Pauls Letters..?

Question

Tell me some letters attributed to Paul and tell me if you think it was written by him or not.. Why or why not?? I really have trouble with this issue

No Im not trying to get u to do homework.. Just assist me with it ;)

how do scholars know this??

Answer 1

There is no proof that these letters were written by Paul and several have in fact been proven to be fakes. There are no original copies of any of these letters or any of the gospels (you would think someone would have put them away for safe keeping). Also all of these letters were written at least 2 generations after jesus supposedly was crucified (I think I have heard this myth once or twice pre-jesus).

Answer 2

Those attributed to Paul are Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and the Epistle to Philemon. Ephesians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians might have been written by the same auther, but it's unlikely.

There are, however, a lot of problems with those attributed to Paul. For instance, why would he write at the end of his letters, "This is written by Paul, as you can no doubt tell from my handwriting." This says two things. First, if he wrote that, he would only do so if there were several other letters floating around that had his name written on them. Second, it's a little weird. I mean, when you write a letter, do you say, "xoxo, Jenny, as you can no doubt tell from my writing?" You typically see something like that in fiction, such as Les Liasons Dangereuses, where the reader would never see the supposed letter, but it's a way to describe it to her.

There are a lot of other problems as well, but that's one that I find interesting. For all I know, Paul might've written them all. Of course, who was Paul? That's where you start getting into questions about Simon Magus and Marcion. Wonderful stuff.

Answer 3

Well, let's see:
Romans, 1&2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Galatians, Philippians, 1&2 Thessalonians, 1&2 Timothy...basically, Paul is accepted as being the author of all the books in the New Testament except for Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, 1,2, and 3 John, Jude, James, and Revelations. Both Titus and Philemon are attributed to him, though this is disputed.

Yes, I do think they were actually written by him. First of all, the writing style is the same all the way throughout. Secondly, in almost every book attributed to him, he names himself as the author.

Try this site for more info:
http://www.layhands.com/WhoWroteTheNewTestament.htm

Answer 4

Of the epistles attributed to Paul, 1 Coronthians and Galatians are generally considered to be by the same author known as "Paul" who seems to have been imitated by others.
Ephesians, Colossians, and 2 Thessalonians are often cited as pseudopigraphical, but there is some controversy over them. The pastoral epistles are all generally considered pseudopigraphical.

Answer 5

The question you are asking has to do with the Bible Canon. Jewish tradition credits Ezra with beginning the compiling and cataloging of the canon of the Hebrew Scriptures, and it says that this was completed by Nehemiah. The official listing of the books which belong in the collection of Hebrew Scriptures was complete by the end of the fifth century B.C.E.
Evidence for an authorized listing of writings for the Christian Greek Scriptures began piling up as early as 90-100 C.E. Before the end of the second century, there is universal acceptance of the four Gospels, Acts, and 12 of the apostle Paul’s letters. Only a few of the smaller writings were doubted in certain areas. Likely this was so because such writings were limited in their initial circulation for one reason or another and thus took longer to become accepted as canonical. And so by the end of the second century, there was no question that the canon of the Christian Greek Scriptures had been closed. Origen, about the year 230 C.E., accepted among the inspired Scriptures the books of Hebrews and James, both missing from the Muratorian Fragment. While he indicates that some doubted their canonical quality, this also shows that by this time, the canonicity of most of the Greek Scriptures was accepted, only a few doubting some of the less well-known epistles. Later, Athanasius, Jerome, and Augustine acknowledged the conclusions of earlier lists by defining as the canon the same 27 books that we now have There are at least 16 outstanding early catalogs of the Christian Greek Scriptures, from the Muratorian Fragment of 170 C.E. to the Third Council of Carthage of 397 C.E. Additionally, manuscripts of this part of the Bible in the original language (Greek) total more than 5,200. In addition, there are over 8,000 manuscripts in various other languages—a total exceeding 13,000 manuscripts all together. Dating from the 2nd century C.E. to the 16th century C.E., they all help in determining the true, original text. The oldest of these many manuscripts is the papyrus fragment of the Gospel of John in the John Rylands Library in Manchester, England, known by the number P52, which is dated to the first half of the second century, possibly about 125 C.E. Thus, this copy was written only a quarter of a century or so after the original.
The former director and librarian of the British Museum, Sir Frederic Kenyon, said this: "The interval then between the dates of original composition and the earliest extant evidence becomes so small as to be in fact negligible, and the last foundation for any doubt that the Scriptures have come down to us substantially as they were written has now been removed. Both the authenticity and the general integrity of the books of the New Testament may be regarded as finally established. General integrity, however, is one thing, and certainty as to details is another."
As far as those details are concerned F. J. A. Hort, who was co producer of the Westcott and Hort text, writes: "The great bulk of the words of the New Testament stand out above all discriminative processes of criticism, because they are free from variation, and need only to be transcribed. . . . If comparative trivialities . . . are set aside, the words in our opinion still subject to doubt can hardly amount to more than a thousandth part of the whole New Testament."
I don't know which of the books written by Paul that you have questions about, but let's briefly look at the book of Hebrews. Writer ship of the letter to the Hebrews has been widely ascribed to the apostle Paul. It was accepted as an epistle of Paul by early writers. The Chester Beatty Papyrus No. 2 (P46) (of about 200 C.E.) contains Hebrews among nine of Paul’s letters, and Hebrews is listed among "fourteen letters of Paul the apostle" in "The Canon of Athanasius," of the fourth century C.E.
Modern Bible translations, at least the better ones, are based on "master texts". These are the result of years of study by experts in their field who have examined and compared all known manuscripts and early translations of the original books into other languages. One of the best of these is the master Greek texts is by the Cambridge University scholars B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort, in 1881, which I briefly referred to above.

Answer 6

Forget Paul, read my letters instead

Answer 7

Let's face facts---Paul was a woman-hating self-confessed murderer whose outdated opinions still hold sway over Christianity--because of Paul women will never be equal to men.

Answer 8

She is a cutie, huh Darth?


Uh, sorry. I cant help with this one. Just wanted to tell you how darn cute you are...

Answer 9

First of all, I have credited all my quotes.

Here is an argument which has often come up before. People who either do not understand the Bible or who are just trying to discredit it will challenge the authenticity or accuracy of parts of it, but they don't have a credible argument if you research the subject. Your question is too general for the scope of this format. You can look at my profile and email me with any specific question, or you could re-post your question here and ask about each individual book.

*** it-1 p. 442 Christian Greek Scriptures ***The books of the Christian Greek Scriptures, listed according to the approximate year (C.E.) written, are as follows: Matthew, 41; 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 50 and 51; Galatians, 50-52; 1 and 2 Corinthians, 55; Romans, 56; Luke, 56-58; Ephesians, Colossians, Philemon, Philippians, 60-61; Hebrews, Acts, 61; James, before 62; Mark, 60-65; 1 Timothy, Titus, 61-64; 1 Peter, 62-64; 2 Peter, 64; 2 Timothy, Jude, 65; Revelation, 96; John and 1, 2, 3 John, 98. This period of less than 60 years is quite a contrast with the nearly 11 centuries taken to complete the Hebrew Scriptures

