3a - Antony to Verga
Cross Examination 2

1)   You stated  that the law  given through angels wasn't even mentioned in the O.T., (as an evidence for unwritten tradition).
I proved you wrong (Ex 19:9-25, Deut 33:2, Ps 68:17).   Second request:  Do you now retract?

2)  After  listing some items that Protestants disagree on, you summoned  2 Peter 1:20 into service  as a polemic against private interpretation, leading us to suppose that only the RCC has the right to interpret Scripture in view of all this caterwauling.
My understanding of Peter is that he's saying no prophecy of Scripture is made by private interpretation.  In other words, the prophets are not making up their own prophecies, but rather are receiving them by divine inspiration.

My NAB Catholic Commentary notes BOTH of our respective understandings:  in that it refers to EITHER  "the inspiration of the Bible"   OR, "against private interpretation."

Because the Magisterium has not resolved the ambiguity,

A)  Will you retract your use of this verse to castigate Protestants?  If not, why should I accept  your  confident definition of this verse over the NAB?

B)  Since there's disagreement on the precise meaning of First Peter  amongst Catholics,  why then do you criticize Protestants for having different views on infant baptism?

3)  In your opening statement, you disavowed the superiority of Scripture over other methods of revelation.  But in Mark 7:6-13, the Jews were claiming the Corban Tradition was of divine origin.   Yet Christ REJECTED it, and on what basis?  It's incompatibility with Scripture!    Ergo,  that which was claimed to have a divine pedigree, was subordinate  to and hence, INFERIOR to Scripture.  How do you reconcile the view Jesus had, with yours, which is diametrically opposite?

4)    Can you provide any Catholic source that uses  theopnuestos  to describe Tradition?  

Word Count: 300