Jump to content

Photo

"traditions"


  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 AVBibleBeliever

AVBibleBeliever

    A True AV Bible Believer

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,330 posts
288
Excellent
  • LocationCentral Virginia

Posted 09 July 2014 - 06:53 AM

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

 

And in  2Thess 3:6 ¶ Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us.

 

I have read and re-read Paul's Writtings trying to figure out which traditions he taught in this Epistle.  I still am trying to figure it out but apparently Paul taught some traditions and he gives a command by inspiration to stand fast and hold the traditions which he taught.

 

This is a good a place as any for us to search the scriptures and see what Traditions Paul taught and we are commanded to Stand fast and Hold.

 

Tradition is found only 11 times in the scriptures and Traditions are found only 2 times in Scriptures and they are all in the NT.  Interestingly enough is that Jesus described the tradition of the elders as the Washing of cups and eating without washing their hands.  But surely this is not what Paul was speaking of?
 


Edited by AVBibleBeliever, 09 July 2014 - 06:59 AM.


#2 Ukulelemike

Ukulelemike

    Just a Servant

  • Moderators
  • 2,529 posts
1,987
Excellent
  • LocationNE California

Posted 09 July 2014 - 08:15 AM

Tradition, per Websters 1828: (those that apply to the context)

 

  2. The delivery of opinions,doctrines, practices,rites and customs from father to son, or from ancestors to posterity; the transmission of any opinions or practice from forefathers to descendants by oral communication, without written memorials. Thus children derive their vernacular language chiefly from tradition. Most of our early notions are received by tradition from our parents.

 

3. That which is handed down from age to age by oral communication. The Jews pay great regard to tradition in matters of religion, as do the Romanists. Protestants reject the authority of tradition in sacred things, and rely only on the written word. Traditions may be good or bad, true or false.

 

  So a tradition is something handed down, through generations, or from person to person. Some can be true, some false, not necessarily man-made. So Paul handed down true doctrines of God as traditions, things to be adhered to.



#3 AVBibleBeliever

AVBibleBeliever

    A True AV Bible Believer

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,330 posts
288
Excellent
  • LocationCentral Virginia

Posted 09 July 2014 - 08:32 AM

Uke, Does Webster's identify what the traditions were that Paul taught?

 

The Bible is a document that was handed down from generation to generation.

 

Your statement may be true but no where in the NT does it say that Paul handed down "true Doctrine" of God as tradition.  The word doctrine as defined in the Bible is teaching and he said he taught traditions.  But are traditions the same as "true doctrine"?


Edited by AVBibleBeliever, 09 July 2014 - 08:36 AM.


#4 AVBibleBeliever

AVBibleBeliever

    A True AV Bible Believer

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,330 posts
288
Excellent
  • LocationCentral Virginia

Posted 09 July 2014 - 08:38 AM

also the term "true doctrines" is not found anywhere in the Bible and the one place where  the "Doctrine of God" is found is here  Titus 2:10 Not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things.

 

Obviously Paul used Doctrine and Tradition and it cleary shows that the two are different.  Remember, "things that are different are not the same" James Knox

 

For Clarity it would have been more ingenuous to quote all of the the Webster's meaning rather than just the two you quoted without the scriptures that are in the Webster's 1828, and the YOUR Addition of the words to Webster's 1828 "(those that apply to the context)".  Parenthetical statements are meant to clarify a statement but Webster did not have this one in the original Webster's 1828 Dict as you imposed it.

 

 

TRADI'TION, n. L. traditio, from trado, to deliver.

1. Delivery; the act of delivering into the hands of another.

A deed takes effect only from the tradition or delivery.

The sale of a movable is completed by simple tradition.

 

2. The delivery of opinions,doctrines, practices,rites and customs from father to son, or from ancestors to posterity; the transmission of any opinions or practice from forefathers to descendants by oral communication, without written memorials. Thus children derive their vernacular language chiefly from tradition. Most of our early notions are received by tradition from our parents.

 

3. That which is handed down from age to age by oral communication. The Jews pay great regard to tradition in matters of religion, as do the Romanists. Protestants reject the authority of tradition in sacred things, and rely only on the written word. Traditions may be good or bad, true or false.

Stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word or our epistle. 2 Thess. 2.

Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your traditions? Matt. 15.

 

It is clear by Webster that a tradition is more than just the "true doctrines of God".

 

Doctrine is found 50 times in scripture and only 5 of those are in the OT.

 

Doctrines is found 5 times in the NT only.  two in the gospels, two in Paul's Epistles, and once in the Book of Hebrews.


Edited by AVBibleBeliever, 09 July 2014 - 08:53 AM.


#5 HappyChristian

HappyChristian

    Waiting patiently (ahem) for grandchildren...

  • Moderators
  • 17,870 posts
2,017
Excellent

Posted 09 July 2014 - 08:53 AM

How interesting that you would post this, AVBB! This is the reading from today's Days of Praise.  Days of Praise is put out by the Institute for Creation Research, which is a KJB organization.  Anyway, it's something that I've been ruminating on since I read it this morning and had been thinking of posting about it.  :clapping:

 

“Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold to the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.” (2 Thessalonians 2:15)

Liberals commonly question the authority of the Scriptures on the assumption that they were based on ancient traditions.

However, the word “traditions” itself as used here conveys no such idea. It means simply “that which has been delivered.” Paul used the same word in defining the gospel. “For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures” (1 Corinthians 15:3). Paul did not add or subtract anything to what he had received directly from God. “For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ” (Galatians 1:12).

He was making the same claim to the Christians at Thessalonica. He had first taught them “by word” when he preached there in person (Acts 17:1-4), then later by “our epistle” in his first letter. Now, in his follow-up letter to them, he was reminding them that, in both instances, he (as an apostle) had communicated to them only those things he had directly received from God by divine revelation. Therefore, it was indeed vital that they should “stand fast, and hold” these great truths “which ye have been taught.” Paul was asserting that God had directly communicated, through him, the new truths which He wanted them to have.

Before the New Testament was written, much had to be conveyed verbally to the early church, through the apostles and prophets. Later, the portions of those teachings that were of permanent application were inscripturated (compare Acts 17:3 with 1 Corinthians 15:3-4). The end result of this marvelous process was the inerrant Bible we have today, and it is this completed revelation of God that we must hold fast. HMM

 



#6 AVBibleBeliever

AVBibleBeliever

    A True AV Bible Believer

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,330 posts
288
Excellent
  • LocationCentral Virginia

Posted 09 July 2014 - 08:56 AM

what is even more amazing is that I don't read the "day's of praise" or have any publication of theirs in my home.

 

It was placed on my heart yesterday and I thought I would share it as I was looking at the Bible to determine what were the traditions Paul taught especially as it seems he was pointing to the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians as containing those Traditions.



#7 Ukulelemike

Ukulelemike

    Just a Servant

  • Moderators
  • 2,529 posts
1,987
Excellent
  • LocationNE California

Posted 09 July 2014 - 02:01 PM

Paul taught the word of God-the doctrines of the Lord as they were delivered to him by revelation. Thus, the 'traditions' that he would encourage them to follow must be those doctrines of the Lord. Why he chose the word 'tradition' over 'doctrine' in this case is perhaps a good question to pose, but I suspect Paul would not demand they hold to traditions that were anything other than the doctrines of the Lord.

 

And excuse me if I used the term 'true doctrines' trying to clarify them away from what people might normally consider a 'tradition' to be, ie, a tradtion of men. The Bible mentions doctrines of God and doctrines of devils-it shouldn't take much discernment, particularly considering the context of this discussion, what I meant when I used such a term.

 

My reasoning in not including the first definition of 'tradition' here is that it doesn't fit the context. ie, Paul delivered traditions to them-so he traditioned the traditions to them? That one clearly didn't fit the context of the meaning in the verses you gave, while the second two would. That I included the definiton numbers of 2 and 3, AND mentioned that I was only including the ones that fit the context, wasn't at all disingenuous-to remove them and pretend the first didn't exist would be disingenuous. Just didn't see the point in including it-waste of space.

 

As for the 'traditions', or the practices delivered by Paul to them, it would include such as:

 

1Thes 4:1-6:

   "Furthermore then we beseech you, brethren, and exhort you by the Lord Jesus, that as ye have received of us how ye ought to walk and to please God, so ye would abound more and more.

