Can we agree that the Holy Spirit has done things in the last 2,000 years which are not written in the Bible? This is a question I was recently asked by a Roman Catholic who contended that, while the Bible doesn't support Mary's role as Mediatrix, nor does it permit us to pray to her, perhaps it does not need to. Maybe the Holy Spirit guided His Church towards the Mariology of the Roman Catholic Church.
After thanking me for a thorough reply, he announced that he no longer wished to discuss the topic with me. But I feel it is an interesting, and important topic to discuss. After all, the Roman Catholic Church does not hold to the doctrine of Sola Scriptura, and does claim the Holy Spirit is continuously guiding the Church into new truths. So, is it possible God has guided the Roman Catholic Church into their many many extra-Biblical doctrines?
First, to answer the original question, I will absolutely affirm that God has indeed been active for the past 2,000 years. As Scripture says, "Unless the Lord builds the house, They labor in vain who build it; Unless the Lord guards the city, The watchman stays awake in vain." (Psalm 127:1). Well, there have been a great many houses built over the centuries, and many cities have been guarded by many watchmen. In fact, because I believe in the absolute sovereignty of God, I do not believe a single historical event, good or bad, has occurred without His guiding hand.
Here's where I suspect my answer immediately threw the Catholic: I said I believed God sent Reformers against the Roman Catholic Church. This, I even backed up with an interesting event that happened during the Reformation. As he was being murdered by the Roman Catholic Church, John Huss (1372 A.D. - 1415 A.D.), whose surname literally means "goose", foretold that “You are going to burn a goose, but in one hundred years you will have a swan which you can neither roast nor boil.” (1). 100 years later, Martin Luther was assigned to teach the book of Romans at the new university in Wittenberg, Germany, during which time he discovered that the works-based Gospel of the Roman Catholic Church could not possibly be true. He would, of course, go on to become both a Christian and a Reformer, and while the Roman Catholic Church certainly tried to murder him, he instead ignited a Reformation from which the Roman Catholic Church will never recover.
This, I believe, is one of God's greater extra-Biblical deeds, but as far as this conversation goes, it does lead to a bit of a stalemate. If you toss Scripture aside, the Roman Catholic can suggest God reveals extra-Biblical doctrines to the Roman Catholic Church, I can claim God causes Reformations, and neither of us can really prove anything either way. I will of course contend that Huss' prophecy of Martin Luther is significantly more impressive than the Marian dogmas, but this is an issue that can only really be solved by Scripture.
But when have I ever been willing to toss Scripture aside? I continued to cite Amos 3:7-8, which says "Surely the Lord God does nothing, Unless He reveals His secret to His servants the prophets. A lion has roared! Who will not fear? The Lord God has spoken! Who can but prophesy?" Because of his status as a "minor" prophet (which refers to the length of his book, not the authority of the revelations he received), many casual Bible students tend to ignore Amos, if they even know he exists. However, his book is as important as any other Scripture, and this particular verse tells us something important about God, and in a way that literally cannot be restated in a clearer way: God does nothing unless He reveals His secret to the prophets.
Of course, there is only so far you can take this statement. It's not as if there is some super Bible out there from which you can learn next week's lottery numbers, nor is there some divinely inspired weather channel that won't get you caught in the rain. But it's never enough to just say "this isn't what the verse means". Unless one believes God just randomly smashes His hand against a keyboard and sends whatever gobbledegook comes up out as a revelation, one must assume there is a meaning to this verse.
In this case, it's unbelievably simple. God isn't going to do anything of major theological significance without sending warning ahead. We see this consistently throughout the Old Testament. Many New Testament events, from the minor to the major, are all foretold in the Old Testament. The New Testament even frequently cites the Old Testament as prophetic foundation for itself.
