What is “All Scripture” Among Friends?

[newton3005]

2 Timothy 3:16-17 says “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” Exactly what “Scripture” does Verse 16 refer to? Considering other Verses in the Bible, it appears to be enigmatic that there is no article which accompanies the word “Scripture,” that is, something like ‘All OLD TESTAMENT Scripture.’ On that basis alone, it is questionable as to whether the “Scripture” referred to in Verse 16 means just the Old Testament Scripture. How much more energy would it have taken Paul, who is writing to Timothy in this Book, to add “Old Testament” to the Verse, identifying the Old Testament as the article this Verse refers to? Or was Paul just afraid of running out of ink?

At least one of our friends implies that Paul, in writing to Timothy, is referring to the Old Testament because the Old Testament Scripture was what Timothy knew from childhood, as Paul states in Verse 15. But Paul surely knew that there are other Scriptures when you read 2 Peter 3:15-16 stated by Peter, which says “...count the patience of our Lord as salvation, JUST AS OUR BELOVED BROTHER PAUL ALSO WROTE TO YOU according to the wisdom given him, 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.” Haloa! This passage acknowledges that there are “other Scriptures.” Many regard this passage as a look-back to 2 Timothy 3:16 in which Paul says, “all Scripture.” Seems that as Paul is acquainted with other Scriptures aside from the Old Testament Scriptures existing, even though Timothy may not know of them, Paul could only have been referring to the Old Testament Scriptures AND the other Scriptures, the New Testament, in 2 Timothy 3:16.

What “other Scriptures” could there be, that are in the Bible, other than what’s written in the New Testament, since they are the only “other Scriptures” that are in the Bible? To say that 2 Timothy 3:16 only refers to the Old Testament Scriptures is to treat the New Testament Scriptures as chopped liver! Keep in mind that Verse 16 says ALL Scripture is breathed out by God, or God-inspired if that’s your preference among the translations. Where does this leave the New Testament if Verse 16 infers that only the Old Testament is breathed out by God or God-inspired?

For those that lean on the translation of all Scripture being God-inspired, which implies that all Scripture was created by writers out of God’s Inspiration, there is even a greater case for including the New Testament with the Old Testament when you refer to Scripture, and to question whether it’s really necessary to have a distinction between the Old and New Testaments. Would the writers of one Testament marginalize the writers of the other Testament, when the writers of the New Testament say that ALL Scripture is inspired by God? There may have been rogue Old Testament writers that would have reprimanded the New Testament writers in some of the things they wrote if they were aware of them, but just how influential would they be, when Jews en mass, who like Timothy who may have known only the Old testament, converted to Christianity?

Look, submitted if you will, a parable of sorts. (This is submitted to the extent the God permits us to reason with him as He says in Isaiah 1:18.): An elementary school-age son tells his father, before computers and chips were installed in automobiles, that he wants to be an auto mechanic. The father hands the son a book called ‘Auto Mechanics’, which is easy enough for the son to read and which makes no mention of chips and computers in autos since such autos didn’t exist at the time. The son, being the smart and precocious son that he is, asks his father if he can believe everything that is written in the Auto Mechanics book. The father answers that all books on auto mechanics is the truth.

Years later, when the son graduates from high school, he enters a trade school to learn auto mechanics. He is handed a book called ‘Auto Mechanics- THE NEW EDITION’, which mentions how to install computers and chips into cars that run on them. Should the son question the truthfulness of this book, which mentions computers and chips, when the one his father gave him when he was younger doesn’t mention them? Well, did not the father say that ALL books on auto mechanics is the truth?

So, just as whatever is in a book on auto mechanics is the truth, (and this is not to say that a book on auto mechanics is more important than the Bible from the standpoint of authority at least), whatever is in the Bible as stated in 2 Timothy 3:16-17 is for our teaching, reproof, correction and training in righteousness, that we may be equipped for “every good work.” So, is it a stretch to believe that the Old AND New Testaments are Scriptures referred to in 2 Timothy 3:16-17?

