For popular or very good threads
I've read many times that the New Testament writers did not intend for their writings to be viewed as Scripture.

Is this the case?

For Discussion:
- What are the reasons and evidence for such a view?
- Any evidence against it?
- Did the authors intend for it or was it later Christians?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Multicolored Lemur
The implications I'd be thinking of is does not intending for it to be Scripture mean that it should be ignored or not considered authoritative?

If it is not Scripture, but still considered as having authority to the Christian faith, then what about all of the other writings post NT canon, that claim to be a message from God?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Multicolored Lemur
then what about all of the other writings post NT canon

For example, maybe the letters of Paul — such as Galatians, Philippians, and 1st Corinthians — are viewed more like a Billy Graham book. As something sincerely put together and potentially highly helpful to individual Christians, but not even in the category of “inspired, not literal.”

For example, 1st Corinthians was written by Paul to the new Christians in Corinth to address problems and errors that specific church was having.

… in the specific Greek city of Corinth.

kjm5dk7TIhA4Vzok
 
then what about all of the other writings post NT canon

For example, maybe the letters of Paul — such as Galatians, Philippians, and 1st Corinthians — are viewed more like a Billy Graham book. As something sincerely put together and potentially highly helpful to individual Christians, but not even in the category of “inspired, not literal.”

For example, 1st Corinthians was written by Paul to the new Christians in Corinth to address problems and errors that specific church was having.

… in the specific Greek city of Corinth.
Yes, Paul did say at times that he was offering his own advice and not God's.
Found one website with good info. I can't vouch for its accuracy but I do like that it answers key questions..

Some common misnomers about the New Testament:​

  • Early Christians didn’t have the New Testament
  • The books of the New Testament were not considered anything special in their time, and it was only later on that these books came to be thought of as holy scripture.
  • The New Testament only came into existence at the time of Constantine, 300 years after Jesus.
  • The New Testament has been changed and tampered with over time.
Lets just go over the first point...
In 2 Timothy 3:16, Paul wrote these words: All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.

There are 27 books in the New Testament. By the time Paul wrote 2 Timothy, at least 23/27 books of the New Testament (including 2 Timothy) had been written and were in distribution amongst the early Christians, who considered these books Holy Scripture in the same way that the Old Testament was considered Holy Scripture.

So, when Paul says, “All Scripture” — most scholars believe he’s not just talking about the Old Testament, he’s also talking about the New Testament!
Here are a few examples:

  • In 2 Peter 3:15-16, Peter refers to the writings of Paul as “Scriptures”
  • In 2 Thessalonians 2:13, Paul referred to his own message as “the word of God”
  • In 1 Timothy 5:18, Paul takes a quotation from the Gospel of Luke – and he calls it “Scripture” (Luke 10:7)
  • In some of his letters, Paul instructs the recipients to distribute his letters and have them read in the churches. (Colossians 4:16, 1 Thessalonians 5:27)
Source: https://nickcady.org/2019/05/29/when-was-the-new-testament-recognized-as-holy-scripture/

Just consider the above as being one side of this topic. We can fact check it or post an opposing side.
 

  • “In some of his letters, Paul instructs the recipients to distribute his letters and have them read in the churches. (Colossians 4:16, 1 Thessalonians 5:27)”

———————

1st Thessalonians is considered one of the pretty definite letters of Paul, but Colossians as one of the doubtful ones.

Modern scholars generally view 7 of the letters as pretty definite, and 6 of them as doubtful.
 

When I was a kid, I used to love going to the grocery store, because in the checkout line they had tabloid magazines that were full of fake news.

“Aliens landed and took over Washington DC!” “Sasquatch sightings!” “Giant eagle carries off children!”

We still have fake news today, but back then it was fun; now it’s just disturbing.

——————

Mmm?

How can this guy then be a devoutly religious guy?

Maybe precisely because he does divide things into 2 sharp categories of truth and lies? Whereas in the real world many things are in the middle, confusedly so!
 
Last edited:
Here are the passages listed in both of our sources in posts #4 and 6...

2 Peter 3:15-16 (The Apostle Peter speaking??) (NIV)
15 Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.

2 Thessalonians 2:15 (NASB)
15 So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold on to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us.

1 Timothy 5:18 - (Paul quotes Luke 10:7 and refers to the quoted passage as Scripture?)
18 For the Scripture says, “You shall not muzzle the ox while it is threshing,” and “The laborer is worthy of his wages.”
⬇️
Luke 10:7
7 Stay there, eating and drinking whatever they give you, for the worker deserves his wages. Do not move around from house to house.

1 Thessalonians 5:27
27 I put you under oath by the Lord to have this letter read to all the brothers and sisters.

Colossians 4:16
16 When this letter is read among you, have it also read in the church of the Laodiceans; and you, for your part, read my letter that is coming from Laodicea.

1st Thessalonians is considered one of the pretty definite letters of Paul, but Colossians as one of the doubtful ones.

Modern scholars generally view 7 of the letters as pretty definite, and 6 of them as doubtful.
That's important to keep in mind.

I think the clearest example in support of NT being Scripture, is the 1 Timothy 5:18 point. Then of course the parts where he says to read his letters to others helps that case. Perhaps in favor of the other side, maybe Paul did not know nor intend for his writings to be on the level of Scripture, but it still meant it to be instruction for Christians to follow. It gets to be semantics at that point.
 
1 Timothy 5:18 - (Paul quotes Luke 10:7 and refers to the quoted passage as Scripture?)
18 For the Scripture says, “You shall not muzzle the ox while it is threshing,” and “The laborer is worthy of his wages.”

Luke 10:7
7 Stay there, eating and drinking whatever they give you, for the worker deserves his wages. Do not move around from house to house.

Just out of general interest, Wow, how’d you get this much info this quickly?

And 1st and 2nd Timothy are considered among the doubtful letters of Paul, although still written by a sincere Christian.

—————

I think the Gospel of Luke was written around ??? 70 - 90 AD (??). Meaning, the letter to Timothy may have been written early.

Perhaps the part about “the worker deserves his wages” was circulating earlier.
 
Just out of general interest, Wow, how’d you get this much info this quickly?
Who? Me?

SimpIy made a list of all of the passages we quoted, and did lots of copying/ pasting.


I think the Gospel of Luke was written around ??? 70 - 90 AD (??). Meaning, the letter to Timothy may have been written early.

Perhaps the part about “the worker deserves his wages” was circulating earlier.
I see your point in bringing up the dates. 1 Timothy was thought to be written some time in the 60s AD. Luke 's Gospel written between 80 and 90 AD. So likely that point about 1 Timothy quoting from Luke's Gospel was wrong or as you say, it coud just be certain parts were known about earlier. But then if Paul didn't write 1 Timothy, then that makes Timothy irrelevant or questionable at best.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Multicolored Lemur