The protestant relies on the vatican TRADITION to know who wrote the gospels | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 71475229 United States 04/13/2017 02:09 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 5958224 United States 04/13/2017 02:34 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 21333837 United States 04/13/2017 02:42 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The only author that scholars can agree is authentic is Paul, and Paul never met Jesus in his life either, the closest he got was a vision of Jesus after the crucifixion on the road to Damascus. |
Anonymous Coward (OP) User ID: 74665595 Brazil 04/13/2017 02:51 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 21333837 United States 04/13/2017 02:54 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 71475229 United States 04/13/2017 02:57 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward (OP) User ID: 74665595 Brazil 04/13/2017 02:57 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 73818113 United States 04/13/2017 03:09 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | No, it isn't. The canonical books had been known, along with their authorship from the beginning. The oral tradition of these letters is not like a 'legend' you may think of. That os not what is meant by ecclesiastical Tradition. The Apostolic authorship tradition has been passed down from the beginning. The earliest written canon extant is that of Athanasius of Alexandria in his AD 367 Paschal Letter. Again it is not tedious to speak of the [books] of the New Testament. These are, the four Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Afterwards, the Acts of the Apostles and Epistles (called Catholic), seven, viz. of James, one; of Peter, two; of John, three; after these, one of Jude. In addition, there are fourteen Epistles of Paul, written in this order. The first, to the Romans; then two to the Corinthians; after these, to the Galatians; next, to the Ephesians; then to the Philippians; then to the Colossians; after these, two to the Thessalonians, and that to the Hebrews; and again, two to Timothy; one to Titus; and lastly, that to Philemon. And besides, the Revelation of John. |
Anonymous Coward (OP) User ID: 74665595 Brazil 04/13/2017 03:13 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | No, it isn't. The canonical books had been known, along with their authorship from the beginning. The oral tradition of these letters is not like a 'legend' you may think of. That os not what is meant by ecclesiastical Tradition. The Apostolic authorship tradition has been passed down from the beginning. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 73818113 The earliest written canon extant is that of Athanasius of Alexandria in his AD 367 Paschal Letter. Again it is not tedious to speak of the [books] of the New Testament. These are, the four Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Afterwards, the Acts of the Apostles and Epistles (called Catholic), seven, viz. of James, one; of Peter, two; of John, three; after these, one of Jude. In addition, there are fourteen Epistles of Paul, written in this order. The first, to the Romans; then two to the Corinthians; after these, to the Galatians; next, to the Ephesians; then to the Philippians; then to the Colossians; after these, two to the Thessalonians, and that to the Hebrews; and again, two to Timothy; one to Titus; and lastly, that to Philemon. And besides, the Revelation of John. Athanasius of Alexandria? Was he a protestant? LOL vatican, orthdox church whatever, all the same bullshit |
Anonymous Coward (OP) User ID: 74665595 Brazil 04/13/2017 03:35 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 29338205 United States 04/13/2017 03:42 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Those names didn't appear until around 200 CE, scholars have no idea who wrote them, but the consensus is that none of the authors ever met Jesus. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 21333837 The only author that scholars can agree is authentic is Paul, and Paul never met Jesus in his life either, the closest he got was a vision of Jesus after the crucifixion on the road to Damascus. Paul's identity is open to question, too. Outside of the bible, there isn't a single historical mention of him, even though he was supposed to be such an amazing missionary. Some scholars think he may have been Marcion, others Simon Magus. Whoever he was, his own account of his conversion doesn't mention anything at all about the road to Damascus and it differs in important ways with the account in Acts, which is seen by many scholars as a later bit of church propaganda covering up the rift between Paul and the Judaizers. You are correct that nobody knows who wrote the gospels. There is a consensus among many scholars that they are not historically based, which led to the long sought quest for the historical Jesus. Though it is still the majority held position that he was a historical figure, this does not mean that he was the figure in the gospels. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 59801059 United States 04/13/2017 03:56 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward (OP) User ID: 74665595 Brazil 04/13/2017 03:58 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | How do you know who wrote matthew, mark, john and luke? You don't because the text doesn't say so. You rely on the tradition of the roman church, they named the books not any god lol. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74665595 The text have existed before the Roman Church...lol. That's right Joe, but the texts don't say who are the authors. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 26166310 United States 04/13/2017 04:15 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | How do you know who wrote matthew, mark, john and luke? You don't because the text doesn't say so. You rely on the tradition of the roman church, they named the books not any god lol. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74665595 religion 101: only 1 true Christian religion and that is the Roman Catholic Church! |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 74678057 United Kingdom 04/14/2017 12:19 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | How do you know who wrote matthew, mark, john and luke? You don't because the text doesn't say so. You rely on the tradition of the roman church, they named the books not any god lol. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74665595 The text have existed before the Roman Church...lol. That's right Joe, but the texts don't say who are the authors. Then rewrite your thread title |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 74782920 Brazil 04/28/2017 12:44 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | How do you know who wrote matthew, mark, john and luke? You don't because the text doesn't say so. You rely on the tradition of the roman church, they named the books not any god lol. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74665595 The text have existed before the Roman Church...lol. That's right Joe, but the texts don't say who are the authors. Then rewrite your thread title Just because a few phrases of the text existed before the official roman church with constantine that doesn't mean that you know who wrote matthew mark luke john etc. It's the roman church who named them. |