Personal interpretation of Scripture and Authority of Church

[onenow1]

opcorn:1. Where in Scripture is the verse which gives us moral guidance on cloning of human persons etc ?

Which Scriptural verses provide moral guidance for the question of invitro fertilization?

Which Scriptural verses provide moral guidance for bioethics?

Which Scriptural verses provide moral guidance for the use of human body parts?

The answer to all of the above questions is that Holy Scripture is silent for each and every one of them. Consequently, we have to look elsewhere for the answers.:yup:

Suppose everyone on earth was a bible only believer ?

The three questions aboe and hundreds more under the same circumstances would go unanswered from bible alone.

Fortunately, most of us are not bible only believers ! .

The way fortunately is spelled out in detail in Acts 15.

In Acts chapter 15, such a moral question did arise, the resolution of which could not be found in Scripture itself, the problem was circumcision.

Acts 15: 1-5. present the question, “should Gentiles be circumcised as the Jews were”?

Verses 6-29 explain in detail exactly how it was resolved, by calling a Council,with Peter, at the helm, the final decision made in conjunction with the Holy Spirit.

This decision was made not to burden the gentiles.

It’s very possible they indeed consulted scripture, but found it was silent.:yup:

However there is no mention that they consulted scripture.:nope:

How much help was Sola Scriptura in the resolution of this issue? none.

This exactly how the Holy Spirit is to work in the use of scripture, and Apostolic succession .:yup:

Peace, and God Bless onenow1

 

[LionHeart777]

Ginger, my post was way back

but you said:

Your claim is Tradition is necessary because Jesus did and said many things not written in the Scriptures:
2. Name one thing Tradition teaches Jesus said or did that is not recorded in scripture.

You seem to be putting words in my mouth. Maybe I didn’t make myself clear (I was writing when I woke up after 3-4 hours sleep and went back to sleep after), but I think my point was simply that you had oral teaching being referred to as the “Word”, that is it didn’t have to necessarily be written to be the Word. Did I explain that okay?

What I quoted you saying above is a different issue…I understand that there are a couple of different understandings of Tradition… someone correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m going back to the Aiken/White debate where I believe Jimmy explained that some hold the view you just cited above, and some hold to, I believe he called it “material sufficiency.”

I think I need longer to digest all that and look at each side. Maybe we could start a thread on Tradition.

EstesBob,

I agree that there is a large bit of gnosticism in those who adhrere to sola scriptura.

I don’t think that S.S.’ ists are gnostics (maybe some, and maybe some have a gnostic streak to them.) I just think that when they are wrong they are misinterpreting Scripture.

I know I used to read, and then someone had this interpretation or that, and I went with the one I thought was right when I was a S.S’ist.

BibleAnswer seemed to have a gnostic streak, sorry Bible Answer, but I could be wrong.

BibleAnswer, I think my red flag went off when you started talking about “new Bible information.” Maybe I took it the wrong way, but that kind of alarms me.

EstesBob,

here’s a Theological/ philosophical thing to ponder? I guess, where does the line get drawn between a novel interpretation and gnosticism? I guess the way I see it, if people really are just trying to understand and misinterpret than it’s just a misinterpretation. The gnostics, from what I was reading in Against Heresies were so convinced of their own special insight that I think they might’ve been even claiming that the Apostles (at least some) were in error.

 

[estesbob]

EstesBob,

here’s a Theological/ philosophical thing to ponder? I guess, where does the line get drawn between a novel interpretation and gnosticism? I guess the way I see it, if people really are just trying to understand and misinterpret than it’s just a misinterpretation. The gnostics, from what I was reading in Against Heresies were so convinced of their own special insight that I think they might’ve been even claiming that the Apostles (at least some) were in error.

Isnt that what Sola Scriptura is all about? Special insight? I guess the difference is the modern gnositc bases their “special insight” on a gift from the Holy Sprit while the early Gnositcs beleived it was their work at developing their “Knowledge” that did the trick.

 

[LionHeart777]

Isnt that what Sola Scriptura is all about?

I think that some look at it as just Scripture being the final authority. I don’t know exactly, now that you ask. I do know that when I was Protestant I used commentaries, etc.

