Christian Forums

Second Timothy 3:15-16 reads, "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reprooof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work."

Should we include the Old Testament when accepting this Scripture?  Or was Paul refering to the Old Testament because the New Testament was not yet cannonized?  Was he thinking his writings were Scripture which would then inlcude his writing also?

Quote from: Reflecter on Wed Mar 14, 2012 - 10:43:16
Second Timothy 3:15-16 reads, "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reprooof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work."

Should we include the Old Testament when accepting this Scripture?  Or was Paul refering to the Old Testament because the New Testament was not yet canonized?  Was he thinking his writings were Scripture which would then include his writing also?

Hi Reflecter, we are to include the writing of a prophet if given to him by God. Jesus and the apostles quoted Old Testament scripture thus verifying them as truth.

Paul wrote in Galatians 1:11-12.  But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. 12  For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

1 Corinthians 7:12  But to the rest speak I, not the Lord . . 

1 Corinthians 7:25  Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: yet I give my judgment . .

1 Corinthians  7:10  And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord . .

Paul didn't guess whether his writings were the word of God. Colossians 1:25  Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfill the word of God; 26  Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:
 
There are also historical religious writings such as Machabees. There was not a prophet of God writing it. Another writer highly esteemed by some was Josephus, a Jewish historian which wrote of things concerning the New Testament also, but is not to be included as scripture.

Quote from: Wikipedia
Books, such as the Jewish-Christian Gospels, have been excluded from the canon altogether, but many disputed books considered non-canonical or even apocryphal by some are considered to be Biblical apocrypha or Deuterocanonical or fully canonical by others.

My thoughts

larry2,

Thanks for the thoughtful reply.  Josephus is a guy I read awhile back.  There were four volumes in the set I had. 
After reading your input I remembered 1 Thessalonians 2:13:  It reads, "And for this reason we also constantly thank God that when you received from us the Word of God's message, you accepted not as the word of men, but what it really is the Word of God, which also performes its work in you who believe."

Quote from: Reflecter on Wed Mar 14, 2012 - 23:07:17
larry2,

Thanks for the thoughtful reply.  Josephus is a guy I read awhile back.  There were four volumes in the set I had. 
After reading your input I remembered 1 Thessalonians 2:13:  It reads, "And for this reason we also constantly thank God that when you received from us the Word of God's message, you accepted not as the word of men, but what it really is the Word of God, which also performes its work in you who believe."

Amen and thanks; I have added that to my list now also. 

KJV All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine,   for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

What inspired scripture do you have ?

Quote from: makahiya on Sat Apr 21, 2012 - 12:47:49
KJV All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine,   for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

What inspired scripture do you have ?

It depends on which KJV you're using. The more modern translation has inspired books in it but it's incomplete and therefore really should be called a Bible.

What exactly are you calling scripture ?

Quote from: makahiya on Sat Apr 21, 2012 - 13:06:23
What exactly are you calling scripture ?

The same canon used in the west since the very beginning. How about you?

What inspired scripture do you have ?

Quote from: makahiya on Sat Apr 21, 2012 - 13:23:10
What inspired scripture do you have ?

Did I not already answer the question properly?

No, be sincere, what exactly are you calling inspired scripture ?

#1. You cannot honestly state you have scripture if you believe only the original manuscripts were inspired. There are no original manuscripts. KJV All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:                                                   

#2. You cannot honestly say "the bible

Quote from: makahiya on Sat Apr 21, 2012 - 13:31:04
#1. You cannot honestly state you have scripture if you believe only the original manuscripts were inspired. There are no original manuscripts. KJV All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:                                                   

#2. You cannot honestly say "the bible

I'm 17 yrs postdoctoral Ed.D. in higher education.

Be sincere and professional.

Last time, what inspired scripture do you have ?

What are you calling inspired scripture ?

Quote from: makahiya on Sat Apr 21, 2012 - 13:45:52
I'm 17 yrs postdoctoral Ed.D. in higher education.

Be sincere and professional.

Last time, what inspired scripture do you have ?

What are you calling inspired scripture ?

If you are 17 yrs postdoctoral then you should know very well what I mean. You know I'm referring to the degradation of the canon due to the Reformation.

KJV Seest thou a man wise in his own conceit? there is more hope of a fool than of him.

Quote from: Reflecter on Wed Mar 14, 2012 - 10:43:16
Second Timothy 3:15-16 reads, "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reprooof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work."

Should we include the Old Testament when accepting this Scripture?  Or was Paul refering to the Old Testament because the New Testament was not yet cannonized?  Was he thinking his writings were Scripture which would then inlcude his writing also?

What inspired scripture do you have ?

