Do we need the Bible?

[twb1621]

Tom, I see you are similar to me. I in essence argued my way into the church ala Newman style.I used to accuse the pope of being a paegan leader, the saints were replacements of peagan gods, and many things that would put Jack Chick to shame. But, after letting go of my extreme Anti-catholic rigor, God opened my eyes to the fullness of truth, that is the church that has “The sum of the whole” ,the church “universal”, the Church Katholika

UA. thank you sincerely for sharing your thoughts. It is truly a blessing and the deepest gift of the Holy Spirit to be awakened to the realness of our faith as Christ brought it to us. What a sadness to have missed it but what a warmth and a loving relationship to be reassured by Christ of His kinship and love for us. And His reassurances are quite discernable when one is open to Him.

 

[gtrenewed]

(from a post by gtrenewed: Or that many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside the visible confines of the RCC such as the written Word of God; it doesn’t mean what it clearly says?)

Yes, that is what it says, and it also laments the incomplete communion you have with us, and hopes for a healing of unity. We didn’t separate from anyone.

Thank you for acknowledging that, and I agree it laments the wounds to unity.

And what do we get in return for the olive branch we extend? It would be uncharitable of me to make a list.

It’s not important what you get, it is only important to do the right thing. This is the example of Jesus Christ.

One never could “buy” indulgences. The financial scandal surrounding indulgences, the scandal that gave Martin Luther an excuse for his heterodoxy, involved alms—indulgences in which the giving of alms to some charitable fund or foundation was used as the occasion to grant the indulgence. There was no outright selling of indulgences.

A technicallity and a bit of a smokescreen. The effect is the same - the way it was understood by the people carried the same effect - they were buying indulgences. That is why at Trent they cancelled indulgences that involved money.

There is only one woman mentioned by name at Pentacost, and we still hold to that significance. Do you?

Not sure what you mean here and why you brought it up on this thread. In the upper room were the apostle’s, other disciples including the women and the Lord’s brothers (I know you’ll say cousins and that’s ok), and Mary His mother. Of course Mary holds a unique place in the Body of Christ, this is obvious. All generations shall call her blessed. This is one of the mysteries of God that deserves careful consideration and in doing such, I feel it unwise to enter into debate. I leave you to your practice.

 

[gtrenewed]

God —> Christ —> Church —> Episcopate —> Pope (Tradition =+Magisterium=+Scriture)(2 Tim. 3:14, 15, 16)

My diagram was showing the relationship of the believer to God the Father. Where is the believer in your diagram?

Your Scripture reference seems out of place. These verses are the very one’s I use to prove why we need the Bible. Paul was using the personal interaction he had with Timothy to assure him of what he taught and not to believe others who differed just because they seemed educated and eloquent.
The fact of the matter is that you do not know the lives of those at the Vatican, they are not personal to you. So these verses do not really apply. Although there are other verses you could have used.

Chapter and verse, please.

Hebrews 7:23-25; Hebrews 10:8-10; really all of Hebrews.

The Toda (thanksgiving) sacrifice foreshadows the Mass.

It certainly foreshadows Jesus’ passion

Gen. 14:18 - this is the first time that the word “priest” is used in Old Testament. Melchizedek is both a priest and a king and he offers a bread and wine sacrifice to God.

Psalm 76:2 - Melchizedek is the king of Salem. Salem is the future Jeru-salem where Jesus, the eternal priest and king, established his new Kingdom and the Eucharistic sacrifice which He offered under the appearance of bread and wine. Psalm 110:4 - this is the prophecy that Jesus will be the eternal priest and king in the same manner as this mysterious priest Melchizedek. This prophecy requires us to look for an eternal bread and wine sacrifice in the future. Please explain how your church fulfils this prophecy and we can compare.

I believe in the real presence of Jesus in the bread and wine as I see in Scripture. It is curious, though, that wine was not always presented to the RC congregation and in fact many “tradionalists” do not take it today. Scripturally I see the first century church communing with bread and wine; however, at some point the RCC changed that tradition in favor of just a wafer and then changed it again to wafer and wine but apparantly wine is optional.

Predestination to glory, not to grace.

No, my reference to Hebrews chapter 8 here is to grace because the context of the passage is the new covenant, a better ministry.

