Who ya going to believe...your lying eyes and the holy spirit bringing you understanding...or what someone else tells you the bible says? There is of course a role for the church and for teachers but if what they teach goes against the bible they are a false church and false disciples.
Yes, that drivel implies that the early "teaching churches" never taught anything wrong.
How is it that different churches teach different things?
For example, baptism:
some teachers baptism is absolutely necessary, others, unnecessary.
Some teach infants may be baptized, others only adults.
Some teach baptism has an effect on the soul, others that it is merely symbolic.
Some churches teach one can be baptized more than once, others that it is a one-time event.
That is eight different teachings on baptism. Each is “backed up” by its advocates using the Bible. How are we to know which is true?
“Who ya going to believe...your lying eyes and the holy spirit bringing you understanding...or what someone else tells you the bible says? There is of course a role for the church and for teachers but if what they teach goes against the bible they are a false church and false disciples.”
That’s my position as well. I can consider the viewpoint of others, but I’ve found it is always best to read the Bible and see for myself the words in the Scripture. For many times others change a word or use a different meaning for a word. Doing so can change the meaning of the entire verse. Often others are trying to deliberately mislead you.
Also, verses have to be taken in context so often you have to read an entire chapter or even book in the Bible to determine the meaning. I’d prefer to get the word from the horse’s mouth so to speak.
Nor does it have to.
But the Roman Catholic has selectively edited the verse in John 20 to try to make his point though it fails when read in context.
. John 20-30: And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book, etc.
Incidentally...there is no etc in the passage. If the writer can't get that right what else is wrong.
The verse in question in context including the key part where John notes why things were recorded.
30Therefore many other signs Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; 31but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name. John 20:30-31 NASB 95
In 1 John 5:13-15 he wrote this as well.
13These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life. 14This is the confidence which we have before Him, that, if we ask anything according to His will, He hears us. 15And if we know that He hears us in whatever we ask, we know that we have the requests which we have asked from Him. 1 John 5:13-15 NASB 95
Seems John wants us to know we can know.
The passage below is quoted correctly though cited incorrectly...but it's an improvement. However, it doesn't support the argument the writer is trying to advance. John is noting not everything He did was written down. No one has ever claimed that.
Nor is a complete record of everything Jesus need required. Just the list of meals alone would be extensive.
However, when keeping John 20:30-31 in mind this passage is perfectly fine.
John 21-25: And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written everyone, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written Amen.
COMMENT: Since the Bible is incomplete, it needs something else to supplement it; i.e., the spoken or historically recorded word which we call Tradition.
This is a false claim that the Bible is somehow incomplete.
It ignores what John said about why he wrote his Gospel.
Further it denies what Paul wrote to Timothy regarding Scripture.
All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 NASB 95
What is lacking for the Roman Catholic are the dogmatic explinations for what this officially means. Without Rome's official position the Roman Catholic really has no guide on how to properly understand these and many other passages.
If this is the best the writer has this is hardly worth the effort.