Allow me to go back to the question about the inspiration of the Bible. When Paul wrote to Timothy and said that ‘all scripture is God-breathed’ I concluded in my post on that verse that he was referring to the Old Testament only. But, asked one commentator, what about the point Peter makes in his second letter (2 Peter 3:15-16)? He seems to be saying that Paul’s letters are as inspired as ‘the other Scriptures’.

Paul's missing letter

Was Peter referring to all Paul’s writings or only some? I have no problem in believing that Paul was inspired by the Holy Spirit but there are a couple of issues we need to be clear about. First is the issue of Paul’s lost letter. In 1 Corinthians 5:9 he refers to a letter he had previously sent to the church in Corinth. Even the NIV Bible Commentary, which has a fairly conservative view on things, accepts that this is a reference to a separate letter Paul sent them rather than a reference to the earlier part of 1 Cor. This letter has so far not been found. Did Peter know of it? Did he consider it among Paul’s inspired writings? We just don’t know. If it were found would we then need to include it in our Bible?

Opinionated Paul

Second is the way Paul writes on some issues in 1 Corinthians 7. As you will be aware it is a section about sex and marital status. Consider these phrases: ‘My advice to the unmarried men …’; ‘To the married my instruction (not mine, but the Lord’s) …’; ‘We have no teaching from the Lord addressed to those in other situations, but my advice is …’; and finally ‘I have no specific instruction from the Lord … but I offer my opinion as one who is trustworthy.’ In no other passage of his letters does he differentiate in this way between what his advice is on an issue and what he believes is God’s word on it and yet he clearly knew the difference between these two kinds of advice – that at times he was giving God’s word and at others he was giving his own. What did Peter make of this?

Authentic Paul

As a third and final point I have to include reference to the in-depth scholarly work on Paul’s letters. A large body of opinion now states that some of the letters we have accepted as Paul’s were not actually penned by him. It is suggested that they are the work of later writers – disciples of Paul’s maybe, or people who knew his work and wanted to expand on it. They were included in the canon of the NT because they line up with the theology of Paul’s authentic letters. I realise that such biblical criticism will be anathema to many but I’m not sure we can so easily dismiss it.

The question then needs to be asked – what did Peter mean when he said ‘as our dear brother Paul wrote to you’? It isn’t quite as clear as we first read, is it?


Share