 

[kepha1]

Originally Posted by gtrenewed

A technicallity and a bit of a smokescreen. The effect is the same - the way it was understood by the people carried the same effect - they were buying indulgences. That is why at Trent they cancelled indulgences that involved money.

The part of the paragraph you forgot to include in your re-quote answers this.
"…The Catholic Encyclopedia states: “I*t is easy to see how abuses crept in. Among the good works which might be encouraged by being made the condition of an indulgence, almsgiving would naturally hold a conspicuous place. . . . It is well to observe that in these purposes there is nothing essentially evil. To give money to God or to the poor is a praiseworthy act, and, when it is done from right motives, it will surely not go unrewarded.” *

Protestants to this day want to believe that people back then were stupid and the motive was not almsgiving but purchasing grace or forgiveness or salvation or the same prot hate speech I see every day. Protestants cannot or will not accept the difference between abuses and teaching. There is no evidence of universal abuse regarding indulgences, unless you can judge the souls of each Catholic 400 years ago.
NEWS FLASH!!! Almsgiving is not evil.

You also forgot to include this link: Myths About Indulgences
another good one is A PRIMER ON INDULGENCES
Quote:
There is only one woman mentioned by name at Pentacost, and we still hold to that significance. Do you?

Originally Posted by gtrenewed

Not sure what you mean here and why you brought it up on this thread.

The reason I brought it up was to address the remark something like “the RCC today is nothing like the church at Pentacost”. This statement is ridiculous. Doctrinally, the RCC IS the Church of Pentacost, and the hierarchy listed is the same as the RCC is today. I think I’ll open a thread to that effect. Protestantism bears no resemblance to the church at Pentacost.

Originally Posted by gtrenewed

In the upper room were the apostle’s, other disciples including the women and the Lord’s brothers (I know you’ll say cousins and that’s ok), and Mary His mother. Of course Mary holds a unique place in the Body of Christ, this is obvious. All generations shall call her blessed. This is one of the mysteries of God that deserves careful consideration and in doing such, I feel it unwise to enter into debate. I leave you to your practice.

Good. Let’s get back on track or we can all let this thread snip. Without Tradition and the Magisterium, there would be no Bible.

Remove the Bible from Tradition and the Magisterium, and it is no longer an inspired book.

 

[Benadam]

Repost

Since the dawn of time there has always been a People of God that with their own lives make the Word of God visible on earth. Right behind those lives making the Word of God visible has always been an oral tradition.

That changed with Moses when by the providence of God a written testimony began to develope as well. By the time that the Word of God Himself became visible their was a well developed testimony of Him and His people and that testimony continued afterwards untill the death of the Apostles when again by the providence of God the Word of God as made visible by His People was deemed sufficient along with the written testimony they already had.

That has never changed.

The People of God continue to make the word of God visible and the written testimony and the tradition that follows are still with it.

How could anyone claim that the order God established since the beginning, that he came in the flesh and confirmed, was at an arbitrary moment in time meant to end?

Since Adam their have been human lives making visible the Mystery of God and that primary expression has always been followed with a tradition.

Where are those People of God today? Where is the tradition that has always followed and record that scroll of Life?

According to some it doesn’t exist anymore and all there is now is the written testimony and the same claim it testifies to them. Even though their is no tradition that follows and records their lives. Even though they don’t make visible the Word of God on earth.

I think it an irresponsible position to claim that the written testimony of the People of God is the only rule of faith and that the People of God themselves are no longer relevant.

This is what happened 500 years ago when another people branched off and claimed that the People of God were no longer His people and that the tradition that has followed them since the dawn of time is no longer necessary. And, as it is at this time, teach that the written testimony of their life is not theirs but belongs to someone else.

---

 

[kepha1]

My diagram was showing the relationship of the believer to God the Father. Where is the believer in your diagram?

The believer is the end receiver of divine truth, not the source. And the believer is still part of the Magisterium, but not as the function of teacher. The Church is a mystery and cannot be reduced to a mathematical formula.

Your Scripture reference seems out of place. These verses are the very one’s I use to prove why we need the Bible. Paul was using the personal interaction he had with Timothy to assure him of what he taught and not to believe others who differed just because they seemed educated and eloquent.

