“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.
I agree. Of all the possible human authorities that exist or have ever existed in the history of man, NONE have the endurance, the objectiveness, the honesty, the assurance or the immutability of the word of God. We CAN rest on it indeed, and that by Divine design!
Note that a Catholic convert makes his decision to submit to Rome based on reason, that of his fallible interpretation of purported evidences, and then is required to implicitly trust Rome cannot be wrong when she infallibly speaks, yet which still requires use of fallible human reasoning by the RC to discern which level a magisterial teaching falls under, and thus what level of assent is required, and if any descent might be allowed.
And it remains that the reason writings (Lk. 24:44) were established as Scripture at the time of Christ was not due to an assuredly infallible magisterium, but like as a true man of God, it was and is essentially due to their Divine enduring qualities and attestation.