
2.1. When, however, they are confuted from the Scriptures, they turn round and accuse these same Scriptures, as if they were not correct, nor of authority, and [assert] that they are ambiguous, and that the truth cannot be extracted from them by those who are ignorant of tradition. For [they allege] that the truth was not delivered by means of written documents, but vivâ voce: wherefore also Paul declared, "But we speak wisdom among those that are perfect, but not the wisdom of this world." And this wisdom each one of them alleges to be the fiction of his own inventing, forsooth;..In this, we see the Tradition is placed next to existent Scripture in authority, so that it, TOO comes from the Apostles.
2.2. But, again, when we refer them to that tradition which originates from the apostles, [and] which is preserved by means of the succession of presbyters in the Churches, they object to tradition, saying that they themselves are wiser not merely than the presbyters, but even than the apostles, because they have discovered the unadulterated truth. For [they maintain] that the apostles intermingled the things of the law with the words of the Saviour; and that not the apostles alone, but even the Lord Himself, spoke as at one time from the Demiurge, at another from the intermediate place, and yet again from the Pleroma, but that they themselves, indubitably, unsulliedly, and purely, have knowledge of the hidden mystery: this is, indeed, to blaspheme their Creator after a most impudent manner! It comes to this, therefore, that these men do now consent neither to Scripture nor to tradition.
Irenaeus on Tradition - from Adversus Haereses
Let's see some of the other lines from that series:
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, and [to demonstrate] the succession of these men to our own times; those who neither taught nor knew of anything like what these [heretics] rave about.Here we see that the Tradition, unlike the written Scripture, was manifested throughout the whole world.
Since therefore we have such proofs, 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 [depositing his money] in a bank, lodged in her hands most copiously all things pertaining to the truth: so that every man, whosoever will, can draw from her the water of life. For she is the entrance to life; all others are thieves and robbers. On this account are we bound to avoid them, but to make choice of the thing pertaining to the Church with the utmost diligence, and to lay hold of the tradition of the truth. For how stands the case? Suppose there arise 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 intercourse, and learn from them what is certain and clear in regard to the present question? For how should it be if the apostles themselves had not left us writings? Would it not be necessary, [in that case,] to follow the course of the tradition which they handed down to those to whom they did commit the Churches?And now we see that Scriptures from the Apostles did exist, but that their Tradition existed in marriage thereto.
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, 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, 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. If any one were to preach to these men the inventions of the heretics, speaking to them in their own language, they would at once stop their ears, and flee as far off as possible, not enduring even to listen to the blasphemous address. Thus, by means of that ancient tradition of the apostles, they do not suffer their mind to conceive anything of the [doctrines suggested by the] portentous language of these teachers, among whom neither Church nor doctrine has ever been established.And finally we see that, without a written Scripture, the Gauls were capable of knowing the truth thanks to the Tradition, rebuffing the heresies of Marcion and clinging to Christ.
No, Irenaeus points only to the authority of Scripture. He does not say the same about tradition. In fact, he refutes those who claim some tradition that does not tie directly and unequivocally to Apostles.
Tradition must source to apostles.... a bunch of people had no Scripture, so they therefore had no ability to know the Truth, according to you. But according to Irenaeus, they did. Your interpretation of Irenaeus ignores 4.1-4.3, thus meaning your interpretation is out of context.
Besides that, there was no New Testament in the time of Irenaeus. There were only a bunch of letters, both of true Apostolic origin and forgeries, floating around. No church had the same set of Scriptures, and none accepted all 27 as we know them.
Of course, I bet you think John just took the letters to the Patmos Publishing House and had them bound up to be distributed to all people. At least, that is the only assumption that fits your current statements.
Last edited:
Upvote
0