If anyone adds anything to them

[zz912]

This is not exactly correct.
Just to give two examples:

The “he who has no sin, cast the first stone” scene was not in the early copies of the gospels and added a few hundred years later…

And when Catholic priest and theologian Desiderius Erasmus prepared the Novum Instrumentum omne– the first printed Greek text of the New Testament in 1516, he was told to add in a line that was not in any of the early Greek texts…the line in first John, Chapter 5, verses 7 and 8: “there are three witnesses in heaven…the father, the word, and the holy spirit…and these three are one…”
(or is this considered a Protestant edition?)

.

.

Citation please.

 

[zz912]

Sola scriptura is the idea that all theology must come from the Bible, and my grandpa is using this verse to back up that idea.

He didn’t specifically claim that there are any Catholic techings that are not in the Bible at all, but I suppose it was implied. There are many I can’t find in the Bible, so I didn’t think to argue the point. The first thing that comes to mind is the Immaculate Conception- I’ve never seen anything in the Bible that backs up the idea that Mary was sinless.

Research into “full of grace”. The angel declares her as ALREADY full of grace.

 

[Kamaduck]

Research into “full of grace”. The angel declares her as ALREADY full of grace.

Very interesting. I learned something new there.

But are you really saying there are no Catholic teachings that are not found in the Bible? That seems hard to believe. :ehh:

If that’s true, why would Catholics bother to say that sola scriptura is incorrect?

 

[zz912]

Very interesting. I learned something new there.

But are you really saying there are no Catholic teachings that are not found in the Bible? That seems hard to believe. :ehh:

If that’s true, why would Catholics bother to say that sola scriptura is incorrect?

I’ve found at least implicit evidence for just about every Catholic teaching. But when you don’t have the Sacred Tradition, and the Magisterium, you will make errors (as we’ve seen in Protestantism) in your reading of Scripture.

And sola scriptura MUST be false, because you need something outside Scripture, with at least the same authority, to declare what books even BELONG in Scripture.

 

[Kamaduck]

I’ve found at least implicit evidence for just about every Catholic teaching. But when you don’t have the Sacred Tradition, and the Magisterium, you will make errors (as we’ve seen in Protestantism) in your reading of Scripture.

And sola scriptura MUST be false, because you need something outside Scripture, with at least the same authority, to declare what books even BELONG in Scripture.

The second argument makes the most sense to me. When you put it that way, it seems rather obvious.

Thanks.