You obviously didnt read catholic123's posts (#99 and #100) did you? That will answer your question about how are the saints living and active members of the body of Christ. And as for you second point, im sorry but that my friends is a horrible line of reasoning. Now you are saying that everything God ever wants us to know is in the Bible! Hmmm.....lets think about it. So all of our knowledge of science and necessary life skills are contained in the Bible? So I need to forget how to microwave my food and drive a car because these arent in the Bible? Or how about sola scriptora? Where is that in the Bible?
His Word is absolutely sufficient in itself (Psalm 119:160)
The Biblical message breathed out by God is revelation in written form. (2 Timothy 3:15-16)
The Biblical claim is that what God has inspired was His written word (2 Peter 1:20-21)
When the Lord Jesus Christ said, “the Scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35)
The Holy Spirit continually proclaims that the revelation from God is truth, as for example (Psalm 119:142), “thy law is truth.” There is no source other than Scripture alone to which such a statement applies. That source alone, the Holy Scripture, is the believer’s standard of truth.
People often attempt to give human traditions higher authority than God’s Word. The Scripture records the Lord saying, “Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God” (Matthew 22:29)
Jesus continually castigated and rebuked the Pharisees because they made their traditions on a par with the Word of God—corrupting the very basis of truth by equating their traditions with God’s Word. So He declared to them in (Mark 7:13): "making the word of God of no effect through your tradition which you have handed down. And many such things you do" - Since Scripture alone is inspired, it alone is the ultimate authority, and it alone is the final judge of Tradition.
The Word of the Lord says as a commandment in (Proverbs 30:5-6): "Every word of God is pure; He is a shield to those who put their trust in Him. Do not add to His words, Lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar" - God commands that we are not to add to His Word: this command shows emphatically that it is God’s Word alone that is pure and uncontaminated.
The Lord’s strong, clear declaration in (Isaiah 8:20) is: "To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them" - The truth is this: since God’s written word alone is inspired, it and it alone is the sole rule of faith. It cannot be otherwise.
Psalm 36:9 explains: "For with You is the fountain of life; In Your light we see light" - God’s truth is seen in the light of God’s truth. Apostle Paul said the same thing, "These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual" - It is precisely in the light which God’s truth sheds, that His truth is seen. (John 3:18-21, 2 Corinthians 4:3-7).
The Apostle Peter, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, declares, (2 Peter 1:20-21): "knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit" - Logically then, Peter makes it very clear that in order to maintain the purity of Holy God’s written word, the source of interpretation must be from the same pure source as the origin of the Scripture itself.
Scripture can only be understood correctly in the light of Scripture, since it alone is uncorrupted. It is only with the Holy Spirit’s light that Scripture can be comprehended correctly. The Holy Spirit causes those who are the Lord’s to understand Scripture (John 14:16-17, 26). Since the Spirit does this by Scripture, obviously, it is in accord with the principle that Scripture itself is the infallible rule of interpretation of its own truth - "it is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is truth" (1 John 5:6)
The Lord’s command to believe what is written has always been something that the believers could obey and did obey. In this matter we must have the humility commanded in the Scripture not to think above what is written: "that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another” (1 Cor 4:6)
The Lord himself looked to the authority of the Scriptures alone, as did His apostles after Him. They confirmed the very message of the Old Testament. "The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul; The testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple" (Psalm 19:7) - The believer is to be true to the way of the Lord, holding alone to what is written: “Thy Word is truth.”
John 17:17 - “Thy word is truth.”
Psalm 119:160 - “Thy word is true from the beginning.”
Titus 1:2 - “God who cannot lie.”
The method of the New Testament authors (and Jesus as well) when dealing with spiritual truth was to appeal to the Scriptures as the final rule of authority. Take the temptation of Christ in Matthew 4 as an example. The Devil tempted Jesus, yet Jesus used the authority of scripture, not tradition, nor even His own divine power, as the source of authority and refutation. To Jesus, the Scriptures were enough and sufficient. If there is any place in the New Testament where the idea of extra-biblical revelation or tradition could have been used, Jesus' temptation would have been a great place to present it. But Jesus does no such thing. His practice was to appeal to scripture. Should we do any less having seen his inspired and perfect example?
The New Testament writers constantly appealed to the scriptures as their base of authority in declaring what was and was not true biblical teaching:
Matt 21:42;
John 2:22;
1 Cor 15:3-4;
1 Peter 1:10-12;
2:2;
2 Peter 1:17-19, etc.
Acts 17:11 says,
"These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so." Paul commends those who examined God's Word for the test of truth. He did not commend them for appealing to tradition. Therefore, we can see that the method used by Jesus and the apostles for determining spiritual truth was to appeal to scripture, not tradition. In fact, it is the scriptures that refute the traditions of men in many instances.
