Did the writers of the New Testament regard their writings as Scripture?

We are fully justified therefore in regarding the testimony of the apostles with the utmost seriousness, seeing that they were such highly-favoured servants of God. Now what is their testimony? (1) "For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God" (1 Thess. 2:13). Need I comment on so clear and emphatic a statement? (2) "If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord" (1 Cor. 14:36-37). As comment, I would add the next verse: "If any man be ignorant let him be ignorant." Notice that inspiration is taken as an axiom, not needing proof. (3) "The things of God knoweth no man but the Spirit of God. Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God: that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth" (1 Cor. 2:11-13). Not only is this a statement that the apostles are inspired, but that verbally the Holy Ghost guided them what to write. (4) "I say the truth in Christ, I lie not" (Rom. 9:1). Though he might well have claimed apostolic authority, as he does elsewhere, here he states that it is in Christ that he is speaking. (5) "He that despiseth, despiseth not man, but God, who hath also given unto us his Holy Spirit" (1 Thess. 4:8). That is to say, the writings at which they scoffed were not the writings of men at all, but of God! (6) Paul characterizes his epistles as "not the word of man, but the word of God" (1 Thess. 2:13). (7) "For the Scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And the labourer is worthy of his reward" (1 Tim. 5:18). Now one of these quotations is from the Old Testament (Deuteronomy) and the second from the New Testament (Luke 10:7). Both are called by the name of Scripture, and appealed to as decisive authority. The Old Testament we have seen to be inspired, and the New is here stated to be of equal authority. (8) "But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you" (1 Peter 1:25). The words of the apostles are thus stated to be the "word of the Lord!" (9) "That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us, the apostles of the Lord and Saviour" (2 Peter 3:2). The words of the prophets are put on high authority (we have already seen them to be inspired) and the words of the apostles are put on equal authority. (10) "Even as Our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things: in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction" (2 Peter 3:15-16). What a striking testimony to the inspiration of Paul's Epistles, which, note, were written according to the wisdom given unto him! Incidentally, it is a proof of the Pauline authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews. The Epistles are stated as scriptures, which are, according to 2 Tim. 3:16, divinely inspired. "All scripture is given by inspiration of God." The other scriptures would refer to the three Synoptic Gospels and the Acts (St. John's Gospel was not then written). Thus in this one passage we are told that almost the whole of the New Testament is inspired (11) "But now is made manifest and by prophetic scriptures [literal translation] according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith" (Rom. 16:26). This refers to the New Testament, for the secret was kept since the world began, but was made manifest at the beginning of the new dispensation. Here, then, the New Testament writings are declared to be scriptures, and as such, therefore, inspired. (12) We may now quote a passage which is a remarkable one in many ways: "But I speak by permission, not of commandment." "Unto the married I command: yet not I, but the Lord." … "But to the rest speak I, not the Lord." "Now concerning virgins, I have no commandment of the Lord: yet I give my judgment as one that has obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful." "But she is happier if she so abide, after my judgment, and I think also that I have the Spirit of the Lord (1 Cor. 7:6, 10, 12, 25, 40). Now, as may well be supposed, many fault-finders quote this as a definite proof of non-inspiration. Of course, the apostle says nothing of the kind. Here he distinguishes between his judgment, as to which he could yet appeal to them as having the Spirit to form and guide his experience, and a revelation from the Lord which constituted a commandment.

In 2 Peter 3:15-16 the author puts the writings of the apostle Paul on the same level with the “other scriptures” (the writings of the OT) while writing: “As also in all his epistles, ... which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.” The canon of the OT had been established for a long time. The OT is referred to as “the scriptures” (compare Luke 24:32.45; John 5:39). The Holy Spirit had been at work in the authors of both OT and NT by inspiration and he worked to the effect that the recipients or readers accepted these writings as coming from God. This we see also with Peter. Similarly the Apostle Paul in 1 Tim. 5:18 refers to a verse of the OT (Deut. 25:4) and one of the NT (Luke 10:7) with the introductory words: “For the scripture says.” In these two examples we definitely see that the collection of NT writings had already begun at that time and that they were considered as godly authority as were the writings of the OT.

