I have been following your arguments MLG, if I can call them that. They are straw men. The Apostolic and Church Fathers are not considered inspired; only the Apostles. But the Church is guided by the Holy Spirit and the Church as a whole (consensus patrum) did not accept everything the fathers wrote. That which the Church agreed upon as a whole is considered inspired and those are the decisions reached through payer in Ecumenical Councils.
The authors of the KJV mentioned in their original edition that they were not inspired in compiling this version of the Bible (based on many erroneous sources and froth with errors of which the very authors admit a couple of hundred). Yet most English-speaking Protestants use it as "inspired" word of God.
It was not my argument. "Kolokotronis" said they were both inspired, therefore I was questioning " Kolokotronis".
His comments are contrary to yours:
The Apostolic and Church Fathers are not considered inspired;
"Kolokotronis", said otherwise.
So, which of you is presenting the correct EO position?