 

[LionHeart777]

OneNow, I’m from MI and live here now, but I lived in S. Ft. Myers for a couple of years. I miss it!

 

[Ginger2]

I am moving this weekend, so I don’t have time to address all the comments.

Jesus warned about man-made traditions. What were these man-made traditions Jesus spoke of? They were extra-biblical writings from Jewish Rabbis (church fathers) that interpreted and expound the law - just like Catholic extra-biblical doctrines.

BibleAnswer

First, don’t be too impressed with any human being. It is easy to twist Scriptures into lies that seem to make perfect sense to the human mind.

Mark 13:22 For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform signs and miracles to deceive the elect–if that were possible

I could easily find at least a half dozen verses to support your theory hell doesn’t exist. And then a dozen more to show it does.

The fact is the Bible is clear there is a final punishment for those who reject God. Exactly what that punishment is and how long it lasts is unclear - but it is not just closing our eyes and being no more. God is merciful, but God is just, also.

“Hell” is the word we have chosen to express the permanence of the plight of the unbeliever. Just as “Trinity” is the (unfortunate) word we use to express the character of God.

You are correct, the punishment is permanent. There is no changing after death.

About Lazarus and the Rich Man,… I appreciate your zeal for the Lord and your desire to understand the spiritual things of God. However, the Bible is not clear whether this is a parable or a real event. I would caution you not to state as fact what is not clearly spelled out in Scriptures. I say this with love because all humans are prone to make this mistake because of the excitement of discovery combined with the thrill of drawing nearer to God.

God cautions us on this matter:

James 3:1 Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.

These are your opinions based on Scriptures, and you must be careful not to state your opinions as fact. Rather look to other Scriptures to verify and clarify the true meaning.

As you delve deeper into the Scriptures, depending on God for understanding, remember to be open to the reality God will show you more evidence to prove your theories right in some instances and wrong in others. And some things He may not choose to reveal.

Matthew 24:36 "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.

Have a good weekend

 

[inkaneer]

Jesus warned about man-made traditions. What were these man-made traditions Jesus spoke of? They were extra-biblical writings from Jewish Rabbis (church fathers) that interpreted and expound the law - just like Catholic extra-biblical doctrines.

REPLY: But is extra Biblical doctrines the same as man made traditions? Scripture records that Jesus told the Apostles that He did not teach them everything. In fact He told them there were some things they could not bear to hear [John 16:12]. But He also told them He would send the Holy Spirit to lead them into all truth [John 16:13]. You will notice that this promise is not made to all of Jesus’ followers but only to the eleven Apostles after the Last Supper and before Jesus’ arrest. Notice also that early in this same discourse Jesus tells the Apostles that the Comfortor [Holy Spirit] whom He will send would remain with them forever [John 14:16]. So what can we conclude from this? Well one thing is that the protestant claim of believers being led by the Spirit into all truth is unbiblical. This promise was made only to a few men who comprised the heirarchy of the church Jesus established. This is further proved to be correct by the more than 40,000 protestant denominations that the Gordon Conwall Theological Seminary, a noted protestant minister mill, estimates exists world wide. They can’t all have the Holy Spirit leading them into all truth or else they would be the same denomination. The question is do any of them have the truth? But I digress.

This then is what empowers the Apostles to think they can determine doctrine by a direct revelation from the Holy Spirit without consulting scripture. And they will do so as I pointed out earlier by ordaining bishops, priests and deacons to serve the needs of a growing church. They will celebrate the New Covenant on the first day of the week not the Jewish Sabbath. They will break the commands of the Old Testament and institute new ones. Their immediate successors will grapple with theological questions such as the canon of the New Testament, the Trinity, the divinity of the Holy Spirit, the natures of Christ, the Theotokos rather than Christokos and they will do so knowing and claiming to be guided by the Holy Spirit. Remember John 14:16 where Jesus said the Holy Spirit would remain with them, the Apostles, forever? Later the successors of the Apostles under the guidance of the Holy Spirit would define doctrines precisely. Doctrines such as Transsubstantiation, Immaculate Conception, Assumption, Papal infallibility would be formally defined to remove any ambiguity and we can be assured of their truth because we have the promise of Jesus that the Holy Spirit be with His church forever and would lead His church into all truth. His church, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, would never succumb to the forces of hell but prevail over it.

