Which should I obey: the Bible or the Catholic Church

[mastda]

Ok I will start answering but I am not going to go all over the place. I have time now because I dont like football or the Rolling Stones.

Lets take one topic at a time and lets focus on Salvation in particular the word “works”. Where did you ever get the idea that Catholics believe that we are only saved by works? On the flipside you yourself cannot believe you are only saved by faith, do you?

 

[askeptic]

mich7891:

If God does exist, He would have been the one to give us our reasoning capabilities. What good we achieve with these capabilities can then be considered blessings from God.

If God does exist, it would have been He who would have created us in the beginning. Why would He create us and then leave us without any knowledge about Him. There would have been no reason to create us.

God may give us the potential, but it is human will that develops it and uses it to create results.

Maybe God reveals himself to us through reason and moral conscience? Maybe all religions are pleasing to God in the sense that they all attempt to reach for God.

If God wants us to have knowledge about him, why didn’t he leave better evidence? Why aren’t there miracles today? Why doesn’t he appear to each person at least once in his lifetime to eliminate any doubts about his existence?

Maybe it is more important to God to let us figure things out on our own. Maybe he values creativity and independence more than obedience and docility.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

mich7891:

And how do I know the Catholic church is right? **You better hope that the Catholic Church IS right, since she is the one who gave you the Bible, she’s the one who said,“These books are inspired, these aren’t.” If it weren’t for the Catholic Church, you wouldn’t have your Bible. The Church is formed of MEN, who have sinned too. They themselves are guilty of breaking tthe Ten Commandments. What’s your point? Moses sinned, should the Jews have refused to submit to the Law? ** If God hasn’t preserved His Word and let’s HUMANS decide what it means, how in the world did most of the apostles understand what Jesus was saying? **The apostles WERE the first bishops of the Church. **If Jesus spoke in circles and high above their level (they were only fishermen), did each one individually interpret Jesus’ words to his own understanding? The church didn’t exist back then, so it couldn’t interpret Jesus’ words for them.

They were walked with Him and heard His Words and His Teaching.

 

[LeahInancsi]

I haven’t seen anyone mention the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Catholics base their teachings of the Sacred Scripture (Bible) AND Sacred Tradition (Catechism of the Catholic Church).

Catholics to do not take every word of the Bible literally, but interpret the Bible as a whole. The Catechism brings the teachings of the Church together. This is the fundamental difference between Catholicism and the Protestant religions.

Some of the more knowledgeable Catholics may be able to explain this more clearly and in more detail.

 

[mich7891]

askeptic:

Maybe he values creativity and independence more than obedience and docility.

If God values independence over obedience, God doesn’t have the qualities of a father. I need to leave now, but know this: I will pray for you tonight. I pray the Lord will work in your heart so there is no doubt left in your mind one way or another. Please don’t take this wrong, I don’t mean to put you down or anything. I’m just letting you know what I believe I should do. If in the end I’m wrong, you have nothing to worry about my prayers. But if I was right, may your eyes be wide open to the truth. For “the truth will set you free”. Wherever you are in the world, good night, and may God work mightily in you life.

 

[luvmykids]

mich7891:

Looks like you are take verses out of context now. Mathew 24:13 is talking about the end of times. It says so throughout the verses before the one you mentioned. 1 Corinthians 9:27 is talking about the preaching to others and then sinning yourself. If one can lose his salvation, what good is Jesus’ temporary and only good works salvation? Philippians 2:12 is talking about their faith bring ing forth fruit and showing that they are indeed saved by Christ.
GOD’S WORD CANNOT CONTRADICT ITSELF. IF IT DOES IN ONLY ONE SPOT, HOW CAN WE KOW WHAT IS TRUE AND WHAT ISN’T? CAN THE CHURCH KNOW GOD’S ORIGINAL PLAN FOR HIS WORD?

I have a sincere question: This webstie states “so the kind of salvation Paul is discussing in Ephesians 2:8–9 is initial salvation. It is the kind which we received when we first came to God and were justified, not the kind of salvation we are now receiving (1 Pet. 1:8–9, Phil. 2:12) or the kind we one day will receive (Rom. 13:11, 1 Cor. 3:15, 5:5).”
How many times must you need to be saved? A first salvation, the one we are now receiving, and the one we will receive. How many hells and eternal deaths are there?

What I don’t understand is how you can say something like this, “How can you say that habit, psychological influences, and immaturity can all lessen or remove culpability? The Bible, God’s holy Word, says “All have sinned and are deprived of the glory of God.” (Romans 3:23) Are you going to disagree with God? The next verse says, “They are justified freely by his grace through the redemption in Christ Jesus.” Habit, psychological influences, and immaturity cannot “save” a person, as you seem to think. Only God can through His Son’s blood. There is no way around it.”,(from the thread about smoking) yet then turn around and say faith alone will save us. If we have faith in Jesus, and faith alone will save us, then how can we be culpable for anything? What does it matter what we do? How does that make any sense?

