I think I understand the question. The point is that Jesus several times admonishes the Pharisee and other Jewish authorities for falling to understand God’s word asking “Didn’t you read …”.
From that the conclusion can be drawn that God had guided the writers of ancient scripture and that they had the ability to understand the writings but failed to do so. So how do we know A. The Holy See is correctly interperting scripture and/or B. Why do we rely on there interpretation, or would Christ admonish us for listening to them and not questioning when they seem to have something wrong.
Prior to Christ the word of God was misunderstood, the authorities adhered vehemetly to the letter of the law, without understanding the reasoning behind the law. Christ properly chastised them for this “Did you not read… = Didn’t you understand?”.
Christ taught his diciples the reasoning behind the laws of the old testimate and the prophesies in Scripture. The bible speaks of him “Opening the eyes” of the disciples. Before his death and resurection he founded the instituion of the Church, so that his teachings would not be lost.
I personally know I am not qualified to interperate scripture, like the Ethiopian I do not know enough to infallalbe interperate Scripture. For instance, without a knowledge of the culture of Corinth and the situations that were occuring there that prompted Paul to write letters to the Corintheans, how can I claim to understnd the letters to the Corintheans. But the Church did exist then as it does now and retains that knowledge.
I find the example of being justified apart from works as easy to understand from the Bible, ironic. For does not James tell us “Do you want proof, you ignoramus, that faith without works is useless? Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered his son Isaac upon the alter?..See how a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.” James 2:20-24
It appears we would be in disagreement. You see faith apart from works is clearly the message of the bible. I understand that I must both have faith and works. How can we settle our differences? I feel that Christ left us with the magestirium which teaches me that while I am justified by faith apart from works of the Mosaic law, I can not have faith apart from works of love and hope. “So faith, hope, and love remain, these three, but the greatest of these is love” - 1 Cor 13:13
Lets further say we disagree about something else, such as whether an action is a sin. “If your brother sins [against you], go and tell him is fault…if he refuses to listen to them, tell the church” - Mt 18:15-17 Now under the scenerio where we not given a church, then what church do we go to? The Catholic, the Baptist, Methodist, Lutherans, Anglicans, Universal Life Church, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Seven day adventist, Church of Christ, Church of the Free word, Unitarians, … we aren’t taking our problems to the church, we are searching for a church that tells us what we want to hear. I don’t believe that Jesus commands us to go to the church and doesn’t leave us with the church. Indeed Christ says “Amen, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything for which they are to pray, it shall be granted to them by my heavenly Father” - Mt 18 18-19. Who does Jesus give this mighty power to, the apostles, what church can claim the apostles as its first bishops, bishops who handed down this power to new bishops to continue the church in perpetuity, only one the Catholic church
Looking back through history we find GOD always gives us His word, but then uses people to continually represent and explain the why of it all.
