Sinless Mary

[Josiah]

2Thessalonians 2:15

".... stand firm to the traditions that YOU were taught by US, either by OUR spoken words or by OUR letter."


The "our" and "us" refers to St. Paul, Silvanus and Timothy (See 2 Thessalonians 1:1). And it's very likely the "OUR letter" refers to 1 Thessalonians.



The problem with power-grabbing, power obsessed individual persons, churches or denominations, is that they just delete what the verse says and insert words in their place that can be used to support their never-satisified quest to lord it over others as the Gentiles do.

The LDS for example just changes this verse to: ".... Stand firm to the traditions of me, the individual singular LDS denomination, either by what I alone say or I alone write to you." But the "our" and "we" in the verse doesn't refer to the LDS, it refers to Paul, Timothy and Silvanus.

The RCC for example just changes this verse to: ".... Stand firm to the traditions of me, the individual singular RC denomination, either by what I alone say or I alone write to you." But the "our" and "we" in the verse doesn't refer to the RCC, it refers to Paul, Timothy and Silvanus.


Anything (and I do mean ANYTHING) can be "substantiated" if an individual (person, church, denomination) just says "2 Thessalonians 2:15 mandates that you docility swallow whole whatever I myself individually now tell you," And teachers who are obsession with unmitigated power and unaccountable authority tend to claim just that.



Back to the topic.




.

 

[MennoSota]

You have it backwards - Church dogma supports my interpretation...



That is your ever-present accusation without proof...
My Church is world-wide and ongoing for 2000 years and does not brook new doctrines...



Actually, my Brother, they rejected Christ because of the Pharisitic leaven: Hypocrisy...



Do you really think I am a judgmental hypocrite, Menno??

Back to point - Why not affirm both passages of the Bible?

I sure do...


Arsenios

Of course your church has prooftexted out of context. It is the only way it can support the large number of illegitimate traditions. It is the very same thing the Pharisees and Sadducees did when Jesus walked in Palestine. Trusting in denominational tradition and abusing scripture to do it. It's a sure fire way to go down the wrong path while imagining you're on the correct path.
Scripture shows your tradition is wrong, Arsenios. You simply reject scripture within its context. Instead you prooftext a sentence and make it mean what it doesn't. Interestingly, that's what Muslims do.

 

[Arsenios]

Of course your church has prooftexted out of context.

My Church does not proof-text...

But YOU do...

Therefore I am but speaking to your professed manner of understanding...

And it turns out that you do not believe the Bible when it disagrees with you...

It is the only way it can support the large number of illegitimate traditions.

It is the Church that has already established the traditions from the beginnings...

It is the Church's Tradition that gave us Holy Scripture...

Sola Scripture cannot generate Scripture...

But the Ancient Faith of Christ sure did...

It is the very same thing the Pharisees and Sadducees did when Jesus walked in Palestine.

No - It isn't... Repentance is not a human tradition...

Trusting in denominational tradition and abusing scripture to do it.

That is why I cite Scripture and you deny that it means what it says - And I must say that your translations are sketchy, and you will not hear my literal renderings...

It's a sure fire way to go down the wrong path while imagining you're on the correct path.

As an individual interpreter, you are right... As a Patristic conformer to the Holy Tradition of the Church, you are wrong...

I am not giving you my private interpretation, as you are giving yours...

I am giving you the Church's... Not as the latest thing posted on the internet, but the ancient commentators all the way through to now, all consistently rendered...

Scripture shows your tradition is wrong, Arsenios.

So I bring out Scripture and you do not believe it means what it says...

You simply reject scripture within its context.

I live within its context - If you want to make that charge, you have to demonstrate it...

All you do is repeat your accusations...

Instead you prooftext a sentence and make it mean what it doesn't.

If you think so, then simply tell us what this means:

2 Th 2:15
Therefore, brethren, stand fast (5720) ,
and hold (5720) the traditions which ye have been taught (5681) ,
whether by word,
or
our epistle.

What does this say about the tradition taught by the Apostles?


Arsenios

 

[MennoSota]

My Church does not proof-text...

But YOU do...

Therefore I am but speaking to your professed manner of understanding...

