Traditions, what are they, and where do they come from.

Discussion in 'General Discussions' started by Tsaphah, Aug 7, 2017.

  1. 2,492
    809
    113
    Tsaphah

    Tsaphah Experienced Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2013
    Messages:
    2,492
    Likes Received:
    809
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Many of the scriptural interpretations have become traditional. Do you understand what that means?

    Tradition = late 14c., “statement, belief, or practice handed down from generation to generation,” especially “belief or practice based on Mosaic law,” from Old French tradicion “transmission, presentation, handing over” (late 13c.) and directly from Latin traditionem (nominative traditio) “delivery, surrender, a handing down, a giving up,” noun of action from past participle stem of tradere “deliver, hand over,” from trans- “over” (see trans-) + dare “to give” (from PIE root *do- “to give”). The word is a doublet of treason (q.v.). Meaning “a long-established custom” is from 1590s. The notion is of customs, ways, beliefs, doctrines, etc. “handed down” from one generation to the next. (PIE = Proto-Indo-European)

    “Nobody can make a tradition; it takes a century to make it.” [Hawthorne, “Septimius Felton,” 1872]

    It means that the majority of people believe it to be true, without checking the facts. Many people who claim to be “Christian”, believe that everyone who dies, goes to heaven. That belief is not scripturally true. As a matter of fact, many will go the “Hell”.

    Why keep doing something, saying something, or believing something that is not accurate? Why continue to do this when you have the the answer in your hands? I call it God’s User Manual, the Bible! Why should you choose to remain ignorant when you have the answers available?

    Jesus dealt with this in the account written in Matthew. “Then there came to Jesus from Jerusalem Pharisees and scribes, saying: ‘Why do your disciples overstep the tradition of the men of former times? For example, they do not wash their hands when about to eat a meal.’”

    Jesus replied to them: “Why do you overstep the commandment of God because of your tradition? For example, God said, ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and, ‘Let the one who speaks abusively of his father or mother be put to death.’ But you say, ‘Whoever says to his father or mother: ‘Whatever I have that could benefit you is a gift dedicated to God,’ he need not honor his father at all.’ So you have made the word of God invalid because of your tradition.” (Mt 15:1-6 NWT)

    That word in Greek is: “paradosis (par-ad'-os-is) meaning; giving up, giving over something. The body of precepts, esp. ritual, which in the opinion of the later Israelites were orally delivered by Moses and orally transmitted in unbroken succession to subsequent generations, which precepts, both illustrating and expanding the written law, as they did were to be obeyed with equal reverence.”

    They were doing things from tradition rather than through the written word of God.
    Here is a tradition that most people believe: When you die, you go to heaven to live with god eternally.
    If that were to be true, why does the Bible say; “I also saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God . . .” (Rev 21:2a NWT) If it’s coming down from heaven, where is it going? OH! It’s going DOWN to a NEW EARTH. If people are going to live in heaven eternally with God, what’s the new earth for? Wait. The NEW EARTH is where the NEW JERUSALEM will be. So, it will be empty of people, right? NO! “Look! The tent of God is with mankind, and he will reside with them, and they will be his people. And God himself will be with them.” (Rev 21:3 NWT) So, as it says, God will live on earth, right? NO! The people will live on the NEW EARTH! Read: “Look! I am making all things new.” He does not say, “I am making all new things.” The Greek word used here, appears 7 times in Revelation. It is kainos (kahee-nos); meaning fresh, as respects substance, of a new kind, renewed, restored. (Rev 2:17, 3:12, 5:9, 14:3, 21:1--2, 21:5) Pay attention to Rev 3:12. The term “of my God” is used 4 times, and ends with “and my own name.” Who is speaking? (Rev 1:1) Hmmmm. The revelation of whom? Given by whom? Trinity?

    Here is another tradition that most people never think about. When you meet a person for the first time, you are introduced to them, and both parties hold out their right hand, to shake. Why? Why the right hand? Tradition! It originally was a custom to show you did not have a weapon. You were on peaceful grounds. The right hand was the customary hand holding the sword that was used in war. The left hand held the shield.

    Why do men, when dressing for a formal meeting, wear a suit and tie? Tradition! The suit was usually designed as a formal war uniform. http://www.tie-a-tie.net/the-evolution-of-the-necktie/


     
  2. 2,492
    809
    113
    Tsaphah

    Tsaphah Experienced Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2013
    Messages:
    2,492
    Likes Received:
    809
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In my years of bible study I have learned to check listed sources of information and comments. If the person has letters after their name, it immediately raises a question for me. What is the reason this person wrote this exegesis? What particular branch of religion is this persons belief system? How does this belief system affect their thinking? Does that particular belief influence how this person use it in interpreting the scriptures.

    Also very important is the time period in which this information was created. Cultural, social, psychological, political, philosophical, and governmental systems of the time, have their hidden affects on the results. How much influence do these have on determining the information written? Did the writer attend a college or university that was financed by a religious organization? This is one of the biggest influences on traditions. The immediate reaction or advice given is: Don’t go against tradition! Bad! Don’t question tradition! Bad! Don’t go against authority! Bad! Go with the flow and you will be richly rewarded, and be successful.

