Not by Scripture Alone

Catholic Answers ^ | April 2007 | Jim Blackburn

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

In 1947, a group of Christians in Nebraska formed a fellowship known today as the Berean Church Fellowship. The name of the group is borrowed from the Acts of the Apostles 17:11, which the group quotes on their Web site (www.bereanchurchfellowship.org): "Now the Bereans… Received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true."

The fellowship’s Articles of Faith begin with the following statement: "We believe the Bible, consisting of both the Old and New Testament Scriptures in their entirety, is the only divinely inspired, inerrant, objectively true, and authoritative written Word of God, and the only infallible rule of faith and practice."

In other words, the fellowship subscribes to the doctrine of sola scriptura ("by scripture alone") and believes it patterns itself after the Bereans about which Luke wrote. Using this verse as evidence against Tradition is not really unusual; in fact, many sola scriptura adherents quote Acts 17:11 as "proof" that the Bible is the sole rule of the Christian faith. Some seem to imagine the Bereans to be a group of early Christians faithfully living according to what the Bible teaches when Paul comes along claiming to be a teacher. They listen to what he has to say but they also cautiously compare his teachings to what their Bibles say in order to be sure that what Paul is saying is authentic Christian doctrine.

Interestingly, though, a closer look at Acts 17:11 reveals that the people of Berea were not sola scriptura adherents at all. In actuality, they were primarily Jews converting to Christianity through Paul’s use of Sacred Tradition. Here’s the verse within its fuller context:

The brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea; and when they arrived they went into the Jewish synagogue. Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with all eagerness, examining the scriptures daily to see if these things were so. Many of them therefore believed, with not a few Greek women of high standing as well as men. (Acts 17:10-12)

Luke’s words commend the Bereans for being more noble than the Thessalonians because they eagerly received "the word." They also examined the scriptures to see if the word was true. So just who were the Bereans? What was "the word" they received and what scriptures did they examine?

Before the New Testament

The Bereans, we’re told, were mainly Jews (and some Greeks), not Christians, and they even had a Jewish synagogue. The word they received was Paul’s teaching about Jesus, that same teaching which he sums up in his first letter to the Corinthians, "For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures" (1 Cor. 15:3). The scriptures mentioned here by Paul are the same scriptures which the Bereans examined, the Old Testament scriptures. These were the only scriptures of the day, as no New Testament Scripture existed at the time. Most of the New Testament had not yet been written and what had been written had not yet been canonized so as to attain the status of Scripture. What we see here is a group of people being taught about Christianity by Paul prior to the existence of the New Testament. They eagerly listened to Paul while examining the Old Testament Scripture.

This all makes sense when we understand this event in its historical context. The event occurred during Paul’s second missionary journey. On his journeys Paul taught the good news of Christianity as Jesus had commissioned him to do. As a Jewish convert to Christianity himself, he knew Jewish Scripture well and he knew that it prophesied about Jesus. He undoubtedly explained this Scripture to enlighten other Jews about the truth of Christianity. These Jews would have to examine their Old Testament Scripture to see if what Paul was saying made sense. It did, and many Jews, including some of the Bereans, became Christians.

Not of Human Origin

Paul’s method was one of the ways Christianity was first taught. And Paul’s teaching is an example of what the Catholic Church calls Sacred Tradition.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains,

The Tradition here in question comes from the apostles and hands on what they received from Jesus’ teaching and example and what they learned from the Holy Spirit. The first generation of Christians did not yet have a written New Testament, and the New Testament itself demonstrates the process of living Tradition. (CCC 83)

Now, sola scriptura adherents are quick to point out that tradition is condemned in Scripture. Indeed, some forms of tradition are condemned. For example, Jesus denounced a certain tradition when he said, "And why do you transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?" (Matt. 15:3; see also Mark 7:8-9). In this passage Jesus was condemning a particular Jewish practice of seemingly donating money to God while in reality sheltering it from being used to care for one’s parents. This was a tradition, but certainly not a sacred one which broke the commandment to honor one’s mother and father. Jesus rightfully condemned it, but his condemnation was not meant to be applied to every tradition.

