Your argument would be dispositive if we were arguing on the basis of Sola Scriptura; but we can't accept that principle, because it's historically untrue and logically impossible.
There was a NT Church for almost two decades before even the first book of NT Scripture was written (1 Thessalonians, around 51 AD at the earliest), and there were hundreds of Christian ecclesial communities comprising tens or hundreds of thousands of believers before the canon of the NT was closed (around 96 - 100 AD) --- and even then, most had never even seen a written copy.
The spread of the Holy Church far outstripped the writing, translation, copying and publication of Holy Text. The Church was based on Oral Tradition--- Apostolic preaching --- as the Written Tradition (Scripture) itself demonstrates.
The authority of Written Tradition itself is founded on the reliability and authority of the Oral Tradition which preceded it, sourced it, and provided the hermeneutic context for its correct interpretation.
Remember that even the canonization of the Written Tradition was based on the practice of the churches: the faith of the church was the exclusive source of the canon; the canon of Scripture was not the exclusive source of the faith of the church.
What are the principal truths we have from Oral Tradition? The basics of Sacraments, Liturgy, Apostolic Succession and hierarchy, the veneration of the Saints and of Mary, and the Canon of Scripture itself.
I think this does not interest you because it is not Sola Scripture. But as I said, Sola Scriptura is not tenable, and is not supported by the Bible itself.
In short, "Sola Scriptura" is un-Biblical. It's one of those troublesome "traditions of men". :o!
BTW, if you're ever in Rome, here's an inscription you can see for yourself in the 1st - 2nd century catacombs:
"Beata Maria Semper Virgine" (= "Blessed Mary Ever Virgin")
I can hear Mary's mom now:
"Girl... when you ever gonna give me some more grandchillen?"
“Your argument would be dispositive if we were arguing on the basis of Sola Scriptura; but we can’t accept that principle, because it’s historically untrue and logically impossible.”
First, it is not historically untrue, as we will examine below. Second, your specific claim is that a major doctrine was left out of God’s Word - that same inspired Word that came directly from God.
Now, on to your additional observations and claims.
“There was a NT Church for almost two decades before even the first book of NT Scripture was written (1 Thessalonians, around 51 AD at the earliest), and there were hundreds of Christian ecclesial communities comprising tens or hundreds of thousands of believers before the canon of the NT was closed (around 96 - 100 AD) -— and even then, most had never even seen a written copy.”
Before you hurry on to the NT Scriptures, I pause to tell you that the Hebrew Scriptures were in every major city and according to the Apostle Paul, they contained what was needed to understand Messiah and salvation.
Now, the NT canon began early and closed before the end of 100 ad. During the years before and during the completion of the canon, God did not leave his gatherings without instruction. First, they continued to have the Hebrew Scriptures, they had the Holy Spirit to give them understanding, they have God’s gift of living Apostles, pastors and teachers and they had circulating letters from the Apostles. They heard the Word. They heard the word taught.
“The spread of the Holy Church far outstripped the writing, translation, copying and publication of Holy Text. The Church was based on Oral Tradition-— Apostolic preaching -— as the Written Tradition (Scripture) itself demonstrates.”
It was not simply “oral tradition” as you are claiming. It was oral teaching of what was inspired, and teaching exposition of what was written.
“The authority of Written Tradition itself is founded on the reliability and authority of the Oral Tradition which preceded it, sourced it, and provided the hermeneutic context for its correct interpretation.”
The Scriptures are more than “written tradition”. If you really believe that is all that inspiration means, you are expressing a particularly low view of inspiration. The Authority of Scriptures does not come from oral tradition. It comes from God.
“Remember that even the canonization of the Written Tradition was based on the practice of the churches: the faith of the church was the exclusive source of the canon; the canon of Scripture was not the exclusive source of the faith of the church.”
The canonization of the Word in both testaments was based on a number of things, including what was already known to be from Apostles and some from Peter’s declaration that includes Paul’s inspired books with “the rest of scriptures.”
The source of the inspiration, preservation and canonization was God. Again, this is a rather low view of God’s sovereign work and an exaltation of men.
Later Churches have reexamined the canon and corrected the few errors that remained.
“What are the principal truths we have from Oral Tradition? The basics of Sacraments, Liturgy, Apostolic Succession and hierarchy, the veneration of the Saints and of Mary, and the Canon of Scripture itself.”
The sacraments - baptism and the memorial of the Lord’s supper do not save. The liturgy is not inspired and is not necessary. Apostolic succession is not biblical. Never commanded. Hierarchy is a failure. Idolization of saints and mary is a falsehood and pagan. The canon was completed on multiple factors from a human point of view, but again, if you have a rather low view of the attributes of God, you have larger problems to deal with. You did not mention one “truth” in this paragraph that provides what is needed to save and mature a Christian. Only God’s inspired Word can do this.
“I think this does not interest you because it is not Sola Scripture. But as I said, Sola Scriptura is not tenable, and is not supported by the Bible itself.”
It is and is supported by hundreds of verses in the Hebrew Scriptures and NT. What God reveals about the Scriptures is never said of tradition.
“In short, “Sola Scriptura” is un-Biblical. It’s one of those troublesome “traditions of men”. :o!”
I will disagree. Holding God’s inspired Word at the level of ultimate authority over the actions and traditions of man, holding it as the ultimate authority in every doctrine, prevents tragic failure. It is when churches elevate the teachings of man to equality with Scripture - or completely “dethrone” Scripture, that heresy arises. At that point, paganism rules. Idolization occurs. Sin is accepted. Hierarchies are built. Costumes are sewn. The Spirit leaves.
“BTW, if you’re ever in Rome, here’s an inscription you can see for yourself in the 1st - 2nd century catacombs: “Beata Maria Semper Virgine” (= “Blessed Mary Ever Virgin”)”
So we agree that idolization happened as early as the 200s ad. I will assume that is the best you can find in your quest to claim “it was always believed until 1500.”
And on what authority do you claim a scared believer in the catacombs wrote this? No authority.
By which Apostle do you claim they heard it? No Apostle.
Which inspired Scripture did they read this in? No Scripture.
Best, as always.