 

[Frank Sophia]

2 Timothy 3:16-17 says “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” Exactly what “Scripture” does Verse 16 refer to? Considering other Verses in the Bible, it appears to be enigmatic that there is no article which accompanies the word “Scripture,” that is, something like ‘All OLD TESTAMENT Scripture.’ On that basis alone, it is questionable as to whether the “Scripture” referred to in Verse 16 means just the Old Testament Scripture. How much more energy would it have taken Paul, who is writing to Timothy in this Book, to add “Old Testament” to the Verse, identifying the Old Testament as the article this Verse refers to? Or was Paul just afraid of running out of ink?

At least one of our friends implies that Paul, in writing to Timothy, is referring to the Old Testament because the Old Testament Scripture was what Timothy knew from childhood, as Paul states in Verse 15. But Paul surely knew that there are other Scriptures when you read 2 Peter 3:15-16 stated by Peter, which says “...count the patience of our Lord as salvation, JUST AS OUR BELOVED BROTHER PAUL ALSO WROTE TO YOU according to the wisdom given him, 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.” Haloa! This passage acknowledges that there are “other Scriptures.” Many regard this passage as a look-back to 2 Timothy 3:16 in which Paul says, “all Scripture.” Seems that as Paul is acquainted with other Scriptures aside from the Old Testament Scriptures existing, even though Timothy may not know of them, Paul could only have been referring to the Old Testament Scriptures AND the other Scriptures in 2 Timothy 3:16.

What “other Scriptures” could there be, that are in the Bible, other than what’s written in the New Testament, since they are the only “other Scriptures” that are in the Bible? To say that 2 Timothy 3:16 only refers to the Old Testament Scriptures is to treat the New Testament Scriptures as chopped liver! Keep in mind that Verse 16 says ALL Scripture is breathed out by God, or God-inspired if that’s your preference among the translations. Where does this leave the New Testament if Verse 16 infers that only the Old Testament is breathed out by God or God-inspired?

For those that lean on the translation of all Scripture being God-inspired, which implies that all Scripture was created by writers out of God’s Inspiration, there is even a greater case for including the New Testament with the Old Testament when you refer to Scripture, and to question whether it’s really necessary to have a distinction between the Old and New Testaments. Would the writers of one Testament marginalize the writers of the other Testament, when the writers of the New Testament say that ALL Scripture is inspired by God? There may have been rogue Old Testament writers that would have reprimanded the New Testament writers in some of the things they wrote if they were aware of them, but just how influential would they be, when Jews en mass, who like Timothy who may have known only the Old testament, converted to Christianity?

Look, submitted if you will, a parable of sorts. (This is submitted to the extent the God permits us to reason with him as He says in Isaiah 1:18.): An elementary school-age son tells his father, before computers and chips were installed in automobiles, that he wants to be an auto mechanic. The father hands the son a book called ‘Auto Mechanics’, which is easy enough for the son to read and which makes no mention of chips and computers in autos since such autos didn’t exist at the time. The son, being the smart and precocious son that he is, asks his father if he can believe everything that is written in the Auto Mechanics book. The father answers that all books on auto mechanics is the truth.

Years later, when the son graduates from high school, he enters a trade school to learn auto mechanics. He is handed a book called ‘Auto Mechanics- THE NEW EDITION’, which mentions how to install computers and chips into cars that run on them. Should the son question the truthfulness of this book, which mentions computers and chips, when the one his father gave him when he was younger doesn’t mention them? Well, did not the father say that ALL books on auto mechanics is the truth?

So, just as whatever is in a book on auto mechanics is the truth, (and this is not to say that a book on auto mechanics is more important than the Bible from the standpoint of authority at least), whatever is in the Bible as stated in 2 Timothy 3:16-17 is for our teaching, reproof, correction and training in righteousness, that we may be equipped for “every good work.” So, is it a stretch to believe that the Old AND New Testaments are Scriptures referred to in 2 Timothy 3:16-17?

