Body: | Sola Scriptura: The Bible alone is enough!
Apostolic Fathers used scripture as the primary defense against false
doctrine.
Click to View
Sola Scriptura home page
Click to View Apostolic Fathers: Dates they lived and other information.
Click to View Apostolic Fathers: Five kinds of Tradition.
Click to View
Mandatory: Apostolic Fathers Catechism Class for Catholics and Orthodox.
405 AD: John Chrysostom:
"For doctrine." For thence we shall know, whether we ought to learn
or to be ignorant of anything. And thence we may disprove what is false,
thence we may be corrected and brought to a right mind, may be comforted
and consoled, and if anything is deficient, we may have it added to us.
"That the man of God may be perfect." For this is the exhortation of the
Scripture given, that the man of God may be rendered perfect by it; without
this therefore he cannot be perfect. Thou hast the Scriptures, he says, in
place of me. If thou wouldest learn anything, thou mayest learn it from
them. And if he thus wrote to Timothy, who was filled with the Spirit, how
much more to us! "Thoroughly furnished unto all good works"; not merely
taking part in them, he means, but "thoroughly furnished." (John
Chrysostom, Homily 9, commentary on 2 Tim 3:16-17)
Click to View
John, who is commenting on 2 Tim 3:16-17, clearly believes the scriptures
are all-sufficient and nothing else is needed for truth. But he says
something far more profound that modern Roman Catholic and Orthodox leaders
cringe at: Chrysostom, interprets Paul's statement as saying that "the
scriptures were given IN PLACE OF Paul". This is exactly what we are
saying! We say that from 30 - 50 AD, revelation was 100% oral because none
of the New Testament was written. Then from 50 - 100 AD scripture was
completed. Finally from 100 AD to the second coming our final authority is
the scriptures. God's whole plan was to start with inspired oral
revelation, then part oral, part scripture, and finally when scripture was
complete, it became the all-sufficient authority. We do not dispute that
oral traditions continued after 100 AD, just that as time moved along, oral
tradition by its very nature, became less important. Today oral tradition
is utterly worthless since the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches both
claim they are the right oral tradition, yet they differ so greatly in
doctrine, that they are not even "in communion" with each other!
"For how is it not absurd that in respect to money, indeed, we do
not trust to others, but refer this to figures and calculation; but in
calculating upon facts we are lightly drawn aside by the notions of others;
and that too, though we possess an exact balance, and square and rule for
all things, the declaration of the divine laws? Wherefore I exhort and
entreat you all, disregard what this man and that man thinks about these
things, and inquire from the Scriptures all these things; and having learnt
what are the true riches, let us pursue after them that we may obtain also
the eternal good things; which may we all obtain, through the grace and
love towards men of our Lord Jesus Christ, with Whom, to the Father and the
Holy Spirit, be glory, might, and honor, now and ever, and world without
end. Amen." (John Chrysostom, Homily 13, commentary on 2 Cor 7:1)
Click to View
Chrysostom calls scripture, "exact balance, and square and rule for all
things, the declaration of the divine laws". We not only agree, but ask why
this sounds so opposite to how Catholics describe the Bible.
""So then, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye
were taught, whether by word, or by Epistle of ours." Hence it is manifest,
that they did not deliver all things by Epistle, but many things also
unwritten, and in like manner both the one and the other are worthy of
credit. Therefore let us think the tradition of the Church also worthy of
credit. It is a tradition, seek no farther. Here he shows that there were
many who were shaken." (John Chrysostom, Homily 4, commentary on 2 Thess
2:15)
Click to View
Chrysostom clearly believes in a divine oral tradition that teaches some
things, not contained in scripture. While we would strongly disagree with
Chrysostom on this point, we honestly admit that he seems to take such a
view. After all, we know there was a gradual movement to emphasize church
tradition over what the Bible says, and Chrysostom at 400 AD, may be
indicative that things are changing in that direction. But in light of what
Chrysostom has already said about the scriptures, we could only guess that
the specific things that make up this "unwritten tradition" are
insignificant and of a secondary importance. Like modern Catholics,
Chrysostom merely makes the claim of "unwritten tradition" without ever
really giving us a specific example. Provide us a specific list! Without
such an example, we object that modern Catholics squeeze in all their
extra-biblical doctrines. Jerome, who also lived at the same time as
Chrysostom in 400 AD, does provide such a list in (Jerome, Dialogue Against
the Luciferians, 8), like drinking "milk and honey" immediately after being
baptized. So we can in fact prove out position correct, that much of the
early church's "unwritten tradition" was over insignificant things like
this. Further, neither the Orthdox or Catholic churches even do this today,
which further proves that such "unwritten tradition" really involves what
we call "expedient tradition".
by Steve Rudd
Click to View
Go To Start: WWW.BIBLE.CA
|