Do we need the Bible?

[gtrenewed]

twb1621

This thread is “Do we need the Bible?”

It is not about liturgy. You cannot pick a paragraph out of my post and use it out of context.

My assertion has been that with Scripture alone, we can find salvation in Jesus.

So yes, we need the Bible.

Had the Bible been widely studied by the laity, the leadership corruption and the pillaging of the poor with the sale of indulgences that lead to the reformation and subsequent split might have been avoided. Because of a liturgy of ritual, there was no perceived need to individually study the Bible by either the priests or the laity. Following the split, individual study became sought after and it became possible for the laity to become literate and have a Bible personally due to the printing press and in the vernacular. God provided to those who sought Him.

Scripture tell us that those that God is the rewarder of those that diligently seek Him.

 

[Lev23]

if that were true then the Holy Spirit would have taught the eunuch directly no?

Im confident that we both agree that the teaching and testimony of Jesus from the Hebrew scriptures had to come from the Spirit-filled Apostles and those they taught, and so on.

Ephesians 2:19-20
Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God’s people and members of God’s household, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone.

**Luke 24:44-49
He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.”

Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures. He told them, “This is what is written: The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. You are witnesses of these things. I am going to send you what my Father has promised; but stay in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high.”**

Acts 1:8
But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth."

1 Corinthians 15:1-8
Now, brothers, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.
For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.

 

[gtrenewed]

Are you saying that an OT Jew would not already have been grounded in an authentic enterpretation? This man was open to authentic enterpretation. Nothing in the passage leads us to believe he had heard of Jesus. You are assuming too much.

Different Rabbis taught varied interpretations of Scripture. The eunuch could have been taught by any Rabbi we do not know which one he studied.
But we do know that according to the passage, the eunuch was in Jerusalem to worship, maybe he heard of Jesus and His works, but in any case, he heard from Philip.

Actually Jesus taught that the law could get you to heaven. Matt. ch.19, 16-18

Not even close on this one. Only perfect obedience to the law, which no one can do! This rich young ruler knew there was more so he asked Jesus what he was still lacking. So Jesus told him and he went away grieving.

if that were true then the Holy Spirit would have taught the eunuch directly no?

No, since there was no NT yet, there had to be a preacher, faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God. If the eunuch had heard Peter on Pentecost and had repented, been baptized in the name of Jesus, he would have received the Spirit and then he could have been taught by the Spirit. Who do you think taught him after he returned home after believing Philips word and being baptized?

I agree if the Holy spirit is the guide, but without an existing body of teachers teaching the faith as taught since the beginning how do you know the spirit that is guiding?

It is the promise of God. As a sheep of Jesus, we hear His voice. Still having our fleshly nature we can make mistakes but Jesus promises to complete the good work He started within us. And so we follow the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

 

[Cristian_B]

if that were true then the Holy Spirit would have taught the eunuch directly no?

The Holy Spirit doesn’t implant knowledge like this. He can inspire, but He doesn’t introduce knowledge just like that. The eunuch never actually heard of Jesus. He didn’t have the knowledge. He had nothing to understand since he didn’t have the necessary knowledge. But when the apostle told him about Jesus, then the Holy Spirit could work and make him understand. Until then, how was he supposed to understand if he never actually heard of Jesus? I mean that he possibly heard of a guy named Jesus that was crucified some time ago, but how was he supposed to know the details, I mean the prophecies about Jesus fulfilled. The eunuch knew nothing about Jesus so the Spirit could not make him understand knowledge he did not possess. If the Spirit would have just implanted knowledge in his mind then the eunuch would interpret his ideas as ‘imagination’. But when the apostle told the eunuch the live of Jesus, his eyes began to open. The Spirit made him understand the knowledge which he received from the apostle, because then he had the necessary knowledge. This is like interpreting a passage or prophecy or message from God without the message itself or without big portions of the message.

 

[twb1621]

…

Please consider what exactly you are saying and seriously look into the sources and information we offer;

Jesus guaranteed a way to believe to future generations.

