Hi there,
I am struggling with the issue as to 2 Timothy 3:16 [1] strongest verse in supporting the Protestant doctrine of Sola Scriptura. I am find it hard to accept that the word "profitable" would automatically mean sufficient. A Roman Catholic argument put it this way:
" This passage doesn’t teach formal sufficiency, which excludes a binding, authoritative role for Tradition and Church. Protestants extrapolate onto the text what isn’t there."[2] (Emphasis mine)
Please help me resolve this conflict.
In Christ
For reference:
[1] “All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work” (2 Tim. 3:16–17)
[2] https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/a-quick-ten-step-refutation-of-sola-scriptura
I am struggling with the issue as to 2 Timothy 3:16 [1] strongest verse in supporting the Protestant doctrine of Sola Scriptura. I am find it hard to accept that the word "profitable" would automatically mean sufficient. A Roman Catholic argument put it this way:
" This passage doesn’t teach formal sufficiency, which excludes a binding, authoritative role for Tradition and Church. Protestants extrapolate onto the text what isn’t there."[2] (Emphasis mine)
Please help me resolve this conflict.
In Christ
For reference:
[1] “All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work” (2 Tim. 3:16–17)
[2] https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/a-quick-ten-step-refutation-of-sola-scriptura