[MarkBsnr]

Vermouth is profitable and necessary for the perfect martini, but sola vermouth is not a martini.

Tremendous analogy. I thank you for it.

[D-fendr]

I've also heard it using lime and a Cuba Libré. :)

One doesn't have to be much of a logician to show that sola scriptura is not proven from this verse.

X is profitable and necessary for the perfect Y;
therefore:
X (alone) is entirely sufficient for Y

It only takes one example to invalidate the conclusion, but there are almost countless Xs and Ys for which this is conclusion is not true.

Y=fried chicken; X=grease and flour
Y=living human being; X=blood
Y=Wisdom; X=experience
Y=house; X=foundation

And on and on and on. Likely it's more often not true than true. To say Sola scriptura is proven by this verse defies common sense and simple meaning. Big time.

[boatbums]

Vermouth is profitable and necessary for the perfect martini, but sola vermouth is not a martini.

Tremendous analogy. I thank you for it.

Then there is a dry martini that needs NO vermouth. Y'all seemed have to missed this yet again, but NO ONE said that the Bible is "all that there is" nor that it "contains all truth" or that "nothing is needed but the Bible". In fact, within this thread the definition was given that pretty much sums up what the doctrine of sola scriptura is. Here, I'll post it again all for you:

Sola scriptura (Latin ablative, "by scripture alone") is the doctrine that the Bible contains all knowledge necessary for salvation and holiness. Consequently, sola scriptura demands that only those doctrines are to be admitted or confessed that are found directly within or indirectly by using valid logical deduction or valid deductive reasoning from scripture. However, sola scriptura is not a denial of other authorities governing Christian life and devotion. Rather, it simply demands that all other authorities are subordinate to, and are to be corrected by, the written word of God. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sola_scriptura)

You're welcome.