Skip to content
The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 1 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
Question 1
Bercot argues from 2 Thessalonians 2:15 that refusing to β€œhold to the traditions” taught orally by the apostles can actually be disobedience to Scripture. How does this challenge the way many Christians define faithfulness to the Bible?
Another way to ask: Bercot says 2 Thessalonians 2:15 teaches Christians to keep the apostles’ spoken traditions. If we reject those traditions, we may be disobeying the Bible. How does this challenge the way many Christians think about being faithful to the Bible?

Direct Answer

Bercot challenges the idea that faithfulness to the Bible means relying on written Scripture in isolation. He argues that Scripture itself commands Christians to hold to apostolic teaching delivered both orally and in writing.

Support from Transcript

- He cites 2 Thessalonians 2:15: "stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us." - He says Paul "told Thessalonian Christians not to go by written Scripture alone." - He asks whether Christians today are "any less obligated" than the Thessalonians to obey what Paul taught orally. - He also cites 2 Thessalonians 3:6, where Paul commands believers to avoid those not living "according to the tradition" received from the apostles. - He adds that 1 Corinthians 11:2 praises the Corinthians for "holding firmly to the traditions" Paul delivered.

Discussion Follow-ups

This reframes the question: not whether Christians should add human ideas to Scripture, but whether they should obey the apostolic oral tradition Scripture itself points to.