simon kole

You can examine the texts for youselves to see if I am consistent with them. It's up to you decide if I am or am not.

dockeen

Note though Simon that your last paragraph is a statement of your faith - you can not expect it to carry evidential weight with anyone but yourself. As such, it also cannot form a basis for a real conversation with someone who doesn't share your faith.

Sheshbazzar

Obviously. Most of us have. And reached different conclusions than yours.

simon kole

The second death, which is the lake of fire (Rev 21:8), does not mean ""annihilation or "loss of being," as is seen in 2Th 1:9, which uses the words "eternal destruction" in relation to Christ's second coming.

The meaning of the Greek word, olethros, used by Paul and translated "destruction" in 2Th 1:9, is to slay or to kill, as is seen in Paul's useage of it in 1Co 5:5, 10:10, 1Th 5:3, and also in Heb 11:28, where several forms of the Greek word are used. The word does not mean annihilation or loss of being.

Likewise, the Greek word, apollumi is translated "destruction, perdition, damnation, perishing, lost" in Mt 7:13, 10:28; Lk 13:3,5; Jn 3:16, 10:28, 17:12; Ro 2:12, 9:22; 1Co 15:18; 2Co 2:15, 4:3; Php 1:28, 3:19; 2Th 2:3,10; 1Tim 6:9; Heb 10:39; Jas 4:12; 2Pe 2:3, 3:7,9,16; Rev 17:8,11. The meaning of apollumi is kill, waste, ruin or loss of well being. It does not mean annihilation or loss of being, as is seen where several forms of the word are used in Mt 2:13, 8:25, 9:17, 22:7, 26:8,52, 27:20; Lk 5:37, 15:4,6,24; Jn 6:27; 1Pe 1:7.

So when Scripture speaks of "destruction," in relation to the second death, it uses the word as it does in other Scriptures,
which is not annihilation, but is eternal ruin, eternal loss of well-being.

Addressed in my posts #1, #2, #3.

Two things:

1) I accept the scholars' datings that place only the writings of John, 2Pe, and perhaps Jude, after Paul's last writing. So that leaves three gospels, and all the other epistles, including the heavy-weight Hebrews, in existence when Paul declared all Scripture to be God-breathed.

2) The issue of what was or was not in the canon is irrelevant at that point in time. That some God-breathed books may have not made it into the Canon goes to the subject of God's revelatory will, discussed here.

To which other NT views on the law are you referring that are in disagreement with Paul?

Deus Ex

What truth is that, Simon? With over 30,000 sects of Christianity telling us many different things, just who should we listen to? Shear numbers alone should make us think that God is providentially supporting the Catholic Church, not your little sect of Protestant heretics.

simon kole

Agreed.

But when it comes to the issue of the canon, it's not just an abstract issue of facts, which is what most are engaged in here.

The real issue for those of the faith is whether they have God's word or not. And since it is those of the faith to whom we are referring, it is appropriate that a doctrine of their faith (though the argument is "circular") gives them the answer.

<met yourself coming back yet?>

Deus Ex

Wrong!

The majority view among NT scholars is that none of the gospels predate Paul's writing (sure, you can find some ultra-conservative fringe scholars who date the gospels extremely early, but that view is not the consensus.)

And scholars are pretty evenly divided as to whether Paul is even the author of 2 Timothy, so basically, you have an unprovenanced book that is likely written by a forger claiming that all scripture is god-breathed. Whoopty-do

dockeen

Note that it is a rational discussion of facts is in fact the domain of this forum. If your participation here has to fall back ultimately on "this is what the bible says", and "this is what my faith tells me is true", then you really don't have a basis for real participation.

simon kole

Some of the books in the Catholic canon contradict doctrine of the majority of the canon.

The Protestant canon removed the contradictory books.
And as I've stated previously, when I read those books they came nowhere near the majesty, power, sublimity of truth, and authority with which I am addressed by the rest of the Protestant canon. "No human ever so spoke." (Jn 7:46)

I have no trouble understanding why they were removed because of doctrinal contradiction. They evidenced themselves not to be God-breathed.

simon kole

There are scholars, and there are latter-day speculators in novel conjecture with no conclusive proof.