Do these verses prove Sola Scriptura?

[curtishouse29]

I just wanted to get some people’s thoughts on these verses and I’ll tell you my thoughts on these verses as well.

2Ti 3:16 All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice:
2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.

If there are any verses in the Bible to support Sola Scriptura, I believe these verses would be the closest to prove this doctrine. It seems to be saying that all Inspired Scripture will make the man of God perfect. Isn’t that we are all striving for?

Mat 5:48 Be you therefore perfect, as also your heavenly Father is perfect.

If all Inspired Scripture (which would include the NT Sacred Scripture) will make you perfect if you follow it, wouldn’t that be proof positive for Sola Scriptura? Would love to get some Catholic (name removed by moderator)ut on this and how the church interprets these verses. Thanks for your time and God bless.

-Curtis

 

[Church_Militant]

Nope. “Perfect” in that verse actually is more accurately rendered as “complete” as other translations show.

RSV-CE [16] All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,
[17] that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

NAB 16 All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, or refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness,
17 so that one who belongs to God may be competent, equipped for every good work.

 

[curtishouse29]

Nope. “Perfect” in that verse actually is more accurately rendered as “complete” as other translations show.

RSV-CE [16] All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,
[17] that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

NAB 16 All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, or refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness,
17 so that one who belongs to God may be competent, equipped for every good work.

That’s interesting because I quoted straight from the D-R Bible. There is a world of difference between perfect, complete, and competent. I wonder which one is the most accurate…Guess it just depends on the translation.

 

[ziapueblo]

James 1:4, “And patience hath a perfect work; that you may be perfect and entire, failing in nothing.”

If 2 Timothy 3:17 proves Sola Scriptura then James 1:4 would prove sola patience or sola steadfastness which of course any non-Catholic Christian would find absurd. Plus, non-Catholic Christians want one to think that the word profitable, which we find in 2 Timothy 3:16, means exclusive or sufficient. The Greek word for profitable is ophelimos. Ophelimos only means useful or profitable.

 

[Mea_Culpa]

I just wanted to get some people’s thoughts on these verses and I’ll tell you my thoughts on these verses as well.

2Ti 3:16 All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice:
2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.

If there are any verses in the Bible to support Sola Scriptura, I believe these verses would be the closest to prove this doctrine. It seems to be saying that all Inspired Scripture will make the man of God perfect. Isn’t that we are all striving for?

Mat 5:48 Be you therefore perfect, as also your heavenly Father is perfect.

If all Inspired Scripture (which would include the NT Sacred Scripture) will make you perfect if you follow it, wouldn’t that be proof positive for Sola Scriptura? Would love to get some Catholic (name removed by moderator)ut on this and how the church interprets these verses. Thanks for your time and God bless.

-Curtis

It says all scripture is profitable for those things. It doesn’t say ONLY (sola) scripture is profitable for those things.

 

[mijac]

It says all scripture is profitable for those things. It doesn’t say ONLY (sola) scripture is profitable for those things.

Yes, this is key, there is not pace where scripture teaches only scripture!!!. Is Prayer necessary for prefection, or for being complete…absolutely, all saints will talk about that no prayer no salvation, Scripture points quite clearly to this , when it says to pray unceasingly.

Lastly, Scripture cannot contradict itself. 1 Timothy 3:15, “The church is the pillar and foundation of truth.”
The church which is founded on Christ was founded in the same way the Jews operated, on a three legged stool, the teaching authority of the church-magistarium, the Sacred oral word passed down generation to generation from those early church fathers, long before there was any so called Protestant reformation kicking out two legs of the stool leaving only the third leg of the Sacred written word-aka Scripture.

Just to quote a few of a number of verses which support Sacred Oral teachings.

Scripture is clear on this and is repeated often by Paul that we are to pay attention to both the Sacred Oral word as well as the Sacred Written word passed down.

1 Thessalonians 2:13 …Thank God constantly for this, that when you receivedthe word of God Which your heard from us,…

2 Thessalonians 2:15, “So then, brethren, stand firm, and hold teachings that you have learned whether by word (Sacred oral teaching) or by letter of ours.”

2 Thesalonians 3:6 6* Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us ( Sacred oral teachings)

Malachi 2:7; “The lips of the priest shall keep knowledge, and they shall seek the law at this mouth. (Sacred Oral teaching)”

2 Timothy 2::2, “and the things that thou hast heard from me through many witnesses, commend to trust-worthy men who shall be competent in turn to teach others.”

1 Corinthians 11:2, “Now I praise you, brethren, because in all things you are mindful of me and hold fast my precepts as I gave them to you.”

 

[martinfegan]

I just wanted to get some people’s thoughts on these verses and I’ll tell you my thoughts on these verses as well.

2Ti 3:16 All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice:
2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.

If there are any verses in the Bible to support Sola Scriptura, I believe these verses would be the closest to prove this doctrine. It seems to be saying that all Inspired Scripture will make the man of God perfect. Isn’t that we are all striving for?

Mat 5:48 Be you therefore perfect, as also your heavenly Father is perfect.