   For ye know what commandments we gave you by the Lord Jesus.

   For this is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication:

   That every one of you should know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honour;

   Not in the lust of concupiscence, even as the Gentiles which know not God:

That no man go beyond and defraud his brother in any matter: because that the Lord is the avenger of all such, as we also have forewarned you and testified" 

 

And other traditions or doctrines, or mentioned here, commandments, that Paul taught the Thessalonian church in the epistles to them, as well as anything they learned from Him in other epistles that had been passed to them from other churches, or taught to them by word of mouth when He taught them in person.

 

No reason to only concern ourselves with just the second epistle-I would believe all his teachings would be under consideration. Notice paul says in 2:15, 'whether by word or our epistle" he sent them two epistles, and he also includes word, hence, oral teaching.



#8 No Nicolaitans

No Nicolaitans

    ♫ The B-I-B-L-E...yes, that's the book for me. ♫

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,442 posts
1,231
Excellent

Posted 09 July 2014 - 07:54 PM

Here's a definition of the word "tradition" from the year 1604...

 

tradition, a deliuering from one to another.

 

Now you see why the King James translators used it.  ;)  Paul was telling them to hold to what he had delivered to them in word or by the epistle...which was the word of God delivered to him.

 

Source - http://www.library.u...cawdrey0.html#t

 

Edited to add...the "traditions" were his words preached (which we don't know what all he preached to them in person) and the epistle. If you try to nail down a certain few "traditions" (using the wrong definition), you'll exclude WAY too much. He was referring to God's word.


Edited by No Nicolaitans, 09 July 2014 - 08:01 PM.


#9 lettheredeemedsayso

lettheredeemedsayso

    Super Contributor

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,439 posts
11
Good

Posted 23 July 2014 - 10:19 PM

The context of the verses cited here "tradition" is referring to the teaching that God has taught them. In other verses where it refers to the "traditions of men" which is an entirely different context.



#10 Alimantado

Alimantado

    Super Contributor

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,490 posts
274
Excellent

Posted 24 July 2014 - 07:29 AM

I think one important tradition that pertains to Online Baptist is logging on and seeing Lettheredeemedsayso posting! Welcome back!

 

:clap:  :clap:  :clap:



#11 AVBibleBeliever

AVBibleBeliever

    A True AV Bible Believer

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,330 posts
288
Excellent
  • LocationCentral Virginia

Posted 24 July 2014 - 08:11 AM

oops see below


Edited by AVBibleBeliever, 24 July 2014 - 07:30 PM.


#12 Alimantado

Alimantado

    Super Contributor

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,490 posts
274
Excellent

Posted 24 July 2014 - 08:52 AM

based on what Bible Proof?

 

I need a Bible proof to justify saying that I'm pleased to see an old-time forum member? Ok, John 13:34-35.



#13 HappyChristian

HappyChristian

    Waiting patiently (ahem) for grandchildren...

  • Moderators
  • 17,870 posts
2,017
Excellent

Posted 24 July 2014 - 09:04 AM

I think one important tradition that pertains to Online Baptist is logging on and seeing Lettheredeemedsayso posting! Welcome back!

 

:clap:  :clap:  :clap:

:goodpost:   For sure, Carl!  It's great to see you back, lettheredeemedsayso!



#14 AVBibleBeliever

AVBibleBeliever

    A True AV Bible Believer

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,330 posts
288
Excellent
  • LocationCentral Virginia

Posted 24 July 2014 - 07:30 PM

I need a Bible proof to justify saying that I'm pleased to see an old-time forum member? Ok, John 13:34-35.

my bad I quoted the wrong post.



#15 AVBibleBeliever

AVBibleBeliever

    A True AV Bible Believer

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,330 posts
288
Excellent
  • LocationCentral Virginia

Posted 24 July 2014 - 07:31 PM

The context of the verses cited here "tradition" is referring to the teaching that God has taught them. In other verses where it refers to the "traditions of men" which is an entirely different context.

based on what Bible Proof can you show that tradition is truly speaking of the teaching of God and not that of men?


Edited by AVBibleBeliever, 24 July 2014 - 07:32 PM.


