Jesus's teaching is His tradition. That's why he constantly references the OT. That's why Luke and Matthew write down His genealogy. If anything this argument destroys Sola Scriptura since it demonstrates people were saved without having access to the written Scripture because they still were part of the tradition and professed the true faith (even when Christ was not among them as a man anymore).

You assume a reductionist approach by divorcing the teachings from the tradition, as if the teachings of Christ came out of nowhere and are not part of the revelation of God to man starting with Adam and ending at Pentecost. What the Church did was to teach the gospel of salvation to every nation the way it was revealed to the prophets and the apostles by God. The Church fathers, who received the Holy Spirit and were given authority by the Apostles through laying of hands (the same way Peter did to Timothy) fleshed out the theology of the revelation without adding new meaning or context to it (e.g. the Nicene creed). Idiot unitarians argue that God is not triune because the word Trinity is not in the Bible - that's where literalism and sperg/AI level of context understanding leads to. They will say the Church fathers added their own meaning to Scripture because they presuppose their wrongful literalist interpretation (to which "the Holy Spirit guided them", no doubt).

Adding new interpretation or meaning is considered a heresy and an attack on the true faith and that's what the Early Church fought against vehemently (the gnostics, the arians, the marcians, the valentinians, the neo-platonists, etc.). Unfortunately after Rome fell away, heretical movements started proliferating across Europe leading to the revolutionary Reformation as an antithesis to Rome's mistakes and Church tradition as a whole. And here we are today, where every protestant thinks they have the correct interpretation (being their own Pope) of the Scripture they got from the historic tradition they deny, because they have a personal relationship with God, so basically relativism. Is it any wonder society has turned out this way?

Jesus's teaching is His tradition. That's why he constantly references the OT. That's why Luke and Matthew write down His genealogy. If anything this argument destroys Sola Scriptura since it demonstrates people were saved without having access to the written Scripture because they still were part of the tradition and professed the true faith (even when Christ was not among them as a man anymore).

You assume a reductionist approach by divorcing the teachings from the tradition, as if the teachings of Christ came out of nowhere and are not part of the revelation of God to man starting with Adam and ending at Pentecost. What the Church did was to teach the gospel of salvation to every nation the way it was revealed to the prophets and the apostles by God. The Church fathers, who were given authority by the Apostles through laying of hands (the same way Peter did to Timothy) fleshed out the theology of the revelation without adding new meaning or context to it (e.g. the Nicene creed). Idiot unitarians argue that God is not triune because the word Trinity is not in the Bible - that's where literalism and sperg/AI level of context understanding leads to. They will say the Church fathers added their own meaning to Scripture because they presuppose their wrongful literalist interpretation (to which "the Holy Spirit guided them", no doubt).

Adding new interpretation or meaning is considered a heresy and an attack on the true faith and that's what the Early Church fought against vehemently (the gnostics, the arians, the marcians, the valentinians, the neo-platonists, etc.). Unfortunately after Rome fell away, heretical movements started proliferating across Europe leading to the revolutionary Reformation as an antithesis to Rome's mistakes and Church tradition as a whole. And here we are today, where every protestant thinks they have the correct interpretation (being their own Pope) of the Scripture they got from the historic tradition they deny, because they have a personal relationship with God, so basically relativism. Is it any wonder society has turned out this way?

Jesus's teaching is His tradition. That's why he constantly references the OT. That's why Luke and Matthew write down His genealogy. If anything this argument destroys Sola Scriptura since it demonstrates people were saved without having access to the written Scripture because they still were part of the tradition and professed the true faith (even when Christ was not among them as a man anymore).

You assume a reductionist approach by divorcing the teachings from the tradition, as if the teachings of Christ came out of nowhere and are not part of the revelation of God to man starting with Adam and ending at Pentecost. What the Church did was to teach the gospel of salvation to every nation the way it was revealed to the prophets and the apostles by God. The Church fathers, who were given authority by the Apostles through laying of hands (the same way Peter did to Timothy) fleshed out the theology of the revelation without adding new meaning or context to it (e.g. the Nicene creed). Idiot unitarians argue that God is not triune because the word Trinity is not in the Bible - that's where literalism and sperg/AI level of context understanding leads to. They will say the Church fathers added their own meaning to Scripture because they presuppose their wrongful literalist interpretation (to which "the Holy Spirit guided them", no doubt).

