How do I know “my sect” reads the bible correctly?
I do not assume they do.
I believe we must work out our own salvation with fear and trembling (not relying on a priestly class) - see Phil 2:12-13
Likewise I believe we should prove all things, searching the scriptures ourselves (rather than relying on others) Act 17:11 says the Bereans were more noble than others (early christians) because they did not accept what Paul said just because he was Paul, rather they searched the scriptures to see if what he said were true!
In other words, THEY DID NOT TRUST PAUL — they checked to see if what he said were TRUE!
If they were complemented for such actions, why would someone who is lesser than Paul (being maybe at best a successor, a “Pope”), be trusted any more than Paul was?
There is no benefit in being an “early Christian” in terms of a better argument. Early followers got things wrong, too, and were chastised for it. Early just means they were early. That does not indicate they were more correct, more Godly than today.
But how can we be sure we can find the way? Don’t people need to be told, or led by “men of God”?
Let’s see what God says about the knowledge of God....
18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
WE are WITHOUT EXCUSE. No one can say “I didn’t know” or “The Pope did this or that wrong”, or “I was in a bad church”, or whatever-— God himself (through the agency of the Holy Spirit) lets us know what is right or wrong.
The islander who never saw a bible know the difference between good and evil. The problem is not that man does not know, it’s that he does not embrace the light.
IF we are serious, we will study our bible, and God will continue to enlighten us with wisdom, and the knowledge of God, and salvation.
I am walking with God. I am not perfect. But I place my faith in Jesus, not some Protestant TV preacher or Pope in a Popemobile.
How do I know “my sect” reads the bible correctly?
I do not assume they do.
>> So then you are saying it is actually impossible to understand what the Bible means.
I believe we must work out our own salvation with fear and trembling (not relying on a priestly class) - see Phil 2:12-13
>> I never heard a Catholic priest say we should do otherwise. But Jesus established the sacred mysteries as a way to confirm our faith and as conduits for us to receive his grace.
I search the scriptures and find ample evidence for my faith. I follow the priest, bishops and the Pope as long as they are faithful to scripture and Tradition. Otherwise they are heretics who must be resisted.
There is no benefit in being an “early Christian” in terms of a better argument. Early followers got things wrong, too, and were chastised for it. Early just means they were early. That does not indicate they were more correct, more Godly than today.
>> I’d say the earliest apostolic Christians didn’t have the distortions of the centuries or contemporary distortions to contend with. Considering they were far closer the source than either of us, I’d say they give us a good benchmark, especially in an era where truth has become relative.
The fruits of Sola Scriptura has been the abandonment of Christianity because it really means Sola Meum. Me alone. My will. My thinking. And no one can tell me what is true.
Relativism is the end result of rejecting Holy Tradition as the arbiter for how to properly interpret scripture.
BereanBrain, you have placed your conscience and your judgment above scripture.
I humble myself to the judgment of the orthodox teachers of all ages, all times, and all places to ensure that my limited knowledge and my limited cultural context doesn’t cause me to twist the scriptures.
St. Vincent of Lerins AD 434:
“(3) Now in the Catholic Church itself we take the greatest care to hold that which has been believed everywhere, always and by all. That is truly and properly ‘Catholic,’ as is shown by the very force and meaning of the word, which comprehends everything almost universally. We shall hold to this rule if we follow universality [i.e. oecumenicity], antiquity, and consent. We shall follow universality if we acknowledge that one Faith to be true which the whole Church throughout the world confesses; antiquity if we in no wise depart from those interpretations which it is clear that our ancestors and fathers proclaimed; consent, if in antiquity itself we keep following the definitions and opinions of all, or certainly nearly all, bishops and doctors alike.”
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/434lerins-canon.asp