 

[luvmykids]

mich7891:

If God values independence over obedience, God doesn’t have the qualities of a father. I need to leave now, but know this: I will pray for you tonight. I pray the Lord will work in your heart so there is no doubt left in your mind one way or another. Please don’t take this wrong, I don’t mean to put you down or anything. I’m just letting you know what I believe I should do. If in the end I’m wrong, you have nothing to worry about my prayers. But if I was right, may your eyes be wide open to the truth. For “the truth will set you free”. Wherever you are in the world, good night, and may God work mightily in you life.

And why do we need to have any obedience if faith alone will save us? You are starting to sound Catholic now.

 

[askeptic]

mich7891:

If God values independence over obedience, God doesn’t have the qualities of a father. I need to leave now, but know this: I will pray for you tonight. I pray the Lord will work in your heart so there is no doubt left in your mind one way or another. Please don’t take this wrong, I don’t mean to put you down or anything. I’m just letting you know what I believe I should do. If in the end I’m wrong, you have nothing to worry about my prayers. But if I was right, may your eyes be wide open to the truth. For “the truth will set you free”. Wherever you are in the world, good night, and may God work mightily in you life.

Why not? My father values independence, creativity, and individual accomplishment far more than obedience. He encourages his children to be independent and successful.

I don’t think father = dictator.

 

[decn2b]

But with that in mind…you are coming at this thread with the argument of Sola Scriptura (the bible alone is authority). Can I ask you who canonized the bible? What church decided which books were to be included? By what authority did the people decide which scriptures should be the canon? Or did the bible fall out of the sky from heaven? When was the bible availible in print to be read? (give me a general century) What did people in the first few centuries rely on for the truth? What does the bible say about the church? (read 1 Tim 3:15) If the church of Timothy 3:15 is true could you tell me which church it is referring to? Why doesn’t 2 timothy 3:15 only use the word useful and not sufficient.

Lastly can an illeterate person be saved. I mean they cannot read the bible!! So they have to rely on someone else (sorta like a church) to read it for them. How would they know that the person reading it to them was really reading it right. What about the christians who lived BEFORE there was a bible? Wasn’t it a church that taught them? Where in the bible does it say that when scripture was printed we should switch from a spoken word as authority (tradition) to written word word as authority(scripture). Wasn’t paul referring to the OT when he said scripture was profitable? Since the NT hadn’t been written yet? The Catholic church teaches both. scripture and Tradition… your understadings of contradiciton are misinterpretation of what the bible is saying or what the church is saying or both…because I have never in my 25 years of scripture study come across a contradiction of church teaching and scripture. I am assuming that you have some of the newer renditons of christianity for your beliefs. (the ones that are only 400-500 years old. I prefer the ancient version of christianiy.

 

[carol_marie]

decn2b:

But with that in mind…you are coming at this thread with the argument of Sola Scriptura (the bible alone is authority). Can I ask you who canonized the bible? What church decided which books were to be included? By what authority did the people decide which scriptures should be the canon? Or did the bible fall out of the sky from heaven? When was the bible availible in print to be read? (give me a general century) What did people in the first few centuries rely on for the truth? What does the bible say about the church? (read 1 Tim 3:15) If the church of Timothy 3:15 is true could you tell me which church it is referring to? Why doesn’t 2 timothy 3:15 only use the word useful and not sufficient.

Lastly can an illeterate person be saved. I mean they cannot read the bible!! So they have to rely on someone else (sorta like a church) to read it for them. How would they know that the person reading it to them was really reading it right. What about the christians who lived BEFORE there was a bible? Wasn’t it a church that taught them? Where in the bible does it say that when scripture was printed we should switch from a spoken word as authority (tradition) to written word word as authority(scripture). Wasn’t paul referring to the OT when he said scripture was profitable? Since the NT hadn’t been written yet? The Catholic church teaches both. scripture and Tradition… your understadings of contradiciton are misinterpretation of what the bible is saying or what the church is saying or both…because I have never in my 25 years of scripture study come across a contradiction of church teaching and scripture. I am assuming that you have some of the newer renditons of christianity for your beliefs. (the ones that are only 400-500 years old. I prefer the ancient version of christianiy.

great post.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

With due respect, the question asked by the OP just isn’t a valid question.

If you are obeying the Catholic Church, you ARE obeying the Bible.

What the OP has no doubt unwittingly done is set up what is termed, I believe, a “false dichotomy”.

