"Bible alone," Christians

[Luvtosew]

Sure, 1 Timothy 3:15.

I knew someone would bring that one up, as you know Paul is writing t Timothy who is not an original apostle but one who trained under Paul. He knew the OT well and he was more like an overseer (elder) of the Church , over decons,

also hard to just take one verse and go with it, read the whole book ,

1 Timothy 4:13

New International Version (NIV)

13 Until I come, devote yourself to the public reading of Scripture, to preaching and to teaching.

Probably by 65 ad when that was wrote (the letter) they had written instruction to follow from Paul and the other apostles.

The point of this conversation is not about what Church, its about the Bible and it being the authority , which it should be in any Church.

That is the fault of many preachers now days esp the ones on TV, so yes even the Protestant (some) are scarey nowdays. One needs to be careful out there. The Bible needs to be the instruction book. All chuches have traditions, but they need to line up with the word of God.

 

[LegoGE1947]

I didn’t know Moses & Co. were Catholics

The Church wrote the New Testament and in the 4th Century Catholic bishops decided which of hundreds of writings circulating around should or should not be included in Scripture. (Moses & Co. were Jews or at least Hebrews)

 

[LegoGE1947]

I knew someone would bring that one up, as you know Paul is writing t Timothy who is not an original apostle but one who trained under Paul. He knew the OT well and he was more like an overseer (elder) of the Church , over decons,

also hard to just take one verse and go with it, read the whole book ,

1 Timothy 4:13

New International Version (NIV)

13 Until I come, devote yourself to the public reading of Scripture, to preaching and to teaching.

Probably by 65 ad when that was wrote (the letter) they had written instruction to follow from Paul and the other apostles.

The point of this conversation is not about what Church, its about the Bible and it being the authority , which it should be in any Church.

That is the fault of many preachers now days esp the ones on TV, so yes even the Protestant (some) are scarey nowdays. One needs to be careful out there. The Bible needs to be the instruction book. All chuches have traditions, but they need to line up with the word of God.

As Father John Corapi used to say “Truth in its essence is not SOMETHING Truth is SOMEBODY. Jesus the Christ”!

 

[Blacksword]

I knew someone would bring that one up, as you know Paul is writing t Timothy who is not an original apostle but one who trained under Paul. He knew the OT well and he was more like an overseer (elder) of the Church , over decons,

also hard to just take one verse and go with it, read the whole book ,

1 Timothy 4:13

New International Version (NIV)

13 Until I come, devote yourself to the public reading of Scripture, to preaching and to teaching.

Probably by 65 ad when that was wrote (the letter) they had written instruction to follow from Paul and the other apostles.

The point of this conversation is not about what Church, its about the Bible and it being the authority , which it should be in any Church.

That is the fault of many preachers now days esp the ones on TV, so yes even the Protestant (some) are scarey nowdays. One needs to be careful out there. The Bible needs to be the instruction book. All chuches have traditions, but they need to line up with the word of God.

Great verse, but what does it have to with the discussion? No one’s saying “ignore the Bible”, certainly not the Catholic Church. And I fail to see how the fact that St. Paul was talking to Timothy specifically in this letter alters the conclusion one bit as to the import of this verse. ALL of Paul’s writings were written to some group of people or person who is not specifically us today, yet we understand that his words are providing instruction and teaching to us all today through inspiration of the Holy Spirit. I just don’t see what your point here even is, the verse I quoted above is explicit and clear: the Church is the pillar of truth, not, specifically, a Bible that had notneven yet been written and compiled when St. Paul wrote his letters.

No one is saying the Church “trumps” Scripture, as you like to put it. We’re saying that Scripture itself is from Tradition of the Church, and that Scripture and the Church work together as authority. One cannot really be divorced from the other without entering a quagmire, which we see today in some Catholics who don’t know anything about the Bible at all, and in ALL of Protestantism, which has become an absolute theological MESS, with thousands of denominations, sects, and groups all with their own interpretations, which over time become ever crazier to the point of reaching the snake handlers, and groups who are no longer even properly understood as Christian, such as Jehova’s Witnesses and Mormons. Don’t forget, even those groups of course insist they are simply interpreting Scripture the way THEY think it should be understood. In the end even the people attending the SAME “church” disagree often over Scripture, and every man is his own Pope. And they think they are, of course, the correct ones, and everyone else is wrong. How is this solved? By having an authoritative interpreter, i.e. the Catholic Church! Just as Jesus intended it to be when he talked of authority in the Church in Mathew 16:18, Mathew 18, and prayed for unity in the last supper discourse in John.

