Oral Tradition, is it infallible?

[deMontfort]

tgGodsway:

What would be the difference between what I interpret from scripture and what a Church father would interpret from scripture, seeing that we both have the same document to glean from, and assuming we both have the same holy Spirit leading us?

I don’t know maybe 2000 years?

How about some of them learned directly from the mouth of an Apostle?

They knew the original languages?

They knew the “jargon/slang” of that time period?

Would you like me to keep going?

Just for the sake of argument, let’s say we both have the same education and IQ? Let’s say this church father was from the 1500’s. and I am from today.

I’m talking about the Church Fathers of the first few centuries. You are comparing apples and oranges.

and I too answer to higher human authorities who “send me” to do God’s work

Why do you answer to a higher human authority. I thought your interpretation is just as good as there’s?

Not to mention how do you know they have any authority over you in the first place? Where did their authority come from?

God Bless

Remember, having the same document and being led by the same Holy Spirit is why Lutherans, Calvinists, and Arminians are like TOTALLY in lockstep agreement with each other

 

[MT1926]

First of all, I did not say that I believed that Paul’s word or Timothy’s was corrupted. But certainly the presence of false doctrine was pressing into the Church.

You said…

was it possible that men would twist what they heard from Peter or John and Paul? yes…

You honestly trying to tell me you weren’t inferring that one of the “faithful men” Timothy was teaching might have twisted the oral interpretation of scripture?

I was just pointing out how illogical your line of reasoning is, since we don’t have the original letters from Paul.

God Bless

 

[MT1926]

O’ my goodness, I never said that either. MT, you invent and bloviate my words. Paul gave a charge for Timothy to impart the gospel to faithful men. It isn’t any more complicated than that. Whether the mission was accomplished, I don’t know. But we do have the Apostle’s teachings just in case. Aren’t you glad.

I’m sorry if my words come across as bloviating your words. How else am I suppose to interpret you saying spies might have infiltrated the camp?

What did you mean by this accusation?

It seemed to me you were using this statement to show a break in the succession of faithful men entrusted to teach. Am I wrong?

If I am then you must agree that 2 Timothy 2 is Biblical evidence of a line of succession from the Apostles entrusted with the valid interpretation of the Gospels.

God Bless

 

[tgGodsway]

Why do you answer to a higher human authority. I thought your interpretation is just as good as there’s?

Haven’t you read Peter. “submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake, whether to the king as supreme, or governors, as to those who are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of those who do good.”

Submission to spiritual authorities is not always because they know more than I do, (though they usually do) it is God’s way of doing things.

The only ones we have permission to NOT submit to, are those harboring false doctrine. see Gal. 2:5.

Not to mention how do you know they have any authority over you in the first place? Where did their authority come from?

Usually their reputation is known. They have earned respect by their own display of humble submission.
This is Gods way of doing things.

 

[MT1926]

Usually their reputation is known. They have earned respect by their own display of humble submission.
This is Gods way of doing things.

So authority comes from reputation? Could you please show me where Jesus taught this to the Apostles?

God Bless

 

[tgGodsway]

You honestly trying to tell me you weren’t inferring that one of the “faithful men” Timothy was teaching might have twisted the oral interpretation of scripture?

I was just pointing out how illogical your line of reasoning is, since we don’t have the original letters from Paul.

I suppose this is threatening to you. If oral tradition is on the same level as infallible scripture, it is important for you to believe that everyone who was taught from the Apostles, also taught others correctly, lest oral tradition be defiled. But this is not the essence of what we read in Paul’s letters or John’s when it comes to indoctrination. The possibility of false doctrine springing up in their midst was common ground. Look at all that Galatians dealt with. “Who has bewitched you!” … I’m sure Paul found some faithful men who he directly taught, in the Galatian Churches, yet in his absence “… false brothers secretly brought in to spy out (their) liberty which they have in Christ Jesus that THEY MIGHT BRING US INTO BONDAGE.”

One last thing: I believe we have every letter the Holy Spirit wanted us to have. He is sovereign over all.

 

[MT1926]

Haven’t you read Peter. “submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake, whether to the king as supreme, or governors, as to those who are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of those who do good.”

Submission to spiritual authorities is not always because they know more than I do, (though they usually do) it is God’s way of doing things.

By the way this verse is speaking of civil authority. St. Peter is urging Christians to be model citizens here. He is teaching them that if you don’t submit to civil authorities to ensure a stable society then you are not in submission to God’s authority.

 

[tgGodsway]

By the way this verse is speaking of civil authority. St. Peter is urging Christians to be model citizens here. He is teaching them that if you don’t submit to civil authorities to ensure a stable society then you are not in submission to God’s authority.

Yes and amen. But submission itself begins in the Church.

 

[MT1926]

I suppose this is threatening to you. If oral tradition is on the same level as infallible scripture, it is important for you to believe that everyone who was taught from the Apostles, also taught what they heard, correctly, lest oral tradition be defiled.

Nope never gave it a thought until you brought it up. I firmly believe when Jesus said the gates would not prevail this would apply to both oral tradition and the written word. The only thing I was trying to show you was you can’t believe the oral tradition could be twisted without also believe the written word could as well. Because, just like the oral tradition we have ZERO evidence of what the written word consisted of in the year 90.

One last thing: I believe we have every letter the Holy Spirit wanted us to have. He is sovereign over all.

That’s fine the Mormon’s believe the same thing about their book.

God Bless

 

[MT1926]

Yes and amen. But submission itself begins in the Church.

Yes Agree.

Matthew 18:15-20
15 “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. 17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. 18 Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.[a] 19 Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. 20 For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them.”

However, the disagreement is which Church Christ was referring to in these verses.

God Bless

 

[tgGodsway]

So authority comes from reputation? Could you please show me where Jesus taught this to the Apostles?

Before the Apostles were Apostles, they were disciples of Jesus Christ in total submission to Him for the most part. Reputation was in the making.

They learned how the greatest in the kingdom of God was the least among the brethren. This kind of disposition was required of them if God were to use them in the way He wanted.

Reputation played a part in measuring their heart and their resolve to go into all the world.

If the disciples did not pass this test, do you really believe that God would have given them authority in the first place? I don’t think so.

I think it was Ianman87 who made the comments about Pope’s who committed murder, yet if and when they sat on St. Peter’s chair, it is to be believed that their declarations were of God and infallible. Really?

 

[MT1926]

If the disciples did not pass this test, do you really believe that God would have given them authority in the first place? I don’t think so.

Actually, I’m pretty sure scripture shows us that every single Apostle, with the exception of St. John, failed the test.

Personally, you got me scratching my head here because I believe, as I thought you believed, that the Apostles were chosen by God to be guided by the Holy Spirit, to do His will.

The fact that you believe their Authority comes from their human actions (good works) to pass a test from God before God would give them authority is absolutely mind boggling?

I think it was Ianman87 who made the comments about Pope’s who committed murder, yet if and when they sat on St. Peter’s chair, it is to be believed that their declarations were of God and infallible. Really?

St. Peter denied Jesus three times and St. Paul persecuted Christians. The fact that you believe our God is no longer capable to keep a man from erring in regards to teaching faith and morals, regardless of his outward actions, doesn’t seem like a possibility to me.

God a Bless

 

[tgGodsway]

The fact that you believe their Authority comes from their human actions (good works) to pass a test from God before God would give them authority is absolutely mind boggling?

Well two things here: It wasn’t as much about good works as it was about their dispositions. Obviously the key to receiving authority, both literal and spiritual was firstly their faith to receive it. Judas was disqualified, Peter wasn’t. They both denied Christ.

But it wasn’t because of the color of the apostles hair that won them such a privilege. They practiced the principles they preached such as, “… if anyone cleanses himself from the latter, he will be a vessel for honor, sanctified and useful to the Master, prepared for every good work.” 2Tim. 2:21.

Power, or authority, both relationally, and in physical manifestation, takes a price and not offered irresponsibly. This is why it is doubtful that a pope could go through with an act of murder, and two days later sit on St. Peter’s chair to declare God’s wonder. naaa…

Wielding (real) authority takes a cultivated prayer life, bathed in humility and integrity, as we see in the life of our savior Jesus Christ.

 

[MT1926]

But it wasn’t because of the color of the apostles hair that won them such a privilege. They practiced the principles they preached such as, “… if anyone cleanses himself from the latter, he will be a vessel for honor, sanctified and useful to the Master, prepared for every good work.” 2Tim. 2:21.

I don’t really think this verse has anything to do with authority. The context is talking about disputes. The cleansing is from disputing, he isn’t referencing personal sin here, he is talking about arguing over the interpretation of words. St. Paul is basically telling Timothy I handed you the correct interpretation, I want you and the other faithful men to tell it like it is, don’t quarrel over interpretation. I like when he says a slave to the Lord does not quarrel. That says it all right there. He is telling Timothy you are given the authority and if they Love the Lord they will listen to the authority I handed on to you.

Power, or authority, both relationally, and in physical manifestation, takes a price and not offered irresponsibly. This is why it is doubtful that a pope could go through with an act of murder, and two days later sit on St. Peter’s chair to declare God’s wonder. naaa…

Wielding (real) authority takes a cultivated prayer life, bathed in humility and integrity, as we see in the life of our savior Jesus Christ.

