ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Paul's Letters From God

When Paul said to Timothy...

"All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness"
2Tim 3:16

...did Paul consider his letters on the same level as the holy scriptures referred to in 2Tim 3:15?

Join Our Free Chat and Take The Bible History Quiz
 ---AG on 10/4/07
     Helpful Blog Vote (2)

Reply to this BlogPost a New Blog

1st cliff. I'm not sure. Are you asking me something. Could you clarify.
---jhonny on 10/10/07

Stoney, That's pretty radical isn't it? Does ANY writer have to be "inspired" in order to write "truth"? Do newspaper columnists have to be inspired to write truth? If it's not inspired,is it automatically a lie?? Where's your sense of reason? Are all historians liars?
---1st_cliff on 10/10/07

Paul didn't say it, he didn't have to. He was INSPIRED.>>>By God.
---catherine on 10/10/07

where did Paul say that his letters were considered scripture?
---alexia on 10/10/07

One mans assumption is another mans faith.

If God is who he claims to be and we believe that, how can the Bible not be what it purports to be?

Created all that is seem and unseen, Omnipotent, Omniscient and Omnipresent but can't control the contents of a mere book?

If the bible is not true we are lost and our faith is a joke. Eat drink and be merry for tomorrow we die.

---stoney on 10/10/07

Jhonny, The only "proof" that Paul's writings are scripture is "Because he said so" Pretty shakey proof by anyone's standard! Because they were included in the NT canon makes people assume that they are inspired! No matter which way you look at it ,it is after all "an asumption".
---1st_cliff on 10/10/07

At this particular reference Paul was referring to the old testament of course, but...Yes, Paul considered his writings on the same level as holy scripture.
These writings which today are holy scripture are read to the destruction of some which is profound. Reading holy scripture or Paul's writing's and being destroyed thereby is provoking.
---jhonny on 10/10/07

John, please help me out: you said Exodus 20 states that the earth is 6000 years old. I can't find the verse. Thanks, and God bless!
---InimicusStultitiae on 10/9/07

Tom, 10/5) That is the truth. You are so right. Christian's need to be cautious regarding this matter and discuss the debatable issues among themselves only as cult eyes are watching. They will have a field day with any split that they might find. Jesus preached "be of the same mind" and a house divided against itself will fall. Pastor Larry
---larry9688 on 10/9/07

Have you ever heard (and if so, do you give any creedance to) the theory that Jacob's descendants developed the first written code while in Eygpt?
---AG on 10/9/07

Eloy, *Henock easily recorded the details*? Cuneiform and hieroglyphics were not "written" languages ,simply ,symbols and pictographs. The 1st written language with an alphabet emerged around 1800 BC in Egypt! Only with alphabetic language could "details" be recorded. That's why it's attributed to Moses (Circa 1500 BC)
---1st_cliff on 10/8/07

Again I'm no authority and don't have the tools to intelligently discuss it.
I'll try and find the info for you from the debate I heard.

I remember the debate being kind of a round table of catholic, protestant and jewish historians/scholars. I just remember the interpretation of the evidence leaning toward Moses being the primary author & a 2nd person (probably Joshua) finishing up.
---AG on 10/7/07

I have heard this two creation accounts before. I take the Word at face value, and secular atheist scholars I place little value in. the Bible in Ex 20 says the earth is 6,000 years old, what more do you need? The devil is always busy and today he has affection for science. Stick with the bible for understanding the Bible. 2Tim 3:16 says what need to be said.
---John on 10/7/07

1st cliff, the Bible does not claim Moses to have been the author of Genesis, man does. Genesis does not have different accounts of Creation, but only one account by one author, which is told twice: a generalization in chapter 1 and the details about the 1st protoplast humans in chapter 2. Adam gave the firsthand Genesis history to the seventh generation, which was Henoch, and Henoch easily recorded the details in Genesis.
---Eloy on 10/7/07

Ag, If God dictated the creation account to Moses,why would there be 2 differing accounts? Gen 1 & Gen2? There are too many inconsistencies for it to have been "divinely" dictated! There is proven to be at least 4 authors! Eden was at least 1500 yrs. before Moses.
---1st_cliff on 10/6/07

NO Tom, I don't, but who can say who's works are inspired and who's are just gifted writers?
---1st_cliff on 10/6/07

Read These Insightful Articles About Personal Loans

I've listen to some JED & P debates. And I still believe God dictated the Torah.
I admit to not being an authority. The aurgument I heard against the JEDP theory simply came across as the most convincing to me.
---AG on 10/6/07

