2 Thessalonians 2:15

Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

Therefore. God's sovereign choice, so far from being a ground for inaction, is the strongest incentive to perseverance in action. Compare the argument (Philippians 2:12), 'work out your own salvation, FOR it is God that worketh in you,' etc. We cannot explain the theory; but to the sincere the practical acting is plain. 'Privilege first, duty afterward' (Edmunds).

Stand fast - so as not to be 'shaken or troubled' (2 Thessalonians 2:2).

Hold - so as not to let go. Adding nothing, subtracting nothing (Bengel). The Thessalonians had not held fast his oral instructions, but were imposed upon by pretended spirit-revelations, words, and letters, as if from Paul (2 Thessalonians 2:2), that 'the day of the Lord was instantly imminent.'

Traditions - instructions delivered, whether orally or in writing (2 Thessalonians 3:6; 1 Corinthians 11:2, margin, 'traditions'). The verb is used by Paul, 1 Corinthians 11:23; 1 Corinthians 15:3. From the three passages in which 'tradition' has a good sense, Rome has argued for her uninspired traditions, visually overriding, while held as of co-ordinate authority with, God's Word. She forgets the ten passages (Matthew 15:2; Matthew 15:6; Mark 7:3; Mark 7:5; Mark 7:8; Mark 7:13; Galatians 1:14; Colossians 2:8) stigmatizing man's uninspired traditions. [ Paradosis (G3862) is one of the only two nouns in the 2,000 of the Greek Testament which numerically equals 666, the mark of the beast, Revelation 13:18.] Tradition is the great corrupter of doctrine, as [ euporia (G2142)] 'wealth' (the other equivalent of 666) is the corrupter of the Church's practice. Not even the apostles' sayings were all inspired (e.g., Peter's dissimulation, Galatians 2:11), but only when they claimed to be so, as in their words afterward embodied in canonical writings. Oral inspiration was necessary then, until the canon of the written Word should be complete: they proved their inspiration by miracles in support of the new revelation. This revelation, moreover, accorded with the existing Old Testament-an additional test needed besides miracles (cf. Deuteronomy 13:1; Acts 17:11) When the canon was complete, the infallibility of the living men's inspired sayings was transferred to the written Word, now the sole unerring guide, interpreted by the Holy Spirit. Nothing has come down to us by ancient and universal tradition except this, the all-sufficiency of Scripture for salvation.

Therefore, by tradition, we are constrained to cast off all tradition not in, or proveable by, Scripture. The fathers are valuable witnesses to historical facts, which give force to the intimations of Scripture-such as the Christian Lord's day, the baptism of infants, and the genuineness of the canon. Tradition (in the sense human testimony) cannot establish a doctrine, but can authenticate a fact, such as those mentioned. Inspired tradition, in Paul's sense, is not a supplementary oral tradition completing our written Word, but is the written Word now complete; then, the latter not being complete, the tradition was necessarily in part oral, in part written, and continued so until, the latter being complete before the death of John, the last apostle, the former was no longer needed. Scripture is the complete and sufficient rule in all that appertains to making "the man of God perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works" (2 Timothy 3:16). It is by leaving God-inspired for human traditions that Rome has become the parent of Antichrist. It is striking that, from this very chapter denouncing Antichrist, she should draw an argument for her "traditions," by which she fosters anti-Christianity. Because the apostles' oral word was as trustworthy as their written word, it by no means follows that the oral word of those not apostles is as trustworthy as the written word of those who were apostles or inspired evangelists. No tradition of the apostles, except their written word, can be proved genuine on satisfactory evidence. We are no more bound to accept the fathers' interpretations of Scripture, because we accept the Scripture canon on their testimony, than to accept the Jews' interpretation of the Old Testament because we accept the Old Testament canon on their testimony.

Our letter - as distinguished from the "letter AS from us," (2 Thessalonians 2:2). He means his first letter to the Thessalonians.