Sola scriptura or ECF-like traditions of man? Christ in Mark 7

[Not David]

That’s because the OT testifies to the seat of Moses. Jesus did not say the Scribes and Pharisees rightfully sat in the seat of Moses.

Pharisees were not present in the Old Testament.

 

[Not David]

One only needs to look at what Jesus told the apostles after His Resurrection reference the Scriptures:

Luke 24: NASB


44Now He said to them, “These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.” 45Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, 46and He said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ would suffer and rise again from the dead the third day, 47and that repentance for forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in His name to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem.48“You are witnesses of these things.49“And behold, I am sending forth the promise of My Father upon you; but you are to stay in the city until you are clothed with power from on high.”

Still not Sola Scriptura.

 

[Mathetes66]

'The "Seat of Moses" is not in the Old Testament Scripture.'

Indeed it is. 'Have you not read...?'

The next day, "Moses SAT to judge the people & the people stood by Moses from the morning unto the evening" (Ex. 18:13). The Hebrew word for "sat" is yâshab, which means, "to sit down, specifically as judge" (Strong's Concordance, H3427). This seat is where Moses sat to judge the people--FROM MORNING UNTO EVENING.

Historically & archaeologically, this Scripture & the NT one in Matt 23 is confirmed.

In extra biblical sources this phrase is also mentioned...Rabbi R. Aha, in a 4th century Midrashim called the "Pesikta De-Rab Kahana," describes Solomon's throne “like the Kathedra of Moses." This is the exact phrase as used in Matt 23.

In 1704, a Jesuit Priest named Jean Paul visited the Jews at Kai-Feng Fu (China). He mentions a 'magnificent & highly elevated chair, with a beautiful embroidered cushion.' (Kenneth Newport, “A Note on the Seat of Moses,” Andrews Univ. Seminary Studies 28 (1990), p. 56). He mentions later that it is the chair of Moses & describes how they taught the Torah from this chair on the Sabbath.

 

[chevyontheriver]

They are all equal in weight?

They (Scripture, prayer, teachings of the Fathers, and traditions) all work together.

 

[Mathetes66]

"That would be limited to the OT since the NT had not yet been completed; the gospel and letters of John and Revelation not even being written until they were all dead except John."

Simply because the 'completed' NT canon was not yet confirmed did not make the already written NT books not any less valid.

Have you not read...is it not written?

I Timothy 5:17,18 The elders who rule well are to be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard at preaching & teaching. 18For the SCRIPTURE SAYS, “YOU SHALL NOT MUZZLE THE OX WHILE HE IS THRESHING,” AND “THE LABORER IS WORTHY OF HIS WAGES."

The first Scripture is quoted from Deut 25:4. The second Scripture is quoted from the gospel of Luke chapter 10 verse 7.

Paul wrote I Timothy 4 years earlier (63AD) than 2 Timothy, around 67AD, just before the time of his death. So the Gospel of Luke had to have been written BEFORE 63AD & circulated, for Paul to have quoted Luke 10:7 AS SCRIPTURE, with the same authority as the OT Scripture in Deut 25:4.

The Gospel of Luke was considered Scripture by Paul, an apostle AT THAT TIME, even though the completed NT canon was not yet finished. It didn't make the Gospel of Luke any less Scripture than Deuteronomy.

Also, Luke was Paul's traveling companion, so his gospel was not ONLY (sola) tradition but that tradition was confirmed by an apostle & that tradition was based on actual apostolic authority to confirm Luke WAS SCRIPTURE not by sola tradition.

The APOSTLE Peter also stated in 2 Peter 3:15,16 that all the epistles of Paul WERE SCRIPTURE, just as the rest of the recognized Scripture, at THAT TIME of Peter's writing was confirmed. This was just before Peter's death, also about 67/68AD and AFTER Paul's death.

2 Pet 3:14-17 Therefore, beloved, since you look for these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, spotless & blameless & regard the patience of our Lord as salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you,

16as also IN ALL HIS EPISTLES, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught & unstable distort, AS THEY DO ALSO THE REST OF THE SCRIPTURES, to their own DESTRUCTION.

17You therefore, beloved, knowing this BEFOREHAND, be on your guard so that you are not carried away by the ERROR OF UNPRINCIPLED MEN & fall from your own steadfastness.

The PROPHET Daniel also did the same in his book of Scripture, quoting from the written Scripture of Jeremiah & referring to the sacred writings of Scripture that he possessed AT THAT TIME, even though the OT canon was not yet completed. It didn't make the prior OT books or Jeremiah an less than Scripture written after that.

