is teaching the same as tradition?

Xeno.of.athens said:

In your thinking is teaching the same thing as tradition?

Click to expand...

My thinking has nothing to do with it. I'm only interested in what The Holy Spirit teaches as truth.

Reluctant Theologian said:

No, by definition 'tradition' is the inertia of what you do/believe/say/teach .. Tradition is not always normative, but can be just descriptive (e.g. it sums up what a particular community does over time). When the normative aspects are addressed it's good to pay attention to the 'why' or the arguments for those norms.

In many communities worldwide in history a common pattern can be observed where what is done repetitively over time because it was practical, eventually is regarded as the norm from which one should not deviate. But those norms should be treated with some reservations I'd say.

Where tradition represents 'solidified and tested agreement or best practices' over time it can be most useful IMHO. But when circumstances change, one should not be afraid to update that unless there is a clear faith- or Bible-based reason not to.

Just MHO.

Click to expand...

Tradition is more like a historic of a given hermeneutical framework.

Many traditional societies do have traditions that are changed. In indigenous societies, for instance, traditions change through sacred disruption. Jesus overturning tables in the temple would be an example of such disruption. It's a symbolic gesture meant to point out the brokenness of a system once deemed sacred.

Teaching what??

Once again way too vague

FireDragon76 said:

Tradition is more like a historic of a given hermeneutical framework.

Many traditional societies do have traditions that are changed. In indigenous societies, for instance, traditions change through sacred disruption. Jesus overturning tables in the temple would be an example of such disruption. It's a symbolic gesture meant to point out the brokenness of a system once deemed sacred.

Click to expand...

The overturned tables in the temple had nothing to do with the ancient traditions of Judaism but were a transient deviation that was no more reflective upon the actual tradition of Second Temple Judaism as instituted under divine guidance by St. Nehemiah the Prophet and St. Ezra the Priest, than the sale of indulgences reflects upon the actual tradition of the Roman Catholic Church - both were transient and localized anomalies in the worship of God the Father, Son and Holy Ghost as we now know Him to be. The corruption seen in the Second Temple at that late date does not ameliorate or compromise the earlier holiness evinced with the visitation of Christ our True God to the Temple in the twelfth year of His incarnation, nor years earlier, the presence of the Theotokos in the same temple.

The Liturgist said:

The overturned tables in the temple had nothing to do with the ancient traditions of Judaism but were a transient deviation that was no more reflective upon the actual tradition of Second Temple Judaism as instituted under divine guidance by St. Nehemiah the Prophet and St. Ezra the Priest, than the sale of indulgences reflects upon the actual tradition of the Roman Catholic Church - both were transient and localized anomalies in the worship of God the Father, Son and Holy Ghost as we now know Him to be. The corruption seen in the Second Temple at that late date does not ameliorate or compromise the earlier holiness evinced with the visitation of Christ our True God to the Temple in the twelfth year of His incarnation, nor years earlier, the presence of the Theotokos in the same temple.

Click to expand...

Traditions aren't static.

Read Micah 6:6-8. The temple system had limitations, because it bound the notion of atonement for sin in a place and a priesthood, and ultimately didn't have much to do with actual virtue.

The Liturgist said:

Indeed, but this is an inaccurate and misleading translation.

Holy Tradition is expressly sanctioned not just in 2 Thessalonians 2:15 but in 1 Corinthians 11:2 and by implication in Galatians 1:8-9

Thus in my view while Sola Scriptura as used by Luther, the Anglicans and John Wesley, all of whom valued tradition, is coherent, there are serious problems with the Nuda Scriptura model we see espoused by some Restorationist churches such as one of the larger Sabbatarian denominations, and by some Fundamentalists and other very heavily low-church groups, such as non-denominaitonal churches and megachurches, in that the total rejection of tradition is contradicted by the scriptural text itself.

Click to expand...

Interestingly enough, and unfortunately, there are biased translations that translate the Greek as “traditions” when the meaning of the passage is taken in a negative sense, as in rules imposed by men, but as “teachings” when viewed positively.

FireDragon76 said:

and a priesthood

Click to expand...

We’ve got to be very careful when using the word priesthood in the context of the Hebraic temples. The Hebrew word Kohanim corresponds to the Greek word hierus, which should not have been translated into the Bible as priest, but it was, however, we have to remember priest actually is an Anglicization of presbyter (just like “prester”, an archaic one associated with the legendary figure of “Prester John), which means Elder. Thus when the word priest is used in a Christian context in the English speaking world we suffer from undue confusion because of this dual use, in that people regard the title as impinging upon the Hierarchical dignity of Christ our True God, or the hieratic nature of all believers who are each a royal hierus, but not everyone is a presbyter, which is an office that like that of episkopos, has specific meanings (and the two words appear to have been used somewhat interchangeably in some parts of the New Testament, but were clearly affixed to their modern meaning by the time of St. Ignatius of Antioch).

fhansen said:

Interestingly enough, and unfortunately, there are biased translations that translate the Greek as “traditions” when the meaning of the passage is taken in a negative sense, as in rules imposed by men, but as “teachings” when viewed positively.

Click to expand...

Indeed, and these biased translations are promoted by those intolerant of your church, Anglicanism, Lutheranism or some combination of the above, and also Methodism as well (the choice of John Wesley to publish a liturgy and organize the Methodist Church in North America around episcopal governance made him deeply unpopular among various other denominations in North America and among the non-conforming Protestants in the UK, who previously thought Wesley despite his personal Anglicanism was someone they could work with.