Why don’t Catholics believe that Bible alone is Enough?

[jericho777]

It shows exactly what scripture is and why we have it. It is the benchmark for everything else. Jesus mission was to demonstrate who He was according to scripture and die for the sins of the world. The bible says the Holy Spirit alone inspires men of God to write His word. So your claims are erroneous.

The Jews realized what the word of God was long before 397 AD and those inter testamental books were not included. Jesus never quotes these at all so that’s telling.

 

[Thom18]

Doesnt Timothy 3:16-17, especially the part that I have bolded show that scripture alone is not only “profitable” but “sufficient”.

“All scripture is given by by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; THAT THE MAN OF GOD MAY BE PERFECT, THOROUGHLY FURNISHED UNTO ALL GOOD WORKS.”

2 Timothy 3:16-17

If this was the case, the Hebrew Scriptures would be sufficient, but Sola Christians argue that Scripture is more than that. If we understand 2 Timothy to mean only Scripture, and only Scripture that was recognized as such during that time, then Sola Christians are wrong to assert even that these letters to Timothy are Scripture, because there is no method in Scripture for determining what Scripture is.

 

[jericho777]

Again you are missing the point, Jesus constantly uses scripture alone to prove who He was. He does have the right to expand on scriptures and bring forth new doctrine because He Is God.

 

[LilyM]

The OT scripture is not a problem and was scripture long before the CC said it was. And it was the sole base for Jesus’ authority. It was the proof of who He was and why He was here.

Your second contention is a false argument because God alone is the one who determines when the scriptures will cease. Look God gave a progressive revelation of scripture over an 1800 year period of time. And after each revelation it was sufficient for that time.

OT scripture is not a problem? Given the disagrements between Catholics, Orthodox Christians and Protestant Christians as to what books actually comprise OT scripture as opposed to, for example, deuterocanon, it absolutely was and remains a problem.

As for Jesus relying on scripture as the sole base of his authority - absolutely not.

He relied upon many other things as well - His own self, His own miracles and His own teaching. Which markedly differed in many ways from OT scripture, else Christians would all still be abstaining from pork, observing Saturday as the day of worship and circumcising their menfolk.

 

[anon91549587]

Which did jesus not quote?

 

[EndTimes]

Again you are missing the point, Jesus constantly uses scripture alone to prove who He was. He does have the right to expand on scriptures and bring forth new doctrine because He Is God.

Exactly…

And anyone who knows the NT would see that as stating the obvious truth

And As for a comprehensive understanding of Catholic Teachings on Scriptures, the CCC’s Articles ON Scriptures tell it like it is.

 

[Dan_Defender]

The Jews realized what the word of God was long before 397 AD and those inter testamental books were not included. Jesus never quotes these at all so that’s telling.

Wrong. The New Testament makes reference to the Septuagint especially Heb 11:35. And the early Church fathers all recognized the Septuagint. The Protestant Bible was artificially created in the 16th century.

 

[JimG]

The bible alone is not enough for those who are illiterate—which has been probably most of mankind for most of history. Of course, even to speak of “the Bible” as a singular object was not possible until after the invention of the printing press and binding pages together to make a book.

 

[adamhovey1988]

Nevertheless, the position of the Church is that Scripture is materially sufficient , but not formally sufficient , for knowledge of the revelation of God.

I learned exactly this in my Gospel class, so quite right.

 

[adamhovey1988]

And the usual defense given by Protestants for a shorter Old Testament Canon, is the Council of Jamnia which would be fine and dandy, except there was no such Council. Brant Pitre has a video about it on YouTube.

 

[Dan_Defender]

And the usual defense given by Protestants for a shorter Old Testament Canon, is the Council of Jamnia which would be fine and dandy, except there was no such Council. Brant Pitre has a video about it on YouTube.

I know. That happens when people do not have actual historical witnesses to back them up!

 

[John_Martin]

Doesnt Timothy 3:16-17, especially the part that I have bolded show that scripture alone is not only “profitable” but “sufficient”.

“All scripture is given by by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; THAT THE MAN OF GOD MAY BE PERFECT, THOROUGHLY FURNISHED UNTO ALL GOOD WORKS.”

2 Timothy 3:16-17

The “man of God” is the priest and bishop, Apostolically authorized to use the Catholic Church’s property called “the Bible” or “the Scriptures” to correct you and me, to reprove you and me, to teach you and me their correct meaning of Scripture, and to train you and me in doing righteousness so we will be the actual people of God (doing the obedience of faith).

There are protesters around who think Paul wrote this for anyone to interpret scripture, but no, he wrote it to the bishop, Timothy, as Timothy’s official “charge” and we get to see what Paul assigns to Timothy and all the bishops and priests so that we treat bishops and priests with respect and so that we obediently accept their teaching, correction, reproof, and training because we are obedient to Paul who was authorized to bring about the obedience of faith among the Gentiles.

We are Catholic - obedient to St Paul we trust our Living Magisterial Apostolic use of Scripture, not our private reading of the bible but our reading of the bible and asking our Living Magisterial Apostolic teachers to give us its true use in our lives.

 

[HarryStotle]

What did Jesus Christ say about bible alone?

Ah but the Sola Scriptura advocate would have to ask, "What does the Bible say about Jesus Christ (aka God) alone?

Doesn’t the truth or reliability of the words of Jesus, contained in the Bible, depend upon whether or not they are included in the Bible, for some reason that we aren’t quite certain of?

Oh wait…

 

[HarryStotle]

Again you are missing the point, Jesus constantly uses scripture alone to prove who He was. He does have the right to expand on scriptures and bring forth new doctrine because He Is God.

It would be a stretch to claim Jesus is using “Scripture alone” to prove he is God. What he is doing is citing passages of Scripture (which he and his Jewish audience would both hold to be infallible) to make a point TO his Jewish audience to convince them.

As Christians (and Catholics) we would now use Jesus’ citations of Scripture as solid proof (although not the only grounds we have) concerning which Old Testament books we would consider infallible.

 

[po18guy]

Very interesting points, but the same 100% circular logic with zero foundation.

 

[Theban]

Actually Peter says in 2 Peter 3:16 that Paul’s letters were scripture.

And where is 2 Peter affirmed to be Scripture in the Bible? We could play this game all day long.

Where does the bible say that the bible isn’t enough?

2 Thessalonians 2.15:
So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.

It seems that there is a belief that scripture was some black hole of the unknown until 397 AD when the CC said it was so.

If you think that Christians knew exactly what books belonged in the Sacred Scriptures prior to their definition, then I politely ask you to provide some historical evidence to back that opinion up. And even so, this is an argument from Tradition; because saying that the Early Christians were aware of the Bible and their definition is authoritive is going against Sola Scriptura.

basis for all His teaching.

Well, this is a very bold claim. I guess we can start at the beginning here. Jesus says in Mark 2.27 that the Sabbath was made for man and not the other way around. Is this a teaching based on Scripture? It seems to me to be based on His own authority, as the next sentence affirms.

Jesus never quotes these at all so that’s telling.

That’s an interesting position. Logically, if you believe that this is the definition of the Old Testament, I suppose you will throw out all the other books that Jesus never quotes as well?

 

[Cathoholic]

@chagel_333 . . .

Doesnt Timothy 3:16-17, especially the part that I have bolded show that scripture alone is not only “profitable” but “sufficient”.

“All scripture is given by by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; THAT THE MAN OF GOD MAY BE PERFECT, THOROUGHLY FURNISHED UNTO ALL GOOD WORKS.”

Because Catholics don’t add in the word “ALONE” to Bible verses that are not there.

Take “patience” (also translated as “steadfastness”) for example. . . .

JAMES 1:4 (KJV) 4 But let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing.

JAMES 1:4 (RSVCE) 4 And let steadfastness have its full effect, that you may be perfect and complete, lacking in nothing.

What if an atheist who ADDED in the word “alone” to this verse used the same argumentation in principle saying? . . .

“Well so what if I don’t believe in God?
Big deal if I refuse to hope to get to Heaven.
Why do I need charity and to at least TRY to love my neighbor as myself?”

"Who are you Christians kidding. James 1:4 tells me my patience gets me to be complete, lacking in nothing."

“And as I am a patient person, I guess I am on my way to Heaven!”

.

And they appealed to THIS . . . .

NOT JAMES 1:4 But let patience ALONE have her perfect work, that ye may be PERFECT and ENTIRE, WANTING NOTHING!

What would YOU say to that atheist?

God bless.

Cathoholic

 

[Cathoholic]

jericho777 . . .

Tell me something Jesus referred to or quoted other than scripture for the basis of who He was and why He was here? Never mind all that will come is only found in scripture.

The Canon of the New Testament.

 

[Zaccheus]

What did Jesus Christ say about bible alone? Which bible did He write? Upon which scripture did He found His Church? Which twelve bibles did He send forth to make disciples of all nations? To which bible are we supposed to take disputes for resolution? Which bible forgives your sins in the Person of Christ? Which scripture must we eat and drink to have life in us? Which bible is the blood of the New Covenant? Which bible is the pillar and foundation of truth? Where did the “Sacred Table of Contents” of the bible come from? Where does the bible spell out what should be in the bible? For that matter, where is “bible” in the bible?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Also: which books of the bible did Christ Himself write?

 

[Zaccheus]

Jesus certainly affirmed the written scriptures as the sole standard and truth for believers by constantly referring to them “it is written” as the basis for all His teaching. Tell me something Jesus referred to or quoted other than scripture for the basis of who He was and why He was here? Never mind all that will come is only found in scripture.

Suppose we were arguing about what Abraham Lincoln was trying to accomplish while in office as President of the United States. I try to prove my point by quoting from the text of the Gettysburg Address.
Does that mean I claim the Gettysburg Address is the sole reliable source of truth regarding what President Lincoln was trying to accomplish?

That Christ quoted Scripture is not enough to justify the claim that He claimed it as the sole standard of truth.
Further, when Christ quoted Scripture to prove His identity He was talking to Israelites who were steeped in Scripture. He appealed to the standard they trusted.
Further still, Scripture (the Old Testament) does in fact contain many prophecies about Him and His coming. Why shouldn’t He point to it as evidence?

You need to do a little scholarship, there are many instances where Our Lord showed that “You have said it is written …, but I say to you…”; clearly not OT Scripture alone.

Edit to add: And also this.