Paul can not be talking about the New Testament because when he's writing Timothy even the gospels are still 30 years away...

He does not say that we should devote ourselves to them though, he says they are beneficial towards our completion which when related to 1 John 4:7-21 is about how completely we are living love itself in our daily lives...

We have to take into account how strongly 2 Corinthians 3 also warns against the letter and insists upon going to the Spirit directly...

You will see me use verses in Torah for instance Numbers 11:29 is beautiful, but ultimately I am not a Jewish practitioner.

 

[concretecamper]

2 Timothy 3:16-17 says “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” Exactly what “Scripture” does Verse 16 refer to? Considering other Verses in the Bible, it appears to be enigmatic that there is no article which accompanies the word “Scripture,” that is, something like ‘All OLD TESTAMENT Scripture.’ On that basis alone, it is questionable as to whether the “Scripture” referred to in Verse 16 means just the Old Testament Scripture. How much more energy would it have taken Paul, who is writing to Timothy in this Book, to add “Old Testament” to the Verse, identifying the Old Testament as the article this Verse refers to? Or was Paul just afraid of running out of ink?

At least one of our friends implies that Paul, in writing to Timothy, is referring to the Old Testament because the Old Testament Scripture was what Timothy knew from childhood, as Paul states in Verse 15. But Paul surely knew that there are other Scriptures when you read 2 Peter 3:15-16 stated by Peter, which says “...count the patience of our Lord as salvation, JUST AS OUR BELOVED BROTHER PAUL ALSO WROTE TO YOU according to the wisdom given him, 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.” Haloa! This passage acknowledges that there are “other Scriptures.” Many regard this passage as a look-back to 2 Timothy 3:16 in which Paul says, “all Scripture.” Seems that as Paul is acquainted with other Scriptures aside from the Old Testament Scriptures existing, even though Timothy may not know of them, Paul could only have been referring to the Old Testament Scriptures AND the other Scriptures, the New Testament, in 2 Timothy 3:16.

What “other Scriptures” could there be, that are in the Bible, other than what’s written in the New Testament, since they are the only “other Scriptures” that are in the Bible? To say that 2 Timothy 3:16 only refers to the Old Testament Scriptures is to treat the New Testament Scriptures as chopped liver! Keep in mind that Verse 16 says ALL Scripture is breathed out by God, or God-inspired if that’s your preference among the translations. Where does this leave the New Testament if Verse 16 infers that only the Old Testament is breathed out by God or God-inspired?

For those that lean on the translation of all Scripture being God-inspired, which implies that all Scripture was created by writers out of God’s Inspiration, there is even a greater case for including the New Testament with the Old Testament when you refer to Scripture, and to question whether it’s really necessary to have a distinction between the Old and New Testaments. Would the writers of one Testament marginalize the writers of the other Testament, when the writers of the New Testament say that ALL Scripture is inspired by God? There may have been rogue Old Testament writers that would have reprimanded the New Testament writers in some of the things they wrote if they were aware of them, but just how influential would they be, when Jews en mass, who like Timothy who may have known only the Old testament, converted to Christianity?

Look, submitted if you will, a parable of sorts. (This is submitted to the extent the God permits us to reason with him as He says in Isaiah 1:18.): An elementary school-age son tells his father, before computers and chips were installed in automobiles, that he wants to be an auto mechanic. The father hands the son a book called ‘Auto Mechanics’, which is easy enough for the son to read and which makes no mention of chips and computers in autos since such autos didn’t exist at the time. The son, being the smart and precocious son that he is, asks his father if he can believe everything that is written in the Auto Mechanics book. The father answers that all books on auto mechanics is the truth.

Years later, when the son graduates from high school, he enters a trade school to learn auto mechanics. He is handed a book called ‘Auto Mechanics- THE NEW EDITION’, which mentions how to install computers and chips into cars that run on them. Should the son question the truthfulness of this book, which mentions computers and chips, when the one his father gave him when he was younger doesn’t mention them? Well, did not the father say that ALL books on auto mechanics is the truth?