I think the difficulty we are having here is you keep talking about man made authority. We don’t believe the Pope’s authority is his own. We believe Jesus when He says whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven. Do you think the Holy Spirit would miss guide, even the worst of the worst, and allow them to bind something in heaven. You obviously believe the Holy Spirit was able to guide a murderer, St. Paul, into writing a good portion of the Bible without error, why is it so hard to believe the Holy Spirit can’t guide a bad Pope? Especially since we have historical evidence that none of the bad Popes made a binding moral declaration on the faithful. Sure seems like the Holy Spirit was doing his job to me.

God Bless

 

[hope]

What comes to mind is David, he murdered and Solomon who worshiped other gods. God has always used less than perfect humans. Peter did deny Him three times but that didn’t stop Jesus from forgiving him and telling him to feed His sheep. Jesus prayed specifically for Peter. Somehow we are to believe that He left us alone with just our own personnel beliefs to guide us? The Holy Spirit supposedly inspires everyone to the many different interpretations that exist ? Scripture states that we need someone to interpret scripture for us we cannot do it alone. Yet that is exactly what solo scripture believers want us to believe that we can read scripture and know what it means without help contrary to what scripture says. A good example is our friend tg. He promotes beliefs that he sees in scripture that others do not see. He has no guidance to the truth because the guide Jesus left, His Church, he rejects again because of his own personal interpretations.

 

[lanman87]

St. Peter denied Jesus three times and St. Paul persecuted Christians. The fact that you believe our God is no longer capable to keep a man from erring in regards to teaching faith and morals, regardless of his outward actions, doesn’t seem like a possibility to me.

You are comparing apples and oranges. Peter and Paul were reconciled to Christ. To use Catholic Terminology, they weren’t in a state of mortal sin while ministering. They both had repented and were living lives of faith. The same can be said of many of the Old Testament figures. Many people have living horrible sinful lifestyles then found forgiveness in Christ which led them to become great ministers and teachers of the gospel.

However, to live a horrible sinful lifestyle while claiming to be a minister of the gospel makes someone a hypocrite and they lose credibility and authority. Ministers of the Gospel, whether you call them Pastor, Elder or Bishop must meet the requirements of 1 Timothy 3. If they fail to meet those requirements then they are in disgrace and we are no longer obligated to follow them.

 

[lanman87]

Which reformer?

All of them. This will sound crazy to a non-Catholic. But I think God used the reformation to teach the world a profound truth. That truth is that His people are those that trust in Christ to the point that their lives are changed.

God used the reformation to teach us that God’s people are a people with a changed heart, with a strong faith in Christ, and a heart full of love. Today we can see that God’s people are not just Catholic, Presbyterian, Baptist, Methodist, or whatever. Our intellectual understandings and how God’s grace works, about the role of the sacraments, about the role of Works in justification… none of those things make you one of “God’s People”. Those things may make you Catholic or Baptist or Methodist or Assembly of God or whatever. But what makes you a Child of God is having a heart changed from stone to flesh, being born of God by the indwelling Holy Spirit and trusting in Christ with all our heart and living in the faith of our hearts.

The truth of 1 John 4:13-16 is made known by the Reformation and all the craziness that followed.

13 By this we know that we abide in him and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit. 14 And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent his Son to be the Savior of the world. 15 Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God. 16 So we have come to know and to believe the love that God has for us. God is love, and whoever abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him

The Reformation showed us that God gives His Spirit and abides in His Children based on His Grace and their Faith. We abide in Christ by a spiritual adoption and living faith. If we abide in Christ and He is us then we are part of His body, the church.

There are millions of Baptist, Methodist, Pentecostal, Lutherans, Anglicans, non-denominational and so on that God has given His Spirit and that Abide in God and God in them. That is the what God taught us through the reformation and the rise of denominations.

 

[MT1926]

Peter and Paul were reconciled to Christ. To use Catholic Terminology, they weren’t in a state of mortal sin while ministering.

And you know this how? By your own rules where is this explicitly taught in the Bible?

I agree St. Peter was reconciled to Christ. I think the difference between you an me is I believe he was reconciled long before he was led astray and denied Christ 3 times. At which point Jesus brought him back only to sin by screwing up again.

We have no way of knowing how many times this happened during Jesus ministry because the Bible isn’t a complete book of Christian history. We only have bits and pieces of what happened. Heck St. Peter and St. Paul might have screwed up many more times throughout their lives. The were weak humans just like the rest of us. Once God made them Apostles they didn’t lose their free will and become preaching automatons.

