Originally posted by cougan
Did you catch it Scott and Seebs. Here we learn that the law made NOTHING PERFECT. But in 2tim 3:16 you claim that the scriptures there are the old law and it plainly says in vrs 17 that those scriptures make it to where the man of god may be PERFECT. THROUGLY FURNISHED. The bible makes its very clear indeed that ALL SCRIPTURES mentioned in 2tim 3:16 would include both the Old and NT. This is simple enough for even a child to understand.
We've got a problem here, if we interpret it the way you do. Is it possible for the NT to make a person perfect? If so, then the "Scripture" he is referring to can only mean the NT, and not the OT. The reason that nothing was made perfect under the Old Law was that man, in and of himself, is a sinful creature. If the Old Testament is being spoken of in the Hebrews passage, why would something inspired by God be "weak and unprofitable?" What does that say about the OT? Your combining of the two passages raises many, many more questions than it answers.
Because of the unlikelihood that Timothy had any of the NT Canon with him, we must conclude that Paul is understanding that with the redemption of Christ, which the OT foretold in many, many ways, Timothy could clearly understand the OT Scriptures and what their place was in the time after Christ's death. Again, you assume that Timothy understood that these writings were Scripture, and historical (and Biblical) sources provide strong evidence to the contrary.
Please note the following verse.
2 Peter 3:16 As also in all <I>his </I>epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as <I>they do </I>also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
Here is another passage that shows that Peter confirms to us that he regards Pauls writtings as scripture that is they are ispired of God as he compares people twisting Pauls writing as do they twist the other scriptures/writings.
People twist the laws of the nation, but that doesn't make them Scripture necessarily. Read what I wrote about this passage earler.
One more, If the scriptures in 2tim 3:16 is the Old law by itself and it makes man perfect and throughly furnshished again we would have a contridiction with the following verse.
Galatians 3:22 But the Scripture has confined all under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe.
So under your view that which makes man perfect, throughly furnished confines him under sin. [/quote]
So, now you say that this instance of Scripture is the Old Testament again? Do you change the meaning of the word depending on your own view of doctrine? Interesting! Again, the burden of proof for you to show that the NT by itself can make a man perfect is on your shoulders.
Then you try and seperate the gospel from the written word. If you want to pursue this irrational line of thinking I will show more than what I am about to.
We are called by the gospel.
2Thes 2:13 But we are bound to give thanks to God always for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God from the beginning chose you for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth,
14 to which He called you by our gospel, for the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.
The gospel is the good news how do you suppose we today know about that good news and understand what the good news is? Its by the word of God.
Which the people of Thessalonica did not have. How can you assume that gospel is the written word when it did not exist to the early Church? Did the meaning of Paul's writing automatically switch when the NT was canonized in the middle of the 4th century?
Paul says in Romans 2:16 in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel. Now I ask what does the bible say we will be judged by?
By the gospel of Christ - we are not judged by words out of a book - we are judged by the good news of Jesus Christ.
John 12:48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.
We have those words recorded for us in the NT do we not? Its easy to see that we have the good news or the gospel and that which we will be judged by in the written word. Again, just look back to 2tim 3:16-17.
Again, there's such a huge burden of proof for you to show that this is exactly what Jesus meant.
So you see you cannot seperate the gospel from the written word. We have the good new recorded for us. We no longer need inspired prophets and apostles today going around teaching the gospel and confirming it with sign and miracles today. 1Thes 1:5, Mark 16:20. They have already done that and the word of God has been fully revealed. There is nothing new to add to the word of God it stands as it is and with it we are complete and throughly furnished. 2tim 3:16-17.
SO you do not understand that there is a difference between "gospel" and the writing down of the "gospel?" It seems clear from your verses that this is exactly what Paul is saying. You keep using II Timothy to say that everything is complete, but that says nothing about the canon being complete. Indeed, there is nothing in the Bible that talks about the 27 books we have as being the complete and done Word of God. The authors of the Bible, while they were inspired, show no evidence that they recognized that their letter would be read by the rest of the world for the next 2000 years, and that what they write would be "unable to be added to" according to different people.
I still want to know Scott when are you going to admit that the book of Psalms was part of the law which was nailed to the Cross? I know you dont have a leg to stand on agaist the argument I used against you. Why are you avoiding that argument my friend? I can only conclude that you have nothing to say in your defense. If you truely are led by the HS as they were in the 1st century as you keep claiming then why dont you give me an answer. Ask the HS to teach you and guide you to give an answer to this that I can not deny. I was led by the HS by means of the word he ispired to come to my conclusion but if you indeed are led by the HS directly you should easily be able to show me from the bible why it is my arguement is wrong.
I've given you earlier in the thread my defence for that. You disagreed, and that's fine. I tried to show you what Christ was meaning when he said he fulfilled the prophets and the psalms, but you think he was talking about everyone else.
I have a question about your use of the Holy Spirit. You maintain that you were "led by the HS." According to what I've read in the past about your belief of the HS, the gift of the Spirit can only be given by an apostle. Which apostle has given you such a gift? Or are you going to now deny your previous statements? Well, we both think that our interpretations are led by the Spirit - yet it is I who have shown a doctrine of believing in the leading of the Spirit, and you have not... Hmmm.. I wonder who wins, then...
Oh, and you missed a lot of stuff from my previous post, which includes how Psallo was used in contemporary sources to mean music with accompaniment. I was sure you would talk about that.
What words of wisdom. Wow you really blew me away with all the scripture you provided. I am glad I dont have to repent anymore after I get out of my truck at the end of the day. What about brushing my teeth is that a sin? It sure would set me at ease if you if you would let me know if doing this thing outside of the worship service is a sin or not. I look forward to more of infinate wisdom.
