Why does the Church teach that the Bible teachings alone are not sufficient for our salvation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Zeno11
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Z

Zeno11

Guest
Hi, this is something that has been on my mind more and more, because it contradicts the words of Scripture. For example, 2 Tim. 3:15-17 says, “And because from thy infancy thou hast known the holy scriptures, which can instruct thee to salvation, by faith which is Christ Jesus. All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice, that the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.” Thus, the apostle Paul by the inspiration of God, says to Timothy “thou hast known the holy scriptures, which can instruct thee to salvation” and make you “perfect, furnished to every good work.”

Rom. 1:16 says, "For I am not ashamed of the gospel. For it is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth, to the Jew first, and to the Greek. James 1:21 says, “…With meekness receive the ingrafted word, which is able to save your souls.” Consequently, the word contained in the Bible is able to save our souls.

The usual arguments I have heard to support the Church’s position are on our inability to correctly interpret Scripture and on the fact that the Bible does not contain everything that God taught. But this can also easily be disproved by the word of God in the Scriptures!

The apostle Paul said we can understand what he wrote. “If yet, you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me towards you: how that, according to revelation, the mystery has been made known to me, as I have written above in few words; as you reading, may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ.” (Eph. 3:2-4). Paul said the mystery had been made know to him by the revelation of God. He then showed that he was writing it e.g., “as I have written above in few words” (in the chapters prior to this) and “as you reading, may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ.” In other words, when we read what he wrote, we can understand what he understood. Paul also said , “For we write nothing to you that you do not read and understand” (2 Cor. 1:13) and “Therefore do not become foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is” (Eph. 5:17). Thus, the inspired writers taught that we most certainly can understand the Scriptures.

The Scriptural proof the Church gives to defend their teaching for the Bible not containing everything God taught, is John 20:30. It says, “Many other signs also did Jesus in the sight of his disciples, which are not written in this book.” But In John 20:30, John simply said that Jesus did many other signs (miracles) which he did record. Notice, though, what John says in the next verse, “…But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name.” Thus, the apostle clearly shows that he wrote sufficient things to produce the faith which brings life in the name of Jesus. Life in the name of Jesus refers to eternal life and it is obtained by belief in the things written by the inspired writers.

I can understand that the Scriptures do not contain everything Jesus did. John said, “There are, however, many other things that Jesus did; but if every one of these would be written, not even the world itself, I think, could hold the books that would have to be written.” (John 21:25). Although we do not have everything Jesus did, we do have every **necessary **thing. We have enough to give us life in His name.

Lastly, the doctrine that the Church is the infallible interpreter of Scripture. The Bible says, “Let God be true, but every man a liar…” (Rom. 3:4). It also warns, “See to it that no one deceives you by philosophy and vain deceit, according to human traditions, according to the elements of the world and not according to Christ.” (Col. 2:8).

I find more and more evidence in the Bible that a lot of what the Church teaches as doctrine is not backed by Scripture and in fact contradicts Scripture, as I have shown above. Are there other Catholics who find this extremely uncomfortable? Can I be a Catholic (have been all my life!) if I don’t accept Church doctrines that contradict Scripture?
 
Zeno11 said:
I find more and more evidence in the Bible that a lot of what the Church teaches as doctrine is not backed by Scripture and in fact contradicts Scripture, as I have shown above. Are there other Catholics who find this extremely uncomfortable?
Click to expand...
The Bible doesn’t say that the Bible Alone is sufficient. The Bible only claims, inspite of your misquote of Timothy, that it is profitable ( “profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness”)
and not that we should rely on the Bible Alone. The bible actually indicates that not everything is in the bible.

The Bible actually teaches that that it is The Church which is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth.

It is actually your misquotation of Sacred Scripture which contradicts The Bible.
 
Ignatius said:
The Bible doesn’t say that the Bible Alone is sufficient. The Bible only claims, inspite of your misquote of Timothy, that it is profitable ( “profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness”)
and not that we should rely on the Bible Alone. The bible actually indicates that not everything is in the bible.

The Bible actually teaches that that it is The Church which is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth.

