Point Two: The Bible alone was never Christ’s intention, and is, in fact, unbiblical.
The Bible never states it is to be used alone, anywhere. John indicates that the Bible does not contain all that Christ taught stating, “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) Do you suppose that there were things Jesus said and did that were not relevant to our lives? Certainly, not. Jesus, himself, never committed one word to paper.
Further, in 2 Thessalonians, Paul says “So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.” The mere brevity of the Gospels ought to be considerable proof that this cannot be all that the apostles knew of the faith. But, “tradition!” you exclaim! We are to leave ‘the traditions of men.’ Precisely this is the point! Is an article of faith that the apostles passed on, which was given to them by Christ, a tradition of men? Or was it a different sort of tradition, one to which we should ‘stand firm and hold to’ as Paul tells us in the Bible.
One interesting point and something of a tangent, is about this passage in 2 Timothy right before the 3:16, a passage often cited as proof of Sola Scriptura.
“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 instruct you for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.” This passage cannot and does not refer to the New Testament, as when Timothy was a child, the Bible and, especially the letters to Timothy, did not exist. Does this mean that Christians should only be using the Old Testament? That would be what you would have to infer if you subscribe to ‘Bible Alone.’
Consider, also, that using the Bible as the lone authority is completely unworkable, logically.
Let us say you and I read the same passage. I say it says yes to an action. You say it says no. Who is right? Is it, then, right for me, and not for you? If the truth is objective, this cannot be. Another example, I say, ‘I have done the math, and I believe 2+2=4.’ Another says, “I have done the math, and I believe 2+2=5.” The protestant position is to say that you have reflected and come to your own truth. Your truth is ‘5.’ The Catholic position would be that while we would tell someone they may feel 2+2=5, this is not objective truth which is knowable. Are we mean and hateful for saying this? Are we a bigot for accepting it, or informing someone 4 is not 5?
You might say, “There is no objective truth!” There is an objective truth. The equation 2+2 will not ever equal 5. The statement ‘There is no objective truth,’ would be an objective truth, and, thus, disproves itself. So we return to the fact that this is unworkable. There are Truths which are knowable, and Christ willed we not disagree, shown in the coming passage. Thus, He instituted a system via Peter for preventing fracture and disunity.
Jesus, Himself, anticipated the ways of men and division. We need only see these two passages above, to know that He knew there would be disagreement, and He did not want any. He wanted one church. “I appeal to you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree and that there be no dissensions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgement.” (1 Corinthians 1:10)
Does this sound like Jesus planned for everyone to have their own truth and way and worshiping making their own rules? Thank heavens, no! That would be chaotic, and, as we have seen, resulted in 40,000+ different churches all claiming the ‘truth.’ It would seem this was not the plan, as Paul furthers in 2 Timothy, “For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own liking, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander into myths.” (2 Timothy 4:3-4)
Having said all of this, the Church sometimes reveals some difficult truths. They can be tough to swallow. This doesn’t make them less true. For example, perhaps the church studied the facts and found you are validly married and cannot have a decree of nullity allowing you to remarry because Christ was clear on the permanence of marriage. This happened to one man who wanted to marry his mistress. He founded a new church, and married 6 or so women, total. You know him as King Henry VIII. We call them Episcopalians.
I don’t know about you, but this sounds like Christ’s plan to me, guys! #sarcasm Virtually, every protestant church has a similar story of pride or empathy for someone who could not adhere to the Truth. This leads/lead to the belief someone (or a group of people depending on which denomination about which we are talking) knew better than the magisterium of the Catholic Church, so they founded their own which totally contains the REAL truth. Duh.
Jesus knew we were prideful and arrogant beings. We want to create our own god who accepts us doing whatever we like, a god who has us worship as we please, be with whoever we please, whenever we please, if we please. This is the myth spoken about in Timothy, you can be certain. This is a god created in man’s image, an idol.
Ask yourself, again. Truly, if you find what I am saying to be true, will you have the humility to follow the Truth?
And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” Mt 16:17-19
“If you forgive the sins of any; they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.” John 20:23