Of course it was oral tradition, as much of the Bible was first oral, and not all that can be known has been revealed, (Jn. 21:25; 2Cor. 12:4; Rv. 10:4) but which does not mean all that was of that oral medium was of God, but that which written is God inspired, formally being the word of God. And as such it separates the wheat from the chaff.
And Paul's exhortation to hold to traditions referred to known teaching which could be written as the word of God, and normally was, and was not ancient oral tales such as the Assumption. Moreover, the exhortation to obedience was under the rubric of Scripture being the supreme authority for obedience and testing the veracity of Truth claims, as it is abundantly evidenced to be.
And none of the proffered proof texts you may paste can refute that.
In contrast, Rome presumes to take nebulous ancient oral stories and channeling them into extraBiblical and unScriptural doctrines, and making them equal with Scripture, while making both as servants to her.
For Rome has unScripturally presumed to infallibly declare she is and will be perpetually infallible whenever she speaks in accordance with her infallibly defined (scope and subject-based) formula, which renders her declaration that she is infallible, to be infallible, as well as all else she accordingly declares. Thus Tradition, Scripture and history can only authoritatively mean what she says them mean, as according to her interpretation, only be correct in any conflict.
Which contrary to the basis by which the church was established, that of Scriptural substantiation in word and in power, not the premise of Rome's assured veracity, which.
I wasn't trying to "proof text" anything. I was sharing with a very long time Freeper friend, Salvation, the way I would respond to the request for an explantion of sola scriptura.
Also, it wasn't "proof texting" because it built the basis for the doctrine of sola scriptura on a solid, rational foundation presented from the bible.
Finally, it wasn't "proof texting" because my friend's request was that we USE the bible to demonstrate sola scriptura.
It is not "proof texting" to provide a biblical explanation of the doctrine of the trinity. "Proof texting" is generally understood to be citing a single verse that when taken out of context (or placed in no context at all) supports a narrow biblical argument. For example, proof texting the unbiblical teaching of of "name it and claim it" a person might say, "the bible says 'ask and you shall receive..."