The scriptures you used were about justification, grace, and some were common arguments used by Protestants to support the “justification by faith alone” theory. I simply catagorized them, I did not refute them, that is if I have the right verses you quoted. Paul prefers to physically be there rather than write, (1 Tim. 3:14-15) because his preaching (Oral Tradition) is just as valid as his letters. (Scripture)
gtrenewed;6445671:

Hebrews 7:23-25; Hebrews 10:8-10; really all of Hebrews

I was referring to the last part of your sentence. Nowhere in Hebrews does it demand the abolishment of the priesthood, which you implied by saying We no longer have to go through the priestly sacrifice…" If you meant “…We no longer have to go through the Old Testament priestly sacrifice…” I goofed. If you mean Hebrews demands the abolishment of the New Testament priesthood, it isn’t there.
.
The Toda sacrifice forshadows Jesus’ passion and the Mass which is the same perpetual sacrifice. Jesus died once, but He eternally and perptetually offers Himself to the Father on our behalf. We don’t separate these events from His eternal priesthood. The Mass connects earth with heaven; even as a Catholic it took me a long time to realize this deeper meaning of the Mass.

I believe in the real presence of Jesus in the bread and wine as I see in Scripture.

I believe in the real presence of Jesus in the consecrated Bread and Wine, which occurred some 20+ years before the first inscripturation of the first New Testament book, foreshadowed all over the Old Testament. The Bread I partake in is not a different Bread that Jesus consecrated. It is ONE Bread. Paul makes this clear, but we view Paul in the light of the Gospels, not the other way around. Jesus instituted the Mass before any New Testament was written and the essense of the Mass hasn’t changed.

In keeping on track:
We need the written expression of God’s Divine Revelation, but the written expression is complimentary with the Traditional expression of God’s Divine Revelation. Just because they are different modes of transmission does not make one inferior to the other.

 

[twb1621]

As most of us here are fully aware, the Holy Bible, Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium can not be separated. They are the Catholic Faith and the Eucharist is it’s Heart, Soul and Summit. The question should not be “do we need the bible”, but why do so many Catholics have such limited knowledge of the Bible? That IMO should be the question however, I believe the OP mistook some Catholic apathy toward the Bible for lack of necessity. Correct me if I am wrong.

 

[kepha1]

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

“As most of us here are fully aware, the Holy Bible, Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium can not be separated. They are the Catholic Faith and the Eucharist is it’s Heart, Soul and Summit. The question should not be “do we need the bible”, but why do so many Catholics have such limited knowledge of the Bible? That IMO should be the question however, I believe the OP mistook some Catholic apathy toward the Bible for lack of necessity. Correct me if I am wrong”

Looking the OP, the question presupposes “the Church” has everything she needs without the Bible. That may be true in one sense, given that the bible is contained in Tradition, but I have to go back to Hippo and Carthage where the ECF gave their reason for listing the holy books. The Church had to know for sure what could be called “divine writing to be read in the churches”. That is why we need the Bible.

Formulating suppositions and verifying them with scripture tends to lean the scriptures out of the context from which the sacred authors wrote them, and that does violence to the Bible. I do not wish to offend any lower church or non-denom. readers but that is what I have seen.

I don’t think the OP was indirectly refering to “Catholic apathy” toward the Bible but I would like to address the point. Practicing Catholics may not know the chapter and verse numbers for, say, the Parable of the Prodical Son, but at the same time, practicing Catholics have a good idea of the application of the parable to the forgiveness of the Father and the Sacrament of Reconcilation. What is more important to a persons relationship with God? Having a basic grasp of the teachings that lead to a holier life or memorizing chapter and verse numbers?

 

[twb1621]

“As most of us here are fully aware, the Holy Bible, Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium can not be separated. They are the Catholic Faith and the Eucharist is it’s Heart, Soul and Summit. The question should not be “do we need the bible”, but why do so many Catholics have such limited knowledge of the Bible? That IMO should be the question however, I believe the OP mistook some Catholic apathy toward the Bible for lack of necessity. Correct me if I am wrong”

Looking the OP, the question presupposes “the Church” has everything she needs without the Bible. That may be true in one sense, given that the bible is contained in Tradition, but I have to go back to Hippo and Carthage where the ECF gave their reason for listing the holy books. The Church had to know for sure what could be called “divine writing to be read in the churches”. That is why we need the Bible.

Formulating suppositions and verifying them with scripture tends to lean the scriptures out of the context from which the sacred authors wrote them, and that does violence to the Bible. I do not wish to offend any lower church or non-denom. readers but that is what I have seen.

