This should be sufficient for you. But you see the problem is that Tradition has already tried to overwrite the Scriptures saying that "James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?" Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:2-3 are not Mary's sons.
So my problem with the Tradition doctrine is that it overwrites the Scriptures blatantly.
Have I said otherwise? Again, this is a discussion of Sola Scriptura... the Bible Alone. Your verse here speaks the truth, as does all Scripture... what it doesn't say is that the Apostles were commissioned to write additional Scripture for the Church to follow. Using your doctrine of Sola Scriptura, I would like to see this commission. As I pointed out in an earlier post, I can surely show you where they brought preaching, instruction, their own testimony, and Tradition (2 Thess 2:15, 2 Tim 2:2, Rom 10:17, 1 Pet 1:25, 1 Cor 11:2, Acts 2:42, Acts 20:35, John 21:25)... but brand new Scriptures that all were to follow? Good luck with that.
But you see the problem is that Tradition has already tried to overwrite the Scriptures saying that "James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?" Matthew 13:55 and Mark 6:2-3 are not Mary's sons.
No, the Church has endeavored to explain what isn't as readily apparent to us today as it was in the days immediately after Christ's Ascension. In this case, there isn't a separate word in Aramaic for brother, stepbrother, and cousin. These men were "brethren", yes, but not additional sons of Mary. Were they His biological brothers, surely Our Lord would have not commended His Mother to the household of St John at His Death on the Cross. These two situations are completely contradictory in Protestant interpretation... because you reject the authority of the Church and trust to your own understanding (Proverbs 3:5).