"Bible alone," Christians

  • Thread starter Thread starter Semper_Fi_1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
With all that has been said I can’t discard the possibility that “Bible Alone” believers are responding to our Lord’s call in their own way. After all, my capacity for understanding the way our Lord works with us is not able to grasp the infinite wisdom He has.

The problem is that while the bible (which bible right? 🤷) is the Word of God we must be careful in not making the Bible the Idol it is not. That the Lord is graceful enough to have us partake in a form of communication that His Word can reach us faster and more effectively we must also keep in mind the God’s ultimate Word is Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ did give not only the authority but the responsibility to care for His sheep to the Apostles. And Peter did have primacy among equals. This fact is inescapable.

I rest in the fact that none of these problems we have among us have caught our Lord’s by surprise, and it is but an incredible challenge for us to overcome together and a test we must be able to endure. Calling from us complete obedience and surrender to Him.

Holding to Bible alone beliefs only enslaves the might of our Lord to a compilations of books, He is certainly much much more than that. And there have been many men and women whose lives were taken and sacrificed for their belief in our Lord’s Word, written and verbal. It is inconsiderate for us to ignore the sacrifices these saints have made for the Church to survive.

Keeping St. John’s last verses from his gospel:

[bibledrb]John 21:24-25[/bibledrb]

In Him,

Jose
 
That was great Jose! I agree with what you said. 🙂

As far as I am concerned, we as Christians must be careful not to disregard who came before us. By just interpreting the Bible alone and we can miss how things came to be and why there are still people who believed our Loving Saviour was God ( that’s why we had the Council of Nicea) therefore, we must respect our early Fathers.

Jesus said “whoever welcomes you, welcomes me”, but if we are going to deny the Fathers (who knew those who knew Jesus), it will be us the losers, putting who WE believe who Jesus was and thus have a subjective view of him.

It’s frightening to think there are people who don’t believe say that the Holocaust (by Hitler) didn’t happen because they don’t examine those who suffered and lived through such tragedy.

In the same way if we disregard those who suffered (listened to their authority of the Church and Magesterium, sticking with the the Church through thick and thin to continue praising the Good News), we’ll be denying Jesus and everything that he taught (and with the Bible alone ) we still would not really fully know the Truth without the Church fathers and the Saints and Martyrs.

MJ
 
When my wife and I left the charismatic pentecostal church that we had been associated with for 8 years, give or take we had nothing to lean on but God’s Word and each other. Through His written Word, we were able to see the heresies taught in that particular congregation, and in the charismatic movement in general. We were also led to study the Gospels and the Apostolic epistles to the various churches of that time, and found that to follow Jesus’ teaching, and that of the Apostles is to alienate oneself from the world system and much of the Protestant movement. When we visited a Catholic church at the invitation of a dear friend, we saw those teachings lived out, not only in the Mass, but in individual lives as well. Both of us having fathers who are Protestant ministers made things a bit testy when we mentioned where we visited. I was apalled at the hatred that is aimed at the Catholic church, and all of it in ignorance, or due to lies that have been promoted through the centuries. Any time I ask someone why they have something against Catholicism, they default to the Dark Ages and the Protestant Reform. I don’t get it. Suffice it to say, I’m no longer Protestant in my thoughts or feelings, I’m simply a follower of Christ, and as soon as the qualifications we need to meet are met, we will be joining the Catholic Church. I say all that to say this-God can use His Word alone to draw souls to His Church. Between the covers of that blessed Book are the words of life and peace!
 