I don’t think the OP was indirectly refering to “Catholic apathy” toward the Bible but I would like to address the point. Practicing Catholics may not know the chapter and verse numbers for, say, the Parable of the Prodical Son, but at the same time, practicing Catholics have a good idea of the application of the parable to the forgiveness of the Father and the Sacrament of Reconcilation. What is more important to a persons relationship with God? Having a basic grasp of the teachings that lead to a holier life or memorizing chapter and verse numbers?

Thanks Kepha1… I agree for the most part, but there is a non-personal aspect to being informed of what scripture teaches us and actually reading the Word, the life, the teachings and messages of Christ and the Father in a direct way. Many of the generation I came from and the experiences I have had and come across tend to express this distance between God and the person. Not for all, but for many, receiving the teachings of the faith as an adolescent and teen holds limited appreciation of all that Christ offers us and how He sacrificed Himself for our salvation. For some, it’s similar to hearing about an event from your brother about your brother’s friend who you really are not close to. You may understand the issues of the event and certainly be able to recall his hardships, but without a personal connection, often one cannot appreciate or truly know his place in that event as though knowing the person from personal involvement. Many Catholics taught their faith through grade and high school come out thinking they have learned what there is, many forget what they learned after entering the competition of society and many rarely if ever read the written Word. Sadly, some do not know the difference between the Catholic and KJV or NWT Bibles for instance. Usually they place their blame on the Catholic Church and in some instances it is responsible but what they fail to realize is, it is their individual responsibility to continue in strengthening their faith and relationship with our Lord through scripture and participation with the faithful united. The massive decline in Christian living and morality over the last 50 years is an expression of the lack of involvement many have with their faith, much of which has to do with failure to relate to the true Word of God. Just as the Israelites went astray while Mosses was on the mount, the gathering lost their direction for lack of contact with the Word they relied on for strength. In this case the Word is the Holy Bible and these distant Catholics are those I refer to. Again, sadly I was one of many. If we can understand this aspect of the seperation, we can better express compassion and offer more effective guidence for many back to the True Church founded on the Blood of Christ. I am sure this is at least one of the reasons many of us including you and I are here.

 

[Cashue]

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

Only if it doesn’t conflict with the church. The bible is no good without the church and wouldn’t even have existed without the church so its like a car is uselsess without gas. The Church has the final word but the bible is quite good too.

 

[mackbrislawn]

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

No, “we” don’t need the Bible, but the Church does. The Bible belongs to the Church, and is a tool given to her by God, to use in preaching the good news.

 

[Cristian_B]

Only if it doesn’t conflict with the church. The bible is no good without the church and wouldn’t even have existed without the church so its like a car is uselsess without gas. The Church has the final word but the bible is quite good too.

Actually, the Church has the final word on matters not presented in the Bible. Remember that the Bible is the word of God. In a family the husband has the final word. According to what you said, the wife (Church) has the last word, over the husband (God). This is not how it works. The Church is in submission to God. The Church has the final word in matters not presented in the Bible, which are few, by the way.

 

[Cashue]

Actually, the Church has the final word on matters not presented in the Bible. Remember that the Bible is the word of God. In a family the husband has the final word. According to what you said, the wife (Church) has the last word, over the husband (God). This is not how it works. The Church is in submission to God. The Church has the final word in matters not presented in the Bible, which are few, by the way.

exacltly

 

[Cristian_B]

exacltly

I’m glad we agree.

 

[Cashue]

I’m glad we agree.

Yes, there will be only agreement within the arms of the Holy church. We are all children to her guidence and all speak in agreement. That is what it is all about.

God Bless:thumbsup:

 

[timonews]

Hi all

I’m newbie here and came to this topic on forums.catholic-questions.org from google search engine.

I really think this topic on forums.catholic-questions.org is really interesting.

I’m work on payday loans related work and I have a blog which giving out info about payday loans

For those, who asked me about payday loans reviews, I’ve obtained useful news about it. Now I don’t have to worry about the unexpected bill getting paid. No personal questions, bad credit accepted, and the money is directly deposited into your checking account. I would suggest news77.com/payday-loans/ to anyone who needs quick, fast payday loans.

There you can find the most trusted US compared lenders! I really hope that everyone here don’t need some unexpected cash, but if any emergency appears, do not hesitate to use these services!

Peace out.