Who should actually define what is Holy Scripture? [b]2 Peter 1:20,21 - "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of G-d spoke as they were moved by the Breath of G-d.[/b] This gives us a hint as to who should define Scripture. According to Peter, no prophecy of "Scripture" should be privately (individually) interpreted, but should be consistent with the intent of the original author. Who is the original author? HaShem! What did he originally write? Torah! Christians exalt the inspired writings of the followers of Yeshua and so we should allow them to tell us what Scripture is. But ya know, there is a better, more authoritative place that we can use to show us what Scripture is! Messiah! [b]Matthew 5:17-19 - "Don't think that I have come to abolish the Torah or the Prophets. I have come not to abolish but to complete. Yes indeed! I tell you that until heaven and earth pass away, not so much as a yud or a stroke will pass from the Torah-not until everything that must happen has happened. So whoever disobeys the least of these mitzvot and teaches others to do so will be called the least in the Kingdom of Heaven. But whoever obeys them and so teaches will be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven."[/b] If anyone were to do a word study in the NT looking up the word “Scripture” they would find that every instance, with the possible exception of one, to be referring to Tanach (the book christians call old). Only one 1 out of 51 passages in the NT may even be used to imply that the NT is Scripture. What does Paul say to do? [b]2 Timothy 3:14-17 "But you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, recalling the people from whom you learned it; and recalling too how from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which can give you the wisdom that leads to deliverance through trusting in Yeshua the Messiah. All Scripture is G-d-breathed and is valuable for teaching the truth, convicting of sin, correcting faults and training in right living; thus anyone who belongs to G-d may be fully equipped for every good work."[/b] What Timothy was taught since childhood by word and deed was Torah. Paul himself defines what Scripture is and it is the same thing his Messiah claimed to be Scripture, Tanach! And Paul tells Timothy, as well as the rest of us, to cling to it. Not divide it away from us. In the garden, HaShem gave Adam a two fold job: Tend and guard the sanctuary. In the midst stood HaShem’s instruction, the Tree of Life. Adam never failed at tending what G-d gave him, but he failed to guard what HaShem said to do. What Paul thought to be the source of doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction, and what makes one thoroughly furnished and "wise unto salvation" was nothing else but Tanach. A very clear fact from this passage is that Paul never equated his letters to that of Scripture as he told Timothy to use nothing else but Tanach. Paul would have never dreamed his letters would be placed on the same level as that of HaShem’s Holy Writing much less the fact that they would be used for the better part of two thousand years to invalidate that which he loved so dearly, Torah! Be clear: I am not saying the NT is not inspired I am not saying the NT is of no value in regards to truth. I am not saying one should abandon the clears facts taught in the NT as they were hidden in the Tanach and verified in the very same Tanach. Now the ONE and only One passage used to say the NT is “Scripture.” [b]2 Peter 3:15,16 - "And think of our Lord's patience as deliverance, just as our dear brother Sha'ul also wrote you, following the wisdom G-d gave him. Indeed, he speaks about these things in all his letters. They contain some things that are hard to understand, things which the uninstructed and unstable distort, to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures."[/b] What Peter does call Paul’s writing in this verse is “epistole,” it means: 1992 epistole {ep-is-tol-ay'} from 1989; TDNT - 7:593,1074; n f AV - epistle 15, letter 9; 24 1) a letter, epistle The belief that Peter calls Paul’s writing Scripture hangs on one word (notice he could have called Paul’s letters this instead of “epistole” but did not) this Greek word is “graphe.” It means: 1124 graphe {graf-ay'} of uncertain affinity; TDNT - 1:749,128; n f AV - Scripture 51; 51 1) a writing, thing written 2) the Scripture, used to denote either the book itself, or its contents 3) a certain portion or section of the Holy Scripture. So it could mean Scripture, but could not, as well. Strong's definition of “graphe” (as well as other Greek lexicons) suggests it could just as easily be referring to any "writing" or "thing written". Other lexicons define it as "document" - ANY GENERAL DOCUMENT. To force it to mean "Holy" Scripture is to force upon the passage a meaning that the writer may not have intended! It is very important to note that the Greek term, graphe, is used in a plural form here, which is why it is translated as the plural word "scriptures." In reference to the plural form of this word, the Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament based on Semantic Domains states the following: [i]"The reference is to the OT (Old Testament) and not to the entire Bible, including both New and Old Testaments."[/i] But let us assume Peter is using the word “graphe” to mean “Holy Scripture.” Does this mean he was saying Paul’s letters were Scripture. Ask yourself this, “What is the point of Peter’s writing here? Was his point of writing this to say that Paul was writing Scripture?” Allow me to answer that, NO! Peter mentions Paul’s letters and says that they are sometimes misunderstood. Peter then equates the misunderstanding of Paul’s letters with the common misunderstanding of Scripture. So what Peter is equating is “misunderstanding of,” and not equating the writing in which he is talking about. Again, the focus is on misinterpretation, not that being written. The problem here is a bias brought into the reading. When you read this text again take out the word “other” and watch the problem of this interpretation disappear as now you never see Peter saying Paul’s writing is Scripture. Never base any belief on one word! Is Paul’s writing Scripture? No! Is it inspired? Some yes and some no, as he clearly said himself. [b]1 Corinthians 7:25 - "Now the question about the unmarried: [u]I do not have a command from the Lord, but I offer an opinion[/u] as one who by the Lord's mercy is worthy to be trusted."[/b] [i]“When the Bible uses an allegory or figure of speech it is always obvious[/i] (fig tree, olive tree,living water, ect). [i]But when an interpreter arbitrarily takes a passage that is obviously intended to be a literal statement of fact and treats it as allegory, he is twisting the word and knowingly perverting it’s meaning.”[/i]