Quote:
Originally Posted by photon
Even the Christian scholars who don't take an inerrant view of scripture have the goal of excluding god eh? All the religious educational institutions that have classes with a historical critical approach in their divinities programs are all trying to remove god... fascinating.
Nope, that's not what they "see". What they "see" is far more deep and nuanced than that.
Anyone who disagrees is "they"? I can see how it's easy to classify everyone who disagrees as "they" when you lump them all together with such simple (and incorrect) characterization of the scholarship.
In which group would you include Origen I wonder? As a scholar that tried to help understand and explain the supposed conflicts? Or as an atheist who tried to remove god? Because Origen frequently mentions differences among the writings and disputes the Pauline letters' authorship.
All the Christian biblical scholars who work from a historical critical perspective exclude these conclusions eh?
I wouldn't call these conclusions, they're claims. Claims that have little in the way of support.
"You all".. always a great foundation for discussion.
This is the funny thing, some Christians just can't even conceive that someone could look at things and come to a different conclusion than they do. So instead, accusations of delighting in what must be false evidence to confirm a pre-conceived conclusion. If I don't come to the same conclusion, I clearly must lack the ability to measure the orthodox responses.
First, I've never made any claim to being an atheist.
Second, I didn't start from a position of non-belief and grabbed onto something to defend it, I started from a position of believing exactly as you do. I've read very little that you've ever posted that I could not imagine myself writing not too long ago.
It was when I started to actually read the Bible, to actually research church history, to learn that I was forced to question what many Christian denominations say the Bible says. My position isn't a matter of desire, I didn't WANT to not believe in the Bible, I was forced into it. That's part of why I participate in threads like this, part of me still wants to believe and hopes to find something that will change how I see things.
Now contrast this:
with
This. Usually if someone asks for something starting out with such negative language and accusations will result in conflict rather than discussion...
The wiki article on this has a decent summary and lots of links to resources and books:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authors...uline_epistles |
First of all I will answer your question:
Origen was born in 184 AD to well-to-do Christian parents. He became a respected teacher at a young age. At 17 his Father was killed for his faith and all the family's wealth was taken from them. A year later due in part to Clement running from the persecution he became president of the Alexandrian Catechetical School. He was obviously very intelligent which was helped by having parents who could afford to provide him teachers. He studied under the pagan Ammonius Saccas who was the founder of Neo-Platonism. He had a huge collection of books including the complete library of the gnostic Ambrosius. He vigorously opposed some gnostic beliefs while embracing others. He wrote it is said about 6000 books in his life time with the help of his students whom he would dictate to or use to make copies of his work. His beliefs lead him to live an extreme ascetic life: He walked barefoot; He slept on the bare ground; He even castrated himself. The scriptures didn't tell him to do those things. That probably came from the gnostic belief that the flesh is wicked and can't be saved.
Origen believed souls existed from eternity past and that they transmigrated to a higher or lower life form after death, depending on one's deeds. He believed everyone including the devils would eventually be saved after some punishment and instruction by angels. He denied a physical resurrection which by itself would explain why he rejected certain of Paul's epistles. Origen has been called "the Father of corrupt bibles" but, I'm not sure if that is because of his translations and practice of conjectural emendation or because of what his school produced in the century following his death.
Regarding the link you provided it only mentions two ancient authorities who questioned the authorship of some of Paul's epistles: Origen and Marcoin. I've discussed Origen already. Marcoin actually only accepted 11 of the 27 New Testament books into his canon. He only accepted 1 of the gospels(Luke) and he edited it himself before accepting it into his canon. It should be telling that both Origen and Marcoin were excommunicated by their own religious communities at some point in their short lives. They both rejected certain books of the Bible because they conflicted with their personal teachings.
Apparently according to your article most modern scholars reject or have serious doubts about the authorship of some of Pauls epistles but, I see no examples of denominations altering their Canons in light of this witness. I also am not aware of any of the new translations omitting some of Paul's epistles. With two or three new translations coming out every year you would think someone would stick to this new revised Canon. I see no movement in that direction.
I also wonder why modern scholarship would have more credibility than the scholarship 1600 years closer to the source? I mean wouldn't there be a net loss of information over that time? Most likely some of the churches still existed that these letters were written to. There is no doubt that more of the early writings of the church Fathers still existed which would have referenced Paul's writings. Obviously the copies of the originals were nearer to the source as well. In the absence of new compeling evidence wouldn't the early scholarship carry more weight?
What have I missed that cause you to say with any certainty that Paul didn't author some of the books that is credited to him within the Canon of scriptures? Could you tell me in your own words rather than just providing a link? Thanks.