“Please provide the sources for verification purposes”
“St. Paul does not list the books that comprise Scripture. He does say that all Scripture is inspired and useful, so that he who belongs to God will be fully equipped and made complete for every good work. He does not say “Scripture alone,” and those who read that into the text are doing so based on their own tradition.
Aside from Tradition, there is no proof that St. Peter actually wrote two epistles. We simply don’t have the originals, so we are relying on the traditionally accepted authorship of St. Peter. Yes, it begins with the phrase, “Simon Peter, the servant and apostle of Jesus Christ,” but that phrase alone does not prove apostolic authorship. So when someone says that he accepts the Pauline epistles on the same basis as St. Peter, it is obvious he is relying on Tradition, as St. Peter’s second epistle does not give explicit reasons for their acceptance, does not limit Scripture to the Pauline epistles, and does not tell us the epistles considered inspired by the Prince of the Apostles.
“Yes, it begins with the phrase, “Simon Peter, the servant and apostle of Jesus Christ,” but that phrase alone does not prove apostolic authorship”
It was either Peter, or it is in error and not inspired.
“Prince of the Apostles”
Wow, again with a non-Biblical Title.
That’s not a list of sources that either list the traditions that the Catholic church claims are the oral traditions passed down from the apostle, nor does it verify that those traditions are authentic.