Do we need the Bible?

[Cristian_B]

Ah, sorry - I missed the connection, and in fact I think we agree on this point.

I meant that we should not use the 66 book Bible only because their numbers add up to 12 or that we shouldn’t not use a version with 7 less books because it contains the number 6. These facts are irrelevant.

 

[FiberZilla]

If the Church is the “pillar and bulwark of truth” and knows the sacred traditions and commandments of God, then do we even really need the Bible?

Just curious,
JJ

Scripture tells Christians how a church is supposed to function and gives clear guidelines for christian behavior. However, since catholics are not permitted to interpret the things that they read in the Bible, most see it of little use in their day to day lives… it’s very sad indeed.

 

[PJM]

=NHInsider;6364856]? You really think there is a proof-text verse for every truth? Go for it. Start with proving the Divinity of Jesus - that only took 300 years for the ECF to resolve, because of the potential to interpret different verses differently.

Or, of course, the fundamental question of “Which books are inspired?” Find a verse to answer that question and you’ll be well on your way.

Honestly . . . .

OK

2 Tim.3 Verses 16 to 17: “[16] All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, [17] that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work”

***FYI, its in the KJB too.

Either all of the Bible is true, or none of its true. Secular History alone proves its TRUE!***

 

[NHInsider]

OK

2 Tim.3 Verses 16 to 17: “[16] All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, [17] that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work”

***FYI, its in the KJB too.

Either all of the Bible is true, or none of its true. Secular History alone proves its TRUE!***

Grin. I of course agree completely. But I think RedBert thought I had somehow admitted that Catholicism is unbiblical because I said there wasn’t necessarily a proof-text verse for every Truth of the Faith. Hence my suggestion that he provide the proof-text verse for his table of contents.

I should’ve asked for the verse that proves that there isn’t any Truth of the Faith that isn’t in the Bible. You know - the one that comes after Jesus telling the Apostles that He would send the Holy Spirit to teach them what they need to know? Or is it the one that comes after John’s observation of how much more there was in Jesus’ life and teaching than could possibly be collected in a book. Gee, I just can’t remember the references for all those verses that prove that God gave us a Book and that’s all we need to know. . . .

 

[Church_Militant]

Scripture tells Christians how a church is supposed to function and gives clear guidelines for christian behavior. However, since Catholics are not permitted to interpret the things that they read in the Bible, most see it of little use in their day to day lives… it’s very sad indeed.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

That’s about the lamest piece of hogwash I’ve seen in a very long time.

My sainted Catholic Grandmother read and knew the Word of God better than most people I know. She could respond to anything with scripture that I never saw the like of in over 30 years of errancy among n-Cs.

In fact, (and not to boast here at all), I have discovered that I have that same facility with the Bible and again and again have proved that I know it as well and most often better than most of the n-Cs that I interact with.

As for using it in daily life…that’s also hogwash. Just because we don’t generally carry it around and “thump” it at people doesn’t mean that we see it as useless by any means. I’d venture to say that the % of Catholics who read and know their Bible is at least as high as it is among n-Cs.

Meanwhile, I suggest that you not make remarks like that.

 

[RedBert]

? You really think there is a proof-text verse for every truth? :

No I don’t, of course not , I 100% agree with “do not assume that there must be a verse for every truth”

So there is a double standard because on this site, i have seen **many **Catholics ask a Protestants where in Scripture can you find proof text of Sola Scriptura or “scripture interprets scripture” so from now on I can safely reply

do not assume that there must be a verse for every truth.

That’s what my reply meant.

 

[gtrenewed]

One but not the only one. And do not assume that there must be a verse for every truth.

However, in fact there is! Your example later on about the divinity of Jesus is clearly taught from His own Words not to mention in Pauls letters. The council gathered to officially and intellectually answer the question but it was known by the leading of the Holy Spirit. Your claim on the superiority of the RCC hinges on this point: can a Protestant claim the first century Christians as ancesters? They were first called Christians in Antioch according to Scripture. The writings that came from oral teachings and letters that became Scripture were from first century Christians. All heart changed Christians can claim the first church as ancestral because it goes back to Jesus. I suppose that, like in horse breeding, being able to follow your bloodline back to the first century is something to be proud of but all Blood Redeemed Christians have the ultimate pedigree - adopted sons of the Father!

