Yes, what is wrong with *you*? It's like you think by yelling you can make someone who doesn't speak english understand you.
We Catholics go by a different set of rules than you Protestants do. You can't blame us for pointing out the internal inconsistancies of your rules, particularly when your co-religionists use those self imposed rules craft accusations against US.
Look at the title of this thread, 'sola scriptura' and your refusal to accept this belief because there is no specific verse (even though the principle is indeed strongly alluded to in I Cor. 4:6; Col. 2:8; II Tim. 3:16-17).
First, those verses DO NOT strongly allude to sola scriptura; they are just the best ones Protestants can find in defense of their doctrine, and even those are not conclusive.
Second, it is completely unreasonable to dogmatically insist the Bible is the only authority for faith and practice when the Bible itself makes no such dogmatic pronouncement.
Furthermore, to deny the authority it DOES grant is not reformation, but rebellion. That the rebellion has been self sustaining and much celebrated does not change the fact that it is and always was a rebellion.
You go on a complete witch hunt bashing protestants and cry foul when someone else points out to you that some of your doctrines are not specifically found either. That's what's wrong with me!
This is nonsense. We have no NEED to base our doctrines soley on Scripture, because our authority structure does not require it. That we CAN point to hints is quite satisfactory to us.
It is not satisfactory to Protestants because they are motivated by a need to accuse us of violating or contradicting Scripture in order to "share the rebellion." But we absolutely deny any such violation, and when the items are examined systematically, the only thing we are guilty of is not agreeing with Protestants.
This notion we "cry foul" over scant biblical evidence is nothing but projection. What we cry foul over is all the nastiness Protestants throw at us for not accepting THEIR standards when we discuss differences in faith and practice.
(Rom. 3:28, ALL have sinned, you can't even find anything 'alluding' to the sinlessness of Mary ANYWHERE in the New Testament or Old)
Yes, we can. You just don't accept it.
Are you so blind you can't even see the remotest hypocrisy in this at all?
No, but I am sufficiently educated to recognize the reason a child screeches about the impropriety of an equation "with letters in it" is because that child doesn't know anything about Algebra.
First, those verses DO NOT strongly allude to sola scriptura; they are just the best ones Protestants can find in defense of their doctrine, and even those are not conclusive.
Sure they do.
Second, it is completely unreasonable to dogmatically insist the Bible is the only authority for faith and practice when the Bible itself makes no such dogmatic pronouncement.
That is a false definition. Protestants rely upon tradition, even RCC tradition, to a great degree. A better definition is that the Scripture is the final authority- Those traditions cannot be held to the same state of authority as the Scriptures, for the self evident reason that one could, by that assumed authority, change what the Scriptures provide.
This, for much the same sensible reason that the common law is not codified into our Constitution, and that extraordinary means must be met to physically amend the Constitution. The Canon should be treated in the same way for the same reason.
It is also somewhat misleading to accuse the Protestant of accepting external sources by way of the Gospels (and etc), accepting those things that were oratory at the foundation of the Church, as we all know that those Gospels simply codify the spoken traditions which the Scripture does in fact approve. You also accept them as authoritative.
We begin our disagreement in your extension of those traditions beyond the formal Canon, and what disagreement we have in regard to the Canon itself, namely the Apocryphal books.
Nevertheless, What we as Protestants recognize as Scripture, namely the Protestant Canon, is well defined and is the point at which we begin any sola scriptura arguments, as that Canon defines what we call Holy Scripture, regardless of the matter of it's adoption. Any argument must reasonably fall within those parameters.