FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-14-2006, 07:32 AM   #311
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Washington, DC (formerly Denmark)
Posts: 3,789
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mythra View Post
When we talk of the Pauline epistles that are considered genuine, how can we be at all confident that the writings as we know them bear any resemblance at all to the originals? It seems odd to have prolonged discussions over a phrase such as "kata sarka", when we really have no idea if that was even present in the original autograph.
They have certainly been the object of some amount of editing. Also, it is generally agreed upon that some of the letters are actually multiple letters combined into a single epistle.

It is up to the individual in most cases to decide which parts are authentic and which parts are not. If one considers a section a later addition one must provide reasonable arguments for that position. Overall, however, in order to pursue meaningful discussion we have to assume that the rest is genuine. If we merely throw up our hands and decide that we can never know what was in the autographs, if such existed, and that, therefore, any discussion is meaningless, then this forum would not exist. We work with what we've got, keeping in mind all the uncertainties that go along with any discussion.

Julian
Julian is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:52 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.