Old and New Testament Equally God-breathed ?

Peter considered Paul's writings to be Scripture:


2Pe 3:15 And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him,
2Pe 3:16 as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.
(ESV)

 

Yes

The entire Bible is the Word of God.

 

If the O.T. and N.T. were not equally inspired, then the N.T. may not be all the word of God, how much was only personal opinion. If it were even only partially inspired, then wouldn't God know how much scripture He was going to inspire, and include it all in 1Tim.3:16.(sounds like aparadox) I believe God is in control, and the bible is 100% the word of God, 100% God inspired.

 

That phrase indicates that Peter considers Paul's letters to be "Scripture."

Even in your hypothetical case, it would imply the same thing abot the letter in question.

If you didn't consider them Scripture, you wouldn't say "other." You'd simply say "Scripture."

The only debatable point here, IMO, hinges on the term translated "Scriptures." Literally, "graphas" means "writings." I think it's being used in the technical sense here, as it is often used in the NT. I could see someone arguing that it simply meant writings in general, but I think the use of "loipos" ("remaining", translated "other" here) tends toward the technical meaning.

 

Scarey that we live in a day when some would attempt to pit the Old testament against the New testament in any fashion!

even so, Come! Lord Jesus!

 

When Paul referred to sacred Scripture in 2 Tim 3:15-17, he was referring to the OT canon and whatever NT Scriptures were in circulation (1 Tim 5:18, "For the Scripture says... The laborer deserves his wages;” a quote of Luke 10:7).

 

I agree, the entire Bible is God's inspired word. There's no need to debate this. We don't need to make God's word acceptable to anyone. They will either believe or they will make up an excuse not to believe.

 

Voice from the past

Peter Rideman (1506-1556) wrote:

"The light of devine truth hath appeared more brightly in Christ, who hath revealed to us the real will of the Father...the law was given to Moses, but in truth came by Christ."

Rideman goes on to say that God's demand for His people was found in the words spoken by Jesus and not in 'the shadows' of the Old Testament.

 

Funny, I thought making it clear the entirety of the Bible is inspired was positive, well, except according to what you seem to believe.

In dealing with the skeptics and atheists, first one must establish doctrine. That CANNOT be accomplished through THEIR unwillingnesses to hold to the established doctrines.

Making it conclusive that it could alter the established facts of the word of God in doctrine IS SCAREY!

 

Hi pinoybaptist; Nothing man ever wrote of his own ever had as much power as the gospel . Inspired by God it is. The evidence isn't that it says it is, but that it's power proves it is. It's wisdom proves it. The way it effects even the non believer, proves it is because, it prophesized it in advance. No other religious book has ever had the wisdom, prophecy and attraction as does the New testiment. All of this leaves no doubt of it for me
MB

 

AMEN! PREACH IT!

What'd'ja'say, Ed?

 

I believe understand Pinoy.

There are at least two components to our stand concerning the Word of God, both Old and New Testaments.

1) The leading and illumination of the Holy Spirit.

John 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

Because the Spirit of Christ is within us we recognize His truth when we see it.

This has a presumption that we are walking in the Spirit and not after the flesh - carnal (as the Corinthians).

1 John 5

8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
9 If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son.
10 He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.​

Then ​

2) Add to the leading and enlightenment of the Spirit - Our Faith​

Hebrews 4:2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.​

Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.​

1 John 5:4 For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith.​

HankD​

 

Are you always this paranoid?

What you so arrogantly DON'T understand is we are both arguing the same point from the same side!

You're approaching this from the intellectual's perspective which alters your sense of knowing who is on your side. What a shame!

I believe you introduced this thread as a means of attacking those who would debate your ideal.

How is it you determine other's faith as if it's real or not real?

After that blatant and unjustified attack you should STAY with the FACTS!

Um, Jesus wrote the O.T. as penned down by the men He inspired as well as the N.T.

Case closed!

I don't understand what other points you could make this statement to be more concrete than concrete itsself!

Sorry I answered your folly with emphatic truth,except that I am only sorry you didn't see it from the start.

then I can't understand why you remain to the contrary in your repsonses to me?

You are guilty by your own accusation, friend!

 

Peter himself verified the inspiration of Paul's writings in II Peter 3:15-16. "And regard the patience of our Lord as salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to thier own destruction." NASB

Oh, and let's not have this argument that II Peter shouldn't even be in the Bible or that parts of it are subject to textual scrutiny. It's very clear what he writes here. So in order to disagree you will have to discredit the whole book itself. Give me a break.

 

Certainly some of Paul's letters were Scripture, at the discretion of the Holy Spirit. However, unlike Marcion, the Heretic, I do not believe (nor do I think the majority of orthodox Christian believe) that the Laodicean Epistle was Scripture. (Col. 4:16).

[Was there also a 'third' letter to the Corinthian church? (II Cor. 12, 13) Check out this - the Acts of Paul , which includes a third Epistle to the Corinthian church, and was believe to be Scripture by the 'orthodox' Syrian church fathers, Aphraat and Ephraem.]

Paul wanted the Laodicean Epistle read, just as the Colossian Epistle, however, to the church. Paul, ergo, did not necessarily know what he was writing was Scripture, per se, even though Peter recognized, at least some of what Paul wrote, as Scripture, and hence on an exact par with "the other Scriptures".

Ed