Actually, this is not attacking the Bible, rather it is pointing out that the reformers did debate about removing some books from the bible like Jude and Apocalypse, and removed Maccabees etc., and yet to accept canon is to accept the Councils that were the tool that approved canon
Yes, this thread is not meant to attack Scripture. The point is to provide a logically coherent account for trust in the Holy Scriptures.
Luther contradicted his own theory of "the Bible alone," since he rejected the Bible that was used by all Christians in his day. What authority did he have to change the canon of Scripture? None. And did he act infallibly when he did so? No.
Now, this is NOT an attack on Scripture itself. Rather, it is a different and logically coherent explanation for trust in the authority of Scripture.
This is not meant as an insult to Protestants. Catholics accept all that is true, so of course we share much in common with Protestants. But where differences exist, they must be acknowledged.