James White's "God Breathed" Argument


#1

One of James White’s arguments for sola scriptura is that in
2 Timothy 3:16 it refers to scripture as “God Breathed.” and according to him, since the church, and sacred tradition, are not called God Breathed in scripture, therefore he concludes that only scripture is God Breathed.

But the problem with this is that the church IS called God Breathed

"(Jesus) said to them again, "Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, so I send you."
And when he had said this, **he breathed on them **and said to them, “Receive the holy Spirit.” (John 20:21-22)

here we see jesus (who is God) breathing on the diciples and commissioning them. It is at this point that we beleive that the church officially began and christ is breathing into the apostles his own authority.


#2

Well put! There’s also the bit in Genesis 2:7

"And God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. "


#3

It is not a “God Breathed” Church. In John 20:21, the Greek verb used is the aorist active indicative of emphusao, meaning to “breathe on”. The verse does not use “Theopneustos” God Breathed.


#4

whereinthebible.org/1%20Corinthians%207:12

12 For to the rest I speak, not the Lord. If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she consent to dwell with him, let him not put her away.

Would James want to remove this verse out of the Bible? :smiley:


#5

That’s because God was not Incarnate in Genesis, but He was in John. It’s God who’s doing the literal “breathing on”. That’s God Breathed. One doesn’t need to be a Greek expert to see that.


#6

Did Jesus “breath on” the Apostles? Yes or no.

Is Jesus God? Yes or no.

Did God “breathe on” the Apostles? Yes or no.

Did the Apostles form the leadership core of the Church at that time? Yes or no.

Did God “breathe on” the Church? Yes or no?


#7

Wow, one certainly needs to be wearing roman colored glasses to see that one.

That’s certainly novel to the RCC. Show me the infallibale interpretation?


#8

But the Greek, Randy, the Greek!


#9

You mean the infallible interpretation that Jesus is God? Is that what we’re reduced to now?


#10

big Yes.
If God didn’t “breath on” the Apostles, then it seems that this verse is no use:
whereinthebible.org/1%20Corinthians%207:12

12 For to the rest I speak, not the Lord. If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she consent to dwell with him, let him not put her away.

Should we take the verse out of the Bible now? :wink:


#11

Are you implying that I don’t need a magisterium to figure out Jesus is God? :cool:

Just would like to see your private interpretation of that verse echoed in scripture, history, or magesterium interpretation, not just the past 20 years of catholic apologetics.


#12

This is a circular argument.

“Only scripture (and not tradition) is God-breathed because scripture says it is God breathed”

By the same argument, one might suppose that the Koran is God-breathed because it also claims inspiration.


#13

So what relevance do you ascribe to the “Breathe on” reference kaycee?

How about the fifth ecumenical Church Council at Constantinople in 553’s assertion that “we rightly confess the doctrines that have been transmitted to us by the divine scriptures and the teachings of the holy fathers” (Canon 14). Christ’s original revelation was not given in the form of a written document but was the apostolic preaching to which Scripture and Tradition refers. Christ entrusted the gospel to a small number of people, revelation is personal, communicated after Christ by his chosen, personal witnesses and the New Testament is based on this Apostolic theme. The Church has always sought to maintain the Tradition of the Apostles even before scripture provided a permanent record of revelation. This is evidenced in the letters of St. Paul. Paul tells the Corinthians: -

*“I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you”(*1 Corinthians 11:2)

And he commands the Thessalonians: -

*“So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter”(*2 Thess. 2:15)

He even goes so far as to order: -

“Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us” ([size=2]2 Thess. 3:6)[/size]

To make sure that the Apostolic Tradition would be passed down after the deaths of the Apostles, Paul told Timothy: -

"What you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also”([size=2]2 Tim. 2:2)[/size]

[FONT=‘Times New Roman’][FONT=Arial][size=2]In this passage the Great Apostle refers to the first four generations of Apostolic succession—his own generation, Timothy’s generation, the generation Timothy will teach, and the generation they in turn will teach. St. Paul uses the word “gospel” (the Greek in the N.T. is [/FONT]εὐαγγέλιον)[/size][/FONT][FONT=Arial] on a number of occasions, never in reference to a written document.

