Holy Spirit leads one to correct understanding when reading Scripture?

[LuciusMaximus]

As a Protestant, I frequently hear of the belief that the Holy Spirit guides us to the truth while we read Scripture, and this is essentially offered as a proof for Sola Scriptura.

I am familiar with the obvious arguments for “33,000 Protestant denominations” and how that can’t possibly be true for everyone, since the Holy Spirit would not lead one into error.

My question is, where is this belief found in Scripture? One passage I’ve seen is in 2 Peter chapter 1, where Peter says that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of private interpretation; essentially that the Holy Spirit helps interpret since the Holy Spirit was Himself the author. Are there other verses?

What is the Catholic response to this? Is the Holy Spirit, given at baptism, supposed to guide Scripture readers, and supposed to guide the Magisterium (and Tradition) on a broader level on the meaning of Scripture? While explaining Catholicism to another Protestant, I wasn’t sure how to effectively refute it besides pointing to doctrinal chaos within Protestantism - but I didn’t want to contradict Scripture, if it’s found there somewhere.

 

[catholic03]

Clearly, according to reason and with the support of the scriptures, the Bible is not to be interpreted by individuals.

The Magisterium of the Church interprets because as you say, otherwise we get thousands of different denominations believing different things.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

My question is, where is this belief found in Scripture? One passage I’ve seen is in 2 Peter chapter 1, where Peter says that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of private interpretation; essentially that the Holy Spirit helps interpret since the Holy Spirit was Himself the author. Are there other verses?

I think that this passage actually speaks against private interprevation- hence one can not be sure that Holy Spirit indeed helped him interpret things. One can only be sure if those guided by Holy Spirit and in authority judge it to be correct. Those people are Bishops, successors to Apostles- at least according to historical writings of Early Church.

Is the Holy Spirit, given at baptism, supposed to guide Scripture readers, and supposed to guide the Magisterium (and Tradition) on a broader level on the meaning of Scripture?

Holy Spirit given at baptism guides us… yes. But we can not be sure that He is only one who speaks.

Luke 22
31 “Simon, Simon, Satan has asked to sift all of you (plural form) as wheat. 32 But I have prayed for you (singular), Simon, that your (singular) faith may not fail. And when you (singular) have turned back, strengthen your brothers.”

So Satan tempted even Apostles. Our Lord prayed for Peter’s faith (and everything He asks from Father He gets), so it could strengthen his brothers. That infallible faith has persisted in Church, according to Catholic teaching. Bishops in communion with Pope of Rome embody that authority as a college- but also every single Bishop himself to his flock. That is Catholic teaching, or my understanding of it.

 

[Maximian]

The Magisterium also includes the definition of what consitites Scripture.

 

[ColoradoCatholic]

The Holy Spirit always guides you when you read scripture but that doesn’t mean you infallibly understand what its says all the time. This is why denominations split often based on what people individually want to believe about scripture.

So then you have to ask yourself is that really what Jesus intended? Didn’t he want us to be as one?

But the thing people don’t understand is that Jesus didn’t ascend into Heaven and say “oh and good luck trying to figure out what this means! (tosses a bible to the Apostles)” He gave us twelve men who would lead his Church into the Truth, but specifically Peter himself (who the Early Church Fathers unanimously understood to have the executive responsibility on making the tough choices)

see Acts when they talk about circumcision*. Guess who makes the final call? (Peter)

Ok, I’m going to try my best to answer all of these in a concise manner.

1. The Catholic response to Sola Scriptura, “Scripture Alone” is that the argument for “Scripture Alone” is itself a self refuting statement. What I mean is that nowhere in scripture do you find anything saying that Sacred Scripture is the ONLY source of authority. Yes it is good for teaching etc. but it is not the ONLY authority.
2. If Scripture Alone is true and authoritative, then how do we know what books should be in the Bible itself? (there is no table of contents, AND the Bible itself didn’t exist until the council of Rome in 382 AD, AND it was decided at that council that the Deutero-Canonical books should be included)
3. The Holy Spirit according to the Catholic Church will guide it (the Catholic Church, and its Leadership) infallibly. This does not mean that the men themselves in said leadership positions are always infallible, but that statements made by the Pope, “Ex Cathedra” (from the Chair of Peter), on issues of only Faith (such as Marian Dogmas, etc.) and Morals (such as abortion, etc.) are infallible.
4. This being said, infallible statements are they themselves statements of truth (via the Holy Spirit) and must have always been true, and continue to be true in the Future (hence they will never change)

It comes down to Authority, do you believe that Jesus instated Peter as the 1st among equals? This is extremely important because when you have two or more groups that differ on a theological opinion, then who is right? and how do we know it is correct to say so? This is why Catholics will always have a Pope, who is part of an unbroken line that goes all the way back to the apostles. He makes the call when things get hard, and the Holy Spirit will guide him away from error OR will prevent him from making an incorrect declaration of Faith and Morals in the Church. You have to trust what Jesus said, “you are Peter and on this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of Hell will not prevail against it.”