None of this can be said of anyone of the 40,000 protestant denominations. First, none of them have the 2,000 year history needed to be Apostolic. Second, none of them claim any church authority. Third, lacking Apostolicity none of them can make an even halfway decent claim that their leaders are led by the Holy Spirit. Fourth, they can’t agree on basic doctrine settled by the early church long before any of them were invented. Here I am specifically referring to Baptism. Is it necessary? Does it save? Adult or infant? Sacrament or ordinance? Trinitarian or Jesus only? The church is supposed to be catholic [small “c”] meaning universal but protestants are anything but universal. Protestantism keeps fracturing and dividing like an amoeba on Cialis. Unless the Second Coming occurs to stop it there will be as many protestant denominations as there are protestants. But what else could you expect in a belief system where private interpretation of scripture makes everyone their own pope?

 

[wmscott]

I am moving this weekend, so I don’t have time to address all the comments.

Jesus warned about man-made traditions. What were these man-made traditions Jesus spoke of? They were extra-biblical writings from Jewish Rabbis (church fathers) that interpreted and expound the law - just like Catholic extra-biblical doctrines.

BibleAnswer

First, don’t be too impressed with any human being. It is easy to twist Scriptures into lies that seem to make perfect sense to the human mind.

Mark 13:22 For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform signs and miracles to deceive the elect–if that were possible

I could easily find at least a half dozen verses to support your theory hell doesn’t exist. And then a dozen more to show it does.

The fact is the Bible is clear there is a final punishment for those who reject God. Exactly what that punishment is and how long it lasts is unclear - but it is not just closing our eyes and being no more. God is merciful, but God is just, also.

“Hell” is the word we have chosen to express the permanence of the plight of the unbeliever. Just as “Trinity” is the (unfortunate) word we use to express the character of God.

You are correct, the punishment is permanent. There is no changing after death.

About Lazarus and the Rich Man,… I appreciate your zeal for the Lord and your desire to understand the spiritual things of God. However, the Bible is not clear whether this is a parable or a real event. I would caution you not to state as fact what is not clearly spelled out in Scriptures. I say this with love because all humans are prone to make this mistake because of the excitement of discovery combined with the thrill of drawing nearer to God.

God cautions us on this matter:

James 3:1 Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.

These are your opinions based on Scriptures, and you must be careful not to state your opinions as fact. Rather look to other Scriptures to verify and clarify the true meaning.

As you delve deeper into the Scriptures, depending on God for understanding, remember to be open to the reality God will show you more evidence to prove your theories right in some instances and wrong in others. And some things He may not choose to reveal.

Matthew 24:36 "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.

Have a good weekend

I agree, Jesus did in fact warn about man-made traditions. However I think you have missed the mark on this one, Jesus is speaking of the man made traditions (ritual purification) such as in Mark 7:1-15

1Now when the Pharisees with some scribes who had come from Jerusalem gathered around him,
2 they observed that some of his disciples ate their meals with unclean, that is, unwashed, hands.
3 (For the Pharisees and, in fact, all Jews, do not eat without carefully washing their hands, keeping the tradition of the elders.
4 And on coming from the marketplace they do not eat without purifying themselves. And there are many other things that they have traditionally observed, the purification of cups and jugs and kettles (and beds).)
5 So the Pharisees and scribes questioned him, “Why do your disciples not follow the tradition of the elders but instead eat a meal with unclean hands?”
6 He responded, “Well did Isaiah prophesy about you hypocrites, as it is written: ‘This people honors me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me;
7 In vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines human precepts.’
8 You disregard God’s commandment but cling to human tradition.”
9 He went on to say, “How well you have set aside the commandment of God in order to uphold your tradition!
10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and ‘Whoever curses father or mother shall die.’
11 Yet you say, ‘If a person says to father or mother, “Any support you might have had from me is qorban”’ (meaning, dedicated to God),
12 you allow him to do nothing more for his father or mother.
13 You nullify the word of God in favor of your tradition that you have handed on. And you do many such things.”
14 He summoned the crowd again and said to them, “Hear me, all of you, and understand.
15 Nothing that enters one from outside can defile that person; but the things that come out from within are what defile.”

