Protestant tradition

[stranger]

Again I will state that while tradition is an important aspect of our worship and history, if it violates or in any shape or form does not lign up with the authoritative Word of God then it is to be disposed of.

Hi waitinontheLamb,

Please bear with me - these points I am trying to make are not easy nor popular ones. You have annunciated the protestant principle of scripture alone. Fair enough.

Other protestants may look at you and think that you are, in some aspects following the traditions of men rather than scripture. Do you have any feeling that, as remote as the possiblity may seem, there could be a speck or log in your eye or that of your denomination?

This sort discussion requires a little self examination. That is all I am getting at - my question stands unanswered.

 

[stranger]

The role of Protestant tradition in doctrinal disputes.

There arose a debate over predestination between Jacobus Arminius / Theodore Beza around 1603. Since that time the dispute, never fully resolved, flares up from time to time to the present day some 404 years later. It has even carried over into this forum.

Two conflicting protestant 'traditions' each claiming to be based upon scripture alone!? So tradition can arise from interpretation which can, over time, take on content and dimensions that were not there in the original dispute.

Replacement theology,

I believed this for many years as being scriptural. Subsequently, I now see it arising from the 'Protestant tradition'.

 

[Veritas]

stranger wrote:
This is almost an altar call: Is there anyone who will admit they have stumbled upon 'tradition' being authoritative in a protestant church? I am advocating the the skeleton be brought of out of the cupbpoard - what is the current practise? There has to be someone out there. . .

stranger wrote:
Is there a protestant out there WILLING to admit that their 'tradition' plays an authoriative role besides 'scripture alone' in practice' ? I know what the theory is about - I am asking what happens in practice.

It is my opinion a person can make a 'tradition' authoritive in any church and lose meaning. I believe as long as the person can see through the tradition and back to Christ, and have a personal relationship with Him, the tradition will not be authoritative for that person. Instead The Word will.

 

[waitinontheLamb]

Hi,

Forget the non - protestant side of things. I already stated plainly that this tread has nothing to do with Catholic tradition, nor a Catholic -protestant comparison.

Perhaps my post on Confessions of faith is the clearest - someone has to offer an explanation for the differences - between denominations. My supposition is that there is doctrinal consistency or uniformity deriveable from the scriptures. Furthermore I am suggesting that the differences arise not from scripture but from what I am calling protestant tradition, call this differences in interpretation if you prefer.

I have asked a straight forward question and yes I am fishing in that sense for an answer - the question is:

Is there a protestant out there WILLING to admit that their 'tradition' plays an authoriative role besides 'scripture alone' in practice' ? I know what the theory is about - I am asking what happens in practice.

Is this so threatening or offensive?

Not threatening at all, just non-sensical. I believe you already have received your answer. As Protestant Christians, though I am sure you will find some who claim the name but don't adhere, we do not place tradition in the same light as Scripture.

 

[waitinontheLamb]

Hi aLonevoice,

Your question is fair enough, 'why?' Allow me to answer:

1. a house divided against itself cannot stand. Protestants are a divided house.

2. Protestants are quick to condemn others BUT: Is it a case of removing a log from ones own eye before taking the speck out of another's eye?

3. To see if: there is a protestant out there WILLING to admit that their 'tradition' plays an authoriative role besides 'scripture alone' in practice' ? I know what the theory is about - I am asking what happens in practice.

Gee, it sure sounds like our house stands firm against your silly attempt to pull it down. So, how does that beam look?

 

[stranger]

Thankyou for your comments so far gentlemen,

As I have already said, Protestants don't talk about their own tradition - nor do they discuss it in a constructive way. Hopefully my attempt will not only begin to make sense but be constructive as well. So here goes.

I attend a Protestant Church that is Presbyterian, that follows the Reformed doctrine.

Firstly, that it is Presbyterian is itself a tradition.
Secondly, that it follows the reformed doctrine is also a tradition.

I have listed two traditions. In this church, the slogan scripture alone is declared as the sole principle in determining matters of doctrine and faith.