And it turns out that you do not believe the Bible when it disagrees with you...

It is the only way it can support the large number of illegitimate traditions.

It is the Church that has already established the traditions from the beginnings...

It is the Church's Tradition that gave us Holy Scripture...

Sola Scripture cannot generate Scripture...

But the Ancient Faith of Christ sure did...



No - It isn't... Repentance is not a human tradition...



That is why I cite Scripture and you deny that it means what it says - And I must say that your translations are sketchy, and you will not hear my literal renderings...



So I bring out Scripture and you do not believe it means what it says...



I live within its context - If you want to make that charge, you have to demonstrate it...

All you do is repeat your accusations...



If you think so, then simply tell us what this means:

2 Th 2:15
Therefore, brethren, stand fast (5720) ,
and hold (5720) the traditions which ye have been taught (5681) ,
whether by word,
or
our epistle.

What does this say about the tradition taught by the Apostles?


Arsenios

Arsenios, you simply lie or show complete ignorance when you claim your church does not prooftext. The 2 Thessalonians verse you plucked is a perfect example of prooftexting to establish an illegitimate dogma.

 

[Arsenios]

My Church does not proof-text...

But YOU do...

Therefore I am but speaking to your professed manner of understanding...

And it turns out that you do not believe the Bible when it disagrees with you...

It is the only way it can support the large number of illegitimate traditions.
Arsenios, you simply lieor show complete ignorance
when you claim your church does not prooftext.
The 2 Thessalonians verse you plucked is a perfect example of prooftexting
to establish an illegitimate dogma.

I do not proof-text for atheists...

Nor for Muslims...

Prooftexting I do only for those who claim Sola Scripture...

It is a condescension to the blinders they self impose...

Alas to no avail...

They end up denying the plain meaning of the Bible they claim as their Authority...

The Church relies on the Praxis of the Holy Tradition of the Faith of Christ...

We rely on our obedience to the Commandments of Christ, observing ALL that He commanded the Apostles...

This is the basis for our dogmatic formulaics...

They are path markers outside of which is error and death...

The Written is a very active part of that Praxis, btw...

Which is why we retained it...


Arsenios

 

[MennoSota]

I do not proof-text for atheists...

Nor for Muslims...

Prooftexting I do only for those who claim Sola Scripture...

It is a condescension to the blinders they self impose...

Alas to no avail...

They end up denying the plain meaning of the Bible they claim as their Authority...

The Church relies on the Praxis of the Holy Tradition of the Faith of Christ...

We rely on our obedience to the Commandments of Christ, observing ALL that He commanded the Apostles...

This is the basis for our dogmatic formulaics...

They are path markers outside of which is error and death...

The Written is a very active part of that Praxis, btw...

Which is why we retained it...


Arsenios

You prooftext to establish made-up fantasy dogmas in an attempt to pridefully claim your church as superior. It is a silly game you play by abusing the scriptures to claim a fantasy dogma.

 

[Arsenios]

You prooftext to establish ... dogmas

It is the only language you can engage with...
And even then you don't...
We do not believe Scripture is the Ground and Pillar of the Truth...
Do you???


Arsenios

 

[MennoSota]

It is the only language you can engage with...
And even then you don't...
We do not believe Scripture is the Ground and Pillar of the Truth...
Do you???


Arsenios

I believe that God-breathed scripture to us that we might know Him. Scripture is God speaking, therefore it is the basis for God's truth given to man. It is the ground and pillar of truth because God speaks truth.

 

[Albion]

My Church does not proof-text...

But YOU do...

Therefore I am but speaking to your professed manner of understanding...

It is the Church that has already established the traditions from the beginnings...

It is the Church's Tradition that gave us Holy Scripture...

So...you do not think that Holy Scripture is divine revelation (although it claims to be so itself).

Sola Scripture cannot generate Scripture...

Of course not, because that is not what the term means.

if you think so, then simply tell us what this means:

2 Th 2:15
Therefore, brethren, stand fast (5720) ,
and hold (5720) the traditions which ye have been taught (5681) ,
whether by word,
or
our epistle.

