The Place of Oral Tradition

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

JaumeJ

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2011
15,690
2,699
113
#1
Oral tradition had its place before the Books of Moses, the Prophets, and the Writings were compiled to be our Old Testament. Granted, it was compiled by the faithful among men, but the actual work is Yahweh's work.

It only takes reading the first lines of Genesis to know what oral tradition in the line of men who remembered the Father contributed to the writings, with the Holy Spirit guiding these holy men.

Since then men have taken rabbinical teachings first, then theological teachings of doctrines second and have somehow managed to force these teachings to be valid oral traditions. Were they valid, Our Lord would have had no problem with the scribes and the pharisees.

Were He to come again in the flesh, He would have the same conflict with the traditions that have crept into the assemblies via men.

The only valid oral tradition was before the written Word, and that which is valid is now in the Word because our loving Father has assured it to be all there.

No man can say any oral tradition since the Bible was compiled, by our Father by the hands of the people He chose, has a place in our learning today, or does anyone believe our Father has not prepared all for us? I think not. Yahweh bless all in Yeshua, Jesus, amen.
 

kenisyes

Account disabled by admin team
Sep 2, 2012
4,870
58
0
#2
The problem is, that each group develops an oral tradition of its own. It starts with things as simple as whether the pastor can let his wife speak to him while he is preaching or not, or whether he must finish the sermon in a half hour, or if being the janitor is a "ministry". Hundreds of little decisions that need to be explained by parent to child, and then the child grows up, and considers the explanation some kind of revealed truth. But if you want to worship with those people, do not contradict their practice or how they account for it.

The oral traditions to which you refer have been around longer, but the rule is the same. As long as it does not disagree with Scripture, if you like it, do it, but don't insist your explanation is God's revelation, or obligate anyone else to do it.

If you look at the ancient oral traditions, it is the same. Many explanations of many things, creation, the Flood, movements of peoples, inventions, etc. God chose the ones He wanted for the Bible, as the rest do not accurately express what he wants us to know about Him.
 

JaumeJ

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2011
15,690
2,699
113
#3
I am not insisting anything. God has not revealed this to me in any other manner than He has to all who believe Him. Oral tradition is what Moses wrote down, or is credited as to having written down with the divine inspiration of Yahweh.

Once everything that was know to that time according to faith was written down, there was no longer any need for oral tradition. I speak of the oral handing down of the events from and including creation to the Writings.

Any traditions since the Writings are not of Yahweh, that is, by faith not of Yahweh.

No, I have not been visited by an angel with a message to this effect, it is recorded and in the Word. Before there were any strange gods among you was I am. That is not from me, that is from the Holy Spirit in the Word.


The problem is, that each group develops an oral tradition of its own. It starts with things as simple as whether the pastor can let his wife speak to him while he is preaching or not, or whether he must finish the sermon in a half hour, or if being the janitor is a "ministry". Hundreds of little decisions that need to be explained by parent to child, and then the child grows up, and considers the explanation some kind of revealed truth. But if you want to worship with those people, do not contradict their practice or how they account for it.

The oral traditions to which you refer have been around longer, but the rule is the same. As long as it does not disagree with Scripture, if you like it, do it, but don't insist your explanation is God's revelation, or obligate anyone else to do it.

If you look at the ancient oral traditions, it is the same. Many explanations of many things, creation, the Flood, movements of peoples, inventions, etc. God chose the ones He wanted for the Bible, as the rest do not accurately express what he wants us to know about Him.
 

kenisyes

Account disabled by admin team
Sep 2, 2012
4,870
58
0
#4
I am not insisting anything.
I'm surprised you had the idea that I thought you were. I was agreeing with you, just clarifying and adding to it what a meaningful response might be to the problem.
 

JaumeJ

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2011
15,690
2,699
113
#5
There has been a lot of misunderstanding going on in the forum, and I guess I am not immuned. Forgive that please, and stay the worker you always have been in Jesus....God bless you always.......

I'm surprised you had the idea that I thought you were. I was agreeing with you, just clarifying and adding to it what a meaningful response might be to the problem.
 

kenisyes

Account disabled by admin team
Sep 2, 2012
4,870
58
0
#6
Of course I forgive you. Perhaps it was I who was not clear. God bless you as well.
 
Oct 31, 2011
8,200
180
0
#7
Most of the threads on CC have to do with what is truly God's word, and that is clearly thinking of bible words without traditional thinking fogging up our minds. I don't think you can ever use tradition, isms, denominations, or other men's thinking to arrive at God's thinking.

