To the contrary, my apologetics training is strictly Protestant. You, however, are unused to being beaten with your own cudgel. Neither are you prepared to carry on any serious debate with someone who does not share your extensive presuppositions.
Do you have any response to my Luke 2:29 question or are you content to answer with Pharisaical outrage?
Pure bombast and insolence. Far from being beaten with anything, you have refuted absolutely nothing that i posted, but have majored in sarcasm and psychology.
However, i will provide a chance to be reason-able, in discussing this with me, who is not bound by traditions of men.
In invoking Luke 2:29, i presume you mean 2:26. This deals with private revelation, and if you had seen post #20 you would have known that i do not see this as militating against Sola Scriptura:
“Sola Scriptura does not hold that miracles, history, and reason play no part is discerning what Scripture means, nor that God cannot “speak” to souls today (esp. during the offering:), but that all such is subject to the Bible in determining its veracity.”
There are far more texts than Lk. 2:26 which reveal that the Word of God is not restricted to Scripture, but as Scripture is the only objective authority that is assuredly declared to be wholly inspired, (2Tim. 3:16) than that is what any revelation must be tested by.
While God spoke to men like Abraham before any scripture was written, and confirmed it by supernatural attestation, once revelation was established as wholly inspired and written, then it became the authority for obedience, and for testing revelation.
Thus it is abundantly substantiated:
Ex. 17:14: 24:7; 34:1; 34:27; Dt. 10:2; 17:18,19; 27:8; 29:21; 30:10; 31:11,19,26; Josh. 1:8; 8:31,34,35; 23:6; 24:26; 1Ki. 2:3; 12:22; 2Ki. 14:6; 22:8,10,13,16; 23:2,21; 1Ch. 16:40; 17:3,9;2Ch. 34:14,15,21; 35:12; Ezr 3:2,4; 6:18; Neh. 8:1,3,8,15,18; 9:3; 10:34,36; 13:1; Psa. 40:7; Is. 8:20; 30:8; 34:16; 65:6; Jer. 30:2; 36:2,28; Dan. 9:11,13; Hab. 2:2;
Mat. 2:5; 4:4,6,7,10; 11:10; 21:13,42; 22:29; 26:24,31,54,56; Mk. 1:2; 9:12,13; 14:21,47; 12:24; 14:49; Lk. 2:3; 3:4; 10:26; 19:46; 20:17; 22:37; 24:27,32,45,46; Joh 5:39; 6:45; 12:14l 15:25; Acts 1:20; 7:42; 15:15; 17:2,11; 18:24,28; 23:5; Rom 1:2,17; 2:24; 3:4,10; 4:17; 8:36; 9:3,33; 10:15; 11:8,26; 12:19; 14:11; 15:3,4,9,21; 16:16; 1Cor. 1:19,31; 2:9; 3:19; 4:6; 9:9,10; 10:7; 14:21; 15:3,4,45,54; 2Cor. 4:13; 8:15; 9:9; Gal. 3:10,13; 4:22,27; 2Tim. 3:15; Heb. 10:7; 1Pet. 1:16; 2Pet. 3:16 Mk. 7:3; Lk. 4:4; Jn. 10:35;
It is not extraBiblical traditions that Peter refers to as providing “exceeding great and precious promises that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature,” or being the “more sure word of prophecy” (2Pt. 2:19), but the Scriptures. (v. 20)
That there was a body of literature recognized as Scripture in the time of Christ is internally evident, and that it was this, and not Jewish traditions, which the apostles directed the disciples to look to:
Rom 15:4 For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.
In addition to private revelation, or pubic declaration as in 1Cor. 14, and which was to be judged, one may be said to “preach the word” in declaring Scripturally sound teaching, as is seen esp. in Acts, and disobedience to which is disobeying the Scriptures upon which it is based.
Though when the apostles preached the Word of God, (1Thes. 2:13) they may have contained words which were not later written in Scripture, yet they would be consistent with it, as Act 17:11 infers:
“These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.”
They and others also wrote or spoke words which would become part of the body of Scripture, yet, in addition to the Scriptural integrity of such, this was before the canon of Scripture was closed. To hold any further revelation as equal in authority to Scripture is to essentially add to the canon.
While not all information that could be given is contained in Scripture (Jn. 21:25; Rev. 10:4) only the objective class of revelation called Scripture is established as wholly inspired, and thus is superior in authority.
The uncodified class of revelation called church tradition being held as equal to Scripture is esp. problematic, due to the Biblically unwarranted nature of what has been dogmatically affirmed from it, and the presumption of infallibility which presumes it may establish it as such. Unlike the Jews, Rome’s authority is based upon her own declarations of authority, not Biblical faith, upon which (and by extension, its Object) the body of Christ is founded and overcomes.