(and FYI the 33,000 number is a little big actually, it comes from a source that blows the number a little out of proportion)

 

[fide]

The strongest passages in Scripture for the promised guidance of the Spirit into all the Truth (and which also refutes sola scriptura, I believe) is in John’s Gospel, the last discourse of Jesus to the Apostles:

Joh 16:6 But because I have said these things to you, sorrow has filled your hearts.
Joh 16:7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Counselor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you.
Joh 16:8 And when he comes, he will convince the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment:
Joh 16:9 concerning sin, because they do not believe in me;
Joh 16:10 concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father, and you will see me no more;
Joh 16:11 concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged.
Joh 16:12 "I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.
Joh 16:13 When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.
Joh 16:14 He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you.
Joh 16:15 All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you.

This guidance of the Spirit is promised here to the apostles - to those whom He sends specifically as the teachers and formators in the Church:

Mat 28:18 And Jesus came and said to them, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.
Mat 28:19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Mat 28:20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age."

Jesus did not command, for example everyone who heard the Sermon on the Mount, “Go and make disciples”. He commanded those He formed and taught and sent after the Resurrection: His Apostles - those who passed on their authority as teachers to those later called bishops - hence the Catholic hierarchy and Magisterium as the Teaching Authority in the Church.

These two passages - John, and Matthew - need to be heard deeply, and together, to understand the Scriptural basis for our Spirit-led Magisterium in the Church. There are other passages, of course, (for example those which focus on the Pope) but these are IMHO, crucial.

 

[LuciusMaximus]

Great reply, thanks. That brings up a separate question I’ve had for a while. Is the “Great Commission” aimed at us - individual believers - or just for the Apostles and their successors (the bishops those under them)?

 

[catholicray]

Well if the Holy Spirit is guiding then Scripture is insufficient without the Holy Spirit.

 

[TheLittleLady]

Who was standing there when Jesus said the words? The eleven disciples. It was not a command to the wider group.

 

[Billy_Buescher]

Most if not all protestants do not really believe that the Holy Spirit will guide them.
If they really believed that , why would they waist time going to colleges to learn scripture and why do most church pastors have some kind of degree, when they can learn just by listing to the Spirit.

Act 8:30 And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest?
Act 8:31 And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.

 

[fide]

All Christians become witnesses to Christ in the world, and holy love compels us to share that saving relationship, and His Truth (His Gospel) with others. It is good to seek to evangelize, but we must remember that we do so in union with the whole Catholic Church, and are responsible to pass on only the Truth - not merely our opinions, especially if we are not in union with the Church. The Commission was given to the Church, but we individually are not Bishops, who (as successors to the Apostles) were given that responsibility by Jesus.

Because of that, we lay men and women need to become educated - formed - in the Catholic Faith. We must know it, so we can share it accurately. The actual Gospel is the saving Truth of God, and so it is a precious treasure to be “handled” very carefully - lest we do harm, and not good, in seeking to share it.

 

[yankeesouth]

The risen Lord instructed his apostles, and through them his disciples in all ages, to take his word to the ends of the earth and to make disciples of all people. - Pope Benedict XVI

 

[po18guy]

What is perhaps beeing looked past here is that we are to test the spirits! There is absolutely no guarantee that possession of a bible includes the Holy Spirit. Quite the opposite. What if your ego leads you to desire your own twist on things, i.e. 2 Peter 3:16?

Which spirit leads you then? Joseph Smith claimed to be lead by the spirit. And he was - but which one? Charles Taze Russell the same - but again, which spirit? The same with Arius. The same with Muhammad.

1 John 4:1-4 (the Douay-Rheims puts it most clearly)
Dearly beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits if they be of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. By this is the spirit of God known. Every spirit which confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is of God: And every spirit that dissolveth Jesus, is not of God: and this is Antichrist, of whom you have heard that he cometh, and he is now already in the world. You are of God, little children, and have overcome him. Because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

“Dissolveth Jesus” is the salient point. A dissolving spirit makes Him less than He is; alters His substance - His humanity, His divinity, His presence in the Holy Eucharist - all of it.

The evil one, then ignorant, now knowing that Christ is the Son of God ('if you are son of God…" ) since he could not defeat Him, now desires strongly to dissolve Christ. In that dissolution is defeat for those who follow.

The Wisdom of Solomon, Chapter 2, verses 10-25 speaks to this dissolution extremely well, even describing the life of our Lord and the self-deception of His enemies.

 

[JonNC]

As a Protestant, I frequently hear of the belief that the Holy Spirit guides us to the truth while we read Scripture, and this is essentially offered as a proof for Sola Scriptura

No. That’s not the meaning or intention of sola scriptura, at least not its classical meaning.
Sola scriptura is a hermeneutical principle, and hermeneutics is a function of the Church.

