Posted on 09/13/2014 11:35:30 AM PDT by Blind Eye Jonez
One of the differences between Christians is that some believe in tradition -- Catholics and Orthodox -- and others -- the Protestants -- do away with tradition and believe in scripture, or Sola Scriptura.
For the Catholics tradition is an important tool for understanding and they point to the fact that both Jesus -- who didn't leave written word -- and Apostles taught by tradition.
So my question is, "Why were the Protestants so keen on removing tradition and relying so heavily on scripture, on Sola Scriptura?" Neither Paul nor Jesus ever said "You will only believe only what is written in the Gospels or my letters." But they did say you will believe in what is transmitted and taught to you.
The Bible seems to contradict the rule it is supposed to represent: it is impossible to represent a scriptural principle that is not seen within the Bible.
Maybe there are some Freeper scholars that can explain this issue. I welcome all input.
Barbecue is a pagan practice?
It’s not dogma, so it’s not a required belief to be part of the church
Ignorance. Catholics do not worship Mary, and Sacred Tradition does not trump Scripture — both are equal pillars.
If tradition be raised to the level of scripture, then it necessarily triumphs over scripture — a secular analog would be the law: when 'precedent' becomes co-equal with Constitution, the Constitution ceases to become supreme (and indeed becomes lesser, as the tradition [precedent] can be chosen at-will, even/especially when directly contrary to the Constitution).
Jesus himself noted this; Mk 7:5-13
5 So the Pharisees and the scribes asked him, “Why do your disciples not live[c] according to the tradition of the elders, but eat with defiled hands?” 6 He said to them, “Isaiah prophesied rightly about you hypocrites, as it is written,
‘This people honors me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me;
7 in vain do they worship me,
teaching human precepts as doctrines.’
8 You abandon the commandment of God and hold to human tradition.”
9 Then he said to them, “You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition! 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘Whoever speaks evil of father or mother must surely die.’ 11 But you say that if anyone tells father or mother, ‘Whatever support you might have had from me is Corban’ (that is, an offering to God[d])— 12 then you no longer permit doing anything for a father or mother, 13 thus making void the word of God through your tradition that you have handed on. And you do many things like this.”
“Neither Paul nor Jesus ever said “You will only believe only what is written in the Gospels or my letters.”
Paul said, “See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ.” (Colossians 2:8)
And Jesus said, “You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men.” (Luke 7:8)
It seems neither was a fan of the traditions of men over the word of God.
and
1 Timothy 3:16 (NIV)
All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,
Now since I can't speak directly with the Apostles and hear the word from them, I am left only with the letters that they wrote (scripture). And the scriptures warn us to be wary of the traditions of men.
Mark 7:1-13 (NIV)
The Pharisees and some of the teachers of the law who had come from Jerusalem gathered around Jesus 2 and saw some of his disciples eating food with hands that were defiled, that is, unwashed. 3(The Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they give their hands a ceremonial washing, holding to the tradition of the elders. 4 When they come from the marketplace they do not eat unless they wash. And they observe many other traditions, such as the washing of cups, pitchers and kettles.
5 So the Pharisees and teachers of the law asked Jesus, “Why don’t your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with defiled hands?”
6 He replied, “Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written:
“ ‘These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. 7 They worship me in vain; their teachings are merely human rules.’b 8 You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions.”
9 And he continued, “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions! 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and mother,’d and, ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’e 11 But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is Corban (that is, devoted to God)— 12 then you no longer let them do anything for their father or mother. 13 Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.”
Thus Protestants use the scriptures as the measure of Gods word. It is the stick by which any tradition or teaching is measured against because we know that it is easy to slip into the traditions of men. The Roman Catholic Church has a number of Catholic traditions that are in opposition to what we find in the letters of the Apostles.
Worship of Mary
Praying to the dead
Purgatory
Vain repetitions of prayers
These assertions are not based in scripture. To the Protestant mind, this is at best, adding to the scriptures and and worst, it direct conflict to the teachings of the scriptures.
I hardly ever watch tv. I keep it on the Christian music station or the oldies but goldies music. I like to watch some ghost shows but they are not that many on tv anymore. I do not remember the last time I watched a network show. I do not care for that junk.
This may (or may not?) help some people with the
Marian debate:
http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/mary-mother-of-salvation
Do you think having people this unhinged nonsense is going to help your cause at all?
Many of the Catholic “Traditions” were patently corrupt; such as the selling of indulgences”.
Martin Luther who is the father of the protestant movement main protest points were 1.)Selling of indulgences 2.) worship of Christian relics 3.) forbidding scripture to be read (translated) by the public 4.) Priesthood Celibacy.
