Should Christians rely on the Bible or tradition for doctrine?

While too many

claim that it's from the Bible, others claims that the Bible is not superior to
varied traditions. The Church of Rome, the group with the largest amount of
adherents that claim Christ state that they accept that doctrine comes from the
Living Magisterium which is basically a combination of the portions of the Bible
and its own traditions that the leadership has decided is important. Officially
according to Vatican II, the Roman Catholic Church bases its teachings on what has
been called: Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition (Dogmatic Constitution on
Divine Revelation, Dei Verbum #9, Vatican Council II. As quoted in Birch D.A.
Trial, Tribulation & Triumph. p.5).
Part of the reason for this is based on the findings of the Council of Trent that
was held in the mid 16th Century. The Catholic Encyclopedia reports: The Council,
as is evident, held that there are Divine traditions not contained in Holy
Scripture, revelations made to the Apostles either orally by Jesus Christ or by
the inspiration of the Holy Ghost and transmitted by the Apostles to the Church.
Holy Scripture is therefore not the only theological source of the Revelation made
by God to His Church. Side by side with Scripture there is tradition, side by side
with the written revelation there is the oral revelation. This granted, it is
impossible to be satisfied with the Bible alone for the solution of all dogmatic
questions (Bainvel J. Transcribed by Tomas Hancil. Tradition and Living
Magisterium. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XV, Copyright © 1912 by Robert
Appleton Company. Online Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. Knight Nihil. Obstat,
October 1, 1912. Remy Lafort, S.T.D.,John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New
York).

Also the Eastern Orthodox Church takes a similar position and places a very high
opinion on tradition (Ware T. The Orthodox Church. Penguin Book, St. Ives p.195-
207). The Roman Catholic, as well as Orthodox, position seems to be that since
during most of the time the original Apostles were alive there was not a complete
New Testament, that the early church relied heavily on oral teachings (which it
often calls traditions or oral revelations) transmitted by Jesus and the Apostles.
And this is of course true. The fact is that many pre-Nicene Catholics rushed in
and published many error filled writings, shortly after the departing of the
Apostles! Yet, this does not replace the fact that today we have completed bibles.
And in fact within a short time after the last Apostle died, there were completed
bibles, this is a fact. There is nothing wrong with tradition that is scripturally
based. Let's look at the Protestant views on bible and tradition. They scholars
often appeal to tradition. Mormon's and Seventh Day Adventist's in particular do
this. In order to provide scriptural proof for the position of the value of
tradition, Catholic and Orthodox writers often point out certain writings of the
Apostles John, Peter, and Paul. These writings should be viewed and examined. For
example, John wrote, This is the disciple who testifies of these things, and wrote
these things; and we know that his testimony is true. And there are also many
other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that
even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written" (John
21:24-25)
The above verse does make it clear that Jesus did (from the Greek word poieo "to
make or do") many things not recorded in the written gospel accounts. Though it
must be understood that it does not say that Jesus taught many things that were
essential, but not written.

Peter wrote, That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the
holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour
(2 Peter 3:2).

It should be noted that the people were mindful of the words of the holy prophets
(such as Moses) because they were taught from scripture in the synagogues each
week (Acts 15:15-21). Not just from an oral tradition of the prophets. Thus, this
verse is not teaching tradition in the sense that many Catholics seem to
understand it.

Paul wrote, "13. For this reason we also thank God without ceasing, because when
you received the word of God which you heard from us, you welcomed it not as the
word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which also effectively works
in you who believe. 14. For you, brethren, became imitators of the churches of God
which are in Judea in Christ Jesus" (1 Thessalonians 2:13-14).

It is interesting to note that what Paul is saying he taught orally made the
Gentile church in Thessalonica"imitators of the churches of God which are in
Judea". That would suggest that Paul was teaching that the Gentile Christians
should follow the practices of the Jewish Christians. When referring to 1
Thessalonians 2, many writers who support tradition seem to leave off vs. 14.

