Just kidding. I love you, Grandma. I’ll try not to let such a long lapse happen again.

Thanks, you point out some important Scriptures on knowledge being accessible and attainable. The Bible uses language like “so that you may know,” and “know for certain”, etc.

Now, “infallible” isn’t a word that’s used in those Biblical promises, and it’s not clear to me that it’s quite the right word to use to sum up what the Bible does teach on the matter. It not clear to me that it’s ever accurate to say that something in me, or my knowledge, has become infallible. Jesus was infallible, the Scriptures are infallible, the apostles and prophets were infallible (I think), but my own knowledge or understanding of those sources is always subject to correction. I haven’t found any Biblical promises that lead me to believe that anything in my head ever passes the point of being (in principle) correctable by Scripture. And if that’s the case, I don’t see how I can use the word “infallible” about anything in me. “True”, or “correct”, or “without error”–but not “infallible”. (I talked about this distinction a bit over in an extension of the same discussion, when I was asked if the Christology of the council of Chalcedon was “infallible”.)

Undoubtedly John was reflecting on: “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.” In both cases you is in the plural indicating that it is not a gift that is restricted to an elite few, but is given to all.

The whole argument becomes superfluous and contradictory: “But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brothers.” Simply, this indicates that exclusivity of truth is not the property of the few but as John says because the anointing abides in each of us, each stands on equal footing authoritatively as if we were all teachers. That does not mean that contradictory truths can be mutually held. What it does mean is that infallible truth can be held by each one for the mutual benefit of all.

If indeed we are all brothers and eventhough the teaching authority is give to the ecclesia, Scripture clearly teaches us directly under the tuteledge of the Holy Spirit even if illuminated by teachers.

Do they just not read for themselves? Jesus has removed all barriers. We no longer sit under the instruction of prophets who interceded for God. There is no longer any priesthood save that of the One who dwells in us by the Spirit.

I was thinking, “You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.” That is an infallible piece of truth knowledge, immovable, needing no interpretation. Paul said simply, “What do you have that you did not receive?” And admonishes us not to go beyond what is written. How is it that we have certain infallible knowledge, individually? Paul’s point is that what we have received we have received and it does not move, it is a rock, a sure foundation that no other can lay. Now why all that assurance of access to infallible knowledge if indeed it did not exist, nor was available to the individual individually directly as a promise of both freedom and assurance that that freedom shall never be lost?

Are we exaustively infallible, no. Are we particularly, individually so, yes. In fact, what Jesus said cannot be refuted nor diminished, “You shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free.” What this means is that we are not beholden to any other man. The gift of salvation is not put into the trust of others to be sure for us. Quite the contrary, the very meaning of faith is what we know without shadow of turning. The trust has been placed in us individually, a free gift. What the RC does is to steal that gift, deprive the assurance individually of salvation by making the Church the trustee. But Scripture says that we have a reward, being fully and most highly blessed, seated already with Christ in heaven where nothing, not even the thief can break in and steal. We have received an inheritance that can never be taken away, that makes the enemy even more jealous and angry.