As for St. Paul sure he was reconciled but he himself points out…

2 Corinthians 12:6-10
6 Though if I wish to boast, I shall not be a fool, for I shall be speaking the truth. But I refrain from it, so that no one may think more of me than he sees in me or hears from me. 7 And to keep me from being too elated by the abundance of revelations, a thorn[a] was given me in the flesh, a messenger of Satan, to harass me, to keep me from being too elated. 8 Three times I besought the Lord about this, that it should leave me; 9 but he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” I will all the more gladly boast of my weaknesses, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. 10 For the sake of Christ, then, I am content with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities; for when I am weak, then I am strong.

We have no way of knowing what this thorn was, St. Paul never tells us. However, he does tell us that this thorn continually comes from Satan, so we can be pretty sure it is not a literal thorn piercing his skin. The fact that it comes from Satan tells me it is most likely some kind of sinful thought or maybe he was unable to believe he was fully forgiven for all of the persecutions he performed. We don’t know. But at the same point to claim that St. Peter and St. Paul no longer sinned while they were ministers of the gospel is no where to be found in the Bible. You are reading that into the text to try and prove God won’t do something that in your mind you believe He can’t.

However, to live a horrible sinful lifestyle while claiming to be a minister of the gospel makes someone a hypocrite and they lose credibility and authority. Ministers of the Gospel, whether you call them Pastor, Elder or Bishop must meet the requirements of 1 Timothy 3. If they fail to meet those requirements then they are in disgrace and we are no longer obligated to follow them.

These are the qualifications someone must hold if they “aspire to the office of bishop”. Nothing in here address a Bishop falling into sin. I think you are pulling more out of the text than is there.

God Bless

 

[lanman87]

But at the same point to claim that St. Peter and St. Paul no longer sinned while they were ministers of the gospel is no where to be found in the Bible. You are reading that into the text to try and prove God won’t do something that in your mind you believe He can’t.

I didn’t claim they no longer sinned or struggled with sin. What I am saying is that they have a living faith that was evident by their life. There weren’t in positions of leadership because they were sinless, there were in positions of leadership because they were A. Chosen by God B. Had a deep faith in God C. Lived out this deep faith in word and deed.

Do you think they would have had the same impact if they were liars and murders? Would they still be considered Saints or would they have fell in disgrace?

These are the qualifications someone must hold if they “aspire to the office of bishop”. Nothing in here address a Bishop falling into sin. I think you are pulling more out of the text than is there.

So once you become a bishop you don’t have to maintain a good standing? You can become a lying, murderous thief and still be a bishop… and we are still obligated to follow lying, murderous, thieves?

 

[MT1926]

All of them. This will sound crazy to a non-Catholic. But I think God used the reformation to teach the world a profound truth. That truth is that His people are those that trust in Christ to the point that their lives are changed.

So are you claiming that Catholics, especially before the reformation, didn’t change their lives and the world around them because of their trust in Christ?


Just curious what’s your opinion on this video?

God used the reformation to teach us that God’s people are a people with a changed heart, with a strong faith in Christ, and a heart full of love.

So the Catholic Church hasn’t shown the world LOVE throughout it’s history?

Today we can see that God’s people are not just Catholic, Presbyterian, Baptist, Methodist, or whatever.

So Christ misspoke when He prayed that Christians would be completely ONE, in John 17:23?

But what makes you a Child of God is having a heart changed from stone to flesh, being born of God by the indwelling Holy Spirit and trusting in Christ with all our heart and living in the faith of our hearts.

Sure sounds Catholic to me. I’m guessing we define what is meant by “trusting Christ” and “living in the faith” much much differently though?

The truth of 1 John 4:13-16 is made known by the Reformation and all the craziness that followed.

That is a great verse. The problem with the reformers is they should have backed up and read verse 6

6 We are of God. Whoever knows God listens to us, and he who is not of God does not listen to us. By this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error.

The only thing the reformation showed you is that you no longer have to listen to the Apostles or the faithful men they handed on the authority to teach (2 Timothy 2) and interpret the Bible. Once they convinced people they no longer are bound by authority and can read the Bible on their own authority. This is what caused the rise of denominations. To truly believe God used the reformers to divide us makes absolutely no sense.

There are millions of Baptist, Methodist, Pentecostal, Lutherans, Anglicans, non-denominational and so on that God has given His Spirit and that Abide in God and God in them.

Any your proof is? Not saying there aren’t just saying you are usurping the power of God (Matthew 23:9) by claiming you know there are millions of people “that God has given His Spirit and that Abide in God and God in them.” Only God knows who abides in Him.

God Bless