What is the Orthodox Interpretation of 2 Timothy 3:15-17?

[ArmyMatt]

I've heard protestants say that the Catholic Church pre-schism was trustworthy in determining the cannon of scripture. Kind of arbitrary to draw the line of Holy Tradition so short. Hard to imagine the Holy Spirit guided it a little and then leaving forever.

and I know a guy who said that the Fathers were only needed until the Scripture was put together. once that happened, we are not to look to anything else.

 

[PlatinumTrophies]

and I know a guy who said that the Fathers were only needed until the Scripture was put together. once that happened, we are not to look to anything else.

Where is that written in scripture? It's like they only believe in sola scriptura when they want to.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Where is that written in scripture? It's like they only believe in sola scriptura when they want to.

no sola Scriptura Protestant is actually sola Scriptura.

 

[abacabb3]

I would take the view of the fathers, which is the Scriptures are inerrant and materially sufficiency (i.e. there is no body of revelation outside of the Scriptures needed for salvation and doctrine.) Nonetheless, just like you need Bible translators, manuscript experts, and a historically delineated consensus of what is Canon to read the Bible today, by default we need the Church to rightly interpret Scriptures.

 

[PittBullMom]

My brain can't handle all three pages of this discussion so please forgive me for jumping in not well read on the discussion.lol

However when it comes to oral tradition...isn't it proven that Jesus went by oral tradition when he debated with rabbis and when they challenged him at times?

I believe one time was when he picked wheat on the sabbbath and another time when they asked about the resurrection in end times.

 

[Barney2.0]

The Catholic and Orthodox interpretations of the verse is exactly as it is, only the Protestant interpretation of it seems to warp the text to mean something other then what it actually says.

 

[straykat]

and another time when they asked about the resurrection in end times.

That part at least was against the Sadducees specifically, who didn't believe in the resurrection. Funnily, they tried to ensnare him with a story that sounds pretty similar to to the book of Tobit, about a woman who had to marry seven brothers, after each one consecutively died after the other (on a sidenote, Protestants suffer a bit from cognitive dissonance here and think the Sadducees were referring to just some random idea of 7 brothers. They couldn't POSSIBLY referring to this one... because it's "not scripture").

 

[PlatinumTrophies]

The Catholic and Orthodox interpretations of the verse is exactly as it is, only the Protestant interpretation of it seems to warp the text to mean something other then what it actually says.

Yep, we believe in a straight forward reading.

 

[PlatinumTrophies]

My brain can't handle all three pages of this discussion so please forgive me for jumping in not well read on the discussion.lol

However when it comes to oral tradition...isn't it proven that Jesus went by oral tradition when he debated with rabbis and when they challenged him at times?

I believe one time was when he picked wheat on the sabbbath and another time when they asked about the resurrection in end times.

I think Jesus only cited Old Testament scriptures, which is why protestants cite that as evidence for sola scriptura. Paul used oral tradition, yet protestants accept Paul's books.

 

[PittBullMom]

I think Jesus only cited Old Testament scriptures, which is why protestants cite that as evidence for sola scriptura. Paul used oral tradition, yet protestants accept Paul's books.

Yes. The story of David eating the bread in the temple. I vaguely remember reading that incident was tied to oral law...given the fact that in Jewish law it is not considered stealing if you eat the food on the premises, and only if you removed the item from the place. I don't remember where I read that but it was used as an example of oral law.

 

[ArmyMatt]

I think Jesus only cited Old Testament scriptures, which is why protestants cite that as evidence for sola scriptura. Paul used oral tradition, yet protestants accept Paul's books.

oh Christ didn't only cite from the OT. nowhere does the OT mention Moses' seat.

 

[PlatinumTrophies]

oh Christ didn't only cite from the OT. nowhere does the OT mention Moses' seat.

I meant in Jesus' exchange with Satan in the desert.

 

[ArmyMatt]

I meant in Jesus' exchange with Satan in the desert.

gotcha, thanks! sorry for the misread

 

[straykat]

Honestly, I don't know how to approach this with love. I'm trying, but I don't know how. The idea that the Church could send out apostles and build churches, waking up every day teaching them face to face, day in day out, and yet ALL of that is apparently rendered worthless if it wasn't "written" down? Why is there such magical power to only one medium of communication?

Like I said, I don't know how to address this with love. I'm struggling. Because it's pretty stupid. And every fiber in my being compels me to state it as such. I'm a fallen man.

It's like if I was at a job, and refused to do anything my bosses told me to do, unless they physically jotted down a memo or pasted some step by step instructions on my computer every day. Anyone would get fired with this kind of attitude. Most human communication is done orally. Same goes for the early church.

 

[PlatinumTrophies]

Honestly, I don't know how to approach this with love. I'm trying, but I don't know how. The idea that the Church could send out apostles and build churches, waking up every day teaching them face to face, day in day out, and yet ALL of that is apparently rendered worthless if it wasn't "written" down? Why is there such magical power to only one medium of communication?

Like I said, I don't know how to address this with love. I'm struggling. Because it's pretty stupid. And every fiber in my being compels me to state it as such. I'm a fallen man.

It's like if I was at a job, and refused to do anything my bosses told me to do, unless they physically jotted down a memo or pasted some step by step instructions on my computer every day. Anyone would get fired with this kind of attitude. Most of human communication is done orally. Same goes for the early church.

There are people who want to believe in scientology or Flat Earth Theory. The Pharisees couldn't be convinced because their hearts were hardened.
Oh, and since the Bible says it doesn't contain all truth, a tremendous amount of truth was lost if sola scripture were true. No protestant has any way of proving their theology is correct with incomplete information.

 

[PlatinumTrophies]

I am still awfully curious as to why so many people would believe in something self contradictory like sola scriptura.

 

[ArmyMatt]

I am still awfully curious as to why so many people would believe in something self contradictory like sola scriptura.

my Godfather says it's because it appeals to man's ego. I am the New Testament Moses to whom God is speaking.