Another verse sola scriptura adherents point out is, "See to it that no one makes a prey of you by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the universe, and not according to Christ" (Col. 2:8). Certainly the Catholic Church agrees with Paul that such human traditions are to be rejected. But Sacred Tradition is not merely human tradition. It is the teaching of Jesus and the Apostles guided by the Holy Spirit. It originated with Christ and is inspired by the Holy Spirit, hardly of human origin.

So, if Scripture doesn’t explicitly condemn Sacred Tradition, does it support it? It seems that since the Catholic Church claims that the New Testament came after Sacred Tradition, it makes sense that the New Testament would show ample evidence of Sacred Tradition. In fact, it does. Paul’s teaching in Berea as cited in Acts is one of many places where the New Testament provides evidence of Sacred Tradition.

For example, Jesus’ commandment to the Apostles at the end of Matthew’s Gospel logically assumes the necessity of Sacred Tradition:

Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey all that I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age. (Matt. 28:19-20)

Jesus didn’t tell the apostles to write down everything he had taught them. He simply commanded them to teach it. Much of this teaching later made its way into Sacred Scripture, but every bit of it was and still is considered Sacred Tradition.

Hold to the Tradition

In fact, we know that not everything Jesus taught was eventually committed to writing. John tells us as much at the end of his Gospel: "But there are also many other things which Jesus did; were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written" (John 21:25). Some of Jesus’ teachings had not yet made it into written form by the date John finished writing his Gospel.

Turning to Luke, we see that the author begins his Gospel by explaining why he is writing it. Luke points out that others have already committed certain things to writing, and he thinks it is a good idea to write down what his reader has already been taught:

Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things which have been accomplished among us, just as they were delivered to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word, it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you may know the truth concerning the things of which you have been informed. (Luke 1:1-4)

Luke, then, commits to writing what has already been taught. That teaching is Sacred Tradition just as surely as Luke’s Gospel will later be recognized as Sacred Scripture.

Moving beyond the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles, we find that Paul provides even more explicit evidence of Sacred Tradition in his writings. Here are three examples:

"I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you" (1 Cor. 11:2).

"Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us" (2 Thess. 3:6).

"So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter" (2 Thess. 2:15).

In the third verse, Paul speaks of Sacred Tradition as being taught both orally and in writing. The written teaching would later be canonized as Sacred Scripture, so this verse suggests how Sacred Tradition preceded Sacred Scripture.

Near the end of Paul’s ministry he instructed Timothy to carry on the Sacred Tradition passed down to him: "Follow the pattern of the sound words which you have heard from me, in the faith and love which are in Christ Jesus; guard the truth that has been entrusted to you by the Holy Spirit who dwells within us" (2 Tim. 1:13-14). Paul went on to instruct Timothy to pass down that Sacred Tradition to others: "[A]nd what you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also" (2 Tim. 2:2).

Throughout history, the Catholic Church alone has continued to safeguard and teach the fullness of the Christian faith. This faith is complete only when it includes Sacred Tradition. The Catechism sums it up well:

This living transmission, accomplished in the Holy Spirit, is called Tradition, since it is distinct from Sacred Scripture, though closely connected to it. Through Tradition, "the Church, in her doctrine, life and worship, perpetuates and transmits to every generation all that she herself is, all that she believes. The sayings of the holy Fathers are a witness to the life-giving presence of this Tradition, showing how its riches are poured out in the practice and life of the Church, in her belief and her prayer." (CCC 78)

The Berean Church Fellowship and other sola scriptura adherents would do well to follow in the footsteps of the original Bereans and embrace Sacred Tradition. But of course the result would be one fewer Christian denomination and thousands more Catholics.

[redleghunter]

John 20

30 Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book;

31 but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name.

John shows us in verse 31 that what he presented is sufficient to know Christ's Gospel. What more do we need than "life in His name"?

[redleghunter]

John 21: (We'll be using the KJV today to keep things on even footing): "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen."

