Oral Tradition, is it infallible?

[fhansen]

What is the Catholic Churches official position on Oral Decree or tradition? Is it infallible? if so, on what biblical bases? If not, then why do you give it such blind trust?

For what possible reason do you give the bible blind trust?

 

[tgGodsway]

For what possible reason do you give the bible blind trust?

My trust in the scriptures is not blind. It is build upon testimony of 1st. Century apostles and gospel writers. I believe what they have said.

 

[MT1926]

But if we all share one common reality, that Jesus is the Christ, then competition between circles of belief should diminish. In other words, we are all on the same team, whether protestant or catholic. Not all protestants see it that way, and not all Catholics either.

I think we are all on the same team in regards to the fact the Jesus is the Christ. The simple fact that we are here having this discussion is evidence of that.

However, I would have to disagree that Jesus believed this one simple fact is enough to put us all on the same team.

I personally take Jesus prayer for us to heart…

John 17:20-23
20 “I ask not only on behalf of these, but also on behalf of those who will believe in me through their word, 21 that they may all be one. As you, Father, are in me and I am in you, may they also be in us,[a] so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 The glory that you have given me I have given them, so that they may be one, as we are one, 23 I in them and you in me, that they may become completely one, so that the world may know that you have sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

In verse 20 Jesus isn’t just praying for the Apostles He is praying for all of us Christians in every age to come that we may be “ONE”. If you keep reading to verse 23 Jesus doubles down that we may become “COMPLETELY ONE”. Not just one in believing that He is the Christ, but completely one in all that we believe, that our unified belief will be a visible unity so that the whole world will know. That sound like Jesus wants a lot more for us than to just agree on one or two things about him.

But 1st. John tells us that we all have an anointing who will teach us all things. … how can we begin from this premise if we are more concerned with our affiliation?

Personally I don’t think St. John is telling us that we don’t need teachers in this verse. I mean isn’t the reader of this verse being taught something by St. John when they read it? Are we to believe St. John didn’t ORALLY teach the members of his community?

It seems to me that the context of this chapter is false profits who deny Jesus is the Christ. In this context St. John is telling them that they were already taught, by him, and the anointing they received from Christ, through his ORAL teaching, is all they need. These false profits have nothing more to offer them. Read to the end of the verse it says… just as it has taught you. This is past tense St. John is speaking to people who have already been taught by him. He is not telling people they will receive the spirit and be capable of teaching themselves.

The fact that others that disagree with you are using this exact same verse to try and prove they are being guided by the Holy Spirit is evidence that this verse must not mean what you guys think it means.

God Bless

 

[fhansen]

fhansen:

For what possible reason do you give the bible blind trust?

My trust in the scriptures is not blind. It is build upon testimony of 1st. Century apostles and gospel writers. I believe what they have said.

Ok, but you haven’t supported why you believe. We just believe what they wrote and said.

 

[tgGodsway]

In verse 20 Jesus isn’t just praying for the Apostles He is praying for all of us Christians in every age to come that we may be “ONE”. If you keep reading to verse 23 Jesus doubles down that we may become “COMPLETELY ONE”. Not just one in believing that He is the Christ, but completely one in all that we believe, that our unified belief will be a visible unity so that the whole world will know. That sound like Jesus wants a lot more for us than to just agree on one or two things about him.

I agree with everything you said here.

 

[tgGodsway]

Personally I don’t think St. John is telling us that we don’t need teachers in this verse. I mean isn’t the reader of this verse being taught something by St. John when they read it? Are we to believe St. John didn’t ORALLY teach the members of his community?

Again I agree with you. The context is not addressing the fact that God has placed teachers and the office of teacher in the body of Christ.

 

[tgGodsway]

He is not telling people they will receive the spirit and be capable of teaching themselves

I never said that people would teach themselves. I said that the anointing will do the teaching. This is not one in the same. The anointing of the Spirit is the one who opens our eyes to God’s revelation. This is not about IQ or formal training. It is about unfolding spiritual truth that otherwise would not be understood.

The line-in-the-sand- between false doctrine and true is found in the centerpiece. Christ is that centerpiece to which everyone must agree. So in that sense every Christian is “one” on this pivotal point of doctrine. I agree, we have a long way to go but the objective is to be one, in all truth.

