False arguments that Catholics and Orthodox use to prove oral extra-scriptural church tradition are refuted.

"We only know the identity of John as the writer of the fourth gospel from tradition."

1. We marvel at what lengths Roman Catholic and Orthodox oral tradition defenders will go to prove the need for oral tradition. The fact that Matthew, Mark, Luke, Hebrews and most of the Old Testament books do not tell us who actually wrote them is not a proof of the need for oral tradition. It is obviously not important who the authors are, but that they were inspired by the Holy Spirit.
2. Knowing who wrote the fourth gospel or Hebrews is not important to faith. What difference does it make if we did not know for sure who wrote the fourth gospel. No one knows for sure who wrote the book of Hebrews and it makes no difference.
3. Hebrews, for example was universally ascribed to Paul in the east (orthodox church), while the west (Roman Catholic) put forth several other possible writers. This actually proves the failure of oral tradition, because there was plenty of oral tradition about who wrote Hebrews, but none of it helped answer the question. The Orthodox relies on its tradition and the Catholic relies on its own tradition and they never have agreed.
4. Actually, the earliest tradition clearly states that Paul wrote the book of Hebrews. For the Roman Catholic church to not accept this universal and earliest tradition, only points out the fact that they really don't truly believe in oral tradition at all. If they did, they would be forced to accept that Paul wrote Hebrews, for that is what the tradition states.
5. If the earliest, universal oral tradition clearly states that Paul wrote the book of Hebrews, why does the Roman Catholic church question this tradition to this day? (The Orthodox, are at least consistent in accepting this tradition, not that they are correct.)
6. All this question about who wrote Hebrews, should embarrass the Roman Catholic church who says by its own inspired, God given authority, determined the 27 book canon. They claim that Rome determined Hebrews was inspired, yet never could say for certain who wrote the book.
7. If knowing who wrote the fourth gospel is so important, they why is knowing who wrote Hebrews any less important?

1. Scripture does not explicitly say who wrote the fourth gospel, but scripture does clearly reveal that John is the author when you take all the Bible verses together. Several Bible texts that clearly show us John is the author because John is the disciple whom Jesus loved.
2. What we do know from scripture is that the author of the fourth gospel was an apostle that was part of Jesus inner circle. "When Jesus then saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing nearby, He said to His mother, "Woman, behold, your son!" John 19:26
3. So she ran and came to Simon Peter and to the other disciple whom Jesus loved, and said to them, "They have taken away the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid Him." John 20:2
4. "Therefore that disciple whom Jesus loved said to Peter, "It is the Lord." So when Simon Peter heard that it was the Lord, he put his outer garment on (for he was stripped for work), and threw himself into the sea." John 21:7
5. "Peter, turning around, saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following them; the one who also had leaned back on His bosom at the supper and said, "Lord, who is the one who betrays You?" John 21:20
6. "This is the disciple who is testifying to these things and wrote these things, and we know that his testimony is true." John 21:24
7. It is clear from scripture, therefore, that the "disciple whom Jesus loved" is John.

More Pro-Oral Church tradition arguments refuted!

More Anti-Sola Scriptura arguments refuted!

by Steve Rudd

Go To Start: WWW.BIBLE.CA