The Place of Oral Tradition

[zone]

You're not understanding what I am saying. I know the Bible is the revelation of Jesus Christ.
What I am saying is that the Bereans ultimately believed that this guy from Nazareth named Jesus, who lived in the first century was the Messiah prophesied in Scripture. The prophecies were implicit or explicit but they NEVER mentioned Jesus of Nazareth. That came from ORAL teaching.

Do you understand the difference between implicit and explicit teaching in Scripture?

oh rly?

John 7:52
They replied, "Are you from Galilee, too? Look into it, and you will find that a prophet does not come out of Galilee."

were they right?

Isaiah 9:1
Nevertheless, there will be no more gloom for those who were in distress. In the past he humbled the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, but in the future he will honor Galilee of the nations, by the Way of the Sea, beyond the Jordan--

Matthew 4:13
12Now when he heard that John had been arrested, he withdrew into Galilee. 13And leaving Nazareth he went and lived in Capernaum by the sea, in the territory of Zebulun and Naphtali, 14so that what was spoken by the prophet Isaiah might be fulfilled:

15 “The land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali,
the way of the sea, beyond the Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles—
16 the people dwelling in darkness
have seen a great light,
and for those dwelling in the region and shadow of death,
on them a light has dawned.”

17From that time Jesus began to preach, saying, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”

oopsie.

Isaiah 7:14
Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.

Matthew 1:23
"The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel" (which means "God with us").

Matthew 1:21
She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins."

2424 Iēsoús – Jesus, the transliteration of the Hebrew term, 3091 /Lṓt ("Yehoshua"/Jehoshua, contracted to "Joshua") which means "Yahweh saves" (or "Yahweh is salvation").

 

[RachelBibleStudent]

heheheh... this is getting a little ridiculous... as you know, Hebrew is a semitic language. And it sounded like you were trying to connect a cuneiform word to somehow establishing that Old Testament books existed long before they actually did (which you were) and my incredulous reply stemmed from that intimation.

my point was that the use of the word 'toledoth' was connected with a specific practice...namely the labeling of cuneiform tablets by author or subject...and it is logical to carry that understanding over to the bible when we see the word 'toledoth' there...

it is also significant that the 'toledoth' labels on the cuneiform tablets in the ebla library are found at the -end- of the document...and in genesis these 'toledoth' statements likewise make the most sense as -conclusions- of the stories...

 

[ChurchAuthority]

oh rly?

John 7:52
They replied, "Are you from Galilee, too? Look into it, and you will find that a prophet does not come out of Galilee."

were they right?

Isaiah 9:1
Nevertheless, there will be no more gloom for those who were in distress. In the past he humbled the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, but in the future he will honor Galilee of the nations, by the Way of the Sea, beyond the Jordan--

Matthew 4:13
12Now when he heard that John had been arrested, he withdrew into Galilee. 13And leaving Nazareth he went and lived in Capernaum by the sea, in the territory of Zebulun and Naphtali, 14so that what was spoken by the prophet Isaiah might be fulfilled:

15 “The land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali,
the way of the sea, beyond the Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles—
16 the people dwelling in darkness
have seen a great light,
and for those dwelling in the region and shadow of death,
on them a light has dawned.”

17From that time Jesus began to preach, saying, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”

oopsie.

Isaiah 7:14
Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.

Matthew 1:23
"The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel" (which means "God with us").

Matthew 1:21
She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins."

2424 Iēsoús – Jesus, the transliteration of the Hebrew term, 3091 /Lṓt ("Yehoshua"/Jehoshua, contracted to "Joshua") which means "Yahweh saves" (or "Yahweh is salvation").

And you have not shown me where Jesus of Nazareth was named in the Old Testament so your long, verbose post is MOOT.
The Bereans belived in a truth that was ORALLY taught.

 

[Xanthus]

your 'non scientific assessment' was completely incorrect...

confusing proto sinaitic with paleo hebrew is like confusing arabic with ethiopic...they are not even close... you shouldn't even bring up these things in a debate when you clearly don't know what you are talking about...

and like i pointed out...proto sinaitic dates back to the eighteenth century BC...

furthermore the pre fifth century BC paleo hebrew writing was more than just 'rough scratching on rocks'...for example there is the mesha stele...

and if you disagree with what the bible clearly indicates...well so much for what you said about not claiming to be above the word of God...

you should just quit...you are embarrassing your church both intellectually and morally...

No Rachel, they are not that different, imo. I did not "confuse" the two. The obvious similarities from proto-sinaitic to the early hebrew inscriptions are plainly recognizable while Arabic to Ethiopian is a clear departure. You grossly exaggerate and thus lose integrity.
I purposely couched my comment in non-scientific verbiage to avoid this ridiculous sort of irrelevant tangent that you routinely drift off into.
Your arrogance and continual nonstop insults and put downs aren't making your lame points any stronger.

