Inerrancy is not infallibility

I am aware of the distinction but both the Bible canon and magisterium teaching is declared infallible.

Ex cathedra papal statements are not the only type of infallible teachings. Those are indeed very rare. Councils represent another type of infallible extraordinary definitions. The third type is ordinary and universal magisterium or bishops worldwide definitive doctrinal teachings.

but that didn't add anything to the Protestant doctrine either, because both relied on work done by the catholic orthodox church a thousand years prior.

Exactly. This was why I went after OP. This is where Sola Scriptura fumbles and crashes if one is consistent with the position. RC and Orthodoxy are in the clear because both affirm apostolic succession, the infallibility of ecumenical councils and Church historicity (the Church being a both divine and human institution, the Body of Christ, here on Earth guided by the Spirit).

Separately I stated that the Protestant position of OSAS is not hyper-Calvinism (something which no Reformer ever taught). Check.

No reformer taught OSAS to begin with. It is a later development and I understand not all Protestants believe it. Reformers taught that one can loose their salvation if they apostatize and fall away (or that they never had true faith if that happens). OP believes it though and I was arguing against his flavor of protestantism.

Inerrancy is not infallibility

I am aware of the distinction but both the Bible canon and magisterium teaching is declared infallible.

Ex cathedra papal statements are not the only type of infallible teachings. Those are indeed very rare. Councils represent another type of extraordinary definitions. The third type is ordinary and universal magisterium or bishops worldwide definitive doctrinal teachings.

but that didn't add anything to the Protestant doctrine either, because both relied on work done by the catholic orthodox church a thousand years prior.

Exactly. This was why I went after OP. This is where Sola Scriptura fumbles and crashes if one is consistent with the position. RC and Orthodoxy are in the clear because both affirm apostolic succession, the infallibility of ecumenical councils and Church historicity (the Church being a both divine and human institution, the Body of Christ, here on Earth guided by the Spirit).

Separately I stated that the Protestant position of OSAS is not hyper-Calvinism (something which no Reformer ever taught). Check.

No reformer taught OSAS to begin with. It is a later development and I understand not all Protestants believe it. Reformers taught that one can loose their salvation if they apostatize and fall away (or that they never had true faith if that happens). OP believes it though and I was arguing against his flavor of protestantism.

Inerrancy is not infallibility

I am aware of the distinction but both the Bible canon and magisterium teaching is declared infallible.

Ex cathedra papal statements are not the only type of infallible teachings. Those are indeed very rare. Councils represent another type of extraordinary definitions. The third type is ordinary and universal magisterium or bishops worldwide definitive doctrinal teachings.

but that didn't add anything to the Protestant doctrine either, because both relied on work done by the catholic orthodox church a thousand years prior.

Exactly. This was why I went after OP. This is where Sola Scriptura fumbles and crashes if one is consistent with the position. RC and Orthodoxy are in the clear because both affirm apostolic succession, the infallibility of ecumenical councils and Church historicity (the Church being a both divine and human institution here on Earth guided by the Spirit).

Separately I stated that the Protestant position of OSAS is not hyper-Calvinism (something which no Reformer ever taught). Check.

No reformer taught OSAS to begin with. It is a later development and I understand not all Protestants believe it. Reformers taught that one can loose their salvation if they apostatize and fall away (or that they never had true faith if that happens). OP believes it though and I was arguing against his flavor of protestantism.

Inerrancy is not infallibility

I am aware of the distinction but both the Bible canon and magisterium teaching is declared infallible.

Ex cathedra papal statements are not the only type of infallible teachings. Those are indeed very rare. Councils represent another type of extraordinary definitions. The third type is ordinary and universal magisterium or bishops worldwide definitive doctrinal teachings.

but that didn't add anything to the Protestant doctrine either, because both relied on work done by the catholic orthodox church a thousand years prior.

Exactly. This was why I went after OP. This is where Sola Scriptura fumbles and crashes if one is consistent with the position. RC and Orthodoxy are in the clear because both affirm apostolic succession, the infallibility of ecumenical councils and Church historicity (the Church being a divine institution here on Earth guided by the Spirit).

Separately I stated that the Protestant position of OSAS is not hyper-Calvinism (something which no Reformer ever taught). Check.

No reformer taught OSAS to begin with. It is a later development and I understand not all Protestants believe it. Reformers taught that one can loose their salvation if they apostatize and fall away (or that they never had true faith if that happens). OP believes it though and I was arguing against his flavor of protestantism.

Inerrancy is not infallibility

I am aware of the distinction but both the Bible canon and magisterium teaching is declared infallible.

Ex cathedra papal statements are not the only type of infallible teachings. Those are indeed very rare. Councils represent another type of extraordinary definitions. The third type is ordinary and universal magisterium or bishops worldwide definitive doctrinal teachings.

but that didn't add anything to the Protestant doctrine either, because both relied on work done by the catholic orthodox church a thousand years prior.

Exactly. This was why I went after OP. This is where Sola Scriptura fumbles and crashes if one is consistent with the position. RC and Orthodoxy are in the clear because both affirm apostolic succession, the infallibility of ecumenical councils and Church historicity (the Church being the Body of Christ guided by the Spirit).

Separately I stated that the Protestant position of OSAS is not hyper-Calvinism (something which no Reformer ever taught). Check.

No reformer taught OSAS to begin with. It is a later development and I understand not all Protestants believe it. Reformers taught that one can loose their salvation if they apostatize and fall away (or that they never had true faith if that happens). OP believes it though and I was arguing against his flavor of protestantism.

Inerrancy is not infallibility

I am aware of the distinction but both the Bible canon and magisterium teaching is declared infallible.

Ex cathedra papal statements are not the only type of infallible teachings. Those are indeed very rare. Councils represent another type of extraordinary definitions. The third type is ordinary and universal magisterium or bishops worldwide definitive doctrinal teachings.

but that didn't add anything to the Protestant doctrine either, because both relied on work done by the catholic orthodox church a thousand years prior.

Exactly. This was why I went after OP. This is where Sola Scriptura fumbles and crashes if one is consistent with the position. RC and Orthodoxy are in the clear because both affirm apostolic succession, the infallibility of ecumenical councils and Church historicity.

Separately I stated that the Protestant position of OSAS is not hyper-Calvinism (something which no Reformer ever taught). Check.

No reformer taught OSAS to begin with. It is a later development and I understand not all Protestants believe it. Reformers taught that one can loose their salvation if they apostatize and fall away (or that they never had true faith if that happens). OP believes it though and I was arguing against his flavor of protestantism.