Pauline Epistle not by Paul

I've not expressed any opinion on the subject but have a question for you.

If the scriptures are inspired by God, does it really matter who we think wrote them?

Rob

 

First of all, as you already know, just because a person writes anything on here doesn't make it true. Sometimes, all of us write just to see what we say in print. :tonofbricks:

You need to trust in what the Bible says. Study it. Start a life long love affair with its teachings. But more than that love the one who wrote His book to us. Trust the Holy Spirit to lead you into His Truth. That's His job.

 

I never heard that. Of course there is continuing doubt as to who wrote Hebrews but that doesn’t detract from its canonicity. There is similar debate over whether John wrote Revelation and whether Peter wrote 2 Peter. Most of the doubters, however, would be found teaching in universities that are so liberal they could hardly be called Christian. Bart Ehrman at the University of North Carolina comes to mind.

 

Personally I find the arguments a bit too scholastic for interaction, it doesn’t matter to me.
The way I see it, lawyers couldn’t prove who killed Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman. Do we really think that we can be sure that a certain person did or didn’t write a portion of scripture?

Personally I err on the side of Pauline authorship but others give some persuasive argument to the contrary and still manage to revere the scriptures.

Their argument is that by the standards of the time there was no stigma attached pseudonymous authorship and that we must not judge the literary conventions of past ages by the ethics of modern times.

Rob

 

Sure it does when raising doubt about the authors are a tool to discredit scripture.

 

Well then you have a problem with God, He's the one that inspired them. :laugh:

Rob

 

That's not the issue at hand.

A book cannot be inerrant while containing a false authorship claim.


If the autographs attribute a letter to Paul, then either

A) Paul wrote it.

or

B) The book is errant.

 

I wish Bart Ehrman was a Duke instead. :laugh:

Sorry, just had to say this....back to the topic

What are they saying is evidence as to Paul not writing them?

 

“What God has made clean you must not call profane.” :saint:

Again I’m not arguing from my persuasion, I have no cards in this hand.
Here’s a quote from an author that doesn’t support the Pauline authorship of the Pastoral epistles.

Rob

 

This is ridiculous splitting of hairs that only hyper-intellectuals care about.

 

And the relevance of this would be?

It's simple logic. If not-A is true, and A is claimed to be true, the proposition is false. A and Not-A are mutually exclusive.

Either Paul was responsible for the content or he wasn't.

What we know for certain is that the texts claim Pauline authorship.

If the authorship is non-Pauline, then the text is in error.

This does not answer the extent of authorship (such as secretaries, etc.), but it addresses a fundamental point. If Paul had nothing to do with 1 or 2 Timothy, then the biblical text is in error.

 

If Paul claimed to write them and Paul didn't write them, someone lied. There's no other way around that. If Peter claimed to write an epistle and didn't, then someone lied. Hebrews is a different animal altogether seeing it wasn't signed by anyone. Those that were signed are not up for discussion.

 

It's hard to tell anything about Bill. He loves shock value drive by posting.

 

How about:

C) The book was written by Paul...but a different "Paul."

Just a thought...didn't say it was a good one...

 

Well, since I don't claim to be an intellectual, does anyone have a time machine I can borrow? I will report my findings promptly. (after I take a side trip to punch Adam in the nose for starting all this):laugh: