“The Church has no official commentary on Scripture. The pope could write one if he wanted, but he hasn’t. And with good reason: Scripture study is an ongoing, developing field. To create an official commentary on Scripture would impede the development of this field.” Catholic AnswersWhat are they scared of?
Why would there be an OFFICIAL commentary? Seriously, why would that be needed when we have so many unofficial commentaries that serve us as well as they do?
Also, what kind of commentary: historical, textual, allegorical, for homileys, for children or adults, in what language????
When the Vatican sponsored the production of a definitive Vulgate in the 1930s the final fully collated, and footnoted product was something like 700 volumes long. Can you imagine how long a Bible commentary could be? I would think it would be almost as long. Who going to pay for that nowadays? Isn’t it more realistic to do what the Vatican has already done: http://www.clerus.org/bibliaclerus/index_eng.html
Is this proclamation supposed to assert that since Protestants interpret every word of the Bible they have the winning hand in what to believe? They are innocent of atrocities as opposed to historically horrible Catholic behaviors? Well, we could cite a few Protestant mess ups in some of the various sects. Cromwell, for one. Salem witch trials another. Henry the VIII wasn’t exactly Biblically inspired when he cut off Rome and did his cruelties.
No, this is all a simplistic pointless presentation...to prove what?
2Pe 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
Jesus Christ is our intercessor between us and God, not a priest or a pope. We have 33,000 different denominations, or interpretations of God's Word, time to study and let the Holy Spirit teach you. Put in the time to study and the Book will interpret itself.
What about this scripture, is He the only one in Heaven or not? Everybody knows John 3:16 what about 3 verses earlier?
John 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.
And, BTW, this is a hilarious oversimplification, especially if "Protestant" means something bigger than latter-day fluffy American evangelicalism. If Protestants look only to Scripture, why did they write Luther's large & small catechisms? Why the Westminster Confession?
If Catholics look only to the church, why does the catechism say the church "forcefully and specifically exhorts" the faithful to "frequent reading of the divine scriptures" (section 133) and calls Scripture (quoting Vatican II) "strength for [the Catholic's] faith, food for the soul, and a pure and lasting font of spiritual life" (section 131)?
In his resignation letter, which Charisma has in full, Ekman explains more of the reasoning behind his conversion to Catholicism:
What amuses me is the idea that Catholics are not responsible for their interpretation of scripture. They point to the church - but did they forget that they chose membership in the church themselves? LOL! God is not mocked, and there is no avoiding answering for your own decisions, no matter how many layers of indemnification you THINK you have.
It’s interesting that the Catholic Church teaches that anyone baptized is given the Holy Spirit, yet only those in their “apostolic line” can interpret Scripture. Jesus Himself said man was not to live on bread alone, but every word of God. If you are going to use Scripture in your actual life, you have to judge what it means and how it applies. Peter, I believe, said to be saved, we need to turn to God in repentance and believe in Jesus. A heart that has been changed to love God and submit to Him hears God’s voice and understands Scripture. Christians have disagreed over some of the lesser points, but on the most important there’s agreement. The unity among us might be better seen sometimes by unbelievers who oppose Christ and despise Christians and what they stand for.
That there is so little RC magisterial interpretation, if true, is a highly relevant piece of information to those of us weighing the pros and cons of Catholicism v. Protestantism (or Evangelicalism) in these days of the One Church Emergent of Holy Marxism (the religious corollary to one-party U.S. government, an administrative department of OneWorldSystem, Inc.).
Good thing we have another Freeper Catholics V Protestant thread. It’s been 5 minutes since the last one. Why can’t you guys give it a rest.
Catholics don't follow Luther's tradition of "the Bible ALONE" as the sole rule of faith, because it is a human tradition.
There is no record of Luther's teaching in Scripture, Tradition, Church Teaching, or Church history, prior to Luther.
OTOH, Jesus established a Church which the "gates of hell" would not prevail against, instructing us to "listen to the church," and that those who fail to listen to the church should be treated "like a pagan or tax collector."
You're free to follow Luther's tradition, but don't expect Catholics to.