It is actually your misquotation of Sacred Scripture which contradicts The Bible.
Click to expand...
Where does the Bible say that the Church is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth? I always understood that Jesus was ‘the Way, the Truth and the Life’.

What did I misquote? Apart from the quote I gave you, where does the Bible indicate that not everything we need for salvation is in there?
 
Let me bring up some points that I ran onto when I was a Bible alone Baptist.

First of all, if the Lord established a church to be ran on the Bible only then He would have begun with providing the Bible first, and then passed out Bibles and made that the way to salvation. But he preached the Good News, and trained His Apostles to be be the leaders of the Church. The Bible became a result of the Church, not the Church being the result of the Bible.

Another point is, the Bible itself absolutely needs an interpreter that has just as much divine inspiration as the very words that it contains within its own pages. That is why Jesus established the Church. That authority of being an interpreter was not given to every believer, but it was given to His Apostles, which in turn has been passed on to those who are successors. If everybody who believes the Bible were given the same authority to interpret the Bible then there would not be heresies, but there would be one unified Church believing the same thing. But the only unified body that has believed the same thing is the Catholic Church.

And the point that was a major thing that led me to Catholicism was this, if the Bible was the complete authority to my faith, and there was no other authority outside of the Bible, then who had the authority to determine what books were to be in the Bible in the first place? Jesus did not define the canon, nor did the Apostles. But it was the Catholic Church who determined the canon over a period of time in Church Councils.
 
Zeno11 said:
Where does the Bible say that the Church is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth? I always understood that Jesus was ‘the Way, the Truth and the Life’.
Click to expand...
[BIBLEDRB]1 Tim 3:15[/BIBLEDRB]
 
I don’t believe that your question - as posed in the title - is correct. The problem is not so much a matter of the bible’s teachings being insufficient, but rather that if one divorces the bible from the Authoritative Church (Sola Scriptura) THEN you get into trouble…

You have provided a number of very good verses…but here are other verses to support the necessity of the Church as authority…Ones that you have not included in your post.

Consider…(written by me some time back)

After all of the trading back and forth of this and that verse, meaning, interpretation translation etc…the ultimate question will have to be - which of our personal, prayerful, “Spirit Guided” - and yet conflicting understandings is correct? How do we resolve this issue? Who has the authority to determine what is correct???

What does Scripture say???

Scripture says it is “The Church”

The Church is the pillar and bulwark of Truth (1 Tim 3:15)
The Church has authority to bind and loose - whatever (Mt 16:17-19) (Mt 18:15-18)
The Church settles arguments between distant church communities in a wonderful example of the instructions given in Mt 18…(Acts 15)
The Church is the vehicle by which God reveals His Wisdom to the world. (Eph 3:8-12)
Christ and the Apostles exhort the faithful to unity…to be of one mind
John 17:20-21
20 "I do not pray for these only, but also for those who believe in me through their word, 21 that they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
Code: 
**Rom 15:5-6**
5 May the God of endurance and encouragement grant you to live in such harmony with one another, in accord with Christ Jesus, 6 that together you may with one voice glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

**1 Cor 1:10**
I appeal to you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree and that there be no dissensions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment.

**2 Cor 13:11**
Finally, brothers, rejoice. Aim for restoration, comfort one another, agree with one another, live in peace; and the God of love and peace will be with you.

**Php 1:27**
Only let your manner of life be worthy of the gospel of Christ, so that whether I come and see you or am absent, I may hear of you that you are standing firm in one spirit, with one mind striving side by side for the faith of the gospel,
1 Pet 3:8
Finally, all of you, have unity of mind, sympathy, brotherly love, a tender heart, and a humble mind.

All of these calls to unity, along with the instructions in the Gospel of Matthew and the example in Acts as well as Paul’s presenting his teachings to Peter and others to assure they are correct, the Church being the Pillar etc…All point clearly to doctrinal unity within a visible and authoritative Church.

Scripture Alone (Sola Scriptura) adherents can offer nothing scriptural in support of the (evangelical?) protestant view of “church” and “authority” that comes anywhere close to this preponderance of evidence for the RC/EO “Model” of Church structure and authority.

