ANSWER.
The Aduersarie in this passage vseth certaine Arguments to prooue that Protestants misunderstand the Text of S. Paul, 2. Timoth. 3.15, 16. when they vrge the same to maintaine the sufficiencie of sole Scripture, to be a ground for all Christians finally to rest their faith vpon.
His first Argument is, The Apostle saith not absolutely that the Scriptures are able to make all men wise vnto Saluation, but parti∣cularly to Timothie, a man instructed aforehand, and formerly 〈◊〉〈◊〉 [ C] all substantiall grounds of Doctrine and Discipline, they are able 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to make thee (being such a one, and so prepared) wise &c.
To this I answere, 1. That although sentences of holy Scripture are sometimes restrained to the personall or particu∣lar subiect of which they are first spoken, yet this is not gene∣rall; and when the same happeneth, it must be prooued by better Arguments than by the bare Emphasis of a word. For God said to Ioshua (a man qualified aboue the ordinarie ranke) I will not leaue thee nor forsake thee, Ioshua 1. 5. yet the promise implied in this Text, is generall and common to all iust per∣sons, [ D] Heb. 13.5. Our Sauiour granted ministeriall power to remit sinnes, by speciall commission to the Apostles, and de∣liuering this commission to them, he breathed the holy Ghost into them, saying, Receiue yee the holy Ghost, &c. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 20.22. Neuer∣thelesse our Aduersaries affirme, that this authority was not on∣ly granted them, but to other Ministers of Christ which are not personally qualified as the Apostles were.
Secondly, if the particular circumstance of Timothie his per∣son, expressed in the single word, Thee, 2. Tim. 3.15. do limit S. Pauls doctrine, concerning the Scripture, in 〈◊◊〉〈◊◊〉 [ E] then, where more circumstances are found in Texts con∣cerning Traditions, the same may be answered as the Iesuit doth this place of S. Paules.
For example, 2. Thessal. 2.15. The Apostle saith, Therefore