*** it-1 p. 443 Christian Greek Scriptures ***There are available for comparative study more than 13,000 papyrus and vellum manuscripts containing the whole or a part of the Christian Greek Scriptures, dating from the 2nd to the 16th century. Of these, some 5,000 are in Greek, and the remainder in various other languages. More than 2,000 of the ancient copies contain the Gospels, and more than 700, the letters of Paul. While the original writings themselves are not currently extant, copies date back to the second century, which is very close to the time the originals were written. This vast number of manuscripts has enabled Greek scholars in the course of years to produce a highly refined Greek text of the Scriptures, confirming in many respects the dependability and integrity of our present-day translations of the Christian Greek Scriptures.—See MANUSCRIPTS OF THE BIBLE.This vast mountain of manuscripts caused one scholar to remark: "The great bulk of the words of the New Testament stand out above all discriminative processes of criticism, because they are free from variation, and need only to be transcribed. . . . If comparative trivialities, such as changes of order, the insertion or omission of the article with proper names, and the like, are set aside, the words in our opinion still subject to doubt can hardly amount to more than a thousandth part of the whole New Testament." (The New Testament in the Original Greek, Vol. I, p. 561) To this may be added the observation of Jack Finegan: "The close relationship in time between the oldest New Testament manuscripts and the original texts is also nothing less than amazing. . . . For our knowledge of the writings of most of the classical authors we are dependent upon manuscripts the oldest of which belong to a time between the ninth and eleventh centuries A.D. . . . Thus it is that the certainty with which the text of the New Testament is established exceeds that of any other ancient book. The words which the New Testament writers addressed to their world and time have crossed the further miles and centuries to us substantially unchanged in form and certainly undiminished in power."—Light From the Ancient Past, 1959, pp. 449, 450.
*** it-2 pp. 313-314 Manuscripts of the Bible ***Quite noteworthy in more recent times is the master Greek text prepared by J. J. Griesbach, who availed himself of materials gathered by others but who also gave attention to Biblical quotations made by early writers such as Origen. Further, Griesbach studied the readings of various versions, such as the Armenian, Gothic, and Philoxenian. He viewed extant manuscripts as comprising three families, or recensions, the Byzantine, the Western, and the Alexandrian, giving preference to readings in the latter. Editions of his master Greek text were issued between 1774 and 1806, his principal edition of the entire Greek text being published in 1796-1806. Griesbach’s text was used for Sharpe’s English translation of 1840 and is the Greek text printed in The Emphatic Diaglott, by Benjamin Wilson, in 1864.A Greek master text of the Christian Greek Scriptures that attained wide acceptance is that produced in 1881 by Cambridge University scholars B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort. It was the product of 28 years of independent labor, though they compared notes regularly. Like Griesbach, they divided manuscripts into families and leaned heavily on what they termed the "neutral text," which included the renowned Sinaitic Manuscript and the Vatican Manuscript No. 1209, both of the fourth century C.E. While Westcott and Hort viewed matters as quite conclusive when these manuscripts agreed and especially when they were supported by other ancient uncial manuscripts, they were not bound to that position. They took every conceivable factor into consideration in endeavoring to solve problems presented by conflicting texts; and when two readings were of equal weight, that, too, was indicated in their master text. The Westcott and Hort text was the one used principally in translating the Christian Greek Scriptures into English in the New World Translation. However, the New World Bible Translation Committee also consulted other excellent Greek texts, among them Nestle’s Greek text (1948).Commenting on the history of the text of the Christian Greek Scriptures and the results of modern textual research, Professor Kurt Aland wrote: "It can be determined, on the basis of 40 years of experience and with the results which have come to light in examining . . . manuscripts at 1,200 test places: The text of the New Testament has been excellently transmitted, better than any other writing from ancient times; the possibility that manuscripts might yet be found that would change its text decisively is zero."—Das Neue Testament—zuverlässig überliefert (The New Testament—Reliably Transmitted), Stuttgart, 1986, pp. 27, 28.

*** it-1 p. 409 Canon ***
By the end of the second century there was no question but that the canon of the Christian Greek Scriptures was closed, and we find such ones as Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian recognizing the writings comprising the Christian Scriptures as carrying authority equal to that of the Hebrew Scriptures. Irenaeus in appealing to the Scriptures makes no fewer than 200 quotations from Paul’s letters. Clement says he will answer his opponents by "the Scriptures which we believe are valid from their omnipotent authority," that is, "by the law and the prophets, and besides by the blessed Gospel."—The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. II, p. 409, "The Stromata, or Miscellanies."The canonicity of certain individual books of the Christian Greek Scriptures has been disputed by some, but the arguments against them are very weak. For critics to reject, for example, the book of Hebrews simply because it does not bear Paul’s name and because it differs slightly in style from his other letters is shallow reasoning. B. F. Westcott observed that "the canonical authority of the Epistle is independent of its Pauline authorship." (The Epistle to the Hebrews, 1892, p. lxxi) Objection on the grounds of unnamed writership is far outweighed by the presence of Hebrews in the Chester Beatty Papyrus No. 2 (P46) (dated within 150 years of Paul’s death), which contains it along with eight other letters of Paul.Sometimes the canonicity of small books such as James, Jude, Second and Third John, and Second Peter is questioned on the grounds that these books are quoted very little by early writers. However, they make up all together only one thirty-sixth of the Christian Greek Scriptures and were therefore less likely to be referred to. In this connection it may be observed that Second Peter is quoted by Irenaeus as bearing the same evidence of canonicity as the rest of the Greek Scriptures. The same is true of Second John. (The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. I, pp. 551, 557, 341, 443, "Irenaeus Against Heresies") Revelation, also rejected by some, was attested to by many early commentators, including Papias, Justin Martyr, Melito, and Irenaeus.

Answer 10

...are you trying to get us to do homework for you, luv?

; )


...lol