Yes, of course I read it closely. There is the Word of God, the WORD who was with God and IS God and was made flesh - Jesus (John 1) and there is the word of God, which is the truths God has revealed to mankind. The word of God which is the sword of the Spirit (Ephesians 6:17) and cannot be chained (2 Tim. 2:9). For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. (Hebrews 4:12) Whether these truths are spoken or read, they ARE the word of God. I know that whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that through endurance and through the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope (Romans 15:4). I do not believe that God would have omitted anything from the written word that was binding upon a believer's soul. The Apostles certainly had a special gift and power and they DID rely on the written word (the Old Testament) to bolster their preaching about Jesus being the promised Messiah. Think how futile that might have been for them had God not preserved all those books of Moses and the Prophets that spoke of him. That's how they KNEW Jesus was THE Christ! Their teaching to the early church was written down so that there would be a rule of faith to go by and it had authority and power because it came from the Holy Spirit. So no matter if someone could read or not, there was a standard by which truth could be measured. The time between the resurrection and the last of the Apostles died, the Scriptures were being written. After John died, new revelation ceased.
Yes. However, Scripture Itself records that not everything is written (John 20:30 and John 21:25).
Not everything Jesus DID was written, John said, "Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written." (John 21:25) "Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book." (John 20:30) BUT..."But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name." (John 20:31) Why do some people forget about that verse? Would John have left out anything that would help us believe? Why do so many use this one verse to try to make the Bible say the church can decide anything is "tradition" and must be obeyed, when it's not even saying that?
An example for our discussion, please? (inventing 'truth')
Of the many to choose from, these few come to mind:
Bodily assumption of Mary. Perpetual virginity. No other children for Mary and Joseph. Praying to departed saints. Purgatory. Indulgences. Sacrifice of the Mass. Not interested in carrying on a discussion on all these, just giving examples of things I think the Catholic Church invented outside of Scriptural warrant and in which they claim belief is mandatory to be saved.
Then it's a darn good thing this Church which plays fast and loose with the truth did away with Scripture so they wouldn't be found out! Oh wait. That didn't happen? You mean this Church is actually the one institution in the whole world which faithfully preserved the Scripture intact throughout the ages. Could it be, then, that that which seems contradictory may simply be the result of disagreement from those who reject the teaching authority of the Church? Likely.
It's not a secret that the Catholic Church DID try to stifle the translation of the Bible into the languages of the people. It's also no secret that, at certain times, reading the Bible was forbidden by non-clergy. It is GOD who has preserved his word. He used men but even if no man was found faithful enough to do so, he would have STILL preserved it. "Until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." (Matt. 5:18). "Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.", Jesus said. (Matt. 24:35). "The grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of our God endures forever." (Isa. 40:8) Let's not forget that when we say "church", not everyone presumes the Roman Catholic Church. Even when the RCC was unfaithful to the Bible, there were STILL Christians who honored it and kept it.
Christ prayed that we might be one in faith. We are in the Catholic (universal) Church and maintain that unity with 13 other Churches who maintain communion with Her and with the historical Church back to Christ in unchanging doctrine and dogma. Where we are not one in faith is in the fractalized Protestant denominations where they reject the authority of the Church and claim unity against all obvious observations. There isn't one body and one bride where the members of the body and the bride are not in one accord.
Hmmm...what is it that separates those 22 (actually) other churches? Is there doctrinal unity with the Orthodox churches? They believe it is y'all that have strayed from the truth of the faith. It's getting tiresome explaining that all these "Protestant" denominations - the ones that remain faithful to Scripture - ARE unified in the major tenets of the faith. In fact, on most of them there's not much air between what Protestants and Catholics believe on the major doctrines of the faith. It was those extra-Biblical doctrines that caused the Reformation and the split before that with the East. Not only that, but saying you have unity and actually proving you do are two different things. How do you classify the cafeteria Catholics? Count them out when you talk about your unity?
Asserting that Catholic doctrines and dogmas are the same ones that were taught in the early church is not true. MANY have changed and many were unknown for centuries or longer in the church. The Catholic Church DOES invent doctrines not held by the Apostles, which disproves the claim to submission to their authority. The authority the Apostles were given by Jesus was not something they could hand down who would then hand it down and so forth. Whatever authority existed was one of the passing down of the message. There was no succession of Apostleship.
