I did not say that any of the writings within the Canon of Scripture were not inerrant or original. I said not all writings by or attributed to actual Apostles were inerrant. These include Gnostic works like the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Judas and the Proto-Evangelium of James. The test of Canonicity was both what to include and what to exclude.
Nowhere did I say that "none of the Apostles considered their works scripture". And yes, when the Canon of Scripture was proclaimed in the late 4th century the "Romanists" shared the proclamation with the whole world.
Peace be with you
“I did not say that any of the writings within the Canon of Scripture were not inerrant or original.”
What you are saying is that no one knew the scripture was the scripture until some Papist person figured it out a few hundred years later, as if no one knew anything, or could know anything, until a decree was made sorting it out.
For what logical reason should we assume that the Apostles, who believed they were writing scripture, did not take measures to insure their works were widely available enough that Polycarp and Ignatius could quote from so many? I thought since the printing press had not been made, there’s no way someone who received an epistle of Paul could have had something from, say, Peter or John.
“These include Gnostic works like the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Judas and the Proto-Evangelium of James.”
Looks like Ignatius and Polycarp did not have any problems with the Gnostic works.
“And yes, when the Canon of Scripture was proclaimed in the late 4th century the “Romanists” shared the proclamation with the whole world.”
Really? So, they didn’t have a printing press either, yet could not do what the Apostles could do. Sorry, but that doesn’t appear to have been a real problem for getting the scriptures out to the church. I mean, with 5,000 New Testament manuscripts in GREEK that have been discovered (which implies a whole lot more were available), I don’t think the lack of a printing press or modern transportation was a serious problem for them.
Typo again: “could do what the Apostles could not do”. A misplaced “not.”
what they proclaimed was that which could be found to be Apostolic, and most widely considered inerrant & inspired, accepted as such, by the majority of the churches, for at least a couple of CENTURIES previous. And besides...it was not chiefly those of the Latin church which did the heavy lifting, in the 4th century. They were not yet ascendant, yet claimed such for their own church among churches, a century or so later.