Quote from: makahiya on Sat Apr 21, 2012 - 18:36:51
KJV Seest thou a man wise in his own conceit? there is more hope of a fool than of him.

Typical evasion.

It would be simpler for those who openly reject God-breathed books of the ancient canon to renounce the title of Bible student.

KJV But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God.

What inspired scripture do you have ?

Quote from: makahiya on Sun Apr 22, 2012 - 02:31:35

KJV But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God.

What inspired scripture do you have ?

The same canon as the early church you should try it.

--------------------------
Manuscripts and Bibles
--------------------------

Syriac Gospels                                                                                      
Origenis Hexaplorum                                                                              
Codex Vaticanus                                                                                    
Codex Sinaiticus                                                                                      
Codex Ambrosiano                                                                                  
Codex Alexandrianus                                                                                
Codex Boernerianus                                                                                    
Codex Washingtonianus

N.T. Manuscripts 1st century - 2nd century                                                
N.T. Manuscripts 3rd century - 4th century                                                
N.T. Manuscripts 5th century - 10th century                                                    
N.T. Manuscripts 11th century - 18th century

1522 Erasmus Greek New Testament                                                        
1524 Hebrew Old Testament                                                                      
1534 Tyndale Bible                                          
1537 Matthew's Bible                                                                            
1540 Coverdale Great Bible
1546 Stephanus Greek New Testament                                                    
1549 The Byble Cranmer's Prologue                                                          
1595 Bishop's Bible                                                                                      
1598 Beza's Greek New Testament                                                            
1599 Nuremberg Polyglot Bible                                                                   Greek, Hebrew, Syriac, Latin, French, Italian,
Spanish, English, German, Danish, Bohemian, Polish

KJV 1611 Holy Bible                                                                                    
KJV 1613 Holy Bible                                                                                        
KJV 1728 Holy Bible                                                                                  
KJV 1764 Holy Bible                                                                                      
KJV 1769 Holy Bible                                                                                    
KJV 1773 Holy Bible                                                                                      
KJV 1842 Holy Bible

-----------                                                                                                     E Sword
-----------                                                                                             Concordance to Bibles, Dictionaries, Commentaries                                         86 Bible Texts                                                                                             15 Bible Commentaries                                                                                 14 Word Dictionaries                                                                                       58 Dispensational Charts 20 Maps

--------------                                                                                               Power Bible
--------------                                                                                             Concordance to Bibles, Dictionaries, Commentaries                                        
16 Bible Texts                                                                                             17 Bible Commentaries                                                                                   3 Bible Dictionaries                                                                                         8 Bible Topic Texts                                                                                         2 Bible Lexicons


---------------------------------------------                                                  
80 Historical Authors - Theological Texts                                                        
470 Creation Science - Photographs and Research Papers                              
700 Biblical Studies - Diagrams and Research Papers                                  
120 World Religions - Texts and Research Papers

Consider which books your Bible is missing that all Bibles in the history of the world had prior to the reformation.

And then consider why those books were taken out.

Concerning how Paul saw his on writings....

1 Cor 14:37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.

Exo 25 describes how God commanded Moses to fabricate the lamp of the tabernacle.  It was made out of 39 + 27 parts for a total of 66 parts.  The OT has 39 books and the NT has 27.

Ps 119:105 Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.

God knew 3,500 years ago, want the end product would look like.  66 books.

The Jews never considered the apocrypha inspired.  They have errors.  No Jewish Bible has them.

Peace

Quote from: Talking Donkey on Wed Apr 25, 2012 - 16:39:58
Concerning how Paul saw his on writings....

1 Cor 14:37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.

Exo 25 describes how God commanded Moses to fabricate the lamp of the tabernacle.  It was made out of 39 + 27 parts for a total of 66 parts.  The OT has 39 books and the NT has 27.

Ps 119:105 Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.

God knew 3,500 years ago, want the end product would look like.  66 books.

The Jews never considered the apocrypha inspired.  They have errors.  No Jewish Bible has them.

Peace

False.

On the contrary more Jews used the Septugaint because most Jews since the time of Alexander the Great (before Christ was born) spoke Greek and not Hebrew.

Quit lying to yourself.

Quote from: LightHammer on Thu Apr 26, 2012 - 17:35:04

Quote from: Talking Donkey on Wed Apr 25, 2012 - 16:39:58
Concerning how Paul saw his on writings....

1 Cor 14:37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.

Exo 25 describes how God commanded Moses to fabricate the lamp of the tabernacle.  It was made out of 39 + 27 parts for a total of 66 parts.  The OT has 39 books and the NT has 27.

Ps 119:105 Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.

