Why would there need be? A mature, spiritual man can easily decipher between the two.No, it’s a matter of handling accurately (or, rightly dividing) the (inerrant) word of truth (2 Tim. 2:15).
If only this were true! However, the contrary is the case. Intelligent, prayerful, and well meaning men constantly come to opposite conclusions. Basically what you are saying here is that you are a mature and spiritual man, and anyone who does not understand the Scriptures in the same way you do is spiritually immature, or deceived, or in some other way deficient. You have made yourself the standard.
And, in fact, there are not scriptures that identify which issues are “essential” and which are not.
Code:
But that's not possible with a works based religion which sees *everything* written as a *condition* to be met for a future salvation;
I agree, and fortunately this does not describe Catholicism. However, I think you believe it does. This demonstrates that all of your time here has not given you an appreciable improvement in understanding what the Church teaches. It is amazing that you can be here all this time, and still not understand that for the believer, it is no longer oneself that lives, but Christ, who lives in us. The life we now live, we live to God. The works we do are those that have been prepared from the foundation of the world, that we should walk in them. They are based on grace, through faith.
thereby demonstrating its inability to comprehend what the theopneustos Scriptures have revealed concerning the doctrine of salvation based on personal faith in the Person and finished, expiatory, propitiatory work of the Savior. IOW, if it can’t comprehend Christ Himself as “Savior,” it certainly can’t decipher between those Biblical passages that form the doctrine of salvation and those that are addressed directly to “the saved.”
Well, this is the root of the error, moon. The Scriptures adre not the source of the doctrine of salvation. Jesus is the Source of the doctrine, and He committed it to the Apostles, and they to the Church. The Church then produced the NT, which reflects what she believes and teaches. That is why there are no contradictions between what is in scripture, and what the Catholic Church teaches. It appears that there are discrepancies to you because you have been separated from the Apostolic Teaching.
Hence, for any works based religions the Scriptures are of little value, so instead they lean more heavily on traditions of men (1 Cor. 2:14).
I suppose this may be true. Personally, I don’t know of any religions that are like this, but I will take your word for it. I can appreciate that they would have little need for the Scriptures, since ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ. Such a religion would not be a Christian religion, since Christians are, by definition, saved by grace, through faith, and not of works, lest any man boast.
I’ll certainly admit Protestantism has its share of them. Some being carryovers from Catholicism which itself is heavily burdened down by them. So much so that we’ve seen on this thread that even Catholics themselves are confused by them - even after the last two RC councils.
Indeed there are many poorly catechized Catholics, sadly. However, Catholicism is not “heavily burndened down” by any “works based salvation traditions”. These are not part of the teaching of Catholicism. It is a common misunderstanding, though, as you have demonstrated.
Also, he openly criticized other religions. I found out later, that he was a former catholic
This is our book, written by Catholics for Catholics and it was written in order to supplement our own Catholic oral teachings and our Book is to be interpreted to show Catholic teaching only. Our Book, our rules.