Which "rules" are those, exactly?
Pot, meet Kettle.
Both. Like Christ (the Word)---who is both 100% divine and 100% human---the Bible (the Word) is also both divine and human. That is the Christian doctrine of biblical inspiration.
I never claimed any such thing. Try again.
Which councils in particular?
Of course not.
No it wouldn't. This is merely a false assumption on your part, as I illustrated in Post #421 above. You seem to be having a difficult time comprehending precisely what biblical inspiration actually entails.
Apparently like yourself, I have no idea what you're talking about here. Try again.
Correct, Jesus knew absolutely nothing of the 16th-century Protestant doctrinal invention called sola scriptura. (See this.)
Go ahead and post your definition of "sola scriptura." I only know the definition I was taught at both Evangelical Protestant university and Evangelical Protestant seminary. :chuckle:
I'll wait until you provide your definition of sola scriptura before commenting on this text.
Not only does this biblical text say nothing whatsoever about "Scripture alone," it doesn't even say anything about "Scripture" period. Try again.
Not even close.
Merely a Straw Man Fallacy on your part, since I have never claimed any such position as you describe here.
You mean the authoritative Catholic Council of Nicea held in 325 A.D.? Of course I affirm its decrees, including those on the Incarnation and Trinity.
Post #421.
Yes, both God and men were involved in the process of Scripture's composition. God's inspiration in no way somehow negated or bypassed the personalities, knowledge, cultural mindset, or writing style and ability of the human writers. The Scriptures are God's Word (message) in human words, and the latter cannot properly be ignored it the Bible's interpretation.
I never claimed otherwise.
...but not MERELY or ONLY the influence of the Holy Spirit (see just above).
Agreed. But they were also what the human writers chose to write.
Agreed. We reject the Dictation Theory of biblical inspiration.
I've already affirmed exactly that. Scripture is BOTH Divine AND human.
Of course. Catholics may appeal to Scripture as AN authority without buying into the false 16th-century Protestant assumption that Scripture is the ONLY authority.Hmmm... You are appealing to Scripture for the authority of the apostolic tradition.
Post #398.
Any interpretation must account for ALL of the biblical data on the subject. Yours simply does not. The fact is that it utterly fails to account for the biblical content listed here and here.
The entire context of Scripture must be accounted for. Biblical Interpretation 101.
Yes, God has given us eternal life. The Bible is clear, however, that we can forfeit that divine gift through grave sin and rebellion (see cited sources above).
Yes---provided one "perseveres to the end" (Mt. 10:22; 24:13). (Again, see cited sources above.)
In fact, I did exactly that in Post #434 above.
Funny how non-Catholics like to charge Catholics with things that apply directly to themselves.
Again, funny how non-Catholics like to charge Catholics with things that apply directly to themselves. Thanks for merely proving my point.
Already answered (Post #434).
Strictly speaking, there's really no essential difference.
No, since all teachings of Tradition are at least implicitly contained in Scripture, and vice versa. One Traditional doctrine that comes to mind, however, which is virtually absent from Scripture itself is the Canon of the Bible.
Appealing to the basic authority of Scripture is not the same as sola scriptura. Catholics---who reject sola scriptura---do the former. So did Jesus Christ.