(re: “Sacred Tradition”) It is not a discreet body of information with defined parameters

 

[RedBert]

? You really think there is a proof-text verse for every truth? Go for it. Start with proving the Divinity of Jesus - that only took 300 years for the ECF to resolve, because of the potential to interpret different verses differently.

I’ll quote CM on that

http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h244/corona_stellarum/Smilies/sSig_yeahright.gif

That’s about the lamest piece of hogwash I’ve seen in a very long time.

.

The New Testament SHOUTS the Divinity of Jesus

From the Word is GOD

to " He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities;** all things were created by him **and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him,"

to Before Abraham was I AM
to I am the Alpha and the Omega
to the one who sits on the Throne of God

He is worshiped (Matt. 2:2,11; 14:33).
He was called God (John 20:28; Heb. 1:8) .
He was called Son of God (Mark 1:1)
He is prayed to (Acts 7:59).
He is sinless (1 Pet. 2:22; Heb. 4:15
He knows all things (John 21:17).
He gives eternal life (John 10:28).
All the fullness of deity dwells in Him (Col. 2:9).

and on and on and on

I forced to question if you have ever read the New Testament?

It is a completely different reason why people deny the divinity of Jesus it and it is not because the Bible is unclear about the divinity of Jesus the Christ.

“He (Jesus) said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’” -Luke 16:31

 

[Benadam]

That promise was given to all believers.

.
I can’t reconcile this with " faith is through hearing" doctrin unless ‘believers’ is defined as all those who have heard the same thing, and so, are believers that believe the same thing.

As demontrated for us in this event orchestrated by the Holy Spirit to clarify the meaning of belief that finds it’s source in Him.
As demonstrated here:

Acts 8

26 Now an angel of the Lord spoke to Philip, saying: Arise, go towards the south, to the way that goeth down from Jerusalem into Gaza: this is desert. 27 And rising up, he went. And behold a man of Ethiopia, an eunuch, of great authority under Candace the queen of the Ethiopians, who had charge over all her treasures, had come to Jerusalem to adore. 28 And he was returning, sitting in his chariot, and reading Isaias the prophet. 29 And the Spirit said to Philip: Go near, and join thyself to this chariot. 30 And Philip running thither, heard him reading the prophet Isaias. And he said: Thinkest thou that thou understandest what thou readest? 31 Who said: And how can I, unless some man shew me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.

 

[gtrenewed]

SINCERE THANKS for asking:thumbsup:

I posted this information for all of the following GOOD NEWS PROVEABLE reasons:

By Dying and Rising from the Dead Jesus effected our Redemption, NOT our salvation. In other words, He reopened the gates of heaven, that had been locked form the Orginal Sins of Adam and Eve. Salvation is biblically proveable to be a process, where Jesus, because it is His Divine Will, insist on our cooperation.

Matt.5: 19 Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Matt.19: 17 "And he [Jesus] said to him, “Why do you ask me about what is good? One there is who is good. **If you would enter life, keep the commandments.” **

1John.1 Verses 8 to 10: "If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us."

1John.5 Verses 16 to 17"If any one sees his brother committing what is not a mortal sin, he will ask, and God will give him life for those whose sin is not mortal. There is sin which is mortal; I do not say that one is to pray for that. All wrongdoing is sin, **but there is sin which is not mortal. **

John.20 Verses 20 to 23]" When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord.** Jesus said to them **again, “Peace be with you. **As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.” **And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.”

It is my friend “Good News” ONLY if we know what it says; If we know what it means, and THEN ACTUALLY APPLY IT TO OUR LIVES.

The Bible spacks clearly and precisely about two diferent types of works. “works of the law” which reference the 613 rule expanded Jewish commands. And Good Works [James chapter 2 fo example], that encompass the New Commandment: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”

The Good works merit grace, the works of the Law, while prudent for a lot of reasons, do not.

Love and prayers,
Pat

WOW, Pat, your words lead me to believe that you have no idea about a man’s flesh and his spirit. Nor do you understand the Gospel. The verses from Matthew quoted above are taken out of context, Jesus is speaking to religious leaders and to rich hypocrites. From 1John1 he is talking about the need for all men to believe on Jesus and not to claim special heritage as salvation. Too bad you did not quote all of 1John5 like verse 18 “We know that no one born of God sins;…” verse 20 “And we know that the Son of God has come, and has given us understanding so that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life”. Eternal life is salvation.