 

[tgGodsway]

Okay… nobody has asked me this question before. Great question. I can only speak for myself, not others when I say It all began with an encounter with Jesus Christ at Holy Rosary Catholic Church. He passed by me and drove me to the floor of the church in the middle of the Eucharist. I came to know him in that moment. From this point on, believing the scriptures became easy. I just decided to believe it was true.

 

[MT1926]

Those were my words, I wasn’t quoting a verse. Blue prints are the foundational plans to a construction project. We are called to build upon the foundation of Christ. I used it as an expression.

I know those where your words. And I realize you were using an expression. However, did I misunderstand that you were trying to state a fact? Something that you want people to accept and believe in?

The question I was asking is it appears you are claiming that the bible is our blue print for everything we must believe? Well if you are claiming this fact shouldn’t Jesus have taught this to us and wouldn’t this basis for your believe be explicitly stated in the Bible?

That’s why I asked you where does Jesus tell us, in the Bible, how He would like the Apostles to pass on what He has taught them?

I’m just trying to understand, is the Bible being our blue-print a Biblical teaching or is it your church’s Oral tradition?

God Bless

 

[thistle]

But these decrees all came centuries after the apostolic circle lived and died, and are far removed in terms of the region. This is why the progressive revelation that comes through the papacy and councils is utterly sinful in my view. The N.T. revelation is closed at the book of Revelation. God is no longer speaking to His church in this manner.

Complete nonsense!! You obviously have no understanding about the Catholic Church which was the only Church established by Christ and to which he gave authority in matters of faith and morals!

 

[MT1926]

I never said that people would teach themselves. I said that the anointing will do the teaching. This is not one in the same. The anointing of the Spirit is the one who opens our eyes to God’s revelation. This is not about IQ or formal training. It is about unfolding spiritual truth that otherwise would not be understood.

I’m sorry I don’t follow you hear. Could you maybe explain how the anointing doing the teaching works?

I understand what you are meaning by the Spirit opens our eyes to God’s revelation. However, how do know the difference between the spirit and your own opinions?

The Bible tells us over and over that we can easily deceive ourselves.

God Bless

 

[tgGodsway]

The question I was asking is it appears you are claiming that the bible is our blue print for everything we must believe? Well if you are claiming this fact shouldn’t Jesus have taught this to us and wouldn’t this basis for your believe be explicitly stated in the Bible?

This is a very perceptive question. I don’t think the answer is explicit, but rather implicit. We begin with the identity of Christ Himself who is called the WORD who is God. Jn.1:1. The implication is that He speaks for God through the power of the holy Spirit who rested upon Him. God does not speak without the Son doing the speaking.

This type is a pattern for us. Though we are not God, we can speak what God has said through the power of the Spirit who may rest upon us too. Paul said that "all scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. 2 Tim. 3:16.

He also said that his doctrine came from Christ and NOT MAN. Gal. 1:11,12 Therefore it wasn’t Paul who said “all scripture is inspired of God” but Christ Himself working through Paul’s preaching and teaching.

Does this answer you?

 

[tgGodsway]

I am not qualified to tell you the intricate methods of the Spirit. He shows us truth and confirms it to us. for instance. … if someone says, “Jesus is Lord!” The holy Spirit will come to confirm, establish and move within me to say, yes! I agree!.. unless I am of an anti-Christ spirit as John warned his readers to test the spirits to see if they are of God.

 

[MT1926]

This is a very perceptive question. I don’t think the answer is explicit, but rather implicit. We begin with the identity of Christ Himself who is called the WORD who is God. Jn.1:1. The implication is that He speaks for God through the power of the holy Spirit who rested upon Him. God does not speak without the Son doing the speaking.

This type is a pattern for us. Though we are not God, we can speak what God has said through the power of the Spirit who may rest upon us too. Paul said that "all scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. 2 Tim. 3:16.

He also said that his doctrine came from Christ and NOT MAN. Gal. 1:11,12 Therefore it wasn’t Paul who said “all scripture is inspired of God” but Christ Himself working through Paul’s preaching and teaching.

Does this answer you?

Not really. I agree that Jesus is the Word, but John is bringing emphasis to the fact that Jesus was the Word with God, in the beginning, that brought all things into existence. I’m not seeing how you are saying John is trying to say Jesus the Word is the same as the Bible in this verse?

