protestants who genuinelly think that sola scriptura is coherent and logical, don't know a shit about history of early church and development of biblical canon.

so did you know that earliest list of books that belongs to canon of new testament, was called muratorian fragment / muratorian canon / canon muratori and it was made in year of 170? and even then that canon was barely nothing.

did you know that in early christianity, there was no new testament at all? not even during the life of jesus or apostles? early christians were just a jewish sect that read tanakh all day every day.

did you know that four gospels were written hundred years later of death of jesus? only letters were written during lifetime of apostles.

protestants think that things are holy only if they're found in bible. so do protestants think that jesus, early church, apostles and early church fathers who made nicean council which defined the teaching of trinity and made apostolic creed, were unholy? just because they didn't have current biblical canon? just because they didn't wrote four gospels yet and made new testament canon?

so if you think that they're unholy, then why y'all protestants don't just read only tanakh and become jewish? new testament wasn't a thing in early church. you just can't solely rely on bible because the biblical canon that we all know today, didn't exist back then.

therefore the consept of making tanakh irrelevant by calling it old testament, should be with that logic to be a bad thing. like nowadays it's the cornerstone of christian belief. those things aren't found in the bible.

one of my favorite thing is when protestants think that saints are unholy and unchristian is the fact that veneration of saints is older tradition than establishment of current biblical canon. apostles were first saints in the world. ironically the same people who attended in several important church councils like nicean council, along with people who were involved with biblical canon process, were instantly venerated as saints. cornerstone teachings of christianity as we know today weren't established with help of bunch of jewish dudes who read tanakh all day. they were random ass greek and latin dudes who protestant never heard of.

but let's imagine that the new testament would have been written and established during early christianity. oh. you won't find trinity in the bible. you won't find apostolic greed that defines who are christians and who aren't and is the reason why jehova's witnesses aren't classified as christians. they're both settled in church councils. so holy shit??? so it's unbiblical???? it's unbiblical to be a christian??? probably i should become jehova's witness. all the church traditions are heretic and pagan!!! solely the bible!!! although christianity itself is judaism mixed with hellenistic and roman influences that are foreign to judaism!!! fuck!!!! wait fuck am i jew or christian no maybe i am messianic jew or not wait what????? my brain is melting!!

chill. you don't have to convert to anything. just accept that not every religion is that logical. even orthodox and catholics are illogical. religion nowadays is just preservation of certain cultural customs.

but yeah like this is why i think that martin luther was just a german monk who didn't know about his own religion. like, mr. luther, shit isn't black and white. yes he had theological doctorate but probably from bad university. they didn't teach him arguments of early church fathers. unbiblical church tradition was there for a reason. it's the thing that seperates us from jews. without certain unbiblical traditions we would still be a jewish sect.