The OT can make wise unto salvation

  • Thread starter Thread starter LetsObeyChrist
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

LetsObeyChrist

Guest
2 Tim 3:15 And that from a babe thou hast known the sacred writings which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

2 Tim 3:16 Every scripture inspired of God is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness.

2 Tim 3:17 (HINA) That the man of God may be complete, furnished completely unto every good work.-asv

The appearance of “that” (hina, lit., in order that) at the start of vs 17 identifies what follows as the conclusion to the premise in verse 16.

Reversed it teaches the same thing:

2 Tim 3:17 That the man of God may be complete, furnished completely unto every good work. 16 Every scripture inspired of God is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness.-asv

God revealed to Paul why He wrote Scripture with every verse of it profitable for doctrine, in order that men of God be completely equipped for every good work.

As these Scriptures fully equip men of God for every good work they are able to make Timothy wise unto salvation.

However the OT scriptures can only do this in the context of Christ (The Truth, Jn 14:6), through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

If one accepts the OT testimony Jesus is the Christ (Lk 24:44) and believes in Him as LORD (Rm 10:9) they are made wise unto (eis, into) salvation just as happened to these Bereans:

Acts 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. 12 Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few.

Hence the idea Scripture may be “materially sufficient” but not “formally sufficient” is bogus. Scripture is clear enough to be made wise unto salvation.

It may not contain all the info Catholic apologists would like to see, but it certainly does have sufficiently clear material that the man of God be complete, fully equipped for every good work.

God through Paul says so.
 
There are two big problems with using 2 Tim 3:17 as support for sola Scriptura. First, the completion of the man of God is the result of Bishop Timothy’s teaching, reproof, correction, and instruction, which uses Scripture as a tool. It is not the result or every layman reading the Bible for himself. But I’m even willing to grant the premise that it could refer to this, because it still doesn’t teach sola Scriptura. To equate “read Scripture in order that you may be complete” with “reading Scripture is sufficient to complete you” is blatantly fallacious reasoning and it can only be spiritual blindness that prevents so many people from seeing this. All “read Scripture in order that you may be complete” means is that Scripture will help further the cause of your completion. For example I might say “feed the lawn that it may be healthy.” Does that mean that feeding the lawn is sufficient of itself to make it healthy? No! You have to water it and weed it to. I can show you an example of this principle in Scripture: “And let endurance have its perfect result, so that you may be perfect and complete, lacking in nothing.” (James 1:4) Endurance certainly works towards your completion. But is endurance alone sufficient? No, you need faith, hope, and love, among other qualities, as well.
 
No, God through Paul says, “Every scripture inspired of God is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness that the man of God may be complete, furnished completely unto every good work.”

The word profitable does not equate to being sufficient and neither “that”, “complete” of the grammer changes it. As Hananiah pointed out, we can find all sorts of analogies to substitute that would an show this true.

Discipline is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness that a child may become and adult. No, without food, shelter, school, parental love, etc. he won’t become and adult.

Furthermore, what you just claimed is that “every” scripture is sufficient. Do you think the directions for the building of the tabernacle alone is sufficient for salvation? How about just the geneolgy of Noah?
 
40.png
Hananiah:
There are two big problems with using 2 Tim 3:17 as support for sola Scriptura. First, the completion of the man of God is the result of Bishop Timothy’s teaching, reproof, correction, and instruction, which uses Scripture as a tool. It is not the result or every layman reading the Bible for himself. But I’m even willing to grant the premise that it could refer to this, because it still doesn’t teach sola Scriptura. To equate “read Scripture in order that you may be complete” with “reading Scripture is sufficient to complete you” is blatantly fallacious reasoning and it can only be spiritual blindness that prevents so many people from seeing this. All “read Scripture in order that you may be complete” means is that Scripture will help further the cause of your completion. For example I might say “feed the lawn that it may be healthy.” Does that mean that feeding the lawn is sufficient of itself to make it healthy? No! You have to water it and weed it to. I can show you an example of this principle in Scripture: “And let endurance have its perfect result, so that you may be perfect and complete, lacking in nothing.” (James 1:4) Endurance certainly works towards your completion. But is endurance alone sufficient? No, you need faith, hope, and love, among other qualities, as well.
Click to expand...
It should be observed I did not use this text to teach sola scriptura, rather it teaches the formal and material sufficiency of scripture.

To continue with your argument please underline or highlight where the text says: " First, the completion of the man of God is the result of Bishop Timothy’s teaching, reproof, correction, and instruction, which uses Scripture as a tool."

