Your reasoning makes perfect sense. I’d like to stay to read the other posts as some people will no doubt trip up all over themselves trying to prove two “alones” equals one “alone” yet the two alones are diametrically opposed to each other, but I have to go watch The Journey Home on EWTN.
If someone’s attitude is “I want to do the bare minimum necessary to be saved; trying to actually follow Christ and become more like Him is not for me”… than I’d have to wonder if they really are saved. No, you don’t have to read the Bible to be saved. You don’t even have to be literate. But if Christ is your Lord, doesn’t that entail an interest in learning His teachings?
If someone’s attitude is “I want to do the bare minimum necessary to be saved; trying to actually follow Christ and become more like Him is not for me”… than I’d have to wonder if they really are saved. No, you don’t have to read the Bible to be saved. You don’t even have to be literate. But if Christ is your Lord, doesn’t that entail an interest in learning His teachings?
Oh my! I might be sounding too Catholic there!
:thumbsup:The Catholic Church gave us The Bible to read and Jesus gave us The Church he expects us to attend. So yes, we do have to do those things. Especially attending church. Note: The Bible subordinates itself to The Church. Not the other way around.
We are saved by faith and not works. Absolutely Biblical and true. We wouldn’t know this unless we read Scripture. We wouldn’t know why we have faith and what the road will be like when we have this faith and it grows and encounters obstacles if we didn’t read Scripture. We wouldn’t know how God’s faithfulness will impact those of us who have faith unless we read Scripture. The absolute center of Scripture is Christ, just like the absolute center of the Eucharist is Christ.
The writers of Scripture gave us Scripture. The Holy Spirit guided men to compile the writings. Jesus referred many things to Scripture before establishing his Church. All things necessary for salvation are contained in Scripture.
Ok. But how is it that you know that the Gospel of John is inspired Scripture? Who decided this?
The Holy Spirit discerning it.
Well, that’s a little like answering the question: where do babies come from, with “God.”
And actually, the Holy Spirit discerned nothing. Some* people,* gifted with the charism of infallibility by the Holy Spirit, “discerned” it.
Can you show us where you got that from?
That is really a small deal as compared to where we got the Scriptures. The compliation of Scripture although extremely helpful doesn’t compare to the prophets and the faithful who gave us the original inspired writings previous to the canon. The Bible was compiled by councils of the Early Church who in fact became part of the Eastern Orthodox church.
He did, but I note He built His Church upon people, and not writings, however Holy.
Really? Where did you find THAT in Scripture?
Well, when they split they became the Eastern Orthodox Church (in 1054 was it?), but initially when the Early Church convened in the 4th century, under the leadership of Pope Damasus, they were simply part of the Catholic Church.
Are you honestly going to suggest that the entire Church was not Catholic up until 1054?
But not Roman Catholic. That’s the point.
It wasn’t Roman Catholic. It was the Early Christian Church, The councils belonged to the One Christian Church which was catholic.
No substantiation, just Catholic proclamation. That is NOT meant to be a dig just so you know. I’m looking for root evidence like how we know that God is trinitarian because of the full context of Scripture.
