“...regard the patience of our Lord as salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you,
16as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.”
As Luther noted, Scripture is excellent, but evil men can turn anything to evil use.
What in that passage suggests scripture is not authoritative? If men can twist the God-breathed words of Scripture to evil end, how much more traditions?
Jesus, Paul & Peter all used Scripture as authoritative. We are regularly admonished to study it with diligence...the same epistle says, “to which you do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts”.
A lamp in a dark place reveals, it doesn’t conceal. It makes sight possible. Yet you would have 2 Peter teach us not to trust scripture?
NOTHING suggests that Scripture is not authoritative, this verse states that by itself it is destructive to the untrained.
“Jesus, Paul & Peter all used Scripture as authoritative.”
Yes, they did. Hebrew Scripture, as they were all Jews - and Septuagint Hebrew Scripture at that, as it was the only one around at that point.
The New Testament Canon was not finalized until the 4th Century...by (GASP!!!) Orthodox Bishops...out of the (GASP!!!) tradition of the Church. The first known evidence of the New Testament books in the form which they are known today was in an Easter letter by St. Athanasius in 367, between the first (Nicea) and second (Constantinople) Ecumenical Councils.
Anything else is, as Kolo would put it, ahistorical nonsense.