Ephesians 3:3-5 (New International Version)
3that is, the mystery made known to me by revelation, as I have already written briefly. 4In reading this, then, you will be able to understand my insight into the mystery of Christ, 5which was not made known to men in other generations as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to God’s holy apostles and prophets.
The Church Fathers believed what Paul said in Eph 3:3-5, that the scripture could be understood by merely reading it. They indicated that the scriptures themselves were clear, so clear, they even criticized the heretics for getting it wrong. If those outside the church and common pew dwellers are unable to understand the Bible themselves as the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches teach, then why did the apostolic fathers expect the heretics to understand the Bible with their own human skills? (Tertullian, The Flesh of Christ, ch 20), (Athanasius, On the Incarnation of the Word, 56), (Hilary of Poitiers, On the Trinity, Book 1, 35), (Hilary of Poitiers, On the Trinity, Book 7, 16)
Does Eph 3 really say, that ALL of scripture is clear merely by reading it?
2 Peter 3:16
As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are **unlearned and unstable **wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
If something is hard to understand, does that not mean it is not always clear to the reader what it means?
When reading the questions ask,
What are the authors assumptions?
What in history or scripture is he ignoring?
Where can I read about a council?
Are there levels or distinctions that he is ignoring?
Is he confusing dogma with disciplines?
Is he honestly stating the position of others?
Is there a strawman?
Is this an argument based on ignorance?
Is this an circular reasoning argument?
Once you apply these above questions to each of his questions, the “irrefutiable” disappears.