Do Christians Need Only the Bible?

I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you. 1 Corinthians 11:2

Most Protestant Christians believe that the Bible is the only source concerning faith. According to them, there is no need for Apostolic Tradition or an authoritative, teaching Church. All that they need is the Bible in order to learn about the faith and to live a Christian life. The "Bible Alone" teaching can be appealing in its simplicity, but it suffers from fundamental problems. A few are considered here.

First the Bible itself states that not everything important to the Christian faith is recorded in it. For example, not everything that Christ did is recorded in the inspired Books:

But there are also many other things which Jesus did; were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. [John 21:25; RSV]

According to John 20:31, some things have been recorded in the Gospel in order to come to know Christ; however, John 21:25 suggests that there is still more to know about Him. At least for St. John the Apostle, there was more that he needed to teach which was not recorded in the Bible:

I had much to write you, but I would rather not write with pen and ink; I hope to see you soon, and we will talk together face to face. [3 John 13-14]

Also St. Paul instructs Timothy on how to orally pass on the teachings of the faith:

...what you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also. [2 Tim. 2:2]

St. Paul even commands (2 Thess. 3:6) the Thessalonian Christians to follow the oral Traditions of the Apostles:

So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us (Apostles), either by word of mouth (oral) or by letter (Epistle). [2 Thess. 2:15]

These commands promoting Oral Tradition would be quite strange, if only the Bible were needed to pass on the entire Christian faith.

A second problem with the "Bible Alone" teaching is canonicity - i.e. which Books belong in the Bible? It must be remembered that the Books of the Bible were written individually along with other religious books. Centuries later the Church compiled together the inspired Books under one cover to form the "Bible." A big question in the early Church was which books are the inspired written Word of God. (Inspired=written by men but authored by God; See Catechism of the Catholic Church 106.)

Scripture did not come with an "inspired" Table of Contents. Nowhere in the sacred texts are all the Books listed. There are some Books cited in the sacred writings but these lists are vague and incomplete (Acts 28:23; 2 Peter 3:16). There are also references to books not found in the Bible, such as St. Paul's Epistle to the Laodiceans (Col. 4:16). St. Paul even encourages the Colossians to read this epistle, but still it is not in the Bible. Jesus in the Gospel never attempts to list the "official" Books of the Old Testament (OT). This issue was hotly debated in His day. Today Protestant and Catholic Christians disagree over which Books belong in the OT. Catholics follow the list in the Septuagint (2nd century B.C. Greek translation of the Hebrew Scripture) while Protestants follow the list used by the Pharisees. A list from Jesus could have eliminated this problem, but no such list is found in the Gospel. As a result the Bible needs a visible authority outside of itself to list the inspired sacred Books. This authority must be guided by the Holy Spirit since these Books are from the Holy Spirit.

Some Christians claim that the Table of Contents in their Bible lists the inspired Books. Even though found in modern Bibles, the Table of Contents is still not inspired. It is not the Word of God but words added later by human editors, much similar to footnotes. The Table of Contents is basically the opinion of the publishing editor. Others may claim that the closing verses in the Book of Revelation, specifically Rev. 22:18-19, cap off the Bible and define all the preceding Books as inspired by God. But do these verses apply to the whole Bible or only the Book of Revelation? Another flaw with this idea is that not all Bibles have the same number of Books. As alluded to above, Catholic and Protestant Bibles contain different numbers of OT Books, yet all these Bibles close with the same verses: Rev. 22:18ff. Both cannot be right. Finally the Book of Deuteronomy contains similar verses (4:2 & 12:32). Does this imply that the Books after Deuteronomy are not inspired by God? No.

A third problem with the "Bible Alone" teaching is proper understanding of critical Bible passages. Most Protestant Christians promote personal interpretation of the Bible, i.e. anyone can interpret these passages by himself. Unfortunately this leads to chaos. For example over Baptism, some Protestants accept the validity of infant Baptism, while others do not. Some believe in the necessity of Baptism for salvation, citing Mark 16:16, while others disagree by citing John 3:16. They all claim to be Bible-based, but still they disagree over fundamental issues regarding salvation. Sadly the "Yellow Pages" phone directory is a witness to the many "Bible-Based" churches who disagree with each other over key issues of the Christian faith. Personal interpretation of the Bible naturally leads to a mire of human doctrines as a result of differing personal opinions.

