Can the Church Survive Without man's tradition?

Concord1968 · May 11, 2019

Tone said:
So, the tradition of keeping the Bible in production...do you believe that it can be found within the Bible itself...maybe it is a "tending of the garden"?

Relevance please?

Tone · May 11, 2019

James Murphy said:
Relevance please?

Well, this thread is about the tradition of men...

*And I would say that there is a lengthy tradition of keeping Scripture preserved.

**And I was wondering if there is Biblical precedence for doing so...

Tone · May 11, 2019

"The history of how the Bible has been preserved is truly miraculous and inspiring. Many painstaking hours have been employed to ensure that the Scriptures have been preserved accurately. Many men have given their lives to preserve the Bible. No other books from antiquity have been so guarded.

From the Bible’s very beginning, God saw to its protection. Although we don’t know much about the most ancient times, Jewish tradition tells us that Noah preserved and protected the genealogical records given to us in Genesis 5. The first formal record of the charge to protect the Bible doesn’t appear until the time of Moses. He charged the Levites with the task: “And it came to pass, when Moses had made an end of writing the words of this law in a book, until they were finished, that Moses commanded the Levites, which bare the ark of the covenant of the Lord, saying, Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the Lord your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee” (Deuteronomy 31:24-26). Moses commanded the Levites to keep the books he had completed under God’s inspiration right with the ark of the covenant. The ark was the national symbol of the nation’s covenant with God. On the lid of the ark was the mercy seat, a representation of God’s throne. Keeping the Scriptures with the ark demonstrated to the people that the books were the very Word of God and should be closely guarded, respected and—even more—obeyed!

Yet, in general, it was the Jewish people who were especially commissioned by God to protect the Bible. Notice what Paul states: “What advantage then hath the Jew? Or what profit is there of circumcision? Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God” (Romans 3:1-2). God knew that false prophets, teachers and even writers would come along and claim to be prophesying, teaching or writing for God (Jeremiah 23:32). So God had to inspire His people to preserve what had been given. The Jews have done their job well. A detailed and closely guarded system of copying was developed to preserve the texts as originally written.

Professionals known as scribes were highly trained at writing new copies of the text as the rolls wore out from use. It was the job of the scribes to preserve the Word of God from generation to generation. The Pharisees were responsible for the oral reading of the Scriptures in public services. Jesus Christ recognized that the scribes had authority over the Scriptures (Matthew 23:2-3). He also promised that what had been written would continue to be preserved until His Second Coming (Matthew 5:18)."
How God Preserved the Bible

Interesting article.

Concord1968 · May 11, 2019

You DO understand that something doesn't have to be in the Bible for it to be true, right?

Sola Scriptura is: The sole INFALLIBLE authority for faith and practice.
Sola Scriptura is NOT: The only authority PERIOD for faith and practice.

Tone · May 11, 2019

"The Old Testament canon, with its various books and divisions, was the model used for the canonization of the New Testament. God always used men to canonize various books.

When the Jews in the New Testament refused the message of Christ, God raised up the apostles to go into the Greek world to have His New Testament Scriptures preserved for us. Realize that the Old Testament was written basically in Hebrew with some Aramaic, while the New Testament was written in Greek. The Greeks, not the Jews, were given the New Testament to preserve. However, God used the apostles to make the decision as to which books the Greek world would preserve.

When the New Testament is placed side by side with the Old Testament, the Bible is complete with seven divisions: the Law, Prophets, Psalms, Gospels, Acts, Epistles and Revelation. Seven is the number of completion throughout the Bible. The number seven has made its mark in the canonization of both the Old and New Testaments. Here is how.

The complete Old Testament is actually comprised of 22 scrolls (books), categorized under three divisions.

The Law included five books—Genesis through Deuteronomy.

The Prophets were organized in a special way. The books of Joshua through 2 Kings, excluding Ruth, are known as former prophets and were written on two scrolls. Joshua and Judges shared one scroll. 1 and 2 Samuel and 1 and 2 Kings shared one scroll. The 12 minor prophets were also written on one scroll. Adding in Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Daniel there are a total of seven books.

