John 4, Living water, Eucharist

[WesleyF]

But the basic argument being: that a person all by himself, not around any Christians but somehow in the possession of the Bible, would be able to having saving knowledge (love, faith, repentance of sins) in Jesus just by reading the Scriptures and could bear the fruit of good works without ever getting baptized, taking communion, going to a church service in a building.

This approach hasn’t worked for 500 years of the Protestant reformation. What is “saving knowledge” depends upon how much you have read the Bible and how well you understand it. Does your friend profess that he/she is not ignorant of scripture in some way or the other? Or does he/she know scripture as thoroughly as it can be known?

A person reading the Bible and coming across John 6 could be convinced that Jesus’ flesh and blood is necessary for salvation, contrary to what your friend thinks. A person reading 1 Peter could come to the conclusion that baptism is necessary for salvation, contrary to what your friend thinks. This approach therefore is fallacious. It’s a recipe for disaster.

And what about the times when there was no Bible for the common man? The printing press itself was invented in the 15th century and then Bibles could be printed and distributed to the common man. But what about the 1400 years of Christianity before that? Ask your friend this question. If the Bible is all we need, what happened to those 1400 years of Christianity when it was impossible for each person to have his own copy of the Bible because Bibles had to copied by hand?

And that since the Bible is all he or she needs, you don’t need any knowledge of church history or tradition,

When you don’t have apostolic tradition, you end up making your own tradition, as this person has done. That’s a fact. This person says baptism and the sacraments are unnecessary for salvation. That’s his tradition. Many other believers who believe in Sola Scriptura believe that baptism is necessary for salvation. What therefore makes his interpretation of the Bible accurate and theirs inaccurate? This is the fundamental problem with Sola Scriptura - The lack of an authority to give you the accurate interpretation of scripture.

And then, what Peter warned, actually happens -

“There are some things in them (Paul’s letters) hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures.” (2 Peter 3:16)

Can any of us profess that we are not ignorant of scripture in some way or the other? Probably not. That means we are bound to twist the scriptures to our own destruction because of our ignorance.

especially since the early church Fathers disagreed about the Eucharist and other key things anyway and if that person did join a church,

If there’s one thing the church fathers unanimously agreed upon, it’s the Eucharist.
catholic.com/library/Real_Presence.asp

I just can’t believe that since I don’t think that it is realistic.

That’s true. You have to make him/her think past her indoctrination.

 

[WesleyF]

another church group’s good works are evidence of their faith and a better option because they don’t believe in the Eucharist, infant baptism, etc.

The issue is not what is the better option, the issue is what is the truth. Sometimes mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses also do many good works, but that doesn’t make them a good option. The Catholic church also has many good works, especially in the area of defending life and taking a stance against abortion, homosexual marriage, etc. But that’s not the issue.

Also, another thing you need to point out is that nowhere does the Bible say that works are evidence of faith. No. The Bible says that faith is brought to completion by the works (James 2:22). It also says that** we** have to make every effort to supplement our faith with virtue (2 Peter 1:5). It doesn’t say that virtue is evidence of faith.

But at the same time, a person is justified by faith alone, once and for all, without works, sacraments, etc. I just don’t understand the objections well enough to answer them and I appreciate the help here.

The key to understanding the Catholic position is this - I can do all things in Christ who strengthens me (Phil 4:13), and apart from him we can do nothing (John 15:5). The Catholic church teaches that all our works are actually done by God in and through us. The Catholic church emphasizes that we must participate in Christ, if we are the members of his body. Without participation, we are cut off (John 15:2).

We were both heavily indoctrinated against the Catholic church and lame as it may sound, it is not easy to get past all these things.

Ask him/her to put away this indoctrination and seek the truth with an open heart.