Does it say Final Authority? No. But what it does say is:
“14But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it 15and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.”
“May be complete (ina hi artiov).
Final clause with ina and present subjunctive of eimi. Artiov is old word (from root arw, to fit), specially adapted, here only in N.T.
Furnished completely (exhrtismenov).
Perfect passive participle of exartizw, rare verb, to furnish (fit) fully (perfective use of ex), in N.T. only here and Acts 21:5. In Josephus. For katartizw, see Luke 6:40; 2 Corinthians 13:11. “
http://www.studylight.org/com/rwp/view.cgi?book=2ti&chapter=003&verse=017
It it equips you “for every good work”, then it is sufficient. You don’t need more if it fully equips you for every good work.
Also - how do you get more authoritative than “breathed out by God”?
Please note what Peter said:
“16For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17For when he received honor and glory from God the Father, and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased,” 18we ourselves heard this very voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain. 19And we have something more sure, the prophetic word, to which you will do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts, 20knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. 21For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.”
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Peter%201&version=ESV
Please note that, if Peter had to chose between being present at the Transfiguration and scripture, he would choose scripture - “we have something more sure, the prophetic word”.
Now, against that you have what? Matt 16:16 setting up Peter as the Infallible Leader of the Church? Not hardly!
“11But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12For before certain men came from James, he was eating with the Gentiles; but when they came he drew back and separated himself, fearing the circumcision party. 13And the rest of the Jews acted hypocritically along with him, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy. 14But when I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all, “If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?”
15We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners; 16yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.
17But if, in our endeavor to be justified in Christ, we too were found to be sinners, is Christ then a servant of sin? Certainly not! 18For if I rebuild what I tore down, I prove myself to be a transgressor. 19For through the law I died to the law, so that I might live to God. 20I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. 21I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose.” Galatians 2
Peter was as wrong as possible: “I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose.” He was wrong in his teaching and example. But, as I pointed out, PETER knew what was important. Not his experiences, not his standing, but the prophetic word of God.
Thanks for your post.
Perhaps too some confuse the Word with words.
Though Mary is certainly the most blessed woman who ever lived, it's clear from church and secular history that the doctrines that began to bubble up around Mary several hundred years after her death were unknown to the early church.
How can you expect to be taken seriously by any rationally thinking adult when you put forth a proposition like this?
If adding a nickle to what money I have gives me enough to purchase a particular thing, does that mean all I ever needed was a nickle?
Any doctrine that was unheard of until the middle ages is no doctrine of Christianity.
Watch out for those dogs, those evildoers, those mutilators of the flesh. For it is we who are the circumcision, we who serve God by his Spirit, who boast in Christ Jesus, and who put no confidence in the flesh (Philippians 3:2)...compared to this:
Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law. You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace. (Galatians 5:2-4)
Paul came to Derbe and then to Lystra, where a disciple named Timothy lived, whose mother was Jewish and a believer but whose father was a Greek. The believers at Lystra and Iconium spoke well of him. Paul wanted to take him along on the journey, so he circumcised him because of the Jews who lived in that area, for they all knew that his father was a Greek.Oops?
First of all, I want to compliment you on your response, sincerely. Yours was the type of response I always hope for, and rarely see. You were to the point, and stayed with my comments. Truly, my hat is off to you, sir. I will add that I do not agree with your personal, fallible interpretation, with my reasoning following thusly:
You said:
‘ “Does it say Final Authority? No. But what it does say is:
“14But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it 15and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.”
“May be complete (ina hi artiov).
Final clause with ina and present subjunctive of eimi. Artiov is old word (from root arw, to fit), specially adapted, here only in N.T.
Furnished completely (exhrtismenov).
Perfect passive participle of exartizw, rare verb, to furnish (fit) fully (perfective use of ex), in N.T. only here and Acts 21:5. In Josephus. For katartizw, see Luke 6:40; 2 Corinthians 13:11. “
http://www.studylight.org/com/rwp/view.cgi?book=2ti&chapter=003&verse=017
It it equips you “for every good work”, then it is sufficient. You don’t need more if it fully equips you for every good work.
Also - how do you get more authoritative than “breathed out by God”?” ‘
My point here was that the specific phrase kindred used is not in the Bible. Protestants, speaking generally, often ask Catholics where one finds this or that in the Bible. If kindred is going to represent something as being in the Bible, should it not be there? Likewise, in 2 Timothy, 3, the context is thus:
“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. All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice, That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.”
St Paul is exhorting Timothy to constancy. He makes mention first of the Old Testament (that being the scripture Timothy has known ‘from thy infancy’) All scripture, must also include the New Testament, taking along with it the traditions of the Apostles, and the interpretation of the Church, to which the Apostles delivered both the book, and the true meaning of it.
I will remind you of John 20:30-31
“Many other signs also did Jesus in the sight of his disciples, which are not written in this book. But these are written, that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing, you may have life in His name.”
I will also remind you of 1 Timothy 3:15
“But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.”
I will remind you of 2 Thessalonians 2:14
“Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle.”
I will also remind you of 2 Timothy 2:2
“And the things which thou hast heard of me by many witnesses, the same commend to faithful men, who shall be fit to teach others also.”
I will also remind you of 1 Corinthians 11:2
“Now I praise you, brethren, that in all things you are mindful of me: and keep my ordinances as I have delivered them to you.”
I will also remind you of 1 Thessalonians 2:13
“Therefore, we also give thanks to God without ceasing: because, that when you had received of us the word of the hearing of God, you received it not as the word of men, but (as it is indeed) the word of God, who worketh in you that have believed.”
I will also remind you of Acts 2:42
“And they were persevering in the doctrine of the apostles, and in the communication of the breaking of the bread, and in prayers.”
Final Authority, as kindred out it, consists of the Word of God, which includes the Bible, the traditions of the Apostles, and the Magisterium (teaching Authority)of the One, True, Holy, and Catholic Church.
I say this as respectfully as I am able, as I my intent is not harm or malice. The post by kindred used specific verbiage not in the Bible. While the intent of the author of the original post was, shall we say, not even thinly disguised, I do give kindred credit. I also point to the original author having not done his homework in some respects. I have no doubt that where we disagree, you will respond with erudition, and I think the same might be said of kindred. I could give much more response than I have, but in the last week have apparently consumed something glutenous, so my attention is somewhat divided. ;)
I will add that my quotes are from the Douay-Rheims online:
www.drbo.org/index.htm
with interspersed bits from
http://haydock1859.tripod.com/index.html
All mistakes are mine.