My question is, where is this belief found in Scripture? One passage I’ve seen is in 2 Peter chapter 1, where Peter says that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of private interpretation; essentially that the Holy Spirit helps interpret since the Holy Spirit was Himself the author. Are there other verses?

There are scriptural references that imply the use of scripture as the final norm. The Lutheran Confessions reference Ps. 119:105: Thy Word is a lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path. And St. Paul: Though an angel from heaven preach any other gospel unto you, let him be accursed, Gal. 1:8.

But I am not aware of a scriptural instruction to personal interpretation.
Second generation Lutheran theologian Martin Chemnitz states:

“This is also certain, that no one should rely on his own wisdom in the interpretation of the Scripture, not even in the clear passages… We also gratefully and reverently use the labors of the fathers who by their commentaries have profitably clarified many passages of the Scripture. And we confess that we are greatly confirmed by the testimonies of the ancient church in the true and sound understanding of the Scripture. Nor do we approve of it if someone invents for himself a meaning which conflicts with all antiquity, and for which there are clearly no testimonies of the church.”

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

No. That’s not the meaning or intention of sola scriptura, at least not its classical meaning.

What you are referring to is nowadays called “Prima Scriptura”. Sola Scriptura indeed means by literal translation “Scripture Only”, while “Prima Scriptura” means “Scripture primarily”. More traditional Protestants lean towards Prima Scriptura, while less traditional ones lean towards Sola Scriptura.

But I am not aware of a scriptural instruction to personal interpretation.
Second generation Lutheran theologian Martin Chemnitz states:

I consider that very wise. Thanks for sharing.

 

[porthos11]

As a Protestant, I frequently hear of the belief that the Holy Spirit guides us to the truth while we read Scripture, and this is essentially offered as a proof for Sola Scriptura.

I am familiar with the obvious arguments for “33,000 Protestant denominations” and how that can’t possibly be true for everyone, since the Holy Spirit would not lead one into error.

My question is, where is this belief found in Scripture? One passage I’ve seen is in 2 Peter chapter 1, where Peter says that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of private interpretation; essentially that the Holy Spirit helps interpret since the Holy Spirit was Himself the author. Are there other verses?

What is the Catholic response to this? Is the Holy Spirit, given at baptism, supposed to guide Scripture readers, and supposed to guide the Magisterium (and Tradition) on a broader level on the meaning of Scripture? While explaining Catholicism to another Protestant, I wasn’t sure how to effectively refute it besides pointing to doctrinal chaos within Protestantism - but I didn’t want to contradict Scripture, if it’s found there somewhere.

The Catholic response is that we agree wholeheartedly. The Spirit guides the reader of Scripture. Since we recognize that the Scriptures are inspired of the Holy Spirit, we must ask the Author to aid us in our understanding.

The difference is that we form our beliefs and understanding on the fullness of God’s revelation, not just Scripture. Along with Scripture we depend on Tradition and the Magisterium as well. Together they form a three-legged stool. Take away one, and we fall flat.

Contrary to opinions held by even Catholic, the Church does not interpret every single bit of Scripture. Private interpretation by Catholics is both permitted and encouraged. What we are not to do is interpret it independently of the Church’s Tradition and Magisterium. The Church often simply lays limits beyond which is heresy. Within those parameters, we are free to play. In some cases, the Church does definitively issue an interpretation, such as on John 6.

 

[LuciusMaximus]

Good points. My denomination, Pentecostalism, relies on Sola Scriptura, then, since nothing is given any credence unless it’s explicitly given in the literal sense in Scripture - a position that I find increasingly illogical, ahistorical, and untenable.

 

[JonNC]

What you are referring to is nowadays called “Prima Scriptura”. Sola Scriptura indeed means by literal translation “Scripture Only”, while “Prima Scriptura” means “Scripture primarily”. More traditional Protestants lean towards Prima Scriptura, while less traditional ones lean towards Sola Scriptura.

It may be referred to as prima scriptura, but what I’ve described is what sola scriptura is. There are, indeed, some who interpret sola scriptura as personal interpretation. The Lutheran Confessions contradict that view:

“We believe, teach, and confess that the sole rule and standard according to which all dogmas together with [all] teachers should be estimated and judged are the prophetic and apostolic Scriptures of the Old and of the New Testament alone, …”

Take note that it speaks of “dogma”, which is not a matter of individual interpretation, and hold teachers accountable

I consider that very wise. Thanks for sharing.

Thank you for your kind words.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

what I’ve described is what sola scriptura is

I understand that this is probably the traditional view of Sola Scriptura. Nowadays it is quite helpful to use the “newer” terms but then again I guess we understand what Lutherans mean by it and what some other Protestant denominations do.

 

[Lion_IRC]

Are there other verses?

How about this as a proof text?

"Jesus knew their thoughts and said to them: “Any kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and a house divided against itself will fall. If Satan is divided against himself, how can his kingdom stand? I say this because you claim that I drive out demons by Beelzebul. Now if I drive out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your followers drive them out?"

(Related)
“…for whoever is not against us is for us.”