|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Scripture versus that support Sola Scriptura - 6/20/2008 8:41:06 PM
|
|
|
Ezra
Posts: 1778
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: loco79
I have a question about 2 Tim 3:16. Many people i talk to say that the scripture here is implied for the OT and the NT to come. That this is an umbrella for all scripture. My question is how can that be, because in the preceeding verse it references the scripture he has known since infancy. And to me the only scripture he could know from infancy is the OT.
2 Tim 3:15
And because from thy infancy thou hast known the holy scriptures which can instruct thee to salvation by the faith which is in Christ Jesus.
Actually, while in verse 15 Paul is referring to the Tanach (OT), in verse 16 he is speaking about both the OT and NT since he says "ALL Scripture".
It is a common fallacy to assume that because v. 15 refers to the OT, v. 16 must necessarily do so. The truth is that Paul wrote 2 Timothy at the close of his ministry (A.D. 66) shortly before his martyrdom, when the majority of the NT books were already in circulation.
Peter had already equated his and all Paul's epistles with the OT Scriptures (2 Pet. 1:19-21; 3:15,16), and Paul was fully aware that his preaching, teaching and epistles were Divinely inspired (Gal. 1:11,12; 1 Thess. 2:13). Paul was also a prophet who prophesied of many things, including his impending death (2 Tim. 4:6). He could easily have been prophesying of a complete Bible.
The most compelling evidence for this is the fact that what Paul was writing were the words of the Holy Spirit ("the more sure word of prophecy" as stated in 2 Pet. 1:19). God the Holy Spirit saw the completed New Testament before it was completed (since He knows the end from the beginning). And it is God who revealed through Paul that ALL Scripture (OT & NT) is theopneustos (a very unique word that occurs just once in the NT. "Inspiration" in Job. 32:8 has a different though related meaning).
Therefore we need not assume that Paul was excluding the NT because of his limited perception. Furthermore the only other Scriptures pending were the epistles of John and the Revelation of Jesus Christ. The bulk of the NT was already in existence when Paul wrote to Timothy, and Timothy had certainly been exposed to the NT writings then in existence, knowing that they too were Scripture (2 Tim. 4:13).
< Message edited by Ezra -- 6/20/2008 8:47:22 PM >
_____________________________
And whosoever will, let him take the Water of Life freely. Revelation 22:17
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Scripture versus that support Sola Scriptura - 6/21/2008 9:59:25 AM
|
|
|
KickingBird
Posts: 8
Joined: 6/8/2008
Status: offline
|
So many good thoughts by all of you. I will take time later to respond to them.
I wrote this a couple years ago and have shared this on another forum, but it speaks to my heart concerning Sola Scriptura.
Is it correct that we should let a church, any church, have sole authority over doctrine and be the final arbiter? To me this is solely the work of the Holy Spirit. To leave such a daunting task in the hands of fallible men is usurping the work of the Holy Spirit and denying His complete sovereignty and divine prerogative over His own work.
I personally feel this is the breeding ground for cults. It is when doctrine becomes subjective to man rather than objective that man gets into trouble. GOD’S TRUTH IS OBJECTIVE: it needs NO MAN’S APPROVAL to give it credence. It stands well on its own.
Many churches have insisted that truth cannot be known unless they (the Mother church) decipher it for the laity. To be caught up in this way of thinking assumes a group salvation mentality (a cult body of believers), which is driven by the tutelage and approval of men, and which usurps the authority of the Holy Spirit. Let’s be very, very cautious here.
I am not implying that truth cannot be found in Confessions of Faith or in Mission Statements, which we all know that fallible men have worked in conjunction with other fallible men to systematically define. But there is a difference, however difficult it is to define. Those that put the Holy Spirit first, who choose to let scripture lead where it will, despite it’s difficult sayings, will not bend and come into subjection to the authority of any church that insists it has sole authority over doctrine, these types of churches deny Christ’s headship of the church. NOT GOOD!
The Holy Spirit is our interpreter. We are beholden to Him and Him alone. If men cannot, and do not find truth as anything but an elusive butterfly, always out of their grasp, then there must be a reason. Does the bible tell us that ALL men have ears to hear? Sadly, according to scripture, not all men do.
Just my thoughts. Not meant to offend anyone.
KB
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
