How does Jesus actions support the Roman Empire?
Again the good thief asked to be remembered (baptism) and be part of Kingdom of Jesus. He spoke out and stood up for Jesus (action - works). He confessed he sins and accepted his punishment.
Again, not everything in written in the Bible, Catholics follow tradition as we were commanded by God.
It is clear that the oral teaching of Christ would last until the end of time. “’But the word of the Lord abides for ever.’ That word is the good news which was preached to you” (1 Pet. 1:25). Note that the word has been “preached”—that is, communicated orally. This would endure. It would not be supplanted by a written record like the Bible (supplemented, yes, but not supplanted), and would continue to have its own authority.
Then he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.”w 43He replied to him, “Amen, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.”
Your question: “Can you show where this is supported in the Word?”
Luke 23 Do you remember the story of the good thief who died next to Jesus?
* Now one of the criminals hanging there reviled Jesus, saying, “Are you not the Messiah? Save yourself and us.” 40The other, however, rebuking him, said in reply, “Have you no fear of God, for you are subject to the same condemnation? 41And indeed, we have been condemned justly, for the sentence we received corresponds to our crimes, but this man has done nothing criminal.”v 42Then he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.”w 43He replied to him, “Amen, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.”
And now your question:
How does Jesus actions support the Roman Empire?
The good thief being asked to be remembered is not baptism and is a false assertion of what the Word is saying. If anything it would be a profession of faith by the thief.
That he spoke up for Jesus is not a "work". That is not what saved him. It would have been the belief in Christ that did.
He had little choice in whether he accepted his punishment. Rome was going to execute him for his crimes. What his words indicate is he did recognize he was a criminal and he is receiving the punishment for his crimes.
His crimes had nothing to do with the catholic position of mortal or venial sins.
Again, not everything in written in the Bible, Catholics follow tradition as we were commanded by God.
Can you show clearly in the Word where we are told to follow tradition? And keep it in the context of the passage.
No Christian has ever claimed everything about Christ or the disciples has been written down. What Christians do reject is the catholic reliance on tradition and equating it with equal authority of the written Word.
If you allow for the acceptance of "tradition" you open up the door to Mormons, Islam, the Hindu, etc.
Catholic tradition has also introduced all of the false teachings on Mary.
This is why Christians reject the roman catholic appeal to tradition. So much of it goes against the written Word.
It is clear that the oral teaching of Christ would last until the end of time. “’But the word of the Lord abides for ever.’ That word is the good news which was preached to you” (1 Pet. 1:25). Note that the word has been “preached”—that is, communicated orally. This would endure. It would not be supplanted by a written record like the Bible (supplemented, yes, but not supplanted), and would continue to have its own authority.
Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of Christ (Romans 10:17).
The Word is usually preached orally as we witness every Sunday. I don't think any disagree with this.
The message the disciples preached was the Gospel. We have the written word for that. John notes it twice.
The NT books were written for different reasons....but in all cases they point to Christ and how to have a relationship with Him.
We have no need of any additional "tradition" to share the Gospel...especially when the "tradition" that is being espoused goes against the Word.