Liberal Christians explain how you view 2 Timothy 3:16, 17

by ShadesofGrey 25 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Doug Mason

  Shades,

  Paul did not write 2 Timothy (and several others in the NT that are attributed to him). So it is a fraud, pretending to be what it is not. It was written some 40 years after Paul died. You need to research the events taking place between the Christian sects at the end of the first century CE, and find out why that person felt moved to write these words.

  The NT writings were not canonised until the 4th century CE, with the dominant section of the Christians and the Roman Emperor having their say -- and getting it wrong. Several lists were proposed, and the current list was first put forward by the Trinitarian Athanasius.

  Fortunately we still can read several of the writings that were rejected.

  Any Scriptures that Timothy would have read would be the Hebrew writings.

  Doug
• 

  wobble

  The writer of Timothy , whoever he was, purports to be Paul, so the words would mean what the writer would see as Paul's view. It is more than likely that Paul, and the writer of Timothy too, viewed "scripture" very differently from the modern day literalists. ( a less than 2 centuries old phenomenon really, and still far from universal)

  The method common among Rabbinical schools of the time was to re-tell the stories of scripture, often changing many details, so that the stories had an impact on thinking and action in their day and circumstances. They did not view them as literal truth to be held sacrosanct as to every detail, but as a basis for "teaching and setting things straight".

  The God -Breathed bit did not make them view the Bible as the WT and other Fundies do.

  Leolaia has an excellent thread on the Midrash method.
• 

  PSacramento

  In what way is Chronicles "God inspired" ?

  Considering the the majority of the people had the Septugaint as their "bible", then does that mean ONLY what was in that was scripture?

  Considering that at the time of writing, even the Hebrews had books that are NOT in the current bible, does that mean those books were scripture?

  Certianly Jude quotes Enoch and the Assumption of Moses, two OT books NOT in the western canon...
• 

  Band on the Run

  I cannot imagine that Paul with his hubris would consider his writings scripture. Recently, I discovered that Jesus' references to scripture do not mean what we consider scrpture today. His Hebrew scriptures were scant compared to today. The Hebew scriptures were canonized around the time the New Testament was canonized. I know the Christian process but not the Jewish process. When Jesus says "scripture," he means the Torah (the first five books), the Psalms (he adored the Psalms), and the major prophets (such as Daniel, Jeremiah, and Isaiah).

  I studied New Testament in college. It explained so many questions I always had. Also, it completely and absolutely repudiated the Witness doctrines and explanations. Besides reading the text, we studied NEUTRAL academic histories and social studies of the first century. Judaism was highlighted. It was very hard then to have access to these materials. Jewish students did not automatically adopt the Christian view. They paid more attention to the actual text than the Christians. Time after time, Christians students were wrong. Jewish students correct.

  I studied in the mid 1970s. In fact, I wanted to do graduate work at a good seminary but needed Greek ability. Within the past fifteen to twenty years, there has been an explosion of popular books written by scholars b/c people are fascinated. It is an industry within itself. Amazon and websites allow easy access to Gnostic scriptures and other materials that are free or nominal cost. One other thing I do is to find an excellent, academic type seminary. I view the catalogue and ask profs for the leading books in the field.

  Another great resource is the Encyclopedia Judaica, available in most libraries. Whether Christian authorities lied, or simply had no access to correct information, it is a treasure trove to discover how Jesus and the apostles would view an Old Testament story or concept.

  I cannot overstate what access to this info did to my fears of JWs. It was shocking to me to discover how uncoordinated the Bible is. Revelation is not spooky when you know what was happening and read about 10 different apocalyptic books of Christian and Jewish origin. The spooky stuff is a literary genre, not sheer spookiness. The Romans looked the other way if you wrote in code. A code that contemporaries would know but we do not know.

  A google search of "HIstorical Jesus" and "New Testament Studies" will bring back countless documents. I would recommend N.T. Wright, Marcus Borg, Crossan, Ehrman. They will reference other scholars in their books so you don't rely on only one author.
• 

  PSacramento

  It is assumed that Jesus quoted from the Septuaguaint (LXX) as it was the most common verison around at His time.

  It may be debated that within the various syngougues ( and most assuredly in the sanhedrin HQ in Jerusalem) they had actual Hebrew writings of the OT.

  It is unclear which books of the OT were "canon" at the time, but as BOTR mentioned above, the ones that all scholars agree on is the Pentauch, Pslams and the propehts ( with Daniel being debated at some point but that Jesus quoted Daniel shows that HE valued it).

  What 1st century Jews would have viewed as scripture would have been those books and it is arguable that Paul would have viewed his own writings as scripture.

  It seems that the writer of 2Timothy ( be it Paul in totallity, which it probably wasn't, or Paul in some part and edited/finished by another) was stating that the scriptures have authority and that Timothy can and shoudl use them in his preaching/teaching works.

  Whether the writer means to bother hebrews and gentiles alike is unclear ( gentiles would not have viewed the OT books as authoritive so it makes sense that the writer was actually meaning them since it wouldn't be necessary to remind a Hebrew of the authority of the OT books).

  Perhaps Tim has asked him if teaching from the OT books was still need or valid since they were under the New Covenant and the writer was clearing that up.
• 

  Norcal_Sun
• 

  botchtowersociety

  His Hebrew scriptures were scant compared to today.

  Actually, they were greater. They included books such as Wisdom, Sirach, and others. These books were excluded by Jews in the year 90, decades after his death. The Christian canon kept these books. They are, for the most part, the books found in the Septuagint.
• 

  ShadesofGrey

  Very helpful, as were the searches. Thank you. I am going to ask my Eastern Orthodox friends and will report back.

  May Love, Joy and Peace abound,

  Sister SOG
• 

  Band on the Run

  Indeed, I listened to Ehrman's Teaching Company early Christianity tapes this past month. When Jesus died, the earliest Christians were merely a Jewish sect. Within about ten years, Christianity was opposed to Judaism. Ehrman states that age of a religion was an important selling point. The older your tradition the better. Chrisitianity had these new concepts, esp. Christ is God. People did not want to convert to a new cult, a flash in the pan. Christians almost confiscated the Old Testament stories and gave them different interpretations from Judaism. The OT new purpose was to show that Jesus was predicted throughout. Many pagans were impressed with Jewish monotheism and very impressed with its ancient origins.

  If I have time, I check to see how Jews viewed a certain OT topic raised by New Testament or early Christian writers. The Christian view is frequently different. Psalm 23 is one example. I am a history buff and love all ancient scriptures. I am fascinated by the process. It may be utterly boring to others.
• 

  Bella15

  You know ... when I came back to the bible and Almighty God Creator YHWH, the God of Abraham, Isaaic and Jacob, I focused only on what Jesus' "supposedly" had said according to Mark, Luke, John, James, Peter, Matthew, and I read only the parts in red. I was paying close attention when sentences started with The Lord says this or that in the OT. I believe the Bible contains words from God and Jesus, and that 2Timothy refers to the Hebrew Scriptures ... the bible that Jesus and the apostles read. The NT offer us the testimony of the people that witnessed Jesus live here on earth. Jesus said they were going to be witness of this and to this day the apostles are. Somehow I have always seen the NT this way even while I was a JW.

  By the way I have read the books of Sirach, Wisdom, Judith (I love Judith) and others because I wanted to read all the books that were part of the Septuagint and others that Jewish people may have read too. I would recommend to any serious bible student to read as much as of the books of antiquity that are now translated into modern languages, you'll get a better understanding of the bible...