tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post639862397154944374..comments2024-03-27T17:15:37.606-04:00Comments on Triablogue: Papias, Apostolic Succession, Oral Tradition, And "Relativism"Ryanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17809283662428917799noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-30698621402841437842010-07-30T04:53:04.294-04:002010-07-30T04:53:04.294-04:00Andrew,
See Richard Bauckham's discussion, pa...Andrew,<br /><br />See Richard Bauckham's discussion, part of which I quoted above. Papias seems to be referring to a common historiographic principle of his day. The preference is related to books in general, within a specific category, not scripture in particular. Within a Christian worldview, scripture has attributes that books in general don't have. Elsewhere, Papias defends the gospels, even referring to how Mark "committed no error" and was "careful" (Eusebius, Church History, 3:39:15). Papias put his own comments in writing. That's why later sources, like Eusebius, were able to read and quote what he had written. He didn't leave the preservation of his own words to oral tradition. Apparently, the context in which Papias generally prefers oral tradition is one in which witnesses to an event are involved. He'd rather interview a witness than merely read what the witness wrote. It doesn't follow that he prefers oral tradition from non-witnesses to written accounts by witnesses. Papias was living at a time when eyewitnesses of Jesus and the apostles were still alive. We're not. See Bauckham's comments, some of which I've cited above, regarding how the value of the testimony Papias appeals to decreases over time. Papias wasn't referring to some sort of oral tradition that remains just as significant in the twenty-first century as it was in the first century. Rather, its value depended on the living status of witnesses relevant to an event. Those witnesses are all dead today.Jason Engwerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17031011335190895123noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-68619201685521739932010-07-29T09:47:19.068-04:002010-07-29T09:47:19.068-04:00Jason,
I don't know if you're still readi...Jason,<br /><br />I don't know if you're still reading this, but in case you are:<br /><br />have you addressed somewhere the suggestion that Papias is making his oral sources more authoritative than apostolic documents like the Gospels, etc.?Andrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00489605258427120527noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-12781440127891516542010-01-18T14:59:24.225-05:002010-01-18T14:59:24.225-05:00Good job Jason. Once again it is demonstrated tha...Good job Jason. Once again it is demonstrated that all Dave's bluster about good ecumenical dialog is hogwash. Dave reads you in the worse possible light and uses all kinds of poisonous language in the process. You initial post and this response has been very respectful in tone even where you disagree. Dave has failed to live up to you in tone and quality so far.Ronniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12999674884401144818noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-43733640854264267872010-01-18T13:16:38.278-05:002010-01-18T13:16:38.278-05:00Great work Jason!
The closeness of sola scriptura...Great work Jason!<br /><br />The closeness of sola scriptura to Papias' rule of faith would be clearer if you stated explicitly the principle of canonicity you eloquently defended in your thread on the NT canon last year.<br /><br />I.e., the Prot rule of faith is the prophets and apostles while exercising their teaching authority. Insofar as Papias was listening to oral tradition because it connected him directly with those individuals, he's using the same rule of faith, just as we use copies of copies of their letters to do the same thing. The fact that he is not seeking to verify his information via the Bishop of Rome or the Church universal is at least not helpful for RCC/EO claims, if not more damning.Andrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00489605258427120527noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-10328834510696816662010-01-18T12:43:24.759-05:002010-01-18T12:43:24.759-05:00A remarkable charitable response with some scholar...A remarkable charitable response with some scholarly discipline and depth and all I had to do was come to this blog and read!<br /><br />Wow!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-45240973221089101422010-01-18T11:43:06.905-05:002010-01-18T11:43:06.905-05:00Jason wrote:
---
...I don't suggest that they&...Jason wrote:<br />---<br />...I don't suggest that they're "old fuddy-duds" whose beliefs "don't matter a hill of beans".<br />---<br /><br />Although that does describe Dave Armstrong....Peter Pikehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11792036365040378473noreply@blogger.com