Paul also wrote, But we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus
Christ, that you withdraw from every brother who walks disorderly and not
according to the tradition which he received from us (2 Thessalonians 3:6). And
the things that you have heard from me among many witnesses, commit these to
faithful men who will be able to teach others also (2 Timothy 2:2).

Furthermore, he wrote "Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all
things and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you" (1 Corinthians
11:2).

In those verses, it is clear that Paul is saying that Christians should pay
attention to the tradition that he and other church leaders taught. But does that
mean that tradition is on equal or superior footing to the Bible?

Certain Catholic writings suggest so, such as Dei Verbum #9 from the Vatican
Council II, ...both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with
equal feelings of devotion and reverence (As quoted in Birch D.A. Trial,
Tribulation & Triumph; p.5).

One Orthodox bishop wrote, ...to an Orthodox Christian, Tradition means...the

books of the Bible; it means the Creed; it means the decrees of the Ecumenical
Councils and writings of the Fathers; it means the Canons, the Service Books, the
Holy Icons -- in fact the whole system of doctrine (Ware, p. 196).

One biblical verse that seems to support the concept of tradition was also written
by Paul, Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were
taught, whether by word or our epistle (2 Thessalonians 2:15).

What Paul seems to be saying is that Christians should follow what they were
taught whether orally in person or by writing. But by whom? Paul had some concerns
about words and epistles, ...we ask you, not to be soon shaken in mind or
troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the
day of Christ had come. Let no one deceive you by any means (2 Thessalonians 2:1-
3).

Apparently, some pretended to write or claimed to have oral teachings as if from

Paul and the apostles, but they were false. Hence, this seems to be a warning
against false teachings. And that is the primary concern about oral tradition. And
that is, does the oral tradition contain deceptive or anti-biblical information?
For if it does, it should not be heeded.
Paul wrote to Timothy, ...you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to
make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture
is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for
correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete,
thoroughly equipped for every good work (2 Timothy 3:15-17).

It should be noted that Paul referred to the scriptures as "Holy" (hieros in the
Greek, meaning sacred) a term never used in the Bible to refer to tradition.
(There is another Greek term, hagios, that is also translated as "holy" in the
Bible that possibly can also mean sacred. It is also used to denote scriptures as
holy {Romans 1:2} as well as what God's prophets taught {Luke 1:70; Acts 3:21; 2
Peter 3:2; Revelation 22:6}--which was written down in scripture (e.g. John 10:35;
Acts 13:40-41; Acts 28:25-27; Romans 16:26; 2 Peter 1:20; Revelation 22:7,18-19}.)

Notice that Paul makes it clear that doctrine comes from the scriptures and that
the scriptures themselves are there so "that the man of God may be complete".

Note that tradition is not needed for the man of God to be complete nor needed to
be "thoroughly equipped for every good work".

Also note that the Holy Scriptures themselves, and not tradition, are able to make
one "wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus". Thus, perhaps the
most dogmatic issues in the Bible CAN be determined from the Bible WITHOUT
tradition.

Paul also taught, Preach the word in season, and out of season! (2 Timothy 4:2) So
then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God (Romans 10:17).

Notice that hearing (and even faith) comes from the word of God, not traditions.
Paul wrote that his traditions never contradicted his letters-Let such a person
consider this, that what we are in word by letters when we are absent, such we
will also be in deed when we are present (2 Corinthians 10:11). It is also
important to note that Peter refers to Paul's letters as scripture (2 Peter 3:15-
16).

When Paul taught (even though he did learn some things directly from Jesus) he
normally based his teachings on the scriptures, Then Paul, as his custom was, went
in to them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned with them from the Scriptures (Acts
17:2).

It is interesting to note that Paul also taught; Not that we have dominion over
your faith, but are fellow workers for your joy; for by faith you stand (2
Corinthians 1:24).

This suggests that he was teaching that his (or any other apostles) oral teachings
do not have dominion over scripture.

Paul also warned about tradition! Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy
and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic
principles of the world, and not according to Christ (Colossians 2:8).

This warning from Paul seems to be saying that traditions that are "not according
to Christ" may deceive some and that Christians need to be on guard against it.
Traditions that contradict biblical instruction cannot be considered "according to
Christ".