[FONT=Arial]Christianity does not begin with doctrine or structure, but with people. It begins with a divine intervention that is God’s self-communication. In the God-man, Jesus, the constant human search is united with the divine answer. Revelation is an explanation of who God is; the revelation of the truth about human beings GS 22]. Jesus demonstrates to us who we are and who God is. [/FONT][/FONT]


#14

Doesn’t 2 Timothy 3:16, in context, refer to the Old Testament scriptures, according to many Protestant scholars? I really doesn’t say anything about the NT


#15

Well, if that’s the case, then their argument that scripture alone is sufficient says the NT is not necessary at all. Only the OT was written in it’s entirety at the time and the complete canon of scripture wouldn’t be decided for about 350 more years.


#16

It is your gross sweeping assumption that “tradition” means something other that what has already been written down in other epistles.

Give me one Apostolic Oral “Tradition”?

To make sure that the Apostolic Tradition would be passed down after the deaths of the Apostles, Paul told Timothy: -

"What you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also”([size=2]2 Tim. 2:2)[/size]

[FONT=‘Times New Roman’][FONT=Arial][size=2]In this passage the Great Apostle refers to the first four generations of Apostolic succession—his own generation, Timothy’s generation, the generation Timothy will teach, and the generation they in turn will teach. St. Paul uses the word “gospel[/size]” (the Greek in the N.T. is [/FONT]εὐαγγέλιον)[/FONT][FONT=‘Times New Roman’][FONT=Arial] on a number of occasions, never in reference to a written document.Is this some secret Gnostic teaching that only the apostles know about?

Again fill me in on Any specific teaching he refers to.


#17

Everything the 1st century church did in How they worshiped came from the oral instructions of the apostles.

You won’t find an order of worship anywhere in the scriptures.

How did they worship–they asked the apostles and the apostles told them.

What’s so hard to understand about that?

Is it beyond human comprehension to think that maybe just maybe Jesus taught the disciples things that are not written in the scriptures such as how they should worship and that the apostles relayed those details?

Is it beyond human comprehension to think that the worship of the church developed and changed as the Holy Spirit guided the apopstles as Jesus had promised?

Since that did happen and since the deatils of how worship was conducted were not in the scriptures is it beyond human comprehension to think that maybe just maybe those Oral Authoratative traditions given to the Apotles by Jesus weren’t written down because there was no need to write them down because oral Authority was valued and obeyed and since it developed and changed that those oral traditions in some minute details were lost?

And is it beyond human comprehension to think that maybe just mabe people living in say 130 AD weren’t concerned about such details and it didn’t bother them that they were lost?

So you see not having Oral Tradition written down makes 100% perfect sense–especially since the church ran 400 years without a set canon of scriptures to run by even if someone had been dumb enough back then to think that It Had to be Run That Way!

Nobody was that dumb back then–that would come many centuries later!


#18

OK, kaycee. Can you please explain for us the significance of God Breathed to the Bible. What is the mechanism of this God-breathed business?

Is the Bible God and the Bible breathed?
Or did God breathe onto/into/through the Bible?

Thank you.


#19

Run out of substantive refutations?


#20

[quote=kaycee]Are you implying that I don’t need a magisterium to figure out Jesus is God? :cool:
[/quote]

As for me I am stating straight up that you have a magisterium to figure out Jesus is God. No implying about it.

[quote=kaycee]Just would like to see your private interpretation of that verse echoed in scripture, history, or magesterium interpretation, not just the past 20 years of catholic apologetics.
[/quote]

Why the past 20 years? What happened then? Here is a link you might find useful. It has all the interpretation you’ll need to understand Catholic teaching. That is what you want to do, isn’t? Understand Catholic teaching?

vatican.va/ :slight_smile:


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.