I have seen your "evidence" of Sola Scriptura, and frankly, I find it pitifully weak and illogical. If I can totally destroy the concept, it remains difficult to see why you are not aware of this flimsy "proof", since I am not a rocket scientist. You point me to Scripture that doesn't say anything about "alone", just Scripture is "profitable". So are a lot of things...
As to Sola Fide, the Scripture says quiet clearly, faith without works is dead. And CATHOLICS twist Scriptures?
The plain meaning? The plain meaning is that we are not saved by faith alone. The plain meaning? Scripture alone is NOT the sole source of Christian teaching. That much is pretty freakin obvious when the first 20 years of Christianity did pretty well without a NT Scripture. Nor did the average Joe have access to a Bible until the printing press some 1400 years later. Imagine, somehow, Christianity survived without everyone reading the Bible daily and doing group study questions on Job... Again, sorry about the sarcasm, but I tire of this exercise in pointing out the obvious over and over again.
The Bible is packed with examples of men using scripture as authority, not tradition.
The Scriptures THEMSELVES are Tradition. They were written dozens of years after the fact, in some cases, even more. Jesus didn't put down all traditions, he put down traditions that led people from God. As to Satan in the desert, he ALSO used Scriptures...
The Bereans, I already answered. You think the Bereans consulted the OLD TESTAMENT to read about how CHRISTIANS should worship and celebrate the Eucharist or celebrate the Sabbath on Sunday??? Paul calls the Bereans worthy because they, unlike the Thessalonians, were open to Paul's message! Not because they consulted the OT! SO DID THE THESSALONIANS! But they didn't believe Paul.
Notice they did not examine the Tradition to see if what Paul said was true.
WRONG. ALL Scripture reading is based on a particular traditional background reading, just like you read Scriptures with a tradition that claims that man has no responsibility for his actions and God condemns people without knowing if they would reject Him or not...
Note also that it is axiomatic to you that the Church is the only authority on earth to interpret scripture.
I never said that only the Church can interpret Scriptures! I do it all the time. It is just that we read Scriptures within the paradigm established by the Church, not our personal opinion. If I decided that God was a Duality rather than a Trinity, I would no longer be a Catholic. If I said that as a Protestant, what would happen to me? Nothing. I am the ultimate authority in Protestantism. If "the Spirit" leads me to believe their are only two persons in the Godhead, who are you to tell me I am wrong?
Thus, Catholics read the Bible with an overall background that God is love and that God desires the salvation of all men and that God has chosen to show His great love for man by dying on the cross to redeem ALL men. Thus, we read Scriptures through these lenses. I already told you the Church only infallibly declares about a dozen verses that mean "x" and there is no way around this. Otherwise, the Catholic is quite free to interpret Scriptures - as I have pointed out about our vaunted freedom that you despise. For example, I have the freedom to consider that Genesis 1 did not scientifically happen the way described. Or that Jonah was literally swallowed by an actual whale. YOUR fundamental stance PREVENTS that! And YOU tell ME that I am told how to interpret all of Scriptures? Come on, now.
Regards
Well, yes, but that is a separate issue. As we have discussed, we define faith itself very differently. My understanding of your view is that faith is ULTIMATELY man-generated. That is free will. In addition, after free will faith is achieved or demonstrated, there is also the requirement of free will works (deeds) in order to achieve salvation after death on earth. You believe that one can have true faith, but not persevere. I completely disagree with that because I see faith as being solely a gift from God to the elect. With that faith comes also love and perseverance.
Anyone can say he has faith. It seems that you would accept that assumption and then look for works. I would never take the assumption.
The Scriptures THEMSELVES are Tradition.
So the words of men are equal to the words of God? Your three-legged stool just lost a leg. :)
As to Satan in the desert, he ALSO used Scriptures...
He ALSO used scriptures??? Let's take a look:
Matt. 4:4 : Jesus answered, "It is written: 'Man does not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.'" (See Deut. 8:3)
Matt. 4:7 : Jesus answered him, "It is also written: 'Do not put the Lord your God to the test.'" (See Deut. 6:16)
Matt. 4:10 : Jesus said to him, "Away from me, Satan! For it is written: 'Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.'" (See Deut. 6:13 and 10:20)
It sure looks like He used a lot of scriptures here, but not much Tradition. In fact, NO tradition. What else do you think He used?
Paul calls the Bereans worthy because they, unlike the Thessalonians, were open to Paul's message!
So your interpretation is that when Paul praised the Bereans because they tested his say-so against scripture he didn't really mean that. Instead, he only meant to praise them because they gave Paul an honest hearing. I see. That silly scripture has confounded me again.
Acts 17:11 : Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.
---------------
ALL Scripture reading is based on a particular traditional background reading, just like you read Scriptures with a tradition that claims that man has no responsibility for his actions and God condemns people without knowing if they would reject Him or not...
Putting aside your total error concerning our belief about man's responsibility, now I may understand why you keep talking about our supposed belief that God condemns people without knowing if they would reject Him or not. Until this minute I haven't understood why you have been pushing this. Is this an "order of salvation" issue? Are you talking about Supralapsarianism vs. Infralapsarianism? I'd be happy to comment, but I'd like to know first if I'm on the right track. :)
FK: "Note also that it is axiomatic to you that the Church is the only authority on earth to interpret scripture."
I never said that only the Church can interpret Scriptures! I do it all the time.
You're dodging. :) I never said you couldn't interpret scripture either. I said that you think the Church is the only Authority, and gave you credit enough that you would not claim to be an Authority.
If I decided that God was a Duality rather than a Trinity, I would no longer be a Catholic. If I said that as a Protestant, what would happen to me? Nothing. I am the ultimate authority in Protestantism. If "the Spirit" leads me to believe their are only two persons in the Godhead, who are you to tell me I am wrong?
Protestantism is not monolithic. There is no club to be kicked out of. So what? Individual Protestants are not the authority in Protestantism, God always is. Not the Church, but God. If you were a Protestant and you felt that the Spirit had led you to believe that there were only two persons in the Godhead, then I would strongly counsel you, and show you the truth of what you must believe in as a Protestant, the Bible.
For example, I have the freedom to consider that Genesis 1 did not scientifically happen the way described. Or that Jonah was literally swallowed by an actual whale. YOUR fundamental stance PREVENTS that! And YOU tell ME that I am told how to interpret all of Scriptures? Come on, now.
What? Whose fundamental stance are you talking about. Mine as an individual? Mine as a Protestant? Mine as a Southern Baptist? In none of these cases am I told how to interpret scripture. None. You, OTOH, are commanded on how to interpret. You claim there are only a dozen or so verses set in stone, but that ignores the Catholic lens which you must peer through for any understanding. That lens affects ALL SCRIPTURE. Effectively, then, you have drastically less freedom than you attempt to portray.