That could be a danger, but I think the idea was the Bible became “Pope,” in other words, the Bible became the standard rather than the current Pope or the college of cardinals, etc.
I prefer this. Popes and Cardinals are fallible. God’s word is not.
Of course my interpretation of God’s word could be fallible; but so could theirs.
I think it is the best thing to start with the infallible thing: God’s word. I’m not denying that it can be misinterpreted. But I say the Pope can misinterpret just like any other man.
“Popes and Cardinals are fallible. God’s word is not.”
Well put.
How can one know what part is infallible, if it is so often misinterpreted?
Well & good . . . except that “God’s word” says “Thou art Peter and upon this rock I shall build my church.” God (Christ) didn’t say “Thou art Barney . . .” (or Paul or John or even Simon). And the apostles and their successors saw Peter and his successors as the leader(s) of the church. Why is it harder to believe that Christ left an earthly authority than to believe that Christ was God? In even simpler terms, why *believe* anything at all? Why not just figure that each of us knows best and the hell with scripture or churches or anything else that might impede our own, personal, subjective notions?
“the Bible became the standard “ after Luther tossed out the Books that didn’t quite fit his worldview notably Maccabees.