So, just as whatever is in a book on auto mechanics is the truth, (and this is not to say that a book on auto mechanics is more important than the Bible from the standpoint of authority at least), whatever is in the Bible as stated in 2 Timothy 3:16-17 is for our teaching, reproof, correction and training in righteousness, that we may be equipped for “every good work.” So, is it a stretch to believe that the Old AND New Testaments are Scriptures referred to in 2 Timothy 3:16-17?

The scriptures Timothy knew from his youth (previous verse) can only be the Tanahk.

 

[HTacianas]

2 Timothy 3:16-17 says “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” Exactly what “Scripture” does Verse 16 refer to? Considering other Verses in the Bible, it appears to be enigmatic that there is no article which accompanies the word “Scripture,” that is, something like ‘All OLD TESTAMENT Scripture.’ On that basis alone, it is questionable as to whether the “Scripture” referred to in Verse 16 means just the Old Testament Scripture. How much more energy would it have taken Paul, who is writing to Timothy in this Book, to add “Old Testament” to the Verse, identifying the Old Testament as the article this Verse refers to? Or was Paul just afraid of running out of ink?

At least one of our friends implies that Paul, in writing to Timothy, is referring to the Old Testament because the Old Testament Scripture was what Timothy knew from childhood, as Paul states in Verse 15. But Paul surely knew that there are other Scriptures when you read 2 Peter 3:15-16 stated by Peter, which says “...count the patience of our Lord as salvation, JUST AS OUR BELOVED BROTHER PAUL ALSO WROTE TO YOU according to the wisdom given him, 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.” Haloa! This passage acknowledges that there are “other Scriptures.” Many regard this passage as a look-back to 2 Timothy 3:16 in which Paul says, “all Scripture.” Seems that as Paul is acquainted with other Scriptures aside from the Old Testament Scriptures existing, even though Timothy may not know of them, Paul could only have been referring to the Old Testament Scriptures AND the other Scriptures, the New Testament, in 2 Timothy 3:16.

What “other Scriptures” could there be, that are in the Bible, other than what’s written in the New Testament, since they are the only “other Scriptures” that are in the Bible? To say that 2 Timothy 3:16 only refers to the Old Testament Scriptures is to treat the New Testament Scriptures as chopped liver! Keep in mind that Verse 16 says ALL Scripture is breathed out by God, or God-inspired if that’s your preference among the translations. Where does this leave the New Testament if Verse 16 infers that only the Old Testament is breathed out by God or God-inspired?

For those that lean on the translation of all Scripture being God-inspired, which implies that all Scripture was created by writers out of God’s Inspiration, there is even a greater case for including the New Testament with the Old Testament when you refer to Scripture, and to question whether it’s really necessary to have a distinction between the Old and New Testaments. Would the writers of one Testament marginalize the writers of the other Testament, when the writers of the New Testament say that ALL Scripture is inspired by God? There may have been rogue Old Testament writers that would have reprimanded the New Testament writers in some of the things they wrote if they were aware of them, but just how influential would they be, when Jews en mass, who like Timothy who may have known only the Old testament, converted to Christianity?

Look, submitted if you will, a parable of sorts. (This is submitted to the extent the God permits us to reason with him as He says in Isaiah 1:18.): An elementary school-age son tells his father, before computers and chips were installed in automobiles, that he wants to be an auto mechanic. The father hands the son a book called ‘Auto Mechanics’, which is easy enough for the son to read and which makes no mention of chips and computers in autos since such autos didn’t exist at the time. The son, being the smart and precocious son that he is, asks his father if he can believe everything that is written in the Auto Mechanics book. The father answers that all books on auto mechanics is the truth.

Years later, when the son graduates from high school, he enters a trade school to learn auto mechanics. He is handed a book called ‘Auto Mechanics- THE NEW EDITION’, which mentions how to install computers and chips into cars that run on them. Should the son question the truthfulness of this book, which mentions computers and chips, when the one his father gave him when he was younger doesn’t mention them? Well, did not the father say that ALL books on auto mechanics is the truth?