I say this with confidence because I have repeatedly asked protestant apologists to counter this evidence with “equally clear and compelling” evidence for what I call the “Protestant model” of locally independent church communities based on SS.
They just simply cannot do it…

Peace
James
 
There are three sources of authority in the Catholic and Apostolic Faith, all of which are co-equal:
  1. Sacred Scripture: (aka, the Bible)
  2. Sacred Tradition: (the teachings of Christ and the Apostles not written down, but passed through oral Tradition; see John 21:25 and 2 Thessalonians 2:15).
  3. Magisterial Teaching: (the teachings of the Pope and the Bishops in communion with him. There are a variety of ways this can manifest, but all are tied to the authority given to the Church, from Christ and through the guidance of the Holy Spirit).
Oh, and please show me in the Bible, where anyone actually promises us a Bible. The Canon of Sacred Scripture was complied several hundred years after Christ rose from the dead and ascended into Heaven. How was the Faith taught in those first few generations of the Church? Answer: Oral teaching.
 
(Numbering by paragraph)
  1. Yes, the Bible gives us knowledge of salvation. No conflict with Catholic doctrine.
  2. Obviously. The Word ingrafted into the Bible is the Word of God. Anything to the contrary is against Catholic doctrine.
  3. 2 Peter 1:20-21 and John 20:30
  4. Yes we can understand Scriptures correctly if we interpret them properly, as the early Christians were doing under the care of the Apostles. But people can also twist them to suit their own agenda, as St. Peter mentions in 2 Peter 3:16.
  5. Of course everything needed for salvation is in the Scriptures. But how is it supposed to be interpreted. Catholics and Protestants look at the same Scriptures, yet come to different conclusions. As you have quoted above, St. Paul says that we can come to complete understanding of the Scriptures. But the way we do that without it being twisted to suit what we want is under the Magisterium of the Church.
  6. Yes we do have every necessary thing to help us understand what is needed for salvation. That still doesn’t mean we shouldn’t use the Tradition of the Church to help interpret the Scriptures. The Bible says the Holy Eucharist is necessary for salvation, yet the same Protestants who believe all that is needed is in the Bible will deny that. Why would that be if we look at the same Scriptures and can interpret it by ourselves? It’s because, as Scripture says, the Church (not the Bible) is the pillar and foundation of ALL Truth (1 Tim. 3:15). The same Scripture says to listen to the teachings passed on whether by word of mouth or by hand (2 Thessalonians 2:15).
  7. God reveals his Truth through the Church. The Tradition of the Church isn’t human tradition but Tradition from God. In fact, it is those who are separated from the Church that deceive others and follow human traditions.
  8. Nope. The Bible is a Catholic book so naturally doesn’t contradict Catholicism, properly interpreted. Keep in mind it was the Catholic Church that put the Bible together in various Church councils. How do you know what should be counted Scripture or not if not for the Catholic Church? Why isn’t the Gospel of Thomas or the Epistle to Barnabas in the Bible? You are Catholic by virtue of your Baptism; nothing can change that. The difference is you will be a heterodox Catholic.
 
Zeno11 said:
Hi, this is something that has been on my mind more and more, because it contradicts the words of Scripture. For example, 2 Tim. 3:15-17 says, “And because from thy infancy thou hast known the holy scriptures, which can instruct thee to salvation, by faith which is Christ Jesus. All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice, that the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.” Thus, the apostle Paul by the inspiration of God, says to Timothy “thou hast known the holy scriptures, which can instruct thee to salvation” and make you “perfect, furnished to every good work.”

Rom. 1:16 says, "For I am not ashamed of the gospel. For it is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth, to the Jew first, and to the Greek. James 1:21 says, “…With meekness receive the ingrafted word, which is able to save your souls.” Consequently, the word contained in the Bible is able to save our souls.

The usual arguments I have heard to support the Church’s position are on our inability to correctly interpret Scripture and on the fact that the Bible does not contain everything that God taught. But this can also easily be disproved by the word of God in the Scriptures!