The Catholic Church’s teachings are Biblical in the truest sense; the Bible itself comes from the work of those in the Catholic Church. The reason that the Bible has the books it does, rather than say containing only the Torah, or containing the gospel of Thomas, or letters of Clement and Ignatius, or the Didache, is because of those wonderful Holy Spirit guided people in the Catholic Church who were inspired to recognize the words they did–and, as well, to continue to hold fast to the ORAL SACRED TRADITION of which Paul spoke.

There is nothing–nothing!–in Catholic teaching (and let me make it clear, I speak Catholic teaching in the Catechism, not of what somebody’s “catholic” friend SAYS is Catholic teaching) which contradicts the Bible. . .and vice versa.

 

[jaegeaghan]

If you can take your Bible and believe it is the Word of God then you have the Catholic Church to thank because it was through this church God used to give us these measuring sticks of truth. God didn’t just drop it out of the sky therefore he is showing how He works through the Church. it is clear than man’s will fueled by anti catholicism is at hand. How else can you explain the existance of 20,000 different protestant denominaions? All claiming to follow the Word of God all believing different key doctrines from salvation to sacraments.

So where is the Biblical support?

1 Timothy 3:15 (a verse never emphasized at the Protestant bible college I attended) NASB protestant Bible
“but in case I am delayed, I write so taht you will know how one ought to conduct himself in the household of God, which is the Church of the living God, the pillar and support of the truth.”

In Catholic Bibles it is stated as ‘the pillar and foundation of truth’…but either way, Paul is telling Timothy that it is the CHURCH that is the pillar and support of the truth or foundation whichever you prefer. Not scripture. In one of the verses mentioned about scripture, the 'all scripture is inspired and to be used to correct etc please be advised that it is stating that all scripture is inspired and is to be used to correct…but it doesn’t say ONLY scripture. (saying ALL dogs have lungs isn’t meaning that ONLY dogs have lungs) WHO declared what is scripture and what wasn’t scripture? Who declared the inspiration of scripture. The Catholic Church through the Holy Spirit, and by owning and reading a Bible you concur.

Study the origins of the Bible. Many protestants are clueless. (also, most protestants don’t even attempt to see scriptural backing for Catholic doctrines and simply because THEY disagree, it is declared UNBIBLICAL.

With ‘should we follow scripture or the church’ you must realize that IN scripture it is spoken of that scripture is up for NO personal interpretation (because scripture can be difficult to grasp and interpret) thus, we get 20,000+ denominations making the faith even more confusing and giving it more of a personal relativism appraoch than submission to absolute truth FOR EVERYONE. (2 Peter1:20, 2 Peter 3:15-16) you either agree or you disagree if you disagree, then you find a way to agree or be considered a heretic AS many early christians such as Origen who’s writings are still read today, but he was declared a heretic for developing ideas and beliefs that were not of the Christian faith. No church shoping/jumping allowed in the early centuries.

So with the Catholic Christian model, as it was in the very beginning (as these letters were not read by congregation but instructed to the congregation by the leaders (priests, bishops) It is the Church that can properly instruct the believers on what scripture means. There are two traditions (teachings) written and oral–protestants ignore the oral, and expect to understand the written.

1 Cor 11:2, 2 Thess 2:15, 2 Thess 3:6 are great references to the importance of the recievers of the letters to also remember what Paul taught in person via word of mouth. This is were much of our sacred tradition comes from–and we find the additional understandings of the apostles by their successors who PHYSICALLY ordained them…and personally taught them the faith…(and it is these teachings that we believe are protected by the Holy Spirit–because they have been preserved from the early church, man has not changed them)

Mark 4:33-34 "With many such parables He was speaking the word to them, so far as they were able to hear it; and He did not speak to them without a parable, but He was explaing everything privately to his own disciples " So pretty much the disciples knew the meaning of what Jesus taught…in which, we recieved many teachings from the apostles from sacred tradition.
ACTS 20:35 has Paul recording a saying from Jesus which cannot be found in the Gospels–therefore a perfect example of sacred tradition (very much the understanding of the oral and written Word of God) within scripture itself.

So who are we to believe? Our own understanding of scripture==or the consistent uniformed teaching of the Church which can be traced back to the early church fathers in their testimonies of what scripture means–AND even back to the practices of the early christian church, which includes infant baptism as washing away of original sin and the Eucharist as the TRUE PRESENCE.

I like to remember that body language is 90% of the communicating force in a conversation…so with written scripture alone you are only getting 10% of the message–oral tradition and the understanding of both gives you the ‘body language’ in understanding the whole picture.

Catholics are the True Bible Christians.