I should have mentioned the "faith of Jonah factor." Of the four I mentioned, the first 2 I doubt their standing with God, not the last 2. But all put aside their own mental prejudices and accepted God's Word, despite their intellectual arguments, and included that which God included. They saw His Will because they accepted Him as greater than themselves. Again. not blind faith but trusting faith.
---ed_the_other_one on 10/6/07

Ag, *first 5 books dictated to moses*? Sorry but they were compiled (blended) from 4 groups listed as J,E,D & P, Lengthy discussion!
---1st_cliff on 10/6/07

not too surprised the adventists and mormons have a problem with the integrity of the scriptures. it is to your benefit to denounce them in favor of your own prophets and books.
cliff do you really consider the book of mormon and the koran as inspired scripture
---Tom on 10/6/07

Read These Insightful Articles About Auto Insurance

I did a little searching on II Peter. Origen and Esubius (Spelled wrong, I know!) both had doubts but included it. Same with Luther and probably Calvin. Most who dismissed it were dismissive of the supernatural. Most who accepted were convinced of God's superiority. Same arguments used by both sides. I accept that God superintended His Own Scripture through the churches which trusted His Words. II Peter, canonical. It's a faith issue. Not blind faith, but believing faith in a God preserved Word.
---ed_the_other_one on 10/6/07

Tom, * if you can discredit scripture...* Define "scripture" Apocrypha? Quran? Book of Mormon? Vedas? Is "scripture" only what YOU accept? Do you have authority to say this is scripture and this is not? If not ,who does? You know there are some people who think Shakespere was inspired,personally I think he was just "gifted" How many others are just "gifted?
---1st_cliff on 10/5/07

Since the 1st 5 books of the bible were dictated directly from God himself to Moses & the Gospels are testimonies of the Messiah's teachings, why do we consider the other books of the bible equally as Holy?
---AG on 10/5/07

So if you can discredit scripture, wow just think of the implications. The SDAs will have a field day without Paul.
The RCC doesn't pay any attention to scripture anyway.
The JWs write their own
the LDS have other books

Satan will be shouting for joy

keep up the good work.....NOT!
---Tom on 10/5/07

Send a Free Online Ecard

(part 1)

Greek has no special word for 'scripture'. It uses the same word as 'writing'. Also. the Greek does not include the verb "to be" here, so translators had to insert it to make sense in English. But it could also be read "All writing inspired by God is..."
---StrongAxe on 10/5/07

(part 2)

I find this translation makes more sense, because
2) It is more obviously true (in that it also includes other writings that are wise, even if they aren't "scripture")
3) Most Christians believe this even if they don't think about it (otherwise, there would be no Christian bookstores)
4) It does not rely on an implicit definition of "scriptural canon" which is not addressed anywhere in the Bible.

(Then again, I'm no Greek scholar).
---StrongAxe on 10/5/07

Ag, My next answer is the same as yours.Who had/has the authority to declare any writing "inspired?" 1st century on.
---1st_cliff on 10/5/07

Ed_the_other_one, there is a problem with your contention using 2nd Peter. 2nd Peter is considered to be a pseudophragraphic [false authorship] text. It appears in only only 2 papyri documents p72 & p74 both date no earlier than 125 CE. There are papyri of Paul's text that date into the 1st century. So we can't say that the author 2nd Peter is a contemporary with Paul.
---notlaw99 on 10/5/07

Read These Insightful Articles About Holidays

It was a group of Catholic bishops meeting in Carthage in North Africa around A.D. 400 who first dogmatically imposed Paul's epistles and the rest of the New Testament on the Church as scripture.
---InimicusStultitiae on 10/4/07

All these holy men were under the influence of the holy spirit. Everything that was written down was by the holy spirit. These men were only God's instruments.
---catherine on 10/4/07

notlaw99 & v1st_cliff,
I agree you both.

My next question is would Paul consider his letters holy scripture today?

Also, how did man come up with a criteria to determine what was scripture are what wasn't? It seems like only God himself could make that designation.
---AG on 10/4/07

Peter (first century Christian and same generation as Paul) considered Paul's epistles as Scripture. II Peter 3:15-16
---ed_the_other_one on 10/4/07

Read These Insightful Articles About Health Insurance

At the time of Paul most Text comprising the New Testament other than his own writings did not exist. So Paul is referring to the Old Testament only.

Paul considered his letters as exactly what they were, uninspired letters in response to correspondence or a letter where he was the originator not in response to a letter from some one else.

Religious Text don't become dogmania until about the second generation after the writer.
---notlaw99 on 10/4/07

Ag, He was referring to the already established scrolls of the OT.
---1st_cliff on 10/4/07

Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.