Where does the above give authority to add to what was recorded?

[CynicalBear]

>>Where does the Bible say that I have to prove from Scripture that Rev. 1:10 was speaking of the first day of the week?<<

Scripture doesn't but you made the claim here that Revelation 1:10 was a proof that Sunday was the "Lord's day". I simply asked for proof that that verse was talking about Sunday. I don't suppose you can.

>>Regardless: The Lord's Day<<

Nothing on that site shows that Sunday was called the "Lord's day". It simply shows that they gathered on that day.

[metmom]

Let me know if you get an answer......

[af_vet_1981]

In what ways are you just a fallen human being and imagine Mary, mother of God with us, was just like you ? “My soul glorifies the Lord and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,

No, glorifying the LORD and rejoicing in God my Savior is not sin, nor evidence of sin, much less being totally depraved.

[polishprince]

St Thomas You wrote:
Otherwise you would have to believe that mentally retarded people and babies sin

I do believe that ALL men are guilty of sin, babies and mentally retarded alike. Everyone born has the sin nature of Adam when they were born...You, me, Abraham Mary etc....The only one born without the sin nature was Jesus Himself since the Holy Spirit came upon Mary and thru the Holy Spirit He was conceived..thats a lot different then you or I or anyone else who has ever been born. Also the birth of Jesus does not necessitate Mary being sinless nor remaining sinless. So for the RCC to say she was without sin stretches the scripture to be inconsistent and contradictory. In looking at Rom 5 that shows that we all have that sin nature and eph 2 shows that by nature we are children of wrath. Ps 51:5 shows that we are sinful at what time??? Birth. Even if your premise was correct that the mentally retarded nor babies dont sin it still doesnt apply to Mary. She wasnt mentally retarded and she didnt remain a baby.
Your trying to use the argument that since Gabriel used a certain phraseology to show she didnt sin because she was highly favored doesnt imply sinlessness.

[delchiante]

Passover was on a Monday last year. If we believe scripture, the next day was the High Sabbath.. and it would have made Wednesday the first day of the week, feast of first fruits..

14th, 15th, 16th.. just as Paul preached..

That made Tiw’s day that month His Sabbath..

(Ezekiel 46 confirms this template)

What if the world has been a vessel to hide His Sabbath?

And the world sets the false premise that the Sabbath argument is based only on a Saturday/Sunday choice..

It is how passover on the 14th day, unleavened bread on the 15th and first fruits on the 16th day of His month has been replaced by good Friday and easter Sunday..

His calendar is ignored by Jews today too.. they don’t need to observe it because the world gives them a day out of seven every week..
But new moons were used to count days and they sort of ridge those today..

[af_vet_1981]

Nice dodging of the points i presented...When there is no way to answer, to offer no response, then belittle the other person

False, nothing written to belittle the other person; graded failed arguments that were transparently false.

Also look at the entirety of scripture. Rom 3:10 None righteous no not one Rom 6:23 All have sinned and fallen short 1John 1:8 If one says they have no sin the truth is not in them

As for the rest, there is nothing to dodge, although you have an obvious error in your second reference. All the claims of the total depravity of Mary are false.

[Old Yeller]

“How will this be,” Mary asked the angel, “since I am a virgin?”

So the tradition of Mary's perpetual virginity is congruous with Scripture.

How do you get perpetual virgin out of that? It just means she was a virgin when Jesus was placed in her womb. It doesn't mean she was a virgin her whole life, which would also mean, poor Joseph her husband would have had to remain a virgin all his life too.

[roamer_1]

Thing number one: It has solidified my understanding of the message, the connections between the old and new testaments, the teaching of Christ, and daily application.

The only worthless page in the entirety of your Bible is the one that says 'The New Testament' on it. Tear it out and throw it away. The Bible is one Book... Beginning to end.

Thing number two. I now see it as what it is: A collection of books and letters from individual sources and I’m finding I respect some sources less than others.