What does this say about the tradition taught by the Apostles?

Traditions or customs can be good--or bad. Hold onto the good ones. It is simply a good policy; but this verse does not identify a single Hebrew tradition!

Therefore, we have the principle, but that is all. This is not a blank check for any church or clergy to simply invent doctrines without Scriptural warrant and then call them the equal of revelation (although having read your post here I have reason to doubt that you think Scripture is revelation rather than something manmade, anyway!).

 

[Arsenios]

So...you do not think that Holy Scripture is divine revelation (although it claims to be so itself).

Much of it is, and much is "Sacred History"...

Much is pastoral...

All is inspired by God...

Written by Holy Men of God...

Of course not, because that is not what the term means.

Scripture cannot generate Scripture, hence the Achilles heel of Sola Scripture...

But the Holy Ones of God can and have generated Scripture, and in the NT, they are Christian writers...

can be good--or bad. Hold onto the good ones. It is simply a good policy; this verse does not identify any Hebrew traditions!

Scripture says

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

So human tradition is not Apostolic Holy Tradition...
Because he also says:

Gal 1:14
And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation,
being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.

So there are two kinds of Tradition - Old and New...

The New is Apostolic...

The Old is Pharisitic...

Therefore, we have the principle,
but not but it is not a blank check for any church or clergy
to simply invent doctrines without Scriptural warrant
and then call them the equal of revelation
(although having read your post here I have reason to doubt that you think Scripture is revelation rather than something manmade, anyway!).

Divine Revelation in your terms tells us that it is the Ekklesia, the Body of Christ Who IS Her Head, is the Ground and the Pillar of Truth...
I agree that this is divinely revealed and recorded in Holy Scripture...

So you are slaying a mighty straw figure, but the Church moves very very slowly in these matters...


Arsenios

 

[Arsenios]

I believe that God-breathed scripture ...is the ground and pillar of truth

Scripture disagrees with you...


Arsenios

 

[Albion]

It doesn't mean that traditions are the ground and pillar either, if that is what you're leading up to.

 

[MennoSota]

Scripture disagrees with you...


Arsenios

2 Timothy 2:16-17
All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,*that*the man of God*may be complete,*equipped*for every good work.

No, scripture doesn't disagree.

What it doesn't say is: "All tradition of Eastern Orthodoxy is breathed out by God." We don't find that anywhere.
You and your unscriptural traditions must be loosed to the scrap heap of idols.

 

[Josiah]

No Christian disregards Tradition....

The only issue is WHAT Tradition and how does such relate to Scripture. It is undeniable that Tradition plays a role. MennoSota points us to "Scripture" without admitting that what we regard as "Scripture" is a matter of Tradition; there is no verse that lists the books of the Bible. As for MennoSota, he verbatim parrots and echoes hyper-Calvinist Tradition. NO MATTER WHAT. And he does so at least, AT LEAST, as consistently and passionately as any Catholic or Eastern Orthodox imposes theirs. The only difference is that Catholics and Orthodox admit it's Tradition and MennoSota doesn't.


Now, to the point.... I honestly see no point to the unique, new dogma of the singular, individual RC Denomination - that of the Immaculate Conception of Mary (1870). I find nothing that suggests this new, unique idea (found only in one denomination) is "a matter of highest certainty and importance", a matter on which salvation itself hinges. I find it more LIKELY that Mary did have original sin since the Bible says "for all have sinned." Now, I'm SURE MennoSota will disagree because to him, "all" means "few. a minority of, a small subset of all."




.

 

[Albion]

No Christian disregards Tradition.... The only issue is WHAT Tradition and how does such relate to Scripture. It is undeniable that Tradition plays a role.

That's true, but here's the rub...

Holy Tradition is said by the churches which go that way, to be divine revelation that is just as authoritative as the Bible. It however is delivered in a different way. But the doctrinal claims are themselves false, even if we were persuaded to believe the theory in the absence of any Scriptural backing for it.

That is to say, what makes Holy Tradition be Holy Tradition is supposed to be the continuity of the belief (whatever it is, Assumption of Mary, for example) by the people of the whole church from the beginning of the church onwards. In reality, THIS NEVER IS THE CASE.

