Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: dignan3
the808bass, you ask about Tradition, the belief in a non-symbolic Eucharist is a part of that Tradition.

Unfortunately for you, there is no explicit delineation of that doctrine from the beginning. (We obviously disagree on the meaning of John 6. I don't hold your interpretation to be invalid, just incorrect. In other words, both interpretations give account of the evidence at hand. You think yours does better. I, mine.)

But, apart from the statements of Scripture and your accompanying interpretation, you have no oral tradition that explicitly delineates the doctrine (in fact, one has to wait a bit to even get it in writing). When someone asks for the oral tradition (and this is the entire point of my challenge), we are told to look at the Tradition. They are not equal. Your Tradition has developed, oral tradition does not. Your Tradition is not "from the beginning." Oral tradition was. Your Tradition equals Roman Catholic doctrine. That's not wrong. It's not even bad. Tradition brings stability and structure. I am not against tradition. But the claim that Tradition is equal to the oral tradition of the early church is unsubstantiated.

249 posted on 10/12/2001 9:29:59 PM PDT by the808bass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies ]


To: the808bass
Man. I didn't even get to see what the special agent said.
255 posted on 10/12/2001 10:01:58 PM PDT by the808bass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 249 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson