Yes, what can be said of those traditions or traditional ways of thinking that cannot clearly be seen, nor stated??

Tradition has a preserving quality ...and much good can be said of preservation.  Much care was taken to translate and copy the Bible ...preserving it so we can read it today.

Here is a little background on that:

  When we think of a patriarch from the Bible, Abraham certainly comes to mind.  As he left his birthplace, many may have viewed him as a wanderer, but he was directed by God into the land of Canaan to settle there, no longer to wander. 

Around 1000 BC, at the time of King David, scribes and copyists were writing on papyrus and skin scrolls, know as early Hebrew.  Then a couple hundred years more found the northern kingdom conquered by the Assyrians, and later the southern kingdom fell to the Babylonians.

It wasn’t until much later, under King Cyrus of Persia, that repatriation began.  King Cyrus encouraged the Jewish people to return to the land and restore the temple.  Though the Scriptures continued to be written in Hebrew with great care to ensure the accuracy of the sacred text, Aramaic began to replace Hebrew as the common language.   

A couple hundred years later, Alexander the Great’s conquests (300s BC) were paramount with helping make Greek the prominent language of the Mediterranean. The visionary ideas that emerged from Alexander’s campaign brought the notion of the “brotherhood of man” and was seen partly as a missionary effort of sorts aimed at the advancement and conversion of the pagan world.  The Scriptures were translated into Greek for the non-Hebrew speaking people.  The work of 70 legendary scholars was called the Septuagint.   But, some rabbis saw it as more helpful in Hellenizing the Jewish people than being effective in converting the Hellenes.  Some rabbis held the view that the day the Septuagint was completed was “as unlucky a day for Israel as the day of the fabrication of the golden calf.”

There were many good priests, and John the Baptist’s dad, Zacharius, was one of them. But, there were also many who were not good.  At the time Jesus began His ministry, you’d think they’d be pleased with the many wonderful things Jesus did, but many chief priests were very displeased.  Scribes and Pharisees were constantly attempting to twist or trip up Jesus with their questions and His answers.  They felt they were the authority, and would not accept Jesus. Matthew 26:3-4 sums up their conclusion of their thoughts about Jesus …”Then assembled together  the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders of the people, unto the palace of the high priest, who was Caiaphas, and consulted that they might take Jesus by subtilty, and kill Him.”  (And the same attitude towards the apostles is expressed in the Book of Acts …challenging them, Acts 4:1-7. Most of the apostles also died horrific deaths, including being stoned, beheaded, burned, and crucified.

After the death and resurrection of Jesus, the 4 Gospels did not appear as a collection until over a hundred years later.  The Epistles of Paul were gathered together much before that.  There were many writings in circulation, some of which brought much confusion, so in AD 367, a Bishop from Alexandria established 27 New Testament Books.  Pope Damasus I. requested Jerome to deal further with this reorganization, and the version is called the Vulgate.

Though I am focusing mostly on how the English Bible came about (for me to read), the struggle did not just exist in one small area …it was throughout Europe.  In 1229, a church council in Toulouse, France, forbade anyone who was not a priest from owning a Bible.

In the Middle Ages, several thousand monasteries were established throughout Europe, with the chief task of monks being to copy the Scriptures.  But, by the late Middle Ages, with the growth cathedral schools and an increasing number of universities, a new group called ‘professional copyists’ made profit as booksellers and setting up shop near the areas of the advantaged.  Though, aside from these privileged who could afford to further an education, most of the people were illiterate …so there was more a need for the picture Bibles, full of wonderful illustrations to tell the story.

Although the New Testament had reached England around AD 600, hundreds of years elapsed before a complete English Bible was available.  In the 1300s, John Wycliffe tried to introduce his English translation, but he and his followers were branded heretics.

In 1455, Johann Gutenberg’s printing press produced its first important book, a Bible, the Latin Vulgate.  In 1534, Martin Luther came out with his work, including also an artistic rendering of the ancient text …giving even the illiterate a picture or glimpse of  the awesomeness of God. The push for an English Bible continued.  William Tyndale tried to convince church authorities of the need of a printed English Bible, and he found means to print it outside the country, then shipping it to England.  But, Henry VIII had the copies seized and publicly burned.  In 1536, Tyndale was arrested by Dutch authorities, and executed.

Though, about that same time, Coverdale published his complete Bible, dedicating it to Henry VIII, now head on an independent church in England.  The Bible did not get royal approval, but at least this one was spared burning.  Then 4 years later, Coverdale was instructed and instrumental in making sure a copy was placed in every church.   

Yet, when the Queen Mary came to the throne several years later (succeeding her half-brother Edward VI), she forbade the printing of any English Bible, and she condemned its use in parish churches, stating the Bible had to be in Latin and explained by the clergy.

Though in 1558, Queen Elisabeth saw things differently, ordering an English translation in each parish church.  Then in 1603, King James assumed the throne, and in 1611 the King James Version was published. 

It seemed that each ruler had their own version of ‘Game of Thrones’.       

An argument from ignorance, or appeal to ignorance is a fallacy in informal logic. It says something is true because it has not yet been proven false.

To make an argument from silence is to express a conclusion that is based on the absence of statements in historical documents, rather than their presence.

Direct observation showed that the sun revolved around the earth …so, it can be seen how difficult Copernicus’s task must have been in attempting to convince respected scholars who believed he was in error.  Only about a hundred years earlier Galileo Galilei was tried for heresy for similar ideas.

Likewise, when discussing the Bible, a popular phrase is: “…the text simply does not say.”  But, there are occasions that the text does say something …yet, we are faced with a similar argument, as it often does not say enough.  Or perhaps it says just enough to get the mind working …or for someone to work your mind for you.

Evolution, stating that approximately 14 billion years ago the ‘Big Bang’ took place …and here we are today (of course, filling in some blanks with chosen data presented as facts) borrows both from the ‘argument from ignorance’ and the ‘argument from silence’. Yes, take your pick …they did!!

Many Christians are stating that in reading the Bible, there are those who use the argument from silence approach, when really it appears that it could be more accurately an argument for who spoke first …and leaning upon the majority, or how longstanding is the acceptance.

Isn't it quite clear that history shows that 'silence' is what many leaders wanted ...and they would go to extreme lengths to achieve it??

In summary, I contend this has been very effective in steering the church.  The very thing we should all have is reverence towards God …but, it often is influenced by those who feel they have supreme understanding about the very things that are not written in God’s Word.  And in understanding the reverence that we must have ---authority and guilt go hand-in-hand, the church having the authority ---and we know we are all guilty.

Sin is separation from God …and I believe we need to make a conscious effort not to be separated from Him, as we are naturally sinners.  The first separation from God most believers would say was instituted by Lucifer.  And with God’s righteousness, He could say we are all going to be judged by that very act of rebellion …as we all do rebel in some fashion or another.  Yet, Lucifer was sent to this world …and it was Adam who was set apart to choose whether to act in separation from God, or not. 

Of course, Adam failed on that note, called sin, and we all fail in that way.  But, God did not fail to make a way for us.  Jesus came to earth to provide the way, the truth, and the life.

Why is there a need for the Apostle Paul to write, “For the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse.”

And Romans 3:23 reminds us, “For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God;” …along with Romans 5:12-13, “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law ...”)

Yes, there was need for Paul to write to those in Rome, Corinth, Galatia, Ephesus, Philippi, Colosse, and the Thessalonians …and to individuals as Timothy, Titus, and Philemon.  How quickly they often went astray!!

And the most open believers became martyrs …no longer being around to help the church stay on a straight path.  Yes, there was much care to preserve the documents which have become the Bible …yet, it was not initially available to all, and many were illiterate.  Today, that is not true at all …the Bible being the best-selling and most read book of all time.

Today we are pretty casual about this great treasure, so readily available to us.  Still, there are those who feel that we cannot read with understanding, though the majority of us can read.  And if we challenge the understanding of others, they make it seem we are challenging God.

Some people like challenges, and a certain group has also said that we should rewrite the US Constitution ...saying that it was written for a time that we are now far removed from.  (For the record, I disagree.)

Others have said that the Bible is similarly outdated.  (I wholeheartedly disagree.)

Whether it's the US Constitution, or the Bible ...we may do ourselves well to attempt to look at the intent and meaning behind what is being said, and the motivation.  Interpretation should not be solely based upon past precedents, as traditions are not always grounded in truth, and too often there are ulterior motives in the establishment of those traditions.

At this point, perhaps I should differentiate between mere tradition and a much less cultural traditional thinking. I see no harm in some enjoyable traditions, such as is the case with the Christmas tree.  We can have a healthy understanding of Christmas as a celebration of the birth of Jesus, while still putting up a Christmas tree.  Hopefully that will not rile anyone's fir (fur, or hair ---if you're a human; feathers ---if you're a bird) when your fir stands on end, with all its decorations. What can be really wrong with trying to spruce up your living area!?!

Now, traditional thinking, in reference to God, and His Word ...what can be said of that?  The Bible does not need to change. God is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow.  Now, that does not mean we are taught the same lesson the same way. As a youngster, I was not forbidden to eat certain fruit ...yes, my home, like most homes, encouraged their children to eat fruits and vegetables.  But, early on, my hand may have been slapped if I touched the TV controls when I was told not to. 

Yes, my parents did their best ...and raised me in obedience, and with a good measure of respect.

Later on ...let's say, today, if I breach that respect, they may shake their head.  But, that little nod of disapproval affects me. No, my hand does not still get slapped.  I love my parents, so I am inclined to quickly remedy anything I detect as disappointing to them.

But, back to the traditional thinking ...in reference to God.  Aside from the core belief that God's Word to us, is the Bible, we are at times told different and additional things by different faiths or denominations. And we don't always know the motivations behind why certain ways of traditional thinking began. Also, it is difficult at times to decide whether we are too quickly challenging those things, or too easily accepting them.

Primarily, I don't want to dismiss what I do read ...and if it is not clearly stated, I don't want to be clearly confused..

I can say, that if something in the Bible is not clear, it could be that it was not the most significant part to focus on ...or it was not what was being stressed.

Yet, some of us do stress ...and we find it difficult to answer those who try to stress a certain point.  Some people may want us to stumble, and like certain scribes and Pharisees, they may somehow feel good about themselves for not being as ridiculous as those of us who do want to sincerely seek the truth. 

But, more often it is not the case that others want us to stumble, but rather they themselves could be stumbling ...and perhaps they do sincerely want an answer. Uncertainty can make people very uneasy, and it may be comforting to them that someone has the confidence and authority to clear up their misunderstanding.

Yet, often it is not true what they are told ...for any number of reasons.