I also don’t see how your implicit teaching trumps Jesus words when He commanded the Apostles.

Matthew 28:16-20 16 Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them. 17 And when they saw him they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age.”

Jesus told the Apostles to go out and verbally teach us what He wanted us to know. He never commanded the Apostles to write anything down. Sure they did eventually write some letters, that included some but not all of Jesus life, and sure they are inspired and important, but it seems to me Jesus wanted His teachings to be Oral so men couldn’t argue over the meaning of His words.

I don’t follow your line of reasoning on St. Paul either because he also told Timothy to…

2 Timothy 2:2
2 and what you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.

He didn’t tell Timothy to pass around the Sacred writings to others he told him to entrust what he was Orally taught to other men who will Orally teach others. I would think one of St. Paul’s Oral teachings that Timothy was to teach these faithful men was for them to entrust his teachings to other faithful men.

Sure scripture is inspired by God, but I see no evidence that Jesus, nor St. Paul had any plans of placing the interpretation of the scriptures in the hands of men. or of making the Scriptures our “Blue print” for the faith.

Your thoughts on these verses?

God Bless

 

[MT1926]

I am not qualified to tell you the intricate methods of the Spirit. He shows us truth and confirms it to us. for instance. … if someone says, “Jesus is Lord!” The holy Spirit will come to confirm, establish and move within me to say, yes! I agree!.. unless I am of an anti-Christ spirit as John warned his readers to test the spirits to see if they are of God.

Ok fair enough.

But how do you know it is the Spirit speaking to you and not your own mind deceiving yourself?

God Bless

 

[fhansen]

This is simply not true. Great exegetes often disagree, dramatically on important tenets.

 

[tgGodsway]

I’m not seeing how you are saying John is trying to say Jesus the Word is the same as the Bible in this verse?

I think to call Jesus the WORD is a highly unusual way of thinking… But I agree, God spoke the world into existence and the Son being the WORD was there … It is above my pay-grade. I don’t get it. But we also know in Col. 1:15,16 that the Son participated in the creation act as you mentioned. The Son said, Let there be light!"…

I don’t know why John would call the Son of God, the WORD. but he goes on to say “… and the word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory,…” 1:14. incarnate word.

This voice, this word, continued when Jesus breathed on his disciples and said, receive the holy Spirit, in John 20. Therefore, the voice, expressing the will of God was then found in the word of God spoken by the Apostles. They became the conduits moved by the Spirit to speak. But during and after their death, that same word was preserved in a written word. this is my understanding of it.

 

[MT1926]

Therefore, the voice, expressing the will of God was then found in the word of God spoken by the Apostles. They became the conduits moved by the Spirit to speak. But after their death, that same word was preserved in a written word. this is my understanding of it.

Totally agreed that the Apostles writings are inspired. However, Could you explain how this proves Jesus intended us to follow our interpretations of their writings alone, the “ blue print” instead of the faithful men the Bible tells us Timothy was suppose to teach, so that they may entrust the teachings to other faithful men who will eventually teach us?

Thanks,

God Bless

 

[tgGodsway]

Jesus told the Apostles to go out and verbally teach us what He wanted us to know. He never commanded the Apostles to write anything down. Sure they did eventually write some letters, that included some but not all of Jesus life, and sure they are inspired and important, but it seems to me Jesus wanted His teachings to be Oral so men couldn’t argue over the meaning of His words.

This is flawed reasoning MT. If Christ wanted an oral tradition only, He would not have sent the Spirit to inspire the apostles to write. It wasn’t their idea to write. It was Gods. “All scripture is inspired of God and profitable…” Oral tradition, on the other hand, is elusive because there is no record of accountability with each message or teaching. It is like someone prophesying in Church with a “Thus saith the Lord!” but the message is not scrutinized by all who are there.

The 1st. century Church was uniquely used of God who provided an inspired document that would preserve throughout the centuries.

If we want to understand our freedoms as American citizens, we wouldn’t go to the local news paper to get their take on it. We would go to the founding fathers and their writings to find their “intent.”

 

[guanophore]

As I just mentioned, the sinless-ness of Mary was just one.

Do you believe that Adam and Eve were born without original sin?

Do you believe that Mary is the new Eve?

Do you believe that John the Baptist was born regenerated?