However, to give it sole authority is to deny the Holy Spirit Who Christ promised would teach us all things (John 14:26). If you close revelation with Scripture then we have been adrift for nearly 2,000 years with no further revelation of God. This isn't in keeping with Christ's promise. Scripture is like a textbook. It is correct and unerring. However, we still need a teacher to fully comprehend the subject matter (Acts 8:30-31). Christ promised us the Holy Spirit and the Church has been taught and led from the beginning. Remember that St Peter did not cite Scripture when pronouncing that the gentiles did not have to circumcised under the Law in order to partake of the New Covenant with the Jews (Acts 15). He did this of the authority given him by Christ through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. It is a model for the Church... to recognize the truth and teach through the Spirit even on issues for which there is no Scripture to directly consult.
The Holy Spirit is within each and every believer and was promised by Jesus to lead us into all truth. He illuminates God's truths to our hearts. The leaders within the churches (local churches) have the gift of the Holy Spirit to BE preachers and evangelists and teachers...to the edification of the members of their church. That's why Paul instructed the Corinthians on the proper protocol for handling disputes among members. Peter did have the Holy Spirit, who Jesus said would "bring to their remembrance everything he had taught them" so that they could evangelize and plant churches and ordain elders to pastor the new believers, teaching them the SAME truths Peter had received from Christ. Now that we have the Bible, all those teachings are there and a good pastor should have an intimate knowledge of them so that he can teach and disciple others. It's a different ball game now than when Peter lived. He was on the ground floor building the church up through the power of the Gospel along with the others. The "model" for the church is to use what God has provided for us, his sacred revelation recorded in Holy Scripture. Whatever the church teaches, whatever makes up the rule of our faith, is found in the Scriptures. I can't think of even one area that the Bible doesn't address in some way. Though their epistles were narrowly instructive, together they make up the rule of faith. God forgot nothing.
We have the word and the WORD of God. Praise HIS name!
There is the Word of God, the WORD who was with God and IS God and was made flesh - Jesus (John 1) and there is the word of God, which is the truths God has revealed to mankind.
Here is our fundamental difference... there is no separation between Jesus and the Word. HE IS THE WORD in all ways. There are many examples where Christ is speaking first-hand through the words written by men. Consider the fact that all of Jewish history is Jesus's history ("out of Egypt, I called my son... this was true of the Jews and it was also true of Christ following the death of Herod"). Here's a great example, though... on the Cross, Jesus cried out "My God, My God. Why have you abandoned me?" Most Protestants with whom I converse see this as proof that Jesus became our sins and God can't look on sin, so Jesus was alone. There is another way to see it. Jesus didn't have much breath available to Him. Every word He spoke required Him to pull Himself up by His nailed Hands and stand up on His nailed Feet... a physical requirement to speak. It was agonizing and, as close as He was to death, very difficult. This is why Christ said seven things from the Cross. One, seven is a holy sign of the Covenant with God but two, it was all He had left to give. Anyway, Jesus was teaching us even then on the Cross. From our perspective, He was celebrating the Holy Mass and this cry was His homily. It hearkens back to the Psalms and is the most unique opening of any passages of the Bible. Just as you and I could say, "Four score and seven years ago..." and know the rest of the quote by heart, so could the Jews do that with the Psalms. Read Psalm 22 with an eye toward Jesus speaking first-hand from the Cross. You can see it begins in tragedy but it ends in triumph. God did not abandon Jesus on the Cross. What God saw was an obedient Son doing His Holy Will.
The Apostles certainly had a special gift and power and they DID rely on the written word (the Old Testament) to bolster their preaching about Jesus being the promised Messiah.
Yes, just as the Church relies on Holy Scripture today. When the Gospel was spread, the Apostles told their listeners to search the Scriptures to see the truth of their message. What Scriptures? There wasn't a New Testament yet. They were instructing their listeners to see how Christ fulfilled all that was prophesied. The testimony of the Apostles was new. The Messiah had come. What He promised and what He fulfilled was known.