Sojourner61 said:
When my wife and I left the charismatic pentecostal church that we had been associated with for 8 years, give or take we had nothing to lean on but God’s Word and each other. Through His written Word, we were able to see the heresies taught in that particular congregation, and in the charismatic movement in general. We were also led to study the Gospels and the Apostolic epistles to the various churches of that time, and found that to follow Jesus’ teaching, and that of the Apostles is to alienate oneself from the world system and much of the Protestant movement. When we visited a Catholic church at the invitation of a dear friend, we saw those teachings lived out, not only in the Mass, but in individual lives as well. Both of us having fathers who are Protestant ministers made things a bit testy when we mentioned where we visited. I was apalled at the hatred that is aimed at the Catholic church, and all of it in ignorance, or due to lies that have been promoted through the centuries. Any time I ask someone why they have something against Catholicism, they default to the Dark Ages and the Protestant Reform. I don’t get it. Suffice it to say, I’m no longer Protestant in my thoughts or feelings, I’m simply a follower of Christ, and as soon as the qualifications we need to meet are met, we will be joining the Catholic Church. I say all that to say this-God can use His Word alone to draw souls to His Church. Between the covers of that blessed Book are the words of life and peace!
Click to expand...
Well said !

Mistirious are the ways of God to show us the way 👍
 
Sojourner61 said:
When my wife and I left the charismatic pentecostal church that we had been associated with for 8 years, give or take we had nothing to lean on but God’s Word and each other. Through His written Word, we were able to see the heresies taught in that particular congregation, and in the charismatic movement in general. We were also led to study the Gospels and the Apostolic epistles to the various churches of that time, and found that to follow Jesus’ teaching, and that of the Apostles is to alienate oneself from the world system and much of the Protestant movement. When we visited a Catholic church at the invitation of a dear friend, we saw those teachings lived out, not only in the Mass, but in individual lives as well. Both of us having fathers who are Protestant ministers made things a bit testy when we mentioned where we visited. I was apalled at the hatred that is aimed at the Catholic church, and all of it in ignorance, or due to lies that have been promoted through the centuries. Any time I ask someone why they have something against Catholicism, they default to the Dark Ages and the Protestant Reform. I don’t get it. Suffice it to say, I’m no longer Protestant in my thoughts or feelings, I’m simply a follower of Christ, and as soon as the qualifications we need to meet are met, we will be joining the Catholic Church. I say all that to say this-God can use His Word alone to draw souls to His Church. Between the covers of that blessed Book are the words of life and peace!
Click to expand...
Truly sad at the amount of ignorance many have about the Catholic Church. Ironically many point to the Dark Ages and the Reformation,but turn the blind eye at the horrible crimes also committed by Protestants during the Reformation and after towards others and Catholics as well.
 
Luvtosew said:
No I’m not winning, but I’m not out to win anything, just voicing my opinion. I mean 50/50 by Protestant and RC views as far as the Christian population in the US. I feel Bible alone Churches are good if they have a spirit filled Preacher who knows the Bible. As a Catholic I feel theres just too much, but I’m simple, I’d rather have a balanced plate of food than well say a smogasboard. Mind you I love RC’s but I also have many Protestants that I love and I have great respect for them also. I believe all one needs is in the Bible for salvation, all the extras are just that extras.
Click to expand...
But here is where you simply refuse to listen. No offense,but your opinion is merely only that…an opinion. You have yet to present a single word from Jesus where he clearly says the Bible contains everything one needs for salvation;moreover, where He says the Bible is the final authority and above His Church?
 
batman1973 said:
The impression that I’m getting is that Catholics seem to put more stock in Sacred Tradtion, and put Sacred Scripture aside (I’m guessing that’s Sola Ecclesia? Church alone?) There has to be a balance. To say that the Church is the only authority would seem to negate the Bible. The Bible came to be for a reason. It stands as part of a “Checks and Balance” if you will. Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture together, would make a more perfect balance. Scripture alone leads to all kinds of open interpratation,(Like the prosperity movement, and to a degree, cults) and Church alone leads to no free thought, and can lead to all kinds of desctuctive herasies.
Click to expand...
First, as Catholic, you should know how the Church was founded. Then how the Church should be administered because the Lord will not be with us physically. Then, basing on the scriptures, how the Church should function. The Catholic Church as far as I know is invoking the scriptures through the Church because everything the Church does is according to scriptures. So where is the problem there that says we are not in accord with the scriptures? Based on my knowledge, actually only the Catholic Church is the only Church that follows the instructions from the scriptures. Check it out.
From the foundation, succession of authority, governing the Church in obedience to the letters of the apostles,confession, forgiveness, partaking of the body, teachings through written and oral by the authority of the Church. The Mass is according to scriptures, and everything said in the Mass is in accord with the scriptures.