Jesus said “this is the work of God, to believe in Him whom God has sent.” The Good News is the Good News no matter what and that is “it is not by might nor by power says the Lord but by My Spirit” Of course we must repent and believe in Jesus and then He completes the Good Work He started within us. Jesus took our punishment, we are free because we are in Him. He is truth and the truth sets us free. Jesus is the vine we are the branches that receive life from Him. If we deny Him He cuts us off. If we sin, we ask forgiveness and He is faithful and just to forgive us and restore us. It is a journey but one that is secure in Jesus Christ.

You can type in capital letters of any color you want to but it does not make you right! If you understood the Good News you would have a Spirit conscience. You are exhibiting a flesh, sin, conscience which colors your judgement.

If you read all of James 2 with the Spirit, you would see the works has to do with making certain that all Christians have what they need here on earth, wealth redistribution among the brethren. It is not that doing this work merits grace, we have grace in Jesus, James is pointing out something Paul pointed out and that is we should allow the grace of our Lord to flow out of us to others, by bearing one anothers burdens and sharing our wealth. If we think we are specially favored by God over another and that this closes up our hearts, it is sin.

That is why we need to be led into all truth by the Holy Spirit. The tradition of indulgences led to redistribution of wealth from the poor to the powerful breaking what James 2 teaches. A sad time but then the Holy Spirit brought the truth of God’s Word to bear to bring reproof and correction.

 

[PJM]

=NHInsider;Grin. I of course agree completely. But I think RedBert thought I had somehow admitted that Catholicism is unbiblical because I said there wasn’t necessarily a proof-text verse for every Truth of the Faith. Hence my suggestion that he provide the proof-text verse for his table of contents.

I should’ve asked for the verse that proves that there isn’t any Truth of the Faith that isn’t in the Bible. You know - the one that comes after Jesus telling the Apostles that He would send the Holy Spirit to teach them what they need to know? Or is it the one that comes after John’s observation of how much more there was in Jesus’ life and teaching than could possibly be collected in a book. Gee, I just can’t remember the references for all those verses that prove that God gave us a Book and that’s all we need to know. . . .

Perhaps the GREATEST proof is the fact that the Canon was set narly 1600 years ago, and for Christ One True Church, there is still one true Church, with 27 brances and common creed and beliefs.

The other “guys” 400 years later have THOUSANDS of denominations. Thousands of versions of “One Faith???”

**Eph. 2:19 **So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, [singular] built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure is joined together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord; [singular] in whom you also are built into it for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit."

Dear God, help us; SAVE US!

 

[gtrenewed]

First, I don’t know what your understanding of “faith is through hearing” doctrine is. Romans 10 is about Paul’s desire for Israel. He teaches that they had the Scriptures and that these Scriptures point to Jesus as the Christ. That is why Paul preached to the Jews initially but they wouldn’t believe so he went to the Gentiles.

Acts 8 agrees with Romans 10, a preacher who is in Jesus, like Philip, preaches Jesus from the OT to the Jews. To the Gentiles, all other people, a preacher who is in Jesus can preach about eternal life in Jesus and they can believe, faith can come.

Today, if anyone in Jesus, RCC or Protestant, preaches Jesus as in the NT, the Word of God, faith can come. “Faith comes by hearing, and hearing from the Word of Christ”, Rom 10:17. The same thing you refer to should be that Jesus is the Christ sent by the Father for the salvation of the world. That is unity. You may be mistaking conformity for unity.

[/QUOTE]

 

[NHInsider]

The New Testament SHOUTS the Divinity of Jesus

I forced to question if you have ever read the New Testament?

It is a completely different reason why people deny the divinity of Jesus it and it is not because the Bible is unclear about the divinity of Jesus the Christ.

I have read the New Testament, multiple times, yes, thank you. But you are simply wrong about whether the divinity of Christ is unmistakeable by Scripture alone. There are at least three threads going on right now on CAF that deal with “read this verse - doesn’t that say Jesus isn’t really God?” The Arians quoted Scripture to prove their points.

It’s obvious to us BECAUSE we believe it.