So, just as whatever is in a book on auto mechanics is the truth, (and this is not to say that a book on auto mechanics is more important than the Bible from the standpoint of authority at least), whatever is in the Bible as stated in 2 Timothy 3:16-17 is for our teaching, reproof, correction and training in righteousness, that we may be equipped for “every good work.” So, is it a stretch to believe that the Old AND New Testaments are Scriptures referred to in 2 Timothy 3:16-17?

As @Frank Sophia said above, the new testament didn't exist at the time Paul was writing. Imagine Saint Thomas, who founded the Church in India. The Indian Church was thousands of miles away from any of the Churches Paul wrote to. They would not have had any of Paul's letters nor any of the gospels for decades after they were written. The Church in India would consider as scripture whatever books of the old testament they had access to and perhaps even others.

 

[BobRyan]

2 Timothy 3:16-17 says “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” Exactly what “Scripture” does Verse 16 refer to? ...

At least one of our friends implies that Paul, in writing to Timothy, is referring to the Old Testament because the Old Testament Scripture was what Timothy knew from childhood, as Paul states in Verse 15. But Paul surely knew that there are other Scriptures

Luke 24:27 we have "all the scriptures"
25 And then He said to them, “You foolish men and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and to come into His glory?” 27 Then beginning with Moses and with all the Prophets, He explained to them the things written about Himself in all the Scriptures."

So it is reasonable that the term as used in the NT refers to the OT canon of scripture known to Jews at the time of Christ as we see in Luke 24. And when you link it to vs 15 - the scriptures that Timothy was reading in childhood - it is pretty certain that this is the primary reference.

when you read 2 Peter 3:15-16 stated by Peter, which says “...count the patience of our Lord as salvation, JUST AS OUR BELOVED BROTHER PAUL ALSO WROTE TO YOU according to the wisdom given him, 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.” Haloa! This passage acknowledges that there are “other Scriptures.”

Other translations say "as they do with the REST of scriptures"

2 Tim 3:14 Therefore, beloved, since you look for these things, be diligent to be found spotless and blameless by Him, at peace, 15 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, 16 as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which there are some things that are hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction. NASB

Which means Peter is including the writing of Paul in "the rest of scriptures" . Where the "rest of scriptures" includes the OT and other inspired writings of the NT age.

Acts 17:11 they "studied the scriptures daily to SEE IF those things spoken to them by the Apostle Paul - WERE SO" must be the OT text primarily until more NT letters would be added.

Paul himself makes the point that his words were being accepted as "The word of God".

1 Thess 2:13 For this reason we also constantly thank God that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of mere men, but as what it really is, the word of God, which also is at work in you who believe.

To say that 2 Timothy 3:16 only refers to the Old Testament Scriptures is to treat the New Testament Scriptures as chopped liver! Keep in mind that Verse 16 says ALL Scripture is breathed out by God, or God-inspired if that’s your preference among the translations. Where does this leave the New Testament if Verse 16 infers that only the Old Testament is breathed out by God or God-inspired?

I don't think 2 Tim 3 makes the claim that only those things God has inspired in the past are scripture or are useful for doctrine. The text is not arguing against current revelation but is making the case for sola scriptura testing of all doctrine and tradition. It is not trying to create an "end point" for when scripture stopped being produced as inspired by God.

For those that lean on the translation of all Scripture being God-inspired, which implies that all Scripture was created by writers out of God’s Inspiration, there is even a greater case for including the New Testament with the Old Testament when you refer to Scripture, and to question whether it’s really necessary to have a distinction between the Old and New Testaments. Would the writers of one Testament marginalize the writers of the other Testament, when the writers of the New Testament say that ALL Scripture is inspired by God?

I agree that this is not a text about Paul attempting to marginalize one group of scriptures as compared to another or an attempt to diminish NT scripture.

