Warner/Jackson Debate on Tradition as Religious Authority

 
 
 Proposition: 
 Both Scripture and Oral Tradition are authoritative for the Church in matters of doctrine.
 
 Affirm:  Matt Warner
 Deny: George A. Jackson
 
 
 Before I start, let me define some terms in my affirmative.
 
 Scripture:  the inspired books of the Old and New Testaments as accepted by the Church.  I realize 
 that there is a difference between the Catholic and Protestant Old Testaments (the Catholic Church
 recognizes seven more books than Protestants do), but this shouldn't have any bearing on this 
 debate.
 
 Oral Tradition: the teachings of the Apostles which were not recorded or explicitly recorded in the 
 books of the New Testament.
 
 Authoritative:  the standard, source, and authority from which the Church derives its teachings.
 
 -------------------
 
 To begin, let me say that I believe that the Scriptures are inspired of God and are authoritative in 
 the Church for matters of doctrine.  They are the very words of God, and they deserve our utmost 
 reverence and obedience.  But, this does not mean that they are the only authority for the Church 
 in matters of doctrine.  The Apostles handed on their teachings in two ways - orally (Tradition) 
 and written (Scripture).  Both ways are inspired of the Holy Spirit, and thus, are authoritative.
 
 First, let me point out that the Scriptures themselves do not teach that they are the only authority 
 for the Church in matters of doctrine.  Scripture says of itself that it is inspired, helpful, holy, 
 everlasting, sure, etc., but nowhere does is teach that it is our only authority.  So to believe that the 
 Scriptures are our only authority is to believe something that is not supported by the Scriptures 
 themselves.  This is the biggest problem with the belief that the Scriptures alone are our only 
 authority, for the belief itself fails its own test and must be rejected by its own standard.
 
 We see in the Scriptures that the Christians in the Bible followed both the oral and written 
 teachings of the Apostles, and considered both to be authoritative in matters of doctrine.  Biblical 
 scholars and historians will affirm that the first books of the New Testament were not written until 
 at least twenty years after the resurrection of Christ.  This means that for at least the first two 
 decades of the Church, the teachings of the Christian Faith were faithfully passed on orally from 
 person to person.
 
 But then, through time some of the Apostles and their companions began to put down into writing 
 many of their teachings. But did these writings supersede the oral teachings of the Apostles? No, 
 not at all.  In fact, the Apostle Paul writes to the Thessalonians, "So then, brethren, stand firm and 
 hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth [oral] or by letter 
 [written]" (2 Thess. 2:15).  He tells them to remain faithful to both his oral and written teachings.
 
 Now, some will say that it is true that the Christians in the Bible followed both the oral and written 
 teachings of the Apostles, but that after the completion of the canon, and after the death of the 
 Apostles, the Church only followed the Scriptures alone.  But the problem with this idea is that the 
 evidence shows otherwise. Historical evidence from the early Church shows that the early 
 Christians, after the death of the Apostles, continued to follow both the oral and written teachings 
 of the Apostles, and considered both to be authoritative in matters of doctrine.  Here are just a few 
 examples:
 
 "Papias [A.D. 120], who is now mentioned by us, affirms that he received the sayings of the 
 Apostles from those who accompanied them, and he moreover asserts that he heard in person 
 Aristion and the presbyter John. Accordingly he mentions them frequently by name, and in his 
 writings gives their Traditions concerning Jesus . . .. There are other passages of his in which he 
 relates some miraculous deeds, stating that he acquired the knowledge of them from Tradition" 
 (Fragment in Eusebius, Church History 3:39 [A.D. 312]).
 
 "At that time [A.D. 150] there flourished in the Church Hegesippus, whom we know from what 
 has gone before, and Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, and another bishop, Pinytus of Crete, and 
 besides these, Philip, and Apolinarius, and Melito, and Musanus, and Modestus, and finally, 
 Irenaeus. From them has come down to us in writing, the sound and orthodox faith received from 
 Tradition" (Eusebius, Church History 4:21[A.D. 312]).
 
 "As I said before, the Church, having received this preaching and this faith, although she is 
 disseminated throughout the whole world, yet guarded it, as if she occupied but one house. She 
 likewise believes these things just as if she had but one soul and one and the same heart; and 
 harmoniously she proclaims them and teaches them and hands them down, as if she possessed but 
 one mouth. For, while the languages of the world are diverse, nevertheless, the authority of the 
 Tradition is one and the same" (Irenaeus, Against Heresies 1:10:2 [A.D. 189]).
 
 "It is possible, then, for everyone in every church, who may wish to know the truth, to contemplate 
 the Tradition of the Apostles which has been made known throughout the whole world" (Irenaeus, 
 Against Heresies 3:3:1 [A.D. 189]).
 
 "Although there are many who believe that they themselves hold to the teachings of Christ, there 
 are yet some among them who think differently from their predecessors. The teaching of the 
 Church has indeed been handed down through an order of succession from the Apostles and 
 remains in the churches even to the present time. That alone is to be believed as the truth which is 
 in no way at variance with ecclesiastical and Apostolic Tradition" (Origen, The Fundamental 
 Doctrines 1:2 [A.D. 225]).
 
 "But you are blessed, who by faith are in the Church, dwell upon the foundations of the faith, and 
 have full satisfaction, even the highest degree of faith which remains among you unshaken. For it 
 has come down to you from Apostolic Tradition, and frequently accursed envy has wished to 
 unsettle it, but has not been able" (Athanasius, Festal Letters 29 [A.D. 330]).
 
 "Of the dogmas and messages preserved in the Church, some we possess from written teaching 
 and others we receive from the Tradition of the Apostles, handed on to us in mystery. In respect to 
 piety both are of the same force" (Basil the Great, The Holy Spirit 27:66 [A.D. 375]).
 
 "It is needful also to make use of Tradition, for not everything can be gotten from Sacred 
 Scripture. The holy Apostles handed down some things in the Scriptures, other things in 
 Tradition." (Epiphanius of Salamis, Medicine Chest Against All Heresies 61:6 [A.D. 375]). 
 
 So we see that there is a continuous belief from the Apostolic period to the post-Apostolic period 
 that both the Scriptures and Tradition were followed and authoritative in the Church.  In fact, we 
 do not see any evidence of the early Church ever following Scripture alone in matters of doctrine.  
 This is important to note, for it shows the apostolic origins of the belief that both Scripture and 
 Tradition are equally authoritative.  And it shows that the belief that Scripture alone is 
 authoritative is not apostolic in origin, and thus, is a man-made doctrine which came centuries 
 after the Apostles.
 
 I am looking forward to hearing from my opponent on this issue.  I have been able to get 
 acquainted with George through reading his posts in several Yahoo! clubs, and I admire his great 
 zeal and love for God and His Word.
 
 With His Love,
 
 Matt Warner