[annalex]

Why don't you quote [2 Tim 3:14-15] the way it's written???

2 Timothy
	English: Douay-Rheims	Greek NT: Byzantine/Majority Text (2000)
	2 Timothy 3
14.	But continue thou in those things which thou hast learned, and which have been committed to thee: knowing of whom thou hast learned them;	συ δε μενε εν οις εμαθες και επιστωθης ειδως παρα τινος εμαθες
15.	And because from thy infancy thou hast known the holy scriptures, which can instruct thee to salvation, by the faith which is in Christ Jesus.	και οτι απο βρεφους τα ιερα γραμματα οιδας τα δυναμενα σε σοφισαι εις σωτηριαν δια πιστεως της εν χριστω ιησου
16.	All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice,	πασα γραφη θεοπνευστος και ωφελιμος προς διδασκαλιαν προς ελεγχον προς επανορθωσιν προς παιδειαν την εν δικαιοσυνη
17.	That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.	ινα αρτιος η ο του θεου ανθρωπος προς παν εργον αγαθον εξηρτισμενος

As I commented before,

The man of God will be complete if he learns the Holy Tradition (2 Tim 3:14) as well as Holy Scripture (2 Tim 3:15) which two together are sufficient, just as the Catholic Church teaches.

[2Th. 2:14 - I believe you got the verse number wrong] either allows you to chose between the two, OR, the oral and the written are the same thing...

No, it does not do the latter. It says, like you say, follow the tradition, whether it is oral OR written. That part you got right. Now, it does not say that they two are the same and it does not say that you should choose. It says, follow both.

[metmom]

The man of God will be complete if he learns the Holy Tradition (2 Tim 3:14) as well as Holy Scripture (2 Tim 3:15) which two together are sufficient, just as the Catholic Church teaches.

That is not what the passage says, but as a mental exercise, even supposing that it did mean that, since Paul didn't specify what traditions it was that he passed down to Timothy, there's no way to know what they were.

Nor does that give people leave to make things up, claim it's tradition, validate it by quoting out of context a Scripture passage and then expect it to become truth.

It is not a license to add fairy tales to Scripture and pass them off as truth.

The only reason that the Catholic church has to elevate tradition to the level of Scripture is to give some sort of credibility to the obviously unscriptural doctrines it teaches. It's the only way they can justify overriding the authority of the Bible.

[OLD REGGIE]

No, it does not do the latter. It says, like you say, follow the tradition, whether it is oral OR written. That part you got right. Now, it does not say that they two are the same and it does not say that you should choose. It says, follow both.

Where does it say to follow "Tradition" not yet invented?