Quote:
Originally Posted by Actor
Paul's existence is even more questionable than Jesus's.
Pseudepigraphic works were common at the time. Even if the author identifies himself as a specific person in the text that does not mean it's true. A. Conan Doyle is not the fictitious Doctor John Watson. Of the 14 traditional Pauline letters scholars attribute, through textual analysis, only 7 to Paul. Even then the analysis only confirms that those seven had a common author who may or may not have been Paul.
Paul and pseudopigrapha aside do any of the authors of the non-Pauline letters identify themselves in the text?
Why not? I know people who have an extensive knowledge of The Lord of the Rings, or of the Harry Potter books, Sherlock Holmes, Agatha Christie books, the Star Wars movies, Star Trek (both generations). All it takes is being passionate about the subject, and a bunch of religious nuts inevitably will be very passionate. So a bunch of Gentiles could very easily have an extensive knowledge of the OT, particularly since (as you point out) it was available in Greek.
Scripture proves nothing.
I am struck by the geography of the letters. With the exception of the letters to the Hebrews are they not all addressed to churches in Italy, Greece and Asia minor? If so that would be a strong indicator that the religion was Greek, partly based on Judaism to be sure, but Greek nonetheless.
|
Methinks you are struck by much more than geography.
Luke 20:17-18
17 But He looked at them and said, "What then is this that is written,
'The stone which the builders rejected,
This became the chief corner stone'?
18 "Everyone who falls on that stone will be broken to pieces; but on whomever it falls, it will scatter him like dust."
NASB
Your mind is like fragmented pieces which accounts for all your loonie theories. Christ is such a huge stumbling to you, you have fallen on that Rock and he has destroyed your mind.
Why would the pagan Greeks go to all the trouble to gain such intimate, extensive knowledge of the OT scriptures? Why would a "bunch of guys" who weren't monotheistic in their worldview care a whit about Old Covenant Judaism? What was their motive? What was in it for them?
Again, prove your theory that other people wrote all the Pauline epistles.
Thirdly, the fact that the vast majority of the epistles were written to believers outside ancient Palestine proves the veracity of scripture, since both the OT and New predicted that the Gospel of Salvation would go to the Gentiles. So, it makes perfectly good sense that the vast majority of epistles would be directed to churches outside Palestine. Do not forget, sir, that the kingdom of God was
taken from Israel and given to another nation -- this "nation" being the Church consisting largely of Gentile believers. The Gospel originated in Jerusalem, then all of Judea, then spread north to Samaria and eventually to the "remotest part of the earth" (Act 1:8). In other words, it was God-fearing, pious, messianic Jews who initially preached the gospel for the forgiveness of sins; and Paul was specifically designated as the apostle to the Gentiles, his three missionary journeys accounting for a very large percentage of Gentile conversions to Christianity. And if you read the Book of Acts, this is precisely how Christianity spread throughout the whole world per 1:8
Finally, you have to explain how those "bunch of guys" (pagan Greeks) were able to get their message in 100% sync -- to not only agree with each other but to agree with OT theology -- that even most Jews themselves couldn't agree upon.
They would have had to conspire and collaborate with each other and they would have had to have had a super-intelligent redactor to get everything to harmonize.
Both scripture and Occam's Razor says the simplest, most straightforward explanation for NT authorship is in all likelihood the best and most coherent explanation.