Perhaps you wanted to convey that the Catholic Church in general and a simple practicing Catholic in particular does not encourage scriptural readings, because I also believe in general that there many Catholics who relied mostly on Mass and Sacraments. The Church invokes freedom of individual for their choice of faith. It teaches and of course encourages holiness. It believes that an individual, by the virtue he possessed can make his or her own decision to become closer to God, and to be holy and perfect. Therefore, this is up to you because as far as I know, there many Catholics who not only dedicated their lives to the Lord, but literally gives their lives to the Lord (Monasticism).
 
The first church after the ascension of Jesus was the Church of Jerusalem with James as the head. They followed a Jewish interpretation of the teachings of Jesus. Not surprising given the fact the apostles were Jews. Paul was in conflict with their continued practice of sacrificing at the Temple and insistence on circumcision. In effect Paul is the main person responsible for bringing Gentiles into the church.
All of this occurred before the Catholic Church existed. There were many different churches and traditions in the first centuries including Gnosticism. Emperor Constantine solidified Christianity as the main religion of Rome although Peter and Paul preceeded him. So to say the Catholic Church began in 33 A.D. is simply wtong.
 
pgreen said:
The first church after the ascension of Jesus was the Church of Jerusalem with James as the head. They followed a Jewish interpretation of the teachings of Jesus. Not surprising given the fact the apostles were Jews. Paul was in conflict with their continued practice of sacrificing at the Temple and insistence on circumcision. In effect Paul is the main person responsible for bringing Gentiles into the church.
All of this occurred before the Catholic Church existed. There were many different churches and traditions in the first centuries including Gnosticism. Emperor Constantine solidified Christianity as the main religion of Rome although Peter and Paul preceeded him. So to say the Catholic Church began in 33 A.D. is simply wtong.
Click to expand...
What i take from your post is that cause of all the different groups that exist today then the Catholic church doesn’t exist today either.
Actually to say that the Catholic church didn’t exist until after Constantine is wrong.
The universal church existed or else Constantine wouldn’t have anything to call christainity.
 
pgreen said:
The first church after the ascension of Jesus was the Church of Jerusalem with James as the head. They followed a Jewish interpretation of the teachings of Jesus. Not surprising given the fact the apostles were Jews. Paul was in conflict with their continued practice of sacrificing at the Temple and insistence on circumcision. In effect Paul is the main person responsible for bringing Gentiles into the church.
All of this occurred before the Catholic Church existed. There were many different churches and traditions in the first centuries including Gnosticism. Emperor Constantine solidified Christianity as the main religion of Rome although Peter and Paul preceeded him. So to say the Catholic Church began in 33 A.D. is simply wtong.
Click to expand...
Could you offer some proof to back up your opinion? I would like references.
 
batman1973 said:
The impression that I’m getting is that Catholics seem to put more stock in Sacred Tradtion, and put Sacred Scripture aside (I’m guessing that’s Sola Ecclesia? Church alone?) There has to be a balance. To say that the Church is the only authority would seem to negate the Bible. The Bible came to be for a reason. It stands as part of a “Checks and Balance” if you will. Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture together, would make a more perfect balance. Scripture alone leads to all kinds of open interpratation,(Like the prosperity movement, and to a degree, cults) and Church alone leads to no free thought, and can lead to all kinds of desctuctive herasies.
Click to expand...
How do you come to that conclusion?

Also what is the problem with Church alone? Would that not mean Christ Alone.

The Bible itself says the Church is the Pilar of All Truth. So if the Bible says this, why do people rely on the bible alone and not the Church?
 
Luvtosew said:
No I’m not winning, but I’m not out to win anything, just voicing my opinion. I mean 50/50 by Protestant and RC views as far as the Christian population in the US. I feel Bible alone Churches are good if they have a spirit filled Preacher who knows the Bible. As a Catholic I feel theres just too much, but I’m simple, I’d rather have a balanced plate of food than well say a smogasboard. Mind you I love RC’s but I also have many Protestants that I love and I have great respect for them also. I believe all one needs is in the Bible for salvation, all the extras are just that extras.
Click to expand...
Okay lets go your way. Now how do we obey the words in the bible and receive Salvation.