Consider this… Believe what teachings? Which set of beliefs of non-Catholic Christian denominations do you refer to? Any that do not follow the same faith and teachings as has been consistent since the beginning are not believing what Jesus taught completely. And as Scripture tells us, if you don’t accept all you accept none. You see to have the ability to understand much more than you do if you search the correct resources. I remind you of the previous posts I offered you although you may not have read them considering your lack of response.
Ephesians CH4; 1 “I therefore, a prisoner in the Lord, beseech you that you walk worthy of the vocation in which you are called, 2 With all humility and mildness, with patience, supporting one another in charity. 3 Careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. 4 One body (the Church) and one Spirit (Holy Spirit); as you are called in one hope of your calling. 5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism.”
*

***You say this is through the RCC. I say it is through the Scripture of the first century church writings that are Christian and Jesus is guaranteeing that these teachings will be available to future generations. The RCC as an organization comes along much later. ***

*No offense, but you make it seem Jesus wrote His own Book and placed it on the bookshelves. I am eager to here your support for these opinions.

The first century church is comprised of a group of local churches not necessarily linked organizationally.

So wrong… look into the writings of the ECFs.

All Christians are linked ancestoraly to the first century church, Jesus and His disciples. To a RC this does not make sense because you are looking from the inside out. To a non-RC it is evident that the RCC failed as an organization, but is Christian to some if not to most other non-RC groups. It is the vine (or tree) and branches analogy. Jesus is the vine (or tree trunk) and Christian groups are the branches bearing the fruit. Jesus is the head of the Body, His church at large.

This is anti-scriptural. Yes all Christians are “linked” as you put it due to the fact that the contents of all Christian Bibles came from The Holy Bible, from the Latin Vulgate, Vetus Itala Septuagint…

continued…

 

[twb1621]

continued from previous post;

For you to even say the church failed is defiance of the covenant Jesus made with His Church and a display of a lack of faith and trust in Jesus as the High Priest of His Church. As an organization as you put it, the church has never failed, it has been those who abandoned her that failed and reproduced over and over and over again. The Church has maintained itself through the Holy Spirit for 2000 years. It is sad that you have been so misled in whatever sources you have come to these opinions. Scripture itself shows the initial establishment of the Church hierarchy. Scripture itself presents in writing the covenant Jesus made with His Church and the 1st century writings and there after of the ECFs show the unity of the one church and the recognition of authority to the chair of Peter.

Our Apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that there would be strife for the office of bishop. For this reason, therefore, having received perfect foreknowledge, they appointed those who have already been mentioned, and afterwards added the further provision that, if they should die, other approved men should succeed to their ministry (Letter to the Corinthians 44:1 A.D. 95]).

You must all follow the bishop as Jesus Christ follows the Father, and the presbytery as you would the Apostles. Reverence the deacons as you would the command of God. Let no one do anything of concern to the Church without the bishop. Let that be considered a valid Eucharist which is celebrated by the bishop, or by one whom he appoints. Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church (*Letter to the Smyrnaeans *8:1 A.D. 110]).

Follow your bishop, every one of you, as obediently as Jesus Christ followed the Father. Obey your clergy too as you would the apostles; give your deacons the same reverence that you would to a command of God. Make sure that no step affecting the Church is ever taken by anyone without the bishop’s sanction. The sole Eucharist you should consider valid is one that is celebrated by the bishop himself, or by some person authorized by him. Where the bishop is to be seen, there let all his people be; just as, wherever Jesus Christ is present, there is the Catholic Church (Letter to the Smyrneans 8:2 A.D. 110]).

In like manner let everyone respect the deacons as they would respect Jesus Christ, and just as they respect the bishop as a type of the Father, and the presbyters as the council of God and college of the apostles. Without these, it cannot be called a Church. I am confident that you accept this, for I have received the exemplar of your love and have it with me in the person of your bishop. His very demeanor is a great lesson and his meekness is his strength. I believe that even the godless do respect him (Letter to the Trallians 3:1-2 A. D. 110]).

When finally he concluded his prayer, after remembering all who had at any time come his way – small folk and great folk, distinguished and undistinguished, and the whole Catholic Church throughout the world – the time for departure came. So they placed him on an ***, and brought him into the city on a great Sabbath (*The Martyrdom of Polycarp *8 A.D. 110]).

True knowledge is the doctrine of the Apostles, and the ancient constitution of the Church throughout all the world, and the distinctive manifestation of the body of Christ according to the successions of the bishops, by which they have handed down that Church which exists in every place, and has come even unto us, being guarded and preserved, without any forging of Scriptures, by a very complete system of doctrine, and neither addition nor curtailment [in truths which she believes]; and [it consists in] reading [the Word of God] without falsification, and a lawful and diligent exposition in harmony with the Scriptures, both without danger and without blasphemy… (ibid.4:33 A.D. 189]).

