[daniel1212]

You could say Catholic bishops through Church counsels were responsible for discerning and codifying what books and letters constitute divinely inspired scripture. In this sense Catholic tradition, i.e., Church counsels made of Bishops/men framed what you and I today call the Bible.

Actually,

And rather than Rome being necessary to know what is of God, an authoritative body of wholly inspired Scripture had been established by the time of Christ, as manifest by the frequent appeals to Scripture, including "He expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself. Luke 24:27) And writings of which provided the prophetic and doctrinal epistemological foundation for the church.

Meanwhile there was no indisputable definitive canon for Catholicism until AFTER the death of Luther. Thus scholarly disagreements over the canonicity (proper) of certain books continued down through the centuries and right into Trent, until it provided the first "infallible," indisputable canon after the death of Luther.

Protestantism follows the canon of Hebrews, the most ancient OT canon, which is even affirmed within Catholicism: “the protocanonical books of the Old Testament correspond with those of the Bible of the Hebrews, and the Old Testament as received by Protestants.” “...the Hebrew Bible, which became the Old Testament of Protestantism.” (The Catholic Encyclopedia>Canon of the Old Testament; htttp://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03267a.htm) The Protestant canon of the Old Testament is the same as the Palestinian canon. (The Catholic Almanac, 1960, p. 217)

The Catholic church did not write the NT, for distinctive Catholic teachings are not manifest in the only wholly God-inspired, substantive, authoritative record of what the NT church believed (which is Scripture, in particular Acts through Revelation, which best shows how the NT church understood the gospels)

According to the Catholic logic that being the magisterial discerners and authorities on what is of God means that all their other like judgments are to be followed, then first century souls should have submitted to the judgment of those who sat in the seat of Moses, (Mt. 23:2; cf. Dt. 17"8-13) which judgments included which men and writings were of God and which were not, (Mk. 11:27-33) as the historical magisterial head over Israel which was the historical instrument and steward of Scripture, "because that unto them were committed the oracles of God," (Rm. 3:2) to whom pertaineth" the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises" (Rm. 9:4) of Divine guidance, presence and perpetuation as they believed, (Gn. 12:2,3; 17:4,7,8; Ex. 19:5; Lv. 10:11; Dt. 4:31; 17:8-13; Ps, 11:4,9; Is. 41:10, Ps. 89:33,34; Jer. 7:23) Yet instead they followed an itinerant Preacher whom the magisterium rejected, and whom the Messiah reproved them Scripture as being supreme, (Mk. 7:2-16) and established His Truth claims upon scriptural substantiation in word and in power, as did the early church as it began upon this basis. (Mt. 22:23-45; Lk. 24:27,44; Jn. 5:36,39; Acts 2:14-35; 4:33; 5:12; 15:6-21;17:2,11; 18:28; 28:23; Rm. 15:19; 2Cor. 12:12, etc.)

And instead they followed an itinerant Preacher whom the magisterium rejected, and which the Messiah reproved, based upon Scripture as being supreme, (Mk. 7:2-16) and established His Truth claims upon scriptural substantiation in word and in power, as did the early church as it began upon this basis. (Mt. 22:23-45; Lk. 24:27,44; Jn. 5:36,39; Acts 2:14-35; 4:33; 5:12; 15:6-21;17:2,11; 18:28; 28:23; Rm. 15:19; 2Cor. 12:12, etc.)

For God manifestly made writing His most-reliable means of authoritative preservation. (Exodus 17:14; 34:1,27; Deuteronomy 10:4; 17:18; 27:3,8; 31:24; Joshua 1:8; 2 Chronicles 34:15,18-19, 30-31; Psalm 19:7-11; 119; Isaiah 30:8; Jeremiah 30:2; Matthew 4:5-7; 22:29; Luke 24:44,45; John 5:46,47; John 20:31; Acts 17:2,11; 18:28; Revelation 1:1; 20:12, 15;

And thus as abundantly evidenced , as written, Scripture became the transcendent supreme standard for obedience and testing and establishing truth claims as the wholly Divinely inspired and assured, Word of God. Thus the veracity of even apostolic oral preaching could be subject to testing by Scripture, (Acts 17:11) and not vice versa.

[JesusIsLord]

Thus the veracity of even apostolic oral preaching could be subject to testing by Scripture, (Acts 17:11) and not vice versa.

I wouldn't argue your point. However, it manifests a problem, as I see it. The World Christian Encyclopedia claims there are 30K+ Protestant denominations. Why? One reason is interpretation of scripture. There are many areas of disagreement between Christians, not just Protestant and Catholics. Let's take one major area. There is great divide between Protestants who believe that some or all the gifts of the Holy Spirit stopped functioning after the 1st century - others, just the opposite. Why the disagreement? The answer is interpretation of scripture.

I would posit that you and I can interpret scripture to mean whatever we want it to mean. Ergo, thousands of denominations.

You could argue that personal interpretation is better than being spoon fed by a magisterium or like bodies in Protestant churches that serve a similar purpose. I wouldn't disagree. I believe in Sola Scriptura but the problem is not validity of the scripture but that every Christian or Christian denomination becomes an interpreter. You may not see this as a problem, I do.

As I mentioned in my earlier post, I see through a glass darkly now. I don't claim to have or know the correct interpretation of all scripture. My faith is the the life, death and resurrection of Christ for my salvation. Whatever I misunderstand or get wrong on this side of heaven, I trust there is grace for my darkness. Jn 3:16,17