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

[brb3]

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?

Yes, stay a Catholic …as Confession & the Eucharist are most efficacious for us !! And, encourage the Protestants to come back to their roots.

 

[pablope]

Interestingly enough,

Secondly, the Church didn’t create scripture or the Bible.

 

[Zeno11]

Yes, stay a Catholic …as Confession & the Eucharist are most efficacious for us !! And, encourage the Protestants to come back to their roots.

I agree; I was never saying that the Scriptures alone are sufficient, because The Bible can’t baptise you, for example! But when church teachings seem to have no roots in anything but tradition - and these traditions change, over time, then how can they be anything other than the ‘precepts of man’? (I am thinking of Mk. 7:5-13). And if ordinary Catholics can see these things, and we are the body of the church - we ARE the church! - then can we not call for reform within the church?

 

[Zeno11]

I have read the bible over 30 times, have studied the Catechism extensively; I find nothing that contradicts the bible in Catholic teaching. Please provide exambles

Thank you, it could be helpful to debate some things that trouble me!

One example that immediately springs to mind is the wearing of ashes on Ash Wednesday. We generally listen to a gospel that exhorts us to fast in private (Matt 6:16) and are told not to be like the ‘hypocrites’ who ‘disfigure their faces’ so that people may know they are fasting. Then we all promptly disfigure our faces with ashes!! It makes me really uncomfortable, as though I have listened to the Word of God, and now I’m off to do the opposite.

Another example would be the Veneration of the Cross on Good Friday, when Catholics kneel and kiss a crucifix or the feet of a statue of Jesus. You will probably say this is a symbolic act, which is how I’ve always rationalised it, but the Bible is quite clear: Exodus 20:4-5, Leviticus 26:1; Isaiah 44:8-11, Acts 17:29-3, Rev. 19:10. The law of God explicitly teaches that God’s people must never bow down to or serve statues

The Bible indicates that all of the apostles were married except for Paul (1 Cor. 9:5) but the Church teaches the celibacy of the priesthood.

The Bible teaches us to confess our sins directly to God (1 Jn. 1:9) while the Church requires confession to a priest. God’s word says that Christians are justified by faith apart from the works of the law (Rom. 3:20), yet the church teaches salvation by faith plus our own good works or human merit. The Scriptures say that there is only one Mediator between God and man, the man Jesus Christ (1 Tim. 2:5) however, we advocate a whole host of mediators between man and God.
Our Lord said call no man father (Mt. 23:9), yet Catholic priests have taken unto themselves this forbidden religious title.

I think that over the centuries the ‘doctrines of man’ and ‘human tradition’ have woven themselves into the fabric of the church yet Jesus was so hard on the Pharisees of His time for precisely that reason.

Further, why do homeless beggars sit outside the walls of the Vatican? Why does the Pope sit on a golden throne? Why all the beautiful vestments and priceless treasures? We are followers of One who told us : And he said unto them, Take nothing for your journey, neither staves, nor scrip, neither bread, neither money; neither have two coats apiece (Luke 9:3); we are followers of a man who walked and fasted in deserts, who rode a donkey, who exhorted people to rid themselves of wealth and to build up treasures in heaven (Matt 6:19). How has His church on earth departed so far from His teachings?

I actually believe the Catholic church *has * in fact kept Christ’s message of salvation down through the centuries, but i also think it has been corrupted and polluted by the very things Jesus warned us against, and that it is long overdue for a radical renewal according to the teachings of Christ revealed in Holy Scripture.

 

[JRKH]

I agree; I was never saying that the Scriptures alone are sufficient, because The Bible can’t baptize you, for example! But when church teachings seem to have no roots in anything but tradition - and these traditions change, over time, then how can they be anything other than the ‘precepts of man’? (I am thinking of Mk. 7:5-13). And if ordinary Catholics can see these things, and we are the body of the church - we ARE the church! - then can we not call for reform within the church?

You are quite correct in saying that WE are the Church and indeed we can call for reform. But consider too that “reform” can take different paths. We can “re-form” our thoughts to better understand teaching and tradition and Tradition just We can re-form certain practices etc. individually - or as a community.
But the important thing to remember is that we ARE a community - and that community does have structure and authority - as clearly specified in Scripture. So as we discuss these things it is important that we recognize and respect that God given authority and Structure so that “WE” doesn’t become I.

Thank you, it could be helpful to debate some things that trouble me!

Amen - that is the Spirit of Mt 18:15-18…

One example that immediately springs to mind is the wearing of ashes on Ash Wednesday. We generally listen to a gospel that exhorts us to fast in private (Matt 6:16) and are told not to be like the ‘hypocrites’ who ‘disfigure their faces’ so that people may know they are fasting. Then we all promptly disfigure our faces with ashes!! It makes me really uncomfortable, as though I have listened to the Word of God, and now I’m off to do the opposite.

Oooo…Interesting. I never thought about it in this context.
However…I would suggest that you consider that this is done only once a year, as a symbol of mortality - not fasting - while you can fast at any time without any outward sign necessary.
Also I would beg you to note the word “hypocrite” in the text…don’t be like the hypocrites…So if you are not hypocritical in your life and your faith, then you have nothing to be concerned about in wearing ashes one day,
Finally - I would make note that - so far as I know the wearing of ashes is an option…not a requirement of the Church…So if it does not fit with your spirituality…you need not do it.

