After all, the Bible was written by man, too.
And what about the period before the Bible was written? Traditions were all you HAD. I fail to see what is so horrible about traditions in and of themselves.
Fundamentalist protestants see as ‘man made traditions" anything not part of their traditions
Jesus meant such things as negated His teachings or the ethics of the Torah
Non Fundamentalist Christians tend to see FP customs, traditions and teachings as "man made tradition" or borrowed from other Christians such as Catholics or Methodists
All Jewish and Christian teachings and customs( just about) were orally given before they were written down( if they were written down in the Bible at all) and that goes for those the Fps uphold
Fps will fight endlessly among themselves over what customs are ‘man made" and are to be rejected
Every single tradition humans do are man made traditions, even if you are a religious person.
they might be inspired by your particular diety, I suppose, but man (or woman) made them, designed them, defined them.
References :
The trinity
Helfire
Predestination
Just War
to name but a few.
References :
Because "traditions" serve no real purpose other than to make people blindly follow routines.
The Bible was "written by man" by DIRECT REVELATION FROM GOD. That’s different than what you’re implying.
References :
you mean like going to church and reciting the pledge of allegiance?
References :
My goodness fundamentalists have their traditions too! Some of the churches have made absolutely no external changes for 150 years. They schedule their worship services for farmers. Nobody in cities farm! But suggest they change that. Their preachers dress in suits and ties. All ministers up until the revival movements of the 1800s dressed in robes. both of them are traditions. And for the contemporary churches where preachers dress in jeans and polo, heaven forbid!
Traditions provide levels of comfort to people.
The only traditions you oppose are the traditions that are not yours.
References :
Christian fundamentalism is also a man-made tradition. That’s what traditions are. Man made. I hate to point it out since I’m not any sort of Christian anymore, but the Catholic Church claims apostolic succession. The first Pope (ie Bishop of Rome) was Peter, who is mentioned in the Bible, since he was one of the apostles.
I agree with your assessment. Their argument is that if it’s not in the Bible, it’s not Christian. But Jesus described Peter as the rock on which the Church would be founded. It’s in the Bible. The name Peter even comes from the Greek word for rock.
References :
Some Christians oppose traditions that either disagree with things God would want them to do or traditions that tend to take attention off of the religious purpose of an event.
For instance, some Christians oppose Santa Clause because they feel it distracts from what they see as the true story of Christmas: Jesus birth. However, there are Christians who know the "true" meaning of Christmas, but also like Santa Claus – it’s just an added aspect to the Christmas celebration.
References :
What traditions in particular are you referring? What do you consider "man made"? Is the celebration of the winter soltice "man made" or is it inspired by something else? I don’t like to answer in questions, but there needs to be more info. in what you are really asking.
References :
Haha. Yes, the fundies’ traditions came from GOD, from the leather-bound KJV Bibles that magically fell from the sky one day. And everything else is a filthy Catholic tradition.
You just can’t win with people like that. Their judgements are clouded by their prejudices.
References :
Jesus got very upset by religious leaders who replaced the actual commandments from God with traditions that were handed down that were NOT part of the actual Scriptures.
If you assume that the Scriptures are NOT from God, then all kinds of chaos results. As a Christian, we start with the basic foundation that "All Scripture is inspired by God (God breathed) as the Holy Spirit moved on individuals.
If you don’t start there, you have nothing.
But as a Christian, that is the starting point. Jesus held a very high standard when it came to the recorded Scriptures, and even after 2500 years, he was satisfied that the Scriptures were accurate. He had no problem with the accounts of David, Noah, Moses, Adam and Eve, etc.
Likewise, Christians hold to the inerrancy of Scripture, so when traditions come along that do NOT correlate with the recorded Scriptures, we treat it the same as Jesus treated traditions. They are wrong because they try to replace God’s Word with man’s word.
Traditions, in and of themselves, are NOT bad. Only when those traditions of men contradict God’s Word.
The question of the Bible being God’s Word is a question for another time, and there is some pretty amazing evidence to support this claim that even convinced the Russian Mathematician and "evangelistic" atheist, Ivan Panin, that, contrary to everything he believed (or disbelieved, as it were), was wrong, that the Bible truly was authored by an infinite mind, and that the God behind the Bible is real; even to the point where he had to renounce atheism.
But, that – as I already said – is for another question. This one uses the premise that the Bible truly IS the Word of God.
References :
Man made traditions are things man makes up, which go against the word of God. Example: the Pharisees held to washing hands before eating, but didn’t care that inside they were like dead men’s bones. They had many other traditions that made the commandments of God of none effect. Any tradition that does not line up with God’s word is sin, because God’s word is greater than any man made tradition.
References :
man made traditions are not from god
men penned the words which were spoken by god
men did not make up the bible
god instructed men what to do by his scriptures before the bible was put together
no they had the old testament from the time moses wrote the first five books and others through out time god had men write more books until the time of jesus.
after jesus men were told by god to write books of the new testament and were passed to all the church’s by 100AD
References :
2 Thessalonians 2:15
Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.
Traditions are fine as long as they don’t go against the holy word of God.
