Look, it was left to Peter and His disciples to write down and TEACH the words of God. Thus an authoritative structure was established. It had to be ONE truth, and Christ as far as we can tell established ONE Church to deliver his Great Commission until the end of times. He instituted the Eucharist for this purpose as confirmed by Scripture, and early and unbroken Church tradition and revelation. Saints, scholars, theologians from Augustine to Aquinas to Newman to Benedict confirm all of this.
From the very inception, this was all about authority and how it was handed down, by interpretation and tradition. This was not left to Luther, to you, me, or to the David Koresh’s and Billy Graham’s or Jim Jones’s of this world. When Christ says one must forgive 70 x7, that’s an expression and it doesn’t mean one forgives upto 490 times. Words require interpretation by not only text but by context, design, purpose, and traditions. For example, Christ used a number of parables relate to farming because this is how his audience could relate to.
Thus it is the ridiculous nature of you Scripturalists that have brought about a scandalous a flurry of heresies leading to several thousands of Protestants sects including a Church of God where serpent worship rituals are found in Kentucky. This sheer and manifest folly doesn’t seem to open up your mind when scores if not hundreds of theologians form a variety of denominations have seen the light and converted to the Catholic Faith.
But then again, low-information Christians think they can crack open the pages of Scripture, select some quotes from here and there, and give it any interpretation they believe comports with “their” idea of what is in Scripture. Hence the prosperity Gospel of the Joel Osteen and the revolutionary Gospel of Jeremiah Wrights.
The Catholic Church is the mustard tree, it is the Rock of Peter, its Catechism is the infallible teaching of the Christ founded on the four pillars of scripture, tradition, revelation and faith.
The fact remains that the church did not begin under you model, but began upon the basis of Scriptural substantiation in dissent from those who were the stewards of Scripture, and the inheritors of promises of God's presence and preservation, and had historical descent, and sat in the seat of Moses with a structure and authority.
And thus under the Roman model, in which those whom she rejects are invalid (based upon the premise that she is the stewards of Scripture, and the inheritor of promises of God's presence and preservation, and has historical descent), then the church itself began on an invalid basis.
And while you can rant about Al Sharptons, ignoring the unity that has made evangelicals overall more unified in conservative views than even weekly Catholics, your model has the problem is competing sola ecclesia churches each claiming to be the OTC based upon their interpretation of evidence.
You can argue for Rome being the OTC based on evidence, yet that is not your basis for assurance, as it is for evangelical types regarding Scripture, but your assurance is based upon the premise that Rome's interpretation of Scripture, Tradition and history is correct. But which is not the basis under which the church began.
But which is why you never actually deal with the fundamental problems with your polemic, and what refutes the false premises, logical fallacies and broken record irrelevant rants about men that you invoke. Thus you have marginalized yourself as just another ranter.