Believers should not have to be commanded to remember him any more than family members have to be commanded to remember their loved ones.
I don't at all consider the Trinity to be extra-scriptural Tradition. The totality of scripture contains the whole idea of the Trinity. I think I have posted this website before, but just in case see: Trinity in Scriptures.
Yes you have and thank you again. It's a good source of study, but of course it is not all that it's hyped to be. It wold be good to debate it but on another thread.
and for Sola Scriptura here are some examples in support:
2 Tim. 3:16-17 : 16 All Scripture is God-breathed...
Neat, except Paul doesn't specify what constitutes scripture, by whose decision, and how. Jewish canon was not uniform. It varied greatly between the sectarian communities of Samaria, the Sadducees, the Pharisees, and the Alexandrian Greek-speaking diaspora.
...1 Cor. 4:6-7 : 6 ...“Do not go beyond what is written.” Then you will not take pride in one man over against another
Unless, of course, he is Paul! Now, you may try the banal Berean argument, which of course itself is another vague and open-ended argument, because it doesn't say that just, because the checked the scriptures (whatever they were), they found Paul's ramblings to be true; it just says they checked and not what they conlcuded.
Supposedly being an observant Jew, it is strange that he would think so lowly of oral transmission of the faith, which, in Judaism, is actually considered higher than the written, and which was not reduced to writing until well into the Christian era otherwise known as the Talmud.
Only the Christians consider Paul a "Hebrew scholar." People who practice Judaism and are familiar with Hebrew scholarship don't, the way Christians know that Mormons are not Christians and that it would be wrong to call Joseph Smith a "Christian" anything.
...Luke 1:1-4...it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4 so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.
So, how did the people before Luke know with "certainty" what they have been taught before any of the NT (or for that matter any scripture) was written and widely read? Luke himself gathered what others told him, and not something he actually read! And what about those poor souls (most of the pagan world) who couildn;t read? LOL! This is so naïve it's embarrassing anyone would take it seriously.
We also have Jesus' example of handling every temptation of satan with scripture only.
Yeah, right, in the Greek, Zoroastrian-influenced dualistic sectarian stroy-telling. The Jews don't believe in the devil. How could an observant Jew?
Believers should not have to be commanded to remember him any more than family members have to be commanded to remember their loved ones.
But family members very often do not remember their loved ones properly. It happens with many things from birthdays and anniversaries to not taking their feelings into account and saying hurtful things. We need reminding about that all the time too. Part of our nature is that we slack off. (Look at how long it took Peter to forget his pledge to never deny Christ.) God recognizes this and so there is much repetition in His word. That isn't by accident, He knows our weaknesses and helps us with reminders.
It's a good source of study, but of course it is not all that it's hyped to be. It would be good to debate it but on another thread.
Yes, that website is not the be all and end all. I just like it because it is so easy to use as a quick reference.
Neat, except Paul doesn't specify what constitutes scripture, by whose decision, and how. Jewish canon was not uniform. It varied greatly between the sectarian communities of Samaria, the Sadducees, the Pharisees, and the Alexandrian Greek-speaking diaspora.
If scripture is the word of God, then God determined what it was. He informed us of what scripture was by communicating it through His Church (or members thereof). You're right that it didn't happen overnight, but we can be confident today that what we have contains the essence of what God wants us to know.
...1 Cor. 4:6-7 : 6 ...“Do not go beyond what is written.” Then you will not take pride in one man over against another
Unless, of course, he is Paul!
Paul was chosen solely by God to be one of a handful of people to actually write down "what is written". Therefore, he did not go beyond it. He participated in creating it.
Supposedly being an observant Jew, it is strange that [Paul] would think so lowly of oral transmission of the faith, which, in Judaism, is actually considered higher than the written, and which was not reduced to writing until well into the Christian era otherwise known as the Talmud.
But Paul was a prodigious preacher. Weren't his epistles basically follow-ups to his earlier personal visits during which he transmitted the faith orally (preached)? With the Bereans, he told them to check the scriptures against what he SAID.
...Luke 1:1-4...it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4 so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.
So, how did the people before Luke know with "certainty" what they have been taught before any of the NT (or for that matter any scripture) was written and widely read? Luke himself gathered what others told him, and not something he actually read!
That's right, before any scripture was written down its truth was transmitted orally. Sola Scriptura is fine with that. The Apostles taught orally with authority from Christ, and we can be sure that what later became scripture matched what they taught. So, as Luke's statement partly implies, if one did not have a reliable oral chain back to an Apostle, one could not be as sure as getting the information from what became scripture.
FK: We also have Jesus' example of handling every temptation of satan with scripture only.
Yeah, right, in the Greek, Zoroastrian-influenced dualistic sectarian storytelling. The Jews don't believe in the devil. How could an observant Jew?
I'm not sure what you mean. Jesus was an "observant Jew", and clearly believed in the existence of satan. The story of His temptation in the desert had to have come from Him since He was the only one there to report it. Therefore, other observant Jews who were followers of Jesus would have believed the same thing.