One example of a tradition that goes against the word of God is the "trinity". The trend toward trinitarianism began by making the Logos (the Word of John 1) a separate person. Following a thought in Greek philosophy, particularly in the teachings of Philo, some of the Greek apologists began to view the Logos as a separate person from the Father. This was not trinitarianism, however, but a form of binitarianism, and one that subordinated the Logos to the Father. To them the Father alone was the real God and the Logos was a created divine being of second rank. Eventually, the Logos became equated with the Son. Apparently, the triune baptismal formula became a practice among some Christian churches, although the few early references to it may be either recitations of Matthew 28:19 or interpolations added by later copyists. Moreover, during this time, an apologist named Theophilus used the word triad (triados) to describe God. However; he probably did not use it to signify a trinity of persons but rather a triad of God’s activities.
Irenaeus (died c. 200) is often considered the first true theologian of this time. He emphasized the manifestation of God in Christ for the sake of redemption. Some scholars have characterized Irenaeus’ beliefs as "economic trinitarianism." By this they mean he did not believe in an eternal trinity or a trinity of essence but only a trinity that is temporary in nature – probably a trinity of God’s activity or operations only. Irenaeus, who did not use the Greek Logos doctrine, identified the Logos with the Father. His theology had three key characteristics: a strong biblical emphasis, a reverence for apostolic tradition, and a strong Christocentric emphasis. It seems he was not a true trinitarian but at most a transitional figure.
In summary, in the first century after the apostles, the doctrine of the trinity had not even developed. However, in some circles a form of subordinationistic binitarianism emerged based on Greek philosophical ideas, a doctrine denounced in the first chapter of John’s Gospel. The New Catholic Encyclopedia says of trinitarianism at this time in church history: "Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective; among the second century Apologists, little more than a focusing of the problem as that of plurality within the unique Godhead… In the last analysis, the second century theological achievement was limited… A trinitarian solution was still in the future."
The "trinity" has its roots in polytheism, pagan religion, and pagan philosophy. The doctrine itself did not exist in church history before the third century. Even at that time, early trinitarians did not accept many basic doctrines of present day trinitarianism such as the co-equality and co-eternality of Father and Son. Trinitarianism did not achieve dominance over Oneness belief until around 300. It did not achieve victory over Arianism until the late 300′s.
In Christ,
James
Apostolic Minister
References :
Where does the idea come from all traditions are bad? What traditions don’t come from humans? All traditions are started by people. No fundamentalist Christian would preach all traditions are bad, having no scripture to back that claim up. Look the word up. We are opposed to a category of traditions of men that God protests. Any tradition that serves vanity, serving no lasting godly purpose while interfering with scriptural righteous behavior is a vain tradition, useless in the Kingdom. There are four good answers above me, so I’ll try not to repeat those.
2 Thes. 2:15 "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle."
Some are based on scripture texts, such as gathering on the first day of the week to worship and collect tithes and offerings. Some traditions were taught in sermons and by example. Reading the Bible to your children at every bedtime is a scriptural and highly beneficial tradition. "The Way" of Christ is more of a tradition than a world religion, the way of living taught by Jesus and spread by His disciples by written and spoken word. Jesus and His followers were men acting on words received from the Father God by divine inspiration. Their followers followed by sets of traditions, but those traditions handed down through generations are supposed to be compared to what is written. If the shoe you wear doesn’t fit, it usually means your foot enlarged. If your tradition doesn’t fit The Way of Jesus and the apostles, then you have changed and are off course.
Col. 2:8 "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ."
If a belief doesn’t fit what Jesus or His apostles taught, then it should be discarded. The Old Testament contains much wisdom for development of healthy traditions not at all in conflict with The Way. Christians are direct beneficiary of all it promises without burden of the curses of the law. Nothing there is commanded by Christ beyond limits agreed to by the apostles in Acts 15.
Before Moses wrote in the books was Abraham, from whom oral traditions arose based on his relationship with God. Before he knew God he was a pagan in the area of Iraq. But even those ancient people shared many oral and written traditions carried forward from Babel after the Flood. Noah and his sons carried knowledge over the Flood. The oral traditions carried from Adam to Noah.
Some say all oral-based Jewish or Christian traditions are distorted. I don’t believe that, especially when they claim nobody messed up oral versions of Greek mythology or any other pet religion. They circulate too widely, becoming corrected when told in error later. I told an old once favorite popular joke recently. Nobody laughed. My sister said I messed it up and on top of that missed the punch line. She told it and everyone laughed, including me. I retold it incorrectly, but more than one remembered the right way to tell it even though born decades after it was popular.
References :
The Methodists have a good bit of variety in their convictions because of the "quadrilateral". Before John Wesley The churches used to varying degrees three guide lines: scripture, tradition, and reason. To that John Wesley added experience.
When we need to decide how to live or what to think, we have these 4 things to consider.
We are all individuals and are going to come up with different answers, so Wesley said that we should "think and let think".
References :
Fundamentalist protestants see as ‘man made traditions" anything not part of their traditions
Jesus meant such things as negated His teachings or the ethics of the Torah
Non Fundamentalist Christians tend to see FP customs, traditions and teachings as "man made tradition" or borrowed from other Christians such as Catholics or Methodists
All Jewish and Christian teachings and customs( just about) were orally given before they were written down( if they were written down in the Bible at all) and that goes for those the Fps uphold
Fps will fight endlessly among themselves over what customs are ‘man made" and are to be rejected
References :