The oldest complete codices only go back to the 4th century. This is also the time that the definitive canon was settled by Catholic bishops.
Unlike that missing list of Paul’s Traditions.
As oral tradition there would be no "list," but only the day to day teaching and practices that were universally held. You can find this by reading the Church Fathers. BTW, they do not include the writings of Luther or the Scofield Bible Commentary.
“The oldest complete codices”
Not necessary. We have actual fragments that are used to confirm originals.
No fragments of Paul’s List ever existed. Any claim of rwhat they were is a guess or a wish from a later date.
The oldest complete codices only go back to the 4th century. This is also the time that the definitive canon was settled by Catholic bishops.
You may be interested in this article.
http://www.dts.edu/read/wallace-new-testament-manscript-first-century/
>>Unlike that missing list of Paul’s Traditions.<,
As oral tradition there would be no "list," but only the day to day teaching and practices that were universally held. You can find this by reading the Church Fathers. BTW, they do not include the writings of Luther or the Scofield Bible Commentary.
Which ECF?
The ones that agree with Roman Catholic doctrine or the ones that disagree with Roman Catholic doctrine?
I always find it interesting that for Mary to play such a prominent role in Roman Catholicism, she is scarcely mentioned after the Gospels and Acts 1.
It is also interesting that Paul doesn't carve out an exception for her regarding, "all have sinned". Something that deviates from his passage in Romans would require some additional explanation one would think.
You would also think that when he was writing we have one Mediator he would have also included Mary if...and if, that was what he was teaching and so widely believed as Roman Catholicism would have us to believe.
You may begin to see why so much of what Roman Catholics call Tradition is questioned by Christians.