In terms of affection the Apostle links Paul with himself as a witness of “these things” to the Hebrew believers. He speaks of Paul's writings as forming part of the Scriptures and warns us that there are those “untaught and ill-established” who wrest his writings, as well as other Scriptures, to their own destruction.

The New Testament, as well as the Old, is vouched for in the general statement of 2 Tim. 3:16, "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God." The word "Scripture" I admit, merely means "writing," but it is the technical term for the sacred books, and understood as such. We are quite understood when we say "the Bible," which, after all, simply means "the Book." Consequently whatever comes under the heading of "Scripture" is inspired of God. Thus Paul's writings are vouched for, including (and I suppose specially referring to) the epistle to the Hebrews, in 2 Peter 3:16. Paul calls his epistles "Scripture" himself in Romans 16:25-26, where read "prophetic Scriptures," not "the Scriptures of the prophets." And in Timothy 5:18, he quotes from Luke 10, and says "The scripture says."

The New, be it remembered, has come to us from the pens of some of the apostles of our Lord and Saviour, and their co-labourers. In 1 Corinthians 2:13 we have the Apostle Paul claiming inspiration for verbal utterances of his own and of the other apostles when conveying the truths of Divine revelation. In 1 Corinthians 14:37 he asserts that his writings are "the commandments of the Lord." In 2 Peter 3:15-16 we have the Apostle Peter corroborating the epistles of Paul and putting them on a par with "the other scriptures."

He now casts us upon Scripture specially. In v. 15, it is the Old Testament Scriptures which Timothy had known. In verse 16 he embraces "all Scripture." Scripture is the point - that which was written. Peter stamps Paul's writings with the authority of the other Scriptures. He says they are Scripture (2 Peter 3:16). The man who can do this was conscious he was writing Scripture himself.

Let us turn to the rule he has given by which we are to know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error. Notice that in the first place he insists on the divine origin of the apostolic mission. He says, "We are of God;" which means that those in apostolic times who had introduced and established Christianity had done it by the authority of God; that by divine sanction, by the Spirit of God, they had given the faith its permanent form — the form in which it was to be handed down to succeeding generations. John teaches that the New Testament Scriptures are given to us by the Spirit of God, and to be held as such. If we speak of teachers, since the days of the apostles, we need ask but one question: Do they hear the apostles and prophets who by the Holy Spirit have given us the New Testament Scriptures? John says: "He that knoweth God heareth us" (ver. 6). The way to know whether a teacher or prophet is of God, therefore, is by the teaching he brings. Does he teach apostolic doctrine and practice? Whatever his claim may be, if he does not do this he has no claim to be received as sent of God.

This significant instruction demands the most careful attention. It will at once be observed that the apostolic communications are put on a level with the written Word, the Old Testament scriptures, with which Timothy had been acquainted from a child. (See chapter 1:5.) These communications have since been committed to writing, and are now found in the epistles of the New Testament; but at that time they were conveyed to the Church through inspired men, such as the Apostle Paul. And it is of the utmost moment to observe that Paul claims for them divine authority, and can thus exhort his child in the faith to continue in the things he had learned and believed, knowing, as he did, from whom he had learned them; that is, in his case, from the Apostle.

We have a particular class of writings, and this class of writings is inspired and is called "the scriptures." Romans 16:26 defines this principle very clearly. "But is now made manifest [that is, the mystery], and by prophetic writings [see Greek], according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith." This passage again points out that class of writings which we call "the scriptures," writings which have the authority of a revelation — of an oracle from God: they are "prophetic writings." In short, to sum up this part of the testimonies which we possess, Peter, in his Second Epistle, recognizing these writings as the scriptures, tells us, when speaking of Paul's Epistles, that those who are "unlearned and unstable wrest them, as they do the other scriptures"; hereby proving that Paul's Epistles form a part of "the scriptures," a term very well understood, and having the same meaning then as now, as the Lord's own words demonstrate. I know, indeed, that Mr. Scherer rejects this Epistle, but I do not accept his dictum as an authority.