The Bible was not written as a catechism. It is a collection of many different styles of writing - poetry, history, parables, letters, songs, etc. - requiring different ways of understanding. Sometimes Jesus in the Gospel purposely taught in figurative language and parables, which makes literal interpretation impossible. Even St. Peter admits that St. Paul's Epistles can be difficult to understand:

...Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. [2 Peter 3:15-16]

Finally the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8:30ff needed St. Philip to explain the Book of Isaiah. Obviously not everyone can understand the meaning of Scripture by simply reading it. More is required. These difficulties in the Bible demand an independent visible teaching authority that is guided by the Holy Spirit.

Even the Bible points to the importance of the Church for teaching the Truth. According to St. Peter in the Bible:

First of all you must understand this, that no prophesy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God. [2 Peter 1:20-21]

At least prophecies in the Bible are not a matter of personal interpretation. These prophesies must be properly interpreted by "men moved by the Holy Spirit" since the Holy Spirit is the Author. These "men" are the Bishops of the Church - the successors to the Apostles (Acts 20:28-32). Finally the Bible does not call itself the bulwark of the truth; however, St. Paul does make reference to the Church in those terms:

...the household of God, which is the Church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth. [1 Tim. 3:15]

According to the Bible, the Church is "the pillar and bulwark of the truth."
All Christians, including Catholics, should read the Bible in order to grow more in the faith; however, we still need the Church. The Church is needed to accurately pass on Apostolic Tradition (Romans 10:17), define the canon of the Bible (i.e. list the inspired Books), safeguard the accurate transmission (e.g. translations) of the Bible and interpret key passages, all with guidance from the Holy Spirit according to God's Will. The Church is needed for other reasons too. It must be understood that the Church is not merely men making arbitrary decisions but men executing authority from God guided by the Holy Spirit. The Church may at times be tested by scandals or scarred by the sins of men. We may sometimes disagree with the policies of the Church, but she is still the instrument of the Holy Spirit. This visible Church is the one built by Jesus Christ on St. Peter, the rock (Matt. 16:18-19; John 1:24). This is the Catholic Church.

make of Pope Alexander VI?

I’ll have to look him up to comment, but it isn’t necessary. If he was an idiot...so be it, but he was still protected by the Holy Spirit from declaring anything “ex Cathedra” that was in error. The Catholic church is made up, as is any other institution, of people with human frailties. The United States government, great as it is, is made up of men and women who are human and can err. Has any pope ever said anything that was found to be in error....of course, but when the Pope speaks on matters of faith and morals, he speaks without error.....Christ promised that and I, for one, believe Him

The parables of the workers goes hand in hand with the example of the thief on the cross. When the workers who had worked the fields all day were upset that those who had just worked an hour got the same pay, the Master said “Have I not paid you what I promised?”

The lesson is clear. A person who accepts the gift of salvation in childhood and leads a long life of service to God recieves the same reward as the vile criminal who accepts the gift of salvation as he is going to his execution.

The idea that there is a mature and informed faith that is required for salvation is unbiblical. A simple faith is what is required.

Paul spells it out clearly in his letter to the Romans:

“The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart,” that is, the word of faith we are proclaiming: That if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. As the Scripture says, “Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame.” For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

Maybe someone should have told Paul it wasn’t that simple.

Maybe someone should have told him that if a man confesses with his mouth “Jesus is Lord” and believes in his heart that God raised him from the dead, that he wasn’t saved yet. He still needs to have a mature and informed faith.

And that argument is why so many Protestants strike back with Sola Scriptura. Because the scriptures refute that kind of teaching.

John 1:1 In the beginning (Genesis) was the WORD, and the WORD was with God, and the WORD was God.

2. The same was in the beginning with God.

3. ALL things were made by HIM; and without HIM was not any thing made that was made.

4. In Him was life; and the life was the light of men.

5. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it NOT.

There is an appointed time coming wherein the following will take place.... Revelation 22:18 For I testify unto every man that hearth the words of the prophecy of this book IF any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

19 And IF any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

Now this same warning was given by Moses from the Heavenly Father recorded in the Deut. 4:2 and 12:32

The Holy Spirit does NOT work against the WORD as given and Christ Himself said in Mark 13:23 before Peter was ever sent on a mission or even before the ‘new’ was penned and published to the commoners to read the WORD for themselves. “But take ye heed: behold, I have foretold you all things.”

