Because sola scriptura makes no sense. God did not leave a Bible he left a Church. That 1500 years later some German loons and disgruntled monks invented bibliolatry with the support of avaricious and adulterous princes is of no moment.
I guess that explains why there was no appeal to the Scriptures in the Word.......oh, wait. There was always appeal to the Scriptures in the Word.
1. The typical catholic conflation is in play, conflating their institutional relion with the True Church Jesus established as the collected body of believers, regardless of 'denominational vagaries' ... councils of believer from various cities with growing numbers of believers hashed over doctrines and dogmas, seeking consensus, proving the dogmas and doctrines do not save, do not cause the born from above identity which Jesus identified to Nicodemus.
2. God has in fact 'left a Bible' ... Jesus quoted from The Scriptures/The Septuagint and instructed Saul of Tarsus to write many things for instructing believers; thus it is by God's command that Paul wrote his letters of instruction and these became part of The Bible of God ordained instructions, just as Peter, Jude, James, John and the four authors of the synoptic gospels were doing what God ordained to add to The Scriptures brought forth to Jesus's time.
3. Christians, as a hallmark of ekklesia, hold the belief that God in fact 'left' a Bible for their instruction, as testified by The Bible that scriptures are to be an instructor of the brethren, and that assertion from more than one of the New Testament authors. God has in fact left The Church for our edification and growth. Jesus established a SPIRITUAL body of believers whom He identified as His Ekklesia, founded upon the profession of Whom He is. This Ekklesia is formed from Jews (see the Day of Pentecost preaching by Peter) and Gentiles (see the preaching by Peter in The House of Cornelius). This CHURCH/ EKKLESIA is not an institution, it is a body of souls united in the state of having been born from above by the Grace of God in Christ, not some rituals, rites, and alimentary consumption.
A human borders on blasphemy when they contradict Jesus in order to promote the institution of another gospel such as catholiciism is.
Sola Scriptura makes perfect sense because it's the God breathed, Holy Spirit inspired Word of God, is Truth, and stands alone as such. It is consistent with itself and within itself.
It doesn't need the stamp of approval of men to validate it.
It being the very words of God to us is not enough to make it authoritative for you, then I don't see that anything else would.
And the charges of bibliolatry fall flat as no one has ever built a statute of the Bible or put it on a pedestal and bowed down to it and burned incense to it, or lit candles to it.
God left His word and the Holy Spirit and is BUILDING His church.
That 1500 years later some German loons and disgruntled monks invented bibliolatry with the support of avaricious and adulterous princes is of no moment.
Adulterous men? You REALLY want to go there?
Fine....
Try this......
Top 10 Most Wicked Popes
http://listverse.com/2007/08/17/top-10-most-wicked-popes/
1. Liberius, reigned 352-66 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
2. Honorius I, reigned 625-638 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
3. Stephen VI, reigned 896-89 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
4. John XII, reigned 955-964 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
5. Benedict IX, reigned 1032-1048 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
6. Boniface VIII, reigned 1294-1303 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
7. Urban VI, reigned 1378-1389 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
8. Alexander VI, reigned 1492-1503 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
9. Leo X, reigned 1513-1521 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
10. Clement VII, reigned 1523-1524 [Catholic Encyclopaedia]
Top 10 Worst Popes in History
http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-worst-popes-in-history.php
1. Pope Alexander VI (1431 - 1503)
2. Pope John XII (c. 937 - 964)
3. Pope Benedict IX (c. 1012 - 1065/85)
4. Pope Sergius III (? - 911)
5. Pope Stephen VI (? - 897)
6. Pope Julius III (1487 - 1555)
7. Pope Urban II (ca. 1035 - 1099)
8. Pope Clement VI (1291 - 1352)
9. Pope Leo X (1475 - 1521)
10. Pope Boniface VIII (c. 1235 - 1303)
Don't be a hypocrite and falsely accuse and condemn non-Catholic men while ignoring worse behavior than they're accused of out of your own popes.
In other words you have no argument with which to interact with what refutes you but simply resort to more parroted polemics which also are specious. In this case the fact is that rather than as under the RC model for discerning what was of God, in which the instruments and stewards of express Divine revelation are the assuredly infallible interpreters and authorities on it, The church actually began in dissent from those who sat in the seat of Moses over Israel, (Mt. 23:2) who were the historical instruments and stewards of Scripture, "because that unto them were committed the oracles of God," (Rm. 3:2) to whom pertaineth" the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises" (Rm. 9:4) of Divine guidance, presence and perpetuation as they believed, (Gn. 12:2,3; 17:4,7,8; Ex. 19:5; Lv. 10:11; Dt. 4:31; 17:8-13; Ps, 11:4,9; Is. 41:10, Ps. 89:33,34; Jer. 7:23)
And instead they followed an itinerant Preacher whom the magisterium rejected, and whom the Messiah reproved them Scripture as being supreme, (Mk. 7:2-16) and established His Truth claims upon scriptural substantiation in word and in power, as did the early church as it began upon this basis. (Mt. 22:23-45; Lk. 24:27,44; Jn. 5:36,39; Acts 2:14-35; 4:33; 5:12; 15:6-21;17:2,11; 18:28; 28:23; Rm. 15:19; 2Cor. 12:12, etc.)
Thus the NT church began contrary to Rome with her the novel and unScriptural premise of ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility, which is unseen and unecessary in Scripture.
That 1500 years later some German loons and disgruntled monks invented bibliolatry with the support of avaricious and adulterous princes is of no moment.
You mean,
Cardinal Bellarmine:
"Some years before the rise of the Lutheran and Calvinistic heresy, according to the testimony of those who were then alive, there was almost an entire abandonment of equity in ecclesiastical judgments; in morals, no discipline; in sacred literature, no erudition; in divine things, no reverence; religion was almost extinct. (Concio XXVIII. Opp. Vi. 296- Colon 1617, in “A History of the Articles of Religion,” by Charles Hardwick, Cp. 1, p. 10,)
"For nearly half a century, the Church was split into two or three obediences that excommunicated one another, so that every Catholic lived under excommunication by one pope or another, and, in the last analysis, no one could say with certainty which of the contenders had right on his side. The Church no longer offered certainty of salvation; she had become questionable in her whole objective form--the true Church, the true pledge of salvation, had to be sought outside the institution.
"It is against this background of a profoundly shaken ecclesial consciousness that we are to understand that Luther, in the conflict between his search for salvation and the tradition of the Church, ultimately came to experience the Church, not as the guarantor, but as the adversary of salvation. (Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, head of the Sacred Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith for the Church of Rome, “Principles of Catholic Theology,” trans. by Sister Mary Frances McCarthy, S.N.D. (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1989) p.196). http://www.whitehorseinn.org/blog/2012/06/13/whos-in-charge-here-the-illusions-of-church-infallibility/)
Then we can throw it away and just list to what Rome puts out; right?
Makes perfect sense to those of us who believe the bible...