All Scripture is inspired, but ... (Epistles, churches, Revelation, preaching)

[Jayhawker Soule]

First, ...

2 Timothy 3:14-17

• You, however, must continue in the things you have learned and are confident about. You know who taught you
• and how from infancy you have known the holy writings, which are able to give you wisdom for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.
• Every scripture is inspired by God and useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,
• that the person dedicated to God may be capable and equipped for every good work.

- source

where 2 Timothy 3:16 is frequently quoted. My questions are:

• Who wrote it and when?
• Who was the audience?
• What is the body of work referred to as 'scripture'?

It reads very much like a reference to a corpus of religious work that had been available to its audience "from infancy," and this of course would exclude the entirety of the "New Testament" - which leads one to wonder how 2 Timothy 3:16 comes to be seen as validating that disparate body of work.

[snowdenscold]

Yes, the primary view that Paul had in mind in verse 16 is the OT. He uses a specific technical term (graphe) that has a special meaning, and is never used of any writings belonging outside of Scripture. So everything that belongs in category "scripture" or "graphe" is God-breathed. Still, there seems to be an awareness throughout the NT that additions were being added to this deposit. 2 Pe. 3:16, 1 Ti. 5:18, 1 Cor. 7:12, and John 14:16 / 16:13 give us insight here. So if we establish a text as "scripture" (which we see the NT as), then it falls into the characterization given in verses 16-17 above.

[Jayhawker Soule]

Originally Posted by snowdenscold

Yes, the primary view that Paul had in mind in verse 16 is the OT.

Primary or only? Furthermore:

On the basis of their language, content, and other factors, the Pastoral Epistles are today widely regarded as not having been written by the Apostle Paul, but after his death. (Although the Second Epistle to Timothy is sometimes thought to be more likely than the other two to have been written by Paul.) Critics examining the texts fail to find their vocabulary and literary style similar to Paul's unquestionably authentic letters, fail to fit the life situation of Paul in the epistles into Paul's reconstructed biography, and identify principles of the emerged Christian church rather than those of the apostolic generation.


- Wiki

So Pauline authorship is a belief.

Originally Posted by snowdenscold

So if we establish a text as "scripture" (which we see the NT as), then it falls into the characterization given in verses 16-17 above.

But did you not just say that all scripture is inspired by God when we define 'scripture' as that body of work which is God-inspired? If so, then gMat (for example) becomes God-indpired not by virtue of any claim made in 2 Timothy, but by virtue of a much later decision (claim) to include it as part of Christian Canon.

[Michael Way]

Originally Posted by Jayhawker Soule

Primary or only? Furthermore:

On the basis of their language, content, and other factors, the Pastoral Epistles are today widely regarded as not having been written by the Apostle Paul, but after his death. (Although the Second Epistle to Timothy is sometimes thought to be more likely than the other two to have been written by Paul.) Critics examining the texts fail to find their vocabulary and literary style similar to Paul's unquestionably authentic letters, fail to fit the life situation of Paul in the epistles into Paul's reconstructed biography, and identify principles of the emerged Christian church rather than those of the apostolic generation.


- Wiki

So Pauline authorship is a belief.


But did you not just say that all scripture is inspired by God when we define 'scripture' as that body of work which is God-inspired? If so, then gMat (for example) becomes God-indpired not by virtue of any claim made in 2 Timothy, but by virtue of a much later decision (claim) to include it as part of Christian Canon.

All of the Pauline epistles in the New Testament were indeed written by Paul.

One of the criteria for recognizing N.T. canonicity was that of apostolicity. A book had to have been written by an apostle or by someone closely associated with an apostle. Mark was associated with Peter, and Luke was associated with Paul.

Another criteria was the original acceptance by contemporary believers. The books must be universally received by the local churches as authentic at the time of their writing.

Each of the pastoral epistles; 1 and 2 Timothy, and Titus, identify Paul as the author and the early church with few exceptions such as Marcion and Tatian, recognized them as Pauline.

It was not until the rise of liberalism in the 19th century that the Pauline authorship of the pastoral epistles was seriously questioned. Today, most liberal scholars attack the Pauline authorship of the pastoral epistles just as they attack the Bible in other ways.

Since the pastoral epistles were written under unique circumstances to a unique audience (Timothy and Titus first and foremost), and for unique purposes, it is to be expected that those epistles would not sound exactly like Paul's other epistles.

The New Testament has the same Scriptural authority as the Old Testament. The Old and New Testaments are the word of God. The New Testament is the fulfillment of John 16: 12-15.

[snowdenscold]

I'm not going to debate Pauline authorship here, if that's what you really wanted to get it at in the original post (though I believe he wrote the pastoral epistles). In fact, I'm not sure what point you're really trying to make - why not just be more clear in your skepticism or objection(s)?

[twin.spin]

Originally Posted by Jayhawker Soule

First, ...

where 2 Timothy 3:16 is frequently quoted. My questions are:

• Who wrote it and when?
• Who was the audience?
• What is the body of work referred to as 'scripture'?

.

• Who wrote it and when?
  • A: Paul. Written from prison in Rome while expecting to be executed for his preaching
• Who was the audience?
  • verse 2 ... "To Timothy"
• What is the body of work referred to as 'scripture'?
  • OT and the Apostles writings (NT)

[AngusHsu]

"Every scripture is inspired by God and useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,
that the person dedicated to God may be capable and equipped for every good work."

I completely disagree with the claim of biblical inerrancy. God is more than just a collection of 66 books written primarily by Jewish men. God is mysterious and we are hardly scratching at the surface of his majesty. This verse is often cited to support inerrancy. The authorship and what constitutes scripture are secondary to the intention of this verse.

[Jayhawker Soule]

Originally Posted by Mike555

All of the Pauline epistles in the New Testament were indeed written by Paul.

You are certainly free to hold to that as an article of faith.

Originally Posted by Mike555

The New Testament has the same Scriptural authority as the Old Testament. The Old and New Testaments are the word of God. The New Testament is the fulfillment of John 16: 12-15.

You are also free to hold to that as an article of faith while noting that John 16 is irrelevant to this thread.

[Jayhawker Soule]

Originally Posted by twin.spin

• Who wrote it and when?
  • A: Paul. Written from prison in Rome while expecting to be executed for his preaching
• Who was the audience?
  • verse 2 ... "To Timothy"
• What is the body of work referred to as 'scripture'?
  • OT and the Apostles writings (NT)

So you claim that "the Apostles writings (NT)" predates Paul. Strange.

[snowdenscold]

Originally Posted by AngusHsu

"Every scripture is inspired by God and useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,
that the person dedicated to God may be capable and equipped for every good work."

I completely disagree with the claim of biblical inerrancy. God is more than just a collection of 66 books written primarily by Jewish men. God is mysterious and we are hardly scratching at the surface of his majesty. This verse is often cited to support inerrancy. The authorship and what constitutes scripture are secondary to the intention of this verse.

You are presenting a false dichotomy here. [Inerrant] Scripture is a subset of God's revelation (though a very important part!), not the entirety of it. Now if you want to get into what should interpret what, that's a different issue.