The Holy Spirit is NOT going to direct a nobody like me to any flesh led organization against the WORD of the Heavenly Father. I have NO other vehicle to test that proverbial fruit than from the WORD.

The Catholic Church has tried to promote itself as the compiler and assembler of the Scriptures since so many of its traditions contradict the Bible, i.e.,infant baptism, the perpetual virginity of Mary, Peter as the first Pope, etc.

let’s go real slow here...I racall an instance in the bible where it refers to someone baptizing everyone in a household....do you suppose they asked for i.d.’s to determine age. Did Christ not say to become like a little child to enter the kingdom....don’t biblical analogies mean anything to you....do you think that Jesus actually saw someone sowing grain and noticed that some fell on the sidewalk and some on fruitful earth.....probably not. Protestants love to interpret the bible literally except when it comes to “thou art Petros (rock) and upon this rock I will build my CHURCH and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it (I will protect it)....did he give Peter the title of “Pope” of course not, but the early church did, and all it means is papa or father. I myself have no idea about why Catholocism insists on the perpetual virginity of Mary, I personally think that it would creat a very difficult lifestyle for both her and Joseph. However, I understand that she had taken a vow of virginity in the Jewish religion for whatever reason, and I assume that she was of sufficient character to honor and fulfill that vow. There is also the concept that the vessel that carried Jesus should remain perfectly “pure”...since the Holy Spirit will not allow Catholocism to err, I assume their teachings are 100% correct......unlike those of Luther, Calvin, Zwingley, Henry VIII, Wesley et al

Surely you can’t be serious? I did not say that you could not write without a dictionary, just as I did not say that you couldn’t be a Christian without a Bible.

However, if you wish to be a great writer, you are going to need a dictionary for help with some of those discommodious and recondite words while searching for that perfect word to express yourself. As Mark Twain once said: “The difference between a perfect word and a near-perfect word is like the difference between lightning and a lightning bug.”

Likewise, if you wish not to be so easily prone to deception and false teachings, you are going to need your Bible “for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.”

“There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death.” - Proverbs 14:12

Apologetics ping for a Saturday evening.

Thanks. As I've posted so eloquently elsewhere, I've moved on from apologetics to "assertogetics."

***

In any event, who these days is not painfully familiar with the limitations of communicating complex topics via the written word -- email, for example. Who hasn't been misunderstood by email? Who among our mortal, finite, sinful selves hasn't hoped for 'a chance to explain?' How much more when we are trying to communicate the infinite?

As a former protestant of the "evangelical" type, I have to conclude that the body of that "theology" and/or the way it's taught requires the student to cease thinking. It's as if they (the evangelical apostles) understand from scripture (and perhaps from experience) the woeful limitations of the fallen human mind, and decide the only fix is to abandon its use. Don't think -- just do what it says.

Whereas the Catholic tradition, using the Incarnation as its teacher, seeks to sanctify the human mind (I believe this is actually dealt with in scripture) in order that it may be redeemed, and that the mysteries of the infinite might be glimpsed more fully.

This is one -- just one -- of the refreshingly vital gifts of the Church.

the scriptures refute that kind of teaching.

The scriptures don't. They do refute the Judaizers in the parable of the workers in the vineyard, and they do stress the importance of faith. But they also call for knowledge, self-denial, struggle with sin, totality of committment, and obedience to the Church:

3 As all things of his divine power which appertain to life and godliness, are given us, through the knowledge of him who hath called us by his own proper glory and virtue. 4 By whom he hath given us most great and precious promises: that by these you may be made partakers of the divine nature: flying the corruption of that concupiscence which is in the world. 5 And you, employing all care, minister in your faith, virtue; and in virtue, knowledge; 6 And in knowledge, abstinence; and in abstinence, patience; and in patience, godliness; 7 And in godliness, love of brotherhood; and in love of brotherhood, charity. 8 For if these things be with you and abound, they will make you to be neither empty nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 For he that hath not these things with him, is blind, and groping, having forgotten that he was purged from his old sins. 10 Wherefore, brethren, labour the more, that by good works you may make sure your calling and election. For doing these things, you shall not sin at any time. (2 Peter 1)
If any man will follow me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me (Mark 8:34, many similar)
put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh in its concupiscences (Romans 13:14)

whosoever doth not carry his cross and come after me, cannot be my disciple (Luke 14:27)
why call you me, Lord, Lord; and do not the things which I say? (Luke 6:46 )
Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. (Acts 20:28)

If Protestants were really basing their beliefs on the Bible, they would not be Protestant. I don't know if they would be necessarily Catholic, but Protestants of Bible Alone/Faith Alone persuasion they would not be, because the Bible teaches clearly against that error.

you are going to need a dictionary for help with some of those discommodious and recondite words while searching for that perfect word to express yourself.

