2 Timothy 3:16-17 , if Paul teach Timothy that the Scripture is sufficient, then why make another Scripture according to the Calvinist?

Here is a quote from an article about the verse I read in this link : > Verse 16 is a crucial text in our discussion. All Scripture (Greek: > graphe which is refering to the sacred writings). Here is an obvious > reference to the Old Testament, though it did not exclude the writings > presently being written in Timothy's own day, the New Testament. I talk with a Calvinist friend (who gave me the link above) as he said that *Paul teach Sola Scriptura to Timothy*. After I read the link, so I propose an analogy that "Scripture" is like "chilly".
He agree to the analogy, as he said *"all chilly is sufficient to make someone (who ate it) feel hot. With just only chilly, it can make someone feel hot. So is Scripture. With just only Scripture, the man of God might be complete, fully equipped for every good work "*. Next I propose him an illustration :
There is already chilly in your house.
You like a hot/spicy food.
So then logically your wife can cook food for you with only that chilly in your house, as with just only chilly it will be sufficient to make you feel hot. But then, I see your wife go to the supermarket and buy another chilly. Comeback to the house, she starts cooking with the chilly in your house and with the one she just bought. The question *"why did your wife buy another chilly while only with the chilly at your home is sufficient to make you feel hot ?"* is analog with the title of my question ---> *"why make another Scripture, while only with the existing Scripture the man of God might be complete, fully equipped for every good work ?"* Then my friend show me some sentences from the link above: > If I am a store owner who can fully equip a hiker to hike the Grand > Canyon and if I have the resources and abilities to provide everything > he needs in the way of supplies, hiking gear, shoes, maps, food, etc., > **does it not follow that I am a sufficient source of supply for the hiker?** I say :
Exactly. It does follow that the chilly in your house a sufficient source of supply to make you hot. Then I go on showing the article from the same link: > If he has to go next door to another shop for a few more things, and > then to a third shop for some things that neither mine nor the other > shop had, then none of us are sufficient to equip the hiker Me:
The analogy above doesn't apply to what I am asking. Your wife go to supermarket is not to buy a powder pepper or other things, but chilly. My friend doesn't have an answer.
So I ask the question here. ---------- Addition from the same article's link : > For Luther, the entire Bible is inspired. However, he was asking a > question concerning **which are the right BOOKS to be included in the > Bible** The sentence above show a condition that The Scripture already exist. Yet, later on some people want to ADD that existing Scripture. IF those some people ---*who want to add the existing Scripture*--- already had in mind that the existing Scripture alone is sufficient, then why did they want to add more it ? > The word canon comes from the Greek word kanon and means "a measuring > rod, ruler, norm, or standard by which other things are **measured or > judged**." Measured or judged by what ? By the Scripture ?