It is not required of Scripture to have a statement to the effect, "The Bible alone is to be used for all spiritual truth," in order for sola scriptura to be true. Many doctrines in the Bible are not clearly stated, yet they are believed and taught by the church. For example, there is no statement in the Bible that says there is a Trinity, or that Jesus has two natures (God and man), or that the Holy Spirit is the third person in the Godhead. Yet, each of the statements is considered true doctrine within Christianity, being derived from biblical references. So, for the Catholic to require the Protestant to supply chapter and verse to prove Sola Scriptura is valid, is not necessarily consistent with biblical exegetical principles, of which they themselves approve when examining such doctrines as the Trinity, the hypostatic union, etc.
If Sacred Tradition were really inerrant as it is said to be, then it would be equal with the Bible. But, God's word does not say that Sacred Tradition is inerrant or inspired as it does say about itself (
2 Tim 3:16). Merely to claim that Sacred Tradition is equal and in agreement with the Bible does not make it so. Furthermore, to assert that Sacred Tradition is equal to Scripture effectively leaves the canon wide open to doctrinal addition. Since the traditions of men change, then to use tradition as a determiner of spiritual truth would mean that over time new doctrines that are not in the Bible would be added and that is exactly what has happened in Catholicism with doctrines such as purgatory, praying to Mary, indulgences, etc. Furthermore, if they can use Sacred Tradition as a source for doctrines not explicit in the Bible, then why would the Mormons then be wrong for having additional revelation as well?
If the Bible is not used to verify and test Sacred Tradition, then Sacred Tradition is functionally independent of the Word of God. If it is independent of Scripture, then by what right does it have to exist as an authoritative spiritual source equivalent to the Bible? How do we know what is and is not true in Sacred Tradition if there is no inspired guide by which to judge it? If the Roman Catholic says that the inspired guide is the Roman Catholic Church, then it is committing the fallacy of circular reasoning. In other words, it is saying that the Roman Catholic Church is inspired because the Roman Catholic Church is inspired.
Sacred Tradition is invalidated automatically if it contradicts the Bible, and it does. Of course, the Catholic will say that it does not. But, Catholic teachings such as purgatory, penance, indulgences, praying to Mary, etc., are not in the Bible. A natural reading of God's Word does not lend itself to such beliefs and practices. Instead, the Catholic Church has used Sacred Tradition to add to God's revealed word and then extracted out of the Bible whatever verses that might be construed to support their doctrines of Sacred Tradition.
Nevertheless, the Catholic will state that both the Bible and Sacred tradition are equal in authority and inspiration and to put one above another is a false comparison. But, by what authority does the Catholic church say this? Is it because it claims to be the true church, descended from the original apostles? So? Making such claims doesn't mean they are true. Besides, even if it were true, and CARM does not grant that it is, there is no guarantee that the succession of church leaders is immune to error. We saw it creep in with Peter, and Paul rebuked him for it in
Gal 2. Are the Catholic church leaders better than Peter?
To continue, is it from tradition that the Catholic Church authenticates its Sacred Tradition? If so, then there is no check upon it. Is it from quotes of some of the church Fathers who say to follow Tradition? If so, then the church fathers are given the place of authority comparable to scripture. Is it from the Bible? If so, then Sacred Tradition holds a lesser position than the Bible because the Bible is used as the authority in validating Tradition. Is it because the Catholic Church claims to be the means by which God communicates His truth? Then, the Catholic Church has placed itself above the Scriptures.
One of the mistakes made by the Catholics is to assume that the Bible is derived from Sacred Tradition. This is false. The Church simply recognized the inspired writings of the Bible. They were in and of themselves authoritative. Various "traditions" in the Church served only to recognize what was from God. Also, to say the Bible is derived from Sacred Tradition is to make the Bible lesser than the Tradition, as is stated in Hebrew 7:7
that the lesser is blessed by the greater, but this cannot be since Catholicism appeals to the Bible to authenticate its tradition.
CONCLUSION
Since the Bible is the final authority, we should look to it as the final authenticating and inerrant source of all spiritual truth. If it says Sacred Tradition is valid, fine. But if it doesn't, then I will trust the Bible alone. Since the Bible does not approve of the Catholic Church's Sacred Tradition, along with its inventions of prayer to Mary, prayer to the saints, indulgences, penance, purgatory, etc., then neither should Christians.
