>>You are switching the topic here. The Church fathers are far more reliable than a bunch of rebels who came out of the woodwork 1500 years after Christ. Hardly. Why don't you answer the question? To what authority do the patristic commentaries appeal for primacy? What makes them the correct sources for information?
If you want to split hairs over fallibility then let’s end this and call it a draw because even if the Bible is inerrant, no Protestant is.
IF the Bible is inerrant? So... you're saying God-breathed scripture errs? And you say Protestantism is fabricated!? Wow. Just wow.
We have every right -- in fact, we have a DUTY to call out and refute ANY OTHER GOSPEL. And that IS what the Roman Catholic Church is... another false gospel.
Hoss
Yes!!!!Protestantism is 100 percent fabricated. I trust commentaries that were not tainted by the Protestant-Roman Catholic schism before I'll trust anything from Luther or even St. Thomas Aquinas for that matter. The Church Fathers were far closer to the source than either you or I. I'm saying it height of arrogance to presume your own infallibility in your sectarian understanding of the scriptures that evolved out of the same philosophy that later gave birth to militant atheism and nihilism.
