[wagglebee]

Most of time, when you see "sola scripture" it is a Catholic trying to put a presupposed boundary around non-Catholics.

And can you honestly say that Protestants don't do the exact same thing with Catholic dogmas they disagree with?

[zbigreddogz]

Even if they do, what difference does THAT make?

This isn't a "Who can suckerpunch the other guy harder" contest, or it shouldn't be.

[ScubieNuc]

And can you honestly say that Protestants don't do the exact same thing with Catholic dogmas they disagree with?

No, of course a lot of us come into discussions with a presupposed understanding. That one of the reasons I think honest debate is good. Sometimes people can clear up those presupposed boundaries, with reasoned debate/discussion.

There was a time I would have fallen into the "all Catholics are going to Hell" crowd. I wouldn't put myself into that category now. The main reason is because of the good reasoned debates I have had on FR.

Sincerely

[OLD REGGIE]

And can you honestly say that Protestants don't do the exact same thing with Catholic dogmas they disagree with?

Wellllll, Sola Scriptura is not dogma. There is no "fixed in concrete" definition of Sola Scriptura. As such it is possible to state your own definition and to tear it to shreds. Not so with Catholic Dogma.

Catholic Dogma, when accurately stated, does have clear and well defined boundaries and as such cannot be the subject of a "straw man" argument.

When one (a Protestant?) misstates a dogma and attacks this false definition it is dishonest and unethical.

When one manufactures his own definition of Sola Scriptura, attributes this particular stated, or unstated, definition to the mythical "Protestants" it is dishonest and unethical.

BTW, I agree with you that some Protestants will misstate the practices of some Catholics and falsely attribute those practices to all Catholics.