God knew 3,500 years ago, want the end product would look like.  66 books.

The Jews never considered the apocrypha inspired.  They have errors.  No Jewish Bible has them.

Peace

False.

On the contrary more Jews used the Septugaint because most Jews since the time of Alexander the Great (before Christ was born) spoke Greek and not Hebrew.

Quit lying to yourself.

Where did you get this info?  What credibility does the author have?

Quote from: LightHammer on Thu Apr 26, 2012 - 17:35:04

Quote from: Talking Donkey on Wed Apr 25, 2012 - 16:39:58

The Jews never considered the apocrypha inspired.  They have errors.  No Jewish Bible has them.

On the contrary more Jews used the Septugaint because most Jews since the time of Alexander the Great (before Christ was born) spoke Greek and not Hebrew.

It is my understanding that the Greek Septuagint was widely used among the Jews at the time of Our Lord, and that nearly all the OT quotations found in the NT are verbatim from the Septuagint.

It is also my understanding that after ~33AD, the rabbis (Pharisees and Sadducees) nearly all rejected the Septuagint, calling it the "Christian Scriptures," and with it the Deuterocanonical Books.

There was some discussion regarding the canonicity of the Deuterocanonical Books in the early centuries of the Church, but this eventually ended until about 50 years before the Reformation.

The question was, what did Paul mean by "Scripture?"


If Paul wrote 2nd Timothy in the latter half of the first century, then the chances of his reference being to any NT writing is suspect. However, it is possible that he includes in the term some of the early writings of the church, but we likely don't have them and/or recognize them as Scripture today (e.g., the letter from Jerusalem to the Gentile converts as a stand alone document, or the Didache).


The Jews did not have a settled canon until mid or late 2nd century, and it is largely thought that they did eschew the LXX because the Christians used it (among other reasons). Prior to the 2nd century, neither the Jews nor Christians had a settled canon, and both referred to what are now considered by Protestants apocryphal documents on a regular basis. The Church Fathers refer to other Christian writings that did not survive the cononization process.


The development of cannon is essentially a defensive tactic rather than one born of altruistic good will. This is true for both canons. The Jews likely began looking at their written record following the repression of their revolt in 135, and the early church eventually felt the need to restrict her canon in response to various perceived herecies.


In the ancient world, "Scripture" did not equate to "canon," because the latter implies if not requires a set of recognized documents; usually a closed set. Simply, that did not exist in Paul's time - for either the Jewish or Christian communities.


Because Paul was a well trained Pharisee, there is no real reason that he would not have been referring to whatever documents the Jewish community used. It is likely that the Torah would have been included, but we don't know about the Writings and the Prophets precisely, nor how the apocrypha was categorized. Apparently the Qumran community thought that particular writings were worth keeping around.


A caveat: it does not necessarily follow that just because a document is referred to in the NT, or that Jewish or early Christian writers refer to it that it must be 'Scripture.' It may simply be a book worthy of reading and reflection; that is one that is useful for maturing the reader.


The simple answer to the OP is that we don't know precisely what Paul referred to was. We can take an educated guess, but we cannot definitively put a bow around it.

Quote from: HRoberson on Thu Jul 19, 2012 - 22:43:52
The question was, what did Paul mean by "Scripture?"

The simple answer to the OP is that we don't know precisely what Paul referred to was. We can take an educated guess, but we cannot definitively put a bow around it.

Being that the risen Christ revealed the fulfilled gospel to Paul alone, is it possible concerning scripture we might apply something else uttered by Him in Revelation 1:8 to John?  That "which is, and which was, and which is to come."

What part of Scripture is inspired: All of it from Genesis 1, to Revelation 22.

Quote from: samuel40 on Thu Jul 19, 2012 - 23:26:59
What part of Scripture is inspired: All of it from Genesis 1, to Revelation 22.

2 Timothy 3:16
All Scripture is inspired by God and is useful to teach us what is true and to make us realize what is wrong in our lives. It corrects us when we are wrong and teaches us to do what is right.

Quote from: samuel40 on Thu Jul 19, 2012 - 23:26:59
What part of Scripture is inspired: All of it from Genesis 1, to Revelation 22.

Whose canon are we going to use? How are we going to settle that our chosen canon is what Paul used? Since the NT writers appealed to the Greek version of the Old Testament, it may be that Paul considered the LXX as Scripture. However, the Jews of Paul's time do not seem to have had a settled canon.


In any event the LXX, if Paul used it, included some apocryphal writings and does not conform with the Protestant OT. Further, the Jews eventually dismissed the LXX as "Christian" and preferred the Masoretic Text. This of course was a development after the coming of Jesus and therefore doesn't really help us figure out which documents Paul would have used.


