By your long list of citations, you did not show that each individual has the right to interpret Scripture and thus you did not answer your friend’s challenge.
Assertion and nothing more. The passages themselves show that Jesus expected his hearers to already know both what the canon was and what its proper interpretation was. He asks them very matter of factly, “haven’t you read…”
At the most, you show that Jesus had authority to interpret Scripture, and this is not in dispute.
No, the passages prove that Jesus expected those who had the Scriptures to be able to read and understand them themselves.
The fact that he referred his listeners to the Scriptures proves nothing: Catholics also cite Scripture and hold it as authoritative (though not in a formally sufficient sense which the Bible does not even claim for itself), but they do not hold that it is open to individual interpretation.
You’ve missed the whole point. Jesus held them accountable for knowing, as individuals, the proper interpretation without an infallible guide.
Jesus and his contemporaries who were fellow Jews operated on the assumption that certain writings were inspired. Aside from the fact that the Pharisees and Saducees (his main Jewish opponents) accepted different canons, the fact of canonicity was not an issue for them, and has no bearing on the main issue, which is interpretation.
Right on. The fact of canonicity was known without an external, infallible group of men to tell them.
The reason the fact that there are scores of disagreeing Protestant denoms is important is because it demonstrates the failure of the perpiscuity of Scripture belief.
We are united in the gospel which is why I accept all of my Protestant brethren as brothers in Christ, while Neo-Catholics consider Traditionalists and sedevacantists to be schismatic and heretical. The irony is thus quite striking - but this is irrelevant. Let’s stay focused on the issue before us.
Give an adequate answer to your friend’s challenge. Then we’ll talk.
I’ve heard lots of smoke and mirrors thus far, but no one has taken up the issue before us as of right now. Why did the Lord Jesus cite Scripture to people expecting them to have already read it, to know that it was Scripture, and to know its correct interpretation? The citations prove that He did so. And if you disagree with that, show me from the text that such is not the case.