“But that’s not in the Bible!”

As a Catholic, I often hear  from Protestants the exclamation of “But that’s not in the Bible!” during our discussion of Catholic doctrine and practice. Now, while I think that Catholicism can be more than adequately defended from the Bible, during these conversations I always feel that it’s necessary to point out some general issues with this objection. In today’s post I would like to outline the three main problems that can be highlighted…

Problems

Here are the problems in saying to a Catholic “But that’s not in the Bible!”…

1. Whose Bible?
Before we can say whether or not something can be found in the Bible, we have to be specific about the books found in the Bible. This is because there are some doctrines which are explicitly present in Catholic Bibles which are not present elsewhere. This is because Protestants typically reject the seven deuterocanonical books, thus reducing the canon from 73 books to 66 books.

A good example of a belief and practice explicitly found in Catholic Bibles is praying for the dead which is found in the books of Maccabees. However, since Protestants don’t have First and Second Maccabees in their canon, they don’t have an explicit Biblical example of praying for the dead.

2. But I don’t believe in Sola Scripture!
The statement “But that’s not in the Bible!” assumes that if something can’t be found within the pages of the Bible, then it must be automatically rejected. The questioner is assuming that I hold the doctrine of Sola Scriptura, but that is a belief rejected by Catholics (as well as all Christians prior to the Reformation in the 16th Century).

Since Catholics don’t hold to Sola Scriptura, the consequences of not being able to locate explicitly something in the Bible are not the same as they would be for a “Bible Alone” Protestant. Of course, this begs the question as to whether or not the Bible even teaches Sola Scriptura…

3. Some interpretation required
When someone claims that something is “not in the Bible”, what they typically really mean is that they don’t find something spelt out explicitly in the Bible. This clarification needs to be articulated and highlighted when someone claims that something is “unbiblical”.

There are many Catholic doctrines which may be seen in Scripture, even if they’re not explicitly articulated. Consider, for example, consider this passage from Matthew’s Gospel:

“…And whoever says a word against the Son of man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.”  – Matthew 12:32

At no point does this passage use the word “Purgatory”. However, the above quotation speaks of a subsequent age in which sins are purged. What might this be? It can’t be Heaven because there is no need of forgiveness there. It can’t be Hell since there’s no hope of redemption for the damned. Since it can’t be referring to either of those two choices, there must be a third option. Now, granted, this passage doesn’t fully articulate the complete doctrine of Purgatory, but it does point to it and it does describe a reality which is perfectly compatible with Catholic teaching in this area. The point is that although Purgatory isn’t explicitly taught, it is subtly found within the pages of Sacred Scripture.

In response to this explanation, I’ve sometimes been told that I’ve got a false standard. I have been told that, in order for us to believe a doctrine, the Bible must teach that doctrine “clearly”. I typically respond to this assertion by testing to see whether this standard is applied consistently by the person with whom I’m speaking:

1. The Trinity
The Trinity is a doctrine held by all orthodox Christians. It teaches that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are consubstantial, each three persons of the one God. However, not only will you not find the word “Trinity” in the Bible, you won’t find God described in terms of “Persons” or “Substance”.

Holy Father, keep them in thy name, which thou hast given me, that they may be one, even as we are one. – John 17:11

Please note, I am not saying that the doctrine of the Trinity can’t be found in Scripture, simply that it’s just not clearly spelt out. We believe that God is Trinity because the doctrine articulates in technical theological terms the reality of what we find described in Scripture concerning the Father, Son and Spirit.

Given this, will your interlocutor concede that doctrines don’t always have to be explicitly spelled-out in Scripture?

2. Jesus’ Claims to Divinity
Oftentimes I encounter Muslims who object to Christianity saying that “Jesus never said ‘I am God. Worship me’!”. It is true that He never said those specific words. However, no Christian would find this a convincing argument because Jesus made many claims to divinity in the text of the Gospels, just not in those explicit terms.

Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.” – John 8:58

The Lord’s divine claims can certainly be found in the Gospel texts…when they are interpreted properly in context.

Given this, will your interlocutor concede that doctrines can be seen in Scripture as long as the text is correctly interpreted?

3. The Lord’s Day
Aside from the Seventh Day Adventists and a few tiny denominations, virtually every Christian church gathers for worship on Sunday. The question is…where’s that in the Bible?

Therefore the people of Israel shall keep the sabbath, observing the sabbath throughout their generations, as a perpetual covenant.  – Exodus 31:16

If it’s not found explicitly in the Bible, why does your Protestant friend’s church congregate on Sundays rather than Saturdays? Where is the explicit Biblical testimony?

So, in summary, it’s problematic to say to a Catholic “But that’s not in the Bible!” because Catholics and Protestants don’t have the same Bible, Catholics don’t believe in Sola Scriptura and also there are common doctrines which all Christians hold which are not explicitly laid out in Scripture.

The purpose of these objections is to get the person with whom I am speaking to think about his presuppositions, as well as examine the consistency of his theology. In my experience, this redirects the conversation towards the doctrine of Sola Scriptura and raises the question as to who has the final interpretation of the Scriptures. I’ve typically found this to be a much more productive way of proceeding with the conversation, rather than dealing with every single Catholic doctrine one by one: prayers for the dead, Purgatory, Immaculate Conception, …