Z
1. "Catholic" is an adjective and "Christian" is a noun; the two term cannot properly be put in opposition. As stated you imply that Catholics are not Christians when what you really mean is that they are not "Bible Christians". Also, unless 2 Tim. 3:16, 17 is prophetic, it doesn't include the NT which you would say is "Scripture"; in fact, Paul plainly states what he is referring to in v. 15 and he is plainly referring to the OT. If Scripture is "perfectly and fully sufficient for everything in the Christian life," then why is the Church, not the Bible, "the pillar and foundation of the truth" (1 Tim. 3:15)? Indeed can you show me the Scripture that lists what books are to be included in Scripture? And your statement "that for a church tradition to be valid, it must be based on the clear teaching of Scripture" begs the question, "According to whose understanding?" Catholics don't see any contradictions between their traditions and Scripture because they have been taught a different understanding of Scripture than the one you hold. How one understands a particular Scripture is entirely dependent upon one's upbringing, education, experience and prejudices. You are doing a good job of generalizing statements to the point that it sounds as if your understanding of Scripture is God's understanding of it. You are not infallible so you could be wrong on a number of points but you will never learn you mistakes if you keep acting as if your understanding of Scripture is "the" understanding of Scripture.
2. You make two statements which are mutually contradictory: that "Christ is our one and only mediator" and that "both Christ and the Holy Spirit are already interceding on our behalf" cannot both be true. Obviously there is a difference between intercession and mediation here. You are creating a false dilemma. Christ is our only mediator in the sense that He is the only one who exists who is fully God and fully man. Mary is co-mediatress because it was through her that Christ took upon Himself our human nature. Obviously she has a special relationship with both God and the Son in that she is the only human being who bore the Son in her womb. Now don't get twisted up because my trinitarian terminology is unfamiliar to you.
While there is only one mediator, one god-man, Jesus Christ, there are many intercessories besides the Holy Spirit and Christ. If you Bible Christians really believe what you say, then why in the world do you pray for one another? As soon as you offer a prayer for another, you have become an intercessory and depending on how you word it, you may be placing yourself as mediator.
If we were in a doctor's office and I asked you for a magazine, you would probably hand me a publication made out of cheap paper. If we were on the battlefield and I asked you for a magazine, you would probably hand me a box of ammo. The difference in meaning isn't in the word itself but in the context in which it is used. Proving differences between Catholics and Bible Christians doesn't prove one right and the other wrong. If Catholicism is wrong, you will have to study it to the point that you know it so thoroughly you can justifiably claim to have found an inherent contradiction: Catholicism says thus and so but it also claims this and both cannot be true. All you are doing is comparing apples and oranges and stating the obvious. An apple isn't wrong for being an apple nor is an orange wrong for being an orange but try to make an apple pie with oranges or make orange juice with apples there are going to be problems.
3. You are almost correct concerning the Catholic view of salvation. It is better said that salvation is past (justification), present (sanctification) and future (glorification). Sadly, your description of salvation demonstrates a profound misunderstanding or lack of understanding of our true humanity. You see, there were two divisions in the Fall: a division in mankind between Adam and Eve as well as a division between God and mankind. True salvation overcomes both divisions. The "new creation" you speak of is not an individual human restored to God; it is the Church which reunites both divisions. You probably don't see any need for the Church in salvation because you don't understand the full consequences of the Fall.
In closing, if you spent half as much effort in trying to understand Catholicism as you spend in trying to prove it wrong, you might actually learn something. The difference between you and a Catholic isn't that he doesn't follow the Bible and you do. Each of you follows a different tradition by which you interpret the Bible. Until you can see that this is the real difference, you will never understand.
2. You make two statements which are mutually contradictory: that "Christ is our one and only mediator" and that "both Christ and the Holy Spirit are already interceding on our behalf" cannot both be true. Obviously there is a difference between intercession and mediation here. You are creating a false dilemma. Christ is our only mediator in the sense that He is the only one who exists who is fully God and fully man. Mary is co-mediatress because it was through her that Christ took upon Himself our human nature. Obviously she has a special relationship with both God and the Son in that she is the only human being who bore the Son in her womb. Now don't get twisted up because my trinitarian terminology is unfamiliar to you.
While there is only one mediator, one god-man, Jesus Christ, there are many intercessories besides the Holy Spirit and Christ. If you Bible Christians really believe what you say, then why in the world do you pray for one another? As soon as you offer a prayer for another, you have become an intercessory and depending on how you word it, you may be placing yourself as mediator.
If we were in a doctor's office and I asked you for a magazine, you would probably hand me a publication made out of cheap paper. If we were on the battlefield and I asked you for a magazine, you would probably hand me a box of ammo. The difference in meaning isn't in the word itself but in the context in which it is used. Proving differences between Catholics and Bible Christians doesn't prove one right and the other wrong. If Catholicism is wrong, you will have to study it to the point that you know it so thoroughly you can justifiably claim to have found an inherent contradiction: Catholicism says thus and so but it also claims this and both cannot be true. All you are doing is comparing apples and oranges and stating the obvious. An apple isn't wrong for being an apple nor is an orange wrong for being an orange but try to make an apple pie with oranges or make orange juice with apples there are going to be problems.
3. You are almost correct concerning the Catholic view of salvation. It is better said that salvation is past (justification), present (sanctification) and future (glorification). Sadly, your description of salvation demonstrates a profound misunderstanding or lack of understanding of our true humanity. You see, there were two divisions in the Fall: a division in mankind between Adam and Eve as well as a division between God and mankind. True salvation overcomes both divisions. The "new creation" you speak of is not an individual human restored to God; it is the Church which reunites both divisions. You probably don't see any need for the Church in salvation because you don't understand the full consequences of the Fall.
In closing, if you spent half as much effort in trying to understand Catholicism as you spend in trying to prove it wrong, you might actually learn something. The difference between you and a Catholic isn't that he doesn't follow the Bible and you do. Each of you follows a different tradition by which you interpret the Bible. Until you can see that this is the real difference, you will never understand.