Replies

[paladinan]
One can't simply grab a verse which seems to suit one's purposes, and then throw it against the wall in the hopes that it'll stick!

[CynicalBear]
Oh that's funny right there. One only look at "on this rock" to see that.

Do tell?

Evidence that Mary was not sinless is not based on one verse.

All right: on what IS it based, then? And if you want your argument to remain coherent, it'll have to be dependent on "Scripture alone" (and you'll have to clarify exactly what YOU mean by "sola Scriptura"--and not simply offer it as "self-evident and obvious", since the term seems to have 100 shades of meaning when asking 100 different non-Catholics).

[paladinan]
In other words, you're using non-sola-Scriptura approaches to try to defend sola Scriptura... and that simply won't do.

[CynicalBear]
No, I don't. Scripture will always be sufficient and does give explanation within itself.

Now, you MUST know that this statement is far too vague to be of much use! For instance:

a) "sufficient" for WHAT?
b) "sufficient" ALONE?
c) "sufficient" in a way which any human can access and use?
d) etc.

e) "give explanation" for WHAT?
f) how complete an explanation?
g) Is the explanation guaranteed of infallible interpretation by you? By anyone?

You hope to establish the principle of "sola Scriptura"... and unless the Bible provably teaches that idea, you're done. This isn't my doing; it's your doing, in the fact that you're trying to argue that idea. It's simple logic.

[paladinan]
it is not "proven false" simply because Enoch and Elijah went to God without dying, nor are the assumptions of Enoch and Elijah disproven because of Hebrews 9:27!

[CynicalBear]
Enoch and Elijah have not died yet. Who are the two witnesses in Revelation? I would submit they are Enoch and Elijah.

Let me anticipate your own demand, below: prove it. From Scripture alone.

[paladinan]
Mary--who is sinless by the sheer gift of God

[CynicalBear]
Prove it.

From a 30-second internet search...

Note the deafening silence from the rest of the Christian world, when these pronouncements were made? If you had been alive (and an author of influence) at the time, you would not have ceased decrying every last word of these, right? So... this suggests that the early Christians were not of the same mind as you, on this topic (and many others). The sinlessness of the Blessed Virgin was portrayed as an already-known idea by these Church Fathers, and no clamor of "Hey! That's heresy! That's unbiblical! You're not following sola Scriptura!" erupted on the scene. Suspicious, yes?

[paladinan]
The doctrine of the sinlessness of Mary states that the Blessed Virgin was given sufficient grace BY GOD

[CynicalBear]
Once again, prove it.

Who ELSE could have given her such a gift (as that of sinlessness), but God? She certainly didn't give it to HERSELF...

Who ELSE could have given her such a gift (as that of sinlessness), but God? She certainly didn't give it to HERSELF...

Another RC troll!

Circular reasoning and false assumptions do not make good arguments for positions. Many have spent a lot of wasted bandwidth to say nothing of consequence, but instead make attempts to be considered authoritarian by appealing to Catholic dogma.

However, FRiend, the Roman Catholic religion is nothing but another manmade cult, making up rules and doctrines out of nothing. It may have fooled millions and billions, but that is mainly due to the stranglehold threat of expulsion and alleged separation from God (since excommunication is considered as that).

Constant appeals to logic reinforce the ignorance posted, and the fallback position of adherence to Roman Catholic dogma shows how much an early indoctrination can overshadow even God's Holy Spirit and Guide! (for similar results, see: Islam!)

You FAILed to advance any cogent argument. Do you teach 2+2=5?

But, have a good life and accept Christ as your ONLY Savior before it's too late! The RCC is only a false religion, not a relationship with God!