 

[Luvtosew]

What did you verse have to do with the discussion? All Churches need to adhere to the Bible and not add to it or put their own spin on it, so I see nothing wrong with Bible alone
Christians.

 

[JonNC]

=pgepps;9053260] The Catechism clearly teaches us (and St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, among many others, including the Apostles who wrote in Scripture and the Prophets they drew on) that we cannot possibly have “sola” anything that leaves out the Word of God written–the Scriptures–or the Word of God Incarnate–the Christ Himself, speaking in His Church’s reading of Scripture, present in His Church by the Eucharist, and the Head of the Body who speaks to us when our priests perform the sacraments and offer us absolution in His Person. If some Catholics have a habit of behaving as though Scripture is unimportant, that’s an unfortunate overreaction against the Protestant teaching that every individual’s reading of Scripture is the important theological authority.

The problem with “sola Scriptura,” ultimately, is not that it puts Scripture in such a high place. JUST THE OPPOSITE. The problem with “sola Scriptura” is that, in the end, it lapses into “only what I think.” The reader, rather than the God who breathed Scripture, ends up being the authority by which one teaching or interpretation is judged against another. Look at serious conversations among Protestants with important disagreements, and you will find an endless series of exegetical strategies for winning arguments ultimately of the form, “my reading is better than yours.”

While what you state here may be what is practiced by some, it is not the intent of sola scriptura. The intent of sola scriptura is most importantly a practice of the Church, used for hermuenetics.
The Lutheran confessions declare:

We believe, teach, and confess that the sole rule and standard according to which all dogmas together with [all] teachers should be estimated and judged are the prophetic and apostolic Scriptures of the Old and of the New Testament alone, as it is written Ps. 119:105: Thy Word is a lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path. And St. Paul: Though an angel from heaven preach any other gospel unto you, let him be accursed, Gal. 1:8.

So, in fact, the opposite of what you say is true. Sola scriptura actually holds all to the ord of God, not our individual interpretations. Second generation Lutheran reformer Martin Chemnitz states:
“This is also certain, that no one should rely on his own wisdom in the interpretation of the Scripture, not even in the clear passages…"
For one to be Lutheran, one’s right to individually interpret scripture is outside of doctrine set by the Church.

Jon

 

[jlhargus]

Mark

 

[Blacksword]

What did you verse have to do with the discussion? All Churches need to adhere to the Bible and not add to it or put their own spin on it, so I see nothing wrong with Bible alone
Christians.

Really? 1 Timothy 3:15 directly relates to the discussion because it declares flatly the authority of the Church! Indeed, let’s follow the Bible, I agree. And the Bible says “Follow the Church, it is the pillar of truth”!

 

[Luvtosew]

Really? 1 Timothy 3:15 directly relates to the discussion because it declares flatly the authority of the Church! Indeed, let’s follow the Bible, I agree. And the Bible says “Follow the Church, it is the pillar of truth”!

And my verse, mentions scripture

1 Timothy 4:13

New International Version (NIV)

13 Until I come, devote yourself to the public reading of Scripture, to preaching and to teaching.

 

[pismopal]

" The Church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of truth." 1 Tim 3:15

It could not be more clear…to anyone who wants to hear.

 

[Luvtosew]

Its of course taken out of context, Jesus warned and put down the Jews for the Tanakh, man made rules that distorted the word of God. He couldn’t make that much clearer either.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

The Church wrote the New Testament and in the 4th Century Catholic bishops decided which of hundreds of writings circulating around should or should not be included in Scripture. (Moses & Co. were Jews or at least Hebrews)

Determining a Canon does not equal authorship.

Our Lord and Savior established the Catholic Church. He also quoted from the Septuagint and as far as I know, neither Him, nor Paul, nor any of the Apostles said there was anything wrong with it. Our Church Fathers later streamline and determine which canon of Scripture was to be used for the body of Christ.

We, Catholics, did not write the entire Bible. We are but keepers of the Word of God.

In Him,

Jose

 

[Blacksword]

And my verse, mentions scripture

1 Timothy 4:13

New International Version (NIV)

13 Until I come, devote yourself to the public reading of Scripture, to preaching and to teaching.

Yes, but what of it? What are you getting out of this verse?! It doesn’t say a thing about authority of the Church v. Scripture. It says absolutely nothing about the issue at all. It says read and know your scriptures and preach and teach. This simply provides zero support for what you are arguing for.

