The Bible contains doctrine.
You only need to hear and obey it.
Not once did any of the Apostles or even Christ himself make that ridiculous charge of “not knowing the scriptures infallibly” against any of their adversaries.
Infallibility means teaching without error. Impeccability means living without sinning. Let's not confuse the two. John and Paul taught infallibly against the Gnostics. 1st and 2nd Peter are infallible encyclicals. I never met a sola scripturist that understood infallibility, trying to explain it to a "Bible alone" Christian is like talking to a wall. Let's suppose Satan were to somehow become Pope. He would do a lot of damage but he could not formally teach errors because the Holy Spirit would not let him. There are many indications in the Bible that God would protect His Church from teaching error. If you don't believe that, you don't believe the Bible.
Isa. 35:8, 54:13-17 – this prophecy refers to the Church as the Holy Way where sons will be taught by God and they will not err. The Church has been given the gift of infallibility when teaching about faith and morals, where her sons are taught directly by God and will not err. This gift of infallibility means that the Church is prevented from teaching error by the power of the Holy Spirit (it does not mean that Church leaders do not sin!)
Acts 9:2; 22:4; 24:14,22 – the early Church is identified as the “Way” prophesied in Isaiah 35:8 where fools will not err therein.
Matt. 10:20; Luke 12:12 – Jesus tells His apostles it is not they who speak, but the Spirit of their Father speaking through them. If the Spirit is the one speaking and leading the Church, the Church cannot err on matters of faith and morals.
Matt. 16:18 – Jesus promises the gates of Hades would never prevail against the Church. This requires that the Church teach infallibly. If the Church did not have the gift of infallibility, the gates of Hades and error would prevail. Also, since the Catholic Church was the only Church that existed up until the Reformation, those who follow the Protestant reformers call Christ a liar by saying that Hades did prevail.
read more here:
The Biblical Church - Scripture Catholic
Matt. to Rev. – we must also note that not all Christian doctrines are explicit in Scripture (for example, the dogma of the Blessed Trinity). However, infallibility is strongly inferred from the foregoing passages. Non-Catholic Christians should ask themselves why they accept the Church’s teaching on the three persons of the Trinity, the two natures of Christ in one divine person, and the New Testament canon of Scripture (all defined by the Catholic Church), but not other teachings regarding the Eucharist, Mary, the saints, etc.?
The Jerusalem Council certainly regarded its teachings as infallible, and guided by the Holy Spirit Himself. The records we have of it don’t even record much discussion about biblical prooftexts, and the main issue was circumcision (where there is a lot of Scripture to draw from). Paul accepted its authority and proclaimed its teachings (Acts 16:4).
You’re trying to set the Bible against the Church, which is typical Protestant methodology, and ultra-unbiblical. The Bible never does that. I’ve already given the example of the Jerusalem Council, which plainly shows the infallibility of the Church.
The Bible repeatedly teaches that the Church is indefectible; therefore, the hypothetical of rejecting the (one true, historic) Church, as supposedly going against the Bible,
is impossible according to the Bible. It is not a situation that would ever come up, because of God’s promised protection.
What the Bible says is to reject those who cause divisions, which is the very essence of the onset of Protestantism: schism, sectarianism, and division. It is Protestantism that departed from the historic Church, which is indefectible and infallible (see also 1 Tim 3:15).
Dialogue with a Calvinist: Was Paul a "Lone Ranger"?