Clement of Rome
Accept our counsel and you will have nothing to regret. . . . If anyone disobeys the things which have been said by him [Jesus] through us, let them know that they will involve themselves in no small danger. We, however, shall be innocent of this sin and will pray with entreaty and supplication that the Creator of all may keep unharmed the number of his elect (Letter to the Corinthians 58:2, 59:1A.D. 95]).

much more available.

 

[Benadam]

[/quote]

[/quote]

** 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.
This man was the highest authority in Ethiopia besides the queen herself. An educated Jew, the highest authority of his country say’s he *can’t *know what his own scriptures mean unless someone shows him.
I hope you notice the gap this presents in your view of this event… This passage teaches about authority as it pertains to scriptures and those chosen to teach it. It doesn’t teach, by any stretch, that the scriptures are self authenticating.

Not even close on this one. Only perfect obedience to the law, which no one can do! This rich young ruler knew there was more so he asked Jesus what he was still lacking. So Jesus told him and he went away grieving.

Jesus said this according to the Gospel. if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. The grief was about attaining perfection in ‘this’ life. Not going to heaven. He could say to Jesus face. Jesus didn’t correct him.
*20 The young man saith to him: All these I have kept from my youth, what is yet wanting to me? *
*21 Jesus saith to him: If thou wilt be perfect, go sell what thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come follow me. *

No, since there was no NT yet, there had to be a preacher, faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God. If the eunuch had heard Peter on Pentecost and had repented, been baptized in the name of Jesus, he would have received the Spirit and then he could have been taught by the Spirit. Who do you think taught him after he returned home after believing Philips word and being baptized?

The NT is not the bible. The bible is the NT but not it’s primary nor it’s entire expression on earth. We recieved God in the flesh through flesh primarily. Jesus called scriptures a ‘testimony’ of me…He calls His faithfull ‘Me’.

Your statement seems to imply that the written testiment of Public revelation negates the need for preachers and the spoken Word as the conduit of faith. Faith doesn’t require the presence of a human source anymore?

It is the promise of God. As a sheep of Jesus, we hear His voice. Still having our fleshly nature we can make mistakes but Jesus promises to complete the good work He started within us. And so we follow the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

Just remember how Jesus taught His voice is heard. “Those who hear you hear me.”
[/quote]
[/QUOTE]

 

[gtrenewed]

Please consider what exactly you are saying and seriously look into the sources and information we offer;

Consider this… Believe what teachings?

Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 819 “Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of the visible confines of the Catholic Church: the written Word ofGod; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements. Christs Spirit uses these Churches and communities as means of salvation,…”

No offense, but you make it seem Jesus wrote His own Book and placed it on the bookshelves. I am eager to here your support for these opinions.

If not Jesus then who?

 

[gtrenewed]

As an organization as you put it, the church has never failed

 

[gtrenewed]

[/quote]

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.
This man was the highest authority in Ethiopia besides the queen herself. An educated Jew, the highest authority of his country say’s he *can’t *know what his own scriptures mean unless someone shows him.

It was the Rabbi’s that taught the interpretation, soooooo, yeah, he needed an interpreter.

I hope you notice the gap this presents in your view of this event… This passage teaches about authority as it pertains to scriptures and those chosen

to teach it. It doesn’t teach, by any stretch, that the scriptures are self authenticating.

It teaches that all must believe in Jesus, great or small. And it teaches that without the Word of God as presented in the NT, a preacher most definitely is required.

And, I never said it was self authenticating, I said it was Holy Spirit taught. Even the Catechism of the Catholic Church says this in paragraph 819.

The grief was about attaining perfection in ‘this’ life. Not going to heaven.

It was about the kingdom of heaven, which Jesus announced earlier was at hand, here and now, and after we die. He was grieving because Jesus gave him a personal commandment, “Go and sell…and follow me” And he was very rich and used to doing his own thing. Then Jesus summed up the event “Truly, I say to you, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven.” Yes, it was about this life; however, it was also about the next in heaven.

He could say to Jesus face. Jesus didn’t correct him.
*20 The young man saith to him: All these I have kept from my youth, what is yet wanting to me? *

*21 Jesus saith to him: If thou wilt be perfect, go sell what thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come follow me. *

Jesus did correct him in verse 21 and verse 23.

The NT is not the bible. The bible is the NT but not it’s primary nor it’s entire expression on earth. We recieved God in the flesh through flesh primarily. Jesus called scriptures a ‘testimony’ of me…He calls His faithfull ‘Me’.

