Very well (I won’t squabble with 1, which calls St. Paul’s apostolship willed by God, but doesn’t exactly call the letter itself inspired). So you do not know 1-6 entirely from the Bible. You, rather, base your answer on reason, history, and guidance of the Holy Spirit in “us”. Would that be correct?
Further you answer is spoken from a group: you couch it in plural form and you yourself hardly could have compared every thought in 1 Timothy with every thought in other scripture (2); you personally could not have seen St. Paul convert and preach and your reliance of the Book of Acts is indeed circular (3); you use plural form in (4) and justly so as the Holy Spirit, reasonably, indwells not in you alone; you refer to history which you could not yourself witness in (5); and in (6) you could not personally be informed of every such objection and decide in favor of Timothy 1.
You speak on behalf of a community of believers, don’t you?
In my next question we shall examine what that community of believers must possess in order to ascertain (1-6).
” You, rather, base your answer on reason, history, and guidance of the Holy Spirit in “us”. “
I’d like to say I base my answer on Scripture. I admit that reason, roughly defined, is part of every thought and communication. I use reason, in a sense of the word, to write this sentence. The Bible is reasonable. It uses language, syntax, grammar - arguments are built and defended, etc. So if that is reason, so be it.
And yes, Scripture is historical. It is the history of the creation of this world, and its redemption. It occurred in time.
And finally, how can I deny the work of the Holy Spirit? Again the Bible tells us that He indeed convicts us of the truth of Scripture.
” These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. “ (1st Cor 2 13-14)
It is obviously very much the work of the Holy Spirit as to whether you recognize the word of God or not.
So you might say I use reason and history and guidance of the Holy Spirit, and there would be truth in that, but I see these things as subservient to God’s revealed word in the Scripture.
For example, if I “reasoned” that it was ok to commit adultery, I’d have to reject that reasoning, as it is not in line with the Bible. Or if “history” taught me that might makes right, I’d have to reject that, as it is not in line with the Bible. As for the work of the Holy Spirit, that is personal to Him, so I won’t speculate or give examples about that. God being triune, the Father, the Word, the Holy Spirit, inextricably linked, I would not even try to parse out a separation.
“Further you answer is spoken from a group: you couch it in plural form and you yourself hardly could have compared every thought in 1 Timothy with every thought in other scripture (2); you personally could not have seen St. Paul convert and preach and your reliance of the Book of Acts is indeed circular (3); you use plural form in (4) and justly so as the Holy Spirit, reasonably, indwells not in you alone; you refer to history which you could not yourself witness in (5); and in (6) you could not personally be informed of every such objection and decide in favor of Timothy 1.”
No, I have not personally compared every verse. After 40 years of sermons, Bible studies, and personal Bible reading, I have compared a whole lot of them! Also chain reference Bibles are abundantly available, easily read, we can see that astounding synchronicity of Scripture. This of course is scholarship of others, but it is a common misunderstanding of RC’s that Protestants are total lone rangers, subject to no authority or influence of other believers. Not usually so. I respect the authority and government of my church, submit to it in the Lord, and rely quite often on the scholarship of those who have gone before me! I just don’t elevate all that to the point of infallible, that’s all.
Oh no, I have not personally witnessed a historical thing in the world, from creation to the ordination of St. Paul - it is of faith. That is what faith is, is it not?
“Jesus said to him, “Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” John 20:29
I don’t know about using plural form, perhaps I should say I I I, I am trying to communicate here, and I assumed you knew along with me about Paul’s apostleship.
As for not knowing of every objection to 2 Timothy, of course not, however, it is of no consequence, my point is that no sustained creditable objection is known. God preserves His word, supernaturally:
“The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.” Isaiah 40:8
We can trust Him on that; He is trustworthy; the Bible has a purpose, and it is preserved, despite the best efforts of our greatest enemy.
It’s a pleasure for me to defend it. I love the Lord. I love His Word. I am eternally grateful for it. We can rest upon the truth of Scripture.