So let's talk about the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15). This council of the Apostles was called to deal with the issue of circumcision for the gentiles. There was a great disagreement among the Jews that if "salvation is from the Jews" the gentiles must be part of God's circumcision covenant with Abraham to participate. There was no consensus of thought between the Apostles. Acts records that there was a great discussion... until St Peter spoke. He didn't quote Scripture. He spoke by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit to build the Church with a doctrine not known until that time. It didn't contradict Scripture but there was no source for him to cite. He spoke from the authority given him as an Apostle and he was heard as the one who was given special grace to speak on behalf of all of the Apostles (Acts 1). This is how the Church still functions. Through careful prayer and reflection, it comes together to understand the instruction of the Holy Spirit promised to them by Christ to teach them all things. Not everything is included in Scripture... if it were, it would be so voluminous as to be unsearchable. Scripture records the story of our fall and redemption. The Church has had to fill in the "gaps" when confronted... as in the Council of Jerusalem.
After John died, new revelation ceased.
I know you don't see it but this statement says that since then we have been abandoned by the Holy Spirit. This is not so and would not fulfill Christ's promise to be with us always.
Why do some people forget about that verse? Would John have left out anything that would help us believe?
I don't leave anything out. That verse says exactly what I've been telling you... that only those things which help you see the identity and purpose of Christ were written. Certainly, as God Incarnate, EVERYTHING that Jesus did and touched was made holy. I know I would hang on every word which came out of His mouth. Over His 33 (or so) year life, and certainly during His three year ministry, more could be written than the short synopsis of the Gospels. If what we have in the Gospels is every word He ever spoke, He would have been better known as the silent prophet. He would have said very little for months on end!
Why do so many use this one verse to try to make the Bible say the church can decide anything is "tradition" and must be obeyed, when it's not even saying that?
The Church does not teach that anything is tradition. There are traditions (like the colors of the liturgical calendar, the placement of candles around the altar, the courtesies shown to bishops) and then there is Tradition (with a capital T). We observe the former because we have a common heritage. We observe the latter because it is the instruction given by Christ to the Apostles for understanding Scripture and the whole of revelation. Scripture is not contradicted by the Church, It is illuminated where It is not self-illuminating. If Scripture were self-illuminating, there would not be disagreement among believers on Its meaning!
Bodily assumption of Mary. Perpetual virginity. No other children for Mary and Joseph. Praying to departed saints. Purgatory. Indulgences. Sacrifice of the Mass. Not interested in carrying on a discussion on all these, just giving examples of things I think the Catholic Church invented outside of Scriptural warrant and in which they claim belief is mandatory to be saved.
I prefer to handle these one at a time... these posts are getting WAY too long! For a more comprehensive answer, I offer this post... some conversations repeat on this forum. If posts were editable, I would go back and amend a few things slightly (like point out that Elijah was bodily assumed in Heaven on a flaming chariot, for example) but I think it suffices. Feel free to click on my name below for more conversations I've linked for more understanding of the Catholic perspective.
This whole discussion comes down to a question of authority. Who had it? Who has it now? How is it exercised? During the lives of the Apostles, it's abundantly clear they had the ecclesial authority. By what other right could they define doctrine for the whole Church to follow (Acts 15)? Scripture is clear that someone must be in charge... from the time of Abraham over his tribe, to Moses over the nation of Israel, to the judges, to King David... someone had to be in charge to keep the people on the straight and narrow. Even among the Protestant denominations, it takes leadership and teaching authority to keep unity of faith.
So the Apostles had authority. Could their authority be conferred on others? What was the first thing they did after they lost one of their number (Judas)? They sought the inspiration of the Holy Spirit for filling his office (Acts 1). Again, the Church follows this model down to today. If it has authority to illuminate Scripture and teach what is not explicitly clear, then it has the authority to define doctrine (as St Peter and the Apostles did at the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15)
It's not a secret that the Catholic Church DID try to stifle the translation of the Bible into the languages of the people.
It's also not a secret that before the printing press Bibles were copied by hand... by Catholic monks in monasteries. Bibles were a precious scarcity and the copies were made that churches would have them to share... especially during Mass. Repeatedly, Scripture notes that faith comes by hearing the Word of God. Until Bibles were produced in quantity with the printing press, this hearing was done during Mass on Sundays. That's the reality for 75% of Church history! Rather than have the monks churn out Bibles in every language, the people were taught a common ecclesial language in Latin so that all could read the same Scripture and participate in the same liturgy. Therefore, Bibles were really only available to the learned of people and kept for safe-keeping by the Church and in the churches.