Daniel 9:2 In the first year of his reign, I, Daniel, understood from the SACRED BOOKS, according to the word of the LORD to Jeremiah the prophet, that the desolation of Jerusalem would last seventy years.

Scripture was inspired (God breathed out) by God. It was first spoken, passed on & then written down, whether OT or NT books. The 10 commandments were first spoken by God, then God Himself had Moses write them down on tablets. These tablets were broken & God had Moses COPY DOWN again on tablets the 10 Commandments. So we have the original destroyed but an exact copy made, just as valid as the original.

And Sola Scriptura, handled in a humble, spiritual sense, according to the APOSTLE Paul?

I Cor 4:6 Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively transferred to myself & Apollos for your sakes, so that you may LEARN IN US NOT TO THINK (GO) BEYOND WHAT IS WRITTEN, SO THAT NONE OF YOU--may be PUFFED UP on behalf of one AGAINST the other.

 

[Crosstian]

The heading was added.

You know this ... how exactly? You know the originals didn't contain it? You have personally seen the originals? And the old copies we do have contain it ...

I think our conversation has come to its conclusion.

 

[JohnAshton]

With due respect, Crosstian, you do not know that the originals contained the heading. You have not see the originals. And that the old copies we do have does not mean the heading was not added.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

One of the characteristics of a genuinely converted Christian believer is that he or she accepts the Bible as God's communication to mankind. Jesus told the rich man in hell that his brothers had the Law and the Prophets, and if they did not believe them, then even a person rising from the dead to warn people to keep away from hell wouldn't convince them.

This is the difference between Scripture (Old and New Testaments) and church tradition: The former is the record of the Holy Spirit speaking by inspiration to men, and the latter is man's attempt through his natural reason to try and make sense of it.

 

[JohnAshton]

Oh, tradition is far, far more than that.

 

[GingerBeer]

This is the difference between Scripture (Old and New Testaments) and church tradition: The former is the record of the Holy Spirit speaking by inspiration to men, and the latter is man's attempt through his natural reason to try and make sense of it.

Why not think of tradition as God guiding the church in the world by granting wisdom to those who lead and faith to those who follow and all the while speaking in the holy scriptures for the benefit of all?

 

[Mountainmike]

And yet again we see the false dichotomy.
Not least because looking from the 21st century you dont even seem to understand what the words you are using mean like "tradition", or what they meant at the time to the jews, indeed the true translations.

The word "paradosis" means "handing down", means the entire faith handed down. And that was how the faith was passed. The word used to translate paradosis is "tradition" which has a colloquial interpretation now which resutls in false assumptions as is yours.

You see in Paul the apostle says "stay true to traditions we taught you by word of mouth and letter"
So in true meaning of tradition even Paul says it has veracity. So not the traditions of man then.


Jesus said "teach this" and "do this" he did not say "write this" or "read this" although some of them did. Presumably because it would be almost another 2000 years before first the printing press had allowed mass publication, and average joe could both own and read one!. So assuming that the bible was the sole source of truth is a denial of basic history. Indeed the bible states that the "foundation of truth is the church" because the disciples and so succession were given the power to "Bind and loose" which means give definitive judgement on doctrine. That is the power that created your creed, and selected the new testament, before which there was only "tradition" the faith handed down through the succession.

So what do we see if we look at what is SACRED tradition, the true faith that was handed down in the first generation?

Read ignatius to smyrneans (he and polycarp were disciples of john the apostle). We see a eucharist of "real flesh" valid only if performed by a bishop in succession or his appointee, in a liturgical sacramental church.

So that was what they handed down , that was the "tradition", indeed writers such as iraneus who were hot on outing heresies, positions which became accepted in the church and confirmed in council, he was vociferous in defending the role of succession through bishops in handing down the faith, ie tradition. Indeed he also said that Rome had authority over doctrine. Speaking long before your new testament or creed existed.

You are on the horns of a painful dilemma choices.
That either what ignatius was passed down sacred "tradition" was true, or that John the apostle was already apostate, or that his disciples were apostate. And in either of those you are telling our Lord he broke his promise allowing "the gates of hell to prevail against his church" and that the bible is wrong when it says "the foundation of truth is the church". So not "man made" anything then. The inspiration granted by heaven.

One of these days someone like you will research that history before making such pronouncements, but I wont hold my breath. The same post appears almost weekly from one of the ill informed.

So many new threads recently turning from scripture and insisting that traditions of man are all that matters...

What did Christ say?