I couldn't disagree more. The very fact of it's continuity across so many contributors declares it's singular AUTHOR:

Rev 19:10 And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

Every word of the Bible was uttered by the Spirit of Prophecy into the ear of some man, that he would write it down.

That is, btw, empirical evidence that the source of it is necessarily beyond space and time... And it is the ONLY evidence I have ever found of that sort, through decades of study across every sort of documentation of some 'god' or another. What a marvelous and extraordinary thing. Just when I think I have it all figured out, another layer of the onion peels away, and I am left incredulous and amazed that I had missed so very much, as I settle in to read it over yet again in the light of new revelation.

In that I might suggest to you that those whom you might more readily dismiss are not being interpreted correctly - The Jews suggest that if one finds contradiction within their Bible, it is a sure sign that you are to dig a little deeper there - That the answer is not upon the face of the text - And I have found that advice to be priceless.

I first noticed it when listening to Jude for the umpteenth time. Who the heck was that guy and why do I give his letter status of being God speaking to ME?

Ahh, but Jude, the brother of James and of Yeshua is a HUGE book, made specifically for our generation. Perhaps a little 8hr (!!!) study with Chuck Missler with regard to the book of Jude will give you a little help.

Hang in there, brother! Keep digging!

[ravenwolf]

My point is that, for Luther’s doctrine of the Bible alone as the SOLE or ULTIMATE rule of faith to be logically coherent, it must be contained in the Bible.

---

I think I see where you are coming from as you see the Catholic Church as The church which was started by St Peter.

So do you believe That Jesus told the Church many things which are not mentioned in scripture?

[cuban leaf]

Check those you question against those you don’t. Do they differ? Do the contradict? Do they support?

---

Exactly. That is WHY.

[cuban leaf]

Very enlightening. I’ll continue to listen from that perspective.

[cuban leaf]

And thank you!

[cuban leaf]

Every word of the Bible was uttered by the Spirit of Prophecy into the ear of some man, that he would write it down.

---

But Paul actually called out that some of what he wrote was not from God, but from him.

[CynicalBear]

I had that same problem years ago. Keep looking. They will all agree. Guaranteed. Keep studying. If you have some you question shoot me a pm.

[ravenwolf]

And the “brother” comes from a word that can also be translated “cousin” argument may be possible, but why make it? Multiple times Jesus’ brothers are mentioned, yet it seems to be imperative to some that it HAS TO mean cousins

---

But it could be step brothers easily enough or even half brothers, we don`t know how old Joseph was.

What we do know is the fact that no where does it connect Mary with other children but only mentions the siblings of Jesus.

And also the fact that just before Jesus died he appointed his mother as Johns mother and appointed John as her son, this is more telling to me than all of the scriptures talking of the siblings of Jesus.

I do not believed it would have happened had Mary had other children.

But the plain truth is the Bible does not tell us.

she was not the mother of Jesus because she was blessed. Rather, she was blessed because she was the mother of God.>>>>>>>>

Exactly.

[roamer_1]

But Paul actually called out that some of what he wrote was not from God, but from him.

And yet, I would argue, every word is by precise design... That is harder to defend in the new covenant, but I believe it there too. Torah is so precise as to be an astonishment, and proven preserved by encryption. Likewise but lesser in the rest of Tanakh... and the intertwining of Word and Prophecy - Two witnesses in one - the construction is just intensely incredible!

So while Paul 'steps out of character, so to speak, even so, it is still by design. What a fun conundrum that is. A riddle wrapped in an enigma. Find it out!

[CynicalBear]

>>But Sacred Tradition is not merely human tradition. It is the teaching of Jesus and the Apostles guided by the Holy Spirit. It originated with Christ and is inspired by the Holy Spirit, hardly of human origin.<<

But Catholics can't prove that what they call "sacred tradition" is exactly what the apostles taught as "tradition" or "oral tradition".

[redleghunter]

By God’s Grace you are welcome.

All scriptures are Holy Spirit inspired.

You do a lot of driving and listening to the Bible is awesome.

Maybe mix in some iPod APP sermons from conservative preachers and theologians. If interested in some ideas please PM me.