Even more amazing is how useful this verse is for demonstrating the authenticity of Christ and the New Testament to Jews. The destruction of Zerubbabel's temple is of major theological significance, so much so that it both changed the Jewish religion as a whole, and ultimately made it impossible to fulfil Haggai's prophecy that "‘The glory of this latter temple shall be greater than the former,’ says the Lord of hosts. ‘And in this place I will give peace,’ says the Lord of hosts.”" (Haggai 2:9).
Because the Old Testament gave no hint that Zerubbabel's temple would be destroyed, and indeed hinted that it would stick around until a... "certain event"... took place, the Jews were not expecting it to be destroyed. However, it obviously was. Yet God sent no prophet to tell them. That is, unless Jesus really was a prophet (Matthew 11:9; Luke 7:26), and He not only fulfilled Haggai's prophecy, but also foretold of the destruction of the temple (Matthew 24:2; Mark 13:2; Luke 21:6). Taking Amos 3:7 in context is a fantastic way to witness to our Jewish brethren, and hopefully bring many of them into the fold.
But doing so also affects the Roman Catholic religion, simply because the Roman Catholic religion would require God to have not only done a vast array of things He never told any prophet, but also a number of things that explicitly contradict what He did tell His prophets. See, it's one thing to say God hasn't been in stasis for the past 2,000 years. As I said, I believe God guided the Reformation, possibly including giving John Huss a prophecy of Martin Luther. The main difference here is the Reformation wasn't an addition of anything new, but rather, it was a call to return to the old.
It's another thing entirely to say God is completely different outside the Bible than He is inside. As if He'll change the faith He constructed so meticulously from start to finish, so much so that even the very Gospel is affected.
To illustrate this point, consider the following questions:
1. Is gay "marriage" permissible?
2. Is abortion morally acceptable?
3. Did Evolution happen?
These are just three examples of questions to which the Bible gives firm answers. Marriage, traditionally, is one man and one woman for life, whereas homosexuality is a very explicit sin. Scripture is quite clear on the morality of murder, including abortion. Evolution is a secular religion that is incompatible with the Christian faith, and indeed, was explicitly designed to replace it.
Many Roman Catholics understand this, because in spite of how much weird stuff there is in Roman Catholicism, there is still enough of the Christian faith in there that we do have things in common. That includes a Biblical view of sexuality, the sanctity of human life, and the origins issue. But what's especially ironic is that even these are not immovable pillars in the Catholic faith.
See, the Catholic faith has been evolving ever since its origins. Nothing has ever been set in stone, and some of what the Roman Catholic Church teaches today, it may have had a very different view even within living memory. Even the modern doctrine of the Eucharist was not entrenched until the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 A.D. In short, man made the Roman Catholic Church, and so man can change the Roman Catholic Church.
But only God can change the Christian faith. Yet, He has made it perfectly clear in His word that He will not. In Jude 1:3, God tells us the faith has been delivered to the saints (that's the entire body of Christ, not just the dead ones Rome declares as such) once for all. Furthermore, God Himself does not change, nor will He ever change His mind (e.g. Numbers 23:19).
What that means is that, ultimately, the Bible we have today is the end result of an eternity of meticulous planning, followed by thousands of years of precise, Godly implementation, and centuries of divine revelation, which shall by no means be broken (John 10:35), or pass away (Matthew 23:35; Mark 13:31; Luke 21:33). Furthermore, and here is the most important part, "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work." (2 Timothy 3:16-17).
This is more significant than Amos 3:7. While Amos tells us God will do nothing without first telling a prophet, Paul is telling Timothy that what He has already given the prophets is all we will ever need. We don't need some super-Church to tell us the secrets of Heaven, or restore some lost oral tradition, or decode what God really meant to say, but it didn't come out right. Therefore, the Roman Catholic Church simply cannot be the one true Church of Christ, as it so passionately claims, and there is not a single action God has ever performed, before the completion of Scripture or after, that can ever change that.
References
1. Arnold, Travis - A Reformation Prophecy, Portland Bible College, October 27th 2017 (link)