If all Inspired Scripture (which would include the NT Sacred Scripture) will make you perfect if you follow it, wouldn’t that be proof positive for Sola Scriptura? Would love to get some Catholic (name removed by moderator)ut on this and how the church interprets these verses. Thanks for your time and God bless.

-Curtis

Hi Curtis,
following scripture and all it implies would indeed make you perferct. Therefore you would also have to follow the word of Jesus and submit to the authority He places on His Church. Remember; Thou art Peter and upon this rock I shall build My Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I give to you the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven. Whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven.

 

[AlegreFe]

I just wanted to get some people’s thoughts on these verses and I’ll tell you my thoughts on these verses as well.

2Ti 3:16 All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice:
2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.

Hello Curtis!

Those verses do not prove Sola Scriptura at all.

Notice it says “profitable to teach…” but it does not say “sufficient to teach…”

I think there could be some confusion because it says ALL scripture is inspired by God. Of course we know that everything in scripture is inspired by God. But it is not the only thing that is inspired by God. Sacred Tradition is also inspired by God.

Jesus preached the Word of God. He did not write it down in a book and pass it out at church. The Apostles wrote only what they needed to write. If they wrote everything that Jesus taught and did, there would not be enough paper on which it could be written.

25 Now there are also many other things that Jesus did. Were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.
John 21:25

 

[Des]

If all Inspired Scripture (which would include the NT Sacred Scripture)

Why would the writer include to mean the New Testament also during that time when all the books weren’t fully written and circulated?
If Paul says ''All Scripture" then He must also mean that ‘All Scripture’ up to that point will make one perfect and complete yet I doubt He actually means this or the other NT writings are not needed.

Here’s how I see that verse. We notice that He’s talking about ‘a man of God’ here. And who would a man of god be in this case. Back up a bit and it will tell us. It’s someone who was well trained in the Old Testament, and learned from the Apostles himself as Paul taught Timothy (a Bishop).

It isn’t saying any Tom, Larry or Harry who gets their hands on Scripture will be perfect. We see this is impossible with the thousands of conflicting ss denominations out there.

So what it is saying is on top of all of the teachings ‘A man of God’ goes through, inspired Scripture is like icing on the cake. Completes the man. It is not saying ONLY Scripture makes a man of God perfect or complete.

Like a Doctor who goes through years of medical on hands training to become what he is. Even after that he’s still learning. But we can likewise say that a Doctor’s medical manuel now completes him yet it doesn’t mean that only his medical book completes him for his job at hand without the need of anything else.

 

[AlegreFe]

Like a Doctor who goes through years of medical on hands training to become what he is. Even after that he’s still learning. But we can likewise say that a Doctor’s medical manuel now completes him yet it doesn’t mean that only his medical book completes him for his job at hand without the need of anything else.

I love your analogy! If you don’t mind I would like to borrow that one sometime. I also love what you put for your location, “on a little blue marble.”

 

[GailMac]

Dear Curtishouse - In response to your choosing these verses as the support for a sola scriptura premise, 2Ti 3:16 All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice: 2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work., I would say these verses written by St. Paul in a letter to St. Timothy are referring to the OLD TESTAMENT, not the New Testament! And he is only advising Timothy that they are good for teaching, reproving, correcting, instructing, etc. it says nothing about his eternal salvation. If I took this passage as literally as you do, I’d have to not read any of the New Testament because it is the Old Testament St. Paul is referring to. If your premise that this is the ultimate reason for rejecting things other than the Bible for salvation, then you are only riding in a cart with three wheels! You’re not gonna get very far.

Peace,

Gail

 

[curtishouse29]

Dear Curtishouse - In response to your choosing these verses as the support for a sola scriptura premise, 2Ti 3:16 All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice: 2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work., I would say these verses written by St. Paul in a letter to St. Timothy are referring to the OLD TESTAMENT, not the New Testament! And he is only advising Timothy that they are good for teaching, reproving, correcting, instructing, etc. it says nothing about his eternal salvation. If I took this passage as literally as you do, I’d have to not read any of the New Testament because it is the Old Testament St. Paul is referring to. If your premise that this is the ultimate reason for rejecting things other than the Bible for salvation, then you are only riding in a cart with three wheels! You’re not gonna get very far.

Peace,

Gail

Since both the OT and NT are inspired, don’t you think that the passage would ring true for both testaments since it is all 'God-breathed"?

Btw, I never said that I believe in Sola Scriptura. I just saw those few verses and said what it sounded like to me…Anything past that is just adding something to my post that was never typed.

 

[Des]

I love your analogy! If you don’t mind I would like to borrow that one sometime.

You sure can since I borrowed it from someone myself.
I read it a loooong time ago on the net somewhere but it has always stuck with me as it made complete sense. Though that’s not exactly how I read it, it’s still pretty much the gist of it.

I also love what you put for your location, “on a little blue marble.”

heheh thanks. Actually I used to have my real location down but since I’m using my real name and wasn’t allowed to change it, I had to do what was necessary and throw a funny in there
instead.

