But we do not share that view. I think you're a Sola Scriptura person --- amirite? ---while I am quite definitely not.
As a consequence, the stunning discovery that "Our Lady, Untier of Knots" does not appear in the Bible, does not disconcert me in the least.
Our discussions often go off at cross-purposes, because you evidently think I should consider a Catholic doctrine "disproved" if it is not commanded or dispositively proven from the Bible. This is applying a too-narrow criterion. We Catholics believe in Sacred Tradition and in the authority of the Church --- both on Biblical grounds, as the Bible itself teaches both the authority of Sacred Tradition (oral teachings) plus the authority of the Church as such.
So it occurs to me, that when I am not cast down by Sola Scriptural arguments, some may think this is obstinacy on my part. It's not obstinacy. It's that I am not making a Sola Scriptura argument.
Well; I MIGHT think this. Have I stated such any where; or are you gathering some straw to built up a point again?
Rome's Sola Scriptura boogey man (that most every Catholic I've run into adheres to) is a phrase DESIGNED to put a Prot on the defensive.
Kinda like a lizard that sheds it's tail while slithering away to safety.
We Protestants agree that Rome's assembled book is GOOD ENOUGH to get people saved.
While Rome; apparently; is convinced that it is not.
Where do YOU stand with my claim here?
And; apparently; neither does the FACT that some Catholics actually APPLY this TITLE to Mary disconcert you.
That simply will not do, for sanctioning doctrine merely if it is not disproven in the Bible opens up the door for all sorts of cultic teaching or such as the Talmud can provide. Instead the premise is that unless the veracity of something rests upon Scriptural substantiation then it is not to be made binding belief. Which the truths we both affirm do.
We Catholics believe in Sacred Tradition and in the authority of the Church --- both on Biblical grounds, as the Bible itself teaches both the authority of Sacred Tradition (oral teachings) plus the authority of the Church as such.
A SS preacher can enjoin obedience to oral teaching of Scriptural Truths, and can also hold to some traditions that are not in Scripture, if consistent with it, but not as binding, but cannot presume to be speaking as wholly inspired of God, nor to be provided new revelation as apostles and NT writers could. And neither does Rome claim to be speaking thusly. Even if she spoke infallibly, that would not make it fully equal with the wholly inspired word of God, which has God as its author, unlike merely "infallible" teaching. But Catholic traditions at issue both lack Scriptural warrant and are contrary to it.