A
avflf
Guest
That’s fine with me
- Status
A
avflf
Guest
Origen, on the other hand, had doubts about Paul’s authorship.There is know way to know for sure**. We were not there and can not prove it. Perhaps Paul hired a different scribe to write this letter and he was better at Greek then the others. Perhaps it was edited during or after he wrote it to be more formal considering who he was writing to. To assume he did not write any of those listed is to assume such based on grammar facts. Just because he used a certain word in a letter and did not use it anywhere else does not prove it is not written by him, it just says that this particular letter uses specific words, that’s it.
Plus, Clement only says he noticed the “purity of the Greek”, that’s it. Nothing about the authorship. They may be recognized as peculiar, but not doubting the authenticity.
N
Nicea325
Guest
**Origen, on the other hand, had doubts about Paul’s authorship. **
Which letters in particular? Second, one church father is not the voice of an entire church.
It is no different than St.Jerome who preferred the 39 OT canon over the 46 OT canon.But guess what?He obeyed the authority of the church over his own private judgment like any good Catholic has done thoughout the ages.
Which letters in particular? Second, one church father is not the voice of an entire church.
It is no different than St.Jerome who preferred the 39 OT canon over the 46 OT canon.But guess what?He obeyed the authority of the church over his own private judgment like any good Catholic has done thoughout the ages.
N
Nicea325
Guest
I don’t know what the Edict of Milan is so I don’t think I am wrong, based on your argument
Then precisely what you referring to in your statement?
However, if you did refer to Edict of Milan,then you are incorrect. It has nothing to do with a merger of church and state.
Then precisely what you referring to in your statement?
However, if you did refer to Edict of Milan,then you are incorrect. It has nothing to do with a merger of church and state.
D
Dokimas
Guest
Why are you having a hard time understanding? Let me try again. I’m NOT saying it is hypocritical to defend your belief. I’m not sayuing it is even good to say you’re wrong if your are not convinced you are wrong (if you see you’re wrong it’s good to admit it but that’s ANOTHER story.) It IS hypocritical to tell someone they are wrong AND complain they are telling you are wrong. Please notice **the two parts **of this has to happen for a person to by hypocritical.
Paul does speak of church authority. That’s NOT in question for me. The question is is that church the CC. I say no,not for me.
What’s a prelate?
D
Dokimas
Guest
How do you understand this form the comments by AVFIF? IMO, you either greatly misunderstand or you are misrepresenting what was said.
D
Dokimas
Guest
You have proof Paul wrote Hebrews? His name isn’t in the book.
D
Dokimas
Guest
I’m confused why you’re having such a hard time understanding what I’ve said. I was NOT referring to anything I had NO idea about. I provided a link about the merger, that’s about it.
N
Nicea325
Guest
**I’m confused why you’re having such a hard time understanding what I’ve said. I was NOT referring to anything I had NO idea about. I provided a link about the merger, that’s about it. **
Because I caught one statement,which is why I asked you exactly what were you referring to when you mentioned an incorporation of church and state? Catch my drift?
Because I caught one statement,which is why I asked you exactly what were you referring to when you mentioned an incorporation of church and state? Catch my drift?
D
Dokimas
Guest
I tried to drift you back to my link. That’s all.**I’m confused why you’re having such a hard time understanding what I’ve said. I was NOT referring to anything I had NO idea about. I provided a link about the merger, that’s about it. **
Because I caught one statement,which is why I asked you exactly what were you referring to when you mentioned an incorporation of church and state? Catch my drift?
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
I said, ‘That one statement from Paul substantiates an authoritative Church.’
Then I asked, ‘If there wasn’t an authoritative Church, why does he say to obey your prelates?’
The response to the points I raised was:
'Possibly because Paul never wrote Hebrews. Hebrews is a very consciously '“literary document”
This seems to imply, since the verse is supportive of a Catholic belief, the writing is just a “literary” document, as if the verse doesn’t mean what it clearly states.
Then we see an opportunity to avoid the discussion of some ‘proof’ known, and admonish me for asking if avflf was implying the verse has no merit because it ‘might possibly have not been written by Paul’, or because, it seemed, he veiwed this particular letter in the Bible as a ‘literary’ document.
