WRT Sola Scriptura: I believe that those who claim that the Scriptures alone are justification, will also point out the ‘correct’ way to understand scripture. This, I think is also a ‘tradition’, albeit a shorter one, but tradition it is. It is like the issue of icons and what purpose they serve. This was resolved centuries ago by the early Church. I can somewhat understand the need to argue it in modern terms, but to what purpose? Your spiritual path does not need to be wrong in order to validate mine. I.E., if you see no devotional value of icons as part of your spiritual path, don’t do it.
RE: WRT Sola Scriptura: I believe that those who claim that the Scriptures alone are justification, will also point out the ‘correct’ way to understand scripture. This, I think is also a ‘tradition’, albeit a shorter one, but tradition it is
___________________________
If by “tradition”, one means that we take into account he teachings church fathers ( but do not necessarily take one or the other as the FINAL interpreter ), yes, I agree that this is one thing we have to consider, study and take seriously.
If by “tradition” one means that certain practices that are not written or taught in scripture itself are REQUIRED of Christians ( e.g. the veneration of saints and icons ), then no, Christians are NOT bound to follow these traditions.
RE: if you see no devotional value of icons as part of your spiritual path, don’t do it.
Well, I’m glad we have Christian liberty on this. But this is “tradition” in the Orthodox sense of the word, and correct me if I am wrong, if by Scripture plus Tradition, one means that the above Tradition is also part of the ULTIMATE requirement one must abide by, then here’s where the doctrine of Sola Scriptura clashes with Scripture + Tradition.
Your above statement seems to be telling us that you don’t consider the devotion of icons ( an Orthodox tradition ) as BINDING to Christians. In what sense then is this not in support of Sola Scriptura?