The Bible was NOT man made, it was Godly made

Hi all,Rahvin :

quote:

---

What if they completely contradict the Bible? What of the canons that include additional texts that the Council of Nicea determined were not inspired? What of the few churches who predate the Council and have a different canon? What of the Protestant canon that leaves out several books accepted by the Council of Nicea?

---

Just a reminder -
The Council of Nicea had nothing to do with choosing the canon.Iasion

quote:

---

The authors did know about some of the earlier books, but what difference does that make?

---

A HUGE difference.
They wrote books based on stories in the earlier books.Just like Star Wars fans write Luke Skywalker books to this day.

quote:

---

The four Gospels were written by four different men, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Some of them knew Jesus, and presented an eyewitness account, while others wrote stories they had heard from others.

---

The Gospel authors are unknown.
None of them met Jesus.Not one book of the NT was written by anyone who ever met any historical Jesus - that is the view of modern NT scholars.Iasion

'All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness.' -2 Timothy 3:16Actually,
the Greek is ambiguous - the passage is translated differently in many bibles :'All inspired Scripture is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness.' -2 Timothy 3:16Completely different meaning.Anyway,
Timothy was FORGED by someone else in Paul's name.Do you think a FORGERY is good evidence, gen ?Iasion

Hi all,

quote:

---

"4000-1000BC(approximately) - Scripture was written, inspired by God"

---

Rubbish.4000 BC ?
Bollocks.
Mankind wasn't even WRITING then.1000BC ?
Bollocks.
Literacy was not common in this period in the Bible lands.The OT was written probably 8th - 6th C. BCEThe various "Bibles" (you know there are several different canons, right?) were changed often over the years - books added, books removed.It's all man-made - nothing from God.Iasion

Hiya,The reasons why the Pastorals are considered pseudo-graphs (the polite word scholars use for forgeries) are summarised here :Norman Perrin summarises four reasons that have lead critical scholarship to regard the pastorals as inauthentic (The New Testament: An Introduction, pp. 264-5):

​

Vocabulary. While statistics are not always as meaningful as they may seem, of 848 words (excluding proper names) found in the Pastorals, 306 are not in the remainder of the Pauline corpus, even including the deutero-Pauline 2 Thessalonians, Colossians, and Ephesians. Of these 306 words, 175 do not occur elsewhere in the New Testament, while 211 are part of the general vocabulary of Christian writers of the second century. Indeed, the vocabulary of the Pastorals is closer to that of popular Hellenistic philosophy than it is to the vocabulary of Paul or the deutero-Pauline letters. Furthermore, the Pastorals use Pauline words ina non-Pauline sense: dikaios in Paul means "righteous" and here means "upright"; pistis, "faith," has become "the body of Christian faith"; and so on.

​

Literary style. Paul writes a characteristically dynamic Greek, with dramatic arguments, emotional outbursts, and the introduction of real or imaginary opponents and partners in dialogue. The Pastorals are in a quiet meditative style, far more characteristic of Hebrews or 1 Peter, or even of literary Hellenistic Greek in general, than of the Corinthian correspondence or of Romans, to say nothing of Galatians.

​

The situation of the apostle implied in the letters. Paul's situation as envisaged in the Pastorals can in no way be fitted into any reconstruction of Paul's life and work as we know it from the other letters or can deduce it from the Acts of the Apostles. If Paul wrote these letters, then he must have been released from his first Roman imprisonment and have traveled in the West. But such meager tradition as we have seems to be more a deduction of what must have happened from his plans as detailed in Romans than a reflection of known historical reality.

​

The letters as reflecting the characteristics of emergent Catholocism. The arguments presented above are forceful, but a last consideration is overwhelming, namely that, together with 2 Peter, the Pastorals are of all the texts in the New Testament the most distinctive representatives of the emphases of emergent Catholocism. The apostle Paul could no more have written the Pastorals than the apostle Peter could have written 2 Peter. From:
1 TimothyAny modern NT commentary should agree - the Pastorals have long been considered spurious.Iasion