My concern, along with LC, is that we frequently end up discussing a strawman that is not what most practicing Protestants mean by
sola scriptura. For meaningfuld discussion to occur, BGTF, you need to describe
our position in terms that
we agree accurately depict it. This has not yet happened. May I refer you to the course on Bibliology and Hemeneutics put together by The Theology Program
here. The notebook is free with registration on the site. I also refer you to Keith Mathison's excellent recent book,
The Shape of Sola Scriptura. Otherwise we will talk past one another and Christ will not be glorified by the discussion.
The odd thing here is that there really are at least 2 definitions of Sola Scriptura. There is the definition of the Reformation, our battle cry against the tyrany, oppression, and false doctrine of the Roman Catholics. This definition has not changed. It is still our cry today against Rome.
However, those who were a part of the anti-Reformation movement which birthed modern day Arminians, have their own definition(s) of Sola Scriptura, which I have identified as Solo Scriptura for the tendency to interpret Scripture apart from the church and apart from any tradition.