Freethought & Rationalism Archive

outhouse · 07-31-2013, 10:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrMacSon

critical scholars like AQ Morton saw Galatians as the benchmark for refuting Pauline authorship of most other epistles; AQ Morton, J McLeman. Paul, the Man and the Myth (1966).

1966 really? You have to go back almost 50 years to find a source?

Quote:

F. R. McGuire

unknown. Google turns up nothing. Did you find this name at a unaccredited bloggers site?

Quote:

Robert Price

One credible scholar who is known to hold a fringe position. Congrats.

But it doesn't change this

Quote:

Galatians is one of the four letters of Paul known as the Hauptbriefe, which are universally accepted as authentic. It is typically dated c. 54 CE.

outhouse · 07-31-2013, 10:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

The Westar Institute, home of the Jesus Seminar, is about to come out with some new material at their fall conference. It will be interesting to see.

Yes it will.

outhouse · 07-31-2013, 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrMacSon

But the question is
Yes; pls answer Toto's questions.

and, why is 1 Thessalonians "undisputed" but not 2 Thessalonians??

Im not allowed to post wiki links.

But from Yales NT course, I can recall that the writing style was completely different. Its believed one of Pauls disciples possibly wrote it to add to it.

The link for the vid is posted up in the stickies section

outhouse · 07-31-2013, 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

I'm sorry, you are just out of your depth here.

No you are. You cannot refute scholars,, but you do well following 1 obscure fringe scholarship.

This does not overturn the thousands of scholars with real educations that exceed mine and yours.

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/1corinthians.html

First Corinthians is one of the four letters of Paul known as the Hauptbriefe, which are universally accepted to be authentic.The letter is usually dated c. 54/55 CE. Werner Georg Kummel states (Introduction to the New Testament, p. 275): "The genuineness of I Cor is not disputed: the letter is already clearly known in I Clem 37:5; 47:1-3; 49:5; Ign., Eph 16:1; 18:1; Rom 5:1; Phila 3:3."

Toto · 08-01-2013, 12:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

As far as Paul is concerned, the difference between you and me is I follow most scholars.

...

I see no evidence that you follow most scholars. You read some secondary or tertiary source that says that all scholars think X, and you say you agree. But you don't have a clue as to how the scholars reached their conclusions, or what the problems in the evidence might be.

Toto · 08-01-2013, 12:53 AM

Did Paul write Galatians by Frank R. McGuire

MrMacSon · 08-01-2013, 01:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

... You cannot refute scholars,, but you do well following 1 obscure fringe scholarship.

This does not overturn the thousands of scholars with real educations that exceed mine and yours.

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/1corinthians.html

First Corinthians is one of the four letters of Paul known as the Hauptbriefe, which are universally accepted to be authentic.The letter is usually dated c. 54/55 CE. Werner Georg Kummel states (Introduction to the New Testament, p. 275): "The genuineness of I Cor is not disputed: the letter is already clearly known in I Clem 37:5; 47:1-3; 49:5; Ign., Eph 16:1; 18:1; Rom 5:1; Phila 3:3."

yet

Quote:

"First and Second Corinthians have garnered particular suspicion, with some [biblical] scholars, among them

Edgar_Goodspeed and

Norman Perrin, supposing one or both texts as we have them today are actually amalgamations of multiple individual letters. There remains considerable discussion as to the presence of possible significant interpolations. However, such textual corruption is difficult to detect and even more so to verify, leaving little agreement as to the extent of the epistles' integrity."

Authorship_of_the_Pauline_epistles#The_.22undisput ed.22_epistles

mountainman · 08-01-2013, 06:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

universally accepted to be authentic.

This is a false statement.

Don't you even know what the word universal means?

εὐδαιμονία | eudaimonia

James The Least · 08-01-2013, 06:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

universally accepted as authentic.

What does this mean? is it a mystery?

It means that a group of scholars who start from certain assumptions about Paul agree that this letter is authentic.

Well said.

James The Least · 08-01-2013, 07:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

...

By the way, I find your rebuttal to what I posted very poor, it was more like a explanation or bad excuse. Your claim "who start from certain assumptions about Paul" is firmly unsubstantiated.

Unsubstantiated?? Please demonstrate this.

Do you know how Paul's letters are dated? Scholars in a previous generation started with the assumption that the Book of Acts contains a historically accurate chronology, and matched places in the letters with the chronology in Acts. But this was before the consensus swung to regarding Acts as lacking in historical value. So the dating of the letters is based on a demonstrably false assumption. But no one has resolved the difficulty - yet.

The Westar Institute, home of the Jesus Seminar, is about to come out with some new material at their fall conference. It will be interesting to see.

It's just as likely that the letters were written after Acts. That would explain Acts' silence about Paul writing letters. The writers asked themselves, "WWPW (What Would Paul Write)?" One of them was more prolific than the others, writing seven letters as Paul, while the others only wrote two or three. ALL the letters were written to address current (c.120-150) problems in the church, but were projected into the past so that the authority of an esteemed martyr could be used to justify current churchmen's authority.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-01-2013, 12:53 AM	#36
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Did Paul write Galatians by Frank R. McGuire

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.