When quoting Paul's mention of scripture, Paul was referring to the OT since the NT was being written during this period and did not exist as we know it today. So how were these ones saved without the NT only relying on the spoken word?
Would the Slickster care to explain Harold Camping who adhered to your sola and rapture nonsense with total devotion. When are you going to make some prophetic prediction?
In the first place, it’s obvious that you don’t even understand the difference between Sola Scriptura and Solo Scriptura. There are many scriptural references to testing anything one hears by what is written. Here are a couple of examples.
I Corinthians 4:6 I have applied all these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, brothers,[a] that you may learn by us not to go beyond what is written, that none of you may be puffed up in favor of one against another.
You would evidently not agree with that portion of scripture since praying to dead people, the ascension of Mary, and many other teachings of some religions have no basis in scripture.
Acts 17:11 Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so.
Going back to the original discussion of this thread it’s obvious that Camping didn’t agree with portions of scripture, as it’s evident you don’t given the example above, or he would have also read the written word that “no one knows the hour or the day”. Therein lies the need to “examine the scripture daily to see if these things were so”.