It's also no secret that, at certain times, reading the Bible was forbidden by non-clergy.
And you don't see any wisdom in that? Again, the Bible was only accessible in written form to the clergy and those others who understood the language. In an age of illiteracy, that was a small minority. Those who claimed wisdom outside of the Church and sought to twist the language of the Bible did so to their own destruction in accordance with 2 Peter 3:16. There is only Christian unity where there is unity of faith. That requires a teaching authority in the Church to explain what is mysterious and define what is hidden.
It is GOD who has preserved his word.
And it is God Who has preserved the Church to do His Will. This is a key piece... the Scripture can't DO God's Will. God's Word goes out and will accomplish its purpose... but its purpose isn't clothing the naked or feeding the hungry. That is the job of the Church. In that purpose, there must be shepherds to guide the faithful. God gave those to us in His Clergy.
Hmmm...what is it that separates those 22 (actually) other churches? Is there doctrinal unity with the Orthodox churches?
We are one in faith. However, there are variations in voice. For example, the Maronites are charged with keeping the Aramaic language alive in the liturgy. Each church is unique but we are united in communion of faith.
It's getting tiresome explaining that all these "Protestant" denominations - the ones that remain faithful to Scripture - ARE unified in the major tenets of the faith. In fact, on most of them there's not much air between what Protestants and Catholics believe on the major doctrines of the faith.
True. We do agree on a vast majority of the faith. I thank God for that.
It was those extra-Biblical doctrines that caused the Reformation and the split before that with the East.
This is ahistorical. Martin Luther was the catalyst and political power was the engine. German princedoms latched on to the major heresies of the day as a means to differentiate themselves from the Church and thereby inflame the religious furvor of their peoples in the accomplishment of political ambition. That is why Christianity made war on each other. NO WHERE are we admonished to make war on one another... whether Catholic or Protestant. As you said, we share 95% of a common faith. As a side note, though, the issues you cited above (except for indulgences) were not an issue for Martin Luther.
How do you classify the cafeteria Catholics? Count them out when you talk about your unity?
They count themselves out. This is a perspective which separates Catholic from Protestant and it goes back to the question of authority. If the Church is Christ's and the Magisterium is guided by the Holy Spirit, then its edicts must be followed. To put aside parts of the faith with which you disagree is to not be in communion with the Church. There is unity for those who remain in communion. Those who do not are not really Catholic. We don't seek a Church which agrees with our Will, we are to conform our wills with Christ through the ministrations of His Bride.
The Holy Spirit is within each and every believer and was promised by Jesus to lead us into all truth.
The Holy Spirit is a person with a Will. He was promised to the Church through the Apostles but has certainly operated outside of that to those open to Him.
He illuminates God's truths to our hearts.
And yet there is no unity of faith to those who trust solely in private revelation. You would certainly expect that one Spirit, speaking with one voice, would give a consistent message. However, the message from the Protestant denominations is anything but consistent. See here on this very thread the disagreements among Protestant brethren who supposedly follow the same Spirit and truth! Private revelation has occurred and has been tested by the Church and it has enriched the Church. There are many, though, who exemplify 2 Peter 3:16.
The leaders within the churches (local churches) have the gift of the Holy Spirit to BE preachers and evangelists and teachers...to the edification of the members of their church.
And what man or body of men certifies the Spirit in these pastors who disagree with each other? Jesse Jackson is a reverend... just sayin'...
It's a different ball game now than when Peter lived.
Wrong! It's the exact same ballgame. That's why the Bible remains relevant to us today... we are still the same and still in need of the same Grace. God gave us the Church with the Spirit passed in succession through its ministers to continue the saving work of Christ.
The "model" for the church is to use what God has provided for us, his sacred revelation recorded in Holy Scripture.
And yet Scripture lifts up the Church as the pillar of the Truth and the one to settle discipline on its members. You still haven't dealt with 1 Tim 3:15.
I can't think of even one area that the Bible doesn't address in some way.
It didn't deal with the proper method of welcoming the gentiles in the age of the Church. St Peter and the Apostles had to discern the answer to this question through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit not in scrutiny of Scripture. Along the way, there have been many more... but you reject these because you can't find them explicitly written in Scripture. That is the circular logic you apply to the Church.
We have the word and the WORD of God. Praise HIS name!
And we have only the Word of God. His Name be praised indeed!