 

[BobRyan]

As @Frank Sophia said above, the new testament didn't exist at the time Paul was writing.

Inspired NT letters did exist then and even Paul admits that those letters were being accepted as "the Word of God" - so not just the OT.

1 Thess 2:13 For this reason we also constantly thank God that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of mere men, but as what it really is, the word of God, which also is at work in you who believe.

Peter affirms the same point - that they were both reading and accepting NT letters as scripture

2 Peter 3:15 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, 16 as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which there are some things that are hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.

 

[HTacianas]

Inspired NT letters did exist then and even Paul admits that those letters were being accepted as "the Word of God" - so not just the OT.

1 Thess 2:13 For this reason we also constantly thank God that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of mere men, but as what it really is, the word of God, which also is at work in you who believe.

Peter affirms the same point - that they were both reading and accepting NT letters as scripture

2 Peter 3:15 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, 16 as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which there are some things that are hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.

The Thessalonians had received the word of God from Paul by mouth. See 1 Thess 2:1-12.

 

[Frank Sophia]

Inspired NT letters did exist then and even Paul admits that those letters were being accepted as "the Word of God" - so not just the OT.

1 Thess 2:13 For this reason we also constantly thank God that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of mere men, but as what it really is, the word of God, which also is at work in you who believe.

Peter affirms the same point - that they were both reading and accepting NT letters as scripture

2 Peter 3:15 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, 16 as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which there are some things that are hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.

You are misinterpreting these verses... the first is because he has already written Galatians and others and expresses his delight that it is manifesting among them, I agree with Peter too because some things Paul says can be used to justify hatred towards Jewish people and that is not the point at all... rather he is simply making us completely separate as a new people.

Galatians is the first Christian text historically and should really get more attention because it says this is the Gospel that we should never accept the contrary of, even if it comes from him.

Personally, it is the most infused text in the bible, almost as though it is entirely authored by the Spirit itself.

 

[Soyeong]

2 Timothy 3:16-17 says “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” Exactly what “Scripture” does Verse 16 refer to? Considering other Verses in the Bible, it appears to be enigmatic that there is no article which accompanies the word “Scripture,” that is, something like ‘All OLD TESTAMENT Scripture.’ On that basis alone, it is questionable as to whether the “Scripture” referred to in Verse 16 means just the Old Testament Scripture. How much more energy would it have taken Paul, who is writing to Timothy in this Book, to add “Old Testament” to the Verse, identifying the Old Testament as the article this Verse refers to? Or was Paul just afraid of running out of ink?

It was not known as "Old Testament Scripture" at that time, so it is completely ridiculous for you to expect Paul to refer to it as such.

At least one of our friends implies that Paul, in writing to Timothy, is referring to the Old Testament because the Old Testament Scripture was what Timothy knew from childhood, as Paul states in Verse 15. But Paul surely knew that there are other Scriptures when you read 2 Peter 3:15-16 stated by Peter, which says “...count the patience of our Lord as salvation, JUST AS OUR BELOVED BROTHER PAUL ALSO WROTE TO YOU according to the wisdom given him, 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.” Haloa! This passage acknowledges that there are “other Scriptures.” Many regard this passage as a look-back to 2 Timothy 3:16 in which Paul says, “all Scripture.” Seems that as Paul is acquainted with other Scriptures aside from the Old Testament Scriptures existing, even though Timothy may not know of them, Paul could only have been referring to the Old Testament Scriptures AND the other Scriptures, the New Testament, in 2 Timothy 3:16.

What “other Scriptures” could there be, that are in the Bible, other than what’s written in the New Testament, since they are the only “other Scriptures” that are in the Bible? To say that 2 Timothy 3:16 only refers to the Old Testament Scriptures is to treat the New Testament Scriptures as chopped liver! Keep in mind that Verse 16 says ALL Scripture is breathed out by God, or God-inspired if that’s your preference among the translations. Where does this leave the New Testament if Verse 16 infers that only the Old Testament is breathed out by God or God-inspired?

