[Natural Law]

"You forget, the Apostles were alive and everything they said was authoritative. Yet, since they considered themselves scripture-producers, it’s illogical to think they would leave the most important parts of Christianity up to an oral tradition, so that any Tom, Dick or Autolycus can claim to be spreading something important through word of mouth."

The Apostles, the Disciples and their students and converts had spread the Gospel from India, to Russia and the Balkans, to Spain and North Africa by the end of the first century. Not all Apostles wrote and not all writings attributed to them are inerrant or original. Also consider that Mark and Luke were not Apostles or even eye witnesses, yet the New Testament captures what they learned through the Traditions.

Peace be with you

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

“Not all Apostles wrote and not all writings attributed to them are inerrant or original.”

---

So which book of the New Testament that Ignatius or Polycarp quoted from, before the end of the first century and into the second, that is not “inerrant or original”? Since according to you, none of the Apostles considered their works scripture (Luke is quoted and called scripture by Paul), and therefore did not make it a point to collect their works and send them. (How is it that Paul commented on the epistles of Paul, calling them scripture, if Paul and Peter were too busy evangelizing separately?) And did the Romanists truck their canon of scripture to the farthest ends of the Earth to let the hapless converts in faraway places know they finally figured out what was the word of God?

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

Typo: “How is it that Peter commended on the epistles of Paul... etc” I wrote Paul twice.