So when you say Genesis 1, to Revelation 22, which documents and forms specifically is it to which you refer?

Quote from: Reflecter on Wed Mar 14, 2012 - 10:43:16
Second Timothy 3:15-16 reads, "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reprooof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work."

Should we include the Old Testament when accepting this Scripture?  Or was Paul refering to the Old Testament because the New Testament was not yet cannonized?  Was he thinking his writings were Scripture which would then inlcude his writing also?

That comment referred to the Old Testament, not the new. 

However, Paul, to Tim or Titus, Tim I think, commanded him to remember to teach the things he had spoken and Tim had heard, meaning it wasn't written down. So, Paul had words and thoughts he didn't write that were important to be learned. 

And Paul told someone that he taught different things to the meat eaters than the milk eaters.  His letters were written to the milk to help them become the meat.  The meat didn't need letters, they "had arrived".   (this is a good argument for something like "tradition" in the Xian faith, but it is a statement from scripture that seems to be in disagreement with the concept of sola scriptura." 

Quote from: HRoberson on Fri Jul 20, 2012 - 15:43:56

Quote from: samuel40 on Thu Jul 19, 2012 - 23:26:59
What part of Scripture is inspired: All of it from Genesis 1, to Revelation 22.

Whose canon are we going to use? How are we going to settle that our chosen canon is what Paul used? Since the NT writers appealed to the Greek version of the Old Testament, it may be that Paul considered the LXX as Scripture. However, the Jews of Paul's time do not seem to have had a settled canon.


In any event the LXX, if Paul used it, included some apocryphal writings and does not conform with the Protestant OT. Further, the Jews eventually dismissed the LXX as "Christian" and preferred the Masoretic Text. This of course was a development after the coming of Jesus and therefore doesn't really help us figure out which documents Paul would have used.


So when you say Genesis 1, to Revelation 22, which documents and forms specifically is it to which you refer?

Think about this.  The apocrypha and pseudipigrapha were quoted in the New Testament.  There were examples there that conveyed examples of the MESSAGE.  The words/interpretations aren't important, it's the message.  The words are to help convey the message. 

Quote from: Catalyst on Sat Jul 21, 2012 - 15:33:38

Quote from: Reflecter on Wed Mar 14, 2012 - 10:43:16
Second Timothy 3:15-16 reads, "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reprooof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work."

Should we include the Old Testament when accepting this Scripture?  Or was Paul refering to the Old Testament because the New Testament was not yet cannonized?  Was he thinking his writings were Scripture which would then inlcude his writing also?

That comment referred to the Old Testament, not the new. 

However, Paul, to Tim or Titus, Tim I think, commanded him to remember to teach the things he had spoken and Tim had heard, meaning it wasn't written down. So, Paul had words and thoughts he didn't write that were important to be learned. 

And Paul told someone that he taught different things to the meat eaters than the milk eaters.  His letters were written to the milk to help them become the meat.  The meat didn't need letters, they "had arrived".   (this is a good argument for something like "tradition" in the Xian faith, but it is a statement from scripture that seems to be in disagreement with the concept of sola scriptura."

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: -2 Timothy 3:16
That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works. -2 Timothy 3:17

All means all.
Can any preacher be "thoroughly furnished unto all good works" with only the OT?

Quote from: kjb1769 on Sat Jul 21, 2012 - 17:13:42

Quote from: Catalyst on Sat Jul 21, 2012 - 15:33:38

Quote from: Reflecter on Wed Mar 14, 2012 - 10:43:16
Second Timothy 3:15-16 reads, "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reprooof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work."

Should we include the Old Testament when accepting this Scripture?  Or was Paul refering to the Old Testament because the New Testament was not yet cannonized?  Was he thinking his writings were Scripture which would then inlcude his writing also?

That comment referred to the Old Testament, not the new. 

However, Paul, to Tim or Titus, Tim I think, commanded him to remember to teach the things he had spoken and Tim had heard, meaning it wasn't written down. So, Paul had words and thoughts he didn't write that were important to be learned. 

And Paul told someone that he taught different things to the meat eaters than the milk eaters.  His letters were written to the milk to help them become the meat.  The meat didn't need letters, they "had arrived".   (this is a good argument for something like "tradition" in the Xian faith, but it is a statement from scripture that seems to be in disagreement with the concept of sola scriptura."

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: -2 Timothy 3:16
That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works. -2 Timothy 3:17

All means all.
Can any preacher be "thoroughly furnished unto all good works" with only the OT?

Would you mind listing the "all" to which Paul referred, and explain why you think your list is authoritative.