 

[AlegreFe]

Since both the OT and NT are inspired, don’t you think that the passage would ring true for both testaments since it is all 'God-breathed"?

Yes Curtis, that would ring true for us today. But Gail meant that Paul meant the OT since the scriptures back then were only the Old Testament. They did not have the NT yet as we have it today.

Btw, I never said that I believe in Sola Scriptura. I just saw those few verses and said what it sounded like to me…Anything past that is just adding something to my post that was never typed.

I hope everyone here realizes that you intend to become Catholic, officially that is.

 

[GailMac]

Dear Curtishouse - You asked for a comment, I gave one. I’m very happy you don’t subscribe to the sola scripture diatribe. It is a very sad state of mind to be stuck in. I’m sorry if I offended with my comments.

As for Alegra Fe’s affirmation that they now apply to the OT and NT, as you suggest in your comments regarding the “God breathed” notion, I can’t agree. St. Paul ment the OT when he wrote his words and yes he was operating under the influence of the HS. Why do some need to stretch that fact to include everything else? So they can support SS of course! That would be a faulty premise that can let the devil of SS in the door. So I stick to what I wrote.

Peace,

Gail

 

[tobias]

Since the Lord warned the Pharisees ‘You search the scriptures daily because you think you have life in them.’ I don’t think Paul meant sola scriptura. Not to mention that Paul admits that he oversaw the persecution of christians as an adhearant to the scriptures, He used the Old Testament law to validate this persecution. Sola scriptura didn’t work to well for him since God had to knock him off of his high horse so to speak.

 

[porthos11]

I just wanted to get some people’s thoughts on these verses and I’ll tell you my thoughts on these verses as well.

2Ti 3:16 All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice:
2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.

If there are any verses in the Bible to support Sola Scriptura, I believe these verses would be the closest to prove this doctrine. It seems to be saying that all Inspired Scripture will make the man of God perfect. Isn’t that we are all striving for?

Mat 5:48 Be you therefore perfect, as also your heavenly Father is perfect.

If all Inspired Scripture (which would include the NT Sacred Scripture) will make you perfect if you follow it, wouldn’t that be proof positive for Sola Scriptura? Would love to get some Catholic (name removed by moderator)ut on this and how the church interprets these verses. Thanks for your time and God bless.

-Curtis

Some points.

1. I need to eat that I may live. Therefore, I believe in sola eat, and drinking and sleeping are traditions of men.
2. Even if a book were to claim that it is inspired, that does not make it so. The Quran and Book of Mormon both make that claim.
3. Even if we are to take that passage at face value, it refers only to the Septuagint, as the New Testament had not even been completed, and no one had determined what the New Testament books would be. Therefore, only the Old Testament is inspired and should be believed.

If one were to say that it now includes the NT, then by what authority do we claim that the 27 NT books are inspired of God?

 

[AlegreFe]

As for Alegra Fe’s

lol That is not my login name. It’s AlegreFe, not Alegra like the allergy medicine.
But please call me Sandy.

affirmation that they now apply to the OT and NT, as you suggest in your comments regarding the “God breathed” notion, I can’t agree. St. Paul ment the OT when he wrote his words and yes he was operating under the influence of the HS. Why do some need to stretch that fact to include everything else? So they can support SS of course! That would be a faulty premise that can let the devil of SS in the door. So I stick to what I wrote.

Gail, I realize that Paul meant only the OT because there was no NT at that time. Did you not read that in my comment?

But you cannot say that the NT is NOT God breathed. The New Testament IS God breathed, do you not agree with that? That is the only thing I meant by my previous comment. I did not mean that Paul meant the NT also.

I have no idea why you would think that saying that the NT is God Breathed would let the devil of SS in the door. That’s just ridiculous. And even if someone took Paul’s words to include the NT, it still would not let the “devil of SS” in the door.

If someone would really read just that passage alone without any other passage (the way some protestants do) it still would not lead you to believe Sola Scriptura. Not if it is read correctly. The key word there is “profitable” which means just that. If the word were “sufficient” it could make someone believe in SS. But it doesn’t say that.

I still stand on the fact that both the OT and NT are God breathed. And even if someone thinks that Paul also meant the NT (which would be silly 'cause there was no NT) it would not make SS true. Again, because of that word being “profitable” and not “sufficient.”

 

[rocketrob]

Don’t these verses DISprove Sola Scriptura?

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (John 1:1)

And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth, we have beheld his glory, glory as of the only begotten Son from the Father. (John 1:14)

But there are also many other things which Jesus did; were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. (John 21:25)

rocketrob

 

[GailMac]

Dear Sandy, you state:" But you cannot say that the NT is NOT God breathed." Perhaps you should go back and read again what I wrote. I don’t use the pop verbage of “God-breathed.” In my post I simply state that St. Paul was operating under the influence of the Holy Spirit when he wrote what he wrote and that he meant the Old Testament in his letter to St. Timothy. I don’t understand what you mean by “God-breathed.” It doesn’t work for me. A little too charismatic in the verbage dept. Perhaps you could explain what you mean by it. That would be nice. Then we could be on the same page!

Peace,

Gail