Either Hebrews is God inspired, irregardless of the author, or it isn’t. If it is, the passage telling us to obey our prelates is something we should be doing.
Now, that I’ve explained my part in this communication, the question still stands. If there wasn’t an authoritative Church, why does he say to obey your prelates?
It might also be a good time for Dokimas to present this history ‘shattering’ evidence that the Cathoilc Church is not the AUTHORITATIVE Church in scriptures.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
What does this have to do with what is written in the inspired word of God?
It really seems to be the ‘lifering’ you were searching for to avoid presenting this ‘evidence’.
C
CWBetts
Guest
My proof is Patristic Tradition. The Early Fathers attributed it to Paul. They carry more weight than you do.
D
Dokimas
Guest
AVFIF must have noticed that some of you keep saying Paul is the author of Hebrews. She/he was JUST commenting that this may NOT be correct. There didn’t seem to be ANY comments by AVFIF upon Hebrews not being inspired (I’ll bet AVFIF believes it is as inspired as all the other 26 books of the NT) or on the verses in question being for or against the CC position.
BTW, as you surely are well aware, it is impossible to prove a negative. I can’t prove the CC is not the one and only church started by Jesus except to observe that you and others think the doctrines of the CC are 100% correct and I’ve pointed out from the Bible why I disagree. If my disagreement is based truth, then there’s a good posibility the CC is not THE church established by Jesus but that many of its members ARE part of the church equal with all non-catholic Christians.
R
rev_kevin
Guest
Paul, Luke, Barnabas, Apollos, Silas, Philip, Priscilla, and others have been suggested because the name of the author is not given in the biblical text itsef.
C
CWBetts
Guest
By who? If it just some “scholar,” forgive me if I am not impressed.
D
Dokimas
Guest
D
Dokimas
Guest
You seem to be correct.
Please concider this… Fromgotquestions.org/author-hebrews.html
"Church tradition teaches that Paul wrote the book of Hebrews, and until the 1800s, that issue was closed. However, though a vast majority of Christians—both and scholars and the laity—still believe Paul wrote the book, there are some tempting reasons to think otherwise.
First and foremost is the lack of a salutation. Some sort of personal salutation from Paul appears in all of his letters. So it would seem that writing anonymously is not his usual method; therefore, the reasoning goes, Hebrews cannot be one of his letters. Second, the overall composition and style is of a person who is a very sophisticated writer. Even though he was certainly a sophisticated communicator, Paul stated that he purposely did not speak with a commanding vocabulary (1 Corinthians 1:17; 2:1; 2 Corinthians 11:6).
The book of Hebrews quotes extensively from the Old Testament. Paul, as a Pharisee, would have been familiar with the Scripture in its original Hebrew language. In other letters, Paul either quotes the Masoretic Text (the original Hebrew) or paraphrases it. However, all of the quotes in this epistle are taken out of the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament), which is inconsistent with Paul’s usage. Finally, Paul was an apostle who claimed to receive his revelations directly from the Lord Jesus (1 Corinthians 11:23; Galatians 1:12). The writer of Hebrews specifically says that he was taught by an apostle (Hebrews 2:3)."
R
rev_kevin
Guest
Not trying to impress you. Believe what you will. It really don’t matter to me.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
It is very noticable that you failed to address my question on the verse telling us to obey our prelates. It’s just as noticable that you now say, ‘IF your disagreement is truth based…’ So, much for that evidence I suppose.
How many scriptures tell us to be of the same mind and judgement, of the same accord and to take note of those creating dissensions? Christ even prayed that we all be ONE as He and the Father are one. But many members, of many denominations with different doctrines, are a part of the ‘same’ Church. Ahh, but there I go, using scriptures and showing I disagree. I guess that makes me hypocritical.
I remember a discussion where a poster relied on some verses in John, and I stated, ‘Christ was only speaking to the Apostles’, to which you told me to, ‘prove it’. I told you to read John 14 through 18 and see that the only audience was the Apostles. But, that wasn’t proof enough. Now, I must admit to error, based on some evidence you claim, without seeing any evidence first. That’s somehow avoiding a question, as you’ve stated multiple times. There’s so much double standard here, it’s easy to see there’s more than ‘sharing’ our beliefs…
- Status