At the time that 2 Timothy was being written, the books of the NT were still being written, spread, and becoming recognized as Scripture, but the time of Timothy's childhood was many years earlier when the books of the NT had not yet been written, so Paul could have only been referring to books of the OT. This is not to say that the books of the NT are chopped liver or that they are not inspired by God, just that they were not what Paul was speaking about as being available to Timothy at the time of his childhood.

For those that lean on the translation of all Scripture being God-inspired, which implies that all Scripture was created by writers out of God’s Inspiration, there is even a greater case for including the New Testament with the Old Testament when you refer to Scripture, and to question whether it’s really necessary to have a distinction between the Old and New Testaments. Would the writers of one Testament marginalize the writers of the other Testament, when the writers of the New Testament say that ALL Scripture is inspired by God? There may have been rogue Old Testament writers that would have reprimanded the New Testament writers in some of the things they wrote if they were aware of them, but just how influential would they be, when Jews en mass, who like Timothy who may have known only the Old testament, converted to Christianity?

Paul could not have been referring to books that were written, spread, and recognized as Scripture after the time that 2 Timothy was written and saying this does not in any way marginalize books of the NT or suggest that they are not inspired by God. The distinction between the OT and the NT is completely unnecessary and has been a major source of confusion. The OT authors spent a lot of time calling for people to repent and return to obedience to the Torah, so if it is a correct interpretation of the NT authors that they spoke against doing that, then OT authors would have certain reprimanded them if they had been aware. In Acts 17:11, the Bereans were praise because they diligently tested everything that Paul said against OT Scripture to see if what he said was true, so according to that precedent, disagreement with the OT is the standard by which we should reject the writings of the NT authors.

Look, submitted if you will, a parable of sorts. (This is submitted to the extent the God permits us to reason with him as He says in Isaiah 1:18.): An elementary school-age son tells his father, before computers and chips were installed in automobiles, that he wants to be an auto mechanic. The father hands the son a book called ‘Auto Mechanics’, which is easy enough for the son to read and which makes no mention of chips and computers in autos since such autos didn’t exist at the time. The son, being the smart and precocious son that he is, asks his father if he can believe everything that is written in the Auto Mechanics book. The father answers that all books on auto mechanics is the truth.

Years later, when the son graduates from high school, he enters a trade school to learn auto mechanics. He is handed a book called ‘Auto Mechanics- THE NEW EDITION’, which mentions how to install computers and chips into cars that run on them. Should the son question the truthfulness of this book, which mentions computers and chips, when the one his father gave him when he was younger doesn’t mention them? Well, did not the father say that ALL books on auto mechanics is the truth?

So, just as whatever is in a book on auto mechanics is the truth, (and this is not to say that a book on auto mechanics is more important than the Bible from the standpoint of authority at least), whatever is in the Bible as stated in 2 Timothy 3:16-17 is for our teaching, reproof, correction and training in righteousness, that we may be equipped for “every good work.” So, is it a stretch to believe that the Old AND New Testaments are Scriptures referred to in 2 Timothy 3:16-17?

The statement that all books on auto mechanics are truth should be understood as speaking about all of the set of books that have currently been written and not about all of books that have not yet been written. Books on auto mechanics that are written after the father made that statement may or may nor also be true, but they are not what the father had in mind when he made that statement because he was making a statement about what is presently true, so if a book was later written that was full of false statements, then that would not contradict his statement.

 

[BobRyan]

The Thessalonians had received the word of God from Paul by mouth. See 1 Thess 2:1-12.

Which is not an argument against them accepting his letter to the church as that very thing "the Word of God" as he already clarified for us

 

[BobRyan]

As @Frank Sophia said above, the new testament didn't exist at the time Paul was writing.

Inspired NT letters did exist then and even Paul admits that those letters were being accepted as "the Word of God" - so not just the OT.

1 Thess 2:13 For this reason we also constantly thank God that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of mere men, but as what it really is, the word of God, which also is at work in you who believe.

