Changes

But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings which are able to instruct you for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. '''All scripture is inspired by God''' and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work. (2 Timothy 3:14-17 RSVCE ''boldface emphasis added'')}}

But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings which are able to instruct you for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. '''All scripture is inspired by God''' and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work. (2 Timothy 3:14-17 RSVCE ''boldface emphasis added'')}}

'''It is proper and licit to refer to the sacred writings of non-Christian religions as being the "scriptures" of those religions.''' However, it is not proper or licit for Christians to refer to them as "inspired" scriptures, or to quote them as if they were equal to the Bible. The text of 2 Timothy 3:17 ("''All scripture is inspired by God''") is quoted by some [[Historical-critical method (Higher criticism)#"illegitimate historical-critical findings".|liberalist scholars]] and [[New age movement|New Age theologians]] as if the word "scripture" also refers to and embraces within its meaning the sacred scriptures of non-Christian religions. This is a complete violation of the integral meaning of the text as written by [[Saint Paul]]. Such an application takes it totally out of context (see [[Cafeteria Christianity#Proof texts|Proof text]] and [[Eisegesis]]). This is an example of using the Bible itself to mock the unique claims of Christianity by using [[sophistry]], and is a prime example also of the danger of any [[Cafeteria Christianity#Proof texts|literalist]] reading of the words of the Bible apart from two millennia of established Christian tradition of understanding and [[Hermeneutics|interpreting the Bible]]. The liberal theologian who studies non-biblical sacred texts is willing to say,  

'''It is proper and licit to refer to the sacred writings of non-Christian religions as being the "scriptures" of those religions.''' However, it is not proper or licit for Christians to refer to them as "inspired" scriptures, or to quote them as if they were equal to the Bible. The text of 2 Timothy 3:17 ("''All scripture is inspired by God''") is quoted by some [[Historical-critical method (Higher criticism)#"illegitimate historical-critical findings".|liberalist scholars]] and [[New age movement|New Age theologians]] as if the word "scripture" also refers to and embraces within its meaning the sacred scriptures of non-Christian religions. This is a complete violation of the integral meaning of the text as written by [[Saint Paul]]. Such an application takes it totally out of context (see [[Proof text]] and [[Eisegesis]]). This is an example of using the Bible itself to mock the unique claims of Christianity by using [[sophistry]], and is a prime example also of the danger of any literalist reading of the words of the Bible apart from two millennia of established Christian tradition of understanding and [[Hermeneutics|interpreting the Bible]]. The liberal theologian who studies non-biblical sacred texts is willing to say,  

:"All of these writings are sacred scriptures. That means they too were inspired. Even St. Paul himself says they are inspired by God, for he says, ' All scripture is inspired by God', and all of these are scriptures."  

:"All of these writings are sacred scriptures. That means they too were inspired. Even St. Paul himself says they are inspired by God, for he says, ' All scripture is inspired by God', and all of these are scriptures."  

This is a liberal abuse of the literal meaning of scripture, especially in the context of [[Christianity]]—it is an illustrative example of the logical fallacy of the [[Loaded question]].

This is a liberal abuse of the literal meaning of scripture, especially in the context of [[Christianity]]—it is an illustrative example of the logical fallacy of the [[Loaded question]].