And there you have a major problem with sola scripture. How can the Bible alone be a sufficient rule of faith if we cannot know what is the Bible. And note here that we are not talking about the dispute over the deuterocanonical books but of the Gospel of Mark. In fact, why do we accept Mark or Luke as Scripture since neither was an apostle nor a witness to our Lord? It is only on the authority of the Church which accepted them as Scripture. If it is not the church which can determine and authenticate the canon of Scripture who can?
If the doctrine is taught elsewhere in scripture then I will develop the evidence from that instead. Sound reasonable?
No, it does not! If this passage is authentic, which it is, then this is sufficient to accept the necessity of Baptism. Nor is this something that we can pass over as unimportant; one's very salvation is at stake.
This passage doesn't mention baptism, which passage is correct? Mark 16 or Romans 10?
It is not a question of either/or but of both/and. If a person believes then he believes in everything that Jesus taught and commanded, including the necessity of Baptism.
Saved? Yes or No.
“If it is not the church which can determine and authenticate the canon of Scripture who can?”
There was a day, where it was the roman church who “authenticated” the canon. They largely got it right. After the Reformation, this has been revisited with far more detail and authenticated by protestants, correcting earlier errors.
So you know nothing about textual issues then?
In fact, why do we accept Mark or Luke as Scripture since neither was an apostle nor a witness to our Lord?
They were companions of the apostles.
It is only on the authority of the Church church which accepted them as Scripture.
Agree ...
If it is not the church which can determine and authenticate the canon of Scripture who can?
Here is where your Romanism trips you up. The church doesnt determine canonicity ... God determined it. The NT was God-breathed, therefore it is authoritative. It is God who determined the canon via inspiration of the texts. The only thing left for the church to do was to recognize those texts that were authoritative ... and they did very early on (long before the councils in 300+ AD.)
By 60 AD Peter already recognized Pauls writings as scripture ... because they were written by Paul! Peter didn't need any council or church to tell him that ... he recognized the apostolic authority of Pauls writing ... and so did all the churches. That Peter recognized Pauls writings as scripture before the completion of the NT also shows that the recognition of the canon was gradual (since Revelation was not even penned until 95 AD).
The church doesn't determine the canon, God determined it by inspiring the writing.