aa5874

Again, you OPENLY admit you are speculating so you should accept responsibility for your own admission instead of erroneously accusing others of your problem.

But look at your OWN words in an earlier post.

Now, you admit that you don't know if Seed of David was an interpolation.

You are going in circles.

Duvduv

No, I'm not. IF it was an interpolation at a time BEFORE they got their act together then they plain forgot about the messianic verses which were no big deal for the later period after the gospels emerged, or it was added mistakenly as a marginal insertion at the time when the text was already sacred but when there were scribal errors. I was making a rhetorical supposition that the interpolater forgot IF it was a case that that writer or interpolater did identify the Christ as the davidic messiah but forgot that with him goes the Elijah figure.

aa5874

I think I see your problem. Your circle is SO LARGE you think you are going in a straight line.

The forgetful interpolator??? Another circle!!!!

Please, your speculation is not getting you anywhere.

Please deal with the DATED evidence.

The Pauline writings were unknown up to the mid-2nd century.

MrMacSon

I think this is likely.

There is the view that the messiah stories had been around for a long time, in various forms, as stories that were popular because they fulfilled the old testament prophecies. It is likely they were collated for a while before being aligned and 'fixed' as a canon.

Duvduv

Thus I suppose it wouldn't matter that much if anyone talked about the Seed of David even as a marginal interpolation by someone in Romans because they already had other stories telling them about the Baptist as Elijah and the messianic prophecies.

Solo

Oops, forgot to mention 1 Ti 6:13 with Jesus giving testimony before Pilate.

As for tampering, Eusebius quotes (H.E.5.20) Irenaeus' treatise called Ogdoad (On the Number Eight), as having an appended note that reads:

If you read this little book, I adjure you by the Lord Jesus Christ and by his glorious advent when he comes to judge the living and the dead, that you compare your transcript and carefully correct it from this copy and that you also include this solemn charge in your copy.

Evidently there was a large concern about the accuracy of transmission in the early church. The perception that the Christian scribes were inveterate liars and forgers must have been widespread, especially among tradiional Jews.

Best,
Jiri

mountainman

The big question is of course how long the texts were around before the momentous Nicaean event of Constantinian collation. Was the period just under 300 years, 200 years, 100 years or as little as 12 years? The evidence that can be brought to bear on this question is exceedingly sparse, and is fraught with being associated with apologetic dogma and rhetoric.

We already known that the Pauline Letters were not all written by "Paul", and that someone to be known as "Pseudo-Paul" is to be considered as an original source for many (if not all) of these "canonical Pauline Letters". We already also know that the letters between Paul and Seneca were written by either the same, or another "Pseudo-Paul", in the 4th century, and were in circulation by the Nicaean christians, evidently for the purpose of providing "Paul" with authenticity and kudos.


In which century was the Paul-Seneca letter exchange first identified as 4th century forgery?

Duvduv

What is the purpose of writing additional letters in the name of Paul who was already long dead? And how does anyone know that the "authentic " epistles were not forged the same way as the so-called "unauthentic epistles?!

outhouse

time of death really didnt matter, they were trying to tone paul down and give him their own light.


we know a single author who lived before the fall of the temple wrote the uncontested epistles, based on content [you cant fake some of the people and places and cultural traits unless you were there]

There are no good reasons why the leader of this early movement wouldnt be saul/paul

Toto

What is the purpose of any forgery? To claim the authority of Paul.

All of the so-called authentic letters could have been forged, or heavily interpolated. But then you have to ask why the forger picked Paul's name to write under.