[paladinan]

Going beyond what is written and building doctrine upon assumptions will always lead to trouble, regardless of denomination.

Hm. Then why do you "go beyond what is written" in order to embrace "sola Scriptura", since it's nowhere in Scripture?

And if you embrace "sola fide", you're in an even worse spot, since the only mention of "faith alone" is a CONDEMNATION of that idea by St. James (James 2:24). That is, if you're using the plain sense of Scripture, and not trying to twist it to suit a preconceived belief...

[metmom]

Hm. Then why do you "go beyond what is written" in order to embrace "sola Scriptura", since it's nowhere in Scripture?

And where is phrase *sacred tradition* found in Scripture?

Or any of the following plethora of terms that Catholicism hangs on to?

Since they're not in Scripture by name either, then we can just as easily dismiss them as Catholics dismiss *sola Scriptura* because that term is not specifically found in Scripture.

trinity

catholic

pope

eucharist

sacraments

annulment

assumption

immaculate conception

mass

purgatory

magisterium

infallible

confirmation

crucifix

rosary

mortal sin

venial sin

perpetual virginity

apostolic succession

indulgences

hyperdulia

catechism

real presence

transubstantiation

liturgy

free will

What's good for the goose, is good for the gander.

If *sola Scriptura* is disallowed because the term is not found specifically in Scripture, then those terms above are as well.

The double standard which Catholics apply to support their belief system is blindingly obvious. It's called, *hypocrisy*

[RegulatorCountry]

Hm. Then why do you "go beyond what is written" in order to embrace "sola Scriptura", since it's nowhere in Scripture?

We're admonished repeatedly throughout scripture to test everything against it and to adhere to what is written. Doctrine or tradition that contradicts scripture is not Biblical. It does not belong. The purpose of scripture is to serve as an anchor of truth that remains true to the unchanging Word Of God. Embracing traditions that are not supported Biblically and especially those that go against scripture, is error.

[CynicalBear]

>>Hm. Then why do you "go beyond what is written" in order to embrace "sola Scriptura", since it's nowhere in Scripture?<<

Then you need to show another infallible source that the apostles taught the assumption of Mary.

≤font color=blue>Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

If you can't show where the apostles taught the assumption of Mary then we will simply consider it " another gospel" and as such will consider those that teach it accursed. Since the only infallible source of what the apostles taught scripture alone is what we have.