It is important to keep in mind what the Catholic Church means by tradition. The term does not refer to legends or mythological accounts, nor does it encompass transitory customs or practices which may change, as circumstances warrant, such as styles of priestly dress, particular forms of devotion to saints, or even liturgical rubrics.

My question is are you reading anything that is posted here that explains what the differences between Sacred Tradition and Man made tradition?

 

[greggy53]

Protestants don’t have man made traditions?? Most of them have an established order to their services. That is they do the same things every Sunday: Altar calls etc. These are traditions of men no doubt.

 

[whm]

BA,

I have a bit of a disconnect with your belief system. You say that you do not trust any formal church, catholic or otherwise. You say that reading and re-reading the bible is the path to truth and salvation. How do you reconcile that with the fact (as you pointed out) that the bible was not available to the masses until the invention of the printing press? If churches are bad, few bibles are available and not to mentioned few could read, how were people during the first 1500 to 1800 years of Christianity suppose to follow your belief system?

 

[cides23]

I didn’t realize we were discussing Sola Scriptura, but here goes…

The early Christians had Jesus, then the eyewitnesses (ie the Apostles) then the complete Scriptures, which were finished before the close of the first century.

Since you obviously can’t name one thing Jesus said or did that is not recorded in Scripture, I’ll ask if you Can you name one dogmatic teaching Paul or the other Apostles handed down that is not found in the Holy Scriptures?

Please cite legitimate writings of church fathers giving exact quotes from one of the Apostles that they heard with their own ears that is not found in Scriptures.

Ginger

and yet you have not yet answered the question about the Sacred Tradition of Scripture itself. John’s book of Rev was written just before 100 ad or around that time but just cause he was the last to write the Christians just didn’t have the 27 books we have as the NT but also had other letters that were used as well. It was not until the Church guided by the Holy Spirit that declared what we have as the NT no more and no less. This Sacred Tradition is not found in the NT. no where does the NT list what boos are declared inspired and so we are relying on the the HOly SPirit guiding the Church founded by Jesus.

You asked for a Tradition that is not found in scripture that we need to follow, well here it is, why have you not responded to this? but just ignore it?

 

[Sword_Brethren]

What weight does your interpretation have? Jim Jones, Jim Baker, and David Koresh had thier interpretations of scripture too. The Holy Ghost does not guide individuals interpretations of scripture. The pillar of truth is the Church not you or me.

 

[PJM]

The discussion about Mary’s perpetual virginity came back, of course, to the question of what individuals believe the Bible says, as distinct from what the Church teaches. This is, of course, the central issue in the Protestant schism - does the individual’s ability to read and interpret Scripture for himself trump the authority of the Church?

Catholics believe the preservation of the Scripture is itself an exercise of the authority of the Church, promised to and passed down by the Apostles. Protestants reject an infallibly authoritative Church in favor of infallible personal interpretation under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

This observation leads me to this question for those who reject the authority of the Church:
what’s your interpretation of Matthew 28:19-20, Luke 14:6, Matthew 16:18, 1 John 4:6?

***THEE SINGULAR authority of the CC to interpect THEE Bible is best explained when inserted between the bookends of cause and effect. Mt. 16:18 -19 must be properly understood.

Simply put one cannot seperate having sole posession of “the key’s to thee Kingdom” from the mandate, which by logical necessity have to include the authority and tools to fulfill the task just assigned.

The terms to “bind” and to “loose” were common terms, binding at Jewish Law for uninhibited, complete and total control of Governance; wherein the one given this responsibility answered only to THEE KING. [Peter to answer only to Jesus.] Considering that most cities at the time were walled in, actually had gates with locks, and such cities each had their own King; who delegated day to day operations to the “Prime Minister”; the holder of the keys was the the Governor and administrator of the kingdom on behalf of the king. So everyone there knew exactly what was being mandated and authorized.*

Thee Cause

***If one considers the Bible as the “Mission statement” of thee new Religion and Church, [the only ONE founded by Jesus] one must conclude that only thee Person placed in close proximity to “the keys” of thee Kingdom, would have the ability and authority, thee necessary insite and understanding to interpet, teach and explain what is the Mission and how it is to be accomplished. ***

Thee Effects

After 2,000 consecutitive years of faith, hope and charity there remains only ONE Catholic Church with some 22 world wide brancehs connected to the same vine. Jesus Christ and his Inspired Word.