Thanks.
 
40.png
LetsObeyChrist:
It should be observed I did not use this text to teach sola scriptura, rather it teaches the formal and material sufficiency of scripture.
Click to expand...
Alright then switch out the words sola Scriptura for formal sufficiency in my previous post. The argument is still the same.
To continue with your argument please underline or highlight where the text says: " First, the completion of the man of God is the result of Bishop Timothy’s teaching, reproof, correction, and instruction, which uses Scripture as a tool."
Click to expand...
Just read v. 16f. The completion of the man of God is connected through the word hina not directly with Scripture but with the teaching, reproof, correction, and instruction. The one who does this teaching etc. is the local ordinary, i.e. Bishop Timothy.
 
40.png
Hananiah:
Alright then switch out the words sola Scriptura for formal sufficiency in my previous post. The argument is still the same.

Just read v. 16f. The completion of the man of God is connected through the word hina
Click to expand...
not directly with Scripture but with the teaching, reproof, correction, and instruction. The one who does this teaching etc. is the local ordinary, i.e. Bishop Timothy.2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 so that one who belongs to God may be competent, equipped for every good work.-New American Bible

I cannot see that in the passage, HINA = in order that.

God inspired Scripture to be profitable for doctrine in order that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

No mention of a third party such as a Bishop.
 
40.png
pnewton:
No, God through Paul says, "
Click to expand...
Every scripture inspired of God is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness that the man of God may be complete, furnished completely unto every good work."

The word profitable does not equate to being sufficient and neither “that”, “complete” of the grammer changes it. As Hananiah pointed out, we can find all sorts of analogies to substitute that would an show this true.

Discipline is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness that a child may become and adult. No, without food, shelter, school, parental love, etc. he won’t become and adult.

Furthermore, what you just claimed is that “every” scripture is sufficient. Do you think the directions for the building of the tabernacle alone is sufficient for salvation? How about just the geneolgy of Noah?

I never said “profitable” = sufficient, I said as Scripture makes one " complete, furnished completely unto every good work…makes wise unto salvation (vs 15), it must be clear enough and have enough to be considered by God as sufficient.

It may not contain all the info Catholic apologists would like to see, but it certainly does have sufficiently clear material that the man of God be complete, fully equipped for every good work.

God through Paul says so.
 
How would you respond to pnewton’s final argument, though?

There is obviously disagreement on what subject, either “Every scripture inspired of God” or “teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness”, the predicate “that the man of God may be complete, furnished completely unto every good work” actually modifies.

Without even debating that, your conclusion:
LetsObeyHim:
Scripture makes one "complete, furnished completely unto every good work…makes wise unto salvation (vs 15), it must be clear enough and have enough to be considered by God as sufficient.
Click to expand...
can be shown false by looking at the first two words of the passage, “Every Scripture”.

“Every Scripture” does not equate to “All Scriptures together”. For example, if you said “Every blade of grass is green”, you would be stating positively that in addition to all blades of grass being green, that each individual blade of grass is also green. Thus, if you looked at a single blade of grass, separate from all others, it would be truly green.

Basic logical deduction states if “When every A is B” is true, it must be true that each individual A is also B, otherwise the first statement is false. Another example: if I claimed to you that “Every dove is white”, to disprove me all you would have to do is find a single dove that is not white.

Applying this basic logical concept to your argument, if the statement is “Every Scripture has ‘sufficiently clear material that the man of God be complete, fully equipped for every good work’”, then the statement “Each individual Scripture has sufficiently clear material…” must also be true.

This is obviously false. ONE of the Scriptures alone (take Numbers, for example) clearly does not contain enough to make a person “complete” and “fully equipped”.

If you are trying to say that "All Scriptures together are complete enough and clear enough to make a person “complete” and “fully equipped” (which is what I believe you are saying), these passages and your stated line of reasoning cannot be used as proof, for God through Paul did NOT say “All Scriptures together”, he said “Every Scripture”.

Peace,
javelin
 
LetsObeyChrist said:
2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 so that one who belongs to God may be competent, equipped for every good work.-New American Bible

I cannot see that in the passage, HINA = in order that.

God inspired Scripture to be profitable for doctrine in order that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

No mention of a third party such as a Bishop.
Click to expand...

The letter is addressed to Timothy. Paul is giving advice to Timothy regarding how to pastor his flock. Read vv 14f. The passage is written in the second person (you) to Timothy. Timothy is a bishop. Paul tells him that Scripture is profitable for teaching, etc. He is telling Timothy that he should use Scripture for for these purposes. V 17, which uses the word HINA, which you are so fond of, links the completion of the man of God to this teaching, training, correction, and reproof.
 
