Question Regarding Tradition

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Catholic : One Thread

My question is about (I forget the verse off the top of my head) the Bible verse where the apostle Paul talks about how the fact of Jesus Christ was crucified for our sins and raised again to life. He says how he "recieved it as it was passed on to him" but then he also says "in accordance to the scriptures".

What scriptures if these facts were traditionaly "handed" down to him? It sounds like he could be talking about the gospel (even though supposely none were written yet by that time) of Christ (as in Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John) being given to him since he says "in accordance to the scriptures." He couldn't have been meaning the O.T. since that says nothing about Christ dieing and being raised again on the 3'rd day.

I believe in tradition of course, but I need help with this verse.

-- Jason (Enchanted fire5@aol.com), May 05, 2004

Answers

Jason,

I looked all through my cross-references in my study Bible and I could not find the verse you are talking about. I did find this, however:

John 20:9 NIV (They still did not understand from Scripture that Jesus had to rise from the dead.)

I think whatever Scripture you're referring to must mean the OT, since the NT was not yet canonized, and depending on the book, was not even completely written yet. In referring to the Scriptures, I think it must be the OT prophesies about Jesus.

If you know even one word or phrase from the verse to which you are referring, you can search for it here: http://www.biblegateway.com/cgi-bin/bible/. If you are sure it's in one of Paul's epistles, you can limit your search using the drop-down arrow at the bottom. This is a great Bible search engine that I use all the time, but unfortunately they don't have any Catholic versions and they lack the Deuterocanonicals. Nonetheless, it is quite helpful in finding passages and also in posting Scriptures.

If you find the exact passage, let me know and I can check my cross reference Bible to see in the OT what passage it's referring to.

God bless,

-- Emily ("jesusfollower7@yahoo.com"), May 05, 2004.


The Torah was the only group of scriptures available to Paul and all of the earliest Christians. Hebrew texts available to Paul contained numerous events and people that forshadowed Jesus, as in 2nd Isaiah the "suffering servant."

-- Jim Furst (furst@flash.net), May 05, 2004.

Jason,

I thnk you might be talking about 1 Cor 15:1-8.

"Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you-- unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve. After that He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain to the present, but some have fallen asleep. After that He was seen by James, then by all the apostles. Then last of all He was seen by me also, as by one born out of due time. "

-- Andy ("aszmere@earthlink.net"), May 05, 2004.


Yes! That's it Andy. Emily, It's 1 Corinthians 15:1-8. Please help!:)

-- Jason (Enchanted fire5@aol.com), May 05, 2004.

Paul was in contact with James and Peter, so he must have gotten what became Corinthians 15:1-8 verbally directly from them. As for written scriptures, besides the Hebrew texts, there wern't any.... (other than what Paul himself was writing)

-- JimFurst (furst@flash.net), May 05, 2004.


Well Jason, I'm sorry to say that that particular verse in my NIV Study Bible didn't refer me to any OT passages. But some of its referents did. You may wish to check these:

From Mt. 26:24 - Is. 53, Dan 9:26

From Lk. 24:27 - Gen 3:15, Num 21:9, Dt. 18:15, Is. 7:14, 9:6, 40:10- 11, 40:53, Ezk. 34:23, Dan 9:24, Mic. 7:20, Mal. 3:1

From Lk. 24:44 - Ps. 2, 16, 22, 69, 72, 110, 118

If you go to that Bible search link I gave you, the NASB has a great cross-references section there. I did the search here for you this time, so that might also help.

God bless!

-- Emily ("jesusfollower7@yahoo.com"), May 05, 2004.


Jason,

Even though Paul was not among the 12 apostles when Jesus was them in flesh and blood, he was chosen by God in Jesus Christ to be an apostle (see the introduction of all Paul's epistles). Apostles are those who have seen, looked, touched Jesus Christ (1Jn.1:1), and God made that good by giving a direct revelation and experience of Christ to Paul (See Act.9). Hence Paul did not receive his gospel either from OT or from other apostles, but like other apostles, he too received his divine knowledge, his calling, and his mission directly from Christ by a direct revelation (See Gal.11-12)

Hope that helps.

Yours in Christ

-- Leslie John (lesliemon@hotmail.com), May 06, 2004.

The only ones who received doctrinal truth by direct revelation from God were those who walked with God for three years, receiving daily instruction from Him. After that, the teaching of the Church was the only source of revealed truth. People either listened to the Apostles and those the Apostles catechised and ordained, or they attempted to discover the truth through direct revelation. Those who chose the latter route inevitably wandered off into heresy, often forming new churches in the process. Since Paul remained doctrinally sound, there is no question that he was properly catechised by the Church. He journeyed to consult Peter, and remained with him for some time, receiving instruction before setting out on his own ministry. This is how the Word of God is passed on in unity and in truth - through those specifically entrusted, authorized, commissioned and ordained by Christ to preach in His name.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), May 06, 2004.

Jason,

I found specifically that this passage refers to Ps. 16:10 (NASB), I think, when saying that Jesus would be raised: For You will not abandon my soul to Sheol; Nor will You allow Your Holy One to undergo decay.

Also, specifically look at Is. 53.

-- Emily ('jesusfollower7@yahoo.com'), May 06, 2004.