And as far as, "well so much for what you said about not claiming to be above the word of God" ?? ... I don't recall saying anything about being above the word of God.

 

[Abiding]

did they stick telescopes up their ears

 

[Xanthus]

my point was that the use of the word 'toledoth' was connected with a specific practice...namely the labeling of cuneiform tablets by author or subject...and it is logical to carry that understanding over to the bible when we see the word 'toledoth' there...

it is also significant that the 'toledoth' labels on the cuneiform tablets in the ebla library are found at the -end- of the document...and in genesis these 'toledoth' statements likewise make the most sense as -conclusions- of the stories...

Then once again... your point was totally irrelevant. This barely tangential lecture does not improve on your error in any way shape or form. I repeat, the early OT books stemmed from Oral Tradition. This little teledoth cuneiform sideshow does not support the argument you were originally positing when you first introduced it.

 

[zone]

The Bereans belived in a truth that was ORALLY taught.

uh duh cuz it wernt all wrote down yet, nor completely reeveeld, dood.

hullo?

the pope ain't an authoritative apostle like Peter, k?

like it or lump it.

no apostolic succession...not for making divine decrees.

soly.

join the Lutheran church.
everybody's just reg'lar christians
no crowns and carried on litters and such

 

[Ariel82]

thought it would be nice to go back to the OP.....

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.

but you see the scribes and pharisees thought they were truly worshiping God by their actions. that is why God sent His prophets to tell them what a true fast was but people still spiritually put on their ash cloths and berate their souls and body by not eating instead of do what God told them to do (Isaiah 58). Paul tells us that he thought he was righteous and according to the law blameless but all of it was dirty rags when He learned of Jesus and His Gospel. Most only have a theological understanding of the Holy Spirit and not a personal relationship with God. That is why God tells us that to many the OT is still veiled and the words of the Bible to them are just parables without the true understanding of what the passages teach of how to stay spiritually healthy and in line with God's ways.

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.

Oral traditions have the same place in our learning it always did: it is a tradition. it does not save the soul but neither does it condemn it. Some people like the outward shows to remind them of the spiritual lessons that God wants people to learn.

that is why it is written the following:

Romans 14

Romans 14

New King James Version (NKJV)

The Law of Liberty

14 Receive one who is weak in the faith, but not to disputes over doubtful things. [SUP]2 [/SUP]For one believes he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegetables. [SUP]3 [/SUP]Let not him who eats despise him who does not eat, and let not him who does not eat judge him who eats; for God has received him. [SUP]4 [/SUP]Who are you to judge another’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls. Indeed, he will be made to stand, for God is able to make him stand.
[SUP]5 [/SUP]One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind. [SUP]6 [/SUP]He who observes the day, observes it to the Lord;[SUP][a][/SUP] and he who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not observe it. He who eats, eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks; and he who does not eat, to the Lord he does not eat, and gives God thanks. [SUP]7 [/SUP]For none of us lives to himself, and no one dies to himself. [SUP]8 [/SUP]For if we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. Therefore, whether we live or die, we are the Lord’s. [SUP]9 [/SUP]For to this end Christ died and rose[SUP][b][/SUP] and lived again, that He might be Lord of both the dead and the living. [SUP]10 [/SUP]But why do you judge your brother? Or why do you show contempt for your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.[SUP][c][/SUP] [SUP]11 [/SUP]For it is written:
“As I live, says the Lord,
Every knee shall bow to Me,
And every tongue shall confess to God.”[SUP][d][/SUP]

[SUP]12 [/SUP]So then each of us shall give account of himself to God. [SUP]13 [/SUP]Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather resolve this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother’s way.

 

[zone]

oopsie.
thx ariel
didnt check the OP.
exit.

 

[ChurchAuthority]

uh duh cuz it wernt all wrote down yet, nor completely reeveeld, dood.

hullo?

the pope ain't an authoritative apostle like Peter, k?

like it or lump it.

no apostolic succession...not for making divine decrees.

soly.

join the Lutheran church.
everybody's just reg'lar christians
no crowns and carried on litters and such

Uhhh, now there's an intelligent response with Scriptural and historical evidence.

REALLY?? That's all you have??

 

[PS]

Nothing Changes except God

 

[hattiebod]

Wrong again, Rachel. You basically made that claim by stating that a Hebrew word was found in cuneiform.
My statements were honest and truthful.

The rest of your lecture was totally irrelevant gibberish.