 

[jegow]

mich7891:

So, who should I believe? God’s holy Word, *“inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness, so that one who belongs to God may be competent, equipped for every good work.” *(2 Timothy 3:16-17), or should I believe the Catholic Church?

BOTH

 

[trogiah]

After careful consideration of your question I respectfully submit that it is not quite the right question.

The question to ask is “Who should I obey?” and the answer is "God the Almighty.

Now if a person says “The Bible is the word of God” they are speaking the truth but that does not mean they fully understand and interpret it correctly. Though I believe every person should read and try to understand as best they can.

If a person says “The Catholic Church teaches the truth” they are also speaking the truth but that doesn’t mean that every statement of every priest, bishop, or even pope is guaranteed true for all eternity. Assuming the priest or higher is teaching correctly, there is still the problem of right understanding.

Both the Bible and the Catholic Church are very valuable resources to a person who seeks the truth. If someone followed either one of them they would likely do very well in life.

God is the ultimate authority.

Regarding your original contention of an apparent difference in teaching between works and faith. Consider Jesus’s simple teaching. “A tree is known by its fruit” I believe it to mean that putting faith in God is the same thing as acting as though you have put faith in God. Works and faith are not opposites. One is a reflection of the other.

 

[Aaron_I]

Read Romans 11. The chapter tells us that we will be saved “provided [that] you remain in his kindness; otherwise you too will be cut off.”

The OP’s refutation of James is pretty weak. What makes you think that one’s relationship with Christ doesn’t matter? Faith is more than intellectual. As James tells us, even Satan and his minions believe. Catholics believe we are saved by grace.

Oh, and Catholics can know whether or not they would be saved at present, but we realize that we can always willfully turn away.

 

[scriabin]

Which should I obey: **my own personal interpretation of ** the Bible or the Catholic Church’s interpretation of the Bible?

Come on, that’s what you really mean.

Your questions are best answered in an expository book format, not with on-the-fly tidbits on an internet forum.

 

[JimG]

Well, if you are going to obey the Bible, I guess you will also have to accept the authority of the Catholic Church, from which came the Bible.

I note that Jesus commanded the Apostles to preach the Gospel to all nations. He didn’t specifically command that anyone write anything. Nevertheless, some did, and from those writings the Church discerned which were inspired and belonged in the canon of scripture.

Is it necessary to be literate to be saved? Learning to read is, after all, a ‘work’, and a precondition to reading and obeying the bible.

 

[Brendan]

mich7891:

From the authority of the Bible. Do you not believe this verse: "All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness, *so that one who belongs to God may be competent, equipped for every good work. * " And by the way, you can look at the surrounding texts. It all says the same.

And no Catholic would disagree with that. I fail to see your point.

 

[mastda]

Brendan:

And no Catholic would disagree with that. I fail to see your point.

Brendan, I hope this person answers you because I asked him what he believes with regards to salvation and he has not responded. Also he seems to think that we (Catholics) dont read the bible and all these verses are knew to us.

I think the funniest thing about this thread is that it is one of few places that an agnostic will be on the same side of a baptist.

 

[mercygate]

mich7891:

The Bible is God’s holy Word, but the Catholic Church seems to disagree with it on certain points. Which should I follow and obey? For example, the Catholic Church says we must do good works to gain favor with God. But the Bible says in Ephesians 2:8-9, "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not from you; it is the gift of God; it is not from works], so no one may boast." To truely be saved then, is to “confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead…” (Romans 10:9) The Bible states that good works are not a part of our salvation.

In James 2:26, the Bible states, “*For just as a body without a spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead.” *Here James is writing to either the Jews or the churches throughout the land. Whichever it is, he is talking to people who already know God and have faith in Him that He has saved them from eternal death. So this passage doesn’t refer to salvation since James is talking to believers about their personal life IN Christ.

Also, I have never heard the Catholic Church says if it is possible to know you are saved or not. I have even heard Catholics on the street when questioned say they HOPE that they are going to Heaven, but they aren’t sure. The Bible, though, says we can be sure. In 1 John 5:13, it says, “I write these things to you so that you may know that you have eternal life, you who believe in the name of the Son of God.” Yet Catholics around the world are insecure about life after death.

So, who should I believe? God’s holy Word, *“inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness, so that one who belongs to God may be competent, equipped for every good work.” *(2 Timothy 3:16-17), or should I believe the Catholic Church?

No Catholic teaching contradicts Scripture. The New Testament was produced under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit by Catholics for the Catholic Church. Therefore it is helpful to read the Bible in the light of the Church which gave it to you.

It would be a serious error to assume (as many have before you) that these verses, which you THINK contradict Catholic teaching, actually do contradict Catholic teaching. They do not.