12 The existence then of prophetic scriptures — of the scriptures of the New Testament, which have the authority of "the word of God" — of "the commandments of the Lord," is most clearly proved. He who finds more authority in the words of the Lord's apostle than in those of the author of the letter — he who reveres the word of God and the revelations of God — will have no doubt on the subject. But if there exist writings of John or Peter, making the same claim, addressing Christians in the same manner, and that in perfect accordance with the same divine ministry committed to these apostles (as, for instance, the Epistles of Peter to the circumcision), could a Christian say, "the writings of one apostle are inspired, but those of another are not," although entirely of the same nature, and although the writer speaks expressly in the name of his apostolate, and as exercising the authority of his mission? I assume now their-authenticity, and that they are really the writings they claim to be. We need not look for the words, "I am inspired." We find in them the unequivocal expression of authority. The faith of Christians consequently clothes them with this authority. The authors announce the truth, as having a right to impose their thoughts upon the acceptance of Christians, and in fact they do so impose them.

Take the First Epistle of Peter. Does he not speak with full authority as an apostle? And when Paul said, "If any obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him"; had not that written word apostolic authority? When John said, "We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us" (1 John 4:6), exercising thus divine authority over the conscience, do you think he meant that these words, pronounced so solemnly, had not the same authority? Such a conclusion would involve a palpable contradiction; for if they rejected his words, they did not hear him. One cannot attribute authority to his words spoken elsewhere, without attributing it to the words which claim that authority. If I say, "I command you to obey me," the command which I give, and the authority of that which I have already commanded, stand or fall together. I cannot believe the authority of Peter to be less than that of John or of Paul. He was sent forth with the same authority by the Lord.

13 What then have we proved? That there is a class of writings called the "scriptures" — which are inspired — which possess absolute authority as the word of God — which are recognized as such by the Lord and His apostles, and are constantly referred to by them with the greatest solemnity. We have found, that a very large portion of the New Testament is spoken of as forming part of these scriptures; that there is a body of writings attached to the apostolic work, "prophetic scriptures," employed by the command of God, and having the authority of the word of God. The question then is narrowed into very small dimensions. The assertion that there is no inspiration, no divine authority for "the word," has been proved entirely false. It is in flagrant opposition to the authority of the Lord and the apostles, and it seeks to overthrow that which they maintain. The only question then is this, Does such or such a book form a part of this inspired collection? A very important question, but one which, by the very fact of its being asked, pre-supposes the existence and the authority of the word of God, and seeks only not to confound human pretensions with the divine authority which it reveres, and of which it seeks to preserve the full value untouched and without alloy.

There cannot be a more unfounded or false assertion than that the gospels or epistles do not present the Old Testament and themselves as inspired. They formally claim inspiration both for Old and New. Πᾶσα γραφὴ θεόπνευστος does not simply apply to the Old Testament. It is the assertion of the character of πᾶσα γραφὴ And in Romans 16:26 prophetic writings (for this is the true force) are said to be means used for propagating the truth; and Peter, in his second epistle, refers to Paul's epistles as scriptures. Scripture is not an essay on inspiration. Nor does it in every epistle or book set about to say "I am inspired." It would be a proof that it was not, and feared people should say so; but there are the most distinct testimonies, when the occasion occurs, that it is so. What can be stronger than saying — "The scripture foreseeing that God would justify the heathen by faith?" It is treating the scripture as if it were God Himself, because it is God's own expression of His mind which scripture gives. The Lord Himself gives testimony to inspiration, and to the inspiration of scripture, which is what rationalists deny. The referring merely to the New Testament is a subterfuge; and the New Testament gives the plainest declaration of the inspiration of the testimony by which Christianity was founded, and that the New Testament, as other scriptures, is inspired.