Mark 7
6 And He said to them, “Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written:
‘This people honors Me with their lips,
But their heart is far away from Me.
7 ‘But in vain do they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’
8 Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.”
9 He was also saying to them, “You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition. 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, is to be put to death’; 11 but you say, ‘If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God),’ 12 you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother; 13 thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.”

Not saying that all ECF statements are errors of man - only that scripture is the "Gold standard" and not the other way around

Paul himself "tested" sola scriptura
Acts 17:11 "they studied the scriptures daily to SEE IF those things spoken to them by the Apostle Paul - were SO"

Gal 1:6-9
"6 I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; 7 which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we (Apostles), or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! 9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!"

Acts 20
28 Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood. 29 I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; 30 and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them. 31 Therefore be on the alert,

 

[FenderTL5]

So many new threads recently turning from scripture and insisting that traditions of man are all that matters...

This seems like a false dichotomy to me. Other than an outlier here or there, I know of no church that insists "that traditions of man are all that matters.."

 

[BobRyan]

This seems like a false dichotomy to me. Other than an outlier here or there, I know of no church that insists "that traditions of man are all that matters.."

A number of new threads on this forum started with the idea that showing doctrine from the Bible means nothing - it must be shown only from the ECFs

 

[BobRyan]

Pharisees were not present in the Old Testament.

???
Do you think they started at the resurrection of Christ?? At the birth of Christ??

 

[BobRyan]

Trinity is present but Sola Scriptura isn't.

until you read Acts 17:11 and Mark 7:6-13

 

[BobRyan]

The Lord never mentioned "Sola Scriptura".

until you see him use it in Mark 7 to hammer the so-called holy-tradition of the one true nation church started by God at Sinai - and find that John tells us to walk as He walked 1 John 2

 

[BobRyan]

Isn't "sola scriptura" a doctrine of men? I never saw the words "sola scriptura" in the scriptures. I Never saw the doctrine behind "sola scriptura" in the scriptures. Perhaps you can write down exactly what doctrine of sola scriptura you are using for the idea in the topic title?

We see it in Acts 17:11
We see it in Mark 7:6-13

 

[BobRyan]

The entire process of writing, receiving, compiling, verifying the authorship of, ordering, discerning, and canonizing Scripture came about through the Church. So indeed, yes, Sacred Scripture is something given us by the Church.

We were never meant to use Scripture alone, or even primarily, as a guide for Christian life and thought, as a contrast for the prayers, devotions, liturgies, theology, practices, beliefs, and conclusions given us by those same Christians who helped us get the Bible.

What "besides" scripture , what "tradition" is Jesus talking about here ... or is it just scripture?

What did Christ say?

Mark 7
6 And He said to them, “Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written:
‘This people honors Me with their lips,
But their heart is far away from Me.
7 ‘But in vain do they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’
8 Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.”
9 He was also saying to them, “You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition. 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, is to be put to death’; 11 but you say, ‘If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God),’ 12 you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother; 13 thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.”

 

[BobRyan]

Isn't "sola scriptura" a doctrine of men? I never saw the words "sola scriptura" in the scriptures. I Never saw the doctrine behind "sola scriptura" in the scriptures. Perhaps you can write down exactly what doctrine of sola scriptura you are using for the idea in the topic title?

We see it in Acts 17:11
We see it in Mark 7:6-13

What "else" is Jesus using in Mark 7 -- other than scripture?

What did Christ say?

Mark 7
6 And He said to them, “Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written:
‘This people honors Me with their lips,
But their heart is far away from Me.
7 ‘But in vain do they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’
8 Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.”
9 He was also saying to them, “You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition. 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, is to be put to death’; 11 but you say, ‘If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God),’ 12 you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother; 13 thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.”

 

[BobRyan]

The "Seat of Moses" is not in the Old Testament Scripture.

Ps 1:1 "In the seat of scoffers" -- in the place of, in the role of.
Matt 23:2 "in the seat of Moses" - in the place of, in the role of.

But we "see" how Jesus taught "in action" as he hammers the so-called holy tradition of the one true nation-church started by God at Sinai -- sola scriptura

What did Christ say?

Mark 7
6 And He said to them, “Rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written:
‘This people honors Me with their lips,
But their heart is far away from Me.
7 ‘But in vain do they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’
8 Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.”
9 He was also saying to them, “You are experts at setting aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition. 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who speaks evil of father or mother, is to be put to death’; 11 but you say, ‘If a man says to his father or his mother, whatever I have that would help you is Corban (that is to say, given to God),’ 12 you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or his mother; 13 thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that.”