#16 lettheredeemedsayso

lettheredeemedsayso

    Super Contributor

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,439 posts
11
Good

Posted 24 July 2014 - 09:33 PM

Traditions have to be taught or modeled in order for a individual to follow them.

 

Mark 7:3, Mark 7:5


Edited by lettheredeemedsayso, 24 July 2014 - 09:34 PM.


#17 John81

John81

    Running to Win

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 61,044 posts
5,492
Excellent

Posted 01 August 2014 - 08:54 AM

Is this the thread being looked for?



#18 John81

John81

    Running to Win

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 61,044 posts
5,492
Excellent

Posted 01 August 2014 - 11:28 AM

I lost a friend to the Orthodox Church years ago and much of it was over the "traditions" issue.

 

He had been raised as a child attending a Baptist church, unfortunately it was what many folks would call a legalistic church, but I would say a Pharisee type church would be more accurate. They were far more concerned with outward appearance of righteousness than true transformation and inward holiness. Anyway, that led to his family leaving the church before he was grown.

 

Years later he married a non-practicing Catholic woman. The religion issue wasn't a factor at that point because while both considered themselves to be Christians (they were secular Christians, not actual born again Christians) neither of them was interested in attending services.

 

Then they had a child. Both had been raised in church during their childhood; him in that Baptist church, her in the RCC. They both thought it important their child attend church and receive a Christian upbringing. After much discussion it was determined the husband would do a study of church history, talk with several different clergy from various Christian groups, and try to determine which one was closest to real, original Christianity that Jesus and the Apostles established.

 

To shorten this, I'll just get to the point he determined the Orthodox church was the closest to the original church and he believed they followed the biblical model the best. He believed the RCC was close, yet off in several areas.  He also believed that while all Orthodox churches were the real deal, the Eastern or Russian Orthodox (I don't recall for sure which, but I do remember it wasn't the Greek Orthodox) was the absolute purest or closest to the original. (After some more thinking, I'm fairly sure it was the Russian Orthodox he settled upon)

 

Finally, to the point, so much of his decision was based upon the traditions of the Orthodox church. His study and talking with an Orthodox priest led him to the conclusion that only the Orthodox church truly held to the traditions Christ and the Apostles established. He would constantly refer to the verses from the OP in this thread. There was really no way to argue against the Orthodox traditions because he was locked onto those verses and his perception that the Orthodox church held to the unwritten traditions which the RCC had deviated from and Protestants (every other Christian, according to him) rejected. Therefore, he considered Protestants (which to him would include us) as the farthest away from actually following the true teachings and traditions of Christ and the Apostles. He constantly accused any "Protestant" who argued against him of thinking of themselves as "little popes".

 

I spent months trying to get through to him but he was more tenacious than a pit bull. He had locked onto the Orthodox church and their beliefs and his mind was totally closed. This eventually led to our parting company and him fully immersing and engraining his wife and child into the Orthodox church.



#19 AVBibleBeliever

AVBibleBeliever

    A True AV Bible Believer

  • *Independent Fundamental Baptist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,330 posts
288
Excellent
  • LocationCentral Virginia

Posted 01 August 2014 - 10:20 PM

Molded traditions are not necessarily the word of God or pure sound doctrines.

 

Traditions often time will replace and go against the word of God, Just as Jesus first defined the traditions that made null the commandments of God.

 

I propose that the traditions that Paul alludes too in 2Thess 3:6 are the ordained rules/ordinances suggested by the counsel in Jerusalem as written out in Acts 15:19, 20, 25-29 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. . . . . .   It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men unto you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul,  Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.   We have sent therefore Judas and Silas, who shall also tell you the same things by mouth.   For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;  That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well. and sent by letter to all the Gentile churches by the hand of Paul and Silas. Thessalonica was one of the places the church received the letter that Paul delivered unto them these ordinances, and apparently there were some who were still not following those things that they received from Paul the ordinances of which the Gentiles were to keep.

 

Traditions are a combination of God's word and Outward practice.  If our tradition is in accordance to the word of God then they are good.  But if they make null and void the word of God these traditions must be abandoned. 


Edited by AVBibleBeliever, 01 August 2014 - 10:29 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

The Fundamental Top 500IFB1000 The Fundamental Top 500