The apostle Paul said we can understand what he wrote. “If yet, you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me towards you: how that, according to revelation, the mystery has been made known to me, as I have written above in few words; as you reading, may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ.” (Eph. 3:2-4). Paul said the mystery had been made know to him by the revelation of God. He then showed that he was writing it e.g., “as I have written above in few words” (in the chapters prior to this) and “as you reading, may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ.” In other words, when we read what he wrote, we can understand what he understood. Paul also said , “For we write nothing to you that you do not read and understand” (2 Cor. 1:13) and “Therefore do not become foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is” (Eph. 5:17). Thus, the inspired writers taught that we most certainly can understand the Scriptures.

The Scriptural proof the Church gives to defend their teaching for the Bible not containing everything God taught, is John 20:30. It says, “Many other signs also did Jesus in the sight of his disciples, which are not written in this book.” But In John 20:30, John simply said that Jesus did many other signs (miracles) which he did record. Notice, though, what John says in the next verse, “…But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name.” Thus, the apostle clearly shows that he wrote sufficient things to produce the faith which brings life in the name of Jesus. Life in the name of Jesus refers to eternal life and it is obtained by belief in the things written by the inspired writers.

I can understand that the Scriptures do not contain everything Jesus did. John said, “There are, however, many other things that Jesus did; but if every one of these would be written, not even the world itself, I think, could hold the books that would have to be written.” (John 21:25). Although we do not have everything Jesus did, we do have every **necessary **thing. We have enough to give us life in His name.

Lastly, the doctrine that the Church is the infallible interpreter of Scripture. The Bible says, “Let God be true, but every man a liar…” (Rom. 3:4). It also warns, “See to it that no one deceives you by philosophy and vain deceit, according to human traditions, according to the elements of the world and not according to Christ.” (Col. 2:8).

I find more and more evidence in the Bible that a lot of what the Church teaches as doctrine is not backed by Scripture and in fact contradicts Scripture, as I have shown above. Are there other Catholics who find this extremely uncomfortable? Can I be a Catholic (have been all my life!) if I don’t accept Church doctrines that contradict Scripture?
Click to expand...
Nowhere in the Bible does it say that the bible alone is the only way to God. Paul tells us in 2 Thess 2:15 to hold fast to the teachings passed on, whether by word of mouth or by letter, indicating sola scriptura was not on the cards. Incidently references to scripture at this point are references to the old testament, the new testsment was not canonised until the 300s by the (Catholic) Church, so if you want to use a sola scriptura attitude then I’m afraid you will have to jettison the new testament!

Additionally, Sacred Scripture is the book of God’s revelation in so far as it has been written down by the Church for use in the Church. It(the NT anyway) is the product of the Church(by the Grace of God) for the Church, and outside of this context it doesn’t make sense, which is probably one of the reasons why we see over 30000+ protestant denominations claiming their particular brand of sola scriptura to be the correct one.

Finally, I have a logical problem(along the lines of St. Augustine) with being able to accept that the Bible is really the Word of God without the assurances of Christs Church founded on Peter. As St. Augustine said “I would not believe in the Gospel myself if the authority of the Catholic Church did not influence me to do so.” [Maybe I should point out here that I do believe the Bible is the Inspired word of God Almighty precisly because of the Church Christ gave us, which He founded on Peter]

What good reason can you give me, from your own authority, that the bible is the inspired word of God and that I should follow its precepts alone? Without the assurances of the Church, the Bible would be akin to James Joyce’s Ulysses; a great, and long, work of fiction but one I’m not likely to read anytime soon. Certainly not one to base my life on.
 
There is no Catholic teaching that says the Bible alone cannot be “sufficient” to be saved and there will be plenty of people saved who did believe in sola scriptura. But they might have come to that salvation a LOT more easily with the help of the teaching authority of the Church. In addition, the Church has also revealed truths to us under the guidance of the Holy Spirit that cannot be found distinctively in sacred scripture. The benefit of this is spoken of directly in sacred scripture:

2 Thess 2:15: “Stand firm and hold fast to the Traditions you were taught, whether by an ORAL STATEMENT or by a letter from us.”

It is clear that while all scripture is “profitable” for teaching, it was never meant to be the sole authority. You need an authority to be your guide in interpreting the scripture so that you are looking at it objectively without twisting it to your own liking (which we are all capable of doing, even if only subconsciously)–that authority is the Church. We are free and encouraged to study scripture on our own, but ultimately we must compare our own understanding of scripture with what the Church says–If they do not line up, we need more study in that area to see what the Church actually teaches and why. We are not permitted to have our own private interpretations. After all, the Church gave us the Bible. How can one then say that they know better what was meant to be taught by it than the Church who provided and preserved the Bible for us through all these generations?
 
