No. I'm saying that just as the Holy Spirit worked through sinful, fallible men to create the Bible, the Holy Spirit also works through sinful, fallible men in the Church. How can Protestants say that the Church is not trustworthy because it is composed of fallible men, but have no problem with a Book written by fallible men.
The Roman Catholic "Church" does--just showed you from its own catechism.
Really? I didn't see the line where it said God is not sovereign.
the tired old canard of "man made" ideas are trotted out.
It's not a canard, and it's trotted out again because it's true again.
Try learning what Sola Scriptura really means;
Stop acting like I don't.
education is a good thing!
That's why I'm giving you one.
How can it be said? Because it's true. Scripture is inerrant -- it was not "written" by fallible men in that they originated the content; the Holy Spirit -- God -- inspired them to write scripture. The Roman Catholic "Church" isn't responsible for writing the Bible; God's word would be made manifest regardless -- as it was made manifest through the actions of GOD ALMIGHTY. He used fallible men, true -- just like he used a fallible, fallen woman named Mary to bear Christ -- to record HIS words. We have scripture despite the Romish "Church."
Really? I didn't see the line where it said God is not sovereign.
Nice attempt at deflection -- the quote from the catechism spoke specifically of Mary's "roles" -- one of which the "Church" defines as 'Mediatrix' -- I challenged you to find that in scripture in light of 1 Tim. 2:5. But, instead of confronting that, you ask about sovereignty? Go back and re-read the post.
Stop acting like I don't.
Who's acting? Not me. It IS an old, worn-out canard flung about by the Roman Catholic "Church" to try to refute Sola Scriptura without really knowing what means. Do you think it means that you have to find something word-for-word in scripture? If you do, you're incorrect. Basically it means that scripture is the ultimate authority for doctrine and teaching -- because it is the inerrant, inspired word of God.
That's why I'm giving you one.
That's a laugh! Got your ruler handy? *Snort* Gimme a break. I'm still waiting for an explanation for the conundrum between the Roman Catholic "Church" catechism that ascribes to Mary the authority to mediate when it stands in direct opposition to 1 Tim. 2:5... you know... God's word. "Educate" me on that...
Keep swingin' --
Hoss
“How can Protestants say that the Church is not trustworthy because it is composed of fallible men, but have no problem with a Book written by fallible men.”
Actually, evangelicals do most universally concur on truths which have been held of old which have sound Scriptural warrant and conflation, such as are expressed in the Apostles Creed, and are foremost adversaries against those who deny such, which are a result of holding men or an office as effectively infallible. And so they also contend against traditions of men which lack such warrant and conflation with Scripture, but are against it.
Thus, is not simply a matter of distrust of men but of holding the RCC as if they are infallible, which claim is based upon their claim to formulaic infallibility, which de facto renders statements infallible (if not necessarily the arguments behind them) when declared in accordance with their infallibly declared (scope and content-based) criteria, including their own claim to be infallible. But which still have need of some interpretation.
Moreover, your logic would require us to submit to the Jews, since it is expressly (versus of Rome) said of them that they were given stewardship of Scripture. (Rm. 3:2;9:4)
The way men of God and writings of God became established as such was by their heavenly qualities, supernatural Divine attestation, and their progressive complementary conflation with each other. And as such became established - most being before Rome’s claim to an infallible magisterium - they became the standard by which further revelation was tested by.
Holding Scriptures as supreme does not negate the teaching magisterium of the church, and in fact it materially establishes it, but it makes it subject to the Scriptures, rather than being the supreme authority on faith and morals, as possessing formulaic infallibility.
And while the Scriptures appeal to fallible human understanding in providing for assurance of truth, (1Jn. 5:13) those who hold Scriptures as supreme cannot claim they are infallible, but can only look to the Scriptures as the only objective, transcendent infallible authority, as they alone are affirmed to be so, (2Tim. 3:15-17) not a church office.