Very sad...I have been really enjoying this thread, so informative and such knowledge! It is what makes CC special...but you go and throw cold water on it all by resorting to be insulting. She is certainly not talking gibberish! Whether you agree ( and I think there would be no debate if you did?) or not, you cannot say she speaks gibberish ( gallows laughter) this young lady is placing her learning before us, sharing, as you are and I thank you but please, do not ruin what is a well tempered debate by insulting.
PS. If we do use bold script & CAPS.... it can suggest Shouting....and let's play nice
God bless you, loving the thread, thank you all!! <><

 

[JaumeJ]

Believe what you want to believe, it is your human right.

thought it would be nice to go back to the OP.....



but you see the scribes and pharisees thought they were truly worshiping God by their actions. that is why God sent His prophets to tell them what a true fast was but people still spiritually put on their ash cloths and berate their souls and body by not eating instead of do what God told them to do (Isaiah 58). Paul tells us that he thought he was righteous and according to the law blameless but all of it was dirty rags when He learned of Jesus and His Gospel. Most only have a theological understanding of the Holy Spirit and not a personal relationship with God. That is why God tells us that to many the OT is still veiled and the words of the Bible to them are just parables without the true understanding of what the passages teach of how to stay spiritually healthy and in line with God's ways.




Oral traditions have the same place in our learning it always did: it is a tradition. it does not save the soul but neither does it condemn it. Some people like the outward shows to remind them of the spiritual lessons that God wants people to learn.

that is why it is written the following:

Romans 14

 

[JaumeJ]

Yeshua would say to the unbelieving scribes and pharisees that they were hypocrites. Just a short investigation of this word from the Hebrew demonstrates it meant godless. This is by no means crediting them with believing anything about God, however it does say they thought they were appeasing God. there is a great difference in thinking they are honoring God and trying to influence him by their own merit. No one is capable of achieving this. Rabbinical teaching aside from what is written is called rabbinical for a reason. Read the Word, believe It, and Worship God, amen.

 

[PS]

Very sad...I have been really enjoying this thread, so informative and such knowledge! It is what makes CC special...but you go and throw cold water on it all by resorting to be insulting. She is certainly not talking gibberish! Whether you agree ( and I think there would be no debate if you did?) or not, you cannot say she speaks gibberish ( gallows laughter) this young lady is placing her learning before us, sharing, as you are and I thank you but please, do not ruin what is a well tempered debate by insulting.
PS. If we do use bold script & CAPS.... it can suggest Shouting....and let's play nice
God bless you, loving the thread, thank you all!! <><

I know about shouting so I don't need to be told. It wasn't me who did the picture!

My comment was in lower case!

 

[JaumeJ]

Notice: I make my print larger and in a contrasting color for formatting and for others who may be vision impaired. If you notice, they are not boldened or caps.......forgive me if anyone believes it to be shouting, and thanks.

I know about shouting so I don't need to be told. It wasn't me who did the picture!

My comment was in lower case!

 

[PS]

Yeshua would say to the unbelieving scribes and pharisees that they were hypocrites. Just a short investigation of this word from the Hebrew demonstrates it meant godless. This is by no means crediting them with believing anything about God, however it does say they thought they were appeasing God. there is a great difference in thinking they are honoring God and trying to influence him by their own merit. No one is capable of achieving this. Rabbinical teaching aside from what is written is called rabbinical for a reason. Read the Word, believe It, and Worship God, amen.

I have heard it said that:-

"Religion is what men do to appease their god.

Christianity is what God has done for us."

 

[PS]

Notice: I make my print larger and in a contrasting color for formatting and for others who may be vision impaired. If you notice, they are not boldened or caps.......forgive me if anyone believes it to be shouting, and thanks.

I never thought you were shouting JaumeJ

 

[hattiebod]

Notice: I make my print larger and in a contrasting color for formatting and for others who may be vision impaired. If you notice, they are not boldened or caps.......forgive me if anyone believes it to be shouting, and thanks.

Wasn't directed to you to the gentleman who accused Rachel of speaking 'gibberish' I think he also insinuated she did not know what she talking about...well, thats blatently untrue. He may not agree with her but then he has to try a little harder to get his point across maybe? to me many here certainley have a lot of knowledge and I am grateful for the thread, just hope we can steer away from self righteousness and accusing others of not reading their Bibles....quite ridiculous. I think most posting here have a great deal of knowledge clearly displayed for us all to read, enjoy and to challenge. That's debate isn't it? So apologies if I got badly out of sync God Bless <><

 

[JaumeJ]

Thanks, I have enough going against me without adding something new. God bless you always...........(MD, wet, is a bear)

Wasn't directed to you to the gentleman who accused Rachel of speaking 'gibberish' I think he also insinuated she did not know what she talking about...well, thats blatently untrue. He may not agree with her but then he has to try a little harder to get his point across maybe? to me many here certainley have a lot of knowledge and I am grateful for the thread, just hope we can steer away from self righteousness and accusing others of not reading their Bibles....quite ridiculous. I think most posting here have a great deal of knowledge clearly displayed for us all to read, enjoy and to challenge. That's debate isn't it? So apologies if I got badly out of sync God Bless <><