15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
Protestants cite this as their best example of Sola Scriptura being in the Bible. While it doesn't outright say Scripture Alone, they claim that it implies Scripture Alone since scripture is sufficient for completing us. The Greek word for 'perfect' in verse 17 also means complete. I prefer the King James for the New Testament, but I guess this is an instance I prefer the NKJV.
Is the notion of Scriptura being sufficient for completing us compatible with Orthodoxy?
Interestingly, Paul uses Oral Tradition in verse 8 of this same chapter. If Paul was telling us to not use Oral Tradition, he did a funny way of doing so. Protestants could say that this is 'oral tradition becoming scripture' but that would simultaneously knock down their assertion that Jesus not using oral tradition is evidence for Sola Scriptura.
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
Protestants cite this as their best example of Sola Scriptura being in the Bible. While it doesn't outright say Scripture Alone, they claim that it implies Scripture Alone since scripture is sufficient for completing us. The Greek word for 'perfect' in verse 17 also means complete. I prefer the King James for the New Testament, but I guess this is an instance I prefer the NKJV.
Is the notion of Scriptura being sufficient for completing us compatible with Orthodoxy?
Interestingly, Paul uses Oral Tradition in verse 8 of this same chapter. If Paul was telling us to not use Oral Tradition, he did a funny way of doing so. Protestants could say that this is 'oral tradition becoming scripture' but that would simultaneously knock down their assertion that Jesus not using oral tradition is evidence for Sola Scriptura.