Peter affirms the same point - that they were both reading and accepting NT letters as scripture

2 Peter 3:15 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, 16 as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which there are some things that are hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.

You are misinterpreting these verses... the first is because he has already written Galatians and others and expresses his delight that it is manifesting among them

which points to no misinterpretation at all in my statement above. Or did you mean to include some other detail?

, I agree with Peter too because some things Paul says can be used to justify hatred

Peter said that Paul's letters are included in scriptures... such that other writings are in what Peter calls "the rest of scripture" in 2 Peter 3

 

[Frank Sophia]

Inspired NT letters did exist then and even Paul admits that those letters were being accepted as "the Word of God" - so not just the OT.

Again, he is referencing his own older letters... there is nothing else yet because the Spirit is still among them.

 

[BobRyan]

Again, he is referencing his own older letters... there is nothing else yet because the Spirit is still among them.

John would write more scripture -- the book of Revelation and the Gospel of John which are both after the writing of 1 Thess. Paul would later write second Thessalonians and would continue to write other chapters in the letter of 1 Thess, beyond chapter 2.

 

[Frank Sophia]

John would write more scripture -- the book of Revelation and the Gospel of John which are both after the writing of 1 Thess. Paul would later write second Thessalonians and would continue to write other chapters in the letter of 1 Thess, beyond chapter 2.

The texts associated with John are unsurprisingly written around the same period, some 50 to 60 years after Galatians.

Thessalonians is written ~3 years after Galatians.

 

[Clare73]

Paul can not be talking about the New Testament because when he's writing Timothy even the gospels are still 30 years away...
He does not say that we should devote ourselves to them though, he says they are beneficial towards our completion which when related to 1 John 4:7-21 is about how completely we are living love itself in our daily lives...

We have to take into account how strongly 2 Corinthians 3 also warns against the letter and insists upon going to the Spirit directly...

You will see me use verses in Torah for instance Numbers 11:29 is beautiful, but ultimately I am not a Jewish practitioner.

However, Peter places Paul's writings on the same level of authority as the God-breathed writings of the OT (2 Pe 3:16).

 

[Frank Sophia]

However, Peter places Paul's writings on the same level of authority as the God-breathed writings of the OT (2 Pe 3:16).

What he says is that ignorant people will spin anything such that it justifies evil.

We are to love, to take on each others burdens so that each can come to God as easily as possible.

Instead we make each others yokes heavier and think ourselves righteous.

 

[concretecamper]

However, Peter places Paul's writings on the same level of authority as the God-breathed writings of the OT (2 Pe 3:16).

Thank you for declaring Peter infallible in his assessment of Paul's letter

 

[concretecamper]

Peter said that Paul's letters are included in scriptures... such that other writings are in what Peter calls "the rest of scripture" in 2 Peter 3

Haha, the second one to declare Peter infallible.

Btw, what scripture did Timothy know "in his youth"? Research a bit about Timothy and his age and you will see that Paul cannot be referring to anything but the Tanahk.

 

[Frank Sophia]

However, Peter places Paul's writings on the same level of authority as the God-breathed writings of the OT (2 Pe 3:16).

Also the texts of Peter are dated 30 and as much as 60 years later than Galatians for 1 and 2 respectively...

Dating the Bible - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

This gives an accurate assessment of modern scholarship regarding this.

I never just say things of my own accord.

 

[Clare73]

You are misinterpreting these verses... the first is because he has already written Galatians and others and expresses his delight that it is manifesting among them, I agree with Peter too because some things Paul says can be used to justify hatred towards Jewish people and that is not the point at all... rather he is simply making us completely separate as a new people.

Things hard to understand, as in Ro 5:12-15, 16-19.

Galatians is the first Christian text historically and should really get more attention because it says this is the Gospel that we should never accept the contrary of, even if it comes from him.

Personally, it is the most infused text in the bible, almost as though it is entirely authored by the Spirit itself.

Is not all of the NT the word of God, and is not all the word of God important?