Sola Scriptura: Do We Live Like We Believe This Doctrine?

In the Cambridge Declaration, which is a declaration by the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals, the first thesis states the following on Sola Scriptura:

Thesis One: Sola Scriptura
We affirm the inerrant Scripture to be the sole source of written divine revelation, which alone can bind the conscience. The Bible alone teaches all that is necessary for our salvation from sin and is the standard by which all Christian behavior must be measured.

We deny that any creed, council or individual may bind a Christian's conscience, that the Holy Spirit speaks independently of or contrary to what is set forth in the Bible, or that personal spiritual experience can ever be a vehicle of revelation.

This is a pretty good representation of the Reformation doctrine of Sola Scriptura. But the question that we need to ask is, "Do we really live according to this doctrine?"  Doctrine should always lead to practice or practical living.  For example, the grace and love of Christ that we see in Scripture demands that we live in a certain way.  In Romans, chapters 1-11 are usually looked as the doctrine portion of the book and how does chapter 12 begin?  With how should we now live in view of these doctrines?

"Therefore I urge you, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship. And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect." 

So do we really live in accordance with the Scripture's doctrine of Sola Scriptura?  Let me just pose some thoughts and let you answer this question yourself.  When you discipline your children, I would hope you tell them what they have done wrong, teaching them with correction.  But when they have done wrong, do you communicate to your children that they have done wrong based on your authority or Scripture's authority?  In other words, do you communicate to them what God says about what they have done or do you communicate to them what you think they have done wrong?  When you discipline them do you communicate that God commands you to discipline them or do you communicate to them that you have to discipline them because you have to?  Do you see the difference?  One way of disciplining is based on Scripture and God alone being Lord of the conscience, whereas the other way of disciplining is based on individuals or something outside of Scripture binding the conscience.

I really want to investigate this, look what it says in the thesis above.  No creed, council, or individual may bind the conscience.  You can't bind another's conscience, you can't bind your own conscience, only the Lord can bind the conscience.  So where do you attempt to bind another's conscience, where do you try to bind your own conscience by your logic or by your experience?  It can't be this way, the sole source that can bind the conscience is the Lord and He does so through the Scriptures.  If we are going to preach the Word as Pastors, we have to preach Scripture.  If we are going to evangelize, you can try all your fancy methods of evangelism, but only the Word can bind the conscience.  Are you living in accordance with this doctrine?