[redleghunter]

Does that clarify? No, I have no desire to "disprove the Scriptures"; I merely point out (among other things) that the Scriptures are not meant to be used ALONE, and that they never make that claim for themselves.

I understand your approach now.

Genesis 3:

Now the serpent was more cunning than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said to the woman, “Has God indeed said, ‘You shall not eat of every tree of the garden’?”

2 And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat the fruit of the trees of the garden; 3 but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said, ‘You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die.’”

4 Then the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die.

And to which the above line of reasoning, and your own, Jesus answered:

Matthew 4:

“It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.’”

“It is written again, ‘You shall not tempt the Lord your God.’”

“Away with you, Satan! For it is written, ‘You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only you shall serve.’”

And yet, if these Scriptures required men 'to sort them out'; then after sorting such where did the Roman See gain its authority? If you cast the very 'compiling' of Scriptures in a shady man-made corner, then even the Scriptures Rome claims as its authority are in question.

Oh..I see now that is why we have to listen to the Pope and the self proclaimed magesterium. Because without an infallible source to make the supposed infallible source infallible makes it quite fallible.

Maybe you now see why this former Roman Catholic sees such self proclaimed 'authority' quite an exercise in circular reasoning.

[paladinan]

I understand your approach now.

Hm. Not only mind-reading, but saying that I'm using Satan's own methods. (You aren't suggesting that I'm Satan or one of his servants, are you?) Is this your way of being classy?

Re: your point: I'll leave it to the reader to see that there was nothing, whatever, in my comment which merited ANYTHING of what you said, here. This is patently an effort to demonize your opponent, and avoid the logic altogether.

Should I alert the Religion Mod to your own "methods"? Or would you care to apologize for that crass remark, and try to discuss the *issues*, like logical people would do?

[Elsie]

Now the serpent was more cunning than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said to the woman, “Has God indeed said, ‘You shall not eat of every tree of the garden’?”

BAM!

There you have it!

Have WHAT; ELSIE???

What happens when what GOD has said is NOT written down!

---

Eve merely had hearsay from Adam about the tree. She was NOT there when GOD spoke!

...not touch it...

Where did THAT come from??

Tradition??

It is written...

It is written...

It is written...

[metmom]

And yet, if these Scriptures required men 'to sort them out'; then after sorting such where did the Roman See gain its authority? If you cast the very 'compiling' of Scriptures in a shady man-made corner, then even the Scriptures Rome claims as its authority are in question.

Details, details....

RC's don't realize that they are shooting themselves in the foot with their line of questioning.

[metmom]

And yet, if these Scriptures required men 'to sort them out'; then after sorting such where did the Roman See gain its authority? If you cast the very 'compiling' of Scriptures in a shady man-made corner, then even the Scriptures Rome claims as its authority are in question.

There sure is an awfully strong concerted effort on the part of the RC's to call into question the integrity of Scripture.

[metmom]

And yet, if these Scriptures required men 'to sort them out'; then after sorting such where did the Roman See gain its authority?

By appealing to Scripture, what else?

Kind of ironic, isn't it that they impugn the veracity of the very thing they appeal to to give them their authority to call into question the very thing they appeal to.

And so it goes.