 

[Luvtosew]

The authority of the Church (Christian) is the Word of God. Something I know we both agree on. God Bless

 

[Blacksword]

Its of course taken out of context, Jesus warned and put down the Jews for the Tanakh, man made rules that distorted the word of God. He couldn’t make that much clearer either.

What context is it taken out of? Since you are suggesting that Catholics are misusing this Scripture, please explain how it should be understood other than as a definitive statement as to the authority of the Church to interpret Scripture and teach.

 

[Blacksword]

The authority of the Church (Christian) is the Word of God. Something I know we both agree on. God Bless

? An individual Christian is not “the Church” if that is what you’re suggesting above…and no, the Church and Scripture and Sacred Tradition are all the three legs of the stool, working together. They agree with one another, work with one another, and therefore have no need of hierarchy over or under each other.

 

[Luvtosew]

What context is it taken out of? Since you are suggesting that Catholics are misusing this Scripture, please explain how it should be understood other than as a definitive statement as to the authority of the Church to interpret Scripture and teach.

I never said that, we were talking about Bible Only stuff, but since you asked all Churches, or most, or many or a lot, take scripture and use it to suite their purpose or beliefs. That is why in my opinion all Christians should at least be familiar with the Scriptures, at least know some of the scripture so preachers don’t take advantage.

 

[Luvtosew]

Man sorry you guys, but I’m a Catholic, but I’ll defend the word of God before any Church I put my faith in. No Church can save us, they can help but we need to know the Scriptures and have our own relationship with our creator. Believe me I have known very holy people that read their Bibles and prayer and never went to Church, so yes I do believe some people can be Bible alone wonderful Christians.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

I never said that, we were talking about Bible Only stuff, but since you asked all Churches, or most, or many or a lot, take scripture and use it to suite their purpose or beliefs. That is why in my opinion all Christians should at least be familiar with the Scriptures, at least know some of the scripture so preachers don’t take advantage.

What Scriptures specifically?

From your posts, you seem to quote mostly from NIV.

Is it 1984 or 2011 NIV?

Do you know who are the men that made the translation of the NIV?

When you trust Scriptures, you are trusting that the translation is free from any agenda suited for their purposes and/or beliefs. You are putting your entire life on a translation done by a group of men, very few men, very small group of men.

Even if you were fluent in Greek and Hebrew and Aramaic, you would be trusting a small group of men.

Even then, you are trusting a group of men to put the canon of scripture together for you. A group of men to determine which scriptures are sacred and which are not.

No matter which way you cut it, you are trusting a group of men.

In Him,

Jose

Edit for grammar

 

[Aquila_Lucis]

Man sorry you guys, but I’m a Catholic, but I’ll defend the word of God before any Church I put my faith in. No Church can save us, they can help but we need to know the Scriptures and have our own relationship with our creator. Believe me I have known very holy people that read their Bibles and prayer and never went to Church, so yes I do believe some people can be Bible alone wonderful Christians.

As has been mentioned before–and incredibly eloquently by some in this thread–there is no “alone” way to do any of this. Yes, we need to have an understanding of the Scriptures, and yes we do need a Church. You say you’re a Catholic, so there is a particular piece of Scripture that I would like to draw your attention to:

“Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day.” John 6:53-54

True, our salvation does not necessarily lie in a Church, per se. Our true salvation lies in God alone. But as Catholics, we believe that God’s tools for obtaining that salvation–i.e. the sacraments–were entrusted to the Catholic Church, and therin lies our sole route to salvation. Among those sacraments Eucharist is paramount. And Jesus says, in incredibly clear language, that it is through the Eucharist alone that we are saved. And to whom did Jesus entrust the Eucharist? The Catholic Church.*

Protestant “churches” do not have these tools to salvation. For political reasons, these groups decided to simply be in protest (hence the word “protestant”). When these groups split from the Catholic Church, it was–to be blunt with it–a theo-political middle finger to Rome. As much as Protestant men and women may truly be good people doing what *they understand *to be their best to be holy, the Protestant understanding of Scripture, Tradition, and the Church is limited and does not offer the saving grace that God entrusted to the Catholic Church.

Long story short, though, what the Church offers us–the Sacraments–is not just “help.” It’s pretty much the whole ball game.

Blessings,
~Michael

*As I am not educated well enough about the Orthodox Churches in regards to the Sacraments, I am not going to address that facet of this discussion