    Well, I choose to “go against the grain”, as the saying goes. I take the time to check resources. I check out the background of “scholars”. It’s amazing how often they misquote, or borrow, without credit from other “scholars”. If two or more scholars say the same thing, it must be true or acurate. They will often use what has been accepted tradition without checking the truthfulness of the tradition. It was tradition which became the standard for the pharisees and sadducees. It became their downfall.

    Then the Lord* said, ‘Because this people draw near with their words And honor Me with their lip service, But they remove their hearts far from Me, And their reverence for Me consists of tradition learned by rote,’” (Isa 29:13 NASB )
    This is why Jesus answered them, “And He answered and said to them, “Why do you yourselves transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?” (Mt 15:3 NASB )

    * In looking into the original manuscripts, both Hebrew and Greek, I found that the NWT does not translate Isa 29:13 according to the manuscript it should be “Lord” ('Adonay), not yhwh (Jehovah).

    This information is for another thought/idea/teaching, by just about every bible scholar, including the WTS. That “tradition” is that the apostle John received and wrote the Revelation in the year 99/100.
    If this were true, John would have been somewhere around (Latin:circa) 100 years old. This information cannot be verified. Why? Because we have no record in the Bible that states John’s age! NO WHERE!

    The only information that “scholars” use is a guess about who was ruler/caesar of Rome being responsible for imprisonment (?) on Patmos. Here again, was John in prison? What does the Bible say? What did John actually say? “I, John, . . . was on the island called Patmos because of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus.” ( Rev 1:9 NASB ) Was John actually in a prison? Or, was the island a remote location to take him out of circulation? Or, was John actually on the island by choice, to preach the word of God? Or, was he there according to tradition? Here is one comment from a known “scholar”.

    “It [Patmos] has derived all its celebrity from being the place to which St. John was banished by one of the Roman emperors; whether Domitian, Claudius, or Nero, is not agreed on, but it was most probably the latter.” (Adam Clarke Commentary)

    What period of time?

    Chronological Notes relative to this Book. [Revelation]
    Year from the birth of Jesus Christ, according to Archbishop Usher, 100.
    Year of the vulgar era of Christ's nativity, 96.
    Year of the Dionysian period, or Easter Cycle, 97.

    There are a total of 36 different dates listed.
    (Adam Clarke Commentary)

    Regarding the tradition that the apostle John was banished to Patmos, living in exile there when he received the Revelation, both the event of his banishment and the date of it are uncertain. The usual tradition that he was banished to Patmos by Domitian (c. 95 A.D.) and released 18 months later by Nerva is incapable of any dogmatic proof. Even if accepted, the question of the date would still be in doubt. Regarding the theory of John's having been banished to Patmos, the New Testament gives no hint of any such thing, but the mention of tribulation in the same verse certainly seems not opposed to the tradition. If indeed John was an exile, it would be in keeping with the experience of some of God's other great prophets. Wallace*, however, was of the opinion that John was not an exile, but that, “His reason for being in Patmos was no other than to receive the Revelation.” Certainty in the matter is impossible.” (Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament) *Foy E. Wallace, Jr., 1966

    The following, according to Adam Clarke Commentary, places Paul’s second letter to the Corinthians as the Year from the birth of Jesus Christ, 61.

    To boast surely profits me not; for I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord. I know a man in Christ, fourteen; years ago, whether in the body I know not, or out of the body I know not, God knows, such a one was caught away even to the third heaven. And I know such a man, whether in the body or apart from the body I know not, God knows; that he was caught away into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for man to utter. Concerning such a one I will boast, but concerning myself I will not boast, except in my infirmities.” (2 Cor 12:1-5 Codex Sinaiticus )

    Here is what I believe about this scripture. It was written by the apostle Paul. He was not speaking of himself, as some scholars claim. He was speaking of John. If we except the 61 C.E./A.D. date as correct, minus 14 years as stated, John would have received the Revelation in 47 C.E./A.D., and told Paul about his experience. At that date, John would have been likely middle aged at best. We don’t know how old John was at that time.

    I believe this time period to be more correct because of one obvious fact. 1. None of the apostles, especially John, never mention the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in their letters. Everything they speak about is the present day of their time, and what is to come in the future. It was all written prior to the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple.

    See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ.” (Col 2:8 NASB ) Amen!

    Don't take my word for it. Do your home work, with your life course text book, the Bible. I'm probably wrong! ;) o_O
     
    SingleCell, DinahG and Regent Lessard like this.
  3. 311
    231
    43
    Baruq

    Baruq Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2015
    Messages:
    311
    Likes Received:
    231
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Here (And sometimes there)
    Home Page:
    I have asked you a question about that times ago, may-be you did not see my message (it was the period when you left the forum).
    So, John would have had the Revelation around 47. But it speaks about the congregation of Ephesus. It is generally accepted that Paul founded the congregation of Ephesus in 52 with the help of Aquila and Priscilla. So how could it be possible that Jesus sent a message to the congregation of Ephesus in 47 if it was not existed?
    About Thyatira, it seems that they received the good news during the period 53/55.
    Maybe the dates of when were founded these congregations are wrong, so you can be right (and I would like to, because your reasoning is interesting – "None of the apostles, especially John, never mention the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in their letters. Everything they speak about is the present day of their time, and what is to come in the future. It was all written prior to the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple"). So I would like to hear about what you think about it.
     
