Replies

"And which your own attempts to to clean up the errors in the what Catholics can disagree on” according to how you see it, can illustrate."

It really suggests a lack of humility that whenever I attack your argument you respond by attacking me rather than my points. We are never going to agree and your chances of changing my mind by the volume of your posts is zero. Your scholarship pales in comparison to that of the Early Church Fathers, the doctors of the Church, the Episcopacy that forms the Magisterium, and the various saints and intellectual giants upon whose writings I have based my interpretation of Scripture.

I respect you and your right to have your own opinions, I just don't respect them. At least we are making progress in that you are no longer defending the notion that Scripture can be self interpreting.

Peace be with you.

It really suggests a lack of humility that whenever I attack your argument you respond by attacking me rather than my points NL, seriously, it is you who most often respond to my arguments and those of other's arguments with personal attacks, and your estimation of scholarship in the past has been shown to impugn yours, yet fail to apologize when shown you are wrong, even if you consider that fact to be a personal attack. And yet, as the Lord showed, personal attacks are not necessarily wrong if they are shown to be warranted. As for rejecting that Scripture can be self interpreting, that was your charge, and my point is that RCs do not have an assuredly infallible interpreter for their supreme authority any more than we claim to have one for Scripture, but which does not disallow Catholics may correctly understand their magisterium, nor do i reject that Scripture can be self interpreting, and that one can discern Truth apart from an assuredly infallible magisterium (though the teaching office is overall necessary ), and if it were not then souls would not have been saved prior to the church of Rome, nor would the noble Bereans be convinced of the veracity of the apostles message. And that Scripturally, Truth is established upon corroboration with Scripture, in text and in power.

It really suggests a lack of humility

You speak of humble? What is humble about planning to use Daniel's work?

We are never going to agree

WRONG. One day you will agree and WILL BOW at THE TRUTH while the RCC's teachings are no more. ONLY God's WORD is everlasting!

Your scholarship pales in comparison to that of the Early Church Fathers, the doctors of the Church, the Episcopacy that forms the Magisterium, and the various saints and intellectual giants upon whose writings I have based my interpretation of Scripture.

You just proved Daniel has EXCELLED in his work! The HOLY SPIRIT inspired WORD cannot be understood by the natural man for it is spiritually discerned. Seems you failed in the interpretation of that one, also.

1 Cor 2:14 "The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned". And The Holy Spirit lives within God's own. You base your knowledge on 'men' you never knew while Christians base their knowledge of God's Word on the Holy Spirit. You want to talk pale?

I respect you and your right to have your own opinions, I just don't respect them

God's Word is NOT an opinion - it is TRUTH! The catechism is an opinion of man/the RCC and used to control.

YOUR interpretation of Scripture?

That's allowed?

Since when?

I sure hope that's the last time we are castigated for YOPIOS by you, (although realistically ....)

It is ironic that you are making a choice about which Early Church Fathers, doctors of the church, etc. you will base your interpretation of Scripture upon as well as what they may or may not say on any particular subject yet you denigrate anyone else who makes the same choices OFTEN about the same ECFs. What Daniel has stated many times - and which you confirm - is that all those interested in knowing the truths of the faith once delivered to the saints have equal freedom to accept or reject the ideas and thoughts of those who went before them.

There is no shortage of deep thinking theologians today who build upon the spiritual and intellectual discoveries of those who went before them and what we, and they, have to our advantage is the ready availability of the resources of thought and consideration of them all. We can also understand their context, audience and motives for what they said and this allows a much greater understanding of how some of their views developed over the years and what those developments counted upon.

What we all MUST depend upon is the leading of the Holy Spirit within us who Jesus said will lead us into all truth. I fully agree that the truths of Holy Scripture are the fountain from which all knowledge about God and His purposes and plans are found and a greater understanding and illumination of those truths are available to all those who surrender to God the Holy Spirit's leading. Truth IS absolute and it WILL transcend time. The stalwarts of the faith, both then and now, hold to that.