Not sure what you are saying here? The OT is the Word of God foretelling of Jesus. The NT is the telling of the Word made flesh, Jesus the Redeemer, and His covenant with us.

Your statement seems to imply that the written testiment of Public revelation negates the need for preachers and the spoken Word as the conduit of faith. Faith doesn’t require the presence of a human source anymore?

This post is “Do we need the bible?” My assertion is that we need the bible because it leads us into salvation by the power of the Holy Spirit acting on the Word that is read. I never said that we do not need preachers. Most people hear the Word of God and come to repentence. This spoken Word is the written Word so if a person so dedicated himself/herself to finding salvation they could seek out a preacher or they could read the NT and the Holy Spirit could act on the Word that was read and bring that person to repentence and to salvation. Again, see CCC par. 819.

Just remember how Jesus taught His voice is heard. "Those who hear you hear me

The voices of the Apostles are heard in the NT Word of God.
[/quote]
[/QUOTE]

 

[NHInsider]

Your assertion of a one true church being the RCC is all through this thread. Even your assertion above about an authoritative church confirms your belief.
Again, there can be unity in Jesus if not conformity in liturgy.

 

[Benadam]

[/quote]

[/quote]

[/quote]

[/quote]

[/quote]

[/quote]

Ok, I got it right then. Faith isn’t through hearing anymore in your view. Faith through hearing is a thing of the past.

And, I never said it was self authenticating, I said it was Holy Spirit taught. Even the Catechism of the Catholic Church says this in paragraph 819.

You are saying it is self authenticating if it doesn’t require being heard from those who teach what was passed down and that there is no necessity for external validation that the Holy Spirit’s voice is being heard interiorly.

The Holy Spirit teaches by bringing to mind things that Jesus did or taught. The Holy Spirit teaches by means of human memory.The Holy Spirit teaches out of what the community that surrounded Jesus since the beginning has remembered. Memory is the faculty the Holy Spirit operates in us and in as much as our belief is faithfull to the memory of Him preserved by His church the Holy spirit is able to bring to mind and remind what Jesus did and taught and help us apply it to our current experiences… That characterizes the organic continuity required of the community that recieves the promises of the Holy Spirit’s teaching ministry. You can bring up the catechism but unless you are willing to submit to it’s catholic meaning it is a useless tool for you. And I can tell you that it doesn’t contradict the things catholics have been expressing to you. The gaps in your understanding of what is posted to you here are gaps in your understanding of the catechism as well.

Paragraph 819 say’s that there is Grace and good works through the Holy Spirit outside the visible boundaries of the Church but then it goes on to affirm that the conduit of those graces and the works of the Holy Spirit is the Church. Outside the visible boundaries of the Church there is found faith in Christ that is true to that memory that actually remembers Him and preserves that memory. That in no way means that the Holy spirit is promised to anyone who reads words that have been used to express that memory. The NT expresses what has been remembered and that memory is affirmed again and again by Sacred authors that it belongs to the whole community knowing that the authenticity of what they remember and know depends on it’s unity with the memory of the whole…
[/quote]
[/QUOTE]

 

[kepha1]

Catechism of the Catholic Church paragraph 817 “…But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated…–for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame.”

 

[NHInsider]

gtrenewed;6416246:

Why don’t you name one Protestant leader who acknowlegdes, never mind apologizes, for the numerous atrocities commited against Catholics during and after the so called Reformation?

Respect and dialogue, yes, but not mockery and half-truths.

If you do this, please start another thread.

 

[twb1621]

Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 819 “Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of the visible confines of the Catholic Church: the written Word ofGod; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements. Christs Spirit uses these Churches and communities as means of salvation,…”

If not Jesus then who?

As is said and you quoted and certainly is true, “many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of the visible confines of the Catholic Church:” Many elements of Sanctification" are not all nor is it the fullness of His teachings.

Lets look at the preceeding paragraph of the same writing;
*****818 ******“However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church.” *

What does this mean… it means those who are not familier with the full teachings of Christianity and the Catholic faith know no better than what teachings they have been given and should not be considered responsible for what they do not know as those who did know (such as Luther and others) who mislead them into believing those things that are not accurate. It is those teachings the Catholic Church refers to that these separated brothers and sisters who remain devote in heart find their way through the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Lets look at the paragraph following that that you quoted;
**820 **"Christ bestowed unity on his Church from the beginning. This unity, we believe, subsists in the Catholic Church as something she can never lose, and we hope that it will continue to increase until the end of time."277 Christ always gives his Church the gift of unity, but the Church must always pray and work to maintain, reinforce, and perfect the unity that Christ wills for her. This is why Jesus himself prayed at the hour of his Passion, and does not cease praying to his Father, for the unity of his disciples: "That they may all be one. As you, Father, are in me and I am in you, may they also be one in us, . . . so that the world may know that you have sent me."278 The desire to recover the unity of all Christians is a gift of Christ and a call of the Holy Spirit.”

