2 Timothy 3:16-17, “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.”
It looks to me like the author of the article doesn’t understand the historic meaning of Sola Scriptora. I would direct him, and all interested, to a great book by Keith Mattison entitled “The Shape of Sola Scriptora” in it he looks at historically what was meant by the reformers when it cam to the doctrine of Sola Scriptora and how today it has been abused by evangelicals.
I agree with Sola Scriptora wholeheartedly and it in no way, historicaaly, undermines tradition. It simply means that all that is necessary for salvation is found plainly in scripture. What we need to know to live the Christian life as pleasing to God is found plainly in scripture. Nothing more Nothing less. Those who try to refute this have never been able to answer this question that I pose.
“What doctrine that needs to be believed for salvation is NOT found in scripture??” No one who denies Sola Scriptora has ever answered that. There is none. All that is needed to be believed is found in scripture.
Sola scriptora does not deny the importance of tradition BUT it does make tradition subservient to scripture. If a tradition is not found in scripture it does not have to be believed and cannot hold the conscience of the believer bound.
For example if Scripture teaches Doctrine A and tradition teaches Doctrine A then doctrine A must be believed (The Ressurection of Jesus as and example.
If tradition teaches Doctrine B but Scripture does NOT teach doctrine, or address it, then the believer does not have to believe (or practice) Doctrine B (No meat on friday as an example). The conscience of the believer is not bound to the tradition.
If tradition teaches Doctrine C but Scripture contradicts Doctrine C then Doctrine C is to be rejected. (Immaculate Conception as an example).
That is Sola Scriptura quick and easy