We are told we have two ways to judge whether something is in line with the kingdom of God. One is love. By our love we can be known. If we see someone expressing something opposed to love, we can know what they say is not of God. The other is scripture. We can reason together about scripture, and some of what we are told in scripture is obscured when we don't have to know all. But we may not go anywhere but scripture to arrive at truth.
 
May 6, 2013
119
1
0
#8
Oral tradition had its place before the Books of Moses, the Prophets, and the Writings were compiled to be our Old Testament. Granted, it was compiled by the faithful among men, but the actual work is Yahweh's work.

It only takes reading the first lines of Genesis to know what oral tradition in the line of men who remembered the Father contributed to the writings, with the Holy Spirit guiding these holy men.

Since then men have taken rabbinical teachings first, then theological teachings of doctrines second and have somehow managed to force these teachings to be valid oral traditions. Were they valid, Our Lord would have had no problem with the scribes and the pharisees.

Were He to come again in the flesh, He would have the same conflict with the traditions that have crept into the assemblies via men.

The only valid oral tradition was before the written Word, and that which is valid is now in the Word because our loving Father has assured it to be all there.

No man can say any oral tradition since the Bible was compiled, by our Father by the hands of the people He chose, has a place in our learning today, or does anyone believe our Father has not prepared all for us? I think not. Yahweh bless all in Yeshua, Jesus, amen.
This argument is flawed on many levels.

First of all, NOWHERE does Scripture condemn Oral Tradition. It condemns the precepts and traditions of men that nullify the Word of God (Mark 7:13). On the contratry, we read in passages like 2 Thess. 2:15 that Oral Tradition is on par with what is written.

Secondly, the canon of Scripture itself is a Tradition. NOWHERE in Scripture do we see a list of approved Books. This list was written down, compiled and declared by the Catholic Church at the enmd of the 3rd Century. The later, incomplete Protestant versions did not come into being until 1200 years LATER.

Finally - NOWHERE in Scripture do we find your claim that Oral Tradition is no longer valid and that we are only to hold to what is Written.
 
P

prodigal

Guest
#9
[h=3]Matthew 15:2-4[/h]New International Version (NIV)

[SUP]2 [/SUP]“Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don’t wash their hands before they eat!”
[SUP]3 [/SUP]Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? [SUP]4 [/SUP]For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’[SUP][a][/SUP] and ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’[SUP][b][/SUP]

Washing hands was from the Oral Torah
 
P

prodigal

Guest
#10
Jesus calls that man's tradition. I'm with him
 

JaumeJ

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2011
15,690
2,699
113
#11
It is apparent you believe oral tradition since the Written Word of God is not tradition, it is. Previous, and I did stipulate this, to the Word Written my reference is only to oral tradition of the faith, not of the peoples who according to the oral traditions of the faith had gone away from worshiping the living God. All mankind had know Him in the beginning, but if this is not understood, I cannot force you to understand. Forgive my lack of understanding how to relate to some.
This argument is flawed on many levels.

First of all, NOWHERE does Scripture condemn Oral Tradition. It condemns the precepts and traditions of men that nullify the Word of God (Mark 7:13). On the contratry, we read in passages like 2 Thess. 2:15 that Oral Tradition is on par with what is written.

Secondly, the canon of Scripture itself is a Tradition. NOWHERE in Scripture do we see a list of approved Books. This list was written down, compiled and declared by the Catholic Church at the enmd of the 3rd Century. The later, incomplete Protestant versions did not come into being until 1200 years LATER.

Finally - NOWHERE in Scripture do we find your claim that Oral Tradition is no longer valid and that we are only to hold to what is Written.
 
May 6, 2013
119
1
0
#12
It is apparent you believe oral tradition since the Written Word of God is not tradition, it is. Previous, and I did stipulate this, to the Word Written my reference is only to oral tradition of the faith, not of the peoples who according to the oral traditions of the faith had gone away from worshiping the living God. All mankind had know Him in the beginning, but if this is not understood, I cannot force you to understand. Forgive my lack of understanding how to relate to some.
Not really sure what you're saying here. Are you saying that you disagree with what I said or that you are retracting your earlier claims?
 

JaumeJ

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2011
15,690
2,699
113
#13
Sharing what is common knowledge to any student of the Word is not an argument. The oral tradition to which I refer is that of the faithful from the Garden to the Writing down of all contained in that oral tradition.