The Papacy and whatever governs the decisions made by the EO simply seize upon the legends or theological opinions of a few members of the church, usually separated by big chunks of time from others of similar mind... and then dogmatize it in the name of Holy Tradition. Neither continuity nor universality are anything but talking points.

 

[Josiah]

That's true, but here's the rub...

Holy Tradition is said by the churches which go that way, to be divine revelation that is just as authoritative as the Bible. It however is delivered in a different way. But the doctrinal claims are themselves false, even if we were persuaded to believe the theory in the absence of any Scriptural backing for it.

That is to say, what makes Holy Tradition be Holy Tradition is supposed to be the continuity of the belief (whatever it is, Assumption of Mary, for example) by the people of the whole church from the beginning of the church onwards. In reality, THIS NEVER IS THE CASE.

The Papacy and whatever governs the decisions made by the EO simply seize upon the legends or theological opinions of a few members of the church, usually separated by big chunks of time from others of similar mind... and then dogmatize it in the name of Holy Tradition. Neither continuity nor universality are anything but talking points.

Yes.


As I posted, the issue is WHAT Tradition and how does it play into epistemology and its relationship to Scripture.




.

 

[Albion]

You are talking there about real traditions, however. I was talking about the theory that is arbitrarily labelled as "Sacred Tradition" or "Holy Tradition" and used as the justification for creating dogmas that are not supported by divine revelation.

 

[Arsenios]

It doesn't mean that traditions are the ground and pillar either, if that is what you're leading up to.

It means what it says - It is the Ekklesia - The People of God - Called out from the world - The Body of Christ Who is Her Head - The Holy Men of God -

In these latter times, this means the Church acting as a Body across time, that is this Ground and then this Pillar of Truth...

And the Church is the Communion of God...

Which is why extending and withdrawing Communion is God's Way of disciplining His Body...

What is not the Ground and Pillar of Truth is Scripture...

Scripture is the product, integral feature, and interpretative possession of that Ground and Pillar...

Scriptural understanding is only possible from within the practice (Praxis) of the Faith of Christ that produced it...

I well remember first reading Scripture in my 50s...

It made somewhere between zero and almost zero sense to me...

But now, more than 20 years hence, it is still addressing issues I hadn't even imagined...

Each reading unfolds something I had not seen before...

It is the practice of the Faith that generates maturity in the Faith practiced...

As James records: "By works is the Faith perfected..."

This idea that one can read the Bible, understand it, and proclaim one's Salvation actually describes but a shallow understanding, or better, a beginning understanding...

God wants Scripture written in our hearts, not merely in a book that can be and has been burned...

Scripture is for the sake of the Faith the Apostles disciple into the Faithful...

But if you want to understand Holy Writ, go with your issue to someone who practices it...

Do not go to someone who does not practice it...

Go to someone who has become mature in it - Who has overcome the world...

Someone who has perfected the art of making no provision for the flesh...

And do not go to him or her with banal curiosity...

Approach in profound personal need with tears...

"A heart that is broken and humbled God will not despise..."

As one elder wrote on a piece of wood while for pilgrims absent from his hut:
"Just leave your name and I will pray for you - Talking with me is much less helpful anyway..."

"The Mystery is Christ within us..."

The Ground and Pillar, you see, is Christ...

Christ within us...

The Kingdom of Heaven is within us...

Which is why we need to clean house...

"Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!"


Arsenios

 

[Albion]

It means what it says - It is the Ekklesia - The People of God - Called out from the world - The Body of Christ Who is Her Head - The Holy Men of God -

Yes, it is the household of faith--the believers--on whom Christ was depending to defend the Gospel. The verse does not mean that the institutional church is authorized to simply create doctrines out of thin air. Unfortunately, it is common in some circles to argue that such is precisely what the verse means.

 

[Josiah]

Yes, it is the household of faith--the believers--on whom Christ was depending to defend the Gospel. The verse does not mean that the institutional church is authorized to simply create doctrines out of thin air. Unfortunately, it is common in some circles to argue that such is precisely what the verse means.

I just put up a thread on Tradition....