The Writings total 10 books. The books included are Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Ezra/Nehemiah (one book) and 1 and 2 Chronicles (one book).

Together with the 27 books of the New Testament, there are actually 49 books of the Bible. The number 49 is a significant number that carries divine meaning. This number is seven times seven, showing absolute completion. The seven divisions of the Bible and the number of books is no accident. They are clearly there by design to show that the revelation of God is complete with 49 books."
How God Preserved the Bible

Tone · May 11, 2019

James Murphy said:
You DO understand that something doesn't have to be in the Bible for it to be true, right?

Sola Scriptura is: The sole INFALLIBLE authority for faith and practice.
Sola Scriptura is NOT: The only authority PERIOD for faith and practice.

Relevance?

*please...

Jipsah · May 11, 2019

Tone said:
Any examples?

Sure, any case where any other groups traditions differ from any of ours. Sabbath keeping , consumption of alcohol, real presence in the communion, anything involving End Times, ad infinitum. If your beliefs differ from mine then they’re Traditions of Men, while mine are the Clear Teaching of Scripture.

Tone · May 11, 2019

Jipsah said:
mine are the Clear Teaching of Scripture.

How do you determine this?

Concord1968 · May 11, 2019

Tone said:
Relevance?

*please...

----->

Tone said:
So, the tradition of keeping the Bible in production...do you believe that it can be found within the Bible itself...maybe it is a "tending of the garden"?

bekkilyn · May 11, 2019

James Murphy said:
A point that's often missed is that before the printing press it was extraordinarily expensive to get a Bible: Only the aristocracy could afford them. You needed a thousand sheep and three years wages to buy a single Bible. The sheep to provide the velum (aka "sheep's skin") to write on, and the three years wages for the monk who would spend the next three years handwriting the Bible onto the velum you provided. This isn't even touching on the fact that 90% of the people were illiterate and only the aristocracy and those few with educations could actually read the Bible.

Maybe we're all arguing the wrong thing...it's not God, the Bible, or Tradition that the Church can't survive without. It's the printing press. Without the printing press, Christ would never have been resurrected.

Jipsah · May 11, 2019

Tone said:
How do you determine this?

Because we Rightly Divide the Scripture

Tutorman · May 11, 2019

Jipsah said:
Sure, any case where any other groups traditions differ from any of ours. Sabbath keeping , consumption of alcohol, real presence in the communion, anything involving End Times, ad infinitum. If your beliefs differ from mine then they’re Traditions of Men, while mine are the Clear Teaching of Scripture.

Exactly. Like I could say @Tone beliefs are traditions of man because of such and such, like maybe he threw out everything from the ECF's ect.

Daniel Martinovich · May 11, 2019

Tone said:
Oh wow...and to think about all those who believe the Church can survive without the Bible...I wonder what that would look like.

I think these types of things would be pretty predictable. The international left would take over the free world, ending it. Islam would once more rise to be a dominate military power in the earth. Empires would once more rise and conquer their neighbors for the purposes of looting their wealth. Human slavery would once more become the natural order of the world.

Since elements of the truth of Gods Word would still exist in the world mostly due to underground churches, who would continuously be hunted down. The rulers of the world would not be able to once more impose idolatry on the nations to keep the peoples separated from God, the author of their freedom. That lost its power and therefore its usefulness to the kings and emperors of the ancient world once the NT age really got going. So we would see a return to official state churches, like China and the other communist nations have. Like the imperial churches of kings and emperors of Europe. These would not exist to promote the gospel or the kingdom of of God but to control it. The truths of Gods Word held only in the hands of the rulers would be used and perverted to control and manipulate the ruled.

Thank God this will never happen.

Tone said:
So, the tradition of keeping the Bible in production...do you believe that it can be found within the Bible itself...maybe it is a "tending of the garden"?

