The New Testament

The message of God in the New Testament is part of the teachings of Christ; the other part is hidden in tradition. Could it be God chose only part of His message to be written while the other part was left in tradition, and if it is what was the purpose of it?

The result is total damage to the anti-Catholic theology.


1Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the benefit of circumcision? 2Great in every respect. First of all, that they were entrusted with the oracles of God.

This is sometimes translated as “entrusted with the utterances of Scripture”…and so the OT, written was given and the result for those that it was entrusted to…disobedience, and then a new understanding…the NT…but in the NT…we read…

In times past, God spoke in partial and various ways to our ancestors through the prophets; 2in these last days, he spoke to us through a son,

and much of what the Son said was written but not all that the Son said was written and in fact what was written tells us that not all the He did was written and what was written tells us to hold fast to Oral Tradtion…

because in times past Sola Scripture was not enough…:slight_smile:

Paul said:

35 In everything I did, I showed you that by this kind of hard work we must help the weak, remembering the words the Lord Jesus himself said: ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’ ”

… but you won’t find that anywhere else except for Acts 20. But from the tone of his writing, his audience was familiar with the quote.

John said:

25 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.

So if you consider his earthly ministry lasted for only three years, and that only a fraction of the words and deeds conveyed during those three years was recorded… yes, I think it would be hard to argue that God’s entire message is included in canonical Scripture. But before you go off looking at non-canonical scriptures, you get to tackle the question of who had the authority to determine what was canonical and what was non-canonical, and why. And who gets to determine what’s “real Tradition” (ie, the preservation of the geographic locations of the Stations of the Cross) vs elements that can be discarded (ie, talking animals helping out the Apostles).

Sola Scriptura did not exist prior to Calvin and Luther “Protest” of 1517

In I Timothy 3:15 but if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how men ought to behave themselves in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

There was no Bible at the time of the apostles only the OT. Further the majority of the laity could not read even if the had a Bible.

If you could read and write your were a “Scribe” a VIP of that time :smiley:
When the first Bibles were compiled they cost a fortune in man hours, the printing press did not exist and therefore the texts had to be transcribed ny hand painstakinly, and since we are talking of the word of God here. It was treated with extreme deference.
Even today we can see how the Torah is handled in a Sinagogue or how the priest handles the Gospels in our Churches for the reading.
Imagine the deference required for someone to be considered worthy to copy the Gospels.

No - I don’t think that God did this. Everything is necessary is written down. BUT - what is written down also points to something outside of the written word that is necessary… The living Church and it’s understandings of ALL that has be written, preached and handed down. In short, a living Church guided by the Holy Spirit rather than a dusty set of rules and ordinances.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit