Replies

Thus, even though the claims of Christ and the apostles were established upon Scripture (the law, the prophets, and wisdom books, which were established as being Divine without an assuredly infallible magisterium) in text and in power, it being the supreme transcendent standard for Truth, and even though the Catholic will condescend to appealing to Scripture as if it were the supreme authority, his goal is to bring one to submit to the church of Rome as the supreme, assuredly infallible authority, which she has infallibly defined herself to be. And assurance of the veracity of her pronouncements is not dependent upon the weight of Scriptural substantiation.

And ironically, appealing to the authority of Scripture to give itself authority and then denying anyone else the right to appeal to Scripture as the final authority in all matters pertaining to faith and morals AND appealing to Scriptural authority to give itself authority OVER Scripture.

If Scirpture is the authority by which the RCC has its authority, then it cannot have more authority than the document (Or person) which gave it that authority. It cannot have authority over that which gave it authority because that which gives someone or something authority is the greater authority than the people to which it is given.

"If Scirpture is the authority by which the RCC has its authority, then it cannot have more authority than the document (Or person) which gave it that authority."

Your syllogism is flawed. Since the Church received its authority from God no higher authority is possible or necessary. Scripture itself is not God. Scripture, like the Holy Tradition and the Church draws its authority directly from God.

May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.

If Scirpture is the authority by which the RCC has its authority, then it cannot have more authority than the document (Or person) which gave it that authority.

You have it backward. The Church does not derive it's authority from Scripture; Scripture derives it's authority from the Church.

“If Scripture is the authority by which the RCC has its authority, then it cannot have more authority than the document (Or person) which gave it that authority.”

The reality is that while Scripture (along with Tradition and history) is invoked in support of RC claims to authority, that is an interpretation of such, in which others would differ, including the EOs on some aspects, and what makes the RC interpretation authoritative is her claim to assured infallibility.

The RC argues that she gave us the Bible and thus she uniquely has the authority to tell us what is means, in this case that it means she has the authority.

However, according to that principal the would-be followers of the itinerant preacher in Galilee should have submitted to the authority who sat in the seat of Moses, over the nation that had the promises of the Lord’s presence, guidance and perpetuation.

We instead, as said before, hold that writings were supernaturally established as Divine (due to its Heavenly qualities and attestation), and that Truth was given and preserved without an assuredly infallible magisterium - and God can raise up men to correct those who presume as much - while Truth claims are established upon conformity with Scripture in text and in power, and thus the church began and is preserved as the body of Christ, He in them and they in Him, though in much need of perfecting.