Replies

FK: Of course Christians should be thinking about Christ all the time, but I think reminders like Holy days are still good things. History has proved that we need all the reminding we can get.

So you think it's something we determine? Not God?

No, I think it's from God. It matches what we see in scripture. Christ Himself said "Do this in remembrance of me." Therefore, I would think He would approve of any time or occasion when He is remembered. Forget all the commercialization baloney, reflecting on and remembering the story of His birth has to be a Godly thing. Linus had it right when he said "That's what Christmas is all about, Charlie Brown." :)

FK: Yes, Protestants have some traditions, but one difference from the formal ones that are dogma is that they are not commanded of us by any higher earthly authority and our salvation has nothing to do with complying with them

Like Trinity?

I don't at all consider the Trinity to be extra-scriptural Tradition. The totality of scripture contains the whole idea of the Trinity. I think I have posted this website before, but just in case see: Trinity in the Scriptures.

FK: Latin and Orthodox Churches almost always involve a tradition we believe is in violation of scripture, or is based on an interpretation of scripture with which we strongly disagree

Where do you find in scriptures such beliefs as "sola scirptura" or co-equal, co-eternal Trinity?

The website handles the Trinity stuff, and for Sola Scriptura here are some examples in support:

2 Tim. 3:16-17 : 16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

1 Cor. 4:6-7 : 6 Now, brothers, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, so that you may learn from us the meaning of the saying, “Do not go beyond what is written.” Then you will not take pride in one man over against another. 7 For who makes you different from anyone else? What do you have that you did not receive? And if you did receive it, why do you boast as though you did not?

Luke 1:1-4 : 1 Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, 2 just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. 3 Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4 so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.

We also have Jesus' example of handling every temptation of satan with scripture only.

Christ Himself said "Do this in remembrance of me.

Believers should not have to be commanded to remember him any more than family members have to be commanded to remember their loved ones.

Yes you have and thank you again. It's a good source of study, but of course it is not all that it's hyped to be. It wold be good to debate it but on another thread.

and for Sola Scriptura here are some examples in support:

2 Tim. 3:16-17 : 16 All Scripture is God-breathed...

Neat, except Paul doesn't specify what constitutes scripture, by whose decision, and how. Jewish canon was not uniform. It varied greatly between the sectarian communities of Samaria, the Sadducees, the Pharisees, and the Alexandrian Greek-speaking diaspora.

...1 Cor. 4:6-7 : 6 ...“Do not go beyond what is written.” Then you will not take pride in one man over against another

Unless, of course, he is Paul! Now, you may try the banal Berean argument, which of course itself is another vague and open-ended argument, because it doesn't say that just, because the checked the scriptures (whatever they were), they found Paul's ramblings to be true; it just says they checked and not what they conlcuded.

Supposedly being an observant Jew, it is strange that he would think so lowly of oral transmission of the faith, which, in Judaism, is actually considered higher than the written, and which was not reduced to writing until well into the Christian era otherwise known as the Talmud.

Only the Christians consider Paul a "Hebrew scholar." People who practice Judaism and are familiar with Hebrew scholarship don't, the way Christians know that Mormons are not Christians and that it would be wrong to call Joseph Smith a "Christian" anything.

...Luke 1:1-4...it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4 so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.

So, how did the people before Luke know with "certainty" what they have been taught before any of the NT (or for that matter any scripture) was written and widely read? Luke himself gathered what others told him, and not something he actually read! And what about those poor souls (most of the pagan world) who couildn;t read? LOL! This is so naïve it's embarrassing anyone would take it seriously.

We also have Jesus' example of handling every temptation of satan with scripture only.

Yeah, right, in the Greek, Zoroastrian-influenced dualistic sectarian stroy-telling. The Jews don't believe in the devil. How could an observant Jew?