Here are a few example, maybe you can show me how to achieve these without the Church and the bible for my salvation, as you claim.
  1. In order to have eternal life you must eat and drink the blood of Christ. Okay how can I do that with the bible?
  2. In order to be saved you must be Baptised in the name of the Father, Son and HOly Spirit, does the bible Baptise me?
  3. How do I obtain forgiveness for my sins without confession? Why did Christ give the Apostles to forgive sins, if the bible was enough.
  4. Where was the bible in the beginning of time. Why did Christ send Apostles to teach and preach? ANd why does the bible not teach and Preach?
  5. Marriage, How can the bible join a man and women together as One?
  6. Anointing of Sick. How is it when I am sick does the Bible pray over me?
  7. Back to the Eucharist, I am sorry but this is the whole being of the RCC. Christ said at the last supper on the night he was betrayed, this is my Body which will be given up for you. DO THIS in memory of Me. HOW?? How can we repeat this as Christ told us.
It is only by the MASS that we can obey Christ in this command. How can the bible turn bread and wine into the living Christ? How can we do what Christ has commanded us with the bible.

Just a few, Can’t wait to hear from you.😃
 
Luvtosew said:
Sorry I’m leaving this thread, seems a person can’t voice an opinion without be jumped on. I believe the Bible is the final authority, if you want to believe the Church is over that Bible that is fine.
Click to expand...
I just saw this person left, and I am sorry for that, I would hope they would come back.

I hope I would never make anyone feel jumped on. I think we are just asking a true and fair question.

Luvtosew says she thinks the bible is the final authority, but the bible teaches it is not. While she has her own personal opinion, and is entitled to it, we also have ours.

But is personal opinion what the word of God is about? Or is it truth. If you agree it is truth then saying the bible is the final authority is simply in direct conflict with the word of God.

We are just stating a fact and it was showed in scripture that the CHURCH is the pilar of all truth not the bible.
 
From the Catholic Encyclopedia concerning the leader of the Church of Jerusalem James the Less (or Just) :
Traditions respecting James the Less are to be found in many extra-canonical documents, especially Josephus (Antiq., XX, ix, 1), the “Gospel according to the Hebrews” (St. Jerome, Illustrious Men 2), Hegesippus (Eusebius, Church History II.23), the pseudo-Clementine Homilies (Ep. of Peter) and Recognitions (I, 72, 73), Clement of Alexandria (Hypot., vi, quoted by Eusebius, Church History II.1). The universal testimony of Christian antiquity is entirely in accordance with the information derived from the canonical books as to the fact that James was Bishop of the Church of Jerusalem. Hegesippus, a Jewish Christian, who lived about the middle of the second century, relates (and his narrative is highly probable) that James was called the “Just”, that he drank no wine nor strong drink, nor ate animal food, that no razor touched his head, that he did not anoint himself or make use of the bath, and lastly that he was put to death by the Jews. The account of his death given by Josephus is somewhat different. Later traditions deserve less attention.
 
pgreen said:
From the Catholic Encyclopedia concerning the leader of the Church of Jerusalem James the Less (or Just) :
Traditions respecting James the Less are to be found in many extra-canonical documents, especially Josephus (Antiq., XX, ix, 1), the “Gospel according to the Hebrews” (St. Jerome, Illustrious Men 2), Hegesippus (Eusebius, Church History II.23), the pseudo-Clementine Homilies (Ep. of Peter) and Recognitions (I, 72, 73), Clement of Alexandria (Hypot., vi, quoted by Eusebius, Church History II.1). The universal testimony of Christian antiquity is entirely in accordance with the information derived from the canonical books as to the fact that James was Bishop of the Church of Jerusalem. Hegesippus, a Jewish Christian, who lived about the middle of the second century, relates (and his narrative is highly probable) that James was called the “Just”, that he drank no wine nor strong drink, nor ate animal food, that no razor touched his head, that he did not anoint himself or make use of the bath, and lastly that he was put to death by the Jews. The account of his death given by Josephus is somewhat different. Later traditions deserve less attention.
Click to expand...
I was referring to this opinion of the Catholic Church not starting in 33ad. BTW, James the Less is not mentioned at Pentacost, so I think there may have been a leader of the Church before him.(Peter)

To make my earlier question more clear, if the Catholic Church didn’t start at Pentacost, could you give me a date the CC started? Something supported by history, not just opinion, would be great.
 
