G
Gambera
Guest
I was in friendly debate with a protestant on Sola Scriptura. I made the point that the “go to” verse of Sola Scriptura 2 Tim 3:15-17 is referring to the old testament, since the new testament was not written yet. He countered with “You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain,” (Luke 10:7) and, “The laborer is worthy of his wages.” (1 Tim 5:18) He states, “Right there is a simple refutation of your point - because Paul is quoting from BOTH the old testament there (Deut 25:4), AND the new testament (Luke 10:7) - and yet he refers to BOTH of them as “scripture” - AND…he obviously wrote that letter BEFORE the 2 Timothy verse in question! So that 2 Timothy verse that says “All scripture” is indeed referencing BOTH the new testament and the old testament, as we plainly see”
I then referenced my St Ignatius Catholic edition Bible on 1 Tim 5:18 , and it says “That by the time Paul wrote 1 Timothy, certain books of the new testament were apparently being revered as part of holy scripture. Paul seems to assume that Deuteronomy and the Gospel of Luke share the same authority as inspired writings”.
So am I wrong? Is 2 Tim 3:16-17 both referring to OT and NT? Is this a bad Catholic apologetic when discussing Sola Scriptura?
I then referenced my St Ignatius Catholic edition Bible on 1 Tim 5:18 , and it says “That by the time Paul wrote 1 Timothy, certain books of the new testament were apparently being revered as part of holy scripture. Paul seems to assume that Deuteronomy and the Gospel of Luke share the same authority as inspired writings”.
So am I wrong? Is 2 Tim 3:16-17 both referring to OT and NT? Is this a bad Catholic apologetic when discussing Sola Scriptura?