Zeno11 said:
Hi, this is something that has been on my mind more and more, because it contradicts the words of Scripture. For example, 2 Tim. 3:15-17 says, “And because from thy infancy thou hast known the holy scriptures, which can instruct thee to salvation, by faith which is Christ Jesus. All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice, that the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.” Thus, the apostle Paul by the inspiration of God, says to Timothy “thou hast known the holy scriptures, which can instruct thee to salvation” and make you “perfect, furnished to every good work.”

Rom. 1:16 says, "For I am not ashamed of the gospel. For it is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth, to the Jew first, and to the Greek. James 1:21 says, “…With meekness receive the ingrafted word, which is able to save your souls.” Consequently, the word contained in the Bible is able to save our souls.

The usual arguments I have heard to support the Church’s position are on our inability to correctly interpret Scripture and on the fact that the Bible does not contain everything that God taught. But this can also easily be disproved by the word of God in the Scriptures!
Click to expand...
My friend, I can see how you are struggling to reconcile what you have been taught by other Protestants with what the Church teaches. However, if I disprove the above using Scripture, or at least challenge it, would you reconsider and listen to what the Church teaches upon these matters?

Scripture 1: The Scriptures are able to equip Christians, but God has given ministers in order to equip the Christians. The Scriptures belong to Church, in that way. Where would you see this?

“And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes.” (Ephesians 4:11-14 ESV)

Scripture 2: St. Paul taught that we are to hold to what the Apostles have taught us both in Scripture and in Tradition (oral teaching). Where would you see this?

“So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.” (2 Thessalonians 2:15 ESV)

Scripture 3: The Apostles spoke the Word of God. Where would you see this?

“And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers.” (1 Thessalonians 2:13)

Now, the question would be "where did the Apostles write down what they taught? Clearly, most of the New Testament is comprised of the Pauline Letters, with the few Petrine ones and the Johannine letters. Most of the Apostles didn’t write letters, and those that did write letters to Christian Churches, not theological catechisms. However, the ultimate question I would have to ask you is this.

If 2 Timothy 3:16 teaches that Scripture teaches all things, please use Scripture to show me the canon (the list of books) of the Bible.
 
Zeno11 said:
I find more and more evidence in the Bible that a lot of what the Church teaches as doctrine is not backed by Scripture and in fact contradicts Scripture, as I have shown above. Are there other Catholics who find this extremely uncomfortable? Can I be a Catholic (have been all my life!) if I don’t accept Church doctrines that contradict Scripture?
Click to expand...
What do you feel contradicts scripture? I, personally, have yet to find any Church teaching that contradicts scripture.
 
All of the New Testament IS CHURCH TEACHING.

Jesus established THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. He said that He is the head, and we, The Church are the body. If you toss out The Church, you’ve decapitated Jesus. The Church is God’s gift to us. Why would not accept his gift?
 
Thank you for all your thoughtful responses, wow!

I am going to take a bit of time to read through them and if that is ok, respond. I have, as one poster suggested, been exposed to various points of view that seem very reasonable and truthful and ‘spirit led’ and I am very confused about the role of the hierarchy of the church and its beliefs in itself and its authority.
Can I ask the posters so far, are you saved by the Catholic church, or are you saved by Jesus?
 
Zeno11 said:
Thank you for all your thoughtful responses, wow!

I am going to take a bit of time to read through them and if that is ok, respond. I have, as one poster suggested, been exposed to various points of view that seem very reasonable and truthful and ‘spirit led’ and I am very confused about the role of the hierarchy of the church and its beliefs in itself and its authority.
Can I ask the posters so far, are you saved by the Catholic church, or are you saved by Jesus?
Click to expand...
By Jesus through His Church
 
Can a book baptize?

