“My rejection of Rome’s additions”
(actually Reformer subtractions)
“...Rather my continued acceptance or rejection of a doctrine is due to it having failed sufficient warrant from Scripture or other evidence where applicable.”
Again, absolutely illogical argument. You have accepted the Protest Reformer subtractions as your authority on the Bible and theology, and with it the acceptace of their calcuable determination to change the Holy Word to fit their doctrine. You have accepted that authority as misplaced as it is. To deny this is weaving and bobbing with not only the truth but The Truth.
“The apostles claim to authority did not rest upon their pedigree, but upon their faith and Divine attestation of power, purity, and Scripture probity (2 Cor. 6:1-10; Rm. 15:16; 2 Cor. 12:12).”
Christ gave it to them, if you keep reading the bible as opposed to pasting from others’ websites possibly the Holy Spirit will allow you to see it in the Word.
May God’s Grace be upon you.
“You have accepted the Protest Reformer subtractions as your authority on the Bible.”
I stand amazed at the seeming inability of a Catholic like yourself to perceive one can actually come to his own conclusion or affirm that of another without accepting the latter as their authority. As i basically pointed out to you, if this was the case then i would be accepting Rome as my authority as well, while also being bound to all that the Reformers taught. Your inability to allow such seems to be a manifestation of the acceptance of the need for a cultic implicit trust and reliance in an authority (the RC autocracy), which renders proving all things by the Scriptures superfluous.
“if you keep reading the bible as opposed to pasting from others’ websites possibly the Holy Spirit will allow you to see it in the Word.”
Similarly, this slur also evidences a seeming disallowance that souls can actually come to warranted conclusions, rather than just parroting an authority. I assure you that i have read the Bible plenty in my 30 years as a Christian, and post a chapter online Mon-Fri that i have read, and can post far more worthy texts i have found that substantiate position if needed. And while i certainly do some research into issues (which i am hope you allow Catholic posters do as well), and have posted links for more direct info, yet much of my argumentation is my own, and thoughts of others must be weighed by me as to their veracity before i can stand behind them.
Rather than my stand requiring more Bible reading, it is such as those who place implicit trust in an autocratic authority that should do as the noble Bereans did (Acts 17:11), though according to her interpretation they cannot possible be right even they disagree with her in doctrines which she declares she has infallible defined.