The Father has provided all we need know about previous to the Writings in the Writings, while anything purporting to be oral tradition since the truth has been supplied by God in the Writings, the Word, or Jesus, is not necessary and most times false.

This is according to the Word and according to faith in the Word. It is by no means an argument. I have no argument with anyone.

Perhaps were you to reread the post you may understand what was posted.


Not really sure what you're saying here. Are you saying that you disagree with what I said or that you are retracting your earlier claims?
 
Oct 31, 2011
8,200
180
0
#14
This argument is flawed on many levels.

First of all, NOWHERE does Scripture condemn Oral Tradition. It condemns the precepts and traditions of men that nullify the Word of God (Mark 7:13). On the contratry, we read in passages like 2 Thess. 2:15 that Oral Tradition is on par with what is written.

Secondly, the canon of Scripture itself is a Tradition. NOWHERE in Scripture do we see a list of approved Books. This list was written down, compiled and declared by the Catholic Church at the enmd of the 3rd Century. The later, incomplete Protestant versions did not come into being until 1200 years LATER.

Finally - NOWHERE in Scripture do we find your claim that Oral Tradition is no longer valid and that we are only to hold to what is Written.
I think we are using the same word, and understanding that word differently. According to strong's, in 2 Thess. it is speaking of the law of Moses that was handed down. The word of God has been handed down orally.

That is different from the traditions that come from men. An example is the Talmud that Christ spoke of. This was writings of men and became traditions.
 
May 6, 2013
119
1
0
#15
I think we are using the same word, and understanding that word differently. According to strong's, in 2 Thess. it is speaking of the law of Moses that was handed down. The word of God has been handed down orally.

That is different from the traditions that come from men. An example is the Talmud that Christ spoke of. This was writings of men and became traditions.
Yes, but the OP is condemning all Oral Tradition as being usurped by the Written Word.
This is not the case and this position is not supported by Scripture.
 

JaumeJ

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2011
15,690
2,699
113
#16

The op is referring to all oral tradition since the Word as given by the Father. He did not lack in His teaching for His children.

Yes, but the OP is condemning all Oral Tradition as being usurped by the Written Word.
This is not the case and this position is not supported by Scripture.
 
May 6, 2013
119
1
0
#17

The op is referring to all oral tradition since the Word as given by the Father. He did not lack in His teaching for His children.

Again - to say that the Written Word of God nullifies all other Tradition is false.

Where in Scripture so we see the Canon of Scripture?
Where do we see the Trinity being referred to?
Where do we see the Incarnation being referred to? Yest, these are basic tenets of the Christian faith.

2 Thess. 2:15 clearly states:
"Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an ORAL statement or by a letter of ours."

There is no expiration date or statute of limitations on this verse.
 

JaumeJ

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2011
15,690
2,699
113
#18

A person may put as many words as he wishes in bold letter, but it does not make what is true a lie. The traditions of man are not from God, otherwise they would be commandments, statute or ordinances. They are traditions only, and mostly if not all, as you so plainly have used the word, false.

Again - to say that the Written Word of God nullifies all other Tradition is false.

Where in Scripture so we see the Canon of Scripture?
Where do we see the Trinity being referred to?
Where do we see the Incarnation being referred to? Yest, these are basic tenets of the Christian faith.

2 Thess. 2:15 clearly states:
"Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an ORAL statement or by a letter of ours."

There is no expiration date or statute of limitations on this verse.
 
May 6, 2013
119
1
0
#19

A person may put as many words as he wishes in bold letter, but it does not make what is true a lie. The traditions of man are not from God, otherwise they would be commandments, statute or ordinances. They are traditions only, and mostly if not all, as you so plainly have used the word, false.
So, 2 Thess 2:15 is a lie?
Are you saying that the Written Word of God contains lies?
 

zone

Senior Member
Jun 13, 2010
27,214
156
63
#20
Again - to say that the Written Word of God nullifies all other Tradition is false.

Where in Scripture so we see the Canon of Scripture?
Where do we see the Trinity being referred to?
Where do we see the Incarnation being referred to? Yest, these are basic tenets of the Christian faith.

2 Thess. 2:15 clearly states:
"Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an ORAL statement or by a letter of ours."

There is no expiration date or statute of limitations on this verse.
oh.....:)


2 Thess. 2:15, "Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours." (New American Bible, vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__P10W.HTM)

2 Thess. 2:15, "So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us." (NASB)

2 Thess. 2:15, "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle." (KJV)