Paul also warned that there are: ...are false apostles, deceitful workers,
transforming themselves into apostles of Christ. And no wonder! For Satan himself
transforms himself into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his
ministers also transform themselves into ministers of righteousness, whose end
will be according to their works (2 Corinthians 11:13-15).

While Paul and the other apostles at first seemed to think that Christ would
return in their lifetimes, they later realized that they would not live that long
(Paul mentioned his impending death in 2 Timothy 4:6). It should be noted that as
he was nearing the end of his life, Paul (and also Peter) decided that the
teachings, as found in the books and parchments, needed to be brought together (2
Timothy 4:13) for the apparent purpose of clarifying which teachings were
scriptural and which were not as important. He, shortly before his death,
apparently felt that there was now a need for more than simply a combination of
letters and oral teachings.

While some claim that the Bible was not canonized until the fourth century and
thus teach that oral tradition was at least equal to scripture, this simply is not
the case. The writers of the Bible (many of which who have been cited in this
article) make it clear that the scriptures were complete, were known, should not
be contradicted, should not added to prophetically nor taken away from. This is
not the only Apostle that believed in bible above tradition. Let's look at some
others.
The Apostle Peter was inspired to write this about the written word and tradition,
He who called you is holy, you also be holy in all your conduct, because it is
written, "Be holy, for I am holy." And if you call on the Father, who without
partiality judges according to each one's work, conduct yourselves throughout the
time of your stay here in fear; knowing that you were not redeemed with
corruptible things, like silver or gold, from your aimless conduct received by
tradition from your fathers (1 Peter 1:15-18).

In other words, Peter is saying that many needed to be redeemed from the aimless
conduct taught by traditions received from fathers, and that conduct should be
based on what is written. Also, when confronted with opposition from religious
leaders, who essentially relied on tradition: Peter and the other apostles
answered and said: "We ought to obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29). That seems
pretty clear. The bible is the final word then by two witnesses. One final one to
make it three. John lived the longest of the original apostles. And as such, it is
logical that God would use him to be the last one to write down any necessary
traditions for the Church. This is the disciple who testifies of these things, and
wrote these things; and we know that his testimony is true (John 21:24).
As John got older, he noticed that various ones who claimed to have been taught by
the apostles were not continuing in the ways they had learned from apostles such
as him. Here is some of what he wrote about that, Little children, it is the last
hour; and as you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many
antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour. They went out
from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have
continued with us (1 John 2:18-19). You are of God, little children, and have
overcome them, because He who is in you is greater than he who is in the world. 5
They are of the world. Therefore they speak as of the world, and the world hears
them. 6 We are of God. He who knows God hears us; he who is not of God does not
hear us. By this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error (1 John 4:4-
6).

Notice that John specifically wrote that those that did not follow what he was
teaching those who were with them, that they are not of God, but antichrists
instead! Christ used John to record the final oral teachings, which He told him,
What you see, write in a book (Revelation 1:11).

And this was recorded which demonstrates that this is the final scriptural
teaching that should be preserved and not added to, "For I testify to everyone who
hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God
will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; and if anyone takes
away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part
from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written
in this book (Revelation 22:18-19).

While this does not say that tradition cannot have any value, it seems that John
was inspired to write that scripture would not be added to nor should be
diminished by anyone. This would also seem to suggest that oral traditions were
not to be considered equal to the written word of God. (It should also be noted
that according to Fuller Theological Seminary, the early church took the words of
Revelation 22:19-20 to mean that nothing else was to be added to the entire Bible,
and thus would not have equal value--this also may be part of the reason that no
book was accepted in the NT canon after Revelation).
So as to remove all doubts, let us bring in a fourth and final testimony on the
subject, Jude. Jude also warned that some who had heard proper teachings would go
out and change teachings based on their words, as he wrote, I found it necessary
to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once
for all delivered to the saints. For certain men have crept in unnoticed, who long
ago were marked out for this condemnation, ungodly men...These are grumblers,
complainers, walking according to their own lusts; and they mouth great swelling
words, flattering people to gain advantage (Jude 3-4,16).
If we are "Christians", we are to follow Christ. What did Jesus teach? Let's see
if it lines up with what the Apostles said and did. Of course it does, but mant
wish to discredit their word's by their foolish and vain traditions instead.
Trinity is the major non biblical one. This article will not deal with it directly
as it is but a man made idea brought in at baptism by Justin Martyr (He changed
the Apostles formula from Jesus name only; to a slightly extended trinity formula
with Jesus still inserted in it's middle, in 145 AD.) Or Tertullian who took the
next logical step in ERROR by introducing "Trias" or trinity in Godhead by taking
Plato's work "Timaeus", and twisting it, in 197 AD.)

