Do Orthodox Believe In The Bible?
Short answer? No. We believe in God!
We definitely do believe the Bible to be God's inspired word, the most important thing we have received from the early Church. In fact, it was the Church that gave us the Bible as we know it today.
Isn't that backwards? Isn't the Church based on the Bible?
The Bible didn't just fall from heaven with a table of contents on page one. The Church was alive and well for decades before the New Testament was even written - and for centuries before the canon was "canonized" by Orthodox bishops in the fourth century. The books that make up the Bible as we have it today were shared, assembled, and approved over time by the Orthodox Christian community.
Orthodoxy doesn't artificially set up Church or Tradition against Scripture - rather we recognize that the body of faith and practice passed on from generation to generation is an organic whole. The word "tradition" just means "that which was transmitted." Because the Scriptures are the most important part of that tradition, the early Christian Fathers always argued from Scripture - but they did not interpret that Scripture in isolation from the whole body of faith they'd received from their predecessors. As St. Paul wrote,
Stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by WORD or our EPISTLE. (2 Thessalonians 2:15)
[From "Frequently Asked Questions" At Phil Thomson.net]
Short answer? No. We believe in God!
We definitely do believe the Bible to be God's inspired word, the most important thing we have received from the early Church. In fact, it was the Church that gave us the Bible as we know it today.
Isn't that backwards? Isn't the Church based on the Bible?
The Bible didn't just fall from heaven with a table of contents on page one. The Church was alive and well for decades before the New Testament was even written - and for centuries before the canon was "canonized" by Orthodox bishops in the fourth century. The books that make up the Bible as we have it today were shared, assembled, and approved over time by the Orthodox Christian community.
Orthodoxy doesn't artificially set up Church or Tradition against Scripture - rather we recognize that the body of faith and practice passed on from generation to generation is an organic whole. The word "tradition" just means "that which was transmitted." Because the Scriptures are the most important part of that tradition, the early Christian Fathers always argued from Scripture - but they did not interpret that Scripture in isolation from the whole body of faith they'd received from their predecessors. As St. Paul wrote,
Stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by WORD or our EPISTLE. (2 Thessalonians 2:15)
[From "Frequently Asked Questions" At Phil Thomson.net]
This is an interesting post. I've been reading through your page after talking with Rex. My confusions comes with 2 Thess 2:15. It is easy for me to accept a teaching or tradition given to me by an Apostle because he has the credentials to back up his claim of being from God. However, I think we have to be suspicious of any tradition "recognized by the body of faith and practice passed from generation to generation" if it is not elaborated on in the scripture. Because the people passing the traditions on are not perfect, traditions are easily corrupted or come to mean something other than there original intent, case in point what happened with the Jews in Mark 7. When perhaps good practices become requirements for spirituality or even supersede the core of the message.
ReplyDeleteI guess what I trying to say is that I don't understand how the verse is applicable to the argument.
Hey Dustin,
ReplyDeleteHere is a primer before answering your specific question. I think it will get the heart of the matter.
Do you trust your Bible? Is it the infallible Word Of God? Presuming your answer to be "yes" here is something to consider: It took 400 years before the Bible as we know it came to be. How do we know that it is trustworthy? The answer you come with can be applied to you question above. If you are going to be "suspicious of any tradition" as you say you must be suspicious of the Bible itself for it came to us out of that same tradition. I have dealt with your question very specifically another post: "Authority, It's Huge! Huge!" May, 2006 Article. Read over that and let's talk some more.
Dustin,
ReplyDeleteOne more thing to consider:If as you say, "It is easy for me (you) to accept a teaching or tradition given to me (you) by an Apostle..." can you trust the Apostle that when he asks the Thessalonians to "hold to the traditions" that he presumes they can do so?
A cord of three strands is not easily broken: The Scriptures, The Church & The Christian.
ReplyDeleteSorry it took some time to get back to you, I've been trying to study the subject some more. Rex good comment it helps.
ReplyDeleteThe first two questions do I believe and is it infallible. Yes and Yes. True the Bible as we know it today was compiled some 400 years latter and is in many ways a tradition that has been tested approved and even amended or taken from over the years. However, the Bible was Holy before it was canonized. We have ample manuscripts dating back as early as the 1st and 2ed century to attest to the accuracy with which the Bible has been handed down. And the fact is that the Latin Vulgate that was actually physically canonized could easily be considered one of the least accurate transcriptions of the actual text still used today. Point being we can be very certain of the accuracy of the tradition of the Bible from its original form both from Church writings and secular writings from very close to the "apostolic age", if you like fancy terms, but for many other traditions not recorded in the Bible we don't seem to have this record. I do however understand the point of your article that the traditions were preserved by a "string" of holy men appointed by God, at least I think that was what you where getting at. It requires considerations, there were some things I questioned about that idea, but I shall study it.
Your second post. Of course they could not hold to the traditions. There is clear evidence that the early Christians needed constant correction by the Apostles. If they could hold to the traditions than many of the epistles may not have even been written. Much of Paul's writings are refuting the traditions introduced by Jewish teachers.
Lastly don't take this as "bible beating", the nature of my work is that I have to analyze and prove everything, and I struggle with toning it back at times.