What is this unity… It is plain to identify;
Ephesians CH4; 1 “I therefore, a prisoner in the Lord, beseech you that you walk worthy of the vocation in which you are called, 2 With all humility and mildness, with patience, supporting one another in charity. 3 Careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. 4 One body (the Church) and one Spirit (Holy Spirit); as you are called in one hope of your calling. 5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism.”

***As long as there are different beliefs, there is not “one Body”, One faith, and in many cases, “one Baptism”. ***

As far as your question “if not Jesus, then Who?”

The written Word of Scripture is the Inspired Word of God put into writing, not by God, but by man chosen of God do serve Him. It is authored through the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
You accept this apparently. Jesus, in His covenant with the Church He founded committed the guidance of the Holy Spirit to guide her until His return, If you believe in the Inspired Word of God you must accept this also. This means the ECFs and their successors were also guided by the Holy Spirit in the compiling, identifying the Inspired Word of God from all the writings they were presented with, Selecting those writings that as the Inspired Word of God would be the contents of what we later referred to as the Bible, translated this Word and Interpreted this Word, this being done by the order of pope Damasus to St. Jerome. The content of every Bible version contains at least the majority of these same writings even though some may have distorted interpretations. This is the Bible. It was not hand written by Jesus or our Heavenly Father and it was not dropped from the Sky. Jesus use His chosen and His Church to present and protect His teachings which by some men were taken from their element (the Church) to be adapted to the beliefs of man rather than being believed through faith and trust in God in their Inspiration.

Do not mislead yourself in thinking if you take one excerpt from the CCC you can make it seem to condone as acceptable all other faiths with varied beliefs who refer to themselves as Christian regardless of those varied beliefs. The Church is not saying they offer the fullness of the faith or what God wanted for us, but rather the unity in the Fullness of His teachings.

 

[twb1621]

Catechism of the Catholic Church paragraph 817 “…”

It is well documented that JohnPaul II acknowledged the failings of the RCC regarding the Reformation. .

This my brother is NOT failure but a recognized prophecy and was certainly not hidden from anyone. Christ Himself told us these things would happen and urged perseverence, not abandonment.
*1 Corinthians CH1; 9 God is faithful: by whom you are called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord. 10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no schisms among you; but that you be perfect in the same mind, and in the same judgment. ***
Luke CH22; 31 “And the Lord said: Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you all as wheat: 32 But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and thou, being once converted, confirm thy brethren.”

**Matthew CH24; 4 “And Jesus answering, said to them: Take heed that no man seduce you: 5 For many will come in my name saying, I am Christ: and they will seduce many. **

….Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall put you to death: and you shall be hated by all nations for my name’s sake. 10 And then shall many be scandalized: and shall betray one another: and shall hate one another. 11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall seduce many. 12 And because iniquity hath abounded, the charity of many shall grow cold. 13 But he that shall persevere to the end, he shall be saved.”

Acts Ch20; 28 “Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. 29 I know that, after my departure, ravening wolves will enter in among you, not sparing the flock. 30And of your own selves shall arise men speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.”

*Addition references at seekingdivinemercy.org/christians.html *

As I asked, but no one has the justification to present;

Now, if one is to judge an issue such as this claiming Peter was not in Rome or did not establish his chair there because scripture does not say so, then it is only justifiable to expect such a person or persons to explain the following;

We know scripture tells us Jesus made a covenant to never abandon His Church, that she would never fall and that she would always be guided by the Holy Spirit until His return. We also know according to scripture that in all things Jesus maintains primacy and that by the Father’s will, all things He shall reconcile to Himself. He even went as far as to warn us of the deceit and corruption that would arise at times both from outside and within His Church including the distortion of His Word and the deception of the many, yet asks for perseverance.

So, based on the principles of sola scriptura, who has in the past or does possess the righteousness to question the commitment and ability of our Lord to oversee the Church He founded with His blood, and so love her in her devotion and purge her of her corruption as, how and when He determines appropriate to Himself?