I am simply saying that if the Bible is to Christianity what dictionary is to a writer, then you haven't made a particularly strong argument.

Especially if you consider that most Evangelists used Greek which was not their first language, and did fine by me. I don't think dictionaries were even invented then. For the most part, the Gospels are written very plainly, with what seems a limited vocabulary.

Of course St. Paul was not wrong. But even of you read Romans alone and ignore the rest of the Scripture, you will see exhortations to virtue similar to what I posted.

Off the top:

21 For if God hath not spared the natural branches, fear lest perhaps he also spare not thee. 22 See then the goodness and the severity of God: towards them indeed that are fallen, the severity; but towards thee, the goodness of God, if thou abide in goodness, otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. (Romans 11)
1 I BESEECH you therefore, brethren, by the mercy of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, pleasing unto God, your reasonable service. 2 And be not conformed to this world; but be reformed in the newness of your mind, that you may prove what is the good, and the acceptable, and the perfect will of God. (Romans 12)
1 ...Let every soul be subject to higher powers: for there is no power but from God: and those that are, are ordained of God. 2 Therefore he that resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God. And they that resist, purchase to themselves damnation. (Romans 13)
1 Now we that are stronger, ought to bear the infirmities of the weak, and not to please ourselves. 2 Let every one of you please his neighbour unto good, to edification. 3 For Christ did not please himself, but as it is written: The reproaches of them that reproached thee, fell upon me. 4 For what things soever were written, were written for our learning: that through patience and the comfort of the scriptures, we might have hope. 5 Now the God of patience and of comfort grant you to be of one mind one towards another, according to Jesus Christ: 6 That with one mind, and with one mouth, you may glorify God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. 7 Wherefore receive one another, as Christ also hath received you unto the honour of God. (Romans 15)

Faith that saves is mature faith.

His other name was Rodrigo Borgia. You might want to look him up

Wow, I just did, this guy was a real rounder, broke a couple of his vows didn’t he?? He did keep Charles VIII of France out of Italy, I guess that counts for something!!It also says he was a great cardplayer and one of the wealthiest men of his time.....not bad for a guy in his thirties, damn near sounds like a Kennedy....but who’s making comparisons??You have to be careful not to condemn a 2,000 year old institution that Christ founded, totally corrupt because it had an idiot as leader for a few years. The Democrat party has had idiot after idiot, year after year, and we try not to write the party off. If you can search history, every vatican document ever published, 2,000 years of paperwork, and come up with one.....just one, example of papal error, including Alexander VI, you will have an argueing point....until then, we are still right.....it feels good to be right

It is interesting to me that Christians believe in God but he doesn’t speak to his children anymore. Amos 3:7 “Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.” Why doesn’t he speak? Is this scripture incorrect? Why are there so many different interpretations of the written word?
Why baptism by sprinkling?

Matt. 3:16 And Jesus, when he was Baptized, went up straightway out of the water:—Romans 6:3-4 Know ye not , that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were Baptized into his death. Therefore we are buried with him by Baptism into death—There are many similar scriptures.
Immersion seems to be the appropriate way??

He says that if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God rose him from the dead, that you would be saved.

Was Paul wrong?

wrong, no but this is not a complete statement of what Paul believed....Go slow now...does Lucifer believe that Jesus is Lord, you bet he does, does he believe that God rose him from the dead.....of course he does, well good luck with your buddy, Lucifer, in heaven because you told him that is all it takes to get there. Never mind Jesus’ church, never mind emulating Him and following His commands, never mind those silly apostles, what did they know???the seven sacraments, who needs all that work? Catholocism...a long word that I don’t understand and by the way, I didn’t find it in the index of my KJV (partial edition) of the bible. If you believe everything that Lucifer does......you’re home free.....pathetic

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.