The only thing I ever read about Jesus having to say anything about tradition was to condemn it.
GOD said that the the word of God was enough to make the one wise for salvation and man of God complete for EVERY good work.
2 Timothy 3:14-17 But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.
Why does the Catholic church say it's not?
What is lacking that men feel they need to add something to it? Is it not truth? Is it not authoritative? Is it not God breathed, Holy Spirit inspired?
Disputable matters? If it's relating to salvation, it's not disputable.
Salvation is by faith in Christ. If someone teaches that salvation is some other way, through good works, through baptism, through ritual or sacraments, that is wrong and that is not open for dispute. Only by the shedding of blood is there forgiveness of sin. Nothing else does it. Not works, not suffering, not baptism, not communion, not nothing for the shedding of blood.
If you want examples of *disputable matters*, then read Romans 14. God gives some.
metmom:
Romans 14 offers an example of disputable matters, namely Jewish dietary laws; is it an all-inclusive list?
Jesus condemned *human* tradition, yes, absolutely, when such traditions countermanded the Word of God. But if such traditions are in line with His Word, and with His teaching as handed down by the Apostles, is it to be jettisoned?
“For even creation reveals Him who formed it, and the very work made suggests Him who made it, and the world manifests Him who ordered it. The Universal Church, moreover, through the whole world, has received this tradition from the Apostles.” - St. Irenaeus, “Against Heresies, Book 2, Chapter 9”
All Scripture *is* profitable for teaching, yes, absolutely. But at the time Paul wrote to Timothy, there was no New Testament yet compiled! When he speaks to how Timothy was acquainted with these writings from the time of his childhood, these would have only been the writings seen as Sacred Scripture by the Jewish people, aka the Old Testament.
When it says that all Scripture is profitable for teaching, does that exclude all other sources of wisdom? Does that mean the oral tradition of the Apostles is to be discounted?
Did not Paul exhort the Thessalonians to hold fast to the traditions they were taught, either by letter or that was *spoken* to them? (2 Thessalonians 2:2)
See here for a more thorough explanation: http://www.catholic.com/tracts/scripture-and-tradition
So, does Christ give any indication as to how disagreements are to be settled, or how offenses between fellow Christians are to be handled? As a matter of fact, He does, in Matthew 18:
[15] But if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother. [16] And if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand. [17] And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican.
So I ask you: what church is Christ referring to?
BipolarBob:
To say that God chose Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide for you is to say that such a doctrine was taught by Christ, by His Apostles, and by His Church. Yet ‘Scripture alone’ was not formulated until the time of Luther, and the book of James actively denies ‘Faith alone’.
You ask if God sent a message to flee the Catholic Church, would I listen to it?
The question I ask of you in return is, how do you know that message is from God? For we were warned of the wiles of the Enemy, as Paul instructed in his second letter to the Corinthians (chapter 11):
[12] But what I do, that I will do, that I may cut off the occasion from them that desire occasion, that wherein they glory, they may be found even as we. [13] For such false apostles are deceitful workmen, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. [14] And no wonder: for Satan himself transformeth himself into an angel of light. [15] Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers be transformed as the ministers of justice, whose end shall be according to their works.
And what of Paul’s exhortation in the first chapter of his letter to the Galatians?
[6] I wonder that you are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ, unto another gospel. [7] Which is not another, only there are some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. [8] But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema. [9] As we said before, so now I say again: If any one preach to you a gospel, besides that which you have received, let him be anathema.
We are called to hold fast to the teachings of Christ and His Apostles; so when Christ Himself said that he would build His Church upon Peter, would grant him the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven, and that the gates of hell would not prevail against it...why would I abandon His Church? Why would I abandon that which He instituted?
HMMMmmm...
You said it MUCH better than I did.
When EVER it was; it HAD to be AFTER the awful, disgusting, horrible, terrible, dreadful, ghastly, nasty, vile, foul, revolting, repulsive, repugnant, odious, sickening, nauseating, yucky, gross, beastly, terrible, atrocious, dreadful, frightful, execrable, abominable, inadequate, inferior, substandard, lamentable, crummy, pathetic, rotten, woeful, lousy, appalling, abysmal and awful Catholic TEACHING that RUINED!! seven churches in Asia.
Them Albatrii get a bit gamey after hanging around one’s neck for thousands of years; don’t they!