Adding new interpretation or meaning is considered a heresy and an attack on the true faith and that's what the Early Church fought against vehemently (the gnostics, the arians, the marcians, the valentinians, the neo-platonists, etc.). Unfortunately after Rome fell away, heretical movements started proliferating across Europe leading to the revolutionary Reformation as an antithesis to Rome's mistakes and Church tradition as a whole. And here we are today, where every protestant thinks they're have the correct interpretation (being their own Pope) because they have a personal relationship with God, so basically relativism. Is it any wonder society has turned out this way?

Jesus's teaching is His tradition. That's why he constantly references the OT. That's why Luke and Matthew write down His genealogy. If anything this argument destroys Sola Scriptura since it demonstrates people were saved without having access to the written Scripture because they still were part of the tradition and professed the true faith (even when Christ was not among them as a man anymore).

You assume a reductionist approach by divorcing the teachings from the tradition, as if the teachings of Christ came out of nowhere and are not part of the revelation of God to man starting with Adam and ending at Pentecost. What the Church did was to teach the gospel of salvation to every nation the way it was revealed to the prophets and the apostles by God. The Church fathers, who were given authority by the Apostles through laying of hands (the same way Peter did to Timothy) fleshed out the theology of the revelation without adding new meaning or context to it (e.g. the Nicene creed). Idiot unitarians argue that God is not triune because the word Trinity is not in the Bible - that's where literalism and sperg/AI level of context understanding leads to. They will say the Church fathers added their own meaning to Scripture because they presuppose their wrongful literalist interpretation (to which "the Holy Spirit guided them", no doubt).

Adding new interpretation or meaning is considered a heresy and an attack on the true faith and that's what the Early Church fought against vehemently (the gnostics, the arians, the marcians, the valentinians, the neo-platonists, etc.). Unfortunately after Rome fell away, heretical movements started proliferating across Europe leading to the revolutionary Reformation as an antithesis to Rome's mistakes and Church tradition as a whole.

Jesus's teaching is His tradition. That's why he constantly references the OT. That's why Luke and Matthew write down His genealogy. If anything this argument destroys Sola Scriptura since it demonstrates people were saved without having access to the written Scripture because they still were part of the tradition and professed the true faith (even when Christ was not among them as a man anymore).

You assume a reductionist approach by divorcing the teachings from the tradition, as if the teachings of Christ came out of nowhere and are not part of the revelation of God to man starting with Adam and ending at Pentecost. What the Church did was to teach the gospel of salvation to every nation the way it was revealed to the prophets and the apostles by God. The Church fathers, who were given authority by the Apostles through laying of hands (the same way Peter did to Timothy) fleshed out the theology of the revelation without adding new meaning or context to it (e.g. the Nicene creed). Idiot unitarians argue that God is not triune because the word Trinity is not in the Bible - that's where literalism and sperg/AI level of context understanding leads to. They will say the Church fathers added their own meaning to Scripture because they presuppose their wrongful literalist interpretation (to which "the Holy Spirit guided them", no doubt).

Adding new interpretation or meaning is considered a heresy and that's what the Early Church fought against vehemently (the gnostics, the arians, the marcians, the valentinians, the neo-platonists, etc.). Unfortunately after Rome fell away, heretical movements started proliferating across Europe leading to the revolutionary Reformation as an antithesis to Rome's mistakes and Church tradition as a whole.

Jesus's teaching is His tradition. That's why he constantly references the OT. That's why Luke and Matthew write down His genealogy. If anything this argument destroys Sola Scriptura since it demonstrates people were saved without having access to the written Scripture because they still were part of the tradition and professed the true faith (even when Christ was not among them as a man anymore).

You assume a reductionist approach by divorcing the teachings from the tradition, as if the teachings of Christ came out of nowhere and are not part of the revelation of God to man starting with Adam and ending at Pentecost. What the Church did was to teach the gospel of salvation to every nation the way it was revealed to the prophets and the apostles by God. The Church fathers, who were given authority by the Apostles through laying of hands (the same way Peter did to Timothy) fleshed out the theology of the revelation without adding new meaning or context to it (e.g. the Nicene creed). Idiot unitarians argue that God is not triune because the word Trinity is not in the Bible - that's where literalism and sperg/AI level of context understanding leads to. They will say the Church fathers added their own meaning to Scripture because they presuppose their wrongful literalist interpretation (because the Holy Spirit guided them, no doubt).

Adding new interpretation or meaning is considered a heresy and that's what the Early Church fought against vehemently (the gnostics, the arians, the marcians, the valentinians, the neo-platonists, etc.). Unfortunately after Rome fell away, heretical movements started proliferating across Europe leading to the revolutionary Reformation as an antithesis to Rome's mistakes and Church tradition as a whole.