Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | 2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | 2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed [given by divine inspiration] and is profitable for instruction, for conviction [of sin], for correction [of error and restoration to obedience], for training in righteousness [learning to live in conformity to God's will, both publicly and privately--behaving honorably with personal integrity and moral courage]; |
Subject: Why is the Catholic bible different? |
Bible Note: When I originally commented in a brief note in reply to someone’s concern about what Martin Luther had said about certain books of the Bible that his ‘popular’ views on the canon were not reliable because they were spoken as a preacher and teacher and not as a scholar I had in mind the statements that he made that were well publicised, not his lifeteaching as a whole. I was dealing with a particular viewpoint. Unfortunately for Martin Luther he is remembered popularly for the controversial things that he said and not for the good ones (a misfortune for most famous people. Few are interested in the good things that they said). Examples include, “In a word St. John’s Gospel and his first epistle, St. Paul’s epistles, especially Romans, Galatians, and Ephesians, and St. Peter’s first epistle are the books that show you Christ and teach you all that is necessary and salvatory for you to know, even if you were never to see or hear any other book or doctrine. Therefore St. James’ epistle is really an epistle of straw, compared to these others, for it has nothing of the nature of the gospel about it. But more of this in the other prefaces.” This is then cited popularly as that he called it ‘a right strawy epistle”. Then again he later said, “…I will say nothing of the fact that many assert with much probability that this epistle is not by James the apostle, and that it is not worthy of an apostolic spirit; although, whoever was its author, it has come to be regarded as authoritative.” Concerning the Book of Revelation he said, “About this book of the Revelation of John, I leave everyone free to hold his own opinions. I would not have anyone bound to my opinion or judgment,” and again, “let everyone think of it as his own spirit leads him.” The impression given (which I have elsewhere called ‘atrocious’ evangelically speaking) is that people can treat the Scriptures as something which can be accepted or otherwise depending on how their own spirit leads them. Of Esther he says, Esther…which despite their [the Jews] inclusion of it in the canon deserves more than all the rest in my judgment to be regarded as noncanonical.” Later, of course he dropped these statements from his translations of the Scriptures and he did include all the books in his Bible translations as Biblical books, in contrast with the Apocrypha of which he said that they were, “books not to be regarded as equal to Holy Writ, but which are useful and good to read”. But the damage was done and Martin Luther gained the popular image of a man who did not treat the whole canon of Scripture on a par. No doubt Martin Luther on the whole wished that he had never said these things, but unfortunately for him he did and it is these statements for which he is popularly remembered. I hold Martin Luther in the highest regard (what true evangelical would not). Beside him we are all pinpricks. But we still have to admit that he made mistakes which have unfortunately been perpetuated and have caused many people problems, and that such statements are best disregarded. |