Body: | Extra-Biblical Oral Tradition Arguments Refuted:
Click to View
"John 20:30 clearly tells us that the Bible lacks many things Jesus did."
False arguments that Catholics and Orthodox use to prove oral
extra-scriptural church tradition are refuted.
Click to View
Sola Scriptura home page
Click to View More Pro-Oral Church tradition arguments refuted!
Click to View "John 20:30 clearly tells us that the Bible lacks many things
Jesus did"
"John tells us that his book only contains part of what Jesus did,
therefore we need oral tradition to complete the revelation. This proves
that everything Jesus and the Apostles did and taught were not recorded in
the Bible."
"Therefore many other signs Jesus also performed in the presence of the
disciples, which are not written in this book, but these have been written
so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that
believing you may have life in His name." John 20:30-31
"And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which if they were
written in detail, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain
the books that would be written." John 21:25
Click to View
Refutation of the false Catholic & Orthodox tradition argument:
"John 20:30 clearly tells us that the Bible lacks many things Jesus did"
Sola Scriptura proof texts: John 20:30 proves the Bible is enough!
If we took all that is in the Bible and added what Catholics and
Orthodox say is recorded in "oral tradition" John's statement would still
be true. We would only have a small fraction of the stories while Jesus
walked the earth. So the argument is self refuting. Yes, there are many
stories not written in the Bible, but what is written is all we need for
our faith. That's what John says in Jn 20:31.
It is well documented that the three other gospels deal with a large
number of things Jesus did, that are not found in John. Perhaps what John
lacks, is in the other three gospels!
We accept, however that there are many specific events in Jesus life
that are not recorded in the New Testament, but were known from tradition
because there were people alive who personally witnessed these things that
never got recorded in the New Testament.
But in case these "tradition defenders" missed it, John goes on to
tell us that what is written IS SUFFICIENT. So the very passage Catholics
and Orthodox leaders use to show the need for oral tradition, actually
refute this and say exactly the opposite. Lets quote it again. "these have
been written so that you may believe". In other words, John wrote enough,
all that was necessary, for the purpose of bring about perfect faith in
Jesus.
The bold claims that oral tradition of stories of Jesus life, are
self refuted when the Orthodox and Catholic leaders can't give us even one
example of a genuine story no recorded in the gospels. Even if they did
have an example, the important question is, "What information does it add
to our faith?" For oral tradition to be of any value, it must contribute
something to the pool of information we already posses about the life of
Christ.
Click to View More Pro-Oral Church tradition arguments refuted!
Click to View More Anti-Sola Scriptura arguments refuted!
by Steve Rudd
Click to View
Go To Start: WWW.BIBLE.CA
|