Protestants on the other hand in a period of time that is about 1/4 as long as the CC, have grown to an Astonishing 30,000 plus different denominations, each with there own verision of what the bible means and teaches. It seems that when ever one can’t reach a common understanding, they break away and form thier own church. Is that really what Chrsit had in mind when He said to Peter; “My Church”[singular]?

Because one denies truth [even an obvious TRUTH] in no way changes THEE TRUTH:thumbsup:

 

[Sword_Brethren]

what’s your interpretation of **
*
4You**, dear children, are from God and **have overcome them, because the one who is in you is greater **than the one who is in the world. 5They are from the world and therefore speak from the viewpoint of the world, and the world listens to them. 6We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit[a] of truth and the spirit of falsehood.

What weight does your interpretation have? Jim Jones, Jim Baker, and David Koresh had thier interpretations of scripture too. The Holy Ghost does not guide individuals interpretations of scripture. The pillar of truth is the Church not you or me. I recognize the Spirit of truth in the Catholic Church and in your interpretaions I recognize the spirit of falsehood.

 

[estesbob]

What weight does your interpretation have? Jim Jones, Jim Baker, and David Koresh had thier interpretations of scripture too. The Holy Ghost does not guide individuals interpretations of scripture. The pillar of truth is the Church not you or me. I recognize the Spirit of truth in the Catholic Church and in your interpretaions I recognize the spirit of falsehood.

Of course is her interpreation is correct that means the Holy Sprit selectively revelas the truth-in which case we are all wasting our time-if the sprit wants us saved he will reveal to us the truth-if not we are just out of luck.

 

[Sword_Brethren]

1 Timothy 3: 15 “But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.”

 

[Newbie2]

I agree, Jesus did in fact warn about man-made traditions. However I think you have missed the mark on this one, Jesus is speaking of the man made traditions (ritual purification) such as in Mark 7:1-15

Missed the mark.

Sorry, no pun intended in your post, no?

and yet you have not yet answered the question about the Sacred Tradition of Scripture itself. John’s book of Rev was written just before 100 ad or around that time but just cause he was the last to write the Christians just didn’t have the 27 books we have as the NT but also had other letters that were used as well. It was not until the Church guided by the Holy Spirit that declared what we have as the NT no more and no less. This Sacred Tradition is not found in the NT. no where does the NT list what boos are declared inspired and so we are relying on the the HOly SPirit guiding the Church founded by Jesus.

You asked for a Tradition that is not found in scripture that we need to follow, well here it is, why have you not responded to this? but just ignore it?

That is an “inconvenient truth”. Scriptural guidance could not have been used to assemble the scripture itself, nor is it self-authenticating. Bottom line is that one either has to accept or reject Tradition; if one rejects it, personal interpretation of Scripture, no matter how misguided or just plain wacky one’s conclusions may be, is perfectly logical.

 

[wmscott]

Missed the mark.

Sorry, no pun intended in your post, no?

That is an “inconvenient truth”. Scriptural guidance could not have been used to assemble the scripture itself, nor is it self-authenticating. Bottom line is that one either has to accept or reject Tradition; if one rejects it, personal interpretation of Scripture, no matter how misguided or just plain wacky one’s conclusions may be, is perfectly logical.

I did not put the pun together until you pointed it out, for some reason it just flowed that way. Now that I see it, how much more appropriate it is! Thanks for the laugh.

 

[BibleAnswer]

BA,

I have a bit of a disconnect with your belief system. You say that you do not trust any formal church, catholic or otherwise. You say that reading and re-reading the bible is the path to truth and salvation. How do you reconcile that with the fact (as you pointed out) that the bible was not available to the masses until the invention of the printing press? If churches are bad, few bibles are available and not to mentioned few could read, how were people during the first 1500 to 1800 years of Christianity suppose to follow your belief system?

Moses and the prophets were always available or in other words the Old Testament. And any word of God is as valuable as any other. even a verse of a piece of ripped off paper wit a single scripture, would be adequete for the rule of faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God.

