Was Luke/Acts written to an individual person or to all individual God lovers?

[for_his_glory]

Only the prophets and apostles
were foundational to the household of God (Eph 2:20).

I refuse to deny that word of God by adding others.


.

John 12:44 Jesus cried and said, He that believeth on me, believeth not on me, but on him that sent me. 45 And he that seeth me seeth him that sent me. 46 I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness. 47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world. 48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. 49 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. 50 And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.

It is God alone who commands what is spoken, (even what we teach today), and also penned by the Prophets and Apostles who give testimony of what God spoke to them through Christ as God's word is instruction on how we live our lives for Him that brings glory and honor to His name. Nothing can be added or taken away from what God has already spoken.

 

[for_his_glory]

Non-apostolic works by Mark, Luke (Acts), author of Hebrews,
James, Jude and a host of pseudo-canonical works were circulating as well.


.

All the letters circulated to the churches were that of Gods spoken word as He alone gave what to write unto the churches.

 

[chessman]

Luke went with the apostle Paul on his missionary journeys (2 Tim 4:11).

I didn’t say otherwise. Which doesn’t mean (one way or the other) Luke didn’t write his account (what we call the Gospel of Luke) prior to Paul writing 1st or 2nd Timothy. On the otherhand, Paul’s quotation of a portion of Luke’s Gospel, and calling it Scripture, does show that a portion of the NT was at least written and considered Scripture, prior to Paul writing to Timothy.

Notice how apostles RANK FIRST (1 Cor 12:28, Eph 4:11).

I noticed 1 Cor 12:28 doesn’t say anything about rank. Nor does it show how Paul wasn’t quoting from Luke’s Gospel.

Paul wasn't subservient to Luke, but his superior in the kingdom of God (Rev 21:14).

Who said anything about Paul being subservient to Luke?

 

[for_his_glory]

The foundation is not the Prophets or Apostles, but that which is from the beginning which is God as we are founded in Christ being our foundation and cornerstone we build upon.

1 Corinthians 3:11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

Ephesians 2:19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God; 20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; 21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: 22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

 

[chessman]

What I am getting at is in the days of the Apostles there were only their writings that were circulated among the churches as they were not yet collected in a single volume (book) we call the NT.

I understand that. What I am getting at (with this OP) is that the very reason they circulated what they did have written to them and read from it in the churches and even quoted portions of it in their own epistles was that they considered it Scripture.

If Luke wrote a personal letter to an individual named Theophilus (meaning God-Lover) why would Paul then quote from it and call it “Scripture” on par with what Moses wrote??? (Just a thought)

 

[Jim Parker]

Recommending that I should turn
to ECFs, popes or non-apostolic works is the problem, for they offer opinions of uninspired men.

Who is making that recommendation?
I'm not aware of anyone here who has done so.

 

[Jim Parker]

Paul knew that he was given the word of God !!!!

Your opinion is duly noted.

Paul didn't refer to the OT, but specifically to the prophets.

Ro 2:6 quotes Psalm 62:12 and Proverbs 24:12
Ro 3:4 quotes Psalm 51:4
Ro 3:12 quotes Ecclesiastes 7:20
Ro 4:3 quotes Gen 15:6
Ro 4:17 quotes Gen 17:5
Ro 4:18 quotes Gen 15:5
Ro 7:7 quotes Ex 20:17 and Deut 5:21
Ro 9:7 quotes Gen 21:12
Ro 9:15 quotes Ex 33:19
Ro 11:3 quotes 1 Kings 19:10, 14
Ro 11:4 quotes 1 Kings 19:18
Ro 11:35 quotes Job 41:11

So your opinion is, again, duly noted.

 

[for_his_glory]

I understand that. What I am getting at (with this OP) is that the very reason they circulated what they did have written to them and read from it in the churches and even quoted portions of it in their own epistles was that they considered it Scripture.

If Luke wrote a personal letter to an individual named Theophilus (meaning God-Lover) why would Paul then quote from it and call it “Scripture” on par with what Moses wrote??? (Just a thought)

These letters the Apostles wrote were also called epistles which means written letters and actually at that time not part of the collective. What Paul quoted in 2 Timothy 5:18 and called it scripture came from the Torah, Deuteronomy 25:4, which was already a scroll that was penned and contained the first five books of Moses. It's like us calling the Bible scripture as it is the penned collective beginning with Genesis and ending with Revelation.

 

[WIP]

Let's try to keep things under some control, please. Share viewpoints but avoid what seem like attempts to put others down even subtly. The goal is not to prove others are wrong but to lead each other toward the truth. Thanks.

 

[chessman]

What Paul quoted in 2 Timothy 5:18 and called it scripture came from the Torah, Deuteronomy 25:4, which was already a scroll that was penned and contained the first five books of Moses.

Take a deep breath, clear your mind and read 1st Timothy 5:18 (it’s 1st Tim not 2nd Tim, BTW) again. Now:

Paul makes two quotations (the and is there for a reason). One from Deut 25:4 “and” another from _______ (fill in the blank)?

A. Some other portion within the OT
B. Luke 10:7
C. Trump

 

[for_his_glory]

Take a deep breath, clear your mind and read 1st Timothy 5:18 (it’s 1st Tim not 2nd Tim, BTW) again. Now:

Paul makes two quotations (the and is there for a reason). One from Deut 25:4 “and” another from _______ (fill in the blank)?

A. Some other portion within the OT
B. Luke 10:7
C. Trump

Thank you for the correction as I meant 1 Timothy not 2 Timothy.

