You would have the only evidence I use, the scriptures. Of course since the Church's interpretation of scriptures bears little resemblance to that of Protestants in general, then it is to be expected that you would not accept this as evidence. I'm afraid that's all I have, or need.
Between two Protestants, when you say "x" and it disagrees with another Protestant, then is the "Spirit" who tells you otherwise lying? Or is HIS "Spirit" lying?
I suppose that sometimes we do the same thing that you and the Orthodox did, part company with mutual respect. I believe that the Spirit brings along the elect at different rates and in different ways. This is what sanctification is for. If two Protestants are at different places in their respective walks, then it should not be any surprise that they would disagree on some things. I don't even think that is "bad", in and of itself. So for example, in no way does it defeat the Reformed view that I was wrong about OSAS. You have used the same argument in defending Catholicism in the face of actions taken by certain priests and bishops.
WHERE IS THE PILLAR AND FOUNDATION OF THE TRUTH? Deny it all you want, but it is in the Bible.
Oh, I know what the scripture says, but shockingly we disagree on the interpretation. :) I do not believe that the RCC is the pillar and foundation of truth because the Bible doesn't say that. The Bible talks about the Church of God, which could mean just that or it could refer to God Himself. Even if the former, we don't agree on what God's Church is.
Are you aware of how Christians came to the belief of the Trinity? Do you think the Scriptures alone told us?
I don't know who was the first to make a big deal about it, but I don't think it matters because the basis of the Trinity is fully in scripture. God the Father openly claimed to be God. So did the Son. Then we are told to baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. I'm sure there are plenty of cross-references that when all put together make it clear that the idea of the Trinity is absolutely Biblical. I do not believe that the Trinity is extra-Biblical Tradition.
You, for example, think that man is evil and totally corrupt and can do nothing to cooperate with God's grace, nor can he refuse the Holy Spirit. Thus, you read over passages that deny that or twist them to mean something else.
I don't agree that this is true, but even if it was, this is different from Catholicism HOW? :) "Oh, yes, well God gave all the power to the RCC to interpret scripture." [Really, when did He do that?] "Oh, well you see it's all clear in the Bible. We interpret that God gave us all the power, therefore it is so, etc."
Thus, Scriptures alone don't do much good by themselves.
No, I think they do perfectly by themselves, but you're right that correct interpretation is the key. Some Christians have an outside agenda that needs supporting, (thus tipping the scales on interpretation), and some do not.
Have you not argued with another Protestant over whether Baptism is necessary for Salvation? The two of you will post verses that prove your points and you will both call each other wrong.
Actually, I never have, either on this thread or anywhere else. I suppose that it's possible that it will happen someday, but I'm not worried. Catholics and Orthodox don't agree on everything either. I don't see why it's a big deal. I don't feel obligated to defend all non-Catholics in the same way you should not feel obligated to defend all non-Protestants.
[continuing] And neither will ever know who REALLY is correct...
Boy do you have a gloomy outlook. :) I can only surmise that you do not believe that sanctification is real (at least for Protestants), or that people actually grow in their faiths during their lives. I suppose with a hierarchy that dictates all of your beliefs to you, there might not be much room to grow.
You miss my point... And this is very important.
Without the CHURCH'S interpretation, a final, decisive and dogmatic declaration, we would STILL be arguing over precisely the relationship between God the Father and the Son - and WHO is the Holy Spirit. If you read about the history of the Arian heresy (one where Jesus was not of the essence of the Father), Arius uses SCRIPTURE INTERPRETATIONS to advance his point - that Christ was a creation, not one of the persons of the Godhead (Trinity is not in the Bible).
I'm sure there are plenty of cross-references that when all put together make it clear that the idea of the Trinity is absolutely Biblical.
If you would like, I can advance the Arius point of view, strictly from the Bible. Without the Church's interpretation, you would not have a basis or a standard to come up with "Trinity", now, would you? This idea of WHO is God would be ANOTHER issue that Catholics and Protesters would disagree on. Fortunately, Protestants haven't totally put aside Catholic doctrines...
The Bible talks about the Church of God, which could mean just that or it could refer to God Himself. Even if the former, we don't agree on what God's Church is.
What other Church do you think Paul was refering to? The Second Baptist Church in St. Paul, Minnesota?
"Oh, yes, well God gave all the power to the RCC to interpret scripture."
You certainly feel in a dramatic mood today, huh? The Church was given power to bind and loosen - which includes interpretating Scriptures, exactly what Jewish authorities did, as well. Are you upset that God didn't put you in charge?!
No, I think they do perfectly by themselves, but you're right that correct interpretation is the key. Some Christians have an outside agenda that needs supporting, (thus tipping the scales on interpretation), and some do not.
Naturally, those who cannot live by their own standards, such as Sola Scriptura - by inventing Sola Fide as well as Sola Scriptura - do not have an agenda!!!
Boy do you have a gloomy outlook. :) I can only surmise that you do not believe that sanctification is real (at least for Protestants), or that people actually grow in their faiths during their lives. I suppose with a hierarchy that dictates all of your beliefs to you, there might not be much room to grow.
After so much typing, you still don't know much about Catholicism, do you. Because there is authoritative power available to bind and loosen doesn't mean we don't think or grow. Sanctification is real, especially THROUGH the sacraments of the Church. It is the instrument that God has established to do just that. It is where we receive our daily bread, our forgiveness of sins from God. The correct interpretations of the teachings of the APOSTLES. I have a difficult time wondering why God established a Church that would totally destroy everthing Christ taught in less than 100 years - that is the argument of Protestantism that exceeds all other fantasies...
Regards