Replies

In Gal 1:6-9 does Paul confine his preaching to his written word? Doesn't seem to me that he does. 1 Thes 2:13 tells us that Paul's oral teaching is truly the word of God: "And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers." In 2 Thes 2:15 he admonishes to "hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter." Where does Paul confine his teaching only to his written word?

Cyril of Jerusalem taught doctrines often cited by nonCatholics as unbiblical (purgatory, the Mass, magisterium, etc). Was he a poor exegete to find basis for Catholic doctrine in scripture or was he not really a sola scriptura adherent as you suggest?

Your examples are speaking of those whom were present with Christ when He walked among us, in the form of a man. Why should this later be extended fully to those whom follow after? You may fully allow such, that is your own choice(?), but I'll pass on that form of loose, uncritical acceptance

It is much more prudent to simply stick with the Word as best we can, neither inventing things not found therein, nor accepting some form of gnosticism, even if it crop up or come from within otherwise respected persons or groups. We see what peer pressure can do.

A new and different Gospel, differing from the original, being a much amended one, is highly suspect.

Was he a poor exegete to find basis for Catholic doctrine in scripture or was he not really a sola scriptura adherent as you suggest?

Take it up with the former Catholic, Webster, whom I was quoting. You may then need address your argument (if you actually have one) to his own cited sources also. Some of them could be easy enough to debate, for they are now dead.

In Gal 1:6-9 does Paul confine his preaching to his written word? Doesn't seem to me that he does.

That is exactly the sort of argument the Gnostics brought forth. That they heard or were told things by Apostles that others did not, nor were elsewhere written down. That, and that they received such "secret knowledge" through revelation.

The Early Patristric Fathers smashed them using ---what? Even more "secret stuff"? No, absolutely not. They used the Word. And won those battles!

Go ahead. Place bets on "secret knowledge" given to somebody somewhere, we don't know exactly whom, or where...
I'll pass on that sort of thing...