Isaiah
Isaiah 29:18 And in that day shall the deaf hear the words of the book, and the eyes of the blind shall see out of obscurity, and out of darkness.19 The meek also shall increase their joy in the LORD, and the poor among men shall rejoice in the Holy One of Israel.20 For the terrible one is brought to nought, and the scorner is consumed, and all that watch for iniquity are cut off:21 That make a man an offender for a word, and lay a snare for him that reproveth in the gate, and turn aside the just for a thing of nought. 22 Therefore thus saith the LORD, who redeemed Abraham, concerning the house of Jacob, Jacob shall not now be ashamed, neither shall his face now wax pale.23 But when he seeth his children, the work of mine hands, in the midst of him, they shall sanctify my name, and sanctify the Holy One of Jacob, and shall fear the God of Israel.24 They also that erred in spirit shall come to understanding, and they that murmured shall learn doctrine.

Daniel Martinovich · May 11, 2019

bekkilyn said:
Maybe we're all arguing the wrong thing...it's not God, the Bible, or Tradition that the Church can't survive without. It's the printing press. Without the printing press, Christ would never have been resurrected.

The relevancy here is in Bible prophecy. It said when the fourth of the four gentile empires named in scripture ends; starting in Daniel 2. That is when you will see that great mountain grow and fill the earth. It did not say how or by what means this would transpire. It doesn't say if it is an event or a process. It just said it would happen. Further, there are well over a hundred chapters of prophecy in the Bible that say what the world would look like when this transpires.

So now we can look back on it with hindsight and be amazed that God knew all this would happen the way it did and that great mountain is indeed filling the whole earth.

Isaiah 2:2 And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD'S house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it. It is indisputable NT doctrine that believers are the house of the Lord.
3 And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths:...
Where have people been going to find the Lord, be taught of him and walk in his paths for two thousand years now? To a Christian, or a church, or the Bible. Whcih is the house of the Lord.
for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem. That is where is all started but add to that: that Zion and Jerusalem are also use illustratively in the OT to describe NT believers.
4 And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more. The influnce of the invisible kingdom of God in the OT was heavily reliant on the sword due to the "weakness of the law." This prophecy is explained by Jesus's parable regarding the invisible kingdom of God about the farmer that sowing the word. That is how the kingdom of God is spread. By the Word getting sown in peoples hearts. That is why his kingdom is not of this world. It is spread in different fashion. Not with the sword that is now beat into instruments of farming.

Tone · May 11, 2019

James Murphy said:
----->

Truth is the Word.

Pavel Mosko · May 11, 2019

Jason0047 said:
How do we know this?
Well, there is not a hint of any additional transmission that they had in the Bible.
Jesus and His followers always quoted Scripture and they never referred to some kind of oral teaching.

I am just going to refute this by quoting an article by the author of the text book "the Shape of Sola Scriptura"

SCRIPTURAL PROBLEMS

Scripture itself indicates that the Scriptures are the possession of the Church and that the interpretation of the Scripture belongs to the Church as a whole, as a community. In particular it has been entrusted to specially gifted men. This has already been examined in some detail in the previous discussion of the Bereans and the Jerusalem Council. The Apostles did not tell every individual believer to take their Bibles and decide by themselves and for themselves whether the Judaizers were correct. On the contrary, they gathered in a council as a body and discerned the truth of the matter. Their decision then was given to the various churches. The fundamental point is that Christ established His Church with a structure of authority that is to be obeyed (Heb. 13:7). Even in the first years of the Church, there were those who were specially appointed to the ministry of the Word (Acts 6:2-4). In his letters to Timothy and Titus, Paul indicates that a special teaching ministry was to continue after his death (cf. 1 Tim. 3:1-7; 2 Tim. 4:2; Titus 8:5-9). The modern Evangelical doctrine of Scripture essentially destroys the real authority of ministers of the Word and the Church as a whole.