I think when it comes to ones personal faith we should always act with humility. As catholism has the fullness of the faith, we should act with love. When someone asks a hard question concerning sola scriptura, and others, how we answer is almost as important as what we say. Words spoken with love, humbly; often open others more to listening and understanding; more than the words used as a sledge hammer though they be true. Remember, most protestants have only sola scriptura to fall on thus they have one hand tied behind there back. If we are to truly follow Christ we should love our neighbor as we love ourselves.
Just my 2 cents
 
Luvtosew said:
No I’m not winning, but I’m not out to win anything, just voicing my opinion. I mean 50/50 by Protestant and RC views as far as the Christian population in the US. I feel Bible alone Churches are good if they have a spirit filled Preacher who knows the Bible. As a Catholic I feel theres just too much, but I’m simple, I’d rather have a balanced plate of food than well say a smogasboard. Mind you I love RC’s but I also have many Protestants that I love and I have great respect for them also. I believe all one needs is in the Bible for salvation, all the extras are just that extras.
Click to expand...
How much “you” or “we” love protestants ( whoever they may be) is not the issue. The question is whether or not Bible alone is credible theology. You have been asked many times on different threads to back up your assertions. You don’t because you can’t. This “Bible alone” theory has been debunked countless times. You have repeated countless times how fond you are of your “protestant friends” and somehow this has something to do with your beliefs. My entire family is non Catholic and some of my extended family are LDS…all of them are nice people whom I adore but their theology is flawed in some instances and bizarre in others. I look for the truth for my salvation and I don’t see how nice people are the key to that search. Since I have the luxury of not having responses from you…I will leave this for others to read. For anyone who thinks that the Bible was sufficient for salvation…before there was a Bible, that is OT and NT…I would enjoy the explanation from you because there will not be one from LTSew. She will move to another thread making un substantiated proclamations about the things she likes about the Church and the things she does not adhere to because she has dear friends who don’t so it must be correct. I am not sure how to spell “provocateur” but I absolutely know the definition…just sayin’🤷
 
Luvtosew said:
No I’m not winning, but I’m not out to win anything, just voicing my opinion. I mean 50/50 by Protestant and RC views as far as the Christian population in the US. I feel Bible alone Churches are good if they have a spirit filled Preacher who knows the Bible. As a Catholic I feel theres just too much, but I’m simple, I’d rather have a balanced plate of food than well say a smogasboard. Mind you I love RC’s but I also have many Protestants that I love and I have great respect for them also. I believe all one needs is in the Bible for salvation, all the extras are just that extras.
Click to expand...
If all one needs is the Bible to be saved, I guess all those “Christians” prior to the 4th century were condemned. And I guess we’d have to include those “Christians” who didn’t own bibles even after Scripture was canonized but before the printing press was invented. And I guess we might as well condemn the illiterate altogether, including the mentally challenged, infants, etc… As Paul says, “the Bible is the pillar and foundation of truth” or something like that.
 
stewstew03 said:
If all one needs is the Bible to be saved, I guess all those “Christians” prior to the 4th century were condemned. And I guess we’d have to include those “Christians” who didn’t own bibles even after Scripture was canonized but before the printing press was invented. And I guess we might as well condemn the illiterate altogether, including the mentally challenged, infants, etc… As Paul says, “the Bible is the pillar and foundation of truth” or something like that.
Click to expand...
I do believe most of the Christians were depending on the Church which was going by the writings on the first century apostle writings, so if they were lost it was the Churches fault , not the Bibles.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top