[Cross-poseted in Christianity Unplugged]
In their book, I Don’t Have Enough Faith To Be An Atheist, evangelical authors Norman Geisler and Frank Turek assert that between the years 62-65, Paul alluded to a verse from the Gospel According to Luke (10:7) and called it “Scripture.”
That’s a busy assertion for more reasons than I wish to deal with here, though at least two things must be acknowledged in passing. The reference in question (1 Tim 5:18) is from one of the Pastoral Epistles, which most contemporary biblical scholars 1) deny that Paul wrote and 2) assume was written some decades after his death. Nothing I say here hinges on who wrote the verse in question or when. What matters is that the verse in question is part of the New Testament.
What interests me is the possibility of one NT author referring to another NT work as “Scripture.”
1 Timothy 5:18 reads as follows in the KJV: For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward. (The quote about the ox is from Deuteronomy 25:4.)
Luke 10:7 reads as follows in the KJV: And in the same house remain, eating and drinking such things as they give: for the labourer is worthy of his hire. Go not from house to house.
The phrase we are focused on is “the labourer is worthy of his hire." (Some translations use "wages.")
My Bibles—a modest set, to be sure—note the allusion to DT 25: 4 (-not to muzzle the ox) but give *no* OT citation for “the labourer is worthy of his hire / reward / wages.”
1) Does anyone here have a Bible whose notes contain a reference to this being an OT passage?
2) If this is *not* an OT passage, is there a reasonable alternative to thinking that the author of 1 Timothy 5:18 was referring to Luke 10:7 *as* Scripture? (One possibility might be that the phrase comprised part of the Oral Torah that some first century Jews, including Pharisees such as Paul, might have considered Scripture.)
3) What do you see as the significance—if true—that one NT author refers to another as having written “Scripture”?
In their book, I Don’t Have Enough Faith To Be An Atheist, evangelical authors Norman Geisler and Frank Turek assert that between the years 62-65, Paul alluded to a verse from the Gospel According to Luke (10:7) and called it “Scripture.”
That’s a busy assertion for more reasons than I wish to deal with here, though at least two things must be acknowledged in passing. The reference in question (1 Tim 5:18) is from one of the Pastoral Epistles, which most contemporary biblical scholars 1) deny that Paul wrote and 2) assume was written some decades after his death. Nothing I say here hinges on who wrote the verse in question or when. What matters is that the verse in question is part of the New Testament.
What interests me is the possibility of one NT author referring to another NT work as “Scripture.”
1 Timothy 5:18 reads as follows in the KJV: For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward. (The quote about the ox is from Deuteronomy 25:4.)
Luke 10:7 reads as follows in the KJV: And in the same house remain, eating and drinking such things as they give: for the labourer is worthy of his hire. Go not from house to house.
The phrase we are focused on is “the labourer is worthy of his hire." (Some translations use "wages.")
My Bibles—a modest set, to be sure—note the allusion to DT 25: 4 (-not to muzzle the ox) but give *no* OT citation for “the labourer is worthy of his hire / reward / wages.”
1) Does anyone here have a Bible whose notes contain a reference to this being an OT passage?
2) If this is *not* an OT passage, is there a reasonable alternative to thinking that the author of 1 Timothy 5:18 was referring to Luke 10:7 *as* Scripture? (One possibility might be that the phrase comprised part of the Oral Torah that some first century Jews, including Pharisees such as Paul, might have considered Scripture.)
3) What do you see as the significance—if true—that one NT author refers to another as having written “Scripture”?
posted by:
|
Boca Raton
|
-
Re: 1 Timothy 5:18
Thu, October 4, 2007 - 9:33 AMMat 10:10 Nor scrip for [your] journey, neither two coats, neither shoes, nor yet staves: for the workman is worthy of his meat. -
-
Re: 1 Timothy 5:18
Thu, October 4, 2007 - 11:22 AMin the margin;
deut 25:4
matt 10:10 as Ricardo said
luke 10:07
1 cor 9:9
post script;
gal 6:6
luke 10:7
1 cor 9:4-10
-
-
Re: 1 Timothy 5:18
Thu, October 4, 2007 - 11:26 AMisn't there something in Leviticus to allow workers to glean their wheat? -
-
Re: 1 Timothy 5:18
Thu, October 4, 2007 - 12:42 PMThe fields were never to be stripped; the needy could feed from the leavings. But that's about neediness, not about a laborer and wages. -
-
Re: 1 Timothy 5:18
Thu, October 4, 2007 - 12:45 PMI would love to know what all Paul meant by the term "Scripture." Some may have existed in his day that he did not know about, and some came to be written after his death.
I wasn't aware that he regarded any *NT* passages as Scripture. Indeed, I had been taught the opposite! So I apologize to anyone I may have said that to in a discussion!
-
-
-
-
-
Re: 1 Timothy 5:18
Fri, October 5, 2007 - 12:05 AMI think the key reference may be Deuteronomy 24:14, 15. When Jesus and Paul said "a workman is worthy of his hire" they may have both been using a common proverb that paraphrased this Mosaic law. That could explain why Paul called this aphorism "scripture."