 

[gtrenewed]

Perhaps the GREATEST proof is the fact that the Canon was set narly 1600 years ago, and for Christ One True Church, there is still one true Church, with 27 brances and common creed and beliefs.

The other “guys” 400 years later have THOUSANDS of denominations. Thousands of versions of “One Faith???”

**Eph. 2:19 **So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, [singular] built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure is joined together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord; [singular] in whom you also are built into it for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit."

Dear God, help us; SAVE US!

I would add, “open the eyes of our understanding” The unity of Eph 2 is access to the one true God for the Gentiles and the Jews which is through Jesus Christ. The temple of the OT was the dwelling place of God and only the Jews had access to Him in the temple. But Jesus brought unity in access God to the whole world; in fact, He made it possible to be a temple, a dwelling place for the Holy Spirit, God. The foundations of the apostles is the Word they preached to the world; while, the OT Word, the prophets preaches to the Jews about Jesus, the most important stone in the foundation.

Jesus is the Christ sent from the Father for the salvation of the world. This is the unity of believers, the one faith. You mistake your conformity for unity.

I wouldn’t be so haughty, for if the religious powers from that era had been more open to correction by the Word of God, the abuse of the tradition of indulgence selling would have been stopped and perhaps there would not have been a split. Most of the Protestant splits are about “how to properly live for God”. I see all the societies and orders in the RCC separating themselves for the same reason. So there are more branches for you to consider.

The unity of faith Paul describes in Eph 4:13 had not been achieved as of yet. It was the knowledge of the fullnes of Christ. Guess what, I don’t think that happens here with the encumbrance of the flesh. So our unity is the knowledge of Jesus Christ as Savior and as we grow it is perfected.

Jesus is the vine, we are the branches. If we are in Jesus, then we are in unity, no matter how many branches there are.

 

[Dorothy]

Absolutely not! No no I’m just wondering why the Church needs scripture because she does hold the teachings and traditions handed on by the Apostles

-JJ

Reading and meditating on Sacred Scripture helps us to know the mind of Our Lord Jesus Christ. The Bible is a love letter to us. It is for us and about us. Remember, St. Jerome says “Ignorance of Scriptures is Ignorance of Christ.”

So, along with Tradition and the Teaching Authority (Magisterium) of the Church, it is a treasure.

 

[gtrenewed]

I have read the New Testament, multiple times, yes, thank you. But you are simply wrong about whether the divinity of Christ is unmistakeable by Scripture alone. There are at least three threads going on right now on CAF that deal with “read this verse - doesn’t that say Jesus isn’t really God?” The Arians quoted Scripture to prove their points.

It’s obvious to us BECAUSE we believe it.

So are you saying that Scripture cannot stand alone and therefore is bad because a group twisted it?

Paul contended that Jesus was clearly visible in the OT. The only ones that wouldn’t agree were those who were destined for destruction. How could Paul make this assertion? It is simple, divine revelation, just like Peter received when he announced that Jesus was the Christ.

Jesus’ divinity is clearly taught in Scripture. It is obvious because of divine revelation, the Holy Spirit will lead us into all truth. And yes we do believe it.

Your last quote is not very favorable to you. You say it is obvious that the RCC is the one true church - why? because you believe it.

 

[RedBert]

The Arians quoted Scripture to prove their points.

.

AND ignored other multiple sections

 

[Benadam]

Benadam;6367464:

First, I don’t know what your understanding of “faith is through hearing” doctrine is. Romans 10 is about Paul’s desire for Israel. He teaches that they had the Scriptures and that these Scriptures point to Jesus as the Christ. That is why Paul preached to the Jews initially but they wouldn’t believe so he went to the Gentiles.

Acts 8 agrees with Romans 10, a preacher who is in Jesus, like Philip, preaches Jesus from the OT to the Jews. To the Gentiles, all other people, a preacher who is in Jesus can preach about eternal life in Jesus and they can believe, faith can come.

Today, if anyone in Jesus, RCC or Protestant, preaches Jesus as in the NT, the Word of God, faith can come. “Faith comes by hearing, and hearing from the Word of Christ”, Rom 10:17. The same thing you refer to should be that Jesus is the Christ sent by the Father for the salvation of the world. That is unity. You may be mistaking conformity for unity.

The pattern of transmission as you see it completely ignores the fact that the scriptures can only be understood if heard from someone who understands their truer meaning. How then is the true meaning guaranteed? Unity in belief and understanding.