LOC, you tried this already and were completely shot down in your thread “Christ taught Sola Scriptura using Moses’ seat” I’d suggest we all review that thread also.
 
40.png
Tom:
LOC, you tried this already and were completely shot down in your thread “Christ taught Sola Scriptura using Moses’ seat” I’d suggest we all review that thread also.
Click to expand...
Indeed, Tom.

One of the items to be found in another of his threads is the following assertion by LOC:

“I am a member of Grace Community Church, John MacArthur … see my profile.”

The profile does not say this explicitly, but the “home page” link is a link to John MacArthur’s online book store.

It is both insightful and important to be aware of the theological background of a person with whom one chooses to engage in discussion. LOC is a follower of John MacArthur. To understand Mr. MacArthur’s attutudes towards, and statements concerning, the Catholic Church, one need only follow this link:

biblebb.com/files/MAC/catholicscandal.htm

The title of the piece is “The Scandal of the Catholic Priesthood,” and it is the text of a message Mr. MacArthur delivered at his church. The title is not a reference to the difficulties faced in the American Church; it goes well beyond that.

It is, as I said, important to have insight into the position of those with whom we engage, both for our own well being, and to be of the service we can in the circumstances which present themselves.

Blessings,

Gerry Hunter
 
WOW! I thought this arguemnet sounded familiar. Let me share a rather ironic story. John MacArthur, specificallly his arguement on this passage in Timothy is one of the reasons I am Catholic!

When I was trying to counter Mark Shea’s By What Authority arguement, I remembered a series John MacArthur did on the topic. All I needed on one scripture to show sola scriptura and I could remain a Baptist. I listened repeatedly to the logic he used and each time he made the substitution of slipping the word suffiecient in without justification.

I am sorry but language and the grammer doesn’t cut it for the reason I stated above (i.e. using logical substitution).

I apologize to LetsObeyChrist for implying that he said profitable=sufficient. I did not mean to misrepresent his arguement. I just do not see the progression where this scripture implies sufficiency
 
I was fascinated to read in Lorraine Boettner’s book on Roman Catholicism this quote. “The largest collection of books in the world on the subject of sex is in the Vatican library.”

I think this one line from John McCarthy’s speech says it all. It would take days and volumes to correct all the errors in the speech. The only thing I can do is pray for LOC, McCarthy and all those so angry and hateful of something they don’t have a chance of comprehending with their confused misunderstanding of Scripture, Tradition and the Church.

God Bless
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
One more thought on this passage:

I had a Greek prof that had a passion for sentence diagraming. You can take Paul’s statement to Timothy and diagram it. This gets at the heart of the grammer. (Try it in English. It still works.) Now erase all the terms that are specific to this theological arguement and replace them with terms from baseball, music or anything and see if the rest of the sentece mandates sufficiency. You will see that it won’t. Neither does in mandate sufficiency of the scripture.
 
Gerry Hunter:
Indeed, Tom.

One of the items to be found in another of his threads is the following assertion by LOC:

“I am a member of Grace Community Church, John MacArthur … see my profile.”

The profile does not say this explicitly, but the “home page” link is a link to John MacArthur’s online book store.

It is both insightful and important to be aware of the theological background of a person with whom one chooses to engage in discussion. LOC is a follower of John MacArthur. To understand Mr. MacArthur’s attutudes towards, and statements concerning, the Catholic Church, one need only follow this link:

biblebb.com/files/MAC/catholicscandal.htm

The title of the piece is “The Scandal of the Catholic Priesthood,” and it is the text of a message Mr. MacArthur delivered at his church. The title is not a reference to the difficulties faced in the American Church; it goes well beyond that.

It is, as I said, important to have insight into the position of those with whom we engage, both for our own well being, and to be of the service we can in the circumstances which present themselves.

Blessings,

Gerry Hunter
Click to expand...
Your entire post begged the question, didn’t address the issue.

Could you try again? This time address my argument.

ps, the link you posted doesn’t work.
 
40.png
javelin:
How would you respond to pnewton’s final argument, though?

There is obviously disagreement on what subject, either “Every scripture inspired of God” or “teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness”, the predicate “that the man of God may be complete, furnished completely unto every good work” actually modifies.

Without even debating that, your conclusion:

can be shown false by looking at the first two words of the passage, “Every Scripture”.

