The Bible is there, and it records God’s Word to us. But even if writing were never invented, we would still have the Church, and it would continue to do what it always has done: to spread the Good News of Jesus Christ throughout the world.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
Priests are men and prone to the weaknesses of humanity. Some serve God well and others not quite as well while some may be outright deceivers from within… As in Martin Luther, a catholic monk… would you say martin Luther betrayed his faith through lack of trust in the Covenant of Christ with His Church? The Bible clearly warns us of those who will distort or deceive. Jesus Himself had the corrupt within His first established Church… a man who was recognized as one of the apostles and who had to be suceeded when he betrayed Jesus. Now, because of this corruption within the ranks of the teachers Christ personally selected, should man abandon Jesus as they do His Church?
This is very much in line with what Peter said when Jesus asked them if they would leave Him too.
but by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God"
That is an unjust imposition.
By the 19th century 90% of the world population could not read. Sorry, God is not so cruel as to make literacy a criteria for salvation.
What about children or the senile, or mentally challenged people who **can’t **know the bible?
John 17:17 does not restrict God’s word to the written word alone, you do. Nowhere in the Bible where you find “God’s word” is it restricted to the written word alone. It is not in the Bible. It is a 400 year old man made tradition. Key in the phrase “God’s word” or “word of God” in any bible search engine, and see it for yourself.
My Christian brother, be aware the Bible was taken from its true environment and its contents to one degree or another are in every version no matter who believes what interpretation.
The topic of this thread is “Do we need the Bible?” so of course that is my emphasis!
When you recieve teaching how do you distinguish the Holy Spirit from the human spirit or the evil spirit? I’ll say beforehand that using the Sacred Scriptures is admitting that the bible is self authenticating. And we know that it will authenticate the self because it’s the sharpest tool in the evil shed and the only tool in yours. If you haven’t matured in your dicipleship far eneough to realize that there are many voices that can inspire awe and wonder in your mind with the words of sacred text you can tout the Holy Spirit’s promises till your blue, it wouldn’t matter if you don’t know how to distinguish His voice from your own or the beautifull songs that the evil voice can sing.
Ok ? (!)
Your opinion you “seeHis Church as the Body of Christ as believing people” is wishful but not accurate. At one time I also believed as you do. Believing what teachings do you think are the True teachings and what makes it acceptable while ignoring others and whose version within the Christian division are those to be believed? What Christian faith possesses the lineage of the teachings of scripture for 2000 years and coincides with all the attributes of Scripture? Satin believed in Jesus also and although I do not by any means consider other Christian faiths satanic, I am sure the division of Christ’s people is. That is scriptural. His covenant with His Church, His teachings and prophetic warnings are Biblical as I have shown you in the verses I quoted. Believing goes far beyond accepting His existence. Believing based on what is acceptable or understandable to some but not to others is not. God’s word is not flexible. If you “believe” in His word completely you would have scriptural justification as to why you or others can disregard His covenant with His Church. That, my brother, must be justified before justifying faiths with conflicting beliefs. You would also have scriptural justification for the schisms brought about by men who number many. It is you after all who wish everything to be in scripture or it not to be acceptable. You would also have justification for those verses as in defense as to why there are so many with different beliefs but who claim to be of one faith when faith in Jesus is not faith without trust In Him and His entire teachings, not just those acceptable to some while ignoring the rest. And if you feel you are not ignoring others, look back over these issues I posted to you referring to scripture and see how many you directly responded to. I am not attempting to put you down. I am praying you find the way to put aside your opinions to combine all scripture as unified in His teachings and see where your opinions do not coincide.
Let me point something out. You are referring here to information that is not in scripture at all, isn’t that true? Where did you come up with this from? Explain to me how you accept and refer to information from non-scriptural sources as legitimate but you refuse to accept the writings of the ECFs who carried on the teachings of Christ when there was no Bible to speak of and who themselves took part in the identification, compilation and presentation of the written Inspired Word of God you yourself refer to as the Bible. And you don’t see your own double standards here?
T**hen you oppose **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.
There is no Biblical justification for the splits or continued grow of protestant generated faiths, only the opposite. The gates belong to hell and you are right in that the Church has not been prevailed against. But your double standards (if you are honest with yourself you will see them) show how anti-Catholic Christians justify their own beliefs. Your statement that power broke it apart and your acceptance of branches of different groups of believers is a protestant justification for the “sifting like wheat” 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 (Jesus prays for Simon Peter) , that thy (Peter’s) faith fail not: and thou, being once converted, confirm thy brethren (which he did)*.”
No my brother, when I look at scripture I look at all scripture, not just parts of it. I discard nothing of the word of God. I was against the CC for 25 years. Much of what I believed you now believe. My search for the truth in Christianity and those 25 years experience I accumulated in investigations and research gave me the experience and resources to perform the research that proved the lineage and truth in Catholicism to me when in fact I was hoping to find it elsewhere. You see, rather than accepting the word of the Catholic Church, scripture led me directly to the Catholic Church. Why do you think so many scholars originally of various faiths that became advanced in doctorates and professorships converted to Catholicism after finding the truth in their extended educations. This number far exceeds any other conversions. I was ashamed of what I learned of myself. I was against the CC because I was ignorant to what she truly was and is, the Truth, and fullness of Christ’s teachings. You gave no credible proof, you gave opinions and worked with double standards and I say that as one who did in the past myself. I gave you scriptural proof which is what you insisted was the only legitimate proof.
Where did I say you were doomed my brother?
I provided you the answer to your quote of the CCC and both paragraphs before and after the one you quoted. And if you re-read my response in that post, you will see you misread something the first time around.
For the Word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart - Hebrews 4:12
Are you saying that there are more RCC converted scholars than non-converted scholars? Isn’t it more likely that non-RC scholars outnumber converted non-RC scholars? Do you have a reference?
My opinions reflect my understanding of Scripture prayerfully studied. To go on and on would not do any good because we are using the same Scriptures from differing viewpoints. Also, I do find holes in your Scriptural proof, that is a misapplication of certain Scriptures. I am not trying to dissuade you but to show that there is a church, part of the Body of Christ along with the RCC.
Not really, you whitewashed the main thought of 819, there is truth, sanctification, and salvation outside of the visible confines of the RCC. I am not saying that is the sum total of that section, but it is an important point. I understand that from the viewpoint of the RCC, it all stems from the RCC.
gtrenewed, if you list scriptures or the catechism without explaining ( I knew you well eneogh to mention it beforehand) how they apply to the question they are supposed to answer I’m left to my own to how your mind attaches concepts to them that explain the way you distinguish the Holy Spirit among the voices that whisper meanings in your mind. I knew that would happen because it’s been the pattern of conversation with you on this thread. You should respect the meaning that the author’s attached to the words you quote to support you view. Thinking you know better what the author’s of Sacred Scripture meant is excuseable but to think you know better what the author’s of the catechism mean is an insult to intellect. I pray that you at least open your mind to the possibility that what you have read from catholics on this thread is true. I pray that your mind opens to the possibility that the Catholic Church is the same Church the bible testifies too.