Yes, Paul made reference as what was already written in the first five books of the Septuagint as calling it scripture being the collective writings of Moses that make up the Torah. The letters that the Apostles wrote and sent to certain people including the various churches were not yet collective until many years later.

The collective of the OT was compiled and completed around 300 BCE known as the Septuagint that Jesus knew and quoted from. This would have been the same with Paul as he quoted Deuteronomy 25:4. I think it was around the 4th century when the collective that makes up the NT was officially added to the Septuagint as we know being the Holy Bible today.

 

[chessman]

Paul made reference as what was already written in the first five books of the Septuagint ...

Actually Paul didn’t mention the first five books of the Septuagint. But maybe you can point out where you find the reference, and I quote; “The worker is worthy of his wages” within the first five books of the Septuagint.

The collective of the OT was compiled and completed around 300 BCE

You just made two statements about the collective of the OT using the conjunction “and”:
1. The OT was compiled around 300 BCE
and
2. The OT was completed around 300 BCE.

Paul makes two statements about “Scripture” using the conjunction “and”:

The “Scripture” says;
1. “You shall not muzzle a threshing ox”
and
2. “The worker is worthy of his wages”

BOTH were Scripture being taught in the church at the time Paul wrote 1 Timothy (see v14 if you don’t believe me). The problem for your theory that both came from the first five books of the Septuagint is that only #1 is written in the first five books of the Septuagint. #2 is written in the NT Scripture. Namely in Luke’s Gospel.

 

[Conqueror]

Paul, an apostle - not from men nor through man,
but through Jesus Christ and God the Father ........ (Ga 1:1).

I neither received it (the gospel) from man, nor was I taught it,
but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ (Ga 1:12).

Paul knew that he was given the word of God !!!!



the gospel of God which He promised before
through His prophets in the Holy Scriptures (Romans 1:1-2)

Paul didn't refer to the OT, but specifically to the prophets.


.

Your opinion is duly noted.

Ro 2:6 quotes Psalm 62:12 and Proverbs 24:12
Ro 3:4 quotes Psalm 51:4
Ro 3:12 quotes Ecclesiastes 7:20
Ro 11:3 quotes 1 Kings 19:10, 14
Ro 11:4 quotes 1 Kings 19:18
Ro 11:35 quotes Job 41:11

So your opinion is, again, duly noted.

Those books weren't by inspired prophets,
which means that Paul would have received his gospel through man.

I neither received it (the gospel) from man, nor was I taught it,
but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ (Ga 1:12).

Consider yourself refuted by Paul.



.

 

[Jim Parker]

Those books weren't by inspired prophets,
which means that Paul would have received his gospel through man.

I neither received it (the gospel) from man, nor was I taught it,
but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ (Ga 1:12).

Consider yourself refuted by Paul.

Paul QUOTED those verses.
If Paul quoted those verses then, according to YO)U, they are inspired.
Consider your self refuted by yourself.

 

[Conqueror]

Those books weren't by inspired prophets,
which means that Paul would have received his gospel through man.

I neither received it (the gospel) from man, nor was I taught it,
but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ (Ga 1:12).

Consider yourself refuted by Paul.

.

Paul QUOTED those verses.
If Paul quoted those verses then, according to YO)U, they are inspired.
Consider your self refuted by yourself.

Paul didn't receive his gospel through man or OT works,
but directly through revelation of Jesus.

It will make no difference even if you could prove
that those works were written by prophets.




.

 

[Bull of the Woods]

Paul didn't receive his gospel through man or OT works,
but directly through revelation of Jesus.

It will make no difference even if you could prove
that those works were written by prophets.




.

Where do you stand on the epistle of Jude? A half-brother of Christ most believe. Was he an apostle and therefore a legitimate scripture writer?
How about the unidentfied writer of Hebrews?

 

[Jim Parker]

Where do you stand on the epistle of Jude? A half-brother of Christ most believe. Was he an apostle and therefore a legitimate scripture writer?
How about the unidentfied writer of Hebrews?

Right.
And should we ignore the Gospel's of Mark and Luke and Acts and James since none of them were apostles or prophets?
None of this is making any sense to me.

iakov the fool

 

[chessman]

Paul made reference as what was already written in the first five books of the Septuagint as calling it scripture being the collective writings of Moses that make up the Torah.

Are you going to show where in the Torah Scripture says; “The worker is worthy of his wages”?

 

[Bull of the Woods]

Issac working seven years each for Leah and Rachel?

 

[for_his_glory]

Actually Paul didn’t mention the first five books of the Septuagint. But maybe you can point out where you find the reference, and I quote; “The worker is worthy of his wages” within the first five books of the Septuagint.



You just made two statements about the collective of the OT using the conjunction “and”:
1. The OT was compiled around 300 BCE
and
2. The OT was completed around 300 BCE.

Paul makes two statements about “Scripture” using the conjunction “and”:

The “Scripture” says;
1. “You shall not muzzle a threshing ox”
and
2. “The worker is worthy of his wages”

BOTH were Scripture being taught in the church at the time Paul wrote 1 Timothy (see v14 if you don’t believe me). The problem for your theory that both came from the first five books of the Septuagint is that only #1 is written in the first five books of the Septuagint. #2 is written in the NT Scripture. Namely in Luke’s Gospel.

1 Timothy 5:18 Paul is actually quoting Deuteronomy 25:4 Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn which is the 5th book of Moses in the Septuagint. What Paul said in 1 Timothy 5:..........And, The labourer is worthy of his reward, is what Paul wrote in His letter to Timothy, but not yet set as scripture as the NT was not compiled yet. Now we have scripture called the NT as we read what Paul wrote in his letter. It's all the letters that became scripture.