Adherents of the Evangelical position also ignore the positive scriptural references to tradition. The Gospel was preached for at least 15-20 years prior to the writing of the first book of the New Testament, and that preached gospel was authoritative and binding. This apostolic tradition was the faith of the churches who received the first books of the New Testament, and it was the context within which these books and the books of the Old Testament were to be interpreted. This is the tradition to which the churches were commanded to adhere (e.g., 2 Thess. 3:6). We have already discussed the manner in which this apostolic kerygma was taught to every catechumen and recited from memory at baptism. It is important for our purposes here simply to note that this hermeneutical context of Scripture was not abrogated once Scripture was completed. The Scriptures were written to already existing churches, and this means that these churches had the Gospel before they had the completed Scriptures.

A Critique of the Evangelical Doctrine of Solo Scriptura

Pavel Mosko · May 11, 2019

Tone said:
So far, you are the only one who has brought up "victimization". Well "sifting" and "hashing out" may involve some intellectual provocation...welcome to the forums friend!

*Oh, you're already a seasoned battle-hardened veteran...

Oh I agree with his assessment. I would not use victimization because it seems like an overly strong word, but it does seem a bit like a bit of grand standing and caricaturish etc. and I sort of didn't bother jumping in initially because of it.

I think Protestants need to realize that Catholics and Orthodox actually do very much look to the scriptures. Probably the best explanation I recall is from a famous Catholic Apologist where he speaks of "formal sufficiency" and "material sufficiency" regarding how they are utilized. So to use a analogy of constructing a building....

In material sufficiency, the scriptures give you everything you need to make the building as far as the materials like mortar, bricks and so forth. They however do not give you the blue prints, those come from tradition and the leadership teaching authority. (Scripture informs such things, but those things have to be processed, interpreted etc.). And that is the basic position of Catholics and Orthodox. So essentially without the Bible it would be like trying to build a house with no actual materials!

The other definition is "formal sufficiency" which is probably the position of many Protestants. In this position the scriptures actually give you everything you need, from materials and blue prints etc. Which probably will sound like a great theory, but historically speaking I can point to various examples that show the problems with it. An easy one, that we probably all can agree on are snake handling Pentecostals.

Bible Highlighter · May 11, 2019

Pavel Mosko said:
I am just going to refute this by quoting an article by the author of the text book "the Shape of Sola Scriptura"

SCRIPTURAL PROBLEMS

Scripture itself indicates that the Scriptures are the possession of the Church and that the interpretation of the Scripture belongs to the Church as a whole, as a community. In particular it has been entrusted to specially gifted men. This has already been examined in some detail in the previous discussion of the Bereans and the Jerusalem Council. The Apostles did not tell every individual believer to take their Bibles and decide by themselves and for themselves whether the Judaizers were correct. On the contrary, they gathered in a council as a body and discerned the truth of the matter. Their decision then was given to the various churches. The fundamental point is that Christ established His Church with a structure of authority that is to be obeyed (Heb. 13:7). Even in the first years of the Church, there were those who were specially appointed to the ministry of the Word (Acts 6:2-4). In his letters to Timothy and Titus, Paul indicates that a special teaching ministry was to continue after his death (cf. 1 Tim. 3:1-7; 2 Tim. 4:2; Titus 8:5-9). The modern Evangelical doctrine of Scripture essentially destroys the real authority of ministers of the Word and the Church as a whole.

Adherents of the Evangelical position also ignore the positive scriptural references to tradition. The Gospel was preached for at least 15-20 years prior to the writing of the first book of the New Testament, and that preached gospel was authoritative and binding. This apostolic tradition was the faith of the churches who received the first books of the New Testament, and it was the context within which these books and the books of the Old Testament were to be interpreted. This is the tradition to which the churches were commanded to adhere (e.g., 2 Thess. 3:6). We have already discussed the manner in which this apostolic kerygma was taught to every catechumen and recited from memory at baptism. It is important for our purposes here simply to note that this hermeneutical context of Scripture was not abrogated once Scripture was completed. The Scriptures were written to already existing churches, and this means that these churches had the Gospel before they had the completed Scriptures.

