[boatbums]

Very funny. I meant I still don't know what you mean by the term sola scriptura. And I still disagree that the term fits into what you call a performative contradiction. Even the Catholic Church declares that the Bible is Divinely inspired - God breathed - and is infallible and inerrant. My contention is simply that if they state this, then they cannot come back and assign infallibility to themselves, also. Scripture IS infallible and divinely inspired, so it is no contradiction to state that it is the authority for our faith. God obviously determined it to be here and God does not make mistakes and God did not assign the same authority for the Catholic Church - though they declare themselves as being so. Scripture is God's word to us whether you or I or anyone else believes it to be true. It IS, like God IS. Jesus certainly asserted the authority of Scripture numerous times as did the writers of Scripture. They recognized that the Holy Spirit was speaking through them and, as such, it is a lamp unto our feet, a light unto our path, pure, holy, eternal and trustworthy. My acknowledging the fact does not disprove it.

[D-fendr]

Thanks, BB.

We don’t disagree on what Holy Scripture is, it’s source and essence.

What we disagree on is the doctrine of *sola* scriptura.

As I’ve argued ad nauseam, the doctrine is wrong, an error, because:

A) It doesn’t work.
It fails to result in the Church as seen in Holy Scripture (and afterward) Rather, it results in varied and contradicting doctrine and fractured and fighting congregations that come and go; it is individualistic and subjective. This result alone rules it out as “Christ’s Idea” for His Church.

B) It fails based on its own criteria.
The performative contradiction. It falls on its own weight.

Thanks again for your courtesy and sense of humor.