Another example would be the Veneration of the Cross on Good Friday, when Catholics kneel and kiss a crucifix or the feet of a statue of Jesus. You will probably say this is a symbolic act, which is how I’ve always rationalized it, but the Bible is quite clear: Exodus 20:4-5, Leviticus 26:1; Isaiah 44:8-11, Acts 17:29-3, Rev. 19:10. The law of God explicitly teaches that God’s people must never bow down to or serve statues

Again, this is a reverential act which is not required of anyone in the Church. If it troubles you - then you need not participate.

The Bible indicates that all of the apostles were married except for Paul (1 Cor. 9:5) but the Church teaches the celibacy of the priesthood.

I’m not sure that this is actually true… John was quite young when he became an apostle…Did he marry? Could you provide a source for this? Color me curious…

Anyway - Celibacy IS a discipline that the Latin Church requires of her priests. The Other rites have different disciplines in this regard. So - in this case, certainly this is something that is regularly discussed in the Church. Perhaps someday the rules on this will change.

The Bible teaches us to confess our sins directly to God (1 Jn. 1:9) while the Church requires confession to a priest.

Jesus tells the Apostles:
21 Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.” 22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.” (John 20:21-23)
How does the Church (in the person of the priest) know whether to forgive or retain a given sin, if we do not confess to the Church (in the person of the priest)?
I note here too that it is John who records this, just as it is John who you quote. It hardly seems likely that John (let alone the Holy Spirit) would be contradicting himself.

The answer of course is that we DO confess directly to God when we go to confession. The priest, acting “in persona Christi”, not only forgives or retains, but advises as well. This is a portion of confession that I think too few people recognize and take advantage of. (myself included)

God’s word says that Christians are justified by faith apart from the works of the law (Rom. 3:20), yet the church teaches salvation by faith plus our own good works or human merit.

You are making the same mistake that so many Sola Scripturists make…taking one Scripture and ignoring others.
James says that Faith without works is dead. (James 2:14-18)…Since these two things cannot contradict one another…there must be a solution. The key is in the context of Paul where he speaks of works of the Law (Mosaic Law) and also where he says “Apart from”…In other words one cannot separate faith and works. In this way one sees that Paul and James are saying essentially the same thing…but approaching it from a different viewpoint…where Paul is correcting those who place too much emphasis on works, James is correcting those who put too much emphasis on faith.

(Cont)

 

[JRKH]

The Scriptures say that there is only one Mediator between God and man, the man Jesus Christ (1 Tim. 2:5) however, we advocate a whole host of mediators between man and God.

I guess then we should never ask another to pray for us. I should never ask you to pray for me, nor should you ask me to pray for you. hhmmmmm…
The Saints in heaven are just as much our brothers and sisters in Christ as the faithful on earth. Asking them to intercede for us in no way changes or reduces Christ’s mediation.

Our Lord said call no man father (Mt. 23:9), yet Catholic priests have taken unto themselves this forbidden religious title.

Then why did St Paul take the title Father to himself?
For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel. (1 Cor 4:15
This is just one of a number of places in the NT where the term “Father” is used as a title. Jesus Calls Abraham father Abraham…Paul to refers to “father Abraham”…

I think that over the centuries the ‘doctrines of man’ and ‘human tradition’ have woven themselves into the fabric of the church yet Jesus was so hard on the Pharisees of His time for precisely that reason.

If one chooses to pull Scripture apart, as many have done…one can find many potential pitfalls. However, if one takes Scripture as a whole, including the fact that Scripture points to an authoritative Church and that God will guide that Church and that (according to Paul) all things are lawful so long as they build up…(1 Cor 10:23) one can begin to recognize the deeper truths and profound safety that exists within the Church.

Further, why do homeless beggars sit outside the walls of the Vatican? Why does the Pope sit on a golden throne? Why all the beautiful vestments and priceless treasures? We are followers of One who told us : And he said unto them, Take nothing for your journey, neither staves, nor scrip, neither bread, neither money; neither have two coats apiece (Luke 9:3); we are followers of a man who walked and fasted in deserts, who rode a donkey, who exhorted people to rid themselves of wealth and to build up treasures in heaven (Matt 6:19). How has His church on earth departed so far from His teachings?

The passage you quote above about taking nothing with you is, again, something taken in isolation - consider what Jesus said later…and in the same Gospel…
35 And he said to them, “When I sent you out with no purse or bag or sandals, did you lack anything?” They said, “Nothing.” 36 He said to them, "But now, let him who has a purse take it, and likewise a bag. And let him who has no sword sell his mantle and buy one. (Luke 22:35-36)
Now I will freely say that if the Church were to divest itself of the many treasures in the Vatican it would not bother me in the least. In fact I would applaud it. However…neither the possession or lack of possession of these things effects the holiness of the Church.

I actually believe the Catholic church *has * in fact kept Christ’s message of salvation down through the centuries, but i also think it has been corrupted and polluted by the very things Jesus warned us against, and that it is long overdue for a radical renewal according to the teachings of Christ revealed in Holy Scripture.

I will not disagree with this in any sense. I will however say that such renewal must begin with ourselves. In this I reckon this passage to be most appropriate…
3 Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? 4 Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye. (Mt 7:3-5)
I do not say this to be critical…nor to judge you in any way…for we are all guilty to some extent of this. Perhaps the greatest service we could render to the Church is, instead of seeking great “institutional” reform, to be as St Francis who chose absolute abject poverty. Or at least to choose to get as near to this as we are able.

Peace
James