Even though the Catholic church sought Martin Luther’s life, of his four main criticisms .... only one remains, priesthood celibacy.
So in other words the first three items listed above were all based on tradition and were between hundreds to millennium years old ...... and yet when pressed on these issues the Catholic Church caved.
Consequently, relying on traditions as opposed to scripture can cause greater corruption than solely relying on scripture.
"John 5:39 — “You study the Scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the very Scriptures that testify about me,”
Then why does the New Testament exist, if the OT is such a great and easily understood source????? I note that the Jews got it wrong right up to and past Jesus' crucifixion, INCLUDING most the Apostles (Emaus road narrative).
The simple fact is that both Jesus and the Apostles taught MOSTLY by the spoken and NOT the written word (Paul and John being notable exceptions). And they both taught from Jewish oral tradition, as well. So the existence of Christian tradition is a perfectly valid continuation.
The whole idea of "sola scriptura" is simply ridiculous on its face. We have God's WORD all around us (the physical universe) all the time, written in His Own Language and by His Own Hand, a few words and sentences of which we are beginning to understand.
Catholics don't worship Mary, then venerate her.
"Praying to the dead"
Catholics don't pray to the dead, they pray FOR the dead.
"Purgatory"
Found in Maccabees (Old Testament). Maccabees was tossed out of Scripture by Martin Luther when he re-wrote the Bible to suit his prejudices. Retained by Catholics because they were part of the Septuagint, which is the version of the OT that both Jesus and the Apostles used.
"Vain repetitions of prayers"
Really??? Then why were the Jews, Jesus, and the Apostles constantly singing/reciting the Psalms??? And what, exactly, is a "vain repetition of prayers" anyway?? How can ANY prayer be "vain"??
1) The selling of indulgences was an abuse, like simony, or any other religious abuse. The Church certainly never taught that Christians could "buy their way into heaven." Indulgences themselves are still part of Catholic doctrine.
2) Catholics do not worship relics. Worship is reserved for God alone. Relics are duly respected.
2 Kings 13:21
And it came to pass, as they were burying a man, that, behold, they spied a band of men; and they cast the man into the sepulcher of Elisha. And when the man was let down and touched the bones of Elisha, he revived and stood up on his feet.
Acts 19:12
so that even handkerchiefs and aprons that had touched him were taken to the sick, and their illnesses were cured and the evil spirits left them.
3) Would you distribute a Jehovah's Witnesses Bible in your church?
The Church that wrote, preserved and canonized the Scriptures over fifteen centuries (the Scriptures that Luther inherited and then edited), resisted the publication of poor translations into the vernacular.
4) Priestly celibacy is a discipline, not a dogma. In fact, married men in the Eastern Rites may be married prior to ordination, and there are some married priests in the Latin or Roman Rite. Regardless, St. Paul commends and prefers celibacy, and Jesus was celibate.
I note that the Jews got it wrong right up to and past Jesus' crucifixion, INCLUDING most the Apostles (Emaus road narrative).
Indeed, this is true.
But let's ask this: does their getting it wrong
invalidate their salvation? or is Jesus greater than our misconceptions and falsely held beliefs?
The simple fact is that both Jesus and the Apostles taught MOSTLY by the spoken and NOT the written word (Paul and John being notable exceptions). And they both taught from Jewish oral tradition, as well. So the existence of Christian tradition is a perfectly valid continuation.
I don't think anyone is saying that there are no traditions; but the sola scriptura proponents [of which I am a member] claim that all that is essential is already covered in the scripture — moreover, the role of the Holy Spirit (his work and purpose) fits nicely with this idea... for our God is not dead, but lives and works in the world even now.
The whole idea of "sola scriptura" is simply ridiculous on its face.
I disagree; as someone upthread mentioned: Jesus used scripture as his reply to Satan.
He would certainly be in the right to reply on his own authority [being the Creator] but he did not — instead he quoted/cited scripture.
Does this not imply we ought to have greatest respect for the scripture?
We have God's WORD all around us (the physical universe) all the time, written in His Own Language and by His Own Hand, a few words and sentences of which we are beginning to understand.
His own language? I don't believe that for a second: from nearly the beginning of its inception the New Testament was translated into other languages, and on Pentecost men heard "in their own language" not were suddenly able to understand Hebrew. (And prior to this the Old Testament had been translated into at least Greek.)
It never stops to amaze me, and at a time when real Christians in the Muslim countries are losing their lives for the Lord, that we still have arguments over scripture and tradition vs. scripture alone.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.