>> “ Timothy was a native of Lystra and his father was Greek, a strong indication that his exposure to scripture was through Septuagint and therefore “all” in St. Paul’s writing is a reference to the complete Catholic Canon, not to the Protestant redaction.” <<
.
What a bizarre assertion!
.
First, Timothy’s mother was a devout Jew, and children’s education was strictly the mother’s job in a Jewish family of that time. Read what Paul said of his mother, little is even known of his father.
Paul taught nothing from the Septuagint, he had little knowledge of the Greek language, but he was one of the world’s greatest experts in the Hebrew scriptures, which he had studied since he was a toddler. The same is in all likelihood true for Timothy.
There was no “Canon” in their time but the Tanakh, and the ‘catholic’ anything was 300 years in the future.
The very idea of a NT ‘canon’ is without scriptural basis. The gospel of Matthew, and the various letters of the apostles were copied in a purely random way by whoever wished to have a copy of a letter. Codification of them came long after the apostles were all dead, and Jerusalem long demolished.
The term “scripture” to the apostles meant the Tanakh, in Hebrew, which is how it was available in synagogues across the Mediterranean, (see acts 15:21) including Lystra, and that was instruction in Righteousness, not ‘justice.’
The Septuagint was prepared for a small contingent of Greek speaking Jews in Alexandria, not for Greeks, and Greeks for the most part considered it unreadable.
.
.
Peter referred to Paul's writings as scripture.
Sorry, I read the scripture for how it is written. St. Paul said “all scripture” that Timothy knew “from infancy”, so I understand it to mean “all scripture”, not “the parts of the scripture unconverted Jews half a century later decided to like” or “Luther fifteen centuiries later decided to like”. This is why I am Catholic.