Replies

Show us why the Scripture that the Holy Spirit inspired is not adequate, that God did not do a good enough job the first time around. That would be called a "mischaracterization" of what I said, I think. Back up.

Do I believe that the Holy Spirit inspired all the Sacred Scriptures? Absolutely.

Do I think that they are adequate? Again: don't be vague... adequate for WHAT, exactly? I'm not trying to be annoying, here; since we're coming from two very different worldviews, it's sometimes necessary to be exacting (to the point of being pedantic) about definitions, so that we don't just talk (or yell, unfortunately) past each other, pointlessly.

For my part, I think that the Sacred Scriptures are certainly adequate for their purpose: supplying the entirely of the WRITTEN WORD of God, useful for correction, teaching, etc. (see 2 Tim 3), sharper than a two-edged sword, etc. It's just that I, along with the Bible, don't believe that the Bible was ever meant to be used ALONE, as the SOLE authority for salvation matters.

The "God didn't do a good enough job the first time around" is just straw-man-laden fluff, with all due respect... unless you can find a quote from me which says that?

What do we need to know for salvation and maturity in Christ that is NOT found in Scripture?

At least two answers, to that:

1) Do you mean ALL of Scripture, or just the truncated, 66-book, expurgated version which you use?

2) We need to know the CONTENTS of Scripture, for one thing. (You're missing 7 books, and parts of at least 2 other books.) We also need to know how to INTERPRET Scripture rightly (and not just according to our personal tastes). We also need to know HOW to apply the Scriptures, especially to aspects of life which the Scriptures don't cover in particular (e.g. human cloning, contraception, etc.).

Does that clarify? I'd really appreciate it if anti-Catholic-Church people would stop parroting the same old, tired canards which have nothing at all to do with what I wrote or believe (e.g. "you think the Holy Spirit didn't do a good job with Scripture!", "you don't value the Scriptures!", "you worship Mary and statues!", "you think we shouldn't use Scripture!", "you think you can earn your way to Heaven with works", etc.). It's really tedious, and all wrong.

It's...all wrong.

Based on the missing 7 books and parts of 2 others? What is it about the portions the Holy Bible you say are missing that make those non-RCC Christians posting here "wrong"?

Why should one reading this thread believe your characterizations of non-RCC FR posters over their own or another's? Are you a compensated official of the RCC?

BTW, Non-catholic is not necessarily the same as anti-RCC. But it could turn that way...again. May have to storm the gates...again.

Do I think that they are adequate? Again: don't be vague... adequate for WHAT, exactly? I'm not trying to be annoying, here; since we're coming from two very different worldviews, it's sometimes necessary to be exacting (to the point of being pedantic) about definitions, so that we don't just talk (or yell, unfortunately) past each other, pointlessly.

What you are calling *vague* is Scripture. I gave that answer.

It's in 2 Timothy, right here.

2 Timothy 3:14-17 But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.