Posted by
ValiantForTruth on Tuesday, May 19, 2009 12:58:57 PM
The defining words of Christ are given to His disciples as he commissions them to the Gospel ministry…
And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age” [Matt. 28:18-20].
Notice that Jesus’ command was that His disciples teach in accordance with His commands. Significance is placed on the words of Christ. He is preeminent. Even the words of the apostles, including Peter, are subject to the words of Christ. None of the apostles had the authority to contradict the words of Christ. Their letters to the churches are divine commentary on the words of Christ. If none of the apostles had the authority to contradict the words of Christ, surely no church has such authority.
So how do we evaluate the various traditions which claim to be the truth? For instance, Mormons claim that their traditions come from Christ Himself, and yet they believe that they each have the capacity to become gods, and so Jesus is merely one of many gods. The Jehovah Witnesses also believe that their tradition comes directly from Christ, and yet they believe that there is but one God and Jesus is not God. By what authority is the Roman Catholic tradition any more valid than the other traditions that claim to go back to Christ?
Since Christ said all teaching should be done in accordance with His instruction, how can any tradition be held as valid if it departs from Jesus’ words? Here is the problem: if a tradition can be held as valid even if it departs from the words of Christ, then any tradition can be held as valid.
We make no stand on tradition. However, it could be said that our tradition goes back to Christ, through Augustine; a tradition that was endorsed by the Bishop at Rome at that time. What is the significance of Augustine? We view tradition not mainly that of Roman Catholicism versus Protestantism, but in terms of Augustinianism versus Pelagianism.
The Augustinian/Pelagian controversy has to do with the very nature of salvation. Is it of grace alone or grace plus something of man? What is so ironic is not only has the Roman Catholic Church embraced Pelagian, but also the Methodist Church, the Southern Baptist Convention, the Assemblies of God, the Churches of Christ, the Nazarenes, and the vast majority of Lutherans are now Pelagian.
The Reformed churches stand alone with Augustine. The RCC along with most groups considered “Protestant” stand with Pelagius. Such are the problems of viewing tradition as authoritative. Tradition moves the church away from the authority of Christ and His words.