There is plenty of biblical support for those who aren’t willfully blind.
Nor is biblical support necessary, as I’ve explained.
How can you place your faith in the bible, but refuse to believe in the Church that gave it to you? That is irrational.
Since you like to believe sacred texts in a vacuum, why aren’t you muslim? Why aren’t you Mormon?
To insist on the bible as the sole source of faith is unbiblical. How do you live with this contradiction?
The Church never gave man, the Bible.
Those who seek to usurp authority from God, claim they have inherited authority directly from Him and nobody else can have fellowship with Him except through them.
Such is not the Gospel.
God provides His Word to man and has given us Scripture to understand Him more directly through faith alone in Christ alone.
The Immaculate Conception from catholic encyclopedia online:(http://www.catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=6056)
No direct or categorical and stringent proof of the dogma can be brought forward from Scripture.
You are in disagreement with Catholicism's own admission on this topic.
Nor is biblical support necessary, as I’ve explained.
How can you place your faith in the bible, but refuse to believe in the Church that gave it to you? That is irrational.
The early NT church did yes....not the roman catholic church as there is no evidence of the rcc in the New Testament.
Since you like to believe sacred texts in a vacuum, why aren’t you muslim? Why aren’t you Mormon?
To insist on the bible as the sole source of faith is unbiblical. How do you live with this contradiction?
Jesus often said, "it is written". The Bereans searched the Scriptures to confirm what they were hearing is truth. John wrote in two places he had written down information so we'd know it was true. There is ample evidence of relying upon the written Word in both Old and New Testaments.
Do you even know why the early church put the NT canon together? One of the reasons was false teaching that was creeping into the church through such writings as the Protoevangelum of James (145 AD). You may be familiar with this writing. It was the earliest to talk about Mary being a perpetual virgin.
That the rcc has never included this as part of the canon, even though they had a chance at Trent, should tell you all you need to know about this book.
Same with the Didache. Never included.
Same with Clement....never included.
Perhaps it is you who should be the Mormon....they don't rely upon the Bible as their sole source of authority either. Perhaps you'd like to start using the Book of Mormon....maybe the Koran....maybe Hindu teachings....maybe something from the Church of Oprah??