“Every Scripture” does not equate to “All Scriptures together”. For example, if you said “Every blade of grass is green”, you would be stating positively that in addition to all blades of grass being green, that each individual blade of grass is also green. Thus, if you looked at a single blade of grass, separate from all others, it would be truly green.

Basic logical deduction states if “When every A is B” is true, it must be true that each individual A is also B, otherwise the first statement is false. Another example: if I claimed to you that “Every dove is white”, to disprove me all you would have to do is find a single dove that is not white.

Applying this basic logical concept to your argument, if the statement is “Every Scripture has ‘sufficiently clear material that the man of God be complete, fully equipped for every good work’”, then the statement “Each individual Scripture has sufficiently clear material…” must also be true.

This is obviously false. ONE of the Scriptures alone (take Numbers, for example) clearly does not contain enough to make a person “complete” and “fully equipped”.

If you are trying to say that "All Scriptures together are complete enough and clear enough to make a person “complete” and “fully equipped” (which is what I believe you are saying), these passages and your stated line of reasoning cannot be used as proof, for God through Paul did NOT say “All Scriptures together”, he said “Every Scripture”.

Peace,

javel(name removed by moderator)aul says God inspired all scripture to be profitable doctrine; He didn’t say if you extract a clause or phrase, remove it completely out of its context, it will still be profitable for doctrine or everything said about Scripture completely equipping men of God, is wrong!

Where did you get that?

PASA, literally is “every.”

ASV 2 Timothy 3:16 Every scripture inspired of God *is *also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness.

When translators render this as “all” they are conveying the sense, “every” writing that is God-breathed (is) profitable for teaching etc.

This does not limit what is said to only the OT, it limits what is said to whatever is truly “of God scripture.”

Every word in its context is profitable but that is not Paul’s point, he is viewing what is contained in the books of the Bible and observes it all (in context) is beneficial for doctrine etc.

Taking it all in “renders the man of God fully equipped for every good work” = materially sufficient.

The Bible could not fully equip men of God unless it had all the equipment = materially sufficient.

For the Bible’s teaching to instruct and correct etc, it must be clear = formal sufficiency.
 
I got this from the same text you did. A plurality is a more accurate literal translation than the a unity. Which is more accurate.

Every American may vote this year.

Every American may elect the president this year.

One American vote is not materially sufficient to elect a president (unless you live in Dade county).
 
40.png
Hananiah:
The letter is addressed to Timothy. Paul is giving advice to Timothy regarding how to pastor his flock. Read vv 14f. The passage is written in the second person (you) to Timothy. Timothy is a bishop. Paul tells him that Scripture is profitable for teaching, etc. He is telling Timothy that he should use Scripture for for these purposes. V 17, which uses the word HINA, which you are so fond of, links the completion of the man of God to this teaching, training, correction, and reproof.
Click to expand...
I agree Paul is recommending the Scriptures be used to teach doctrine, but you are not seeing Paul’s stated reasons for doing that.

In contrast to those deceived and being deceived Timothy is to use the book he understood early on in his childhood, that was taught to him by his Jewish mother:

DRA 2 Timothy 3:13 But evil men and seducers shall grow worse and worse: erring, and driving into error, 14 But continue thou in those things which thou hast learned and which have been committed to thee. Knowing of whom thou hast learned them:

Then Paul lists three excellent reasons why Timothy is to use the Scripture to teach others:

1)he has known them since infancy

2)They are able to make others wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus:

15 And because from thy infancy thou hast known the holy scriptures which can instruct thee to salvation by the faith which is in Christ Jesus.

3)God wrote the Bible for the purpose of teaching reproving etc, so the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.

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

For Scripture to furnish to every good work it cannot lack any furnishment necessary for every good work = material sufficiency.

For Scripture to furnish to every good work its furnishments must be comprehensible to those being furnished = formal sufficiency.
 
40.png
LetsObeyChrist:
Scripture is clear enough to be made wise unto salvation.
Click to expand...
I’ve spoken with a man who uses this very argument as “proof” that the OT ALONE is sufficient for our salvation. Is this what you believe?

"Clear enough" is an interesting choice of words. Does this mean that scripture is “clear enough” no matter what one believes it means, even if one’s own interpretation conflicts and contradicts that of another believer? If so, how? If not, how does “clear enough” work in light of conflicting and contradictory interpretations of scripture?
It may not contain all the info Catholic apologists would like to see, but it certainly does have sufficiently clear material that the man of God be complete, fully equipped for every good work.
Click to expand...
Do you equate “every good work” with “salvation” here? If so, why? If not, what do you believe being fully equipped for every good work means for our salvation?
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top