That’s the whole point with the eunuch. He knew that he couldn’t understand the scriptures by reading them as your attern of transmission allows. He needed to speak to someone of autheority. He understood authority since he was a person of great authority.
As i said the events surrounding this eunuch from ethiopia demostrates how the promise of the Holy Spirit to guide to all truth is given.

This statement by the Eunuch implies that he understood the necessity of an unbroken tradition from the community that the testimony is about for an authentic teaching and that he believed Philip would teach him that. " tell me, is the prophet speaking about himself or someone else?" To know if the prophet is speaking about himself or someone else implies that what is taught is ion fact what the prophet taught. Your example falls short of being an imitation of this bible passages teaching about who and how the Holy Spirit guides to Truth.

 

[FiberZilla]

http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h244/corona_stellarum/Smilies/sSig_yeahright.gif

That’s about the lamest piece of hogwash I’ve seen in a very long time.

My sainted Catholic Grandmother read and knew the Word of God better than most people I know. She could respond to anything with scripture that I never saw the like of in over 30 years of errancy among n-Cs.

In fact, (and not to boast here at all), I have discovered that I have that same facility with the Bible and again and again have proved that I know it as well and most often better than most of the n-Cs that I interact with.

As for using it in daily life…that’s also hogwash. Just because we don’t generally carry it around and “thump” it at people doesn’t mean that we see it as useless by any means. I’d venture to say that the % of Catholics who read and know their Bible is at least as high as it is among n-Cs.

Meanwhile, I suggest that you not make remarks like that.

You and your grandmother would be among the few… yet there are a few catholics who have read the bible all the way through. Catholics are still not permitted to interpret what they read in there. But you are not alone. Over 90% of professing evangelical christians have not read the bible all the way through either. Reading is of no value unless one believes and obeys the teachings of Christ found within the pages.

 

[NHInsider]

So are you saying that Scripture cannot stand alone and therefore is bad because a group twisted it?

No, I am saying that Scripture does not stand alone because it wouldn’t exist as an authoritative document without an authoritative Church that preceded it.

Paul contended that Jesus was clearly visible in the OT. The only ones that wouldn’t agree were those who were destined for destruction. How could Paul make this assertion? It is simple, divine revelation, just like Peter received when he announced that Jesus was the Christ.

Or like Joseph Smith did when it was revealed to him that the apostles had apostacized and so Jesus had come to North America to try again?
Or like William Miller did when it was revealed to him that the reason the Second Coming had been delayed was because Christians weren’t keeping the Law?
Or Mary Baker Eddy, who discovered that the mind was a manifestation of God which could overcome the corrupt. material body?
Or John Calvin, to whom it was revealed that individuals could not freely choose to accept or reject Jesus?
Or any number of other less-well-known individuals who have led people into “churches” based on their own interpretations of the Scripture?
Peter and Paul were Apostles.

Jesus’ divinity is clearly taught in Scripture. It is obvious because of divine revelation, the Holy Spirit will lead us into all truth. And yes we do believe it.

Such an assertion reveals an extremely limited knowledge of history, which is filled with the sad stories of various groups that were sure the Holy Spirit was leading them into truth. The promise of the Holy Spirit’s teaching was given to the Apostles. Which is not to say that the Spirit doesn’t guide us all, He does. But we are not all called to be apostles, and the guarantee was given to the Apostles. “Who hears you hears Me.”

Your last quote is not very favorable to you. You say it is obvious that the RCC is the one true church - why? because you believe it.

Fortunately, this is not about me. However, I didn’t say anything about the “one true church,” which would be a subject for a different thread. If you’d like to start a thread proving from Scripture that Jesus intended to found a myriad of churches teaching wildly divergent truths, I’ll be happy to join the discussion.

Catholics are still not permitted to interpret what they read in there.

Are you sure? Would you care to support that assertion with some kind of documentation? You do read these forums, right? How many times a day does someone post “what is the Church’s interpretation of xyz?” only to be told that the Church has not defined “xyz” and in fact does not produce verse-by-verse definitive exegesis?

However, it is true that Catholics take very seriously the message of 2 Peter 1:15-21.

But you are not alone. Reading is of no value unless one believes and obeys the teachings of Christ found within the pages.

Absolutely true.