Started By
Message

re: Does anyone actually believe this

Posted on 7/6/14 at 8:04 pm to
Posted by Stacked
Member since Apr 2012
5675 posts
Posted on 7/6/14 at 8:04 pm to
quote:

The only writer that's historical is Edit: Paul (Sorry), I think (And that one is a long shot). The rest are anonymous and appeared to have somewhat copied each other.


You realize the canon of the bible is made up of much more than the 6 books you've just cited, right? Of the 66 books of the bible, there are 39 identified authors. Geez dude, at least try to not say something completely wrong. shite!
Posted by StrawsDrawnAtRandom
Member since Sep 2013
21146 posts
Posted on 7/6/14 at 8:24 pm to
quote:


You realize the canon of the bible is made up of much more than the 6 books you've just cited, right? Of the 66 books of the bible, there are 39 identified authors. Geez dude, at least try to not say something completely wrong. shite!


Alright, I'll go ahead and go through the rest if you wish. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are just the, you know.

The Gospels. Which talk about Jesus

While the precise identity of the author is debated, the consensus is that this work was composed by a (Koine) Greek-speaking Gentile writing for an audience of Gentile Christians. -- Luke-Acts

Colossians, Ephesians, Second Epistle to the Thessalonians, Pastoral Epistles and Hebrews are all in dispute.

The author of First Timothy has been traditionally identified as the Apostle Paul. He is named as the author of the letter in the text (1:1). Nineteenth and twentieth century scholarship questioned the authenticity of the letter, with many scholars suggesting that First Timothy, along with Second Timothy and Titus, are not original to Paul, but rather an unknown Christian writing some time in the late-first-to-mid-2nd century. Many scholars now affirm this view.

Most modern critical scholars argue that 2 Timothy was not written by Paul but by an anonymous follower, after Paul's death in the First Century.

Scholars are not unanimous about the authenticity of the pastoral epistles. Titus is usually one of the three Pastoral epistles attributed to Paul. Titus has a very close affinity with 1 Timothy, sharing similar phrases and expressions and similar subject matter. While these epistles are traditionally attributed to Paul the Apostle, there are a few scholars who consider them pseudepigraphical. (Disputed)

The authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews is unknown. Traditionally, Paul the Apostle was thought to be the author, but most modern scholars generally agree that it was not written by him.

There are four views concerning the Epistle of James:

that the letter was written by James before the Pauline Epistles,
that the letter was written by James after the Pauline Epistles,
that the letter is pseudonymous,
that the letter comprises material originally from James but reworked by a later editor. -- Protip: No one knows for sure.

The authorship of 1 Peter has traditionally been attributed to the Apostle Peter because it bears his name and identifies him as its author (1:1). Although the text identifies Peter as its author the language, dating, style, and structure of this letter has led many scholars to conclude that this letter is pseudonymous. Many scholars are convinced that Peter was not the author of this letter because the author had to have a formal education in rhetoric/philosophy and an advanced knowledge of the Greek language.

(Second Epistle of Peter)Raymond E Brown and Bart Ehrman, among others, state that most biblical scholars have concluded Peter is not the author, and consider the epistle pseudepigraphical. Reasons for this include its linguistic differences from 1 Peter, its apparent use of Jude, possible allusions to 2nd-century gnosticism, encouragement in the wake of a delayed parousia, and weak external support.

The debate has continued over the author's identity as the apostle, the brother of Jesus, both, or neither. Some scholars have argued that since the author of that letter has not identified himself as an apostle and actually refers to the apostles as a third party, he cannot be identified with the Jude who is listed as one of the Twelve. (Jude)

More recent methods of scholarship, such as textual criticism, have been influential in suggesting that John the Apostle, John the Evangelist, and John of Patmos were three separate individuals. Differences in style, theological content, and familiarity with Greek between the Gospel of John, the epistles of John, and the Revelation are seen by some scholars as indicating three separate authors. (Revelation)

If I missed some, let me know.

Edit: For the copy and paste remark, would you have just accepted it on face value if I said they didn't have authors?

Holy frick, you didn't?

Come on, Stacked, get off my dick.
This post was edited on 7/6/14 at 8:26 pm
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter