On the contrary, we are told numerous times to both study and know the Scriptures. We are told to write them on our hearts and minds (Ex. 13:9; Deut. 11:18; Prov. 3:3; Prov. 7:3) so that we can avoid sinning against God. We are told to study them so that we are able to "give an answer to everyone that asks us of the hope that is in us" (II Tim. 2:15; Psalm 119:15). God's word is "perfect" (James 1:25) and we must know it if we are to obey and walk in it.
Again, you have stated the commonly offered excuse to viewing Scripture as able to make one "complete" and "thoroughly furnished unto all good works" by saying Jesus "taught" things not given in Scripture. NOWHERE in Scripture is that said. However, Scripture DOES say Jesus "did" many other things not written down and that if they could be, the world could not contain all that would be written. That is a far cry from pretending Jesus taught things secretly to certain people and they just happened to be omitted from Scripture BUT everyone must STILL obey it because the "Church" says so. That was the gist of Gnosticism, by the way. Something the early church, including the Apostles, battled against. I do not accept that they left out critical truths from the writings they left for believers.
Jesus DID say to observe all that he commanded and all that he commanded was written down in Scripture so that future believers would also know what Jesus commanded. Jesus told his disciples that he would send the Holy Spirit to them so that they would be reminded of all that he had taught them. What makes anyone think these people would have forgotten to communicate those truths to others? What makes anyone think that, while they were writing their epistles to the churches springing up all over the known world, they would have skipped over any important parts?
You repeat the assertion that Jesus never told anyone to write, yet how else were they supposed to ensure all future generations of Christians knew the Gospel truth? Jesus didn't HAVE to tell them to write things down, he had the example of the sacred writings of the Old Testament already - and he used those writings numerous times in his teachings. How many times did Jesus, himself, say, "it is written"? How many times did Almighty God direct his prophets to write down what he told them? (for example, see Habakkuk 2:2; Deut. 27:8; Isaiah 8:1; Jer. 30:2; Jer. 36:2; Rev. 1:19) Paul clearly gave a precedent, when he said:
For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us, so that through the endurance taught in the Scriptures and the encouragement they provide we might have hope. (Romans 15:4)
Do you suppose Paul forgot to mention all the oral traditions when he said this? Now, nobody is disrespecting ALL the traditions that have developed over the centuries since Christ, just that what makes up the "rule of faith" for Christians can be found in Scripture and, if it is not found anywhere in Scripture, then it is not binding upon a Christian to obey and follow and it is certainly not relevant to our salvation.
One of Jesus' chief complaints about the religious leaders of his day was how they nullified God's word with their traditions (Mark 7:13). He specifically reprimanded them because, "You abandon the commandment of God and hold to human tradition." (Mark 7:8) Now, how would anyone know what was the "commandment of God" unless they had the written word of God? How can anyone, even today, know the difference between what are God's commands and what are human traditions? Without the written word of God, the Bible, we wouldn't have that ability. That is why Jesus stressed the importance of Scripture and it is why the writers of the books of the New Testament did as well.
Meant to ping you to post #69.
You just contradicted your previous statement "Scripture DOES say Jesus "did" many other things not written down and that if they could be, the world could not contain all that would be written."
In Mark 13:31, he tells us that heaven and earth will pass away, but Jesus' Word will not pass away. But Jesus never says anything about His Word being entirely committed to a book. Also, it took 400 years to compile the Bible, and another 1,000 years to invent the printing press. How was the Word of God communicated? Orally, by the bishops of the Church, with the guidance and protection of the Holy Spirit. Mark further tells us in 3:14; 16:15 that Jesus commands the apostles to preach (not write) the gospel to the world. Jesus gives no commandment to the apostles to write, and gives them no indication that the oral apostolic word he commanded them to communicate would later die in the fourth century. If Jesus wanted Christianity to be limited to a book (which would be finalized four centuries later), wouldn't He have said a word about it? The Evangelist Luke reinforces this oral Tradition in 10:15 - He who hears you (not "who reads your writings"), hears me. The oral word passes from Jesus to the apostles to their successors by the gracious gifts of the Holy Spirit. This succession has been preserved in the Holy Catholic Church.
That is a far cry from pretending Jesus taught things secretly to certain people and they just happened to be omitted from Scripture
There are no "secret" things taught by the Catholic Church. Everything comes from the deposit of faith entrusted to Peter upon whom our Lord built His Church.
That was the gist of Gnosticism, by the way. Something the early church, including the Apostles, battled against.
You're right in that the Apostles fought against the heresies that sprung up quickly, following the Resurrection. Notice that the Canon of Scripture, compiled by the Catholic Church, does not include any of the "gnostic gospels".
Jesus told his disciples that he would send the Holy Spirit to them so that they would be reminded of all that he had taught them.
We know from Acts 2:3-4 that the the Holy Spirit came to the apostles in the form of "tongues" of fire so that they would "speak" (not just write) the Word. Judas and Silas, successors to the apostles, were sent to bring God's infallible Word by "word of mouth." (Acts 15:27)
In Matt. 15:3. Jesus condemns human traditions that void God's word. This verse has nothing to do with the tradition we must obey that was handed down to us from the apostles. (Here, the Pharisees, in their human tradition, gave goods to the temple to avoid taking care of their parents, and this voids God's law of honoring one's father and mother.) The same is true for Mark 7:9.
Let's take a closer look at Oral Tradition. In Matt. 2:23, the prophecy "He shall be a Nazarene" is oral tradition. It is not found in the Old Testament. This demonstrates that the apostles relied upon oral tradition and taught by oral tradition. Matthew also tells us (Matt 23:2), that Jesus relies on the oral tradition of acknowledging Moses' seat of authority (which passed from Moses to Joshua to the Sanhedrin). This is not recorded in the Old Testament. In Jude 9, he relies on the oral tradition of the Archangel Michael's dispute with satan over Moses' body. This is not found in the Old Testament.
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church
"Christ the Lord, in whom the entire Revelation of the most high God is summed up, commanded the apostles to preach the Gospel, which had been promised beforehand by the prophets, and which he fulfilled in his own person and promulgated with his own lips. In preaching the Gospel, they were to communicate the gifts of God to all men. This Gospel was to be the source of all saving truth and moral discipline."32
In the apostolic preaching. . .
76 In keeping with the Lord's command, the Gospel was handed on in two ways:
- orally "by the apostles who handed on, by the spoken word of their preaching, by the example they gave, by the institutions they established, what they themselves had received - whether from the lips of Christ, from his way of life and his works, or whether they had learned it at the prompting of the Holy Spirit";33
- in writing "by those apostles and other men associated with the apostles who, under the inspiration of the same Holy Spirit, committed the message of salvation to writing".34
. . . continued in apostolic succession
"In order that the full and living Gospel might always be preserved in the Church the apostles left bishops as their successors. They gave them their own position of teaching authority."35 Indeed, "the apostolic preaching, which is expressed in a special way in the inspired books, was to be preserved in a continuous line of succession until the end of time."36
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."37 "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."38
79 The Father's self-communication made through his Word in the Holy Spirit, remains present and active in the Church: "God, who spoke in the past, continues to converse with the Spouse of his beloved Son. And the Holy Spirit, through whom the living voice of the Gospel rings out in the Church - and through her in the world - leads believers to the full truth, and makes the Word of Christ dwell in them in all its richness."39 cont'd