"He says how he "recieved it as it was passed on to him" but then he also says "in accordance to the scriptures". "

... The Apostles passed on that which they had received directly from Christ, and that which they had personally witnessed concerning His life, death, and teaching. They were indeed preaching the gospel, even though it had not yet been written or defined as scripture by the Church. The gospel message existed within the Church and was preached by the Church for some years before a word of the New Testament was written, and was passed on by the teaching of the Apostles and those ordained by the Apostles - in other words, by oral Tradition. Eventually some of this oral Tradition became written Tradition, and several centuries later the Church gathered some of this written Tradition into a book. But the Apostles knew nothing of that. Any references to "the scriptures" that appear in the Bible were, at the time they were written, references solely to the Hebrew Scriptures, what we now call the Old Testament, for those were the only Scriptures that existed at the time. That is what the word "Scripture" meant to the Apostles and their contemporaries.

What the Apostles had witnessed, and passed on by oral Tradition and later in writing, was "in accordance with the scriptures" because the Old Testament contains many prophetic references to Christ, his life and death. Jesus had explained these passages to them when He appeared to them after His Resurrection, and their eyes were opened, and they were truly amazed at what He revealed to them (Luke 24:32). Jesus revealed to them that the Good News He had preached to them and commissioned them to preach to the world was indeed "in accord with the Scriptures". Some of the passages He likely explained to them would have been:

Is 7:14 (The Messiah would be born of a virgin) 2 Sam 7:12-16 (The Messiah would be of the House of David) Micah 5:2 (The Messiah would be born in Bethlehem) Is 11:2 (The Messiah would be of the lineage of Jesse, and would be anointed by the Holy Spirit) Is 40:3-5 (His coming would be preceded by a messenger) Is 9:1 (He would preach and minister in Galilee) Zech 9:9 (He would enter Jerusalem on a donkey) Ps 118:22, Is 53:3 (He would be rejected by men) Zech 11:12 (He would be sold for 30 pieces of silver) Is 53:7 (He would stand silent before His accusers) Ps 22:7-8 (He would be mocked by His captors) Is 50:6 (He would be spit upon) Ps 22:16 (His hands and feet would be pierced) Is 53:12 (He would forgive and pray for his tormentors) Zech 12:10 (His side would be pierced) Ps 69:21 (He would be offered gall and vinegar to drink) Ps 34:20 (None of His bones would be broken) Ps 22:18 (His tormentors cast lots for His garments) Ps 16:10 (He would not remain in the grave) Ps 110:1 (He would take His place at the right hand of God)

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), May 06, 2004.



Thank you brothers and sisters, especialy Paul and Emily. I understand now.

Praise the Lord!

-- Jason (Enchanted fire5@aol.com), May 06, 2004.


Sorry, it is Gal.1:11-12. I stand by this that Paul received his revelation directly from Christ as special privilage. If he had just received it from other apostles or gleaned from OT, there was no need for the Bible or the Church to refer him as an apostle. Apostles, as you all agree are people who received everything directly from Christ.

Correct me if it is otherwise and that Gal.1:11ff can be interpreted in other way.

-- Leslie John (lesliemon@hotmail.com), May 07, 2004.


Any preacher of the one true Church founded by Jesus Christ can still make the same claim today ...

... "For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ". (Gal 1:11-12)

The ONLY reason such a claim can be made is that the teaching was received through the Church to which divine revelation was given. When one listens to the teaching of the Church, one listens to Christ Himself, Who told its leaders "he who hears you hears Me" (Luke 10:16). Paul knew with certainty that the gospel he preached was not of men because he received it from a divine source - the Church. No Protestant denomination can make such a claim. In fact it would be ludicrous to do so, given the pervasive state of doctrinal chaos in Protestantism. The Protestant scripture, if one is honest, must read ..,.

... ... "the gospel which was preached by me is according to man. For I received it from the founder of my denomination, the result of his personal attempts to define the revelation of Jesus Christ through his individual interpretations of scripture".

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), May 07, 2004.


Paul, I don't know whether you consider me a Protestant. I am not. I am staunch orthodox Roman Catholic, but I am neither favor of the conservatives or the liberals. I saying this because, your posts seem to be colored with such a doubt.

Your answer was good, but not very satisfying as it was just a generalization without any authoritative text to support. If Paul just received everything like us from other apostles, then he should not be called an apostle in the first place, but an evangelist or even a disciple of Christ.

"For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ ……nor did I go to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me…. (Gal 1:11-14)

Let us say, I have received my revelation from tradition, then I will say, "received through (the) revelation of Jesus Christ" and not "received through (a) revelation of Jesus Christ." It is more personal. And, also after his revelation he did not go and meet apostles immediately, thus ruling out any even other apostles' influence at least immediately (Gal.1:16-17). He did eventually in humbleness did submit to the Church later (See Gal.2:1-2). Once had even directly confronted and correct Peter from his error. (See Gal.2:11-14). I am not saying that he was more authoritative, but at least had equal status with that of the apostles, although in submission to Church.

As I gather, even the Church hails both Peter and Paul as the greatest apostles of the church, one for Jews and other for the Gentiles, and if I am not mistaken, their festivals too are celebrated together and names are come together in even the prayers of the Church.

This is unique only in the case St. Paul, because God desired such a direct revelation in his great love for him and because of his unique mission like Peter (Gal.2:9) he had to undertake. No one after Paul can ever claim such a revelation even to the end of the times (except perhaps, a false prophet), and I believe, I go along with the thought of the Church.

Sincerely in Christ,



-- Leslie John (lesliemon@hotmail.com), May 08, 2004.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