Does 2 Thess 2:15 support (recent) Artificial Traditions? - Jay Dyer

Показать описание

Then we looked at 2 Thess. 2:15 as quoted by Jay Dyer in his “10 Reasons” video we started responding to last week.

Рекомендации по теме

Комментарии

It’s interesting that there’s not many Jay Dyer fans commenting on this one.

bobbyr

“The oral tradition isn’t written down, therefore no oral tradition.” Flawless logic dude. No wonder the EO take you soooo seriously 😂 James White is a joke!

WanderingThief

The point on Irenaeus in light of everything else James said is awesome

J_R_Murphy

the Pharisees were seeing the Word of God "within" their sacred tradition. Jesus, in contrast to this, cited the Word of God to judge their traditions. The apostles, likewise, continuously admonished their people to check their teaching against the Scripture (Acts 17:11), thereby substantiating the position that even what they taught was subject to God's Word. After all, no doctrinal teaching should contradict biblical revelation, and the Sacred Word of God was and is the final authority in all things spiritual.

HarrisonB

Paul was in Thessalonica for nearly two years, and James White would have everyone believe that in that stretch of time everything he taught to the people of the Church there day in and day out is contained in two books totaling 8 chapters...Seriously? How does anyone fall for this stuff?

charismaticcatholic

James those are all Catholic dogmas you mentioned not orthodox which were made necessary because the confused teachings of original sin

Stop doing that, you ignoring John chrysostom and the eastern patristic fathers refuting Augustine

jcad

And here's one we prepared earlier!

Bibliotechno

"That's it! That's what the text is about. That's all it's about."

James, just because you can cite the Greek doesn't mean you understand the words spoken. How is this a coherent argument at all against Jay's position? Also -- you keep deflecting to Rome this Rome that. Jay isn't a Roman Catholic, you make the same mistake many boomer prots do in this inability to distinguish between East and West. These arguments are ridiculous and don't really address the contention from Jay in any way at all, aka you're just straw manning. If you're going to engage in this dialogue how about you speak directly to the issue at hand.

Donky-Kng

What in context tells us that he is referring to the gospel, Word, etc.? Presumably, Paul had to hand things off to people that were not recorded in Scripture that were binding. What those things were are in question

stevendobo

As someone who used to really admire White and still do in a way, I have to say it’s sad to see these terrible ‘arguments’ against EO, which he just treats as the RCC

JacobsLadderToTruth

*This is Whites main points against EO/Caths attack against sola scriptura and its extremely well done. Dyer goes to 2th**2:15** just like CA answers does but main question is this: "what quote of Jesus or one of the first apostles is found within your traditions that is not located w/ the written texts?"..none*

justinchamberlain

There is nothing in the text about continuing tradition or oral tradition being passed down from one person to another for 2, 000 years. For the Roman Catholic church to lift the issue of tradition out of its context and apply it to its own "Sacred Tradition" is a clear violation of what the verse is saying.

If you are a Catholic, I hope my words do not offend you.

My desire in writing this is not to alienate Catholics nor belittle their beliefs. I believe that there are some Catholics who love the Lord and are saved. But I would like to add that I believe it is in spite of official Roman Catholic doctrine. Nevertheless, it is my opinion that the Catholic church has added teachings that are not consistent with biblical revelation.

HarrisonB

Just some thoughts on Apostolic Tradition, as someone moving more towards Orthodoxy.
- it’s the full understanding and context of the Gospel that is passed on through Tradition. The early Christians are the original audience, and therefore we should look to them to see how Scripture and the oral teachings were understood.
- we get the canon of Scripture from Tradition. The books were reliably transmitted to the early Christians, from whom we get our Scriptures themselves. No early Christians = no copying, transmitting, and fully understanding the Gospel from the earliest times.
- we wouldn’t know who wrote some of the 4 Gospels, if it weren’t for Tradition. Do we pick and choose our traditions, or accept the truth for what it is? Because the Bible itself is Tradition. That’s how we have the Bible.
- just because maybe the Catholic Church deviates from the original message (ie Papal Infallibility), doesn’t mean the concept of Sacred Tradition is false. That’s their mistake but doesn’t invalidate the claim of Tradition. Also Orthodoxy would agree with you on many of your RC critiques.
- Jesus never wrote any books. Jesus’ words were Inspired by God, decades before being written down. And the same goes for the apostles.
- the Bible even says not everything was written down. The books could not contain what Jesus said and did.
- the early Christians are absolutely heroic, as well, and we shouldn’t desire to separate ourselves from them. Ignatius of Antioch, for example, was martyred willingly, and powerfully ministered to the early churches on his way to his martyrdom.

I appreciate your concern for later accretions, but this certainly doesn’t disprove the original authoritative Apostolic Tradition.

Christos Anesti!

aaronreimer