I never said they did. Gee how words do get twisted.
There was a question as to whether a Gentile had to be circumcised in order to be a Christian. Must they first be subject to the old covenant before being received into the new.
Some said yes. Paul said no. The Council of Jerusalem was called to decide this issue. The Holy Spirit led them to the answer.
That is a development of doctrine under the authority given the Apostles by Christ and under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
That is the pattern set and since followed by the Church.
“That is the pattern set and since followed by the Church.”
The claim of the RCC isn’t that they are creating new doctrine, but that they are the heirs to the doctrines delivered by the Apostles, especially for all the ones allegedly not written down. If one is “developing” brand new doctrine, which even contradicts previous “tradition,” this cannot be something that they received from the Apostles.
There is nothing to object to as regards the church making magisterial judgments, and every one does, Rome being one and which has significant disagreements with the EOs, for one.
The issue is the basis for the veracity of their judgments, that of Scriptural substantiation, which Acts 15 exampled, (Gn. 35:2; Ex. 34:15-16; Ezek. 30:30,31; Gn. 34:1,2,31; Dt. 22:28,29; 2Chron. 21:11; Gn. 9:4; Lv. 7:27; 17:10-14) and which we know by Scripture, or the premise of assured conciliar or papal infallibility as per Rome, which is not what is taught, nor was this necessary for writings to be established as Scripture and saving faith preserved.
Gee...
I wonder if He knew what JESUS said in John 6:28-29?