[cloudmountain]

re: “Not in Scripture.”
Wow. Just not going to even “go there” are you. No matter the writings, the records, the correspondence back then between follow-on disciples. That’s pretty much a “bury your head in the sand” and go (with fingers in ears “la la la la la I hear nothing” approach.
This is what separates the “Protest”-ants from, well, the one, true church, an ACTUAL succession of Peter down through the ages, something the “Protest”-ants just don’t have any answer for.
For “Protest”-ants the Bible appears to have simply ‘appeared’ out of thin air in the hands of ????? in about the Middle Ages.

The early Church fathers took much time and thought as to which books would be in the New Testament.

**John 21:25 There are many more things that Jesus did. If all of them were written down, I suppose that not even the world itself would have space ...
**Now there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if every one .... if I would declare and speak of them, they are more than can be numbered.
**Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.
==============================

There is nowhere in Scripture that says Scripture is the sole source of our faith. So why do some people say that "if it isn't written in the Bible, it's not the true"??

[mrobisr]

“There is nowhere in Scripture that says Scripture is the sole source of our faith.”

Now I ask you why do you need more when Holy Scripture itself says that it is enough to be saved and at peace with the Lord?

2 Tim 3:16
All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;

History has shown through the Jews of Jesus’s time that other writings beyond the Holy Bible leads to death, so exactly why would you want to look to other sources when the Holy Scriptures declare themselves sufficient for salvation?