Nowhere in Scripture are men instructed to claim that Scripture isn’t enough and to add their own traditions to it.
If Catholics want to disallow Scripture alone because it isn’t specifically spelled out in a manner in which Catholics would like to have it spelled out, then Catholics need to be consistent and disallow a lot of Catholic doctrine.
The word *trinity* isn’t found in Scripture and yet Catholics are sure quick enough to claim Scriptural backing for it and expect others to recognized and accept it as valid.
The word *pope* isn’t found in Scripture and yet Catholics are sure quick enough to claim Scriptural backing for it and expect others to recognized and accept it as valid.
The word *transubstantiation* isn’t found in Scripture and yet Catholics are sure quick enough to claim Scriptural backing for it and expect others to recognized and accept it as valid.
The words *immaculate conception* aren’t found in Scripture and yet Catholics are sure quick enough to claim Scriptural backing for it and expect others to recognized and accept it as valid.
For that matter, there are lots of Catholic teachings that aren’t directly and specifically spelled out which Catholics expect others to accept as true and valid.
To not apply the same criteria to *sola Scriptura* is hypocritical.
Jesus never commanded us to add tradition to Scripture and He never, by example, used tradition in addition to Scripture as a point of authority.
Just because God didn’t word something the way Catholics think He should have, doesn’t mean that He didn’t get the message across in Scripture, that Scripture alone is adequate for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness.
“Do as I say, not as I do” is not a Scriptural principle.
That exercise in circular logic falls apart without your a priori contention. One must accept your assertion in order to validate your assertion.
Well raxacoricofallapatorius is no longer the silliest thing I've ever seen.
He didn't write the NT and become sola scriptura.'"
MetMom:
Nowhere in Scripture are men instructed to claim that Scripture isn’t enough and to add their own traditions to it.
The word *trinity* isn’t found in Scripture and yet [Roman] Catholics are sure quick enough to claim Scriptural backing for it and expect others to recognized and accept it as valid.
The word *pope* isn’t found in Scripture and yet [Roman] Catholics are sure quick enough to claim Scriptural backing for it and expect others to recognized and accept it as valid.
The word *transubstantiation* isn’t found in Scripture and yet [Roman] Catholics are sure quick enough to claim Scriptural backing for it and expect others to recognized and accept it as valid.
The words *immaculate conception* aren’t found in Scripture and yet [Roman] Catholics are sure quick enough to claim Scriptural backing for it and expect others to recognized and accept it as valid.
For that matter, there are lots of [Roman] Catholic teachings that aren’t directly and specifically spelled out which [Roman] Catholics expect others to accept as true and valid.
To not apply the same criteria to *sola Scriptura* is [GROSSLY & OUTRAGEOUSLY] hypocritical.
Jesus never commanded us to add tradition to Scripture and He never, by example, used tradition in addition to Scripture as a point of authority.
Just because God didn’t word something the way [Roman] Catholics think He should have, doesn’t mean that He didn’t get the message across in Scripture, that Scripture alone is adequate for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness.
And . . . to repeat . . . maybe some of the lurkers who aren’t deaf and blind will see it who missed it earlier:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2578704/posts?page=11624#11624
ABSOLUTELY INDEED.
WHEN GOD
HIMSELF, walking Israel's paths 2000 years ago
REPEATEDLY
referred to
"IT IS WRITTEN . . ."
AS HIS
POINT OF AUTHORITY
THEN
DENIAL of that
DECLARATION BY JESUS--CREATOR GOD
IS a
DENIAL OF GOD'S OWN EMPHASES
AND
A DENIAL OF GOD'S OWN PRIORITIES.
God does NOT tend to effect
DENIAL OF HIS PRIORITIES
into a spiritual life & GROWTH activity.
He did not even say:
"DADDY SAYS: . . . "
HE, CREATOR GOD, SAID
"IT IS WRITTEN . . . "
Papal Pontificators' STUBBORN, REBELLIOUS refusal to take those declarations of FINAL AUTHORITY FOR WHAT THEY ARE,
Is yet again a brazen addiction to idolizing an INSTITUTION, a dogma, a magicsterical, another 'Gospel,' . . . something different from and OPPOSED TO GOD'S AUTHORITY.
There's no more charitable way to put the stark horrific truth.
Weasel words about the bureaucratic magicsterical power-mongers will not do.
Appeals to rubber 'Bibles' & rubber histories about Peter and the Vatican before it began in 300-400AD will not do.
The stark TRUTH IS
CREATOR GOD IN PERSON DECLARED
"IT IS WRITTEN . . . "
AS A POINT OF FINAL AUTHORITY.
refusal to take CREATOR GOD'S OWN declarations of what HE HIMSELF appealed to AS THE FINAL AUTHORITY
IS BEYOND SUICIDALLY IGNORANT, REBELLIOUS IDIOTIC & STUPID.
IT IS STUBBORNLY REBELIOUS.
It is sticking an institution's fossilized granite finger in God's eye and insisting that the INSTITUTUION KNOWS BETTER than GOD.
HUBRIS TO THE MAX is an inadequate phrase by many orders of magnitude.
> “Nowhere in Scripture are men instructed to claim that Scripture isn’t enough and to add their own traditions to it.”
.
True, in fact the Lord Jesus Christ roundly condemned the adhereance to oral traditions held by the Pharisees, and the only author in the NT that didn’t speak against “traditions” in every way, Paul (yes, the same Paul that most of our Catholic attack postors call ‘wacky’) said, in reference to the teachings in his, and others’ epistles, to “hold firm’ to the traditions they had been taught in one verse only.
From the misinterpretation of that one verse, we now have world wide Catholic apostasy.
.