Matthew 15:1-3 states, Then the scribes and Pharisees who were from Jerusalem came
to Jesus, saying, "Why do Your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders?
For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread." He answered and said to
them, "Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your
tradition?"

Jesus further told them, "Thus you have made the commandment of God of no effect
by your tradition. Hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy about you, saying: 'These
people draw near to Me with their mouth, And honor Me with their lips, But their
heart is far from Me. And in vain they worship Me, Teaching as doctrines the
commandments of men' " (vss. 6-9).

Mark records the same incident, which will be quoted here in more detail than
Matthew's account, Then the Pharisees and some of the scribes came together to
Him, having come from Jerusalem. Now when they saw some of His disciples eat bread
with defiled, that is, with unwashed hands, they found fault. For the Pharisees
and all the Jews do not eat unless they wash their hands in a special way, holding
the tradition of the elders. When they come from the marketplace, they do not eat
unless they wash. And there are many other things which they have received and
hold, like the washing of cups, pitchers, copper vessels, and couches. Then the
Pharisees and scribes asked Him, "Why do Your disciples not walk according to the
tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashed hands?" He answered and said
to them, "Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: 'This
people honors Me with their lips,But their heart is far from Me. And in vain they
worship Me,Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.' "For laying aside the
commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men--the washing of pitchers and
cups, and many other such things you do." And He said to them, "All too well you
reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition. For Moses said,
'Honor your father and your mother'; and, 'He who curses father or mother, let him
be put to death.' But you say, 'If a man says to his father or mother, "Whatever
profit you might have received from me is Corban"--' (that is, a gift to God),
then you no longer let him do anything for his father or his mother, making the
word of God of no effect through your tradition which you have handed down. And
many such things you do" (Mark 7:1-13).

Notice that Pharisees stated that the traditions of the elders ("Jewish church
fathers") said that hands needed to be washed. And it is easy to conclude that
hands should be washed. But notice that in both places Jesus is making it clear
that tradition is NOT equal or superior to what God has commanded (which He did in
writing).

It may be of interest to note that according to Smith's Bible Dictionary, The

fundamental principle of the Pharisees...is that...there was an oral law to
complete and explain the written law, given to Moses.

In other words, the Pharisees were are group of religious leaders who said that
one needed to rely on oral tradition to complete the written word of God. And, as
we saw above, Jesus condemned them for this.

Perhaps the verse from Isaiah Jesus referred to should also be quoted, Therefore
the LORD said: "Inasmuch as these people draw near with their mouths And honor Me
with their lips, But have removed their hearts far from Me, And their fear toward
Me is taught by the commandment of men (Isaiah 29:13).

Hence both in the Old Testament and New Testament we are warned that traditions
are not to be valued to the degree that the word of God should be. Now it is your
turn to think! What is more "Christian", than to live by Christ's words and deeds?
We are baptized into his death, burial, and rising; this states Paul in Romans
6:4, Galatians 3:27, and Colossians 2:12. I love certain traditions such as
Thanksgiving. It brings people who are normally scattered, together to give
thanks, and part take of great festival of thanks; for the blessings given from
the marvelous God above. Nothing is wrong with that. Yet men should honor the
bible far above any tradition or idea, brought forth by even the smartest of men;
if that takes away from the word, it is not to be received. Now God give you grace
and peace, through his all power filled name of Jesus Christ our Lord!