Jesus answered: Amen, amen, I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.—John 3:5

The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation. He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them. Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament. The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are “reborn of water and the Spirit.” God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.—CCC 1257
Zeno11 said:
The apostle Paul said we can understand what he wrote. “If yet, you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me towards you: how that, according to revelation, the mystery has been made known to me, as I have written above in few words; as you reading, may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ.” (Eph. 3:2-4). Paul said the mystery had been made know to him by the revelation of God. He then showed that he was writing it e.g., “as I have written above in few words” (in the chapters prior to this) and “as you reading, may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ.” In other words, when we read what he wrote, we can understand what he understood.
Click to expand...
Leaving aside that logically, understanding does not equal salvation, I believe Paul here is simply explaining the basis for his teaching authority so his readers understand how he came by his knowledge of the Mystery of Christ. Though not my favorite bible, here is the passage in context in the NABRE for comparison:

Because of this, I, Paul, a prisoner of Christ [Jesus] for you Gentiles—if, as I suppose, you have heard of the stewardship of God’s grace that was given to me for your benefit, [namely, that] the mystery was made known to me by revelation, as I have written briefly earlier. When you read this you can understand my insight into the mystery of Christ, which was not made known to human beings in other generations as it has now been revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit, that the Gentiles are coheirs, members of the same body, and copartners in the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel.
Zeno11 said:
Paul also said , “For we write nothing to you that you do not read and understand” (2 Cor. 1:13) and “Therefore do not become foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is” (Eph. 5:17). Thus, the inspired writers taught that we most certainly can understand the Scriptures.
Click to expand...
I agree completely. One can certainly understand Scripture. Why else would the Holy Spirit inspire the holy authors? However the Church, the Body of Christ, is the only authoritative interpreter, therefore if your understanding is in conflict with hers, there is a problem with your understanding. You have already quoted Paul: “Therefore do not become foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is” (Eph. 5:17). Let me add another: “And consider the patience of our Lord as salvation, as our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, also wrote to you, speaking of these things as he does in all his letters. In them there are some things hard to understand that the ignorant and unstable distort to their own destruction, just as they do the other scriptures.” (2Peter 3:15–16) So yes understanding Scripture is possible but it’s not always a slam dunk.

“The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ.” This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.—CCC 85

Read the Scripture within “the living Tradition of the whole Church”. According to a saying of the Fathers, Sacred Scripture is written principally in the Church’s heart rather than in documents and records, for the Church carries in her Tradition the living memorial of God’s Word, and it is the Holy Spirit who gives her the spiritual interpretation of the Scripture (". . . according to the spiritual meaning which the Spirit grants to the Church").—CCC 113
Zeno11 said:
Life in the name of Jesus refers to eternal life and it is obtained by belief in the things written by the inspired writers.
Click to expand...
Beware the error of *Sola Scriptura.
*
Zeno11 said:
Can I be a Catholic (have been all my life!) if I don’t accept Church doctrines that contradict Scripture?
Click to expand...
Fortunately you will never encounter such doctrines, so you’ll need another reason to stop being Catholic. 🙂
 
Zeno11 said:
Thank you for all your thoughtful responses, wow!

I am going to take a bit of time to read through them and if that is ok, respond. I have, as one poster suggested, been exposed to various points of view that seem very reasonable and truthful and ‘spirit led’ and I am very confused about the role of the hierarchy of the church and its beliefs in itself and its authority.
Can I ask the posters so far, are you saved by the Catholic church, or are you saved by Jesus?
Click to expand...
Why not let the Church speak for herself?

From the Catechism…
169 Salvation comes from God alone; but because we receive the life of faith through the Church, she is our mother: "We believe the Church as the mother of our new birth, and not in the Church as if she were the author of our salvation."55 Because she is our mother, she is also our teacher in the faith.

620 Our salvation flows from God’s initiative of love for us, because “he loved us and sent his Son to be the expiation for our sins” (I Jn 4:10). “God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself” (2 Cor 5:19).
(Bolding mine)

Peace
James
 
rissa87 said:
There is no Catholic teaching that says the Bible alone cannot be “sufficient” to be saved and there will be plenty of people saved who did believe in sola scriptura.
Click to expand...
Are you sure about that? The Catechism, citing Lumen Gentium 14 from Vatican II, teaches:

"Outside the Church there is no salvation"

846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers? Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:

Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.​
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top