And I agree with you, and the claim made in the Bible in Acts 1, how the function of the church was to spread the gospel and preach

Your are right about the printing press, this technological advance, by the will of God, allowed the spreading of the Word. Just like the radio. The radio allows the word to be Preached to even more remote hidden places in the world who have never heard the word before.

finally, I would like to make a conclusion.

This has to do with work. My source is Exodus 20 , 31 and Deut 5. The concept of work

The man in Exodus picked up a few sticks on the sabbath. He was then put in jail and awaited the verdict of God, considering there was no punishement for breaking the law just yet. God said, STONE him, take the congregation and stone him. He was killed. God killed him for only pickin up a few sticks

Then we get to today, and the church tells anybody interested, that they have a plan. a way to become saved. If you get baptised, if you confess, if you take sacrament, you will become saved by the church. In other words, the church is going to do the work of saving a person. they have a PLAN. And the plan has nothing to do with the original commision of spreading the word and preaching. A plan implies something man made, something misinterpreted along the way, something incredibly wrong, because the only plan that saves is Gods plan. The church unfortunately over time, as ammended the origina concept of preaching, to know haveing the authority to save somebody with there plan. this doesn’t jive with me.

This is in direct contradiction to the concept of doing anywork to save your soul. Christ did all the work, by the church saying they have a salvation plan, is mockery in the face of the LORD

Perhaps this explanation will help our dialogue because all I claim here, is to have the ability to discern the word, But only through careful study and prayer.

You may ask how can my interpretation be accurate.

Let me offer this. The bible does connect. It has a theme, a message, we all know this, and in order for me to make a conclusino about anthing, i make sure that the message I am getting fits with the rest of the bible, that the same theme the same concept fits with the rest of what the bible is saying

 

[PJM]

Moses and the prophets were always available or in other words the Old Testament. And any word of God is as valuable as any other. even a verse of a piece of ripped off paper wit a single scripture, would be adequete for the rule of faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God.

And I agree with you, and the claim made in the Bible in Acts 1, how the function of the church was to spread the gospel and preach

Your are right about the printing press, this technological advance, by the will of God, allowed the spreading of the Word. Just like the radio. The radio allows the word to be Preached to even more remote hidden places in the world who have never heard the word before.

finally, I would like to make a conclusion.

This has to do with work. My source is Exodus 20 , 31 and Deut 5. The concept of work

The man in Exodus picked up a few sticks on the sabbath. He was then put in jail and awaited the verdict of God, considering there was no punishement for breaking the law just yet. God said, STONE him, take the congregation and stone him. He was killed. God killed him for only pickin up a few sticks

Then we get to today, and the church tells anybody interested, that they have a plan. a way to become saved. If you get baptised, if you confess, if you take sacrament, you will become saved by the church. In other words, the church is going to do the work of saving a person. they have a PLAN. And the plan has nothing to do with the original commision of spreading the word and preaching. A plan implies something man made, something misinterpreted along the way, something incredibly wrong, because the only plan that saves is Gods plan. The church unfortunately over time, as ammended the origina concept of preaching, to know haveing the authority to save somebody with there plan. this doesn’t jive with me.

This is in direct contradiction to the concept of doing anywork to save your soul. Christ did all the work, by the church saying they have a salvation plan, is mockery in the face of the LORD

Perhaps this explanation will help our dialogue because all I claim here, is to have the ability to discern the word, But only through careful study and prayer.

You may ask how can my interpretation be accurate.

Let me offer this. The bible does connect. It has a theme, a message, we all know this, and in order for me to make a conclusino about anthing, i make sure that the message I am getting fits with the rest of the bible, that the same theme the same concept fits with the rest of what the bible is saying

***having never being able to find where in the Bible permission, a mandate or simply a right to self interpation exist. [Please feel free to enlighten me furhter on this topic.] I take note of the fact this bit of evidence seems to beg a question. “Is self interpetation of the Bible a good idea?”

No, THEE Church does not “save” rather Her function is to guide, lead and assist others to do all that is necessary for one’s personal salvation.

Only God saves, and it is a free gift. But like some other gifts, it has strings attached, which is the perogative of the giver of all Good gifts.

Time and again we have explained the Catholic position is that no one by works alone can earn heaven. It is as God Himself mandates Faith as evidenced THROUGH works, that is Faith and Works that hold the potential of personal salvation.***