Now gentlemen - which of you is going to tell me that in the church that I attend - that the two traditions, namely the Presbyterian and the Reformed do NOT affect the principle 'scripture alone'? Would it be more appropriate to annunciate the principle:

scripture alone in the light of two traditions,

And this raises the question:

to what extent are these traditions authoritative?

I am not interested in debating the correctness or otherwise of the Presbyterian or reformed doctrine - but I am genuinely interested in what authoritative role tradition plays in the protestant churches. I know it is like waving a red flag but that situation is not of my making. My apologies for not expressing this better.

 

[Guest]

Thankyou for your comments so far gentlemen,

As I have already said, Protestants don't talk about their own tradition - nor do they discuss it in a constructive way. Hopefully my attempt will not only begin to make sense but be constructive as well. So here goes.

I attend a Protestant Church that is Presbyterian, that follows the Reformed doctrine.

Firstly, that it is Presbyterian is itself a tradition.
Secondly, that it follows the reformed doctrine is also a tradition.

I have listed two traditions. In this church, the slogan scripture alone is declared as the sole principle in determining matters of doctrine and faith.

Now gentlemen - which of you is going to tell me that in the church that I attend - that the two traditions, namely the Presbyterian and the Reformed do NOT affect the principle 'scripture alone'? Would it be more appropriate to annunciate the principle:

scripture alone in the light of two traditions, And

to what extent are these traditions authoritative?

I am not interested in debating the correctness or otherwise of the Presbyterian or reformed doctrine - but I am genuinely interested in what authoritative role tradition plays in the protestant churches. I know it is like waving a red flag but that situation is not of my making. My apologies for not expressing this better.

stranger, I really do not understand - if you attend or are a member of a Protestant church - why can you not answer your own question?

What role does tradition play in your church?

 

[stranger]

stranger, I really do not understand - if you attend or are a member of a Protestant church - why can you not answer your own question?

What role does tradition play in your church?

Hi aLoneVoice,

I am trying to come to grips with the whole topic - I have not even got this far before. This tread my be useful in contacting others who have made similar observations and are willing to share them. There is theory and there is practice - and I think contradiction should be addressed. Also I am interested in basis principles as to what is happening with tradition what role it plays.

 

[Guest]

stranger - there is not concept of 'tradition' in the Protestant church as there is in the RCC church.

The RCC allows for tradition to be equal to biblical authority. Where there are churches that might do 'worship' a certain way, or always go to the same campground for their church retreat, - that 'tradition' is not equal to Scripture.

When 'tradition' is elevated to be equal too Biblical authority - there is a problem.

 

[Gabbylittleangel]

Protestant tradition

Any Protestants out there who will admit that their tradition is important, albeit authoritative, despite subscribing to scripture alone? Anytakers?

...
1. a house divided against itself cannot stand. Protestants are a divided house.

2. Protestants are quick to condemn others BUT: Is it a case of removing a log from ones own eye before taking the speck out of another's eye?

3. To see if: there is a protestant out there WILLING to admit that their 'tradition' plays an authoriative role besides 'scripture alone' in practice' ? I know what the theory is about - I am asking what happens in practice.

Stranger,

When I first read your op, a Scripture came to mind. I decided to pass on responding, but now I believe that the Holy Spirit would have me quote it.

Pro 6:16 ¶ These six [things] doth the LORD hate: yea, seven [are] an abomination unto him:
Pro 6:17 A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
Pro 6:18 An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,
Pro 6:19 A false witness [that] speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

 

[stranger]

Stranger,

When I first read your op, a Scripture came to mind. I decided to pass on responding, but now I believe that the Holy Spirit would have me quote it.

