For some, the Bible is associated with Protestantism and particularly with evangelicals. Many mainstream Protestants have lost faith in the Bible. It’s seen as a mishmash of legends. Evangelicals, by contrast, see it all as inspired by the Holy Spirit, even down to the very words. In my experience as a Catholic, the Bible always formed part of my upbringing, particularly in primary school. In secondary school, the emphasis was more on moral and ethical issues, but I do remember being asked to buy Good News for Modern Man, which was a modern translation of the New Testament. We used to enjoy watching films based on Bible stories, such as The Ten Commandments. In Mass, though I took very little of it in, there were readings from various parts of the Bible. I remember the phrase “This is the Epistle of Paul the Apostle.” 😀.
However, I don’t remember personal study of Scripture being emphasized. People who were big into religion tended to focus on Mary and the various stories of her apparitions. There were public-spirited Catholics involved in the community and voluntary associations, but they weren’t necessarily very religious. Then, there was the charismatic movement. For me, it seemed a little bit superficial. I associated it with folk masses and trying to make religion trendy.
Then there were the religious sects or cults, who did tend to quote the Bible. That was all a bit weird. But I did have more respect for evangelicals, when I started meeting them. I saw them as part of historic Christianity, yet people who loved God’s word. Because I liked the Bible, I was interested in what they had to say. But many Catholics were a bit sceptical. It was often said that you can prove anything from the Bible. Better to trust the clergy and the church, who had centuries of experience. That is a fair point, but it is possible to drift from your foundations.
For example, socialists, who are trying to be true to socialist principles will often criticize the Labour party for drifting from its roots. Maybe modern Labour party members might argue that they agree with the broad principles of equality that Karl Marx aspired to, but they don’t take Marx’s works as gospel truth. But can we have a similar attitude to the Bible? No! Surely, we need to examine ourselves at an individual level and at a church and denominational level and determine if we are following the guidance and example of the New Testament.
You can see this in the life of Jesus. He frequently referred to the Scriptures. He clearly believed that the clergy of his day had drifted from them. Here are examples:
When the devil tempted him, he replied using the Scriptures:
Matt 4:4
Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.’
In his arguments with the Pharisees, he accused them of not knowing the Scriptures:
Mark 18:24
Jesus replied, “Are you not in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God?
In the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, the main message is that the rich man’s brothers should read and apply the Scriptures.
Luke 16:31
He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’
After he rose from the dead, he walked his disciples through the Old Testament and all it said about him, which shows that he didn’t see it as a book of legends, as some do today:
Luke 24:27
And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself.
As well as the Old Testament, we can see that Jesus anticipated the New Testament. How else would we have an authoritative account of Jesus and the early church? The Holy Spirit guided the disciples to write the New Testament. He also gives us an appetite to read and apply it.
John 16:13
But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth.
Jewish people who were introduced to the gospel were praised because they examined what they heard in the light of the Scripture. Surely, we should test what we hear, just as they did:
Acts 17:11
Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.
Paul writes to Timothy, delighting in the fact that he was brought up to know the Scriptures. He also reminds him that it is inspired by God:
2 Tim 3:14-17
But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it, and how from infancy you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
Peter makes references to Paul’s writings. He clearly implies that Paul’s work is part of Scripture:
2 Peter 3:16
He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.
A
s Peter says, people can misunderstand the Scripture. And they can distort it. As the saying goes, “a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.” But that doesn’t mean that we should avoid reading it and just trust the “experts”, be it Catholics, Protestants, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, Muslims, evangelicals or whoever. A little knowledge might be dangerous, but the answer isn’t no knowledge, it’s greater knowledge. To more fully quote Alexander Pope: “A little learning is a dangerous thing; Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring.”
In modern times, the Catholic church does encourage the reading of Scripture, particularly after Vatican II. But the church sees Scripture as one of two sources of authority, the other being tradition. So Catholics must accept what the church defines as tradition, even if it might seem to contradict Scripture or refer to doctrines that have no basis in Scripture. An example is the assumption of Mary:
“we pronounce, declare, and define it to be a divinely revealed dogma: that the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory.
45. Hence if anyone, which God forbid, should dare willfully to deny or to call into doubt that which we have defined, let him know that he has fallen away completely from the divine and Catholic Faith.”
There is nothing to stop God from assuming anyone, body and soul into heaven, but there is no scriptural evidence for the assumption of Mary. It’s a legend that dates back to the early Christian centuries. It seems strange to me that many modern Catholics are very happy to throw doubt on Bible stories, especially Old Testament ones, but still cling to doctrines based on legends and stories of apparitions etc. written after the New Testament.
Having said all that, there is a place for church teachings and traditions in any denomination. If you read an evangelical theology book, such as Wayne Grudem’s Systematic Theology, he will mention early church fathers and people like Augustine and Thomas Aquinas. And denominations and local churches will have their statements of faith, where they indicate their understanding of the Christian faith. But an individual Christian should be free to scrutinize all this in the light of Scripture. What’s the sense in putting all your trust in others? Even the Catholic church won’t necessarily agree with every statement made by great historic church figures.
Perhaps, because there has been so much debate over issues over the centuries, sometimes resulting in bloodshed, it makes sense for the Catholic church, to decide on issues and impose this on their church. We do this sort of thing in evangelical churches. For example, nowadays you might find a few evangelical theologians who believe that hell might not be everlasting or that ultimately everyone will end up in heaven. Most evangelical churches will respond by saying that the New Testament clearly teaches that hell is everlasting, and there is no pathway out of it, so though you are welcome to attend our church meetings, you cannot be a member if you hold to such a teaching. If people invest their time and money into a church on the basis that it’s evangelical, should it be allowed to drift away and end up like the liberal Protestant churches? Finding ways ’round anything in the Bible that we find unpalatable? Such a safeguard is a church ruling. A person might disagree. But in practical terms, sometimes it just makes sense to outline how we understand Scripture. The crucial difference here is that the decision is taken on the basis of Scripture. We don’t believe it just because it was believed by great theologians in the past, or because someone claimed that some angel or saint appeared and introduced it.
To be fair to the Catholic church, you can understand that at one time, Scripture wasn’t very accessible to common people or even to church leaders. If you lived in 150 AD, some New Testament books might have been in circulation in your area, but you might not have been able to easily find them, and you might not have been able to read. You were heavily reliant on Christian teachers. And then, because there were heretical teachers around, you needed to make sure that your teachers were connected in some way with the apostles. Then, the churches needed to agree which books constituted the New Testament. So individuals did need to place much more trust in church leaders and tradition, and they weren’t really in much of a position to think for themselves. Of course, none of this need have stopped them from committing their lives to Christ at a personal level, which is the core message of the gospel, and of evangelicals.
But jump forward to our current age. Now there is an abundance of resources available. We have 2,000 years of church history. We can examine all the mistakes, all the debates etc. Most of all, we have the Word of God in an accessible format. We test everything by that standard. We can, and should, choose our beliefs on the basis of Scripture.
Hibernia Gospel 