Jo kus, I can't agree with you here. The traditions of man can be very dangerous and change over time. God's Word does not. God sent His Son and His prophets to teach us.
Ping,
I'm not saying you're wrong (not now, anyway). I'm trying to say why this rolls right off the back of some Catholics and Orthodox, okay?
We would say not all traditions are traditions of men. SOME traditions are, but, we think, some traditions are not.
So I agree that the "traditions of man" are dangerous and untrustworthy."
In tis connection I think the phrase "word of God" in Acts 13:44 and 15:7 does NOT mean Scripture. In fact, if someone heard Peter, and then went home and told his bed-ridden next-door neighbor what Peter had said, that there would have been what WE call "tradition".
My second alleged point is:
I also think that the Jehovah's Witnesses and some of the Jewish Christian groups are enough to show that reading the Bible does not confer immunity from Itchy Ear Syndrome. It's a widespread disease.
=========
In other news:
His Word tells us Jesus rose from the dead. If one's conscience told us otherwise that person is not of God. I do not think we should listen to our conscience if His Word tells us - it makes the final ruling.
Aquinas does not say that following one's conscience is a guarantee of doing right. He says, as I recall, that NOT following your conscience is a guarantee of doing wrong, either flat out wrong or doing the right thing for the wrong reason. So yes, it is wrong to believe that IHS did not rise from the dead. But, if it were possible to believe it against one's conscience, that would be wrong too. In other words, obedience to conscience is a necessary but not sufficient requirement for doing the right thing.
Mad Dawg, any tradition that is of God is wonderful. My point would be how would we know if we weren't able to verify it? If it was a tradition, even of man, that glorifies God then it too is wonderful. However, if that tradition contradicts God's Word it shouldn't be part of our life.
In this connection I think the phrase "word of God" in Acts 13:44 and 15:7 does NOT mean Scripture. In fact, if someone heard Peter, and then went home and told his bed-ridden next-door neighbor what Peter had said, that there would have been what WE call "tradition".
That's a great point and I agree with it but wouldn't they still be relaying His Word? If that is what you call tradition then it is teaching God's Word. However, if he went to his neighbor and told them what Peter had said and added an extra little twist that would change His Word a problem arises. I understand that in the relaying one's own interpretation may become part of it. That interpretation may be correct or may be in error. It's wonderful that in today's world many of us have access to His word and we are able to at least attempt to see if that person is correct or if we're being asked to send in our life savings to support a charlatan on television so that God will love us and answer our prayers.
I also think that the Jehovah's Witnesses and some of the Jewish Christian groups are enough to show that reading the Bible does not confer immunity from Itchy Ear Syndrome. It's a widespread disease.
I think all religions have this syndrome (please don't think I'm talking about Catholics and Orthodox - I am not). It's just part of our human nature. Some of us may be misled and some may not. As I see it, the only thing we can do, as a child of God, is ask for His guidance and "search the scriptures".
He says, as I recall, that NOT following your conscience is a guarantee of doing wrong, either flat out wrong or doing the right thing for the wrong reason.
Thank you for the clarification - I did wonder.
........Ping