Pro 6:16 ¶ These six [things] doth the LORD hate: yea, seven [are] an abomination unto him:
Pro 6:17 A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
Pro 6:18 An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,
Pro 6:19 A false witness [that] speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

Hi Gabbyslittleangel,

Thankyou for that contribution also, you might have added the bit about a rod for the back of the fool. My colourful figures of speech were too provocative, whenever someone offers such a rebuke I do take it seriously as the Lord has in the past also used rebukes from others for other reasons than what the rebuke was intended for, not that I am implying that that is the case here. My apologies. I will monitor what happens in my inner man and let you know.

 

[Gabbylittleangel]

Blessings! :D

 

[Vic C.]

Without re-reading the whole thread again, let me take a crack at this:


Most Prot churches "celebrate" the Lord's Supper once a month, usually the first Sunday of the month; that is tradition.

Most Prot churches hold services on a Sunday; that is tradition.

Most "celebrate" the resurrection (Easter) in a traditional way, including "sunrise services"; tradition.

Most celebrate Palm "Sunday"; tradition.

Most celebrate Holy Thursday and Good Friday; tradition!

Alter calls or invitationals; tradition.

The lighting of candles and other rituals during what is called "The Advent Season"; tradition.

Christmas... tradition!


I can probably go on, but I'm sure this is what you were going for, stranger. 8-)

 

[stranger]

Without re-reading the whole thread again, let me take a crack at this:


Most Prot churches "celebrate" the Lord's Supper once a month, usually the first Sunday of the month; that is tradition.

Most Prot churches hold services on a Sunday; that is tradition.

Most "celebrate" the resurrection (Easter) in a traditional way, including "sunrise services"; tradition.

Most celebrate Palm "Sunday"; tradition.

Most celebrate Holy Thursday and Good Friday; tradition!

Alter calls or invitationals; tradition.

The lighting of candles and other rituals during what is called "The Advent Season"; tradition.

Christmas... tradition!


I can probably go on, but I'm sure this is what you were going for, stranger. 8-)

Hi Vic,

What you listed are traditions and if you do anything long enough it can become a tradition. The want of 'definition' makes it difficult to discuss. You are more familar than I am with the types of discussions on the forum that quickly end in loggerhead situations that then deteriorate down a slippery slope.

By way of example I said that 'reformed doctrine' is a tradition as are other theological streams, movements, and so on. The Westminister Confession is a tradition which the Presbyterian church regards as authoritative to the exclusion of other confessions. Having another interpretation often has a long history or tradition behind it . . . The list goes on. These are issues of authority first and foremost.

So I asked: to what degree or is tradition authoritative in Protestant churches? And are protestants able to admit this! This is the essence of the OP. Thanks Vic for bringing calm to a storm in a tea cup!

 

[Vic C.]

... So I asked: to what degree or is tradition authoritative in Protestant churches? And are protestants able to admit this! This is the essence of the OP. Thanks Vic for bringing calm to a storm in a tea cup!

Thak you and...I understand.

First, I'd like to correct a typo on my part. I said:

I can probably go on, but I'm sure this is what you were going for, stranger.

I meant to say "I'm not sure this was what you were going for..."


Anyway, this may be one way of "seeing" it:

Scripture may be considered a form of written tradition. Beter to put it this way:

The idea that Scripture alone is the source of Truth may be considered a tradition in itself.

Now, a good question to ask is; what do we do with this passage?

2 Th 2:14 Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.
2 Th 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.
2 Th 2:16 Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God, even our Father, which hath loved us, and hath given us everlasting consolation and good hope through grace,

 

[stranger]

I meant to say "I'm not sure this was what you were going for..."


Anyway, this may be one way of "seeing" it:

Scripture may be considered a form of written tradition. Beter to put it this way:

The idea that Scripture alone is the source of Truth may be considered a tradition in itself.

Now, a good question to ask is; what do we do with this passage?

2 Th 2:14 Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.
2 Th 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.
2 Th 2:16 Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God, even our Father, which hath loved us, and hath given us everlasting consolation and good hope through grace,

In the context Paul recognised tradition (having to do with his person as well as what he wrote) as apostolic as it was authoritative. In other words he did not rely on his 'letters alone.'