Hey Nicea you said to boastinjesus:
I eventually learned, long ago, that the preceding is a historical fact among all protestant scholars. Heck, the first and second and third century Christians, if asked what the Trinity was, would not have known.
It doesn’t.
Which is not the case with apostolic tradition. It was this apostolic tradition that allowed the CC to determine the canon. Since all the apostles were deceased at the time the canon was decided, the CC had to rely on the apostolic tradition of their successors, therefore the bible must be an apostolic tradition of the CC which illustrates that oral tradition did not cease with the death of the last apostle. Other examples of apostolic tradition, that I would hope boastinjesus would maybe acknowledge:
The teachings on the Trinity, the hypostatic union (Jesus had a divine and human nature in one person), the filioque (that the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son), and knowing, for example, that the Gospel of Matthew was written by Matthew.
Nowhere…
There are no passages that explicitly or even implicitly claim that the Bible alone is the final authority. Much to my surprise, as a former Lutheran, no one embraced that notion until the reformation.
Another thing that occurred to me long ago:
Even if scripture was the Christians sole rule of faith, it relies solely on private interpretation because scripture cannot interpret scripture and that is not scriptural.
The best I could throw at you, as a former protestant, would have been, 2 Timothy and I was often too embarrassed to commit to it because it falls short for so many reasons.
