In this little diagram Blogger and I are arguing about, we talk about what proceeded from what. The Church wrote the New Testament and explained the Old. She did not find the scripture in the glove compartment and say "I got the instructions, let's fire this thing up". If you want to know if the Church can teach in material contradiction of the scriptures, of course not. She would be contradicting herself. Could she teach in contraduiction of what various communities outside of the Church believe the scripture says, sure. Why not?
Where did the church get the information that they wrote in the New Testament?
If a church keeps its members cowered and fearful of their salvation, uncertain of Christ's perfect and finished sacrifice on the cross and impotent as far as proclaiming the Good News of the Gospel to all nations and races, then that church does not and will not bear good fruit.
The church is made up of all true believers and the word of God is God speaking to men, both ordained by God from before the foundation of the world. There's no need to segment the church from the word nor to order them in time. They have exsted from before time and they will exist until He returns again.
The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made... And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us" -- John 1:1-3,14
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Answering the Modern Roman Catholic Apologists
by Dr. John F. MacArthur, Jr "...It was inexcusable that tradition would be elevated to the level of Scripture in Judaism, because when God gave the law to Moses, it was in written form for a reason: to make it permanent and inviolable. The Lord made very plain that the truth He was revealing was not to be tampered with, augmented, or diminished in any way. His Word was the final authority in all matters: "You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you" (Deuteronomy 4:2). They were to observe His commandments assiduously, and neither supplement nor abrogate them by any other kind of "authority": "Whatever I command you, you shall be careful to do; you shall not add to nor take away from it" (Deuteronomy 12:32)."
In this little diagram Blogger and I are arguing about, we talk about what proceeded from what. The Church wrote the New Testament and explained the Old. She did not find the scripture in the glove compartment and say "I got the instructions, let's fire this thing up".
Yes, I've been following your discussion with Blogger with interest. In your diagram you have the truth itself and scripture flowing not directly from God, but through the lens of the Church. By definition, that means that the Church doesn't "have to" following what the Bible says, HOWEVER, the Bible does "have to" follow what the Church says. In your diagram, the Church is dependent on God and the truth and scripture are dependent on the Church. That means the Church trumps scripture because the Church, and not God directly, defines what scripture means. In our model God defines what scripture means and the Church is dependent on that.
When you say that "the Church" wrote the NT, you imply that the Magisterium as a body wrote it (perhaps similarly to the way the Constitution was drafted). We both know that's not the way it happened. Individuals wrote the manuscripts, and each was individually inspired by the Spirit, infallibly. The writings were not an act of "the Church". The Church accepted those individual writings later, much later in the whole. That moves both the scriptures and truth ahead of the Church in the diagram.