Has Our Lord not always had the authority to reconcile all things in heaven and on earth to Himself according to His and our Father in Heaven? Does man know better than God and can man do better than God overseeing His own Church for man to believe his own intervention is required to “reestablish” and modify church precepts? Can any man explain how the existence of so many “Christian” faiths is not a testament to man’s weakness of faith and trust in our Savior’s abilities to oversee His Church of which He has always been the High Priest?

These issues are not raised because something is NOT stated in scripture, but rather because these issues are stated in scripture. Please show scriptural support to the issues raised as these issues stand legitimate over and above the question of chair of Peter.

No where in Scripture does it say the Church Jesus founded would end, become corrupt and fail or be reestablished or revised at any time or by any man before His return. Just the opposite is true. God proclaims through scripture everything but these things will occur. Yet many have been mislead into accepting the personal beliefs and disbeliefs of individual men and women who did not have the faith or knowledge to accept the complete teachings of our Lord, establishing their own faiths through their adopted beliefs based on individual interpretations.

The final question; if in fact the Catholic Church was not the true Church founded by Jesus as some were lead to believe, one would have to know which Faith was the True Faith. After all, there must be one (and only one) because the Bible attests to it and to the fact it must be visible, obvious, and is of only “one God, one faith, one body and one baptism”… So which one was established by Jesus through the Apostles and their successors and has the lineage in the teachings of scripture since His ministry without interruption as Jesus’ covenant attests AND has all the Characteristics to identify it Biblically?

 

[mangy_dog]

I can see where everyone has gone off into a tangent and so I will just address the question.

We do need the Bible in much the same way we need our car’s owner’s manual.

The owner’s manual has tons of information that we rarely look at and consequently end up paying mechanics and auto shops thousands of dollars for something we could’ve done ourselves.
However, not everything is contained in the owner’s manual and not everything is easily understood by everyone so - sometimes even if we read the owner’s manual we still have to go to the dealer.

Same with the Bible but of course, at a higher spiritual plane . The Catholic Church which is the church that Christ intended to exist after His ascension into heaven and of which He left Peter as it’s first pope…264 popes later to Pope Benedict XVI…

Is our “dealer” (of sorts). Because sacred scripture, sacred tradition and revelation are the three interlocking means by which we recieve understanding of God’s law and salvation.

There is a completeness to this system that is not found anywhere else in its fulness.

Can you find the Word of God elsewhere? yes you can
Can you find tradition elsewhere? yes you can
Can you find revelation elsewhere? yes you can

Can you find all three in the same place - elsewhere? No you can not.

 

[kepha1]

I can see where everyone has gone off into a tangent and so I will just address the question.

We do need the Bible in much the same way we need our car’s owner’s manual.

The owner’s manual has tons of information that we rarely look at and consequently end up paying mechanics and auto shops thousands of dollars for something we could’ve done ourselves.
However, not everything is contained in the owner’s manual and not everything is easily understood by everyone so - sometimes even if we read the owner’s manual we still have to go to the dealer.

I am a sola manualist. I don’t need a mechanic to repair my electronic ignition. I have a hammer and a screw driver. I don’t need anything else. The manual my mechanic uses is perfectly clear, and anyone can understand it. :doh2:

On a serious note, the ECF’s did not prophecy the printing press or a new class of people that created a market for Bibles. They put together a list of sacred books so the Universal Church would know what was a divine writing to be read in the churches.

Council of Carthage (A.D. 419)​

Canon 24. (Greek xxvii.)
That nothing be read in church besides the Canonical Scripture
Item, that besides the Canonical Scriptures nothing be read in church under the name of divine Scripture.
But the Canonical Scriptures are as follows:
newadvent.org/fathers/3816.htm

The Synod of Hippo says the same thing 26 years earlier. Basically, we have a bible so the Church would now what was a divine writing and what wasn’t, TO BE READ ALOUD AT MASS, not for individual bible readers to confirm their opinions. The Church said we needed the Bible, but the Church doesn’t separate the Bible from Tradition or her Teaching Authority. Doing so denigrates the bible into an opinion manual.

If every Bible on the planet were to be destroyed, the truths taught in the bible are still contained in Sacred Tradition, which can never be destroyed.

 

[gtrenewed]

Conformity in liturgy is not the issue.

Do we have “unity in Jesus” if some of us believe Jesus is God Incarnate and others believe that Jesus was a man “possessed” by the Holy Spirit from His baptism until the crucifixion and others of us believe he was a good man and a great teacher/philosopher?

 

[gtrenewed]

If you do this, please start another thread