Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!psuvax1!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: farkas@eng.sun.com (Frank Farkas) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: The Bible vs traditions of men Message-ID: Date: 27 Jan 91 07:25:32 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Lines: 117 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article , CONS.ELF@AIDA.CSD.UU.SE (Ake Eldberg) writes: >gibson@b11.ingr.com (Stanley) warns us that tradition will not make >us wise, nor will they save us. He claims that the bible alone is >sufficient to guide us. > >The bible itself is indeed our central source, and it warns us >against the traditions of men. But there are two sides to this coin. >On the one hand, Men have always tended to invent traditions and >interpretations which, consciously or not, serve to defuse the Word >of God, make it powerless and easier to live with. That's why we >are warned against such traditions. > >On the other hand, there are dozens of sects and churches who >claim to follow the Bible alone, and they all disagree. We all >too often see people quoting the bible against each other. So >you may say, the bible is still sufficient if it is interpreted >correctly. But who is to do that? How can you *know* that your >interpretation is the right one, when there are thousands of >honest, intelligent, praying Christians out there who have so >many different understandings? > >I think history proves that the bible has not been enough to >set us on the One Right Track...... I agree with you 100% that the Bible is not enough. Look at the confusion in Christiandome. Who can clear it up for us? Are traditions enough? Can tradition be trusted? There are many traditions which are in fact false. The fact is that we have very little, if any teachings at all which didn't come through many hands before they were put done on paper. Let me look at this situation vary methodically. Eye W