Note this carefully: I did not raise the issue of men & sin. You did! You crafted the canonization of saints to be at such an elevated level, it almost sounds like we're talking about unquestionably pure men of God. And I'm telling you that every one of those saints was a sinner in need of a holy God and a Holy Spirit and a Holy Jesus who saved them and separated them from their sin.
I've got further news for you: every person who has been part of "canonizing" past saints is a "sinner" too. Are you trying to tell me that they have inerrantly canonized every person and made not a single mistake?
So, what if I had said, in response to your mention that the Church who canonized people, that I said what you said: "You can only believe in a church run by sinless men, I take it?"
Final question: Where in the NT did the disciples "canonize" the saints of the OT other than giving them recognition like Hebrews 11? Recognition is super. But, given that Rahab was a prostitute who was included in Hebrews 11, I somehow think that the Rahabs of the world are not among the elite list found in the canonization to which you refer. (I'm open to being enlightened on that, tho).
You mean it's possibly that a few Ted Haggard's could have slipped by with "secret sin" and got cannonized? :)
Er, the infallible Old Testament itself canonized Elijah and Enoch, and arguably Moses, too.
Yes, I think we know that already.
And now that salvation and that separation have been accomplished. They're not sinners any more, they've been cleansed from sin and are perfected in the presence of a holy and righteous God, and Jesus is "not ashamed to call them brothers" (Heb 2:11)
Next ... ???