A Critique of the Evangelical Doctrine of Solo Scriptura

Again, it is illogical to assume they had an oral tradition passed down. In the time of the early church (When Scripture was being formed), these were new teachings and not old ones. Jesus started a New Covenant and He did not say to preserve His words by two different distinct means (one being oral tradition and the other being Scripture). Think about this logically for a moment. What motivation would men have for keeping two different kinds of teachings (one being oral and one being Scripture)? That would not even make a lick of sense why a group of people would do that. Oral forms of communication are not a reliable form of preservation. Even church traditions today are written down, but can you trace these written traditions all the way back to the time of Jesus? My guess is that you cannot. They spoke or taught God’s Word in person, but it was later written down. Unless you can prove from the Bible there was a thing separate from Scripture called "traditions." But Jesus and His followers never made this distinction. They spoke orally and they wrote things down, but this oral speaking was never meant to be an entirely different kind of teaching.

The word "traditions" was a word that simply meant "teachings." They were told to hold to the teachings of God's Word by both their personal speaking when they were with them and by letter (Scripture).

Also, to say that the Scriptures can only be taught by gifted men: Well, it is true that the Scriptures are taught by having the anointing of the Spirit (1 John 2:27), but nowhere is this said that only these men could have this particular gift or that it was unique to them. Also, 2 Timothy 2:15 in the King James says that we are to study to show ourselves approved of unto God. This ties into 2 Timothy 3:16-17 that says that ALL Scripture is profitable for doctrine, and instruction in righteousness that the man of God may be perfect unto ALL good works. But if Scripture was only for a select gifted men to know, then 2 Timothy 3:16-17 would say "only those selected men of God gifted by the Spirit" instead of just saying "the man of God" (generically). In fact, in Acts of the Apostles 17:11, we know that the Bereans were more noble because they searched the Scriptures on whether those things (the spoken Word of God) were so (i.e. were in the Scriptures) or not. So they were able to confirm the truth of the spoken Word of God at that time with the written Word.

Tone · May 11, 2019

Pavel Mosko said:
destroys the real authority of ministers of the Word and the Church as a whole.

I believe there was due to be some destroying of usurper hierarchies...the same that Paul warned would come:

Acts 20
"28Keep watch over yourselves and the entire flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers. Be shepherds of the church of God, which He purchased with His own blood. 29I know that after my departure,savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock. 30Even from your own number, men will rise up and distort the truth to draw away disciples after them."

So, the Reformation was the start of a restoration of "real authority", but this is not to say that there has not been more marauding wolves since then, but this is why, true shepherds must always be on guard, and ultimately the Great Shepherd will call His flock.

John 10
"26But because you are not My sheep, you refuse to believe. 27My sheep listen to My voice; I know them,and they follow Me. 28I give them eternal life, and they will never perish. No one can snatch them out of My hand."

ace of hearts · May 11, 2019

Tone said:
Just another way to look at it. It seems that those who believe that the Church can survive without the Bible, are the very same who couldn't live without their tradition...

Yes, unless you're talking about religion instead of the Church.

Can the Church Survive Without man's tradition?

LCMS Lutheran

"Whenever Thou humblest me, Thou makest me great."

"Whenever Thou humblest me, Thou makest me great."

LCMS Lutheran

"Whenever Thou humblest me, Thou makest me great."

"Whenever Thou humblest me, Thou makest me great."

Blood Drinker

"Whenever Thou humblest me, Thou makest me great."

LCMS Lutheran

Contemplative Christian

Blood Drinker

Charismatic Episcopalian

Friend

Friend

"Whenever Thou humblest me, Thou makest me great."

Arch-Dude of the Apostolic

Arch-Dude of the Apostolic

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.

"Whenever Thou humblest me, Thou makest me great."

Well-Known Member

Similar threads