  4. 94
    65
    18
    Regent Lessard

    Regent Lessard New Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2017
    Messages:
    94
    Likes Received:
    65
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    Hi Baruq,I will try to answer to when apostle John received the revelation. Was it around the middle of the first century or toward the end? One Thing that I have to say is, I am pretty sure you are on the right track. We have to let Christ guide us by what He said in those letters, that John wrote for the 7 congregations. We will examine what Christ said to the Church of Ephesus, Rev:2:2,3, "Key" words in those vs "endurance" or "patience" k,j vs, also have not grown "weary" or "fainted" those words gives us a clue that a good many years may have been involve to develop those qualities. Now in vs 4, Christ say's that he held this against you, they had "lost" their "first love" that they had at "first". That are all key word's to guide us to the right conclusion, years seem to be involve. In vs 5, Christ say's " repent and do the "Former" deeds. We know that they were all waiting for Christ return in kingdom power and it seem that many years had pass, that is certainly why that their former "Love and Deeds" were on the wane, especially if they were after 70 c.e. In Pr:13:12 it say's "expectation postponed makes the heart sick. So to what conclusion do you come up to? Its up to "You" May Christ Blessing and Love be with all of you, Regent
     
  5. 2,492
    809
    113
    Tsaphah

    Tsaphah Experienced Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2013
    Messages:
    2,492
    Likes Received:
    809
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Hi Baruq, (Apparently my post was deleted, so here it is again)
    That is the problem we have with supposed or guessed at dates. I have seen several maps showing the missions of the apostles and they have a couple that show times where Paul and John were both in the area of Patmos. Whether they met there, we don’t know. Or, for all we know, they could have met at some later time. As I said, we really don’t know the dates when these events took place. Whenever a date has (c.) date, it means about, some time around that date, which could have a 10 to 50 year spread. That circa time gets wider the farther back we go in time.

    There is another thing we must remember. “There had been a Jewish community at Ephesus for over three hundred years when Paul the Apostle visited Ephesus around 53 AD.” (Ephesus Wikipedia)
    The Apostle Paul and Silas might have visited Thyateira during Paul's second or third journey, although the evidence is entirely circumstantial. They visited several small unnamed towns in the general vicinity during the second journey. While in Philippi , Paul and Silas stayed with a woman named Lydia from Thyateira, who continued to help them even after they were jailed and released.
    With that, it is possible that Paul revisited Lydia at another time. One more figure for the equation; Paul didn’t reveal this information until his second letter to the Corinthians.

    Also, we should take God’s word when it says; “Put not your trust in princes, in a son of man, for there is no salvation in him. His breath will go out, he returns to the earth; his thoughts perish in that day. Blessed is he who has the God of Jacob in his help; his hope is on Jehovah his God;” (Ps 146:3-5 LITV) That is the only one to trust. A good example of trusting in man is the so called “faithful slave” who have received praise and honor for a time, and now they are no longer given that praise because they have been “disfellowshipped”!

    My main point that no-one seems to get is the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. Even that date has a “window” of time. It is based on the dates given from the Roman records and the reign of Vespasian, and the account of Josephus. Josephus does give a date. I'll try to attach a copy of his time table later. He states that Vespasian and, his son, Titus warred against Israel. They were fighting the Israelites up to breaching the walls of the city, then pulled back and retreated. According to the Encyclopaedia Britannica, “Vespasian conducted two successful campaigns in 67 and 68, winning almost all Judaea except Jerusalem. But on Nero’s death in June 68 he stopped fighting.” Other writers place this date as 66 C.E/A.D. In the Encyclopaedia Britannica article, the give exact dates. Where they get them I don’t know. Likely they are from Roman documents. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Vespasian

    Isn’t it unusual that an event so terrible to the Jews is completely missing in the gospel message? Would not that event appear to be a fulfillment of prophesy to the apostles? “Behold, ‘your house is left’ to you ‘desolate’. (Jer. 22:5) And truly I say to you, You shall not at all see Me until it come when you say, ‘Blessed is the One coming in the name of the Lord.’” Psa. 118:26, Mt 23:37-39. Why didn’t they write about it?
     
  6. 2,492
    809
    113
    Tsaphah

    Tsaphah Experienced Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2013
    Messages:
    2,492
    Likes Received:
    809
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I hope this attachment works. I created a pdf of the Genealogical Table . . . From Josephus. It's a bit hard to read because the original text in the book was light.
     

    Attached Files:

    wallflower and SingleCell like this.
  7. 2,178
    553
    113
    SingleCell

    SingleCell Experienced Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2013
    Messages:
    2,178
    Likes Received:
    553
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Sciences
    Location:
    Lala Land, Israel

Share This Page