|
|
Bible Questions and Spiritual Discussion
| |
James Griffey
|
10/31/2013 22:34 |
insofar as 'bible-idolatry', I'd say God may have failed then! The manuscript datings are remarkably accurate!
Funny how you note that the oldest new testament book was not even quoted in the west until 350 CE!
|
| |
Catholica
|
11/01/2013 09:12 |
I have little doubt that the manuscript datings are accurate. But these are copies aren't they? I'm talking about the originals. To the best of my knowledge those autographs are no longer extant.
Also I thought that scholars believe that 1 Thessalonians is the oldest NT book. In your research, was James the oldest book? This particular reference said James was not quoted til 350.
|
| |
Ted C
|
11/01/2013 11:02 |
I just think it's interesting that enlightenment and modern "scholars" (read: "biblical criticism" advocates) discount 25,000 copies with 5% variance (none of it doctrinal) of the New Testament because of reading something into a literal handful of copies of Josephus or something like that with 30% or 40% variance, etc. (That's not a real example [I think], I'm just throwing out some realistic numbers). We have much better manuscript evidence for the New Testament than we do for Shakespeare!
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/people-places/shakespeare.html
|
| |
James Griffey
|
11/01/2013 23:37 |
NIV study notes and a few 'biblically educated' people I know place James as the first book in the bible, c.a. early 40's CE, Andre. I realize that the dating is up for grabs to an extent though.
Ted, you hit the nail on the head! The scholars want to believe the classics are accurate to a 't', but the more reliable biblical documents they want to discredit ravenously. Bias is present, eh?
|
| |
Catholica
|
11/06/2013 12:02 |
I wonder if those who attribute James to such an early date perhaps attribute it to a different "James". If James the apostle wrote the book, then his early death would necessitate an early dating. But I believe that it was a different James that wrote the book. Anyhoo..
|
| |
Davidwayne Lackey
|
11/08/2013 23:13 |
I believe James is attributed to the Brother of Jesus by most Protestant scholars and not the Apostle James. I know this is a touchy doctrinal subject with most Roman Catholic scholars. The date has not been exclusively discerned though so I don't think the Apostle James can be ruled out. The fact that it was hotly debated before inclusion to the Cannon may indicate that it was thought to be done, by what some thought was, by the brother of Jesus. A direct contradiction to main Catholic doctrine as I understand it today. I am curious to know if there were notes taken on the arguments before inclusion and were they written down and do they still exist.
|
| |
Ted C
|
11/11/2013 10:33 |
I ~almost~ agree with Martin Luther (he's controversial too!) on the Book of James, but at the end of the day I do believe it is inspired and belongs in the cannon. I tend to think it was Jesus' brother James. I also tend to think that Apollos wrote Hebrews. Of course, now we see through a glass dimly...
|
| |
Davidwayne Lackey
|
11/11/2013 19:37 |
When you take in to account the known writing style of Paul, I would have to think without reservation that Hebrews was written by Paul, or at least dictated by Paul. Although I have to confess that I have not read anything by Apollos that was not dictated to him.
|
| |
James Griffey
|
11/23/2013 23:54 |
I am very inclined, David, to consider Hebrews as a Pauline writing. The writing style is definitely very similar to Paul's writings. However, there are two reasons why I am inclined to believe that it is not Paul.
1. There was no greeting to a group of people or community, which Paul always placed at the front of his letters
2. The letter to the Hebrews is directed at...the Hebrews first and foremost (although we all gain by reading it), while Paul is the self - described "apostle to the Gentiles"
it could have been Paul's understudy, Barnabas. He was practically Paul's son in all but birth so the similar style would definitely support that theory (which is popular too).
Here, I think it's fun to wonder aimlessly about who wrote this book...
|
| |
Davidwayne Lackey
|
11/25/2013 20:42 |
I do note that Hebrews is the only writing where there is not an introduction by Paul himself. That could be simply because that part of the letter didn't survive for whatever reason. A week assumption I know since it was Paul's habit to introduce himself at the beginning of his letters he dictated as was his habit. Not that he was illiterate but it was custom for the one in charge to dictate to a Scribe that would have perfect lettering.
You have a good argument for the case that Barnabas, being a student of Paul's, may have had his style of discourse. I think the same argument could be made for Timothy too. Still the letter was so Pauline in style I find it hard to believe anyone but Paul wrote it. Even a devout student is going to have something different style wise especially when writing a discourse like the letter to the Hebrews, even if his style is similar. I don't see it myself. If it was someone trying to write in the Pauline style, he did a very good job of it.
|
(page
1
2)
|
